Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.sys.acorn.misc > #5364
| Subject | Re: Wakefield (second attempt) |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.sys.acorn.misc |
| From | Doug Webb <doug.j.webb@btinternet.com> |
| Date | 2012-05-05 12:39 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <4e38148b52.dougjwebb@doug.j.webb.btinternet.com> (permalink) |
| References | <5289868527richtnews@uwclub.net> <109c238a52.thebears@sarno.freeserve.co.uk> <faa9118b52.BrianFerris@brferris.orpheusmail.co.uk> |
In message <faa9118b52.BrianFerris@brferris.orpheusmail.co.uk>
Brian <brferris@orpheusmail.co.uk> wrote:
> So does this Tablet come with Google Play?
> Some comments on this thread indicate it does and doesn't,maybe from
> those who actually haven't got the device?
> On the linkhttp://riscos.blog.com/2012/04/22/behold-the-r-comp-tablet/
> it just says :
> ”Our setup work ensures you‘ll be able to access a range of
> downloadable ”apps•, books and movies from the Google Store, or via
> Amazon‘s Kindle marketplace."
> Google Store is :
> http://www.google-store.com/google/webcontents/default.aspx
> Not for Android Tablets!
> I like to get the majority of apps via Google Play.
> If Google Play is not available then the wording needs changing.What
> is Google Store?
> At least use the correct names.
> I don't always want to sideload apps.
> The virus side and protection is vital if downloading from other '
> store's '
> It's just sloppy marketing and misleading for some?
> You could spend a little more money and buy a different Android
> Tablet?
> Regards
If this device is the Scroll Options Extreme, which has Ice Scream
sandwich AKA Android 4.0 as its OS installed, then it will not have
set up and built in by default access to the Google play store.
http://www.storageoptions.com/products/scroll/tablets/scroll-extreme
"Due to licence restrictions, Scroll Extreme cannot officially be used
to access the Android Marketplace. However applications can be
downloaded from the SlideME market place and a number of other free
App Stores"
This does not mean that you can't install the Google Play application
, as I have done on the earlier Scroll Excel that runs Gingerbread AKA
Android 2.3.
I expect the Google Play application may be part of the RComp
customisation though as ever rather than speculate the best thing is
to ask.
The other thing to note is that some applications like Kobo eReader
can think a device is hacked/rooted and will not work but the Aldiko
eReader used Adobe verification allows you to download and read any
books rather well.
http://www.aldiko.com/
Doug
--
See and experience the future using ARM Technology - BeagleBoard -xM,
Cortex A8 and RISC OS 5.19.
Back to comp.sys.acorn.misc | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Wakefield (second attempt) Richard Travers <richtnews@uwclub.net> - 2012-05-02 12:15 +0100
Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Chris Hughes <news@noonehere.co.uk> - 2012-05-02 13:19 +0100
Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Richard Travers <richtnews@uwclub.net> - 2012-05-02 14:08 +0100
Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Tim Hill <tim@invalid.org.uk> - 2012-05-04 23:20 +0100
Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Rick Murray <heyrickmail-usenet@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-05-05 05:23 +0200
Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Tim Hill <tim@invalid.org.uk> - 2012-05-05 21:13 +0100
Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Richard Travers <richtnews@uwclub.net> - 2012-05-05 10:26 +0100
Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Chris Hughes <news@noonehere.co.uk> - 2012-05-05 12:10 +0100
Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Bryn Evans <d@a.invalid> - 2012-05-05 12:31 +0100
Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Chris Hughes <news@noonehere.co.uk> - 2012-05-05 13:03 +0100
Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Alan Wrigley <spamhater@keepyourfilthyspamtoyourself.co.uk> - 2012-05-05 13:14 +0100
Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Geoffrey Baxendale <thebears@sarno.freeserve.co.uk> - 2012-05-03 16:51 +0100
Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Chris Hughes <news@noonehere.co.uk> - 2012-05-03 18:57 +0100
Re: Wakefield (second attempt) M Harding <riscos@mdharding.org.uk> - 2012-05-03 20:08 +0100
Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Thomas Milius <Thomas-Milius@t-online.de> - 2012-05-03 21:46 +0200
Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Thomas Milius <Thomas-Milius@t-online.de> - 2012-05-03 22:04 +0200
Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Chris Evans <chris@cjemicros.co.uk> - 2012-05-04 16:48 +0100
Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Martin Wuerthner <spamtrap@mw-software.com> - 2012-05-03 21:22 +0200
Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Richard Travers <richtnews@uwclub.net> - 2012-05-04 09:20 +0100
Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Brian <brferris@orpheusmail.co.uk> - 2012-05-05 12:11 +0100
Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Doug Webb <doug.j.webb@btinternet.com> - 2012-05-05 12:39 +0100
Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Chris Hughes <news@noonehere.co.uk> - 2012-05-05 13:01 +0100
Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Doug Webb <doug.j.webb@btinternet.com> - 2012-05-05 13:18 +0100
Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Tim Hill <tim@invalid.org.uk> - 2012-05-12 11:34 +0100
Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Chris Hughes <news@noonehere.co.uk> - 2012-05-05 12:31 +0100
Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Brian <brferris@orpheusmail.co.uk> - 2012-05-05 13:32 +0100
Re: Wakefield (second attempt) charles <charles@charleshope.demon.co.uk> - 2012-05-05 13:43 +0100
Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Brian <brferris@orpheusmail.co.uk> - 2012-05-05 15:06 +0100
Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Doug Webb <doug.j.webb@btinternet.com> - 2012-05-05 15:23 +0100
Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Chris Hughes <news@noonehere.co.uk> - 2012-05-05 16:41 +0100
Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Rick Murray <heyrickmail-usenet@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-05-05 18:59 +0200
Re: Wakefield (second attempt) druck <news@druck.org.uk> - 2012-05-06 11:28 +0100
Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Fred Bambrough <fred@[127.0.0.1]> - 2012-05-06 14:58 +0100
Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Dev <spam-addy@no.spam.invalid> - 2012-05-06 15:04 +0100
Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Rick Murray <heyrickmail-usenet@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-05-06 20:00 +0200
Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Rick Murray <heyrickmail-usenet@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-05-05 18:50 +0200
Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Dave Symes <dave@triffid.co.uk> - 2012-05-05 19:43 +0100
Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Alan Wrigley <spamhater@keepyourfilthyspamtoyourself.co.uk> - 2012-05-05 15:18 +0100
Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Brian <brferris@orpheusmail.co.uk> - 2012-05-05 15:48 +0100
Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Alan Wrigley <spamhater@keepyourfilthyspamtoyourself.co.uk> - 2012-05-05 17:54 +0100
Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Tim Hill <tim@invalid.org.uk> - 2012-05-12 12:12 +0100
Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Matthew Phillips <spam2011m@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-05-12 22:05 +0100
Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Dave Symes <dave@triffid.co.uk> - 2012-05-13 06:53 +0100
Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Rick Murray <heyrickmail-usenet@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-05-13 13:14 +0200
Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Tim Hill <tim@invalid.org.uk> - 2012-05-15 11:40 +0100
Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Chris Hughes <news@noonehere.co.uk> - 2012-05-05 16:36 +0100
Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Tim Hill <tim@invalid.org.uk> - 2012-05-12 11:54 +0100
Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Rick Murray <heyrickmail-usenet@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-05-05 18:28 +0200
Re: Wakefield (second attempt) charles <charles@charleshope.demon.co.uk> - 2012-05-03 17:36 +0100
csiph-web