Forums | developer.brewmp.com Forums | developer.brewmp.com

Developer

Forums

I have some questions on the distribution system :

Can I distribute my brew applications on my own wap site ?
Can a publisher get bds ? or the bds is only for carriers ?

Can a end user download a brew app from a web site and uplaod it with brewapploader to his device ?

Quote:
Can I distribute my brew applications on my own wap site ?
Can a publisher get bds ? or the bds is only for carriers ?
Can a end user download a brew app from a web site and uplaod it with brewapploader to his device ?
1. I don't think that is possible. It has to go through Qualcomm downloading mechanism.
2. Most probably not. You may get more info from Qualcomm tech support.
3. No. I don't think end user would pay $400 to get apploader and then get the phone test enabled to download your application. If you distribute apploader on your own, you would violate license agreement, and get into legal problem.
ruben

Quote:
Can I distribute my brew applications on my own wap site ?
Can a publisher get bds ? or the bds is only for carriers ?
Can a end user download a brew app from a web site and uplaod it with brewapploader to his device ?
1. I don't think that is possible. It has to go through Qualcomm downloading mechanism.
2. Most probably not. You may get more info from Qualcomm tech support.
3. No. I don't think end user would pay $400 to get apploader and then get the phone test enabled to download your application. If you distribute apploader on your own, you would violate license agreement, and get into legal problem.
ruben

Hi all!
I am new on brew. I'd like to know, if there is any way to get free brew content. It happens that my cell phone operator charges $3.4 per each ringtone!!!!
So, I've tried to start developing on BREW, but there is no way I can deploy applications to my cellphone. Only my operator can do that. So I've tried to download applications via wap pages, like any cell phone else that does not use brew do. I've found mid mmf ringtones, but none was compatible with my cellphone. The same happens with images. I am using a LG BD 6070, and I am not even close to be satisfied with either cell phon e and operator.
So, I'd like to know 2 things:
- Is there, and where can I find free brew content?
- How can I deploy applications without contact my cell phone operator?
Best regards,

Hi all!
I am new on brew. I'd like to know, if there is any way to get free brew content. It happens that my cell phone operator charges $3.4 per each ringtone!!!!
So, I've tried to start developing on BREW, but there is no way I can deploy applications to my cellphone. Only my operator can do that. So I've tried to download applications via wap pages, like any cell phone else that does not use brew do. I've found mid mmf ringtones, but none was compatible with my cellphone. The same happens with images. I am using a LG BD 6070, and I am not even close to be satisfied with either cell phon e and operator.
So, I'd like to know 2 things:
- Is there, and where can I find free brew content?
- How can I deploy applications without contact my cell phone operator?
Best regards,

If you are authenticated BREW developer(requires $400), you can download BREW apploader form BREW extreanet. Get your phone test enabled from Qualcomm, then you can download your own application to BREW phone.
ruben

If you are authenticated BREW developer(requires $400), you can download BREW apploader form BREW extreanet. Get your phone test enabled from Qualcomm, then you can download your own application to BREW phone.
ruben

Ya,
That's the problem. It is not fair! I don't want to spend any more money with this. I've alredy spent too much with the cell phone and wap minutes to find out applications. I am almost convinced that brew is not a good solution if you don't have enough money to effort. While in ericsson cell phones I can download free j2me games... i just don't belive it...................
regards

Ya,
That's the problem. It is not fair! I don't want to spend any more money with this. I've alredy spent too much with the cell phone and wap minutes to find out applications. I am almost convinced that brew is not a good solution if you don't have enough money to effort. While in ericsson cell phones I can download free j2me games... i just don't belive it...................
regards

Well, it depends on your perspective. In J2ME phone there is no clear model for developer or carrier to make money out of application because of piracy issue. Unless there exists a decent model, good developer/engineer wouldn't be interested to create any interesting application, as everyone don't have enough time to set internet shopping facility for his/her application.
If you are interested to develop good game/application it would be better for you to get authenticated and thereby you can get rewarded for your hard work by selling your application.
Most of the non-technical users (I guess bulk of the users are like that) would find BREW model more attractive.
ruben

Well, it depends on your perspective. In J2ME phone there is no clear model for developer or carrier to make money out of application because of piracy issue. Unless there exists a decent model, good developer/engineer wouldn't be interested to create any interesting application, as everyone don't have enough time to set internet shopping facility for his/her application.
If you are interested to develop good game/application it would be better for you to get authenticated and thereby you can get rewarded for your hard work by selling your application.
Most of the non-technical users (I guess bulk of the users are like that) would find BREW model more attractive.
ruben

I am interested in developing a series of BREW applications that I need to be able to give to consumers for free (e.g. at no cost to the consumer).
Is there anyway to do this? Can I be "reverse" billed for the download of the application instead of the consumer?
Thanks for you help!
- Rodney

I am interested in developing a series of BREW applications that I need to be able to give to consumers for free (e.g. at no cost to the consumer).
Is there anyway to do this? Can I be "reverse" billed for the download of the application instead of the consumer?
Thanks for you help!
- Rodney

Hi,
That's my problem too. I don't want to charge for my applications / ringtones, and I don't want to have any cost either. With another technologies, I can download any kind of image, ringtone or applications without any charge / software. I can just download them via wap.
That's a real problem....
If you can find out a way to do this, let me know!
Regards.

Hi,
That's my problem too. I don't want to charge for my applications / ringtones, and I don't want to have any cost either. With another technologies, I can download any kind of image, ringtone or applications without any charge / software. I can just download them via wap.
That's a real problem....
If you can find out a way to do this, let me know!
Regards.

I have no doubt that brew is an interesting for those peoples interested in sell applications. BUT for those like me, that just want to fill out some necessities, like having personal photos or custom ringtones and applications. It's non-sense being locked on only one technology. I can't even create a theme !!! If I create a theme I have to pay $400 to send it to my cell phone!!! I said it before, and will say it again: IT IS NOT FAIR!
In some sites like:
v22.net
I could download free ringtones photos if my cell phone wasn't so dependent on BREW technology...
Sorry, but I am REALLY unsatisfied with this technology. Since I live in Brazil, it would take 2 Months of my salary to pay just the $400... With this money, I would prefer to change my cell phone and operator....
Regards

I have no doubt that brew is an interesting for those peoples interested in sell applications. BUT for those like me, that just want to fill out some necessities, like having personal photos or custom ringtones and applications. It's non-sense being locked on only one technology. I can't even create a theme !!! If I create a theme I have to pay $400 to send it to my cell phone!!! I said it before, and will say it again: IT IS NOT FAIR!
In some sites like:
v22.net
I could download free ringtones photos if my cell phone wasn't so dependent on BREW technology...
Sorry, but I am REALLY unsatisfied with this technology. Since I live in Brazil, it would take 2 Months of my salary to pay just the $400... With this money, I would prefer to change my cell phone and operator....
Regards

If you search over net, you can find tools and tricks to modify BREW phone. It is not appropriate for me to post those links here in this forum.
ruben

