1,788 entries

[jalopy]

http://android-developers.blogspot.com/2008/04/android-developers-have-risen-to.html

Good luck!

[Muthu Ramadoss]

Beat me to it ;)

Great news!

http://mobeegal.in
find stuff closer.

On Apr 18, 11:00 am, jalopy <cooljal...@gmail.com> wrote:
> http://android-developers.blogspot.com/2008/04/android-developers-hav...
>
> Good luck!

[freeanderson]

great news.
the competitive rate is 35.76:1 for 50 semi finalist.
of course, although substantially it will be hard competition of 2.8%
of top level.
it's the stern realities.

[jim.renkel]

I'm wondering if the 1,788 is total submissions (including re-
submissions) or unique submissions (not including re-submissions). If
it's the latter, we were all way off on our guesses of submissions. If
it's the former, it's still a large and impressive number, but the
number of unique submissions will be much smaller.

I was not receiving acknowledgments for submissions, so I re-submitted
until I got an acknowledgment. In one case I had to resubmit 5 times
before I got an acknowledgment.

Also, if it's the latter, that means each judge is going to be looking
at an average of 17.8 submissions, and they need to do that and have
the results collated by May 5. Wow, talk about deadline pressure. :-)

Any other thoughts on this?

Jim Rnkel

[Peli]

This happened in 1788:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1788

Most notably, the first edition of "The Times" appears, Timbuktu was
discovered by the British African Association, the French revolution
is about to begin, and Mozart writes his final symphony, the Jupiter
symphony, in 1788.

It is a pity that Jan missed the deadline (
http://groups.google.com/group/android-challenge/browse_frm/thread/68626aaf25f6f8b9#
). 1789 would have been a much nicer number - besides having the first
president of the US elected that year, and the first Thanksgiving,
1789 is also a prime number.

Peli

[tomgibara]

I'd be interested in knowing the proportion of business/team/solo
entrants, simply out of curiosity. I don't see how that information
would be particularly sensitive (unless perhaps there was an extremely
low number of business entrants).

Tom.

[vetch]

On 18 Kwi, 14:09, "jim.renkel" <ja...@renkel.name> wrote:
> I'm wondering if the 1,788 is total submissions (including re-
> submissions) or unique submissions (not including re-submissions).

good point. You gave me hope :D

greets,
peter

[Peli]

> I was not receiving acknowledgments for submissions, so I re-submitted
> until I got an acknowledgment. In one case I had to resubmit 5 times
> before I got an acknowledgment.

This may explain the "170+ submissions per hour" in "the wee hours of
Tuesday morning" ( http://android-developers.blogspot.com/2008/04/android-developers-have-risen-to.html
) ;-)

Another interesting point: Assume that they had some 170 submissions
per hour for say 5 hours: 170*5 = 850. Even if the peak didn't last
that long, spreading this number over the period of 24 hours gives you
some realistic sounding 35 submissions per hour. That would mean,
Monday morning they still had less than 1000 submissions :-)

Peli

[viktor]

I hope that each submission will be valuated by a panel of judges, not
an individual judge:
http://code.google.com/android/adc_judging.html

To be objective, a panel must consist of at least 3 judges.

Let's assume that each of 100 judges receives 17.8 submissions. A
judge will score an app relatively to other apps in the same “bucket”.
In most cases, this will lead to one app from a bucket that makes into
the first 100. Apps are randomly packed into buckets. This may result
in "strong" (several good apps) and "weak" (no good apps) buckets. A
second app in a strong bucket can be significantly better than the
best app in a weak bucket. But this second app may not make the first
100 if buckets are reviewed by individual judges because cross-bucket
judging will not be executed.

So, larger buckets lead to fairer judging.

Dan Morrill, please let us know the size of a bucket when you have a
free moment.

> > > Good luck!- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

[ddm]

:))

I think it's great number, even if 10% of these apps would be useful
it's about 200 apps for device which still doesn't hit the market.

On 18 апр, 16:10, Peli <peli0...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> This happened in 1788:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1788
>
> Most notably, the first edition of "The Times" appears, Timbuktu was
> discovered by the British African Association, the French revolution
> is about to begin, and Mozart writes his final symphony, the Jupiter
> symphony, in 1788.
>

> It is a pity that Jan missed the deadline (http://groups.google.com/group/android-challenge/browse_frm/thread/68...

[wataru]

1788 entires is bit more than I thought, but I think
(if you don't think about the contest outcome)
more the better! It means more apps will be available
for us to play, test or use when real device is out in the market!

I can't wait to get an Android device and play with those
(great & useful) apps!

T.K.

