The Traffic Aware Planner (TAP), developed for NASA Langley Research Center to support the Traffic Aware Strategic Aircrew Requests (TASAR) project, is a flight-efficiency software application developed for an Electronic Flight Bag (EFB). Tested in two flight trials and planned for operational testing by two commercial airlines, TAP is a real-time trajectory optimization application that leverages connectivity with onboard avionics and broadband Internet sources to compute and recommend route modifications to flight crews to improve fuel and time performance. The application utilizes a wide range of data, including Automatic Dependent Surveillance Broadcast (ADS-B) traffic, Flight Management System (FMS) guidance and intent, on-board sensors, published winds and weather, and Special Use Airspace (SUA) schedules. This paper discusses the challenges of developing and deploying TAP to various EFB platforms, our solutions to some of these challenges, and lessons learned, to assist commercial software developers and hardware manufacturers in their efforts to implement and extend TAP functionality in their environments. EFB applications (such as TAP) typically access avionics data via an ARINC 834 Simple Text Avionics Protocol (STAP) server hosted by an Aircraft Interface Device (AID) or other installed hardware. While the protocol is standardized, the data sources, content, and transmission rates can vary from aircraft to aircraft. Additionally, the method of communicating with the AID may vary depending on EFB hardware and/or the availability of onboard networking services, such as Ethernet, WIFI, Bluetooth, or other mechanisms. EFBs with portable and installed components can be implemented using a variety of operating systems, and cockpits are increasingly incorporating tablet-based technologies, further expanding the number of platforms the application may need to support. Supporting multiple EFB platforms, AIDs, avionics datasets, and user interfaces presents a challenge for software developers and the management of their code baselines. Maintaining multiple baselines to support all deployment targets can be extremely cumbersome and expensive. Certification also needs to be considered when developing the application. Regardless of whether the software is itself destined to be certified, data requirements in support of the application and user interface elements may introduce certification requirements for EFB manufacturers and the airlines. The example of TAP, the challenges faced, solutions implemented, and lessons learned will give EFB application and hardware developers insight into future potential requirements in deploying TAP or similar flight-deck EFB applications.