Does anyone know how I can purchase the above SDKs? Calling the standard Sony / Microsoft Sales numbers does not seem to get me anyone who knows what I'm talking about.
Firstup the SDKs are free, though not publicly available. If you're really keen you can probably find them floating around on torrent sites. They're interesting but of little use without any actual hardware..
So I suspect your real question is "how can I buy development hardware?"
Devkits are only available to approved developers and publishers, and cost substantially more than the consumer hardware. A simple test station (runs unsigned code) can cost several thousand, a full devkit is in the region of $10k. (they used to be around $20k but things are 'cheaper' now).
To have any chance of purchasing you need to become a registered developer, which ranges from "hard" to "impossible" based on your company, your track record, & your publisher/financial backing. If you're a new developer without either a publisher or an extremely good demo your chances are effectively nil I'm afraid.
One alternative is to look at something like XNA studio which allows you to develop on the consumer Xbox hardware, and possibly sell your game via Xbox Live later. This is one way you could create a demo to try and attract interest, though you may later have to port from C# to C/C++ if it's to become a 'proper' Xbox or Xbox Live Arcade title.
If you're interested here are the links;
http://www.scedev.net/common_licensing_info.php
http://www.xbox.com/en-US/dev/regdev.htm
http://creators.xna.com
You cant just purchase them. First you have to register with either company, and then once approved, you have to fork over $20K+ in order to buy the unit. For MS, I would try one of their XNA sites
Related
I'm making a desktop app for a company, and they would like to get it featured in the windows app store for Windows 10 users.
The app will likely only work on desktop computers, it's not designed for mobile. What it does is perform lookups on lists of cell phone numbers, and outputs a spreadsheet with carrier info, and it requires a credit for each cell phone number looked up. The credits are bought in bulk through the company's sales team, there is no automated method to purchase them.
Because there is no automated system, it would be difficult to set up in-app purchases, also if Microsoft takes a cut of in-app payments then it wouldn't be feasible due to the tiny profit margin of the credits. But according to this (section 10.8.1), if the app consumes anything that has to be purchased then it needs to use the in-app purchasing api.
Does anyone know if there's some way around this? Or if it only applies to regular apps and not desktop only ones, which I understand are a different type of listing?
I realise I can get a developer account and go through this with them but I don't really want to spend this company's money on the dev account if Microsoft are just going to say no.
Thanks :)
That section of the policy refers to payments taken within the application.
It doesn't sound like what your application will do though. Your application is allowing the allocation (spending) of credits bought separately.
It's a small distinction but an important one. You may have seen other applications work around such limitations by requiring the user to go to a website to buy something and then return to the app to use it.
When submitting the app there is a declaration for "This app allows users to make purchases, but does not use the Windows Store commerce system." You can read more about this declaration at https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/apps/mt148523.aspx but this shouldn't apply to your scenario.
There are potential legal implications here and if the company has any concerns about entering a legal agreement with Microsoft regarding financial matters then they should seek appropriate legal council. Having a developer ask other developers about legal matters is likely only suggest asking a lawyer.
I've been considering for some time now to get into be b2b integration business. I've researched the tools available for doing this,
like Oragle's WebLogic Integration, IBM's WebSphere, or Microsoft's BizTalk. They all seem to do the job (each having their ups and downs).
I've also looked at some companies that already are doing this (ex: www.hubspan.com). It seems that b2b integration is very needed service.
Although my background is in integration of commercial products with open source software, I feel that concerning the b2b integration world,
I still feel that I need to feel some blanks.
So basically I'd like to clear a few things concerning all this:
All the frameworks that I previously mentioned are just that, frameworks. They allow to build an application ON TOP of the said frameworks,
they are not itendet ot be a final product. I assume that this is because the integration needs of different companies vary so much,
that an out-of-the-box solution is just not possible. So my question is, do the applications build with the said frameworks vary so much
from business to business, that it's not possible to reuse them?
Also, is it possible to build a single framework of Suppliers and Customers (build a Core of somekind), and connect new Costumers and/or
Suppliers as they come? (this is the way HubSpan did it, not counting the developing of custom Connectors to the Client ERP systems).
Or will I have to do a separate integration for each Customer?
How much work hours is required to complete a typical integration project, (assuming everything is planned and executed properly)?
(For the sake of simplicity, let's say that the integration includes only 'Query Product Price', 'Query Product Availability',
and 'Purchase Order Management'.
And finally, is this a job for a sigle person (can I do this myself?, assuming I have the knowledge to do it) or a team is required?
Thanks in advance for sharing your thoughs and oppinions.
Yes they can vary that much.
It depends on the business. Some will integrate easily while others will need custom modules and connectors
There isn't really a "typical" integration project.
Depends on the size of the project. If you're talking fortune 500 companies then no. If you're talking a local manufacturer and local supply house (presumably small) then maybe.
This is probably a question better asked on the programmers.stackexchange
I think it varies a lot. You should probably define what you mean by B2B, and there are a lot of different types these days. From a BizTalk perspective, it is possible to build an application service provider (ASP) version of B2B but it is hard to do.
