And as far as I know, Apple isn't saying that applications provisioned in their portal must insure that if Apple/AT&T hosts a piece of content (ring-tone), it must be downloaded from their approved storefront, as opposed to some external site. From a practical matter, there is just no way that the client developer can know whether all content hosted at external site X doesn't have any duplications on the carrier storefront. It's a stupid requirement.
Shane On Wed, Sep 17, 2008 at 10:25 AM, Shane Isbell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > T-Mobile has already published some restrictions on their dev portal, no > pornographic applications. > > Another one that affects slideme: "Storefront: An application using a link > to provide an opportunity to buy or to purchase content being published on > T-Mobile's delivery platform (currently mPower) must point to a > T-Mobileapproved storefront.":http://developer. > t-mobile.com/site/global/device_search/p_device_testing.jsp. > <http://developer.t-mobile.com/site/global/device_search/p_device_testing.jsp> > > So we couldn't provisioning the SAM client in the T-Mobile portal. It also > means if you want to sell ring-tones, mp3's etc, you are out of luck, you > can't get it into the T-Mobile portal. Pretty much the whole e-commerce for > mobile content angle is locked out. And yes, I know that T-Mobile has a > bunch of business reasons for doing so. I don't care to hear them. > > Shane > > > On Wed, Sep 17, 2008 at 9:43 AM, george_c <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Any such restrictions expected from Google? Can anyone from Google comment >> what developers should expect in terms of what will not be allowed or >> restricted? >> >> George >> >> --- >> >> If you are thinking of writing applications for the iPhone, you might want >> to read this story first. The *New York Times* has a report on an Alex >> Sokirynsky, who spent two months working nights and weekends to write an >> application that was eventually rejected for its web store. The reason: The >> "Podcaster" application that he wrote, which allows users to listen to and >> watch Podcasts on their iPhones, "duplicates the functionality of the >> Podcast section of iTunes." This is strange on two fronts: first, this >> software has other features, one of which other than allows users to stream >> podcasts so they can also download them first for listening >> later. Second, there already are all sorts of applications that duplicate >> various aspects of its own software. >> >> For more about this article: >> - check out the *New York Times* >> blog<http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/09/16/apples-capricious-app-policy/> >> >> >> >> > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Android Developers" group. To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
