[News] Op-ed: The Future is Free Open Source Smartphones - Linux

This is a discussion on [News] Op-ed: The Future is Free Open Source Smartphones - Linux ; Open Mobile SDKs March to Freedom ,----[ Quote ] | News Analysis: Open mobile platforms, such as Google's Android, should usher | in a tidal wave of development that could change the industry. `---- http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1895,2219854,00.asp Google's platform is actually open, ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 12 of 12

Thread: [News] Op-ed: The Future is Free Open Source Smartphones

  1. [News] Op-ed: The Future is Free Open Source Smartphones

    Open Mobile SDKs March to Freedom

    ,----[ Quote ]
    | News Analysis: Open mobile platforms, such as Google's Android, should usher
    | in a tidal wave of development that could change the industry.
    `----

    http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1895,2219854,00.asp

    Google's platform is actually open, unlike this new thing:

    Testing Technologies Supports Open Source Community

    ,----[ Quote ]
    | Testing Technologies says, its flagship product — the integrated TTCN-3 test
    | development and execution environment TTworkbench — is based on an open
    | source tool itself, the well proven Eclipse platform.
    `----

    http://opensourcepbx.tmcnet.com/topi...-community.htm
    http://tinyurl.com/34wesk

    Supporting open source with freeware? And calling it open source because
    Eclipse is involved?


    Related:

    A developer's perspective on Google's Android SDK

    ,----[ Quote ]
    | This in-depth, hands-on article introduces Android, Google's Linux/Java
    | mobile phone SDK (software development kit). After a tour of Android's tools,
    | documentation, and code samples, it suggests a path for further exploration
    | and concludes with a simple applet showing the power and simplicity of the
    | Android environment.
    `----

    http://www.linuxdevices.com/articles/AT9900056470.html


    iPhone matures the "free your phone" movement

    ,----[ Quote ]
    | This is why FreeTheIPhone.org project is born, but even better, why OpenMoko
    | project exists. While some are trying to free the locked down device, others
    | are creating a free unlocked device from the start, and a whole software
    | framework to go with it. *
    `----

    http://www.mobiliberty.com/iphone_ma...phone_movement


    Linux Sees 'Astronomic' Growth in Mobile Devices

    ,----[ Quote ]
    | "We were very aware that the growth in mobile for Linux was huge, but we
    | didn't know it was so astronomic," Amanda McPherson, marketing director for
    | the Linux Foundation, told LinuxInsider. "These are very encouraging
    | numbers." Why Linux has drawn significant support from the community of
    | handset manufacturers can be explained on several fronts, McPherson said. * *
    `----

    http://www.linuxinsider.com/rsstory/59162.html


    Google Android dev kit exposes Apple-inspired roots

    ,----[ Quote ]
    | The release to developers of Google's Linux-based Android operating system
    | for mobile phones reveals that the prototype software shares at least a few
    | aspects in common with interfaces from the company's Bay Area neighbor,
    | Apple. *
    `----

    http://www.appleinsider.com/articles...red_roots.html

  2. Re: [News] Op-ed: The Future is Free Open Source Smartphones

    On Thu, 22 Nov 2007 06:06:14 +0000, Roy Schestowitz wrote:

    > ,----[ Quote ]
    > | News Analysis: Open mobile platforms, such as Google's Android, should
    > usher | in a tidal wave of development that could change the industry.
    > `----



    I for one am dissapointed that Android isn't GPL. Doesn't it use Linux?


    -Thufir

  3. Re: [News] Op-ed: The Future is Free Open Source Smartphones

    ____/ Thufir on Thursday 22 November 2007 11:18 : \____

    > On Thu, 22 Nov 2007 06:06:14 +0000, Roy Schestowitz wrote:
    >
    >> ,----[ Quote ]
    >> | News Analysis: Open mobile platforms, such as Google's Android, should
    >> usher | in a tidal wave of development that could change the industry.
    >> `----

    >
    >
    > I for one am dissapointed that Android isn't GPL. Doesn't it use Linux?


    Yes, but the licence isn't /that/ bad. I thought it would be proprietary when
    the rumours began about 6 months ago (starting with Java, then Linux). It's a
    good start. Was it an Apache licence? I can't recall for sure.