If you search over net, you can find tools and tricks to modify BREW phone. It is not appropriate for me to post those links here in this forum.
ruben

I am trying to start a dialogue with Verizon, the only US carrier that uses BREW, to get some idea about how to go about doing this. I know that you can provide an application as a Demo ... perhaps we could accomplish what we are trying to do by creating an unlimited demo ... this would be confusing to users ... but it is at least a start.
Carriers are not likely to be very supportive in this regard ... without charging for the application, they have no way to profit by offering the service (I don't fully agreed with this but it is a common argument). At the very least ... it would be nice to be able to establish a "reverse-billing" option in addition to those that already exist. If you have to charge someone ... charge the company providing the application ... and let the consume have it for free.
It would be nice to have someone from Qualcomm comment on this ... Hint Hint!
- Rodney

I am trying to start a dialogue with Verizon, the only US carrier that uses BREW, to get some idea about how to go about doing this. I know that you can provide an application as a Demo ... perhaps we could accomplish what we are trying to do by creating an unlimited demo ... this would be confusing to users ... but it is at least a start.
Carriers are not likely to be very supportive in this regard ... without charging for the application, they have no way to profit by offering the service (I don't fully agreed with this but it is a common argument). At the very least ... it would be nice to be able to establish a "reverse-billing" option in addition to those that already exist. If you have to charge someone ... charge the company providing the application ... and let the consume have it for free.
It would be nice to have someone from Qualcomm comment on this ... Hint Hint!
- Rodney

Actually, I believe Midwest Wireless and U.S. Cellular are two other US carriers that use brew ;)
-Tyndal

Actually, I believe Midwest Wireless and U.S. Cellular are two other US carriers that use brew ;)
-Tyndal

Point taken ... any idea what their respective user bases are? I've never even heard of Midwest Wireless.
Did you have any thoughts on the rest of the post? What is your experience with "Demo" BREW applications? Is it possible to have a "Never-Ending-Demo" BREW application?
- Rodney

Point taken ... any idea what their respective user bases are? I've never even heard of Midwest Wireless.
Did you have any thoughts on the rest of the post? What is your experience with "Demo" BREW applications? Is it possible to have a "Never-Ending-Demo" BREW application?
- Rodney

Well, from a development standpoint, you could just do nothing with licensing, if it is to be a free-only application, (ie not separate demo and purchase versions)..
During development, the only times you need to mess with licensing (ILICENSE) is if you are going to have separate demo/purchase versions, or you are using a "number of uses" type license.. for other license types.. say 30 day usage, it is handled entirely by brew in the apphandler/mif files when you download the app from the carrier.
So, the final decision on pricing is not done until approching a carrier, and separate from the dev process.. It seems to me you can offer the app as an "unlimited demo", or as a "free" app or as a app for $200, and it doesnt make any difference on the developer end.
I have only dealt with the devlopment standpoint, but i dont see any reason why free apps wouldnt be possible, (unless the carrier wont accept it).. . Theoretically the carrier should accept it even if they dont get a profit off the app, since they make money off the packet usage anyway..
the closest to "free" you can develop an app is probably the $400 plus the cost of one phone (and a data cable, oh, and the cost to send it to Qualcomm to set the test flag).. with that you can download all the tools, and assuming you use the gnu compiler, compile a binary.. I think only the first couple of apps submitted to NTSL are free though.. after that, each app cost $1000 or so for testing.
oh, and no idea on the user base for US Cellular or Midwest Wireless.
-Tyndal

Well, from a development standpoint, you could just do nothing with licensing, if it is to be a free-only application, (ie not separate demo and purchase versions)..
During development, the only times you need to mess with licensing (ILICENSE) is if you are going to have separate demo/purchase versions, or you are using a "number of uses" type license.. for other license types.. say 30 day usage, it is handled entirely by brew in the apphandler/mif files when you download the app from the carrier.
So, the final decision on pricing is not done until approching a carrier, and separate from the dev process.. It seems to me you can offer the app as an "unlimited demo", or as a "free" app or as a app for $200, and it doesnt make any difference on the developer end.
I have only dealt with the devlopment standpoint, but i dont see any reason why free apps wouldnt be possible, (unless the carrier wont accept it).. . Theoretically the carrier should accept it even if they dont get a profit off the app, since they make money off the packet usage anyway..
the closest to "free" you can develop an app is probably the $400 plus the cost of one phone (and a data cable, oh, and the cost to send it to Qualcomm to set the test flag).. with that you can download all the tools, and assuming you use the gnu compiler, compile a binary.. I think only the first couple of apps submitted to NTSL are free though.. after that, each app cost $1000 or so for testing.
oh, and no idea on the user base for US Cellular or Midwest Wireless.
-Tyndal

There are a few other carriers as well. Callling Verizon the only US carrier is definitely not accurate. You can get all the contact information for Brew carriers from the Extranet.
However, I think you will not able to get Verizon or any other carrier to accept free applications of any sort. The reason is simple. They make money when they sell their Brew apps to consumers and there is no reason or incentive for them to offer free services. Verizon is in the business to make money, not to offer free bandwidth and cellular services.

There are a few other carriers as well. Callling Verizon the only US carrier is definitely not accurate. You can get all the contact information for Brew carriers from the Extranet.
However, I think you will not able to get Verizon or any other carrier to accept free applications of any sort. The reason is simple. They make money when they sell their Brew apps to consumers and there is no reason or incentive for them to offer free services. Verizon is in the business to make money, not to offer free bandwidth and cellular services.

There are countless other - open platforms - out there that you can use instead. Brew is clearly not for you. It has been designed with a certain principle in mind, and that's how it works. Like it or not. It has not been created for the hobbyist market.
You may want to take a look at Symbian platforms, J2ME phones or even the Microsoft Smartphone, all of which give you the chanc to release content either for free or with minimal cost involved. Be prepared to compete against a gazillion other amateurs however, doing the same thing as you, flooding the market so that no user will actually ever find your stuff.

There are countless other - open platforms - out there that you can use instead. Brew is clearly not for you. It has been designed with a certain principle in mind, and that's how it works. Like it or not. It has not been created for the hobbyist market.
You may want to take a look at Symbian platforms, J2ME phones or even the Microsoft Smartphone, all of which give you the chanc to release content either for free or with minimal cost involved. Be prepared to compete against a gazillion other amateurs however, doing the same thing as you, flooding the market so that no user will actually ever find your stuff.

