> I have a question about who is really responsible for the DoJa toolkit
that
> is on NTT DoCoMo's site.
HE did it! (He says, pointing in some random direction.)
> The license agreement says NTT DoCoMo, but it
> seems to be rife with Sun MicroSystems copyrights all throughout the
source
> code.
Typical.
> It is pretty obvious that NTT DoCoMo licensed the interface and maybe
> asked Sun to write some samples for the API (that Sun did, but with
> applications that are too large to run on a real phone! Their way of
> getting back at DoCoMo???),
More like Sun's way of shooting itself in the foot.
>....but who should be referred to when mentioning
> the toolkit?
If you are talking about PROBLEMS with it, mention whichever
party seems NOT to be the source of the problem. E.g., if one of
Sun's sample midlets is too big, say, loud and clear, "NTT's
supplied midlet is too big." Early. Often. NTT will wake up
and put pressure on Sun. If, on the other hand, NTT's hacks to
CLDP appear to be in error, say loud and clear, "I can't
get Sun's XYZ method invocation to do what Sun's documentation
says it will." Then Sun will put pressure on NTT.
Shifted blame has so much more momentum than fixed blame.
And if this doesn't work for you, be sure to say, "but....I read it
in the imode-faq!"
-m
leap@gol.com
[ Did you check the archives? http://www.appelsiini.net/keitai-l/ ]
Received on Fri Apr 13 07:02:06 2001