If you flash with the unlocked firmware you should delete the older first? And to format the partition?
2009/3/3 Jean-Baptiste Queru <j...@android.com> > > That wouldn't work, as you could download with the "locked" firmware, > flash an "unlocked" firmware, and get the files out. > > JBQ > > 2009/3/2 vendor <vendor....@gmail.com>: > > What do you think about the idea of two firmware versions for ADP1? > > > > 2009/3/3 Jean-Baptiste Queru <j...@android.com> > >> > >> As far as I know by the time you remove from ADP1 the features that > >> would allow access to forward-locked apps (flashable, root, debuggable > >> system), you have essentially a consumer device. > >> > >> JBQ > >> > >> 2009/3/2 vendor.net <vendor....@gmail.com>: > >> > > >> >> Most importantly though, I'm really disappointed in Google's lack of > >> >> communication on the topic. I have to scour the web just to find a > >> >> hint of some idea of what's going on with the dev phone. There is no > >> >> official word or anything. Google should at least have a posting on > >> >> the Developer's blog. Where is Google's "Contact Us" link for those > >> >> of us who paid the $25? > >> > Totally agree! > >> > > >> > Hint for some desperate developers who wants to trade ADP1 for G1. You > >> > can put the G1 firmware. Your phone will be full locked except for the > >> > sim card I think, but you will have G1 firmware. Just have to flash > >> > it, but still I didn`t think that this is the solution... > >> > > >> > I see one possible solution for dealing with the situation: To have 2 > >> > versions for developers. The first version will be totally unlocked, > >> > but it will not support the full market. The second version will lock > >> > only these dirs which contains the paid apps. The second version of > >> > the firmware will lock only the dirs and the processes which control > >> > the copy/protection of the apps. There could be flaws, but I will be > >> > happy to read your comments about it. It is a possible solution? JQB? > >> > > >> > On 1 Март, 08:08, Sen <senecajust...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> Well, you all have certainly taken this discussion in an interesting > >> >> direction. > >> >> > >> >> I would just like to add to my original posting. Hopefully we still > >> >> have some official Google person's attention. > >> >> > >> >> I'm pretty understanding when it comes to deadlines not being met > when > >> >> it comes to stuff like this. We're all developers here and I'm sure > >> >> we've all experienced this. I would agree though that I think the > >> >> people that went out of their way and paid the extra money for a > >> >> "developer edition" phone, should be the first to get the updates. > >> >> > >> >> Most importantly though, I'm really disappointed in Google's lack of > >> >> communication on the topic. I have to scour the web just to find a > >> >> hint of some idea of what's going on with the dev phone. There is no > >> >> official word or anything. Google should at least have a posting on > >> >> the Developer's blog. Where is Google's "Contact Us" link for those > >> >> of us who paid the $25? > >> >> > >> >> Why do I have to ask this question?... we really should be better > >> >> informed. > >> >> > >> >> Thanks > >> >> > >> >> On Feb 28, 1:16 pm, Jon Colverson <jjc1...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> > >> >> > On Feb 28, 6:46 pm, Al Sutton <a...@funkyandroid.com> wrote: > >> >> > >> >> > > method), and, as far as I'm aware, there isn't a method > circulating > >> >> > > which can be applied to any and every protected application to > get > >> >> > > a > >> >> > > protection free copy by following a simple set of instructions > (if > >> >> > > there > >> >> > > is I'd welcome information on it so we can work on fixing the > flaw > >> >> > > it > >> >> > > uses). > >> >> > >> >> > I'm not aware of one either, but I expect that a tool would emerge > >> >> > very quickly if the AndAppStore takes off when it starts being > >> >> > distributed with handsets and such. You could then tweak the system > >> >> > to > >> >> > stop the tool from working, but then the attacker would release a > new > >> >> > version, and you'd be in an arms race. > >> >> > >> >> > The reason why I say they're equivalent is that while the steps > along > >> >> > the way may be different, the end result is the same: people who > >> >> > don't > >> >> > want to pay will get the apps for free. In my opinion adding extra > >> >> > hurdles just wastes the developers' time and provides a juicier > >> >> > intellectual challenge for those who are inclined to try to defeat > >> >> > the > >> >> > system. > >> >> > >> >> > -- > >> >> > Jon > >> > > > >> > > >> > >> > >> > >> -- > >> Jean-Baptiste M. "JBQ" Queru > >> Android Engineer, Google. > >> > >> Questions sent directly to me will likely get ignored or forwarded to > >> a public forum with no further warning. > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > Jean-Baptiste M. "JBQ" Queru > Android Engineer, Google. > > Questions sent directly to me will likely get ignored or forwarded to > a public forum with no further warning. > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 android-developers-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