Actually if you read the Qualcomm license I believe you will find that for a "free" application you would be charged a minimum fee for downloading.
As Dragon has said, BREW is not meant for users creating their own applications, it is a full end to end retail model.
Curt

Actually if you read the Qualcomm license I believe you will find that for a "free" application you would be charged a minimum fee for downloading.
As Dragon has said, BREW is not meant for users creating their own applications, it is a full end to end retail model.
Curt

Quote:Originally posted by kamogawa
Ya,
That's the problem. It is not fair! I don't want to spend any more money with this. I've alredy spent too much with the cell phone and wap minutes to find out applications.
It sounds like you just want to make your own custom applications for your own personal phone.
In which case, from what I know, no, you can't. As with all network providers, if you want content, you pay for it. As far as I know you can only customise your phone for free up to a point.
It's a hard life isn't it? :rolleyes:

Quote:Originally posted by kamogawa
Ya,
That's the problem. It is not fair! I don't want to spend any more money with this. I've alredy spent too much with the cell phone and wap minutes to find out applications.
It sounds like you just want to make your own custom applications for your own personal phone.
In which case, from what I know, no, you can't. As with all network providers, if you want content, you pay for it. As far as I know you can only customise your phone for free up to a point.
It's a hard life isn't it? :rolleyes:

Consider this scenario ...
Assume a travel company, say an airline, wishes to create a mobile application for its frequent flyers that will enable them to access itinerary information and other related features. The point of the application is to increase customer loyalty. As such, charging the customer for the application is not feasible. The travel company is, however, more than willing to assume the cost that the carrier would have presumably charged the customer.
In this scenario, how does BREW/Carriers address the problem of NOT charging the consumer but instead the issuer of the application (e.g. the Travel Company)?
- Rodney

Consider this scenario ...
Assume a travel company, say an airline, wishes to create a mobile application for its frequent flyers that will enable them to access itinerary information and other related features. The point of the application is to increase customer loyalty. As such, charging the customer for the application is not feasible. The travel company is, however, more than willing to assume the cost that the carrier would have presumably charged the customer.
In this scenario, how does BREW/Carriers address the problem of NOT charging the consumer but instead the issuer of the application (e.g. the Travel Company)?
- Rodney

That's a slightly different scenario, and your example is in a way much like the RoadWarrior exampe in the Brew documentation.
The initial application would have to be bought - by the customer or the travel agent - and then the application transfers travel/flight data from a server from inside the app. This would be a professionally developed application - of course from a authorized devloper and publisher who is willing to pay the entry fee - and has nothing to do with delivering free ringtones the way kamogawa has in mind.
Verizon will be very happy with such a scenario because it clocks in A LOT of minutes of airtime that they make money on. Allowing hobbyists to offer their free ringtones or wallpapers does NOTHING to their business at all, other than cluttering the network.
In your original question you also raised the question of reverse billing, which is a good topic, becasue that could indeed become a feature in the future. I don't think it exists at this time, but given your example, of course it would be great if the travel agent could have the option to carry the cost for the customer to obtain the phone client.

That's a slightly different scenario, and your example is in a way much like the RoadWarrior exampe in the Brew documentation.
The initial application would have to be bought - by the customer or the travel agent - and then the application transfers travel/flight data from a server from inside the app. This would be a professionally developed application - of course from a authorized devloper and publisher who is willing to pay the entry fee - and has nothing to do with delivering free ringtones the way kamogawa has in mind.
Verizon will be very happy with such a scenario because it clocks in A LOT of minutes of airtime that they make money on. Allowing hobbyists to offer their free ringtones or wallpapers does NOTHING to their business at all, other than cluttering the network.
In your original question you also raised the question of reverse billing, which is a good topic, becasue that could indeed become a feature in the future. I don't think it exists at this time, but given your example, of course it would be great if the travel agent could have the option to carry the cost for the customer to obtain the phone client.

Quote:Be prepared to compete against a gazillion other amateurs however, doing the same thing as you, flooding the market so that no user will actually ever find your stuff.
Well, i really do not agree. "Flooding the market" hmm. Well, if you want your game to be downloadable on internet, yop that's defenitely true. But if you want to contact operators to ask them to provide your application to their users, things become harder. Nowadays for alot of carriers you will need to "certify" your application, for free of course. And this content certification is much harder than nstl.
But if you create a good application, it's even possible to contact phone manufacturers (like nokia), and the application may be installed on the phone before it is sold.
It's true your are competing against alot of developers, but if you create something good, it's really no problem, and users will find it.
Btw is there some kind of midlet review for brew games?
/kUfa

Quote:Be prepared to compete against a gazillion other amateurs however, doing the same thing as you, flooding the market so that no user will actually ever find your stuff.
Well, i really do not agree. "Flooding the market" hmm. Well, if you want your game to be downloadable on internet, yop that's defenitely true. But if you want to contact operators to ask them to provide your application to their users, things become harder. Nowadays for alot of carriers you will need to "certify" your application, for free of course. And this content certification is much harder than nstl.
But if you create a good application, it's even possible to contact phone manufacturers (like nokia), and the application may be installed on the phone before it is sold.
It's true your are competing against alot of developers, but if you create something good, it's really no problem, and users will find it.
Btw is there some kind of midlet review for brew games?
/kUfa

I think you misunderstood my remark. I wasn't referring to Brew at all.
My remark was pointed more towards J2ME and Symbian platforms, the MS Smartphone, as well as any other open platform where it is evident how this openness is likely to result in a flood of mediocre product flooding the market, frequently even virtually killing the entire professional market as witnessed in the Pocket PC field. In those markets it is sadly hardly possible for users to find your product, no matter how good it is.
OEM Deals - the *bundling* you refer to - are also only occasionally a choice because there are only so many OEM deals out there.

I think you misunderstood my remark. I wasn't referring to Brew at all.
My remark was pointed more towards J2ME and Symbian platforms, the MS Smartphone, as well as any other open platform where it is evident how this openness is likely to result in a flood of mediocre product flooding the market, frequently even virtually killing the entire professional market as witnessed in the Pocket PC field. In those markets it is sadly hardly possible for users to find your product, no matter how good it is.
OEM Deals - the *bundling* you refer to - are also only occasionally a choice because there are only so many OEM deals out there.

Well i was referring to J2ME and Symbian platforms..

Well i was referring to J2ME and Symbian platforms..

Quote:hardly possible for users to find your product
Definitely true. This is why I like BREW's barriers to entry (i.e. the costs involved).

Quote:hardly possible for users to find your product
Definitely true. This is why I like BREW's barriers to entry (i.e. the costs involved).

Well, all the good j2me/symbian games are well known and easy to find (you cant miss them..) on operators websites/wap pages, and on game reviews website.
And i do not like BREW's barriers to entry: of course less applications, but less good ones...
/kUfa

Well, all the good j2me/symbian games are well known and easy to find (you cant miss them..) on operators websites/wap pages, and on game reviews website.
And i do not like BREW's barriers to entry: of course less applications, but less good ones...
/kUfa

kUfa,
I honestly think you are kidding yourself here. (No offense meant!) While J2ME and Symbian may not be as flooded as some other platforms - the Pocket PC comes to mind once again - it is only a matter of time. Symbian is not interesting for most because of its very limited availability, and J2ME is on the verge of becoming an oversaturated platform very quickly - especially in Europe.

kUfa,
I honestly think you are kidding yourself here. (No offense meant!) While J2ME and Symbian may not be as flooded as some other platforms - the Pocket PC comes to mind once again - it is only a matter of time. Symbian is not interesting for most because of its very limited availability, and J2ME is on the verge of becoming an oversaturated platform very quickly - especially in Europe.

