Comments on: Mobile Service Architecture (MSA) 2

By: Mobile Service Architecture 2 Article | About Mobility Weblog

Mobile Service Architecture 2 Article | About Mobility Weblog — Wed, 20 Aug 2008 15:39:57 +0000

[...] to this see Mobile Service Architecture (MSA) 2 (About Mobility [...]

By: vtguy

vtguy — Tue, 20 May 2008 10:54:13 +0000

Good points. My thinking was that to make a clear branding message MSA should remain, and MSA2 should be for advanced handsets. I don’t really understand the reason behind deprecating MSA, and duplicating much of it in MSA2. MSA would eventually die out as the capabilities of the lower tier rise to the MSA2 level.

My concern is that with a marketing message of “JSR-249 mid-segment with JSR-xyz conditional support and the following option JSR’s” there is no way to market this consistently. MSA2 alone will be a meaningless brand without all of the qualifying statements.

A clear brand that removes some of the fragmentation seems important to Java at this point.

By: ceo

ceo — Mon, 19 May 2008 16:21:52 +0000

I believe there is and always be classes of handsets: low, mid and advanced. It is a matter of economics. Because this is a generic stack regardless of device manufacturer, it must cater all those classes of handsets; having only one stack means catering only one class of device.

So I feel that it is OK to have low, mid, and advanced stacks, based on hardware functionality support -and- OS functionality support, as long as the stacks are consistently implemented across ALL handsets, both functionality and behavior-wise.

ceo

By: vtguy

vtguy — Mon, 19 May 2008 13:40:34 +0000

What do you think of the branding message with this JSR? My concern is that with all of the different stacks, it does not create a clear message that can be marketed against Android. I think it may be a mistake not to keep MSA2 exclusive to a single stack, with the only optionality being those JSR’s conditional on hardware.

By: ceo

ceo — Mon, 12 May 2008 12:59:52 +0000

Interesting… thanks. Would this be the case even if they used Mobile Telephony API (MTA) v1 (JSR 253)?

By: Håkan

Håkan — Mon, 12 May 2008 10:50:47 +0000

The reason for JSR-304,266,307 being left out is that they are all so called “BenQ” JSRs, meaning that the licensing of these APIs is very unclear since BenQ went bankrupt, and there is no way to get access to the TCKs for these JSRs.

By: ceo

ceo — Sat, 10 May 2008 16:30:36 +0000

Just don’t put all the eggs in one basket.

Or, screw it, let many go out of business, so that the few who are brave to deal with this issue of fragmentation and decide to continue pushing forward, those shall win, and grab the market. Mobility today is not for the faint-of-heart.

That said, MSA 2 API set look strong…

ceo

By: Victor Borrull

Victor Borrull — Sat, 10 May 2008 16:08:57 +0000

“MSA 2 looks hot. If all these APIs get delivered consistently across all handsets, we will be in business…”

Many will be out of business as device fragmentation and devices related issues (see deployment and porting) have a big role in mobile development.

I hope still be in business and without having to remember that model X of brand Y has this or that implementation, that would be nice.

Keep fingers crossed Greetings