And you did so well constructively partitioning my points into separate emails before you went all hyperbole.
I'm not a blogger or journalist. Every hard core business types we told about the ADC said the same thing: "Sounds like Google just got thousands of original ideas for free." We see these as the same hardcore types who would have envisioned and defined the ADC rules. /GW On May 6, 8:27 pm, Incognito <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Nice one! Although, from his tone it sounded as if he were one of > those bloggers getting ready to write a story of lies,deception, and > cospiracy. > > On May 6, 11:17 pm, David Moffett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Not getting any server hits? :-) > > > David > > > On May 6, 2008, at 8:38 PM, Google Watch wrote: > > > > Is the Android Challenge legit or an elaborate form of phishing, > > > or even an outright scam of sorts? > > > > It seems that the challenge has a few glaring problems: > > > 1) The rules favor teams and/or individuals with financial > > > backing or resources. > > > The Challenge is scored in 4 areas. I suggest that Originality > > > and Indispensibility are areas that favor contributors equally > > > whether they are poor individuals or well funded teams. > > > However "Effective Use of the Android Platform" and > > > "Polish and Appeal" penalize those with limited financial > > > resources. These qualities require more time to implement > > > thereby favoring those who could spend more time on the > > > challenge than those who responded to the challenge > > > in the "Willy Wonka" spirit (believing all had a chance) > > > and had to work on the challenge in their spare time. > > > > 2) Google discontinued support for the Challenge users > > > while continuing to support OHA and other stakeholders > > > (e.g., device manufacturers, MIT) thereby marginalizing/ > > > under supporting the Challenge members. > > > Using the Android platform, which > > > despite being Linux and Java, is no picnic or walk in the park. > > > The processing model is *different* (and I'll question it's necessity > > > on a Linux platform in another post), the SDK has bugs, the > > > documentation has inconsistencies (e.g., look at the various > > > places where TableLayout and table row are documented), > > > pieces of the SDK were missing (e.g., BT, etc.) and so on. > > > And while independents were toiling away trying to slog through > > > the Android'isms and bugs, Google was actively supporting members > > > of the OHA (are they really on the same SDK version as we are?) > > > Are all submitters *really* isolated from those who had more > > > inside information? Access to the source? > > > > 3) Participants who fail to win in round 1 stand to lose even more. > > > When you made your submission you agreed that if Google > > > or any of the Judges developed your idea you had no recourse. > > > What if Google/Judges never had the idea before you submitted it? > > > Had not yet visualized it on the Android platform before the > > > entries were submitted? Do you think you can get your idea to > > > market faster than the multi-billion dollar Google juggernaut? > > > In it's most perverse form isn't it all really a way for Google > > > to potentially get 1700+ original ideas for which they only > > > need to pay for 50? > > > > /GW > > > > Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. > > > Try it now.- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text - --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Android Challenge" 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/android-challenge?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
