What's the OHA for then? There's an "O" in OHA, and it stands for "Open". This raises certain expectations. Google heard from as last summer when they took that idea off the table, and it's just the same over this time around to get open access to test equipment. Things got to change if carriers and other members in the OHA are interested in leveraging apps with some seriousness. Why bend over and take it like an man?
On Oct 11, 8:54 am, Al Sutton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Joachim, > > T-Mobile still don't list the $399 unlockable agreement anywhere on > their website, and HTC clearly label the G1 on their website as a > T-mobile G1 which would indicate getting the device on it's own isn't > going to happen any time soon. > > As for other devices, it's not uncommon for phones to be contract only > for the first few months and only then add non-contract option, so > developers will always be behind the curve, and even if all of the > Android phones that come out can be bought without contracts, it's still > prohibitive to developers of free applications if they all have their > own quirks. > > I think your viewpoint reflects far more what a developer would like > than what a carrier would like, and after over a decade of dealing with > carriers I can tell you that unless your "in" with the carrier or the > device maanufacturer, the chances of getting a non-contract 'phone for > the first few months of its' release are next to none. > > Al. > > JP wrote: > > > On Oct 10, 11:11 pm, Al Sutton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >> So far only a US and UK release dates have been confirmed by T-Mobile > > > Is it the right approach to only look at T-Mobile? When the G1/Dream > > was announced, I first checked HTC's web site. No selling of the Dream > > there, or pointing to channel partners (dealers) for that matter. > > Let's hope this will change after the G1 launch. After all, everyone > > should be able to go out and order directly from HTC (or channel > > partners), within the usual limits of export control. Shovel over > > those $399 and bypass the carrier altogether, and insert a separately > > purchased SIM card/contract to serve the very purpose we have SIM > > cards in the first place. Sorry if I state the obvious, but we seem to > > lose sight of it... If T-Mobile happens to be a brick and mortar store > > to push the unit over the shelf, fine. > > >> I very much doubt that many of the developers are going to buy every > >> Android 'phone released > > > Exactly, but if one's app is sensitive to multi-touch, he or she will > > have at least the brand new Dream, and later on (six months, twelve?) > > which ever multi-touch capable device of one's choice comes out. And > > later on other devices with new features. This will not end, really, > > and developers will pick up a collection of devices. Which is not a > > problem *as long as we don't have to purchase service contracts along > > with each or any of them*. Such a scenario would drive cost through > > the roof, with cascading price increases, assuming we want to charge > > sustainable app prices. (This puts aside apps which can be leveraged > > in some other form) > > > JP --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
