Related
This isn't really pertaining to WM6, but I wanted everyone here to see it.
Google is offering free directory assitance now via voiceplan http://labs.google.com/goog411/ Just in case you are (like I frequently am) caught in a car when I cannot get online to type in the number and talking would much much simpler. I've only tried it once, and it worked for me.
From their site:
Welcome to Google Voice Local Search
Google Voice Local Search is Google’s experimental service to make local-business search accessible over the phone.
To try this service, just dial 1-800-GOOG-411 (1-800-466-4411) from any phone.
Using this service, you can:
search for a local business by name or category.
You can say "Giovanni's Pizzeria" or just "pizza".
get connected to the business, free of charge.
get the details by SMS if you’re using a mobile phone.
Just say "text message".
And it's free. Google doesn’t charge you a thing for the call or for connecting you to the business. Regular phone charges may apply, based on your telephone service provider.
Note: Google Voice Local Search is still in its experimental stage. It may not be available at all times and may not work for all users. We’re fine-tuning the service to get better at recognizing your requests. It’s currently only available in English, in the US, for US business listings.
ajmoncrief said:
This isn't really pertaining to WM6, but I wanted everyone here to see it.
Google is offering free directory assitance now via voiceplan http://labs.google.com/goog411/ Just in case you are (like I frequently am) caught in a car when I cannot get online to type in the number and talking would much much simpler. I've only tried it once, and it worked for me.
From their site:
Welcome to Google Voice Local Search
Google Voice Local Search is Google’s experimental service to make local-business search accessible over the phone.
To try this service, just dial 1-800-GOOG-411 (1-800-466-4411) from any phone.
Using this service, you can:
search for a local business by name or category.
You can say "Giovanni's Pizzeria" or just "pizza".
get connected to the business, free of charge.
get the details by SMS if you’re using a mobile phone.
Just say "text message".
And it's free. Google doesn’t charge you a thing for the call or for connecting you to the business. Regular phone charges may apply, based on your telephone service provider.
Note: Google Voice Local Search is still in its experimental stage. It may not be available at all times and may not work for all users. We’re fine-tuning the service to get better at recognizing your requests. It’s currently only available in English, in the US, for US business listings.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
its actually not THAT new but it is an excellent service. i love it. use it all the time. and its free.
*bows to google*
edit: since we are on the topic of new products. check out grandcentral.com. and thank me later.
hiimcliff said:
its actually not THAT new but it is an excellent service. i love it. use it all the time. and its free.
*bows to google*
edit: since we are on the topic of new products. check out grandcentral.com. and thank me later.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Grandcentral is old too
CUSTEL said:
Grandcentral is old too
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
yeah i thought so too
but it was new to me when i read that google was buying it. thats when i googled grandcentral.com
its cool though isnt it?
grandcentral
Way cool, simply amazing stuff. What a find! Well done.
Cheers
So i take you guys already know about the text google at 46645 to find info out.
Funny I dropped my grandcentral account today because I just got an 8525 and well since you have to press the number 1, 2 or 3 on an incoming call in order to answer it from grandcentral I just began missing too many calls on this phone.
On an incoming call on these phones you are not presented with the dialpad for pressing a number. First I have to grab my phone, even though I have my bluetooth on which is a bummer in itself, then I have to hit the answer button, then I have hit the dialpad button, then I have to hit the corresponding number to answer the call.
This is not easy when driving, and it sucks to have to do so much to answer a call. Granted I love the service and think grandcentral rocks, not to mention the rumour that google is in talks to acquire them. But there has to be a way to disable this feature or use voice maybe to answer.
RasnCain said:
Funny I dropped my grandcentral account today because I just got an 8525 and well since you have to press the number 1, 2 or 3 on an incoming call in order to answer it from grandcentral I just began missing too many calls on this phone.
On an incoming call on these phones you are not presented with the dialpad for pressing a number. First I have to grab my phone, even though I have my bluetooth on which is a bummer in itself, then I have to hit the answer button, then I have hit the dialpad button, then I have to hit the corresponding number to answer the call.