Quote:Originally posted by mfoundry
Consider this scenario ...
Assume a travel company, say an airline, wishes to create a mobile application for its frequent flyers that will enable them to access itinerary information and other related features. The point of the application is to increase customer loyalty. As such, charging the customer for the application is not feasible. The travel company is, however, more than willing to assume the cost that the carrier would have presumably charged the customer.
In this scenario, how does BREW/Carriers address the problem of NOT charging the consumer but instead the issuer of the application (e.g. the Travel Company)?
- Rodney
Rebate.

Quote:Originally posted by mfoundry
Consider this scenario ...
Assume a travel company, say an airline, wishes to create a mobile application for its frequent flyers that will enable them to access itinerary information and other related features. The point of the application is to increase customer loyalty. As such, charging the customer for the application is not feasible. The travel company is, however, more than willing to assume the cost that the carrier would have presumably charged the customer.
In this scenario, how does BREW/Carriers address the problem of NOT charging the consumer but instead the issuer of the application (e.g. the Travel Company)?
- Rodney
Rebate.

Thanks for the suggestion (if a bit trite) but a rebate is very expensive to administer and often doesn't solve the basic problem. Payment, even if a rebate is provided, is a deterent to download.
I really am looking for a better solution. This is something that BREW/Qualcomm will eventually have to deal with. Call it "Reverse Billing" or "Auto-Rebate" but it needs to be a model that is supported.
- Rodney

Thanks for the suggestion (if a bit trite) but a rebate is very expensive to administer and often doesn't solve the basic problem. Payment, even if a rebate is provided, is a deterent to download.
I really am looking for a better solution. This is something that BREW/Qualcomm will eventually have to deal with. Call it "Reverse Billing" or "Auto-Rebate" but it needs to be a model that is supported.
- Rodney

I am sure there will be something in the future as networked apps become more common and companies discover that they can or actually SHOULD give away the main application for free and then make money on the backend as the user transfers data over the network.

I am sure there will be something in the future as networked apps become more common and companies discover that they can or actually SHOULD give away the main application for free and then make money on the backend as the user transfers data over the network.

Dragon,
i think you got it wrong (or probably i did not explain it properly). Of course J2ME will be oversaturated very quickly, well it's already the case. But finding a good application is not that hard. (btw have no idea how it is for Pocket PC since they are very unpopular in europe). Symbian will be available on most of the new nokia devices (which will also support midp2) and ericsson ones, which means a big market coming for us.
Btw look at pc games. Here the market is VERY big. But good applications are well known.
To clarify my point of view:
Brew: developers need money => few developers => few good games
J2ME: ALOT of developers => alot of crap games and alot of good ones but users can still find them (operator website/wap page, etc)
Symbian: few developers but already alot of crap things, some big companies make good things, big market coming up (in europe at least)

Dragon,
i think you got it wrong (or probably i did not explain it properly). Of course J2ME will be oversaturated very quickly, well it's already the case. But finding a good application is not that hard. (btw have no idea how it is for Pocket PC since they are very unpopular in europe). Symbian will be available on most of the new nokia devices (which will also support midp2) and ericsson ones, which means a big market coming for us.
Btw look at pc games. Here the market is VERY big. But good applications are well known.
To clarify my point of view:
Brew: developers need money => few developers => few good games
J2ME: ALOT of developers => alot of crap games and alot of good ones but users can still find them (operator website/wap page, etc)
Symbian: few developers but already alot of crap things, some big companies make good things, big market coming up (in europe at least)

Quote:Brew: developers need money => few developers => few good games
Please note that BREW is the youngest of all systems currently widely used (Symbian, Palm, J2ME, WinCE etc). Over the time there will not be few developer. In fact if you see the number of people attended in Brew 2003 developer conference in compared to that of 2002 developer conference, you kind of get an idea that BREW is getting popular.
Yes, $400 barrier acts as an filter against many junk content/viruses/spam etc.
ruben

Quote:Brew: developers need money => few developers => few good games
Please note that BREW is the youngest of all systems currently widely used (Symbian, Palm, J2ME, WinCE etc). Over the time there will not be few developer. In fact if you see the number of people attended in Brew 2003 developer conference in compared to that of 2002 developer conference, you kind of get an idea that BREW is getting popular.
Yes, $400 barrier acts as an filter against many junk content/viruses/spam etc.
ruben

kufa,
I think that there is likely more quality J2ME titles than BREW titles, but the reason has nothing to do with having a platform that is free to develop for and has everything to do with their being a lot of games developed in Europe for J2ME, and not for BREW because there aren't any European BREW carriers. As a result, these titles can come to the US on J2ME without too much difficulty, but going to BREW takes more effort. It requires the developing company to hand over their source code and assets to a development house or publishing partner in the US, and those relationships can take time to build. Some developers don't even bother.
If you want to prove me wrong, show me a list of titles developed in the US that are only available on US J2ME carriers that are "better" than titles available on BREW that work on the same level of hardware (Nokia Series 60 type stuff need not apply since that hardware is much more powerful than anything available to BREW).
I know many people have issues with paying the various cash involved to get an app to market, but realistically it's a very small number compared the amount of money you'll make off a game that's good enough to get picked up by the carriers. For anyone doing this as a business, the numbers we're talking should be a non-issue. It cuts out the hobby developers, but I don't feel this is any significant loss. It removes the ability to have free clients for things as an added value for other applications or services, and I think this is something the carriers and Qualcomm need to work out.
Tom

kufa,
I think that there is likely more quality J2ME titles than BREW titles, but the reason has nothing to do with having a platform that is free to develop for and has everything to do with their being a lot of games developed in Europe for J2ME, and not for BREW because there aren't any European BREW carriers. As a result, these titles can come to the US on J2ME without too much difficulty, but going to BREW takes more effort. It requires the developing company to hand over their source code and assets to a development house or publishing partner in the US, and those relationships can take time to build. Some developers don't even bother.
If you want to prove me wrong, show me a list of titles developed in the US that are only available on US J2ME carriers that are "better" than titles available on BREW that work on the same level of hardware (Nokia Series 60 type stuff need not apply since that hardware is much more powerful than anything available to BREW).
I know many people have issues with paying the various cash involved to get an app to market, but realistically it's a very small number compared the amount of money you'll make off a game that's good enough to get picked up by the carriers. For anyone doing this as a business, the numbers we're talking should be a non-issue. It cuts out the hobby developers, but I don't feel this is any significant loss. It removes the ability to have free clients for things as an added value for other applications or services, and I think this is something the carriers and Qualcomm need to work out.
Tom

