Any pointers to what the proprietary binaries are?, there are probably a few people who'd like to work on open source equivalents or methods of removing the dependencies.
Al Jean-Baptiste Queru wrote: > On the open-source side of things, the biggest problem is that the > port of Android to the HTC Dream (the which is the ADP1 hardware) > relies on proprietary binaries that aren't conveniently available to > the general public, and even the current solution of reading the 1.0 > or 1.1 version of those binaries from an existing device isn't > properly developed or maintained. I don't know how practical it is for > "outsiders" to try to help on that front, though it sounds > theoretically possible. But that discussion isn't relevant on this > list. > > On the SDK side of things, sadly I'm really afraid that everything > that needs to be done can only be done by "insiders". > > JBQ > > On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 8:22 AM, Al Sutton <[email protected]> wrote: > >> JBQ, >> >> Are there any problems with the ADP1 build that you can share with the >> list, maybe someone here can help. >> >> Al. >> >> Jean-Baptiste Queru wrote: >> >>> It would take more effort to support 2 developer devices instead of 1. >>> The current message from the developer community is crystal clear: the >>> effort that's currently being spent on the ADP1 by the people who can >>> resolve the current issues with it is frustratingly inadequate. Adding >>> a second device on those people's plate is unlikely to make things >>> better. >>> >>> JBQ >>> >>> On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 8:01 AM, Daniel <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> >>>> >>>>> You only have to look at the "fun" people are having trying to get an >>>>> updated ADP1 image to see how the support for developer devices is >>>>> falling a fair way short of where it should be (remember, the ADP1 which >>>>> is targetted at developers can't see paid-for apps yet, so the very >>>>> people who are suppose to be writing the apps can't see what the users >>>>> are saying). >>>>> >>>>> >>>> Is that an issue that would require double the effort to resolve if >>>> there was more than one developer phone available? Or would the >>>> solution on the ADP1 also solve the problem on the ADP2? >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> I doubt that a G2 would be cheaper than a G1 in terms of buying it and >>>>> shipping it as a developer phone, so I can't see why there would be a >>>>> solid reason to do it. If you don't like the current ADP costs, why not >>>>> pick up a FreeRunner from Koolu, or use one of the ports for some of the >>>>> commodity hardware that's already available (e.g. NITdroid on an N810). >>>>> >>>>> >>>> The handset cost is not the real issue here - it's more about having a >>>> variety of handsets available for developers, as well as the various >>>> marketing and promotional activities that might be undertaken by a >>>> firm developing with Android. Amongst other things, some people have >>>> commented on the G1's physical appearance, and the G1 has battery life >>>> issues. >>>> >>>> Thanks for the heads-up about FreeRunner, I had not seen that phone, >>>> although I notice they don't offer quad band. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >> -- >> >> * Written an Android App? - List it at http://andappstore.com/ * >> >> ====== >> Funky Android Limited is registered in England & Wales with the >> company number 6741909. The registered head office is Kemp House, >> 152-160 City Road, London, EC1V 2NX, UK. >> >> The views expressed in this email are those of the author and not >> necessarily those of Funky Android Limited, it's associates, or it's >> subsidiaries. >> >> >> > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Android Developers" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
