Interesting. Have you talked to Asus as well? From what I hear they've got full time staff working on Android for their netbooks.
S On 24 Feb 2009, at 17:10, Al Sutton wrote: > > If it's any help Koolu are looking to ship over half a million devices > with AndAppStore integrated into their image by the end of the year, > so > hopefully it'll give you the kind of traction we can use to wake > Google up. > > Al. > > P.S. The AndAppStore licensing system isn't limited to AndAppStore, > we've offered it to anyone who thinks they can make use of it. > > Sena Gbeckor-Kove wrote: >> Thanks Al, >> >> I am considering which App Store(s) to launch with at the moment. I >> would still like to launch on the Android Market due to the >> penetration. I suspect I'm going to have to write something similar >> to >> what you've implemented but integrate it with the market back-end. >> >> I'm presenting at a mobile conference soon (pending final sign off) >> and I have to say, its not looking good for Google right now. They >> appear to be relying on momentum to get them through. The handling of >> this launch has been incredibly unprofessional in my opinion. I'm not >> attacking the developers who occasionally stick their heads over the >> parapet to assure us that they are working on things, to them I am >> very grateful. I'm talking about the black hole which is Google >> support infrastructure fall the developers who've poured time and >> money into things. Its a really bad show. >> >> S >> >> >> On 24 Feb 2009, at 16:32, Al Sutton wrote: >> >> >>> Feel free to use >>> http://andappstore.com/AndroidPhoneApplications/licensing.jsp >>> >>> As I understand things the Device ID in 4(c)(ii) should be unique >>> for >>> netbooks, phones, etc. because it's described as "The Android ID (a >>> unique 64-bit value) as a hex string." >>> >>> Al. >>> http://andappstore.com/ >>> >>> Sena Gbeckor-Kove wrote: >>> >>>> The problem is the scammers not the legitimate customers. I'm >>>> considering creating a licenseing library so that people can't just >>>> use the app after having cancelled the transaction. Once that's >>>> done >>>> I'll be happy. Problem is I'm creating a productivity app that I'd >>>> like to be able to run on netbooks as well and I don't want to use >>>> the >>>> IMEI code to calculate my license since its not guaranteed to be on >>>> non phone devices. >>>> >>>> S >>>> >>>> >>>> On 24 Feb 2009, at 03:43, Semprebon wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> You know, as a potential buyer of apps, a 24 hour return period >>>>> seems >>>>> pretty reasonable, even a little short, to me. Maybe if your app >>>>> can't >>>>> hold the customer's attention for that long, its not worth paying >>>>> for >>>>> in the first place... >>>>> >>>>> On Feb 22, 6:12 pm, JP <joachim.pfeif...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> On Feb 22, 1:23 pm, Java Developer <supp...@cyntacks.com> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> Al, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> We finally made the decision to pull the plug too. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> I wonder how pro's that build things from scratch (i.e. do not >>>>>> leverage existing back ends such as Weather Channel, Amazon etc.) >>>>>> would sign up to the platform in an effort to build innovative >>>>>> apps. >>>>>> Technically, Android has the capabilities and "best in class" up >>>>>> front >>>>>> effort and cost. >>>>>> >>>>>> It can be frustrating at times, to say the least. I backed off >>>>>> quite a >>>>>> bit ever since the Google team wasn't able or willing to disperse >>>>>> the >>>>>> allegations that the ADC1 was extended to allow the MIT team to >>>>>> submit >>>>>> and take a price. I sure did not consider quitting my day job. >>>>>> Learning about pretty significant issues like the sidetracked SDK >>>>>> releases in the ADC1 or the launch of paid apps through off-hand >>>>>> remarks in the WSJ is <you fill the blank>. >>>>>> Poor relationship building. >>>>>> >>>>>> ** Google I/O coming. Opportunity to fix the relationship with >>>>>> the >>>>>> developer community ** >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>> >>> -- >>> >>> * Written an Android App? - List it at http://andappstore.com/ * >>> >>> ====== >>> Funky Android Limited is registered in England & Wales with the >>> company number 6741909. The registered head office is Kemp House, >>> 152-160 City Road, London, EC1V 2NX, UK. >>> >>> The views expressed in this email are those of the author and not >>> necessarily those of Funky Android Limited, it's associates, or it's >>> subsidiaries. >>> >>> >>> >> >> >>> >> > > > -- > > * Written an Android App? - List it at http://andappstore.com/ * > > ====== > Funky Android Limited is registered in England & Wales with the > company number 6741909. The registered head office is Kemp House, > 152-160 City Road, London, EC1V 2NX, UK. > > The views expressed in this email are those of the author and not > necessarily those of Funky Android Limited, it's associates, or it's > subsidiaries. > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Android Developers" group. To post to this group, send email to android-developers@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to android-developers-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
