As long as you you don't have the cheek to actually advertise the fact that your app is available elsewhere, then yes - you should be ok. Drop the word Android somewhere in your app however and it's a different story.
Not least because there's a finite probability that http://twitter.com/TheRealNimoy [twitter.com] will respond to you. A thing like that can make your decade.
Agreed, this is a big one. Twitter is a two-way medium. It allows you to casually exchange ideas with people you would never get a chance to meet in meatspace (William Gibson being one mine). If you think it's all about "breakfast tweeters" I have to wonder if you have a very good grasp of the role of technology in communication at all.
:~$ echo "I only kind of agree. The users are definitivelly posting junk. But can you really post anything useful in the length limit of tweeter ?" | wc
137
Only on software support. If you brick your phone flashing it you might be SOL. But if you have a hardware fault (like the dead trackball I experienced) they repair it no questions asked.
As somebody who is getting increasing pressure to support iOS in a (relatively secured) corporate environment, I can tell you that it is anything BUT standards compliant.
Try connecting one to an authenticated proxy. Looks like it works doesn't it? Well it doesn't. Inexplicably half of the outbound packets bypass the proxy and run smack into our firewall. This is for normal port 80 traffic. Or how about how the Youtube app sends a 'Host:' header pointing to gdata.youtube.com, but the requested url is actually iphone-wu.apple.com. We need to put in squid redirectors to repair the mess.
Windows, Linux, OS X all work fine in this environment, but iOS is a bloody train wreck.
As for companies being "greedy," that's really an utterly irrelevant consideration. All companies exist first and foremost to deliver a profit to their owners/shareholders. If they don't maximize their profit, they are not doing their fiduciary duty, and in most countries (certainly including the US) can be sued for that.
This is wrong. Even assuming the company is for-profit there are are variety of ways to charter a company. The responsibility of the company is to follow their charter, NOT to the shareholders. Now, it is possible to charter a company to say "maximise shareholder value" but this is actually fairly uncommon ("increase shareholder value" is more common, but you'll agree they are two very different things).
Of course, shareholders are free to sue who ever they like. Anybody can sue whoever they like. It will then be up to the courts to decide what "value" means - but it isn't always fiducial either.
I've no idea how this concept became so pervasive - it is certainly exploited for shock value in films like "the Corporation" - but for everybody to just accept the worst from corporations is harmful to society and has to stop.
I didn't know Penumbra was a late addition, but I did get Samorost 2 for nothing after purchasing the bundle.
It was a pleasant experience I could certainly get used to. Never before have I paid an agreed price for something and had the publisher contact me with: "we've changed the deal - in your favour. Head back to our website to download your extra shit".
The Google apps are not part of the core OS, they are just nicely integrated. You are free to use any number of alternatives. It is possible to run Android completely Google free.
Unlike some other mobile platforms that shall remain nameless, there is no rule forbidding the use of competing apps or services.
Of course, if you already use gmail I don't know why you would bother. Nobody is going to give you better gmail integration on Android then Google. But I would call that "competition" rather then "lock-in".
You are talking about granting the Government new, opaque and easily-abused powers - without measurably gaining anything in return.
You can mock citizens concerned about their rights if you like, but answer me this - what do you perceive the net benefit of this plan is? What will we gain as a society?
The internet is NOT media. It is a medium.
Of course it should be treated differently to broadcast media.
We are talking about censoring COMMUNICATION here, not fraking superbowl commercials.
it's already illegal to *host* this sort of content in Australia.
Precisely, so what does this achieve? Why allow the Government to grant itself that much power over public discourse when there are already tools in place to address these concerns.
Etc. It seems like a fairly sticky situation when you start legislating against or for certain companies or organizations...
You don't need to, you simply legislate that documents must be in an open format. If certain companies don't want to make their software compliant with the standard that's their problem.
That will be up to future historians won't it? UNIX isn't going anywhere anytime soon. Much of the history of UNIX has already been lost, or only recorded after being passed on via oral tradition.
This case is and will remain a pivotal moment in the future history of UNIX. Imagine what the software/systems landscape would like if SCO had won? It is reasonable to want to preserve this history, as other documentation projects have done with other parts of the hacker tradition.