This is not easy when driving, and it sucks to have to do so much to answer a call. Granted I love the service and think grandcentral rocks, not to mention the rumour that google is in talks to acquire them. But there has to be a way to disable this feature or use voice maybe to answer.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
very valid complaint. post it to their feedback team. they are quite quick on the draw with answering concerns. try it and see.
This is some great info guys, but it needs to be moved to a more appropriate thread. Moving now...
GRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
Google aquired grandcentral.com officially today and already dropped the mp3 ring back tones.
damn bureaucracy
I need to record phone calls. My boss screams at me like a demon monster, and I'd like to preserve this fresh Hell for posterity... maybe make it my ringtone. (Yes, I have a right to in my state, as I am a party to the call)
Searching on AppBrain for 'phone call recorder' gives 13,997 results.
Ideally I'd like it to automatically start when I get a call from a certain number, and otherwise have a push-button start/stop while calls are in progress, and any other time.
Can anyone advise?
Quantumstate said:
I need to record phone calls. My boss screams at me like a demon monster, and I'd like to preserve this fresh Hell for posterity... maybe make it my ringtone. (Yes, I have a right to in my state, as I am a party to the call)
Searching on AppBrain for 'phone call recorder' gives 13,997 results.
Ideally I'd like it to automatically start when I get a call from a certain number, and otherwise have a push-button start/stop while calls are in progress, and any other time.
Can anyone advise?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think Google Voice has this feature, but it lets the other party know via an in-call announcement.
esone1ll said:
I think Google Voice has this feature, but it lets the other party know via an in-call announcement.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks, but no Google apps please. Don't trust them. Open-source is best.
Quantumstate said:
Thanks, but no Google apps please. Don't trust them. Open-source is best.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Interesting choice of phone platforms given that you don't trust Google.
By the way, much of Google's software is open source with that source code freely available, including Android.
Though I've only looked for this in Nexus One forums, it seems that no one can figure out how to get an application (at least not involving GV) to capture audio on both sides of the conversation, unless it's on speaker or maybe a headset. Might vary by device though if it's a hardware thing.
d0ugie said:
Interesting choice of phone platforms given that you don't trust Google.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Long story. Sure you want to know?
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=730544
Yes N1 is the phone of concern. Odd that it's difficult to capture both sides. Shouldn't be difficult to emulate GV by looking at the source.
I was going to suggest Google Voice also. When you hit the number 2 or 4 (can't remember which), it will notify you and the other caller that the session is being recorded (which might shut your boss up for good!). You can even download the conversation into an mp3 format. It records both sides of the conversation, not just yours or his.
Now, why would Google give a crap what your boss is yelling about? My point exactly ... this isn't Big Brother ... yet.
Read that other thread to find out, if you're actually curious.
I notice that comments in many of the call recording apps say 'doesn't work', with one phone or another, usually newer phones. And I am gathering that G**gle Voice is closed-source, as are apparently many of their other apps, so reading source for tips on how to get both sides is not an option.
I wouldn't use G**gle apps in any case, but to notify my boss I am recording would probably get me fired today. I'm just wanting to collect his fiery, abusive calls just in case...
Apparently most apps are unable to record the other party's side of the conversation.
Does anyone know why this would be? What would it take to record both sides. I'm sure there are hooks in Android to get this.
All right, after considerable research it seems I am the best-informed around here.
It is now clear that there is no way a third-party app can record the orther end of the conversation, except in speakerphone mode. (MIC ONLY). Only Google Voice can do this, and it insists on using 'The Cloud' so they have control over all your conversations.
There is confusion over whether this is an API problem, or a driver problem, but if it's a driver problem both HTC and Motorola suffer from it.
So, this is a deal-breaker. No Android phone for me. I'm lucky I'm not already stuck with one.
Winduhs Mobile phones can record with third-party apps, as can the Symbian-based Nokia N8 when it comes out next month. So that's where I'm going.
Good bye Android
Hate to tell you this but you are butting you head up against a long time limitation of the "Smartphone" platform. It isn't limited to Android devices either. WinMo has the same limitations and it has to do with the OS not having access to the incoming audio stream.