    --
    ~~ Best of wishes

    Within reason, consider Free software. The best things in life are also free.
    http://Schestowitz.com | RHAT GNU/Linux | PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
    run-level 2 2007-10-30 19:49 last=
    http://iuron.com - help build a non-profit search engine

  4. Re: [News] Op-ed: The Future is Free Open Source Smartphones

    Roy Schestowitz espoused:
    > ____/ Thufir on Thursday 22 November 2007 11:18 : \____
    >
    >> On Thu, 22 Nov 2007 06:06:14 +0000, Roy Schestowitz wrote:
    >>
    >>> ,----[ Quote ]
    >>> | News Analysis: Open mobile platforms, such as Google's Android, should
    >>> usher | in a tidal wave of development that could change the industry.
    >>> `----

    >>
    >>
    >> I for one am dissapointed that Android isn't GPL. Doesn't it use Linux?

    >
    > Yes, but the licence isn't /that/ bad. I thought it would be proprietary when
    > the rumours began about 6 months ago (starting with Java, then Linux). It's a
    > good start. Was it an Apache licence? I can't recall for sure.
    >


    Not being GPLv3 will serve Google badly in the long run.

    --
    | Mark Kent -- mark at ellandroad dot demon dot co dot uk |
    | Cola faq: http://www.faqs.org/faqs/linux/advocacy/faq-and-primer/ |
    | Cola trolls: http://colatrolls.blogspot.com/ |
    | My (new) blog: http://www.thereisnomagic.org |

  5. Re: [News] Op-ed: The Future is Free Open Source Smartphones

    Mark Kent wrote:

    > Roy Schestowitz espoused:
    >> ____/ Thufir on Thursday 22 November 2007 11:18 : \____
    >>
    >>> On Thu, 22 Nov 2007 06:06:14 +0000, Roy Schestowitz wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> ,----[ Quote ]
    >>>> | News Analysis: Open mobile platforms, such as Google's Android,
    >>>> | should
    >>>> usher | in a tidal wave of development that could change the industry.
    >>>> `----
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> I for one am dissapointed that Android isn't GPL. Doesn't it use Linux?

    >>
    >> Yes, but the licence isn't /that/ bad. I thought it would be proprietary
    >> when the rumours began about 6 months ago (starting with Java, then
    >> Linux). It's a good start. Was it an Apache licence? I can't recall for
    >> sure.
    >>

    >
    > Not being GPLv3 will serve Google badly in the long run.
    >


    Bull****, naturally
    Software will not be "better" by some magic and fairy dust just because a
    GPL licence is attached to it
    --
    Perl - the only language that looks the same before and after RSA
    encryption.
    -- Keith Bostic


  6. Re: [News] Op-ed: The Future is Free Open Source Smartphones

    On Thu, 29 Nov 2007 16:57:17 +0100, Peter Khlmann
    wrote:

    >Mark Kent wrote:
    >
    >> Roy Schestowitz espoused:
    >>> ____/ Thufir on Thursday 22 November 2007 11:18 : \____
    >>>
    >>>> On Thu, 22 Nov 2007 06:06:14 +0000, Roy Schestowitz wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>> ,----[ Quote ]
    >>>>> | News Analysis: Open mobile platforms, such as Google's Android,
    >>>>> | should
    >>>>> usher | in a tidal wave of development that could change the industry.
    >>>>> `----
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> I for one am dissapointed that Android isn't GPL. Doesn't it use Linux?
    >>>
    >>> Yes, but the licence isn't /that/ bad. I thought it would be proprietary
    >>> when the rumours began about 6 months ago (starting with Java, then
    >>> Linux). It's a good start. Was it an Apache licence? I can't recall for
    >>> sure.
    >>>

    >>
    >> Not being GPLv3 will serve Google badly in the long run.
    >>

    >
    >Bull****, naturally
    >Software will not be "better" by some magic and fairy dust just because a
    >GPL licence is attached to it



    Geez.
    Someone must have spiked my Starbucks Cafe because I actually agree
    with Peter Kohlmann for a change.

  7. Re: [News] Op-ed: The Future is Free Open Source Smartphones

    ____/ Peter Köhlmann on Thursday 29 November 2007 15:57 : \____

    > Mark Kent wrote:
    >
    >> Roy Schestowitz espoused:
    >>> ____/ Thufir on Thursday 22 November 2007 11:18 : \____
    >>>
    >>>> On Thu, 22 Nov 2007 06:06:14 +0000, Roy Schestowitz wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>> ,----[ Quote ]
    >>>>> | News Analysis: Open mobile platforms, such as Google's Android,
    >>>>> | should
    >>>>> usher | in a tidal wave of development that could change the industry.
    >>>>> `----
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> I for one am dissapointed that Android isn't GPL. Doesn't it use Linux?
    >>>
    >>> Yes, but the licence isn't /that/ bad. I thought it would be proprietary
    >>> when the rumours began about 6 months ago (starting with Java, then
    >>> Linux). It's a good start. Was it an Apache licence? I can't recall for
    >>> sure.
    >>>

    >>
    >> Not being GPLv3 will serve Google badly in the long run.


