Comments on: DeviceAnywhere Opens Palm Virtual Developer Lab

DeviceAnywhere has unveiled its new public Palm Virtual Developer Lab (VDL) – a remote testing service designed to reduce the time and resources required to develop, test, monitor, and deploy applications and content for Palm smartphones. The on-line service is available globally to all developers who register for DeviceAnywhere's Palm package and provides support for in-market devices released by the Palm, including the Treo 755p and the new Palm Centro.

Read the Full Article Text Here

Article Comments

(11 comments)

The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. PalmInfocenter is not responsible for them in any way.
Please Login or register here to add your comments.

Virtual Centro on VZW

palmit @ 5/20/2008 3:00:26 PM #

Maybe I can signup for a virtual Centro and make believe its on VZW.

Mutex required

SeldomVisitor @ 5/20/2008 3:11:59 PM #

So this joint uses REAL phones for developers to test their software on remotely.

Can ya imagine trying to get "device time" when everyone else is, too?

Oh.

Wait.

We're talking Palm, right?

Nevermind!

RE: Mutex required

PhrkOnLsh @ 5/24/2008 8:40:45 PM #

Where do they say they use real phones?

Best Regards,
Ryan Rix
TamsPalm - The PalmOS Blog

STOP WHINING! If you hate PalmOS so much, get a winmob device and go whine about it on a winmob site!

RE: Mutex required

cervezas @ 5/25/2008 1:11:43 AM #

Yeah, that's exactly what they do. I saw some of their hardware last year and they physically solder in connections to the video controllers and hardware switches to these devices attached to web servers so the screen can be streamed over the web and the device be controlled remotely. They have "farms" of these handsets in different locations (around the world?) so you can test your app on devices for different operator networks. It's pretty ingenious, really.

David Beers
Senior Wireless Developer
MapQuest
www.pikesoft.com/blog

RE: Mutex required

SeldomVisitor @ 5/25/2008 10:44:41 AM #

Speaking of reality...

Is it time to start making REAL noise about getting the source code for Nova?

Or for that matter, ALP?

Maybe a quickie email to The Free Software Foundation might get things moving, huh?

GPL rules, and all that.

ALP =REAL= soon (if that Access guy's words about a phone soon to be available with it plays out), Nova by end of year or so?

RE: Mutex required

hkklife @ 5/25/2008 1:31:55 PM #

Hey Beersie, good to see ya back on PIC.

You at liberty to drop any hints/tidbits on what you're currently up to? Anything that might be of interest to the PIC faithful etc?

Pilot 1000->Pilot 5000->PalmPilot Pro->IIIe->Vx->m505->T|T->T|T2->T|C->T|T3->T|T5->Zodiac 2->TX->Verizon Treo 700P->Verizon Treo 755p

RE: Mutex required

twrock @ 5/25/2008 7:57:10 PM #

Re: the comments about GPL and source code, I am sure that both Palm and ACCESS will comply with the GPL and release the required source code. (However, as I am sure you quite well know, just because you use some GPL code for some of the software used by your company does not mean that all software ever written by your company has to become GPL and you have to release the source code for everything else you write.) SV, do you actually have plans for how you will make use of the ALP and Nova source code? Are you going to develop something for either platform?

"twrock is infamous around these parts" (from my profile over at Brighthand due to my negative 62 rep points rating)

RE: Mutex required

SeldomVisitor @ 5/26/2008 6:47:08 AM #

Plans for the source? No. I am not a phone-software developer, certainly not a phone operating system software developer (though, of course, I =could= be - no need to repeat and enhance the details about my background and education a-GAIN, right? Giggle). My (semi-joking) interest in this is just to see how far they both will go to try to get around the license terms they theoretically are supposed to adhere to.

The GPL says something like:

== "If you keep YOUR software separate from GPLed software, then you
== can keep your software secret. But if you don't, you can't - you must
== make available (to everyone forever) the source for your changes/enhancements
== as soon as you have released the binary version"

Colligan must be turning over in his grave about that.

Without going over the GPL with a fine-toothed legal-mindset comb this probably means that any static code that PALM has added to the Linux core, any deletions and additions, MUST be available as source. I didn't carefully read the GPL about how DYNAMIC code is handled but I believe the GPL has words about just how "separate" things have to be before you can keep them secret (that is, you can't put just about EVERYTHING in a dynamically-loaded module then claim that your almost-boot loader is the only static part that needs its source code released...).

Anyway, come "late calendar year 2008" when the new OS is supposed to be...er..."ready but not seen", I would bet bucks that PALM will be VERY restrictive in its ... er ... "readyness" to make sure it is still "under development", thus considered by the GPL to not yet having been released.

RE: Mutex required

twrock @ 5/27/2008 10:58:33 PM #

== "If you keep YOUR software separate from GPLed software, then you
== can keep your software secret. But if you don't, you can't - you must
== make available (to everyone forever) the source for your changes/enhancements
== as soon as you have released the binary version"

I'm not sure why you would put your interpretation of what the GPL says into quotes and in a standout form. Typically people put something in quotes is because they are actually quoting something else. But just to clarify and make sure I am understanding you, you are in no way trying to imply that the statement above is what the GPL actually says, are you? (And if I am wrong about that, can you give me a link to that quote?) Thanks.

"twrock is infamous around these parts" (from my profile over at Brighthand due to my negative 62 rep points rating)

RE: Mutex required

SeldomVisitor @ 5/28/2008 6:57:35 AM #

Huh?

[and to pointedly note - why are you bothering with these questions? Really? Why? For what reasons? Contemplate your navel.]

RE: Mutex required

twrock @ 5/28/2008 11:44:29 AM #

Contemplate your navel.

No need. It hasn't changed at all since the last time I glanced at it.

"twrock is infamous around these parts" (from my profile over at Brighthand due to my negative 62 rep points rating)