----------------------------------------
If you like RPG game, check this out!
http://dungeonwonders.com/
----------------------------------------

[Alex Pisarev]

Viktor,

Probably, the main flaw in your assumptions is that the judge will
score apps in bucket RELATIVELY to each other, while I think that
they'll be scored relative to "perfect app" with 10 points in each
category. I assume that after judging process all 100 judges will sort
their judged apps by application points and, hence, will get the right
list where the strong apps will be in the front.

Alex

> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

[Dan Morrill]

On Fri, Apr 18, 2008 at 5:09 AM, jim.renkel <ja...@renkel.name> wrote:

I'm  wondering if the 1,788 is total submissions (including re-
submissions) or unique submissions (not including re-submissions).

The number is de-duplicated, unique submissions, and does not include a handful that were disqualified according to the rules in the Terms & Conditions.  (The apps that were disqualified were ones that were submitted with obviously copyrighted material such as music files or ROMs, so don't worry that we were disqualifying people on technicalities.)

- Dan

[Dan Morrill]

This is correct.  We're providing rather detailed judging guidelines intended to help judges calibrate their scores.  We also plan to post-process the results looking for outliers (such as cases where one judge gave a score that varies significantly from the others') to help make sure the results are fair.

Panel size will be at least 3, depending on how many judges we have; currently the panel size is expected to be 4.

- Dan

On Fri, Apr 18, 2008 at 7:38 AM, Living Sword <livin...@gmail.com> wrote:

i dont think apps will be judged relatively. Each app will have its
own scores based on the 4 criteria. Then apps with highest scores will
move on.

On Apr 18, 6:42 pm, viktor <viktor2...@gmail.com> wrote:

> I hope that each submission will be valuated by a panel of judges, not
> an individual judge:http://code.google.com/android/adc_judging.html
>
> To be objective, a panel must consist of at least 3 judges.
>
> Let's assume that each of 100 judges receives 17.8 submissions. A
> judge will score an app relatively to other apps in the same "bucket".
> In most cases, this will lead to one app from a bucket that makes into
> the first 100. Apps are randomly packed into buckets. This may result
> in "strong" (several good apps) and "weak" (no good apps) buckets. A
> second app in a strong bucket can be significantly better than the
> best app in a weak bucket. But this second app may not make the first
> 100 if buckets are reviewed by individual judges because cross-bucket
> judging will not be executed.
>
> So, larger buckets lead to fairer judging.
>
> Dan Morrill, please let us know the size of a bucket when you have a
> free moment.
>
>

[David Moffett]

and if you subtract 1122 you get 666.  :-)

David

[viktor]

Dan,

Thank you for the detailed answer. This process definitely avoids
subjective judging decisions.

> > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>

[efon...@gmail.com]

Dan,

My app contained 15 second bits of music as representitive of a
distribution mechnism for music. And some clearly referenced work as a
parody - within legal use rules. If it was disqualified for these
reasons please send a private email.

Thanks,

Ed

[Peli]

Dan,

Thank you very much for this insight into the judging process. It is
very relieving to know that you try your best to make the judging
process as fair as possible.

Peli

On Apr 18, 5:14 pm, "Dan Morrill" <morri...@google.com> wrote:
> This is correct. We're providing rather detailed judging guidelines
> intended to help judges calibrate their scores. We also plan to
> post-process the results looking for outliers (such as cases where one judge
> gave a score that varies significantly from the others') to help make sure
> the results are fair.
>
> Panel size will be at least 3, depending on how many judges we have;
> currently the panel size is expected to be 4.
>
> - Dan
>

[Izard]

Dan,

Will the authors of disqualified submissions be notified?

e.g. our submission did include ROMs but only those where copyright
owners had explicitly permitted re-distribution; I've made references
in readme and application's "about" dialogs.

Thanks a lot!

Alexander

[Peli]

> The apps that were disqualified were ones that were submitted

> with obviously copyrighted material such as music files or ROMs, ...

I also hope that not all music files were regarded as copyrighted
material. We had included a midi and an mp3 file, both with permission
by the composers to use them...

Peli

[efon...@gmail.com]

Peli,

I think you are OK, as the Astronaut Jones audio on the media demo,
that was downloaded many many times, set a use standard for
distributed material that is consistent with our application. I saw
that as parody :-) and figured that was why it was OK. Quite a catchy
tune.

Ed

[Incognito]

Ho come on, that is a cheap trick.You can do that to any number to get
The Mark Of The Beast. Funny though.

> > - Dan- Hide quoted text -

[Cow Bay]

will google disqualify applications with free-download material that can be
for personal use but not for commercial use?

because the apps will be free downloadable and will be used for free (ie,
NOT for commercial), the copyright issue seems ambiguous in the
disqualification decison, isn't it?

what does "obviously" mean?

