On Mon, 12 May 2003, Giovanni Bertani wrote:
> Native applications, avaible SDKs and the possibility of distributing
> applications are some of the elements for innovation, having a
> common OS with a shared property between handset
> producers (Symbian).
Well, if having a common system between handsets is considered an
advantage, Java probably wins out over Symbian. Since Java is is
significantly faster to develop and deploy than BREW, and I can re-use
almost all of my code across a single providers' handsets, and some of
it different providers' handsets, I can get an application out on pretty
much every Docomo, J-phone and AU Java-enabled handset far more quickly
than I could ever hope to get a BREW application rolled out.
> Some other are the use of open standards, the possibility of accessing
> directly the operator network and the internet from the device with
> installed browsers or installable softwares, the possibility of direct
> connections between handsets by IR bluetooth cables.
>
> Most of these features are not available in the JP market as they
> are not in the interest of the operators.
Actually, these features are slowly being added to the JP market. For
example, i-Appli in the new 505 series are not restricted to connecting
just to the host that they were downloaded from.
And as far as BREW goes, though there's the technical possibility that
you're going to be able to do all those fun things that are "not in
the operator's interest," keep in mind that *every* application must
be extensively vetted and approved by the operator. Unlike Docomo,
BREW operators can block anything they want to at any time, so I'd say
that there's the distinct possibility of having far less freedom and
innovation in that market.
> > AU's BREW applications
> > are quite the opposite: not only do you have to invest a fair amount =
> of
> > money into an SDK, but there's a arduous and expensive approval =
> process
> > that you have to go through to have the application certified and made
> > available for download. No certification, no download. So if AU sees =
> an
> > application they don't like, they can block it. Docomo can do no such
> > thing.
>
> Is this helping innovation? This model is exactly the same model
> adopted by the game console business that is acceptable only
> by organizations with deep pockets. I do not see this approach
> as positive...
Exactly how I feel.
> > My Japanese colleague is asking me explain of the impact on our=20
> > marketting
> > plans, of Docomo's announcement that they will start selling handsets=20=
> > with
> > free-sites web browsing optionally turned off
>
> I really hope this is just a move to stop teens access
> to dangerous sites ... It must be just an option...
Uh...don't they already do this? Certainly for a long time there's a
mode where all your packets are routed to another provider (connected
to Docomo via a leased line), and it decides what it's going to do with
them. That other provider can block or allow anything it likes.
cjs
--
Curt Sampson <cjs_at_cynic.net> +81 90 7737 2974 http://www.netbsd.org
Don't you know, in this new Dark Age, we're all light. --XTC
Received on Tue May 13 05:42:16 2003