On this forum, please avoid quoting people (including me) out of context for your own agenda. I said quite clearly that Sanjay Jha does not speak for Google, and that his comments *pertaining to Google's motivations* are his own opinion. He may or may not have been speaking for his own company, I don't know.
I'm not going to address your conspiracy theory about the Alliance, because it's just silly. - Dan 2008/4/7 Stone Mirror <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > On Mon, Apr 7, 2008 at 1:18 AM, ian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > Cary Harper wrote: > > > We applied several months ago and never heard back. I hope you have > > better > > > luck than we did. > > > > I've emailed a half dozen times now and have never had any kind of > > response. We supply semiconductor IP that's used in lots of TI, Intel, > > etc. devices so you'd have thought the OHA would welcome us with open > > arms rather than the cold shoulder. > > > > If anyone knows of any other email contacts for the OHA or Google > > people involved with Android, then please let me know. > > > There's little evidence, beyond the initial press release from last year, > that the "Open Handset Alliance" even *exists.* > > The license agreement for the SDK isn't between you and the OHA, it's > between you and Google. The domain "openhandsetalliance.org" isn't owned > by the Open Handset Alliance, it's owned by Google. None of the code that's > been released so far, what little there is, contains an "Open Handset > Alliance" copyright; it's all been copyrighted by Google. > > I commented a day or two ago on the story in The Register where Sanjay > Jha, COO of Qualcomm's chipset division, was quoted as saying that it was > Google's goal to create fragmentation by introducing Android to ensure that > only web-based applications (which Google specializes in, not mobile device > operating systems) would be able to gain any sort of foothold in the global > market. > > Dan Morill very quickly informed us that Mr. Jha "doesn't work for *Google", > *and that his statement should therefore be treated as uninformed personal > opinion. Seems odd to me, given that Qualcomm is certainly a member of the > "Open Handset Alliance"; you think they'd be in a better position to know > what the motivation behind Android was. Dan makes it sound as though no one > outside of Google has anything to say regarding Android. > > Steve Ballmer said, early on, that Android was "just a press release". > Clearly there's a bit more to it than that, but I'm coming to believe that > the *Open Handset Alliance *may be "just a press release". > > -- > 鏡石 > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Android Discuss" 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-discuss?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
