Sure. That's how Windows XP is now, no? Though the majority of software I use isn't signed. But also most of the software I use is software that doesn't have to be installed and thus doesn't get behind the device layer to muck up what it's not supposed to. To me, if you're creating a OS platform for developers, you don't make it so that software can root around in internals of the OS without some sort of approval - whether that's this signing process or some sort of confirmation so be it.
On 2/25/08, Jeffrey Kaplan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hello, L. > > On Mon, 25 Feb 2008 15:25:30 -0500 you said: > > > On 2/25/08, Jeffrey Kaplan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > So often it isn't the only criteria. And I think that 90% figure is > > way too high. > > > > I'm all for development without barriers > > Then how about a dual-tier system? Apps signed by the platform > developer to "guarantee" full device compatibility, and unsigned > software where the platform developer assumes no responsibility for any > problems it might cause? > > -- ============================== War Eagle