Ruben,
Quote:Please note that BREW is the youngest of all systems currently widely used (Symbian, Palm, J2ME, WinCE etc). Over the time there will not be few developer
I agree.. But if you look to a younger "free" technology like mophun, you will already find much more developers there, which is quiet stupid since mophun sucks compared to brew..
I also agree with you, we need some kind of barrier against junk contents. But making money on all the developers is not the best choice imo (except for qualcomm ;), would be great if it's like the j2me content certification.
Vexxed,
I agree when you say having to pay is not a big problem for us. But i think having at least a free SDK (no need to become a brew developer), free emulators, docs etc, and the possibility to download ownmade applications on your phone would be so great. Why? Simply because this way more americans will start developing, and show their potential.
Only european j2me games? Yeah. Why? We are better ;) Seriously, java is easier and everybody learn it at school - in europe at least. But the programming language is not the problem (cf mophun). So why are they so few us companies/developers making brew/j2me games? Dunno, but at least i know the answer for brew: you cannot make your own application unless you have money, which is not very suitable if you are a student.
And i'm sure about one thing: with the incoming european Brew operators, only big companies will make games for them, and we will not have that much more developers than we have nowadays.
/kUfa

Ruben,
Quote:Please note that BREW is the youngest of all systems currently widely used (Symbian, Palm, J2ME, WinCE etc). Over the time there will not be few developer
I agree.. But if you look to a younger "free" technology like mophun, you will already find much more developers there, which is quiet stupid since mophun sucks compared to brew..
I also agree with you, we need some kind of barrier against junk contents. But making money on all the developers is not the best choice imo (except for qualcomm ;), would be great if it's like the j2me content certification.
Vexxed,
I agree when you say having to pay is not a big problem for us. But i think having at least a free SDK (no need to become a brew developer), free emulators, docs etc, and the possibility to download ownmade applications on your phone would be so great. Why? Simply because this way more americans will start developing, and show their potential.
Only european j2me games? Yeah. Why? We are better ;) Seriously, java is easier and everybody learn it at school - in europe at least. But the programming language is not the problem (cf mophun). So why are they so few us companies/developers making brew/j2me games? Dunno, but at least i know the answer for brew: you cannot make your own application unless you have money, which is not very suitable if you are a student.
And i'm sure about one thing: with the incoming european Brew operators, only big companies will make games for them, and we will not have that much more developers than we have nowadays.
/kUfa

I definitely disagree and none of your examples live up to it.
The PC market is proabably the worst of them all abd after working in that market for almost 20 years, you can trust me that not all good games find their audience. There is too much product and only a very few of them actually find their market.
The PC Shareware market is even worse, almost, and not even the best titles are oftentimes able to reach the people.
And it just goes from there. I think you are a bit blindsided by taking the success stories of a few break-out hits and translating it into "good games will find their audience." That, is definitely wishful thinking as anyone with experience in the games publishing industry will attest to - and that is entirely unrelated to the platform.

I definitely disagree and none of your examples live up to it.
The PC market is proabably the worst of them all abd after working in that market for almost 20 years, you can trust me that not all good games find their audience. There is too much product and only a very few of them actually find their market.
The PC Shareware market is even worse, almost, and not even the best titles are oftentimes able to reach the people.
And it just goes from there. I think you are a bit blindsided by taking the success stories of a few break-out hits and translating it into "good games will find their audience." That, is definitely wishful thinking as anyone with experience in the games publishing industry will attest to - and that is entirely unrelated to the platform.

Quote:The PC market is proabably the worst of them all abd after working in that market for almost 20 years, you can trust me that not all good games find their audience
Can you give me 1 name of a good game that did not find itsexpected audience?! The problem atm with the PC market is that big companies have the biggest audience since they have alot of money, and they can use it for big ad campaign etc.. But you cant fool a customer with ads. Hopefully they also use their money in big dev team etc, so only "polished" games will have a good audience. It's like that, and i do not think it's bad.
Quote:The PC Shareware market is even worse, almost, and not even the best titles are oftentimes able to reach the people.
Good titles will always be able to reach people, if they are good enough.
Quote:I think you are a bit blindsided by taking the success stories of a few break-out hits and translating it into "good games will find their audience."
Maybe it's my conception of good games which is quiet high.
Quote:That, is definitely wishful thinking as anyone with experience in the games publishing industry will attest to
I do not agree, but that s my opinion..
/kUfa

Quote:The PC market is proabably the worst of them all abd after working in that market for almost 20 years, you can trust me that not all good games find their audience
Can you give me 1 name of a good game that did not find itsexpected audience?! The problem atm with the PC market is that big companies have the biggest audience since they have alot of money, and they can use it for big ad campaign etc.. But you cant fool a customer with ads. Hopefully they also use their money in big dev team etc, so only "polished" games will have a good audience. It's like that, and i do not think it's bad.
Quote:The PC Shareware market is even worse, almost, and not even the best titles are oftentimes able to reach the people.
Good titles will always be able to reach people, if they are good enough.
Quote:I think you are a bit blindsided by taking the success stories of a few break-out hits and translating it into "good games will find their audience."
Maybe it's my conception of good games which is quiet high.
Quote:That, is definitely wishful thinking as anyone with experience in the games publishing industry will attest to
I do not agree, but that s my opinion..
/kUfa

kUfa,
I think we should stop this discussion here. It is evident to me that you are living in your own little world that has little in common with the harsh realities out there. Sorry, pal. No hard feelings.
But just to name one game - as you requested, you can easily take one of my own games as an example. Planescape: Torment. Universally hailed as one of the best RPGs ever made, yet it never found its audience and failed as miserably as a game can commercially.

kUfa,
I think we should stop this discussion here. It is evident to me that you are living in your own little world that has little in common with the harsh realities out there. Sorry, pal. No hard feelings.
But just to name one game - as you requested, you can easily take one of my own games as an example. Planescape: Torment. Universally hailed as one of the best RPGs ever made, yet it never found its audience and failed as miserably as a game can commercially.

The good thing, is that in my "little world" i know alot of big developers that think like me, so i do not feel alone ;) my experience and the people i know suggest me i'm right. And now i understand why most of the game developers are european ;)
Btw i should not complain, few brew developers is good for us, it's just too lame.
Quote:I think we should stop this discussion here
I agree.

The good thing, is that in my "little world" i know alot of big developers that think like me, so i do not feel alone ;) my experience and the people i know suggest me i'm right. And now i understand why most of the game developers are european ;)
Btw i should not complain, few brew developers is good for us, it's just too lame.
Quote:I think we should stop this discussion here
I agree.

