Why use an SDK when the APK is enough?Solved

Well, mate, I reckon that approach might be a bit too simplistic. Sure, APKs are handy for deployment or testing builds, but relying on just the APK bypasses everything an SDK is built to support, like version control, debugging tools, documentation, and integration hooks.

I hear you, but not every developer wants to wade through piles of SDK documentation to figure out how to implement basic functionality. If I can just sideload an APK and see the app in action, that’s a faster feedback loop. Real-world apps move fast; we don’t always have time for a doc deep-dive.

But that’s where SDK documentation actually becomes essential. It’s not about slowing you down, it’s about ensuring what you build is sustainable. I’ve seen devs deploy APKs without understanding what’s going on under the hood, and the moment something breaks, they’re stuck. The SDK tells you the why, not just the what.

Yeah, but when SDK docs are outdated or bloated, it feels like they’re actively working against us. I’ve burned hours looking for a config option that was buried five pages deep. Maybe if the docs were better structured, I’d be more on board.

Fair criticism, mate. Poor documentation is almost worse than none at all. But I’d argue that’s a problem with how the docs are written, not the idea of SDKs themselves. If you’ve got a proper dev portal with clear, searchable, versioned documentation, SDKs can seriously speed things up.

Alright, that’s fair. I’m not anti-SDK; I just wish platforms didn’t make APK support feel like a second-class citizen. Give me the option to plug in the final build, see it run, and then explore the SDK if I need to go deeper.

I think both should exist side by side. Let the APK give you a quick win but keep the SDK doc tight so when things scale up, you’re not flying blind.