arnouf wrote: > Globally, in future, we can be sure that some application can't work > correctly if each manufacturer do everything in their private API.
I'll try linking to this again: http://www.androidguys.com/2009/12/14/code-pollution-reaching-past-the-sdk/ Google never said you could rely on com.android.camera -- if you could, it wouldn't be named com.android.*. Anything in the com.android.* namespace is not part of the SDK, to the best of my knowledge. Device manufacturers never said you could rely on com.android.camera. You, on your own, decided to rely on com.android.camera. Or, perhaps it is my fault -- my baldness forced you to use com.android.camera, or something. Now, it would be nice if someday the SDK had a guaranteed way to invoke a "default video player" for both local and HTTP-based videos. By being part of the SDK, then (and only then) do we have moral ground to try to get device manufacturers not to screw with that portion of the public API. The SDK is a contract. Developers need to hold up their end of the contract, so we have a snowball's chance in Ft. Lauderdale of convincing Google and device manufacturers to hold up their ends of the contract. All parties will fail on occasion. -- Mark Murphy (a Commons Guy) http://commonsware.com | http://twitter.com/commonsguy Warescription: Three Android Books, Plus Updates, $35/Year -- 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
