Weekly Edition
Return to the Press page
| |||||||||||||
It's official: Google announces open-source mobile phone OS, