Well it's been a couple of days and I've basically just stopped using landscape - It's faster to use swype in portrait than it was to use the regular keyboard in landscape. It's taking some getting used to, but it's really very fast.
They definitely are still letting people download it - I just installed it on my HTC Magic.
It works quite well, shocking so actually. In vertical one-handed typing, I'm already much faster and more accurate than I ever was with the regular keyboard. However, the swype idea doesn't make much sense for horizontal typing - there's no real way to use both hands so what's the point? I would prefer to be able to stick with the traditional keyboard for horizontal typing. That said, I'm going to stick with it for a few days and see how it goes under real-world circumstances.
It was a bunch of pictures of this guy and his girlfriend in new york. there was also short video of him playing a guitar with his shirt off - i shit you not. i returned the phone and bitched the rogers guy out, and i got a $50 gift card. i now order my phones directly from rogers over the phone and then have them shipped to rogers video stores, instead of buying the phones in stock at rogers-licensed stores.
my rogers htc magic has a bunch of rogers images preloaded, and several rogers bookmarks placed in the web-browser. i would be surprised if that's done by htc.
also, i've received phones from rogers that have been bought and then returned, with the other person's content still on the sd card - as could easily have been the case with the phone in question. In my case, there were pictures of the guy's trip to new york left on the phone.
Either way, that's pretty crazy. I wonder if it's a case of a rogue employee putting it there, or if it somehow got installed unntentionally by Vodafone. Or maybe the phone was used, returned, and re-sold without having the micro sd card formatted.
Ahh ok so it's an issue of it being a linear development of an existing invention, rather than a new invention in and of itself. That makes sense!
I was thinking that he was saying that, because the parent invention is public domain, all subsequent inventions based on it must therefore also be public domain - which sounded ridiculous.
I'm not sure if I agree with him about VOIP, but I can see the logic of the argument.
I'm not really talking about whether that kind of expression is common or not.
The way I saw his argument was this:
1. Sending data over TCP/IP is public domain
2. All ways of sending data that involve sending it using TCP/IP should therefore also be public domain. This includes VOIP, etc.
So to carry that over to my example, it would be:
1. Using the alphabet to communicate data is public domain
2. All ways of sending data that use the alphabet should also therefore be public domain. This includes books, etc.
To me, the second case seems wrong - and if it follows from the first case, then I vociferously disagree. But I'm thinking that maybe my example is flawed.
This is not meant as a flame - I'm just unclear about what you're saying.
TCP/IP and its relatives might have been patentable back when Kahn, Cerf and others developed them. But thanks to ARPA, they are in the public domain. Since the general case is addressed, moving generic digital data, is in the public domain, then why are specific subsets of this technology patentable?
As I understand it, this line of reasoning could be used to argue that, since the alphabet is public domain, all other uses of that alphabet should also be public domain. If that's what you mean, then I disagree.
Method and apparatus for discerning which patent applicants have actually created something new and which are merely trying to create legal obstacles for their competition.
I'd definitely consider switching to this. Better to have Google know all of the sites I visit than to be constantly redirected to Rogers advertising when I mistype a URL.
The problem for me is that the actual android phone itself is logged into google! Doesn't that make it insecure by their very nature?
I have an HTC Magic/G2, and I've often been concerned about this when connecting to an open wifi ap. I only use wifi, so the fact that my cell phone company can see my usage over 3g is a non-issue (canceled my data plan when the free trial ran out). But it seems to me that my google password is probably not well protected from whoever owns the ap I'm connecting to.
I just downloaded the tor android client and the shadow browser (which tells me that it can't use https, unfortunately), and it seems to work. I just checked my IP and it comes up as somewhere in Vancouver, which is not where I am so that's nice. But I still don't see how one can get past the fact that the phone itself is logged into google at all times.
It's not an issue of you paying. It's an issue of Cyanogen distributing copyrighted software without paying.