And last point, that will make things a bit more clear: for me a good game is a game that will manage to get an audience. (ie good code/gfx/etc, but also good concept, attractive for gamers AND publishers)
/kUfa

And last point, that will make things a bit more clear: for me a good game is a game that will manage to get an audience. (ie good code/gfx/etc, but also good concept, attractive for gamers AND publishers)
/kUfa

Has anyone discovered anything like this? It would seem to make sense that QC would be interested in allowing reverse or third-party billing.
Thanks
mCube

Has anyone discovered anything like this? It would seem to make sense that QC would be interested in allowing reverse or third-party billing.
Thanks
mCube

There has been absolutely no movement in this area that I have been able to gather. Qualcomm/Carrier business models simply won't support it. Any attempt to do this at all would require direct involvement by both the Carrier and QC (uhg!).
Unlike carriers that support J2ME devices (e.g. Sprint, AT&T, Cingular, Tmobile), where it IS possible to deliver free applications to consumers, Verizon et. al. won't have anything to do with it. The problem exists on two levels. The first being that the BREW platform currently does not support the concept of a Free-for-consumer application or a Reverse-Billed application. And secondly, even if they did, it is unlikely that BREW carriers would go for it. Revenues from data usage is not as significant as revenues from downloads.
My advise, abandon BREW in favor of J2ME. Although Verizon owns the "voice" market ... very few Verizon users actually pay for the data-plan (see Recent Jupiter survey). Sprint is actually the highest in terms of consumers with data enabled devices.

There has been absolutely no movement in this area that I have been able to gather. Qualcomm/Carrier business models simply won't support it. Any attempt to do this at all would require direct involvement by both the Carrier and QC (uhg!).
Unlike carriers that support J2ME devices (e.g. Sprint, AT&T, Cingular, Tmobile), where it IS possible to deliver free applications to consumers, Verizon et. al. won't have anything to do with it. The problem exists on two levels. The first being that the BREW platform currently does not support the concept of a Free-for-consumer application or a Reverse-Billed application. And secondly, even if they did, it is unlikely that BREW carriers would go for it. Revenues from data usage is not as significant as revenues from downloads.
My advise, abandon BREW in favor of J2ME. Although Verizon owns the "voice" market ... very few Verizon users actually pay for the data-plan (see Recent Jupiter survey). Sprint is actually the highest in terms of consumers with data enabled devices.

Actually, Qualcomm has prepared an IBilling API to allow for extended control over billing events. This Value-Added Billing package will be available on the developer extranet within the next two months or so, and should allow for greater flexibility in application development.

Actually, Qualcomm has prepared an IBilling API to allow for extended control over billing events. This Value-Added Billing package will be available on the developer extranet within the next two months or so, and should allow for greater flexibility in application development.

That's good news!
Will it be backwards compatible with shipping phones?
Thanks,
mCube

That's good news!
Will it be backwards compatible with shipping phones?
Thanks,
mCube

Hi all,
I was trying to find information about this issue, I hope somebody can help me.
Suppose I have an application pre-installed by the operator in some handset.
If the third party certified developer releases a new version of the application, how can I upgrade the handset with this new version?? I know I have two possibilities using mshop (manually or silently in background). My question is: is it necessary to use mshop??is there any way for the third party developer to set up an its own back-end (some server handling apps versions) and have a dialogue with the client to upgrade it? :confused:
How can it be done in a smart fashion?
Many many thanks
Marco

Hi all,
I was trying to find information about this issue, I hope somebody can help me.
Suppose I have an application pre-installed by the operator in some handset.
If the third party certified developer releases a new version of the application, how can I upgrade the handset with this new version?? I know I have two possibilities using mshop (manually or silently in background). My question is: is it necessary to use mshop??is there any way for the third party developer to set up an its own back-end (some server handling apps versions) and have a dialogue with the client to upgrade it? :confused:
How can it be done in a smart fashion?
Many many thanks
Marco

marcovena wrote:Hi all,
I was trying to find information about this issue, I hope somebody can help me.
Suppose I have an application pre-installed by the operator in some handset.
If the third party certified developer releases a new version of the application, how can I upgrade the handset with this new version?? I know I have two possibilities using mshop (manually or silently in background). My question is: is it necessary to use mshop??is there any way for the third party developer to set up an its own back-end (some server handling apps versions) and have a dialogue with the client to upgrade it? :confused:
How can it be done in a smart fashion?
Many many thanks
Marco
Nobody is able to help me?
I add a comment:
Can I upgrade a brew app without passing through mshop, just using for instance the browser linking to new binaries (.mod,.bar etc..) ?

marcovena wrote:Hi all,
I was trying to find information about this issue, I hope somebody can help me.
Suppose I have an application pre-installed by the operator in some handset.
If the third party certified developer releases a new version of the application, how can I upgrade the handset with this new version?? I know I have two possibilities using mshop (manually or silently in background). My question is: is it necessary to use mshop??is there any way for the third party developer to set up an its own back-end (some server handling apps versions) and have a dialogue with the client to upgrade it? :confused:
How can it be done in a smart fashion?
Many many thanks
Marco
Nobody is able to help me?
I add a comment:
Can I upgrade a brew app without passing through mshop, just using for instance the browser linking to new binaries (.mod,.bar etc..) ?

I just hate the fact that BREW has this barrier to entry. I have a BREW phone and I need an internet browser. I am of course willing to pay for one. But I cant find ANY ! So I am stuck with this LG Chocolate and I cant access the internet only because of BREW. If I had the GSM Chocolate I could have freely installed Opera which is THE best web internet browser so far.
If anybody can give me a solution to where I can purchase a browser I would be grateful. Else I will have to wait till I get frustrated with BREW and leave this CDMA carrier. :(

I just hate the fact that BREW has this barrier to entry. I have a BREW phone and I need an internet browser. I am of course willing to pay for one. But I cant find ANY ! So I am stuck with this LG Chocolate and I cant access the internet only because of BREW. If I had the GSM Chocolate I could have freely installed Opera which is THE best web internet browser so far.
If anybody can give me a solution to where I can purchase a browser I would be grateful. Else I will have to wait till I get frustrated with BREW and leave this CDMA carrier. :(

That has absolutely nothing to do with BREW and everything to do with the fact that the carrier doesn't want you to have access to the web browser. There are plenty of browsers ported to BREW -- including, incidentally, the Opera browser. If the carrier doesn't want to make them available, then you're SOL.

That has absolutely nothing to do with BREW and everything to do with the fact that the carrier doesn't want you to have access to the web browser. There are plenty of browsers ported to BREW -- including, incidentally, the Opera browser. If the carrier doesn't want to make them available, then you're SOL.

I see, you are right I suppose. But that doesnt change the fact that I can download any version of Opera from their website and install it one a phone. But I cant do that with the BREW version.

I see, you are right I suppose. But that doesnt change the fact that I can download any version of Opera from their website and install it one a phone. But I cant do that with the BREW version.

hello,
Do we have to pay some money for testing our application on mobile phone?
Or Apploader software is freely available???
Please tell me!

hello,
Do we have to pay some money for testing our application on mobile phone?
Or Apploader software is freely available???
Please tell me!

shyma.gupta wrote:hello,
Do we have to pay some money for testing our application on mobile phone?
Or Apploader software is freely available???
Please tell me!
You must be an authenticated BREW Developer to download these tools

shyma.gupta wrote:hello,
Do we have to pay some money for testing our application on mobile phone?
Or Apploader software is freely available???
Please tell me!
You must be an authenticated BREW Developer to download these tools

thanks for your reply....
But for authenticating ourself do we have to pay some money? Is that so?
Does that mean that for testing any small application on mobilephone we need to pay some money?

thanks for your reply....
But for authenticating ourself do we have to pay some money? Is that so?
Does that mean that for testing any small application on mobilephone we need to pay some money?

