Comments on: The hidden problem with J2ME http://www.spenceruresk.com/2007/05/26/the-hidden-problem-with-j2me/ Random posts about Java, software development, politics, and economics Fri, 22 Aug 2008 02:59:28 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.1 by: Michael Voong – Java Verification? Not For Me! http://www.spenceruresk.com/2007/05/26/the-hidden-problem-with-j2me/#comment-14093 Mon, 14 Jan 2008 22:47:46 +0000 http://www.spenceruresk.com/2007/05/26/the-hidden-problem-with-j2me/#comment-14093 [...] Apparently, the Java ME code verification system is a joke. One developer has said that if you want to use anything other than the buttons and screen, you need your code signed. All of this was supposed to make code signing in Java ME centralised, being based upon impartial third parties like Verisign, Thawte, and others, but now some carriers (particularly in the US) have implemented their own certification processes, which defeats the point of having a centralised verification service like the Java Verified Program. Cingular’s lock-down in the US is a prime example of this evil - developers can only use the Bluetooth API (JSR-82) if you’re an enterprise partner with $1000 to spare for Cingular to test your application. JSR-179 (location services) is banned altogether. “PIM, SMS, and internet connectivity services are also heavily restricted, with most things requiring at least a 3rd party cert ($500 or so per year) to use.” [...] […] Apparently, the Java ME code verification system is a joke. One developer has said that if you want to use anything other than the buttons and screen, you need your code signed. All of this was supposed to make code signing in Java ME centralised, being based upon impartial third parties like Verisign, Thawte, and others, but now some carriers (particularly in the US) have implemented their own certification processes, which defeats the point of having a centralised verification service like the Java Verified Program. Cingular’s lock-down in the US is a prime example of this evil - developers can only use the Bluetooth API (JSR-82) if you’re an enterprise partner with $1000 to spare for Cingular to test your application. JSR-179 (location services) is banned altogether. “PIM, SMS, and internet connectivity services are also heavily restricted, with most things requiring at least a 3rd party cert ($500 or so per year) to use.” […]

]]> by: anil philip http://www.spenceruresk.com/2007/05/26/the-hidden-problem-with-j2me/#comment-4062 Tue, 29 May 2007 14:26:45 +0000 http://www.spenceruresk.com/2007/05/26/the-hidden-problem-with-j2me/#comment-4062 Thank you for your post. I have an application that I want to port to j2me. Reading your post made me rethink. Perhaps I should just focus on PDAs? Thank you for your post. I have an application that I want to port to j2me. Reading your post made me rethink. Perhaps I should just focus on PDAs?

]]> by: pipedings http://www.spenceruresk.com/2007/05/26/the-hidden-problem-with-j2me/#comment-4061 Tue, 29 May 2007 13:29:01 +0000 http://www.spenceruresk.com/2007/05/26/the-hidden-problem-with-j2me/#comment-4061 What might work is - set the Phone's Product ID to an unbranded one see http://www.averageadmins.com/blog/2006/11/12/force-flashing-the-nokia-e61/ and then install a clean Nokia Firmware with the Nokia software updater What might work is

- set the Phone’s Product ID to an unbranded one

see
http://www.averageadmins.com/blog/2006/11/12/force-flashing-the-nokia-e61/

and then install a clean Nokia Firmware with the Nokia software updater

]]> by: suresk http://www.spenceruresk.com/2007/05/26/the-hidden-problem-with-j2me/#comment-4044 Tue, 29 May 2007 06:26:31 +0000 http://www.spenceruresk.com/2007/05/26/the-hidden-problem-with-j2me/#comment-4044 Yes, getting an unlocked/debranded phone works in some cases. To my knowledge, though, the N75 in particular is only sold to Cingular and therefore is going to be tricky to get unlocked. I may look into other phones that offer good J2ME support and can be unlocked easily, even though it only solves part of the problem. Thanks. Yes, getting an unlocked/debranded phone works in some cases. To my knowledge, though, the N75 in particular is only sold to Cingular and therefore is going to be tricky to get unlocked.