As I see it, you are entitled to install the Google apps that you have already paid for (by buying your phone) on a modded device. Cyanogen, however, is not allowed to distribute that software pre-installed on his mods.
1. Intellectual Property means legal ownership of patents, copyrights, etc. Clearly, you know this. You may not like it, but "IP" is the standard term in this discourse and, more importantly, in the law. So you're going to have to get used to it.
2. I was not saying that Open Source has issues. I was saying that issues arise when you have an intermingling of open and proprietary software, such as in Android devices. This very debate is proof-positive that there are indeed issues in these instances.
2a/3. So after all of that you agree with me? That was so unnecessary!
Hmm, well wouldn't that have the same problem? Whether they ship the Market app with the mod, or if you download and install it independently, it's still an infringement on google's (or whoever's) IP. I guess Cyanogen/whoever could go the traditional approach of saying 'it's up to you to find your own market app, we're not responsible for any piracy' or whatever, but that would again cripple their mods by drastically reducing the number of potential users. How many people are going to be able to handle manually installing an.apk file, let alone finding it in the first place?
THen again, maybe I misunderstood what you were saying. Did you mean that they could design a new browser for the google market, one that isn't proprietary? If that's possible (I have no idea), then it seems like that would pretty much solve the problem from a legal standpoint. Google probably wouldn't be happy about it, though.
Hmm, that's a really good point. The Market app is one of ones they have a problem with? If that's the case, then this really does put a damper on the Android modders. Anyone know if the Market App is one of the ones involved?
I'm with you right up until the end... I agree that there are IP issues with open source, particularly when you have to both open and proprietary IP involved. However, I don't see how this is a case of google being opened to 'unwanted competition.'
Here is how I see it:
- Android is open-source.
- Not all of the apps on Android are necessarily open-source.
- Therefore, Cyanogen, Drizzy, and whoever else are free to mod it to their hearts delight - just so long as they don't also redistribute things that aren't open-source.
If this is really Google's qualm, and they will leave Cyanogen alone after he removes the proprietary IP, then I really don't see the problem.
This actually seems like a more-or-less legitimate point by Google. I'll probably get flamed for this, but it seems like people may have overreacted a little bit.
Slashdot Mirror
Well it's been a couple of days and I've basically just stopped using landscape - It's faster to use swype in portrait than it was to use the regular keyboard in landscape. It's taking some getting used to, but it's really very fast.
They definitely are still letting people download it - I just installed it on my HTC Magic. It works quite well, shocking so actually. In vertical one-handed typing, I'm already much faster and more accurate than I ever was with the regular keyboard. However, the swype idea doesn't make much sense for horizontal typing - there's no real way to use both hands so what's the point? I would prefer to be able to stick with the traditional keyboard for horizontal typing. That said, I'm going to stick with it for a few days and see how it goes under real-world circumstances.
How is this new? This is already being done in Canada - I have a 60gb limit with my Rogers internet service.
It was a bunch of pictures of this guy and his girlfriend in new york. there was also short video of him playing a guitar with his shirt off - i shit you not. i returned the phone and bitched the rogers guy out, and i got a $50 gift card. i now order my phones directly from rogers over the phone and then have them shipped to rogers video stores, instead of buying the phones in stock at rogers-licensed stores.
also, i've received phones from rogers that have been bought and then returned, with the other person's content still on the sd card - as could easily have been the case with the phone in question. In my case, there were pictures of the guy's trip to new york left on the phone.
Either way, that's pretty crazy. I wonder if it's a case of a rogue employee putting it there, or if it somehow got installed unntentionally by Vodafone. Or maybe the phone was used, returned, and re-sold without having the micro sd card formatted.
I was thinking that he was saying that, because the parent invention is public domain, all subsequent inventions based on it must therefore also be public domain - which sounded ridiculous.
I'm not sure if I agree with him about VOIP, but I can see the logic of the argument.
Thanks!
The way I saw his argument was this:
1. Sending data over TCP/IP is public domain
2. All ways of sending data that involve sending it using TCP/IP should therefore also be public domain. This includes VOIP, etc.
