They would need stretch that somewhat and define the dialler application 
as non-core for that to work in relation to the block on third party 
diallers calling emergency services.

Al.

Shane Isbell wrote:
> A trick of language makes the OHA statement cited below true. If they 
> want an application to be more powerful than any competitors, they 
> don't define it as a core application.
>
> On Wed, Jan 7, 2009 at 12:25 AM, Muthu Ramadoss 
> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>
>     The question is,
>
>     Are the API's developed by the Carrier or is that part of the
>     Android core framework?
>
>     If its part of the core framework, then i agree the documentation
>     is false.
>
>     If it had been developed by the carrier, then Android has nothing
>     to do with that.
>
>     take care,
>     Muthu Ramadoss.
>
>     http://linkedin.com/in/tellibitz +91-9840348914
>     http://mobeegal.in - mobile search. redefined.
>
>
>
>     On Wed, Jan 7, 2009 at 1:51 PM, Al Sutton <[email protected]
>     <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>
>
>         Quote from the Open Handset Alliance Page at
>         http://www.openhandsetalliance.com/android_overview.html
>
>         "All applications are created equal
>
>         Android does not differentiate between the phone's core
>         applications and
>         third-party applications. They can all be built to have equal
>         access to
>         a phone's capabilities providing users with a broad spectrum of
>         applications and services. With devices built on the Android
>         Platform,
>         users are able to fully tailor the phone to their interests.
>         They can
>         swap out the phone's homescreen, the style of the dialer, or
>         any of the
>         applications. They can even instruct their phones to use their
>         favorite
>         photo viewing application to handle the viewing of all photos."
>
>         Given what we know that the G1 has APIs locked which are only
>         available
>         to apps signed with the carriers certificate, who else feels this
>         section is totally inaccurate?
>
>
>         Al.
>
>         --
>         ======
>         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.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >


-- 
======
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 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
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to