Not true. Google Voice can do it, built-in, but I'm not sending all recordings to them, no sir.
This proves that the mechanisms are in place but that either the API is rigged, the drivers are, or documentation is lying. Everything records as documented in the emulated SDK, but not on the phone itself.
Phones that actually can record both sides are Nokia S60 & Maemo phones, including N900 & N8 (Recaller, Voxtrack Personal- beepless), Rseven on Symbian & WM, Mvoice & CallRec on Palm, Vito-Audionotes on HTC TouchPro2, Sony Ericsson c905 has the record option.
Right now I'm looking for a Linux port to any of the newer smartphones, as Linux can record and has nav apps, my two vital functions.
Quantumstate said:
Not true. Google Voice can do it, built-in, but I'm not sending all recordings to them, no sir.
This proves that the mechanisms are in place but that either the API is rigged, the drivers are, or documentation is lying. Everything records as documented in the emulated SDK, but not on the phone itself.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That doesn't prove anything. Google Voice calls go through their servers. I can record calls between two landlines, if the call is made through GVoice. Does this mean that my 1970s-era, rotary-dial phone has the SDK to record calls?
It proves that I can't use Android.
I am not going to bicker with you.
This thread is comedy gold. There are several reasons why access the audio stream is restricted. Phones from many platforms cannot record both sides of the conversation, and I am surprised to hear that 3rd party apps can do this on WinMo. I would hazzard a guess that this requires more than just a regular run of the mill type install.
You seem to hate Android, and Google in particular. I have read your posts. I thank you for your lack of contribution to the forum. A good chuckle doesn't really count.
Your fear mongering and paranoia regarding big business and biased news is typical of someone living behind a computer for 52 years. Oh yes, that's you too. If you wish to spread your opinion, I would suggest you start a blog, rather than fill a forum with posts like these.
Take care.
Voice recorder app on win mobile
Until about 10 days ago when I bought my first android phone, a samsung vibrant which i am loving it, I was a windows mobile user for many years and it's true that there is an free app called PMrecoder, that records phone conversation (both sides) and saves it in a folder on the SD card. I still have the app on my Tmobile wing. This app works great and records all coversations automatically. I wish there was an app like that for android also. I am sure someone will come up with a similar app for android soon.
You have nothing but insults "SpeeDemon". {snicker}
Means nothing.
But thanks mayart, for another app that works.
total recall (paid app, about 10 dollards) tryes to do the job.
I've buy it, but...nobody never calls me.
Seriously: i come from an excellent nokia E65. It knew how to record some in's and out's very efficiently.
Doesn't work on Nexus One...
You should send a mail to the developers (company).
I think they want now to be efficient on Android phones, as they are for ages
on symbian (Nokia) ones.
Ah, never mind, I've found an app that does it.
However because of the abuse I was given in this thread I am not sharing it with this forum.
Have a nice day.
I just wanted to know if anyone has developed a solid app for Google wave. I use Google wave allot, but there aren't any good ones in the market place.
If someone can give me a good app for Google wave (with notifications, and updates, like the Facebook app) that would be awesome.
If no one made one yet, this is an opportunity, I need a good Google wave app so bad that I would be willing to pay for it, and I am probably not the only one.
DROID_INC said:
I just wanted to know if anyone has developed a solid app for Google wave. I use Google wave allot, but there aren't any good ones in the market place.
If someone can give me a good app for Google wave (with notifications, and updates, like the Facebook app) that would be awesome.
If no one made one yet, this is an opportunity, I need a good Google wave app so bad that I would be willing to pay for it, and I am probably not the only one.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You probably are actually, google wave is very unpopular. I doubt you'll find one if i'm honest !
Good luck anyways!
edit: go to www.googlewave.com in your mobile browser, should be a mobile version? Not sure if that's any help though.
Wave Lives!
I think Wave is popular amongst certain developers (the kind that were let in early) but i'm not sure what it's future is now that Google has announced it's closure towards the end of the year.
