04-08-2009 05:58 AM
04-08-2009 08:17 AM
And no problem about the quote.
However... i do have a few more questions regarding this issue.
I have since applied to the alliance program and have recently received a reply.
I was not expecting the fee to be as large as it is since all i really need is a few words, deviceside=bsb-b or whatever it is
I know there are various benefits of being part of the alliance but all im really interested in is the BIS-B api.
So my question is:
How acceptable would it be, not to include BIS-B in network config heuristics?
i.e. MDS->WAP2.0->Direct TCP->WAP1.0
I'm not sure if i shold be posting this here since the thread is marked as solved.
Perhaps i should add it to your thread?
Appreciate the advice.
04-08-2009 08:47 AM
Ask the question in a new Thread, then you will get input from other people, and I will stick a reference or the results in the big post. Is that OK?
For me, before BIS-B, we used (and still do use on applications that have not got RIM approval) Direct TCP. WAP 2.0 is a relative new one for me, I've not had a chance to use it anger, when I used in test on our provider (Vodafone) I got a transcoder problem (hence that entry in the post).