You have to pay only $400 to become a BREW developer. Pay QUALCOMM the $400 and you can start developing apps for BREW. :)

You have to pay only $400 to become a BREW developer. Pay QUALCOMM the $400 and you can start developing apps for BREW. :)

QUALCOMM doesn't get the $400, you're paying VeriSign.

QUALCOMM doesn't get the $400, you're paying VeriSign.

The $400 to VeriSign only gets you to start developing. If you plan on actually publish titles on BREW we are talking significantly more money - right around the neighborhood of $10,000 - 20,000 depending on how many handsets you want to put your application out on.

The $400 to VeriSign only gets you to start developing. If you plan on actually publish titles on BREW we are talking significantly more money - right around the neighborhood of $10,000 - 20,000 depending on how many handsets you want to put your application out on.

Dear All,
I have a few questions as below:
1. Can we distribute brew applications by pre-install them on handsets before they are being distributed? It means that users will get free pre-embedded brew applications the first time they buy the handsets (suppose that I have access and joint venture with a handset manufacturer).
Is it possible to do that technically and legally? Is there any legal aspect that will hinder such distribution strategy?
2. Can we avoid using BDS for content download (ringtone, wallpaper, etc.) through brew application in anyway?
3. Is there a work around for the above two cases? What is the requirements?
Please advise. Appreciate any input on this. Thank you.

Dear All,
I have a few questions as below:
1. Can we distribute brew applications by pre-install them on handsets before they are being distributed? It means that users will get free pre-embedded brew applications the first time they buy the handsets (suppose that I have access and joint venture with a handset manufacturer).
Is it possible to do that technically and legally? Is there any legal aspect that will hinder such distribution strategy?
2. Can we avoid using BDS for content download (ringtone, wallpaper, etc.) through brew application in anyway?
3. Is there a work around for the above two cases? What is the requirements?
Please advise. Appreciate any input on this. Thank you.

pidboy wrote:Dear All,
I have a few questions as below:
1. Can we distribute brew applications by pre-install them on handsets before they are being distributed? It means that users will get free pre-embedded brew applications the first time they buy the handsets (suppose that I have access and joint venture with a handset manufacturer).
Is it possible to do that technically and legally? Is there any legal aspect that will hinder such distribution strategy?
2. Can we avoid using BDS for content download (ringtone, wallpaper, etc.) through brew application in anyway?
3. Is there a work around for the above two cases? What is the requirements?
Please advise. Appreciate any input on this. Thank you.
AFAIK all of these cases would require carrier approval, since they are the final word in what goes on the handset.
An app whose purpose is to be free and get around the existing paid content paradigm is unlikely to be welcomed by the carrier IMHO.
For such things you are likely better off going with other platforms in which the distribution model is open (Windows Mobile, J2ME, etc).

pidboy wrote:Dear All,
I have a few questions as below:
1. Can we distribute brew applications by pre-install them on handsets before they are being distributed? It means that users will get free pre-embedded brew applications the first time they buy the handsets (suppose that I have access and joint venture with a handset manufacturer).
Is it possible to do that technically and legally? Is there any legal aspect that will hinder such distribution strategy?
2. Can we avoid using BDS for content download (ringtone, wallpaper, etc.) through brew application in anyway?
3. Is there a work around for the above two cases? What is the requirements?
Please advise. Appreciate any input on this. Thank you.
AFAIK all of these cases would require carrier approval, since they are the final word in what goes on the handset.
An app whose purpose is to be free and get around the existing paid content paradigm is unlikely to be welcomed by the carrier IMHO.
For such things you are likely better off going with other platforms in which the distribution model is open (Windows Mobile, J2ME, etc).

jmiller2 wrote:AFAIK all of these cases would require carrier approval, since they are the final word in what goes on the handset.
An app whose purpose is to be free and get around the existing paid content paradigm is unlikely to be welcomed by the carrier IMHO.
For such things you are likely better off going with other platforms in which the distribution model is open (Windows Mobile, J2ME, etc).
Thanks for your reply.
Actually, I would also have a tight cooperation with a carrier operator, and they would be aware of this. So, from the Qualcomm stand point, is there any legal aspect that will prevent such practice? Or carrier approval would be all that matters?
Thanks

jmiller2 wrote:AFAIK all of these cases would require carrier approval, since they are the final word in what goes on the handset.
An app whose purpose is to be free and get around the existing paid content paradigm is unlikely to be welcomed by the carrier IMHO.
For such things you are likely better off going with other platforms in which the distribution model is open (Windows Mobile, J2ME, etc).
Thanks for your reply.
Actually, I would also have a tight cooperation with a carrier operator, and they would be aware of this. So, from the Qualcomm stand point, is there any legal aspect that will prevent such practice? Or carrier approval would be all that matters?
Thanks

Hello,
In trying to find out if there is a 'noncommercial' developer authentication level. I've searched through about everything on the Qualcomm Brew site including FAQs and finally the forums. And in the forums I found this question asked uncountable times since 2003. Gurus here made it quite obvious that BREW is not for hobbyists wanting to play around with code for their phone. Some said that a cell phone is a terrible platform for hobbyist to pick to develop for. I can see their point. I also understand, as much as I can, how established developers want to protect their turf, and very rightly so. I guess I'm still interested in at least learning about it for reasons that don't really matter, sorry for being so hard headed.
That said I'm sorry, again, to beat a dead horse, but before I put my efforts in PalmOS or winCE I wanted to make sure that Qualcomm wasn't thinking about relaxing the BREW entry requirements and opening up to a more open platform. There are pros and cons to both practices and they have all been flamed over in forums in and out of the brewforums so no need to do that here. I am just wondering if there is any talk about opening up BREW in the next few years; right, wrong or indifferent.

Hello,
In trying to find out if there is a 'noncommercial' developer authentication level. I've searched through about everything on the Qualcomm Brew site including FAQs and finally the forums. And in the forums I found this question asked uncountable times since 2003. Gurus here made it quite obvious that BREW is not for hobbyists wanting to play around with code for their phone. Some said that a cell phone is a terrible platform for hobbyist to pick to develop for. I can see their point. I also understand, as much as I can, how established developers want to protect their turf, and very rightly so. I guess I'm still interested in at least learning about it for reasons that don't really matter, sorry for being so hard headed.
That said I'm sorry, again, to beat a dead horse, but before I put my efforts in PalmOS or winCE I wanted to make sure that Qualcomm wasn't thinking about relaxing the BREW entry requirements and opening up to a more open platform. There are pros and cons to both practices and they have all been flamed over in forums in and out of the brewforums so no need to do that here. I am just wondering if there is any talk about opening up BREW in the next few years; right, wrong or indifferent.