So to carry that over to my example, it would be:
1. Using the alphabet to communicate data is public domain
2. All ways of sending data that use the alphabet should also therefore be public domain. This includes books, etc.
To me, the second case seems wrong - and if it follows from the first case, then I vociferously disagree. But I'm thinking that maybe my example is flawed.
TCP/IP and its relatives might have been patentable back when Kahn, Cerf and others developed them. But thanks to ARPA, they are in the public domain. Since the general case is addressed, moving generic digital data, is in the public domain, then why are specific subsets of this technology patentable?
As I understand it, this line of reasoning could be used to argue that, since the alphabet is public domain, all other uses of that alphabet should also be public domain. If that's what you mean, then I disagree.
Am I misunderstanding your argument?
Someone should patent it, just in case.
Yup, sounds complicated.
If you read the article, you would know that he's kept the twitter account anonymous, and hasn't told them yet.
I'd definitely consider switching to this. Better to have Google know all of the sites I visit than to be constantly redirected to Rogers advertising when I mistype a URL.
Just don't try to unplug one of these robots, they'll do whatever it takes to get that sweet sweet electricity...
I have an HTC Magic/G2, and I've often been concerned about this when connecting to an open wifi ap. I only use wifi, so the fact that my cell phone company can see my usage over 3g is a non-issue (canceled my data plan when the free trial ran out). But it seems to me that my google password is probably not well protected from whoever owns the ap I'm connecting to.
I just downloaded the tor android client and the shadow browser (which tells me that it can't use https, unfortunately), and it seems to work. I just checked my IP and it comes up as somewhere in Vancouver, which is not where I am so that's nice. But I still don't see how one can get past the fact that the phone itself is logged into google at all times.
How is this a 'Troll'?
It's not an issue of you paying. It's an issue of Cyanogen distributing copyrighted software without paying.
As I see it, you are entitled to install the Google apps that you have already paid for (by buying your phone) on a modded device. Cyanogen, however, is not allowed to distribute that software pre-installed on his mods.
1. Intellectual Property means legal ownership of patents, copyrights, etc. Clearly, you know this. You may not like it, but "IP" is the standard term in this discourse and, more importantly, in the law. So you're going to have to get used to it.
2. I was not saying that Open Source has issues. I was saying that issues arise when you have an intermingling of open and proprietary software, such as in Android devices. This very debate is proof-positive that there are indeed issues in these instances.
2a/3. So after all of that you agree with me? That was so unnecessary!
IWell there's the android netbook, the Acer Aspire One D250m, so I can't imagine an android-does-ipod-touch will be far behind.
THen again, maybe I misunderstood what you were saying. Did you mean that they could design a new browser for the google market, one that isn't proprietary? If that's possible (I have no idea), then it seems like that would pretty much solve the problem from a legal standpoint. Google probably wouldn't be happy about it, though.
Hmm, that's a really good point. The Market app is one of ones they have a problem with? If that's the case, then this really does put a damper on the Android modders. Anyone know if the Market App is one of the ones involved?
Can't you just re-download them from the Market?
I'm with you right up until the end... I agree that there are IP issues with open source, particularly when you have to both open and proprietary IP involved. However, I don't see how this is a case of google being opened to 'unwanted competition.' Here is how I see it: - Android is open-source. - Not all of the apps on Android are necessarily open-source. - Therefore, Cyanogen, Drizzy, and whoever else are free to mod it to their hearts delight - just so long as they don't also redistribute things that aren't open-source. If this is really Google's qualm, and they will leave Cyanogen alone after he removes the proprietary IP, then I really don't see the problem.
This actually seems like a more-or-less legitimate point by Google. I'll probably get flamed for this, but it seems like people may have overreacted a little bit.
Oh, so that WOULDN'T be effective, then? Gee whiz! ps, I'm pretty sure the 'palm shares' remark was sarcastic.