The level of customization is one of the factors that drives up cost and the length of the project. I think it is difficult to do B2B alone, usually there is so much business domain knowledge specific to each company that you need those business people to help explain the existing systems.
Thanks,
I'm doing a mobile WebApp using HTML5. My problem is that the "post-login" pages cached by the HTML5 application cache, from what i understand, remain still unsafe. Is there a solution? What is the best way to ensure an offline authentication hiding user/pass and "post-login" pages from intruders?
I am just starting to delve into HTML5 usage of local storage via the Manifest option (http://diveintohtml5.info/offline.html) and this too is a concern for me as much for privacy as security. Two things came to mind: Ezncrypt and the Editor's Draft on Web Storage (Privacy and Security), links to both below...
While I do not know if this will be the 'best' answer, figured anything would be better than nothing and after all you posted this question back on Feb 2, 2012 and no one else has offered anything.
Caveats (ezNcrypt):
It works on Linux
Its a Commercial product with a 30 day trial, honestly do not know the cost as I am not affiliated with them, just heard of what they do via a local meetup, LAPHP, LAMySQL or LAWebspeed last year, and it sounded interesting enough to note for future reference. Transparent encryption will be huge.
Google Ezncrypt products to get a link, I am limited to two here.
Even if its not the 'right' solution for you or others, perhaps it will point you in a good direction with some decent search terms to find more.
If the encryption is handled "transparently" below the application / data layers, it will just work regardless of the IT knowledge of the user.
If you are willing to share some contact information with them, you get this PDF file with 4 case studies, FTP, NoSQL, SQL and something else... its free.
http://blog.gazzang.com/white-paper-unifying-data-encryption-liberating-transparent-encryption-for-any-purpose-/?utm_campaign=Whitepaper&utm_source=Whitepaper
I should get a commission, lol. Hey if it helps us find a solution, that is all that matters.
Whatever your decision make sure you go through the Editor's Draft, Privacy and Security to dot your i's and cross your T's, especially sections 6 Privacy and 7 Security.
http://dev.w3.org/html5/webstorage/#the-localstorage-attribute
Just thought of another, I did not look except to provide a URL to their checklists (cheat sheets) , but my guess is OWASP would have one or two checklists that might lead you to something. Just think of your device as a little desktop/server and see if any of those apply. To bad my Nokia N800 broke on me, a full blown Linux computer in my hand circa 2006 and the new Linux handhelds circa 2012 are so much more powerful. Just use a Linux distro with a small footprint on a device with exchangeable storage (Micro SSD Cards would work...the Nokia N800 had two slots in 2006) and there is no limit to what you could store locally and run offline. Here is the URL to the OWASP checklists:
Sorry limited to two links, google OWASP cheet sheets and you will find them.
If a handheld is truly 'smart' you will have root (administrator) access to the device and underlying operating system / file system. Every operating system has methods to encrypt data on the fly, but you have to have access to utilize them. A device that does not give you this access (usually for proprietary reasons, most often to force you to buy a new device in 6 mos to 1 year) is limiting your options artificially for the wrong reasons and is simply not smart. Remember that all versions of Android (Linux) are not open and rootable, so do your homework or you will end up with an expensive paper weight in the near future.
I would recommend only buying smart handhelds that allow for root/admin access.
After delving into the world of opensource I have found implementation is emphasised over design. Version control allows for a project to branch off in many directions, which projects may do; this suggests lack of consensus or direction amongst the participants.
What software or websites are useful for collaborative design?
There are literally hundreds more collaboration apps out there and more keep appearing by the day, but these should get you started:
Source Control (Online):
Assembla - Public source is
free, private repositories are paid
Source Forge - Open source only
Google Code - Open source only
Git Hub - Public source is free,
private repositories are paid
Bug Tracking/Project Management
LightHouse - Unlimited open source, paid private projects
FogBugz - Full version is free for up to two developers
BaseCamp - Paid only
Trac - Not hosted (although Assembla hosts it), open source - Python
Bugzilla - Not hosted, open source - Python
Mantis - Not hosted, open source - PHP
Mind Mapping
MindMeister - Free for small
plans, with options to upgrade
Documents
Google Docs - Free
Buzzword - By Adobe - free
Scribd - Free
Graphics
Aviary - I'm not quite sure how
collaborative they are, but I think
you can use their tools that way
Photoshop Express - Another
Adobe product
Picnik - Free
Whiteboards
Scriblink - Free with paid
options
skrbl - Free for public, paid
for private
Dabbleboard - Free and paid
plans
Hosted Wikis
pbwiki - Paid plans
Wikidot - Free with paid plans
Miscellaneous
Acrobat - Part of Adobe's
online suite
Zoho - Fits into a lot of
categories
I've been studying collaborative design early in my Ph.D. (contact me if you want a literature survey draft that I wrote about it a back in 2003).
Anyway, collaborative design applications (as in UML modelers) fall into three categories in terms of timing:
Synchronous - Two people or more editing at same time
Asynchronous - Check-in check-out model, a mess if multiple people edit at the same time.
Hybrid (can share certain things in real time).
In addition, they fall into three categories in terms of metaphores:
- Desktop based - Essentially something like rationale rose with multiple user support
- Whiteboard based - Free canvas, not necessarily structured, sometimes has support for UML recognition. Usually a mess to manage multiple models.
- Hybrids
So this gives you a 3x3 "design space" of tools, and there are research tools inside every one of them.
The problem is that in switching to collaborative work there are many usability issues that are difficult to address. For example, access control, synchronization, awareness, shared viewports, etc. There are some academic advances on these, but they're not necessarily in tools yet.
If this is the topic you're interested in, comment, and I'll post some of the tools I'm familiar with.
I would suggest using a Wiki to document/explore the design.
A mailing list. And opensource projects argue on enough of them. I doubt lack of collaborative tools is where the lack of design emphasis comes from.
In no particular order:
A good email client (I use gmail)
Good wiki software (I use media wiki)
Github or an evolved source repository that allows for easy branching and comments on check ins
A chat room, plain old irc or that built in messenger one
A news group or mailing list (I use the free google one)
Skype
I am somewhat skeptical about collaborative design. From Scobleizer: Why Facebook has never listened and why it definitely won’t start now:
My former boss, Jim Fawcette, used to
say that if you asked a group of
Porsche owners what they wanted they’d
tell you things like “smoother ride,
more trunk space, more leg room, etc.”
He’d then say “well, they just
designed a Volvo.”
also from the comment:
Apple never listens to its customers.
In fact, it prides itself on not
listening. If you listen to your
customers, you will never innovate and
you will never be ahead of the curve.
You will always tweak and fix minor
things on what is top of customer mind
that day, week or month.
I agree with the wiki answer. I'd suggest looking at MindTouch. Our company uses them for our Intranet and for other internal and external project collaboration/management.
A wiki (such as ScrewTurn, or MediaWiki) is a good tool to document a project.
BaseCamp by 37 Signals
Microsoft Office Live Meeting
For us, all we use is Adobe Version Cue, Google Docs, Google Calendar and Gmail.
Design wise, Version Cue does the trick in terms of file management really well.
As for Google, well, it helps organizing all of my activities more than very well. I find most collaboration tools, like Basecamp, a tad too restrictive or just not exactly right. Google lets me organize my stuff just the way I want it to be.
For collaborative design ... without a doubt, it's
http://conceptshare.com
I friend asked me this today.
Picasa Web has a cool (and frightening :-) feature where it will recognize all the faces in your photo album.
But the PC (desktop) version doesn't have this.
Several reasons I can think of:
They just haven't gotten around to writing the PC version of the code.
They are licensing that feature and it costs a lot more (or isn't available) on the PC.
Takes a lot of processing power (this seems odd b/c MY PC cycles are free to Google, but they have to pay for for cycles consumed on their server.
Any other thoughts?
I'm certain it'll make it out in coming releases but Google is a funny company when it comes to its own competing/complementing services. One thing is for sure, only somebody on the Picasa team could give an accurate answer.
But we could hypothesise several things...
They don't want their code reverse-engineered.
(As you say), they aren't licensed to redist
It's blocked in the dev version by other new features that aren't complete yet
They don't want to release it because they want people to use PicasaWeb as a social photo network.
I don't think processing power is an issue. If they're running it in bulk on their own servers for free, a modern desktop could probably run it without issue.
From my limited contact with face recognition software, it's probably the redistribution issue. When I dealt with it, face recognition was its own little world with extremely high per-CPU licensing costs and tremendous paranoia about code getting loose.
I'm not so sure it's not a processing issue. It took Google's massive servers 30 minutes to run through all my photos. I can only imagine that same task would have taken days on my local machine.
Actually, its in, just in limited functionality when you do a search, there's an icon to find only photos with faces. The experimental passport feature also works that way.
So the answer is:
Not the same base (APIs) available or used and not the same language so its not directly portable.
Not the same software and there are no stated goals to make both apps feature equivalent.
Programmers are limited and their time is too. They make choices as to what implement now.
No idea if this is the case for Picasa, but there's another case where licensing could be the issue. If the server-side code is using code with a restrictive license with DRM (GPL, for example) which restricts how you can distribute modules using the code. Running that module on a web server, where the user only gets the output, is legal under such licenses. If that code was distributed, there would be many legal requirements attached which would likely be very undesirable for commercial software companies, including google. This is one very good reason to have some capabilities only accessible through web services.
This was also the case with Riya (who was arguably the first to market with reliable facial recognition for consumer photo collections).
The biggest reasons are likely:
Processing Time (they can't control
how fast your CPU is and therefore
they can't control the experience).
Facial recognition is very likely to
be process intensive (this was Riya's
stated reason for not doing it
client-side)
The recognition process requires a
LARGE volume of data for processing
that is only accessible on the
server? (In other words, the process needs to spin through millions of faces, not just the faces that you have on your hard drive?)