Talk:BlueStacks

Missing Infos
Is the software freeware? How does the Company make money? Can't figure out from the article. -- Jonathan Haas (talk) 21:28, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
 * That is a poignant analytical question, perhaps not an unusual question to have in recent years about a new internet/technology company. I have added a statement that the products listed are beta software, which are commonly free with certain conditions.  There is no guarantee the release version of the same products would be free.  The company is privately held, and generally under no obligation to disclose their revenue or plans for such.  Until there was independent coverage of the company located, there would be nothing to add to the article that would shed any further light on the question above. Cander0000 (talk) 08:53, 2 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Done a little research here. Old news item at the Register (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/05/26/bluestacks_android_on_windows/) from May 2011, when the product was in alpha test: BlueStacks has not quite settled on how it will monetize the Android runtime environment, but Sharma tells El Reg that the idea is to make it free to end users who are using maybe 10 to 15 Android apps and then to charge once they have more than that. The company will also sell OEM licenses to PC makers and operating system makers that want to embed an Android runtime in their OSes. Whether this is still the case remains to be seen. Rob Burbidge (talk) 16:36, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

Incomplete info: "Minimum requirement for Bluestacks include: 2 GB or higher memory, 4 GB space in hard drive, and Direct X 9.0 or higher installed" With BlueStacks2 up to BlueStacks2.7, this was true: BlueStacks used DirectX as default graphics engine. All worked fine. Now with BlueStacks3, the default graphics engine is set to "OpenGL" without warning and without asking in the installation process. Due to heavy bug either in state-of-the-art graphics drivers of NVIDIA for Windows10, or in the BlueStacks applications, on many computers even with dedicated consumer graphics cards by NVIDIA or ATI, even simple menus like the registration and login menus run like in "slow motion" on BlueStacks3. I.e. a simple touch on a menu button takes minutes to be operated. This bug is not fixed within 3 months, though reported. It's not just that the product is unusable on many computers in OpenGL mode, but it is configured to use this mode by default and without configuration question during installation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hemmerling (talk • contribs) 08:28, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

Software info
1. Should app player have it's own article? 2. is app player modified android emulator or how dows it work? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.61.54.169 (talk) 14:03, 25 July 2012 (UTC)


 * I don't think there's enough information yet to merit a new article. The register article mentioned above does have a description of the architecture; apparently it uses virtualisation technology based on VirtualBox to host a virtual x86 running a custom Android build to host the apps. All code runs as X86, so it should be able to execute pure java/dalvik code, but there's probably no emulator for applications that use native ARM code. Rob Burbidge (talk) 16:41, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

Hi I work at BlueStacks. BlueStacks is able to run native applications that use ARM code via our proprietary binary translator. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.200.11.243 (talk) 23:59, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

Version number?
Their web site does not tell me which version is the current one, no changelog offered, no news section. I wonder how the press know of any version number. Perhaps i have to download it to find out? --Jerome Potts (talk) 03:43, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

Did someone insert an ad?
"Besides Bluestacks, there are many other Android app players like Nox App Player.[10]", the citation being a link to noxappplayer.com.

I don't have any predisposition to either product but that looks an awful lot like an ad. If there are many other Android app players, a link to a list of them would be more appropriate than promoting an arbitrary one.

24.60.195.116 (talk) 00:35, 30 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Leapdroid has been added, but a list article would fit better in my opinion. Is there a reason why one wouldn't work? —PC-XT+ 23:22, 11 September 2016 (UTC)

Unhelpfully hyperbolic?
"BlueStacks announced its biggest update ever – BlueStacks 5 (Beta), a powerhouse of speed and performance." Regardless of its improvements in speed or power, that reads very much like an advertisement to me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Blacksmith tb (talk • contribs) 17:46, 18 February 2021 (UTC)

Detailed info
What's the community word on detailed information about events or releases? full dates or just year and month? I think detailed info is preferred because there's no such thing as too munch info in an encyclopedia. --Verde Leonino (talk) 00:01, 3 February 2022 (UTC)

System requirements
I have a 4 GB RAM computer and it's not able to run BlueStacks, while here the minimum requirement is 2 GB RAM, which is wrong information. 2A03:2880:30FF:74:0:0:FACE:B00C (talk) 08:49, 4 July 2022 (UTC)

The update where ads prevented play
I did the edit about the version with the ads. This is where bluestacks is reverting to their ancient malware-like and actual malware days, with a side order of crashing games randomly with popup ads that are implied to be from these games (which causes many games with combat to be utterly or nearly unplayable, and other games to have swarms of clueless users lower their google play rating thinking the ads were from the game). Someone plz watch over this article!

I'm pretty sure adding an ad not from google play store on each google play store search result is some kind of google play store TOS breaking, or illegal, too. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.201.204.188 (talk) 02:47, 26 September 2023 (UTC)