I may look into other phones that offer good J2ME support and can be unlocked easily, even though it only solves part of the problem.

Thanks.

]]> by: Jeremy O'Donoghue http://www.spenceruresk.com/2007/05/26/the-hidden-problem-with-j2me/#comment-4043 Tue, 29 May 2007 06:21:04 +0000 http://www.spenceruresk.com/2007/05/26/the-hidden-problem-with-j2me/#comment-4043 If you're going to do this sort of thing you really need to get an 'unlocked' phone. This is unsubsidized by the operator and doesn't have functionality disabled. You'll pay more, of course (your N75 would probably cost ~$500). In the UK, Expansys (www.expansys.com) is a good source of such devices. Many devices sold in Europe are compatible with US GSM networks (look for 1900 MHz and 850 MHz band support), so this may be an acceptable route for you. You still have the certification costs if you want to sell your application on, of course. I agree it sucks, but it won't change while operators subsidize phones (and consumers accept reduced functionality in return for the lowered price). If you’re going to do this sort of thing you really need to get an ‘unlocked’ phone. This is unsubsidized by the operator and doesn’t have functionality disabled.

You’ll pay more, of course (your N75 would probably cost ~$500). In the UK, Expansys (www.expansys.com) is a good source of such devices. Many devices sold in Europe are compatible with US GSM networks (look for 1900 MHz and 850 MHz band support), so this may be an acceptable route for you.

You still have the certification costs if you want to sell your application on, of course. I agree it sucks, but it won’t change while operators subsidize phones (and consumers accept reduced functionality in return for the lowered price).

]]> by: home automation » Blog Archive » The hidden problem with J2ME http://www.spenceruresk.com/2007/05/26/the-hidden-problem-with-j2me/#comment-4003 Sun, 27 May 2007 20:54:36 +0000 http://www.spenceruresk.com/2007/05/26/the-hidden-problem-with-j2me/#comment-4003 [...] …more [...] […] …more […]

]]> by: Tiffani http://www.spenceruresk.com/2007/05/26/the-hidden-problem-with-j2me/#comment-3993 Sun, 27 May 2007 14:35:58 +0000 http://www.spenceruresk.com/2007/05/26/the-hidden-problem-with-j2me/#comment-3993 Yeah, it really is a crock. I'm tired of the lame applications that are out there, too, but like you highlighted, the carriers make it as hard as they can to develop much else. It can be done, but it's going to cost money. You're off to a decent start messing around with emulators, but that's going to be a frustrating can of worms to open when you start (if you continue on the mobile development path) officially moving your mobile apps from the emulator to a real device. I say that because the functionality on the emulator often *does not* reflect the way it works on a real phone. Device fragmentation is something carriers, mobile manufacturers, and in a way, mobile software developers, are going to have to get together to fix. I always complain about JSRs (which I guess I mistook as standards) and how the implementations differ from one device to the next (even within the same manufacturer I've seen different implementations of the same JSR) and how they don't make things any better. Mobile development is promising, but it's got a while to go. I'm still chugging along with an app I'm building, but it's not easy. Perhaps, it will get better when companies get smarter. Yeah, it really is a crock. I’m tired of the lame applications that are out there, too, but like you highlighted, the carriers make it as hard as they can to develop much else. It can be done, but it’s going to cost money.

You’re off to a decent start messing around with emulators, but that’s going to be a frustrating can of worms to open when you start (if you continue on the mobile development path) officially moving your mobile apps from the emulator to a real device. I say that because the functionality on the emulator often *does not* reflect the way it works on a real phone. Device fragmentation is something carriers, mobile manufacturers, and in a way, mobile software developers, are going to have to get together to fix. I always complain about JSRs (which I guess I mistook as standards) and how the implementations differ from one device to the next (even within the same manufacturer I’ve seen different implementations of the same JSR) and how they don’t make things any better.

Mobile development is promising, but it’s got a while to go. I’m still chugging along with an app I’m building, but it’s not easy. Perhaps, it will get better when companies get smarter.

]]>