On the one hand the whole wave-server is free to download and install on our own machines, but on the other hand, Google hasn't (and probably won't) release much of their native client. The "textual" client that was released was so basic as to not catch on for "syndication", or "federating" as it was called. I got as far as setting it all up on a VPS hosting, but wasn't up to the task of coding my own client, at least, not at the time. (thou i would've joined such a group if had found one, which i didn't)
I still see a future for Wave, or a derivative thereof, but the original Wave client would be hard to replicate if Google choose not to release it. Until we hear what Google intends to do with that "popular" client, it's really anyone's guess.
For myself, i was gearing up to code an Android client for Wave using Adobe Air once they (Adobe) have finalized the feature-set (it's still in pre-release for month or two). I would still like to do this, but getting it to the quality of the current Wave client would be large undertaking. Would prolly have to settle for something that looks and works a bit differently. (ie. more suiting Android screens for example)
As for a central server to run it on (since Google are pulling the plug) it would need to be either another central server, or at least partially shoe-horned to run on Google's App Engine, which i have also done some prep work for. (passing waves thru as a web interface, storing of waves in big-table, etc)
Along with character-by-character communication, and having compatibility with existing robots and gadgets (protocols, and everything) it's quite an involved project. Most likely a team effort, which is what Wave is actually designed for after all. ;O)
The only tricky part is getting paid to even attempt it. So even thou there's definitely some latent demand for Wave to continue, method of sponsorship is what really needs to be sorted out first. See my previous post (here on XDA) about "donation bidding" for example of what is really needed.
This is the one i meant... "Developer Bidding"
Ok, thanks guys.
I have used the mobile version but it just plainly sucks. Since I go to college, I do a lot of group projects and its easier through google wave because your group can comment attach, post, etc..., and your entire group can see and discuss. If google is pulling the plug, is there any alternative I can use for what I am doing?
Again thanks for the help.
A popular one before Wave came along was Etherpad (Etherpad.com) but as Wave was gearing up for public release Google bought the company, shut down Etherpad, and got the Etherpad team to help the Wave team improve Wave's usability.
Initially there was a public backlash, since the two services looked and worked quite differently, and many people preferred Etherpad's simplicity. Perhaps because of the growing backlash, Etherpad was then quickly released as open-source (see Etherpad.org) such that it can be downloaded and setup on your own server.
When Google announced Wave is closing, several sites promptly listed some alternatives.
http://www.techmaish.com/5-popular-google-wave-alternatives/
http://www.worldtech24.com/business/10-great-alternatives-google-wave/
Also worth noting that although Google are closing Wave, they are now planning to integrate some of the Wave's technology (whatever that means) into existing products. Think of; google mail, google buzz, google talk, and google voice, all becoming something "more collaborative" and generally more social.
Personally, i liked Wave the most (robots, gadgets, etc) so hoping to catch the timing between Air for Android releasing, and Wave closing, since my background is mainly Actionscript/Javascript, and have already coded a partial client.
Happy hunting thou!
A few weeks ago, I posted a very unfortunate Google+ post of the creator of Focal and why it was removed from the CM codebase. It was a depressing story and it really started to make you wonder about where CM is going.
This time, after reading an extremely well-written article, I've come to a similarly depressing conclusion: Android by Google is slowly becoming as locked down as iOS, but not in the sense that you think; it's not about what apps let you do what, it's the developers.
We've finally arrived at a critical flaw with the way Android is developed and these days, I can no longer claim that Android (by Google) is "open" anymore.
Feel free to give this a read (Disclaimer: I am not affiliated with Ars Technica in any way).
http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2013...ntrolling-open-source-by-any-means-necessary/
It's not just about Amazon's version of Android; CyanogenMod is for all intents and purposes a "fork" of Android. It is designed to work without Google Apps and as we all know, we flash those seperately. But that's the problem, the answer isn't just "Well, I'll just flash the Gapps and it will work like it should". What will happen if new Play Store apps start referring to features in the framework that don't exist in a form that we can flash? What if the license to flash the Gapps gets revoked?