-cow

[Incognito]

If you win some money based on that free-download for personal use
then it is for commercial use.

> > Peli- Hide quoted text -

[Peli]

But this one's only possible with this number:
* Add 123
* Take away the leading "1"
and you end up with "911" ;-)

Peli

[Hielko]

I have to say that i'm very suprised that the number of submissions is
as high as 1788, since the number of applications with publicly
available information is still very low (<100). Why is everyone
keeping it a secret what they are doing: is (almost) everyone afraid
that their idea will be stolen?

> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

[Peli]

This one is even scarier:

Add to 1788 the date February 20, or short 0220, and you get this
year:
1788
+ 0220
=====
2008

February 20, 2008, was a total eclipse of the moon (
http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/LEmono/TLE2008Feb21/TLE2008Feb21.html ).
Eclipse! Android's IDE!!

There is a HUUUGE conspiracy going on! ;-)

Peli

[Peli]

> If you win some money based on that free-download for personal use
> then it is for commercial use.

Except if the whole award is donated to some non-profit
organization... ;-)

Peli

[Cow Bay]

thanks for your comments.

can it be reasoned this way that all submission have violated ADC terms and
conditions becuase android SDK is free-download but not necessarily for
commercial use (for you must not sell it for money into your pocket) but all
have used it "in order to" win the money.

is there any law material regarding the definition of "commercial"?

[Incognito]

I'm a believer! You have shown me the light. :)

> > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

[Incognito]

Yeah, I guess so. Anyway, I'm not a lawyer so don't believe what I
say. Maybe is only commercial if you sell it, who knows.

[Cow Bay]

:-)

i hope google already knows my donation Intent to poor people on streets!!

----- Original Message -----
From: "Peli" <peli...@googlemail.com>
To: "Android Challenge" <android-...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Friday, April 18, 2008 10:04 AM
Subject: [android-challenge] Re: 1,788 entries

>

[Incognito]

Well, android is not prohibiting the commercial use, that is the
difference. Same is with open source, some licenses don't prohibit
commercial use so long as you contribute any changes you've made to
the source code. Now, for your specific case, if the license says that
you cannot use the material to make any income whatsoever, i.e. from a
competition, then you are screwed. However, if it only says that you
cannot use it for commercial use, i.e. sell it to other people, then
entering a competition is not selling so you may be off the hook. It
really depends on what the license prohibits you to do. Check whether
it prohibits you to enter any competitions that grant prizes.

Disclaimer: Not a lawyer so don't believe anything I say.

> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

[efon...@gmail.com]

I guess we are a little bit invested here as are original artists.

I understand short segments and parodys are legal even for commercial
use.

BUT this is Google's contest. And Astronaut Jones aside, they can hold
applicants to a higher standard. It might even be wise to do that. It
would be a shame if differences in sense of parody caused something of
great social value to not be considered by the strongest player...
With our application, the skit and the 15 second music snips in the
software could be discarded. The presentation alone should be enough
to place... for this stage.

Anyway, all teams experience dissapointment. We'll sit tight. There is
still goodness with android.

Ed

> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

[Cow Bay]

i prefer not to believe you but thank you ^.^

[David Moffett]

My lame excuse is I have stepped on my dick in the past with regards
to speaking for the company.

David

[Greg_G]

> handful that were disqualified according to the rules in the Terms &
> Conditions. (The apps that were disqualified were ones that were submitted
> with obviously copyrighted material such as music files or ROMs, so don't
> worry that we were disqualifying people on technicalities.)

Hi Dan,

I can't help but worry about this a little. I included a mechanism
that downloads sample media files per our discussion here:
http://groups.google.com/group/android-challenge/browse_thread/thread/dd0546c420bbd143/

As I mentioned there and also in my documentation, all the media files
I prepared for the judging process are either public domain or
Creative Commons with full attribution in the documentation.
Specifically, the media files that are downloaded by the app are in
the latter category. But since you mentioned in that thread that
y'all wouldn't have time to verify license adherence (although you
said that in reference to a LGPL library I mentioned separately and
not media files) I just want to make sure that my submission won't get
disqualified because someone assumes I didn't "do things right" when
they see it downloading media files.

I'm guessing this is covered by the "obviously copyrighted" remark and
I'm tilting at windmills here.

Thanks,
Greg

[jalopy]

This is really sad if we got disqualified because of one sample media
clip
that we included with our submission to demonstrate the media playback
capability since the MediaPlayer and VideoView can't play back the
media clip recorded by MediaRecorder.

