Can anyone confirm whether the HTC Dream includes GPS? I know that T-Mobile uses triangulation in the network, so for select vendors this is not a strict requirement.
> Can anyone confirm whether the HTC Dream includes GPS? I know that T-Mobile
> uses triangulation in the network, so for select vendors this is not a
> strict requirement.
Without GPS on the device, it looks as though developers will have to apply to become a partner of T-Mobile, get access to their network based LBS system and then pay T-Mobile the necessary fees.
> Does anyone know if location services without GPS will be available
> On Aug 21, 11:10 am, "Shane Isbell" <shane.isb...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Can anyone confirm whether the HTC Dream includes GPS? I know that > T-Mobile > > uses triangulation in the network, so for select vendors this is not a > > strict requirement.
> Without GPS on the device, it looks as though developers will have to apply > to become a partner of T-Mobile, get access to their network based LBS > system and then pay T-Mobile the necessary fees.
> Shane
> On Thu, Aug 21, 2008 at 11:30 AM, niraj <njun...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Does anyone know if location services without GPS will be available
>> On Aug 21, 11:10 am, "Shane Isbell" <shane.isb...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > Can anyone confirm whether the HTC Dream includes GPS? I know that >> T-Mobile >> > uses triangulation in the network, so for select vendors this is not a >> > strict requirement.
That blog doesn't even say there won't be GPS, it just says "may not
be". If you trace his sources it is all based on speculation.
The only public facts are the FCC filings. The current public
documents are not sufficient to determine if it has GPS or not.
However, it is confirmed by those documents that it has Bluetooth 2.0,
WiFi and 1700 WCDMA. Hardly a "crippled" device.
On Thu, Aug 21, 2008 at 11:11 PM, Steve Oldmeadow <st...@smoco.com> wrote:
> That blog doesn't even say there won't be GPS, it just says "may not > be". If you trace his sources it is all based on speculation.
> The only public facts are the FCC filings. The current public > documents are not sufficient to determine if it has GPS or not. > However, it is confirmed by those documents that it has Bluetooth 2.0, > WiFi and 1700 WCDMA. Hardly a "crippled" device.
Actually, I can define crippled however I like. Under my definition, given the heavy Android focus on LBS, not having GPS on the device means it's crippled. As for Bluetooth, it doesn't matter if the device supports Bluetooth at the hardware level if it is not supported at the Android level. The device is crippled. If you choose to define anything that has WiFi and GPRS/CDMA support as not being crippled, then fine with me.
I also get a feeling that hardware related functionalities (GPS, Bluetooth) plus vendor related (GTalk, Maps) etc., are not being exposed publicly as it should have been. Guess some sort of an tieup might be required with the appropriate vendors to get the full functionality.
On Fri, Aug 22, 2008 at 9:09 AM, Shane Isbell <shane.isb...@gmail.com>wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 21, 2008 at 11:11 PM, Steve Oldmeadow <st...@smoco.com> wrote:
>> That blog doesn't even say there won't be GPS, it just says "may not >> be". If you trace his sources it is all based on speculation.
>> The only public facts are the FCC filings. The current public >> documents are not sufficient to determine if it has GPS or not. >> However, it is confirmed by those documents that it has Bluetooth 2.0, >> WiFi and 1700 WCDMA. Hardly a "crippled" device.
> Actually, I can define crippled however I like. Under my definition, given > the heavy Android focus on LBS, not having GPS on the device means it's > crippled. As for Bluetooth, it doesn't matter if the device supports > Bluetooth at the hardware level if it is not supported at the Android level. > The device is crippled. If you choose to define anything that has WiFi and > GPRS/CDMA support as not being crippled, then fine with me.
> Shane
-- == take care, Muthu Ramadoss.
http://mobeegal.in - find stuff closer. +91 98403 48914 mobeegal - mobile search redefined to find stuff closer.
Also GPS receivers require FCC approval, so if the Dream contains GPS it should have been submitted in the FCC docs and it's not there. Maybe I'm missing something, but the available information points to Dream not supporting GPS.
Shane
On Thu, Aug 21, 2008 at 11:53 PM, Muthu Ramadoss <muthu.ramad...@gmail.com>wrote:
> I also get a feeling that hardware related functionalities (GPS, Bluetooth) > plus vendor related (GTalk, Maps) etc., are not being exposed publicly as it > should have been. Guess some sort of an tieup might be required with the > appropriate vendors to get the full functionality.