How will CyanogenMod start adding features to apps that were originally AOSP but are now closed source? What will happen when the open source Messaging app is abandoned and turns into a Hangouts feature? How can CM stay on top of that?
It's not as simple as "take the source we currently have and work with it", because what will happen when Google adds a killer feature to an app that depends on some API that is no longer open source?
These are some rather frightening questions to deal with. I don't know where Android is going, but I'm certainly starting to wonder what's going to happen to it.
I'd appreciate any and all input on this.
Not very continuous, but here's my thoughts about the article:
The Gapps license is meant to lock the makers of Android phones into Google, so users get locked within Google and Google can gain revenue from the users. After going to that extent to make sure Google gets to keep the device's user, what's to gain if Google users of the device who flash CM to be locked out of the system instead of keeping them "trapped" with the Google ecosystem even with a non Google ROM? Doesn't make any sense does it?
I suppose we will still have to flash them like we flash the Play Store now. Unlike Amazon, CM (for now) actually still relies on Google and doesn't "divert" revenue to another company and therefore Google would be more than happy to let their apps be used. But if CM does start going the Amazon way, I believe Google may lock CM out.
Those APIs take time to develop, take the Maps API for example - you think they spent millions, if not billions mapping the entire world and even roaming every street just to make sure you can find your way around for free? They'll need to recoup their costs somehow.
While Android is open source and contributed by Google for free, don't forget Google is a company, not a charity. They have to make money or their shareholders won't be happy. Even if their shareholders are massive fans of open source they also have thousands of employees to pay, and all that costs money. And don't forget, when a company is providing free stuff for you to use, you are not their customer - you are their product. Android will change in ways that will keep Google profitable and keep competitiors unprofitable, while keeping the users as comfortable as possible so they will continue to be their product.
cccy said:
Not very continuous, but here's my thoughts about the article:
The Gapps license is meant to lock the makers of Android phones into Google, so users get locked within Google and Google can gain revenue from the users. After going to that extent to make sure Google gets to keep the device's user, what's to gain if Google users of the device who flash CM to be locked out of the system instead of keeping them "trapped" with the Google ecosystem even with a non Google ROM? Doesn't make any sense does it?
I suppose we will still have to flash them like we flash the Play Store now. Unlike Amazon, CM (for now) actually still relies on Google and doesn't "divert" revenue to another company and therefore Google would be more than happy to let their apps be used. But if CM does start going the Amazon way, I believe Google may lock CM out.
Those APIs take time to develop, take the Maps API for example - you think they spent millions, if not billions mapping the entire world and even roaming every street just to make sure you can find your way around for free? They'll need to recoup their costs somehow.
While Android is open source and contributed by Google for free, don't forget Google is a company, not a charity. They have to make money or their shareholders won't be happy. Even if their shareholders are massive fans of open source they also have thousands of employees to pay, and all that costs money. And don't forget, when a company is providing free stuff for you to use, you are not their customer - you are their product. Android will change in ways that will keep Google profitable and keep competitiors unprofitable, while keeping the users as comfortable as possible so they will continue to be their product.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
First, I appreciate the input! I was looking forward to intelligent discussion and it's great that the first reply is just that.
I would like to clarify though; my concern is not so much about Google making money; they are a business and deserve to make money in whatever way they see fit. We have something they want (ad clicks and search history) and as long as they provide an experience worth using, I don't mind that transaction at all.
My worries start with what the custom development scene will look like one or two years from now if the base apps that make Android useful on its own (and by extension, useful to custom developers) have been molded into Google Play apps or frameworks or APIs.
In parallel, it's also starting to make sense why Cyanogen continues to put effort into alternate applications such as Apollo and Focal; they saw this coming way before we did.
LiquidSolstice said:
First, I appreciate the input! I was looking forward to intelligent discussion and it's great that the first reply is just that.
I would like to clarify though; my concern is not so much about Google making money; they are a business and deserve to make money in whatever way they see fit. We have something they want (ad clicks and search history) and as long as they provide an experience worth using, I don't mind that transaction at all.
My worries start with what the custom development scene will look like one or two years from now if the base apps that make Android useful on its own (and by extension, useful to custom developers) have been molded into Google Play apps or frameworks or APIs.
