Hi Jason - I think you have a couple stumblers here --
1) Getting handsets directly from the manufacturer is a bit of problem
because they produce on behalf of the carrier/region. So you are better to
work directly with the carrier for sample or developer sets.
2) Being a developer partner with a manufacturer or carrier is a good idea.
Easier to get access to loaner and advance issues. We were dev partner of
Moto and Nextel - thus, received the newest handsets for testing and dev.
But this does not mean we had ALL the handsets they deployed in a market.
3) I know a large Japanese company that provides testing for virtually every
handset issued in the Asian market. They are planning a similar business for
the US market. It's brutal - basically they purchase every known handset for
every carrier and then conduct testing with their proprietary software.
They've made a business of it - especially in the ringtone market - because
of the need for extensive QA as you mention.
If you are interested, then please give me a follow up email. I'm currently
evaluating business climate for them and feedback from developers in US is
important. Like - would you pay for this kind of service?
Cheers,
Tim
-----Original Message-----
From: keitai-l-bounce@appelsiini.net
[mailto:keitai-l-bounce@appelsiini.net]On Behalf Of Jason Fields
Sent: Friday, April 16, 2004 4:07 AM
To: 'KEITAI-L@appelsiini.net'
Subject: (keitai-l) Acquisition of Mobile Phones for Site Testing (OT).
Hello,
I got another semi - non asia/EU related mobile phone question to field
to you all...
I am currently working as the Lead Information Architect on a large
scale content delivery project for SBC SMARTpages.com
here in the US... Part of the new site rollout involves mobile phone
content delivery... We are using a hardware solution to deliver
the web pages and content to the mobile phones... My question is, even
with mobile phone emulators, your still going to need to use real world
handsets to test out delivery and rendering? It would be silly to
[ excessive quoting removed by moderator ]
Received on Fri Apr 16 02:34:23 2004