On Apr 18, 12:06 pm, Greg_G <greg_andr...@bitspring.com> wrote:
> > handful that were disqualified according to the rules in the Terms &
> > Conditions. (The apps that were disqualified were ones that were submitted
> > with obviously copyrighted material such as music files or ROMs, so don't
> > worry that we were disqualifying people on technicalities.)
>
> Hi Dan,
>
> I can't help but worry about this a little. I included a mechanism

> that downloads sample media files per our discussion here:http://groups.google.com/group/android-challenge/browse_thread/thread...

[Alex Pisarev]

Dan,

Is it possible to send e-mails for the apps which were disqualified in
order to keep people less nervous?

Regards,
Alex

[efon...@gmail.com]

I did think clear attribution was enough for phase one.

Terms clarification please!

When I first read the terms there was a clear line where the terms for
the first phase ended and the terms for the second phase started. I
missed the transition back to general terms. i.e. everything after the
transistion to phase two applied only to the second phase!!!

This is a 'for the future' suggestion: please make the transition back
to general terms more clear for multiphase contests.

Thanks,
Ed

[Anil]

Dan,
My application has *url links* to copyrighted files on the internet.
As such, that is permitted, right?
thanks,
Anil

[Dan Morrill]

To clarify, when I say "obviously" I mean exactly that: obviously.  As in, I unzipped the bundle containing someone's submission and found myself staring at a bunch of files that scream out "Look at me!  I was pirated!"

It's up to submitters to determine their own compliance, and we give the benefit of the doubt except in cases where a violation is utterly clear.  Submissions that are candidates for an award will get a closer look to verify T&C compliance before being formally selected for an award, but we're not running around disqualifying any submission that includes an MP3 or anything like that.

- Dan

[efon...@gmail.com]

Hi Dan,

Thank you for the clarification. I have contacted Warner Brothers to
figure out what their sense of parody is.

A part of the submission is a suggestion to use "The Dot and the Line"
as a marketing vehicle for android to show difference between a rigid
traditional cellphone and the new compelling flexibility of an android
phone. AND that the two lines and a dot form a differential sensor.
(think bug antennae) A differential sensor is key to choosing which
direction to go... or finding anyone anywhere. There was a bunch of
stuff cut from the skit that showed that the olives only became
animated after they received differential sensors from the android. A
whole segment on chocolate chip cookie smell gradient detection.

Anyway, in the interest of parody, the final footnote to infinity [7]
on the presentation, where you can't exactly find the attribution,
well,... that's an Obama quote. I do not know it's original
source, no plagerism intended!!! I thought the phrasing and word
choice would make this obvious Obama... (-:

All the best,
Ed

On Apr 19, 5:09 pm, "Dan Morrill" <morri...@google.com> wrote:
> To clarify, when I say "obviously" I mean exactly that: obviously.  As in, I
> unzipped the bundle containing someone's submission and found myself staring
> at a bunch of files that scream out "Look at me!  I was pirated!"
> It's up to submitters to determine their own compliance, and we give the
> benefit of the doubt except in cases where a violation is utterly clear.
>  Submissions that are candidates for an award will get a closer look to
> verify T&C compliance before being formally selected for an award, but we're
> not running around disqualifying any submission that includes an MP3 or
> anything like that.
>
> - Dan
>
>
>
> On Fri, Apr 18, 2008 at 12:06 PM, Greg_G <greg_andr...@bitspring.com> wrote:
>
> > > handful that were disqualified according to the rules in the Terms &
> > > Conditions.  (The apps that were disqualified were ones that were
> > submitted
> > > with obviously copyrighted material such as music files or ROMs, so don't
> > > worry that we were disqualifying people on technicalities.)
>
> > Hi Dan,
>
> > I can't help but worry about this a little.  I included a mechanism
> > that downloads sample media files per our discussion here:
>

> >http://groups.google.com/group/android-challenge/browse_thread/thread...

>
> > As I mentioned there and also in my documentation, all the media files
> > I prepared for the judging process are either public domain or
> > Creative Commons with full attribution in the documentation.
> > Specifically, the media files that are downloaded by the app are in
> > the latter category.  But since you mentioned in that thread that
> > y'all wouldn't have time to verify license adherence (although you
> > said that in reference to a LGPL library I mentioned separately and
> > not media files) I just want to make sure that my submission won't get
> > disqualified because someone assumes I didn't "do things right" when
> > they see it downloading media files.
>
> > I'm guessing this is covered by the "obviously copyrighted" remark and
> > I'm tilting at windmills here.
>
> > Thanks,

> > Greg- Hide quoted text -