> On Fri, Aug 22, 2008 at 9:09 AM, Shane Isbell <shane.isb...@gmail.com>wrote:
>> On Thu, Aug 21, 2008 at 11:11 PM, Steve Oldmeadow <st...@smoco.com>wrote:
>>> That blog doesn't even say there won't be GPS, it just says "may not >>> be". If you trace his sources it is all based on speculation.
>>> The only public facts are the FCC filings. The current public >>> documents are not sufficient to determine if it has GPS or not. >>> However, it is confirmed by those documents that it has Bluetooth 2.0, >>> WiFi and 1700 WCDMA. Hardly a "crippled" device.
>> Actually, I can define crippled however I like. Under my definition, given >> the heavy Android focus on LBS, not having GPS on the device means it's >> crippled. As for Bluetooth, it doesn't matter if the device supports >> Bluetooth at the hardware level if it is not supported at the Android level. >> The device is crippled. If you choose to define anything that has WiFi and >> GPRS/CDMA support as not being crippled, then fine with me.
>> Shane
> -- > == > take care, > Muthu Ramadoss.
> http://mobeegal.in - find stuff closer. > +91 98403 48914 > mobeegal - mobile search redefined to find stuff closer.
On Aug 22, 11:59 am, "Shane Isbell" <shane.isb...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Also GPS receivers require FCC approval, so if the Dream contains GPS it
> should have been submitted in the FCC docs and it's not there. Maybe I'm
> missing something, but the available information points to Dream not
> supporting GPS.
Not all the documents are there, more will be available on August 31.
If you look at the equivalent documents for the Blackberry Bold which
definitely does have GPS there is no mention of GPS in the FCC
documents.
On Aug 22, 11:59 am, "Shane Isbell" <shane.isb...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Also GPS receivers require FCC approval, so if the Dream contains GPS it
> should have been submitted in the FCC docs and it's not there. Maybe I'm
> missing something, but the available information points to Dream not
> supporting GPS.
Not all the documents are there, more will be available on August 31.
If you look at the equivalent documents for the Blackberry Bold which
definitely does have GPS there is no mention of GPS in the FCC
documents.
On Aug 22, 4:01 pm, "FuShen Wang" <FuShen.W...@accton.com.cn> wrote:
> It's Blackberry
Correct, I gave that link to show that the documents for the
Blackberry Bold which is known to have GPS do not mention GPS either,
therefore, it can't be assumed that because the Dream documents don't
mention GPS that it won't have GPS. Dream FCC documents are at this
link:
Shane Isbell wrote: > As for Bluetooth, it doesn't matter if the device > supports Bluetooth at the hardware level if it is not supported at the > Android level.
There are roughly three levels of Bluetooth support, not two:
-- hardware -- OS (supporting some Bluetooth profiles) -- application (using OS-provided APIs)
It would appear that Android 1.0 supports the first two, not the third. It is unclear at this time if a firmware update might add back in application-level Bluetooth access or not -- I don't know the logistics of that.
> The device is crippled.
For developers who were aiming to use Bluetooth at the application level, certainly.
But, let's face it, even compared to the full roster of potential developers, that's a small percentage. And compared to the hoped-for *users* of the device, it's a drop that evaporated en route to the bucket.
Users are going to expect their standard suite of Bluetooth profiles, what we know as A2DP, HFP, HSP, etc. If the Dream/Android 1.0 fail to offer enough of those, the device is definitely borked...but we probably won't know that until we get an official spec sheet from T-Mobile.
It sounds like Google/OHA had an unpleasant choice: either ship without application-level Bluetooth and irritate a percentage of their developer base, or ship weeks or months later than planned and irritate the ENTIRE developer base. Frankly, I can't blame them for the choice they made.
Then again, I had no plans on writing Bluetooth-aware applications, either, so I'm biased...
-- Mark Murphy (a Commons Guy) http://commonsware.com _The Busy Coder's Guide to Android Development_ Version 1.1 Published!
On Fri, Aug 22, 2008 at 4:18 AM, Steve Oldmeadow <st...@smoco.com> wrote:
> On Aug 22, 4:01 pm, "FuShen Wang" <FuShen.W...@accton.com.cn> wrote: > > It's Blackberry
> Correct, I gave that link to show that the documents for the > Blackberry Bold which is known to have GPS do not mention GPS either, > therefore, it can't be assumed that because the Dream documents don't > mention GPS that it won't have GPS. Dream FCC documents are at this > link:
