Java Development

[#1]

Okay I've been browsing the net looking at tutorials left and right for the past month or so. I've found a bunch of info on how to connect to a website and pull data. Everything I've tried though only seems to work for some users. I would say 60% of the users have no problem but the other 40% is having connection issues. Here is what I'm trying to accomplish and I'm willing to pay for someone to program some code for me. I know  that's the easy way out, but I feel like I would learn more by dissecting someones code then looking online.

What I'm trying to accomplish is simply connect to a website http://www.test.com/sompage.php. From that page I simply want to pull the content of of it and bring it into my appliction. I think the issue lies with everyone being on different networks bis, bes etc. So if you can produce some code that wroks just let me know how much you want and I will send it over via paypal. =)

Thanks

[#2]

Warning, a bit of a rant coming up. 

You can solve 90% or more of your problems by becoming an Alliance member because then you can use BIS--B, which is carrier agnostic, for your application.  Last year yould could have just paid your Alliance membership and joined and hopefully, as long as your application is approved, got access to BIS-B.

However the rules on becoming an Alliance member are changing and to become an Alliance member with access to BIS-B there are now some quite strigent conditions, that I don't believe an individual developer can achieve.  I think this is unacceptable. 

Also, as an Alliance member, I can't write this transport layer for you and then supply it to you either.  I could if it was a closed system, in other words I supplied you cods only, but then I would need to ask for this and would have to explain exactly what you are going to use it for, stuff which I am presuming you do not want to let out of the bag just yet.

I think this is RIM shooting itself in the foot.  Has any one else reviewed the Alliance changes and reached the same conclusion?

Rant over, back with you.

Are you looking for something for the North American market?

[#3]

---

peter_strange wrote:

Warning, a bit of a rant coming up. 

You can solve 90% or more of your problems by becoming an Alliance member because then you can use BIS--B, which is carrier agnostic, for your application.  Last year yould could have just paid your Alliance membership and joined and hopefully, as long as your application is approved, got access to BIS-B.

However the rules on becoming an Alliance member are changing and to become an Alliance member with access to BIS-B there are now some quite strigent conditions, that I don't believe an individual developer can achieve.  I think this is unacceptable. 

Also, as an Alliance member, I can't write this transport layer for you and then supply it to you either.  I could if it was a closed system, in other words I supplied you cods only, but then I would need to ask for this and would have to explain exactly what you are going to use it for, stuff which I am presuming you do not want to let out of the bag just yet.

I think this is RIM shooting itself in the foot.  Has any one else reviewed the Alliance changes and reached the same conclusion?

Rant over, back with you.

Are you looking for something for the North American market?

---

What would the internet be without rants? haha

I had no idea the Alliance even existed. I guess I'm not as in the loop as everyone else. I'm looking for North America yes. Everything I've found online has like 1000 lines of code and a lot of stuff I don't really need. I just need to figure out how the usre is conneced to the internet and append the url with the right parameters. Atleast that's what I think needs to happen.

[#4]

I agree with Peter's rant, but I suspect the root cause of this BIS-B access issue comes from RIM not wanting to overload their network and also from the carriers who bill for BIS-B/MDS access differently from Direct IP (TCP/UDP) and WAP access.

@dmglakewood, your key issue is that you need to understand that on various BlackBerrys there are various transports/connection types/routes available (sometimes none!). Moreover, there are IT Policies that govern the Internet access. Last but not least, even if you can automatically find out how to connect to the Internet, the user might not like it, because of circumvention of a corporate Internet access policy or simply because of a big bill that all of a suddent arrives in the mail from the carrier (surprise, surprise, BlackBerry users often pay much much more for Direct TCP/WAP traffic, especially when roaming).

To preclude the rants about all mobiles other than BlackBerrys having much easier time with Internet access, you should consider that most other mobiles access the Internet via the Internet or a WAP APN hard-coded by the carrier into the SIM card. On BlackBerrys, many carriers don't put that information onto the SIM card or, to make matters worse, don't even provision the account for the Internet or WAP APN access. The reason for this is mainly commercial.

P.S. One good starting point for dissection is the Network Diagnostics tool from RIM.

[#5]

@klyubin.  Thanks for the support.  If I get other people agreeing, I might start a specific Thread on the point and thus get RIM's response.

@dmglakewood.  I suspect that you could get better than 90% cover by using WAP with a fallback to TCP.  I do this in the UK, but then in the UK I have only 5 carriers, I can detect the carrier from the Service Books, so I can provide the APN parameters if WAP fails.  I've no idea if this is possible in the US and I don't have access to US phones to try it out.  But perhaps someone over there would be willing to write this for you, it is not too involved, simpler than the Network Diagnostics. 

[#6]

---

peter_strange wrote:

However the rules on becoming an Alliance member are changing and to become an Alliance member with access to BIS-B there are now some quite strigent conditions, that I don't believe an individual developer can achieve.  I think this is unacceptable. 

I think this is RIM shooting itself in the foot.  Has any one else reviewed the Alliance changes and reached the same conclusion?

---

I agree with you Peter (although this belongs in a different thread).

[#7]

Everyone points to the NetworkDiagnosticTool as a panacea, which it is not. It illustrates the process of using CoverageInfo to determine what connections are available (which is good info), but it falls short of detecting the carrier, and providing the required WAP gateway or APN info for the specific carriers. If you do not have BES on the device, and you cannot use BIS-B, then you are down to:

* WAP2, which can be used by obtaining the connection ID from the service books (but not supported by all carriers)

* WAP, which requires carrier-specific WAP gateway info to be appended to the url

* Direct TCP, which requires carrier-specific APN info to be appended to the URL

Short of RIM making BIS-B publicly available, I think that the community would be well-served if someone would compile a list of the carrier-specific details, and perhaps some code to detect the carrier and country (the same carrier may have different info for different countries). This would have to be a coordinated effort, because (like Peter), I only have good knowledge of a single market (US, and incomplete at that!).

Peter, perhaps we should start a sourceforge.net project?

[#8]

Network Diagnostics tools is definitely not a panacea, but it's a good starting point for those wishing to find out programmatically what routes/transports/connection types are supported.

As to carrier-specific settings, I'd like to add that even with same carrier different accounts/customers can be enabled for different APNs and event username+password pairs. A typical example is where there is one APN for pre-pay only customers and another one for contract only (monthly paying) customers. Also, carriers can enable access via APNs on per-customer basis.

[#9]

So here is some advice for RIM - make it easier for developers, not harder.

The iPhone folks are incredulous at what we have to go through to make a simple HTTP call - and with good reason. And with all of the carrier restrictions, GPS is no better.

These things are "gimme's" on the iPhone platform, and they are AT THE CORE of what we need applications for, these days.

So, if RIM wants to make it more difficult for developers, so that the iPhone will continue to have more/better/richer apps than Backberry, then kudos, you are doing a great job. Between the unbelivably complex carrier issues, and the newly "re-swizzled" Alliance program, you are giving more folks the incentive to steer clear of RIM.

[#10]

Sounds like I should start a Thread then...

OP, sorry about hijacking your Thread.  Have we answered your question?

Edit: Thread added, see:

http://supportforums.blackberry.com/rim/board/message?board.id=java_dev&thread.id=62467

Further edit to correct link - thanks klyubin.

Message Edited by peter_strange on 09-24-2009 10:12 PM