> Or make it a configurable option. Give people the choice, within space > restrictions.
You don't think that will just cause Apple people to complain about needing to make a choice and having to configure? > Given that there is an established standard for device sync - syncml - > there is no good reason why somebody can't write some sync software > that works over WiFi or Bluetooth to tackle this. But it should really > be in the device. Except of course, Google want you to use their > services instead - gives them more data to mine. I can understand not wanting to hand over certain kind of information as well as the general fear of Google becoming too all-knowing. I'm sure Google wants us to use their services, just as many users do, since it's the cross-pollination of these that drives the contextual applications of tomorrow. However, what other large corporation takes data and security as seriously as Google? Given that they own dataliberation.org and is about to kick out a whole nation? For the cloud paranoid, I am sure we will see alternatives - there's not much in Android that can't be replaced/augmented after all and Google's does not sensor the Android marked.
-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Java Posse" 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/javaposse?hl=en.