    If they decided to choose the GPL, then yes. The GPL is a developer's approach
    to rights. There are loopholes in GPLv2 that do not protect those rights.

    > Bull****, naturally
    > Software will not be "better" by some magic and fairy dust just because a
    > GPL licence is attached to it


    Well, that's true. You have to remember, however, that to a developer a device
    like OpenMoko can become more appealing than Android/'gPhone' devices. It
    gives the developer more control over the stack he or she is relying on.

    Think about development for proprietary Java (before GPLv2) or even something
    like Silverlight. Your code ceases to have any value at all once the stack
    which it relies on simply dies. There is a lot of code out there that can no
    longer be run, or the stack it relies on modified and redistributed (no
    control). It kills the software. It makes it a bunch of arbitrary blocks of
    code.

    --
    ~~ Best of wishes

    Roy S. Schestowitz | HTML is for page layout, not for textual messages
    http://Schestowitz.com | GNU is Not UNIX | PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
    http://iuron.com - proposing a non-profit search engine

  8. Re: [News] Op-ed: The Future is Free Open Source Smartphones

    Roy Schestowitz espoused:
    > ____/ Peter Khlmann on Thursday 29 November 2007 15:57 : \____
    >
    >> Mark Kent wrote:
    >>
    >>> Roy Schestowitz espoused:
    >>>> ____/ Thufir on Thursday 22 November 2007 11:18 : \____
    >>>>
    >>>>> On Thu, 22 Nov 2007 06:06:14 +0000, Roy Schestowitz wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>> ,----[ Quote ]
    >>>>>> | News Analysis: Open mobile platforms, such as Google's Android,
    >>>>>> | should
    >>>>>> usher | in a tidal wave of development that could change the industry.
    >>>>>> `----
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>> I for one am dissapointed that Android isn't GPL. Doesn't it use Linux?
    >>>>
    >>>> Yes, but the licence isn't /that/ bad. I thought it would be proprietary
    >>>> when the rumours began about 6 months ago (starting with Java, then
    >>>> Linux). It's a good start. Was it an Apache licence? I can't recall for
    >>>> sure.
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>> Not being GPLv3 will serve Google badly in the long run.

    >
    > If they decided to choose the GPL, then yes. The GPL is a developer's approach
    > to rights. There are loopholes in GPLv2 that do not protect those rights.
    >
    >> Bull****, naturally
    >> Software will not be "better" by some magic and fairy dust just because a
    >> GPL licence is attached to it

    >
    > Well, that's true. You have to remember, however, that to a developer a device
    > like OpenMoko can become more appealing than Android/'gPhone' devices. It
    > gives the developer more control over the stack he or she is relying on.


    GPL licences ensure that people contribute back. By its nature,
    therefore, it's more likely to result in better code than non-GPL
    licences do.

    Hence my point.

    >
    > Think about development for proprietary Java (before GPLv2) or even something
    > like Silverlight. Your code ceases to have any value at all once the stack
    > which it relies on simply dies. There is a lot of code out there that can no
    > longer be run, or the stack it relies on modified and redistributed (no
    > control). It kills the software. It makes it a bunch of arbitrary blocks of
    > code.
    >




    --
    | Mark Kent -- mark at ellandroad dot demon dot co dot uk |
    | Cola faq: http://www.faqs.org/faqs/linux/advocacy/faq-and-primer/ |
    | Cola trolls: http://colatrolls.blogspot.com/ |
    | My (new) blog: http://www.thereisnomagic.org |

  9. Re: [News] Op-ed: The Future is Free Open Source Smartphones

    Mark Kent wrote:

    > Roy Schestowitz espoused:
    >> ____/ Peter Köhlmann on Thursday 29 November 2007 15:57 : \____
    >>
    >>> Mark Kent wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> Roy Schestowitz espoused:
    >>>>> ____/ Thufir on Thursday 22 November 2007 11:18 : \____
    >>>>>
    >>>>>> On Thu, 22 Nov 2007 06:06:14 +0000, Roy Schestowitz wrote:
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>> ,----[ Quote ]
    >>>>>>> | News Analysis: Open mobile platforms, such as Google's Android,
    >>>>>>> | should
    >>>>>>> usher | in a tidal wave of development that could change the
    >>>>>>> industry. `----
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> I for one am dissapointed that Android isn't GPL. Doesn't it use
    >>>>>> Linux?
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Yes, but the licence isn't /that/ bad. I thought it would be
    >>>>> proprietary when the rumours began about 6 months ago (starting with
    >>>>> Java, then Linux). It's a good start. Was it an Apache licence? I
    >>>>> can't recall for sure.
    >>>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> Not being GPLv3 will serve Google badly in the long run.