Presumably you can't just switch ISP to get the connection back, unless they less that massive hole open too.
Indeed, this is one of the holes they are exploiting: "Operating more than one retail arm selling to customers and allowing customers to migrate freely with no change to service between those retail arms, thus bypassing copyright notice counting and any blocking orders."
One thing that you clearly do not understand about DVDs and movies is distribution is licensed pretty much by country. If the movie does not meet that country's standards, it is not licensed for distribution and cannot be shown or sold.
This isn't really correct. Most national trade authorities (AU, NZ, EU, WTO) take a pretty dim view of region coding. It is tolerated (you can region code your media if you want) but certainly not backed up by force of law. (you can't force people to use region locked players)
Region coding IS part of the distribution license, however this license is between private parties (the distributors). Classification and/or censorship have nothing to do with this process.
Don't feed crap trolls. The crafty ones can get you sometimes but there was no excuse for this.
If it wasn't for your response the moderation system would have made sure I, and thousands of other readers, would never had read the AC's post at all. It has already disappeared off the radar.
But you had to go and open a dialogue. You even quoted the whole thing! No offence man, but WTF were you thinking?
I do agree that it would be nice to ban everybody named "Anonymous Coward" though. I wish we could to a poll on that.
Let me say I can happily use vi all day. I also think that nethack shortcuts are intuitive (well, maybe not - but I like them).
The thing is a document viewer has different input requirements to a document editor.
Vimperator is cute, but I can't shake the feeling it is a joke taken too far. Something like the unixkcd thing, only the neckbeards coding it forgot to include a punchline.
Besides, firefox implements "/" for page search so I'm happy.
Slashdot Mirror
As long as you you don't have the cheek to actually advertise the fact that your app is available elsewhere, then yes - you should be ok. Drop the word Android somewhere in your app however and it's a different story.
Not least because there's a finite probability that http://twitter.com/TheRealNimoy [twitter.com] will respond to you. A thing like that can make your decade.
Agreed, this is a big one. Twitter is a two-way medium. It allows you to casually exchange ideas with people you would never get a chance to meet in meatspace (William Gibson being one mine). If you think it's all about "breakfast tweeters" I have to wonder if you have a very good grasp of the role of technology in communication at all.
137
But I'm still undecided ;)
... and lose you warranty in the process.
Only on software support. If you brick your phone flashing it you might be SOL. But if you have a hardware fault (like the dead trackball I experienced) they repair it no questions asked.
As somebody who is getting increasing pressure to support iOS in a (relatively secured) corporate environment, I can tell you that it is anything BUT standards compliant.
Try connecting one to an authenticated proxy. Looks like it works doesn't it? Well it doesn't. Inexplicably half of the outbound packets bypass the proxy and run smack into our firewall. This is for normal port 80 traffic. Or how about how the Youtube app sends a 'Host:' header pointing to gdata.youtube.com, but the requested url is actually iphone-wu.apple.com. We need to put in squid redirectors to repair the mess.
Windows, Linux, OS X all work fine in this environment, but iOS is a bloody train wreck.
As for companies being "greedy," that's really an utterly irrelevant consideration. All companies exist first and foremost to deliver a profit to their owners/shareholders. If they don't maximize their profit, they are not doing their fiduciary duty, and in most countries (certainly including the US) can be sued for that.
This is wrong. Even assuming the company is for-profit there are are variety of ways to charter a company. The responsibility of the company is to follow their charter, NOT to the shareholders. Now, it is possible to charter a company to say "maximise shareholder value" but this is actually fairly uncommon ("increase shareholder value" is more common, but you'll agree they are two very different things).
Of course, shareholders are free to sue who ever they like. Anybody can sue whoever they like. It will then be up to the courts to decide what "value" means - but it isn't always fiducial either.
I've no idea how this concept became so pervasive - it is certainly exploited for shock value in films like "the Corporation" - but for everybody to just accept the worst from corporations is harmful to society and has to stop.
HTC don't hate their customers. You are just confused about who their customers are.
Nexus One: Customer = You = Hackable device
Desire: Customer = Network Provider = Locked down
Same phone, different customer requirements.
I didn't know Penumbra was a late addition, but I did get Samorost 2 for nothing after purchasing the bundle.
