david wrote: > Thanks Mark for the quick response. So you suggest to move away from > the Android Market and use third party app stores like AndAppStore and > SlideME?
You may wish to re-read my post. I wrote: "Application developers are welcome to use third-party DRM solutions." As Al Sutton pointed out, some of these solutions (in his case, the one published through AndAppStore) work for the Android Market as well. That being said, you should definitely consider publishing in multiple markets. Not all devices will have the Android Market installed. > This leads me to my next question: Will the Android Market > support a copy protection like the "SlideLock" of SlideME in the near > future? Beats me. If it is like their current solution, one that only works for Android Market, it would not be very interesting to me. > Because as a developer of Android apps I don't want to invest > too much time into copy protecting my apps by myself, if a general > solution could solve this. An Android Market-specific solution is not a general solution, since there are other markets besides the Android Market. A third-party solution *can* be a general solution. > I know that there are many high quality > apps on other operation systems circulating, but they invest a lot of > time in re-inventing the wheel over and over by enhancing their copy > protection algos. If you have in your possession a statistically-valid survey that proves this claim, please publish it, as I'd love to read it. The firms who provide third-party Windows-based DRM solutions (e.g., Sentinel) might want to take a peek at it as well. > It's just a big hurdle > to let the user enter endless license keys or something similar. Not all copy protection/DRM solutions require license keys to be entered. For example, near as I can tell, the AndAppStore solution does not require entering a license key. Similarly, SlideLock does not seem to require entering a license key (though it appears SlideLock only works on SlideME's own market, if I am understanding the documentation correctly). > they should also > invest a little bit into helping developers to monetize their apps > later and not spending too much time thinking about copy protection. You are certainly welcome to your opinion. I don't share it, as third parties can more readily offer DRM solutions than they can, say, more Bluetooth profiles or other things intrinsic to the Android OS. And, even within the narrower scope of "helping developers to monetize their apps", I suspect DRM would not be anywhere near the top of my list of things Google could do that would help in this area. The recent crop of people complaining about Google competing with independent developers may not share your opinion either. -- Mark Murphy (a Commons Guy) http://commonsware.com | http://twitter.com/commonsguy Need help for your Android OSS project? http://wiki.andmob.org/hado --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Android Discuss" 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-discuss?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
