Android was a waste - but we could not have known this in advance! It is Google's attitude, "use the developer community, celebrate the few winners and throw away the many losers" that will harm itself and make it lose. I predict that in the times to come, people will dislike Google intensely - just as they did Microsoft.
On Jun 24, 12:19 pm, Shane Isbell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > If we are still sitting with an alpha SDK, it's increasingly unlikely > that the Android platform is close to being certified on devices; the > news that handsets may be delayed until next year doesn't surprise me. > > As for individual developers being squeezed out of the market, that is > exactly what is happening. Google is not releasing their SDK to the > general community and has chosen a select group of software vendors. > This hurts acceptance by the general mobile developer community, after > all if we are going to be on the outside, shouldn't we be on the > outside of a market that already exists. We know that carriers and > other players are not going to change their behavior based on > technology alone, so Google was the best hope of being an agent of > change but in the end they fell back on the established, insider way > of doing things in mobile. > > With the industry endorsing LBS applications through the results of > ADC I (while still saying that the Android location API is optional > and subject to be locked), we are left knowing the dangers that await > the individual developers. > > I can say that this SDK decision has hurt development of SAM, the > SlideME application manager, as we wait to see what security surrounds > application installs. This will give a very good indication about the > openness of the platform and whether independent parties are going to > be able to freely do application installation or whether the carriers > will be able to lock down this functionality. Our original intention > was to build a large enough community that carriers wouldn't want to > ignore SAM. > > The entire Android developer community has not exterted anywhere near > that type of muscle and have even been sheepish when it comes to > insider access to the Android SDK. I can assure you that carriers are > not being quiet about what they want, even forceful, and it is human > nature to listen to the person crying the loudest. > > Shane > > On Jun 23, 7:01 pm, JP <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > The WSJ has an article today about the state of the affairs in the > > Android > > empire.http://online.wsj.com/public/article/SB121418837707895947.html?mod=2_... > > Looks like the journalists made a number of phone calls and did not > > just regurgitate some blogs - some solid insights into carriers and > > developers' current situation, it seems. I have the following > > takeaways from the article: > > - For app developers, there is a world of two speeds. If you got "in" > > through the Challenge or some other relationship, you already have > > access to information about the next SDK, draft release notes at the > > minimum, probably the SDK itself. Nothing in sight to the public > > though. Or did I miss something? The WeatherChannel developer anyways > > indirectly confirms this, which means they are getting a headstart to > > implement the necessary changes to their apps, while everybody else > > has to sit and wait. > > - Carriers are busy branding "their" Android. Worst case, we can > > expect subsidized-only phones a la iPhone, which only include apps > > which made it on the inside track, while independent developers cannot > > load and test theirs (superficial carrier explanation here: copy Steve > > Jobs excuses of yore). The first batches of Android phones will > > certainly come with aggressive SIM locks - no question in my mind, but > > I might be proven wrong. > > It'll be interesting to see however if enthusiasts can flash these > > suckers from clean Android images without too much trouble. Sans SIM > > lock, sans branding, but I suspect special service cables will be > > needed which are not available to the public. Needless to say that > > we'll be told we'll burn in hell (or worse) if we choose to pursue > > this. > > > Overall... question marks keep piling up for independent developers. > > Looks like we are getting squeezed out of the race to market? Perhaps > > some clarifying words by the developer advocates at Google might give > > us some pointers (wink, wink)? > > > JP --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Android Discuss" group. To post to this group, send email to android-discuss@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-discuss?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