It was a pleasant experience I could certainly get used to. Never before have I paid an agreed price for something and had the publisher contact me with: "we've changed the deal - in your favour. Head back to our website to download your extra shit".
Android is Apache licensed - how much more open do you want?
Are you sure you were allowed to carry blades to school? Or could it have been they had specific guidelines for knives over 6". There is a difference.
I always figured Cassandra was a reference to Red Dwarf.
It sounds positively Jobsian - something you'd hear at Macworld keynote.
The Google apps are not part of the core OS, they are just nicely integrated. You are free to use any number of alternatives. It is possible to run Android completely Google free.
Unlike some other mobile platforms that shall remain nameless, there is no rule forbidding the use of competing apps or services.
Of course, if you already use gmail I don't know why you would bother. Nobody is going to give you better gmail integration on Android then Google. But I would call that "competition" rather then "lock-in".
Except the Internet is a totally different world.
[stuff]
All good, relevant points. But I found it interesting you missed the elephant in the room that is P2P, and the nonsense of artificial scarcity.
Um, yes? That is exactly what I was getting at.
You are talking about granting the Government new, opaque and easily-abused powers - without measurably gaining anything in return.
You can mock citizens concerned about their rights if you like, but answer me this - what do you perceive the net benefit of this plan is? What will we gain as a society?
The internet is NOT media. It is a medium. Of course it should be treated differently to broadcast media.
We are talking about censoring COMMUNICATION here, not fraking superbowl commercials.
it's already illegal to *host* this sort of content in Australia.
Precisely, so what does this achieve? Why allow the Government to grant itself that much power over public discourse when there are already tools in place to address these concerns.
Etc. It seems like a fairly sticky situation when you start legislating against or for certain companies or organizations...
You don't need to, you simply legislate that documents must be in an open format. If certain companies don't want to make their software compliant with the standard that's their problem.
That will be up to future historians won't it? UNIX isn't going anywhere anytime soon. Much of the history of UNIX has already been lost, or only recorded after being passed on via oral tradition.
This case is and will remain a pivotal moment in the future history of UNIX. Imagine what the software/systems landscape would like if SCO had won? It is reasonable to want to preserve this history, as other documentation projects have done with other parts of the hacker tradition.
Presumably you can't just switch ISP to get the connection back, unless they less that massive hole open too.
Indeed, this is one of the holes they are exploiting: "Operating more than one retail arm selling to customers and allowing customers to migrate freely with no change to service between those retail arms, thus bypassing copyright notice counting and any blocking orders."
One thing that you clearly do not understand about DVDs and movies is distribution is licensed pretty much by country. If the movie does not meet that country's standards, it is not licensed for distribution and cannot be shown or sold.
This isn't really correct. Most national trade authorities (AU, NZ, EU, WTO) take a pretty dim view of region coding. It is tolerated (you can region code your media if you want) but certainly not backed up by force of law. (you can't force people to use region locked players)
Region coding IS part of the distribution license, however this license is between private parties (the distributors). Classification and/or censorship have nothing to do with this process.
Don't feed crap trolls. The crafty ones can get you sometimes but there was no excuse for this.
If it wasn't for your response the moderation system would have made sure I, and thousands of other readers, would never had read the AC's post at all. It has already disappeared off the radar.
But you had to go and open a dialogue. You even quoted the whole thing! No offence man, but WTF were you thinking?
I do agree that it would be nice to ban everybody named "Anonymous Coward" though. I wish we could to a poll on that.
Not here, AC, I just tried. Maybe in Windowsland (TM).
But come now, did you really need to hide your identity for that?
Mmm, tried it, didn't like it.
Let me say I can happily use vi all day. I also think that nethack shortcuts are intuitive (well, maybe not - but I like them).
The thing is a document viewer has different input requirements to a document editor.
Vimperator is cute, but I can't shake the feeling it is a joke taken too far. Something like the unixkcd thing, only the neckbeards coding it forgot to include a punchline.
Besides, firefox implements "/" for page search so I'm happy.
Firefox has a good solution too, given that accessing the URL bar is a quick keystroke and then a tab over to enter the search box.
If you think that is convenient, then CTRL+K will change your life.