In parallel, it's also starting to make sense why Cyanogen continues to put effort into alternate applications such as Apollo and Focal; they saw this coming way before we did.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I believe the custom development scene wouldn't get affected much. After all, remember the old XDA-Developers? Windows was all locked down, but the cooks still managed to make customized ROMs. What's more, Google wouldn't want to lose their "products" - Google wants us to continue to use their services so they can earn money, they wouldn't lock us out.
What competitors lack is the capability to access Google's services (Frameworks, APIs, etc) as Google has ways to block them (Which is why we had circumvents like device spoofing). If you had a device designed for Google's version of Android, I am sure Google would still enable access if you use a custom ROM. The point of locking those competitors out is to force them to embrace Google's version of Android and not use their own forks which would keep Google out of certain aspects of the user's phone, decreasing revenue. Therefore, if you could roll your own custom ROM, it makes sense for Google to continue supporting you so you still completely rely on them instead of "outsourcing" to other competitors.
CM puts effort into alternate applications because as you can see right now, CM's starting to roll their own commercial forked devices - what happens after that? If you have seen the ways of other commercial versions of Android (Amazon, China brands, etc), they start replacing certain revenue generating aspects of the phone to use their own service instead of Google's. Certainly not what Google wants.
In short, I would say, if you are a small custom ROM user, Google isn't going to come after you, they want you to use their services! But if you are a competing company, expect your devices to be locked out from Google in the hopes that they eventually force you to bow to them and convert all your users completely to Google's "products".
Dear fellow developers,
I wonder how log will it take before we will unite and take some serious action against Google Play practices. Maybe you heard about banned apps and blocked accounts. I got my app blocked today and believe me that it is VERY frustrating experience.
I can write what is wrong with Google Play developer support, but others already done that better: androidofvirtue. com/dear-google-play-we-need-to-talk-about-a-few-things/
Long story short, I feel that Google is abusing its dominant position on the market by providing little to no service to developers. Developers has no other option for app publishing as manufacturers are pre-installing its market to almost every device. Users have no option as they do not have any good alternative available.
Google must listen to us, we are helping them to get money and they are treating us like criminals without any explanations, without possibility to defend ourselves and without possibility to use other and maybe more reasonable app market.
As I am from the EU I wrote an appeal to European Commission to investigate the Google market position regarding the competition advantage abuse. I really hate do do it but currently I feel that I ran out of options and I hate more to feel so powerless against Google ignorance and stupidity of its app removal policies.
If you would like to help then write an appeal too. Contact is [email protected]
They must hear us!
what app did you make and whats the reason they removed it
The app was intended for automatic connection to open hotspots and wifi password sharing. It was possible to enter password for some wifi when you connected to it and it was then shared with other users. This function was explicitly named in the name of the app, description and under the password box directly in application, therefore every user was sharing the password by his will and he was well informed what he's doing. It was intended for sharing of passwords for various public places, cafés etc.
The funny thing is, that the app got approved on Amazon which is also very strict, but obviously employs sane people.
The reason for banning is here:
REASON FOR REMOVAL: Violation of section 4.4 of the Developer Distribution Agreement.
After a regular review we have determined that your app interferes with or accesses another service or product in an unauthorized manner. This violates the provision of your agreement with Google referred to above.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think that they think that I was phishing the passwords or something like that. Or maybe it is not ok to connect to open wifi automatically. Or maybe they think that if somebody share password for some hotspot then other people are not authorized to use it, however I feel that if I share password then I am giving implicit authorization to other users.
Thats the worst part -I simply don't know what is wrong. Can I fix it by adding some policy agreement? Should I ask user for some explicit permission to share the password and authorization for other users to use it? Isn't it a bit crazy?
The whole thing is not about me or my app. I just spend like month of evenings to build it and catch all the bugs, I made worse investments. What I really don't like is the Google attitude. They are keeping their developers in uncertainty, they are threatening them and they are behaving like the worst essence of corporations. We just need alternative store to become strong enough otherwise Google will not listen to us.