    >>
    >> If they decided to choose the GPL, then yes. The GPL is a developer's
    >> approach to rights. There are loopholes in GPLv2 that do not protect
    >> those rights.
    >>
    >>> Bull****, naturally
    >>> Software will not be "better" by some magic and fairy dust just because
    >>> a GPL licence is attached to it

    >>
    >> Well, that's true. You have to remember, however, that to a developer a
    >> device like OpenMoko can become more appealing than Android/'gPhone'
    >> devices. It gives the developer more control over the stack he or she is
    >> relying on.

    >
    > GPL licences ensure that people contribute back.


    No, it does not. It does only if code is distributed later
    Which is not necessarily the case

    > By its nature, therefore, it's more likely to result in better code than
    > non-GPL licences do.


    No, it only makes sure that changes are available if code is distributed.
    That does not make the code any better. The code gets better because more
    people /can/ be involved with it. But that point is equally true for the
    BSD licence or the Apache licence.

    > Hence my point.


    Which is invalid

    < snip >
    --
    Meddle not in the affairs of Dragons, For thou art crunchy, and good
    with ketchup!


  10. Re: [News] Op-ed: The Future is Free Open Source Smartphones

    flatfish writes:

    > On Thu, 29 Nov 2007 16:57:17 +0100, Peter Köhlmann
    > wrote:
    >
    >>Mark Kent wrote:
    >>
    >>> Roy Schestowitz espoused:
    >>>> ____/ Thufir on Thursday 22 November 2007 11:18 : \____
    >>>>
    >>>>> On Thu, 22 Nov 2007 06:06:14 +0000, Roy Schestowitz wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>> ,----[ Quote ]
    >>>>>> | News Analysis: Open mobile platforms, such as Google's Android,
    >>>>>> | should
    >>>>>> usher | in a tidal wave of development that could change the industry.
    >>>>>> `----
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>> I for one am dissapointed that Android isn't GPL. Doesn't it use Linux?
    >>>>
    >>>> Yes, but the licence isn't /that/ bad. I thought it would be proprietary
    >>>> when the rumours began about 6 months ago (starting with Java, then
    >>>> Linux). It's a good start. Was it an Apache licence? I can't recall for
    >>>> sure.
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>> Not being GPLv3 will serve Google badly in the long run.
    >>>

    >>
    >>Bull****, naturally
    >>Software will not be "better" by some magic and fairy dust just because a
    >>GPL licence is attached to it

    >
    >
    > Geez.
    > Someone must have spiked my Starbucks Cafe because I actually agree
    > with Peter Kohlmann for a change.


    Peter is actually bang on the buck on this subject. A better way at
    looking at it (to regain normality) is to realise that you are, as
    normal, disagreeing with every bit of ****wittery that that egotistical
    wind bag Mark Kent utters. He really, really does appear to quite insane
    with his dire predictions and his bustling around to neighbours and
    family houses warning them of the NVidia driver "malware". As mad as a bag of
    hedgehogs he is.

    --
    Do not meddle in the affairs of wizards, for they become soggy and hard to
    light.

  11. Re: [News] Op-ed: The Future is Free Open Source Smartphones

    On Fri, 30 Nov 2007 17:18:59 +0100, Hadron
    wrote:


    >Peter is actually bang on the buck on this subject. A better way at
    >looking at it (to regain normality) is to realise that you are, as
    >normal, disagreeing with every bit of ****wittery that that egotistical
    >wind bag Mark Kent utters. He really, really does appear to quite insane
    >with his dire predictions and his bustling around to neighbours and
    >family houses warning them of the NVidia driver "malware". As mad as a bag of
    >hedgehogs he is.


    That's pretty funny.
    Mark Kent does seem to be a couple of bricks short of a full load.

  12. Re: [News] Op-ed: The Future is Free Open Source Smartphones

    flatfish wrote:

    > Mark Kent does seem to be a couple of bricks short of a full load.



    Where's the proof?

+ Reply to Thread