Google Straightens Out Its Stance On Paid Apps

Julie188 writes "When the Android Market began offering paid apps last month, developers with the unlocked version of Google's Android phone quickly learned that they couldn't access them. The policy, which threatened to alienate the small developer base that Google needs to nurture at all costs, didn't make much sense. And now, with the release of Version 1.1 of Android for the developer phone, developers can access paid apps — as long as they aren't copy-protected. But in a weird way, that's good news. Very few developers currently copy-protect their Android apps simply because Android's copy-protection scheme is notoriously weak."

Comments

Re:People like to be locked in?

[Nursie]

Yes, yes it does.

Have you been following the android dev work for it though?

One of the more recent images even had GPRS working...

Re:"Paid Apps"

[docwhat]

Apps have two "flags" that can be set:
  * Paid -- a payment is required.
  * Copy Protected -- The user isn't allowed to copy the app.

With ADP1.1, you can see and download applications as long as they don't have the copy protection flag turned on.

This means you can purchase apps or download the free ones; unless the app is copy protected.

This is because the copy protection is simply filesystem based: the apps are placed in a directory only root can access.

If you have an ADP1.1, the you can access this copy protected directory.

Google claimed that they deliberately didn't do "forward-locking" because it was error prone and ruined the experience for users.

Ciao!