[Ornate TrueSmart] Lokifish Marz:
If you check, I had moderator rights and access to the moderator section right up until the day the No Play Store update came out. Moot point now.

I main issue is with the way information is being handled. KitKat not having support for the TS directly affects all end users as Android is released on about a 6 month cycle for major version updates. This means that official support is pushed out another +6 months. The only thing that would change this is a special version of Android specifically for devices like the TrueSmart. So the facts are as follows;

No existing version of Android will allow for devices like the TrueSmart to pass certification.

Certification is required for a device to be submitted for official full Google Services support.

Because devices like the TrueSmart cannot pass certification they cannot ship with official full Google Services Support.

Seeing that devices like the TrueSmart cannot ship with official full Google Services support then neither the KS TrueSmart nor the December Pre-Order TrueSmart will ship with official Google Services installed.

Now I don't care what Omate says or doesn't say, these facts have been verified by Google and are publicly accessible to anyone. Again, the only variables are rumors that Google may at some point announce a special version of Android or Play Store specifically for smartwatches or rumors of secret talks that would require Google piss off almost the entire app development community over a couple low volume devices. So for any moderator to support/propagate rumors and disregard the facts or contradict posts that state the facts (even in a joking manner) because Omate hasn't "signed off" on it, is a great disservice to end users and has already cost Omate happy customers.

When these facts are presented, forum members telling end users that they will need to root, install a custom recovery or run a script/program to install Google Services in the mean time is not development. The is an end user solution. Now if the discussion turned into how to locate and edit HEX to root a device or compile a custom recovery then that is development.

-Source

MediaTek has been known to put NDA's and copyright notices in, yes IN, GPL protected files. This is a direct violation of GPL and with regards to those files and cannot be enforced. A comparison scan of the source posted by Google against the source Omate is using will show what files are truly GPL and what files with a fairly high level of accuracy. Any files that may be questionable can then be manually reviewed for further judgement as to their GPL status.

-Unanswered Developer Edition specific questions

Finding out if a device has a custom recovery and what custom recovery takes all of 15secs, 1-2mins if replying to an email. If the firmware developer did there job correctly they would also know the answer of have it in their build notes. There are thousands of posts on xda alone that can verify this as well as any developer worth his/her keystrokes.

Unlocked bootloader (depending on bootloader setup) would also be as easily answered.

Devs that are worth their weight in hardware would know these things of the top of their head and more for multiple devices and multiple ROMs. For them it would take somebody simply asking them to get the answer.

As far as Omate not answering these questions until the device is released is counter to what any of the major players in the industry do. The major players know that "unlocked bootloader" sells devices and not just a thousand here or there. They know that the more independent ROM Developers they get on a device the greater the sales. Go to a Big Android BBQ and you will see official reps and engineers gushing about every little new feature or that they will support the dev community and so on.

Having these answers also helps devs get their "tools" ready. This reduces development time, allows devs and security specialists to locate security issues faster, allows devs to provide bug fixes either via custom ROMs or via direct interaction with the OEM.

-FCC certification

Omate heavily implied that they already had certification by saying that "FCC" wouldn't be on the label if they didn't have it. This turned out to be yet another misdirection and evasion of answering a direct question.

The only things that would really bring me back to the Omate forum is two things.

If a mod has no established experience with a subject or issue then he leave the thread to those that do have the experience or consult with those that do or only act on violations of the forum rules. (multiple forums far larger than the official Omate forum do this on a regular basis)

If facts with verifiable sources are posted, do not disregard the facts or contradict facts or chastise those posting the facts if it is in direct relation to the topic or a question regarding the topic.

Now I think your posts are truly genuine in their intent to calm things down and I thank you for that but until things change I can no longer support Omate as a company even if I believe in the hardware. Also, my development on the device is out of necessity for multiple reasons which I have no issue with sharing my work with others as it may improve their experience with the device. However, until things change on the official forum, my work will remain exclusive to xda and my own site.