Well, if you are hobbyist, want to learn you can use the simulator. BREW 3.1.5 simulator is reasonably good, and you can learn and test most of the things except device integration stuff like call log data access etc.
Now if you want to test that in the device in your system, well you would need to get the digital signature for which you need to pay $400 to VeriSign so that you can generate digital signature locally.
Why it is needed: This has all got to do with security. For many years I have been personally working simultaneously WinCE/Windows Mobile, Symbian, BREW, Linux etc.
Every system has it’s +/- points. All these vendors have different business models.
The area in which BREW excels over all these other mobile systems is that it's distribution model, security, and monetization mechanism and that is the reason you would find that in BREW Joe developer can make money, make his/her living. Pirating BREW application is very hard (only way you can do is if you can break VeriSign digital signature). You would find extremely few independent developers that can make living out of cell phone development in WinCE/Windows Mobile or symbian world due to piracy.
Interestingly from Symbian V3 onwards Nokia is also following BREW's path in certain ways. Symbian has its plus or minus points too. Symbian API's are richer than BREW when it comes to device integration; BREW is playing catch-up game, though there are certain areas where BREW API's better and well developed (mostly in the area of networking, security etc.). Symbian's development environment is horrible, in that aspect BREW is way better. Nokia is more control freak than Qualcomm.
Nokia wants to control hardware, OS, development IDE, middleware, services. Nokia no better, in fact more terrible than Qualcomm or Microsoft in that matter.
Now, if you ask me, my favorite mobile/embedded development environment is WinCE (Windows Mobile, Windows Mobile is just a customization of core WinCE kernel). API's are most well developed; development tool chains are the best. It is interesting is that, now in the year of 2007 Qualcomm BREW or Nokia's symbian started supporting on device debugging (though very flaky and that too also on USB, which is rather slow), in WinCE/Win Mobile we could do on device in the year 2000, and that too over Ethernet (super fast). Microsoft knows how to make developers more productive by providing better tool chain, Windows Mobile/Win CE API's gives system and application developer more control over the system.
The area in which Windows Mobile/WinCE falls short is there is no application distribution model, security is lax (not even half of what BREW provides), but it excels in development tool chain, providing extremely rich set of API. From 2005 onwards, when you get Platform builder, you can get complete WinCE Source code that you can modify and do whatever you want.
On top of that, MSDN is the best documentation, Linux man pages, Symbain or BREW's horrible documentation is no match for MSDN documentation.
Linux has its own set of plus and minuses. On the plus side it also has very rich set of API that is known to the community and standard, support wide array of functionalities, you can access to the source code. On this regard Linux is head to head with WinCE/WinMobile (Since wince also allows you to access source code, Linux camps argument of access to source code is moot point).
For Embedded devices some of the Linux vendors to provide RTOS kernel support, which Windows CE/Windows Mobile didn't support until WinCE/WinMobile 6.0 (from WinCE/WinMobile 6.0 it has RTOS support in the kernel).
Though Microsoft and few other independent university research paper claims that RTOS support in WinCE is very good, we probably have to wait and see if it is as good as in embedded Linux.
The area embedded Linux falls short is, its development tool chain still falls short of Visual studio 2005, it is very hard to plan future business model since the features are community driven, and small business houses are on their own for everything. Linux also lack is robust distribution system, content/application security where BREW is the best of the pack.
Disclaimer: I don't intend to start any flame war on which system is best. This is completely my opinion on different systems that I have been working for last many years on several versions of these systems.

Well, if you are hobbyist, want to learn you can use the simulator. BREW 3.1.5 simulator is reasonably good, and you can learn and test most of the things except device integration stuff like call log data access etc.
Now if you want to test that in the device in your system, well you would need to get the digital signature for which you need to pay $400 to VeriSign so that you can generate digital signature locally.
Why it is needed: This has all got to do with security. For many years I have been personally working simultaneously WinCE/Windows Mobile, Symbian, BREW, Linux etc.
Every system has it’s +/- points. All these vendors have different business models.
The area in which BREW excels over all these other mobile systems is that it's distribution model, security, and monetization mechanism and that is the reason you would find that in BREW Joe developer can make money, make his/her living. Pirating BREW application is very hard (only way you can do is if you can break VeriSign digital signature). You would find extremely few independent developers that can make living out of cell phone development in WinCE/Windows Mobile or symbian world due to piracy.
Interestingly from Symbian V3 onwards Nokia is also following BREW's path in certain ways. Symbian has its plus or minus points too. Symbian API's are richer than BREW when it comes to device integration; BREW is playing catch-up game, though there are certain areas where BREW API's better and well developed (mostly in the area of networking, security etc.). Symbian's development environment is horrible, in that aspect BREW is way better. Nokia is more control freak than Qualcomm.
Nokia wants to control hardware, OS, development IDE, middleware, services. Nokia no better, in fact more terrible than Qualcomm or Microsoft in that matter.
Now, if you ask me, my favorite mobile/embedded development environment is WinCE (Windows Mobile, Windows Mobile is just a customization of core WinCE kernel). API's are most well developed; development tool chains are the best. It is interesting is that, now in the year of 2007 Qualcomm BREW or Nokia's symbian started supporting on device debugging (though very flaky and that too also on USB, which is rather slow), in WinCE/Win Mobile we could do on device in the year 2000, and that too over Ethernet (super fast). Microsoft knows how to make developers more productive by providing better tool chain, Windows Mobile/Win CE API's gives system and application developer more control over the system.
The area in which Windows Mobile/WinCE falls short is there is no application distribution model, security is lax (not even half of what BREW provides), but it excels in development tool chain, providing extremely rich set of API. From 2005 onwards, when you get Platform builder, you can get complete WinCE Source code that you can modify and do whatever you want.
On top of that, MSDN is the best documentation, Linux man pages, Symbain or BREW's horrible documentation is no match for MSDN documentation.
Linux has its own set of plus and minuses. On the plus side it also has very rich set of API that is known to the community and standard, support wide array of functionalities, you can access to the source code. On this regard Linux is head to head with WinCE/WinMobile (Since wince also allows you to access source code, Linux camps argument of access to source code is moot point).
For Embedded devices some of the Linux vendors to provide RTOS kernel support, which Windows CE/Windows Mobile didn't support until WinCE/WinMobile 6.0 (from WinCE/WinMobile 6.0 it has RTOS support in the kernel).
Though Microsoft and few other independent university research paper claims that RTOS support in WinCE is very good, we probably have to wait and see if it is as good as in embedded Linux.
The area embedded Linux falls short is, its development tool chain still falls short of Visual studio 2005, it is very hard to plan future business model since the features are community driven, and small business houses are on their own for everything. Linux also lack is robust distribution system, content/application security where BREW is the best of the pack.
Disclaimer: I don't intend to start any flame war on which system is best. This is completely my opinion on different systems that I have been working for last many years on several versions of these systems.

At this point I'd have to put iPhone ahead of Windows Mobile.

At this point I'd have to put iPhone ahead of Windows Mobile.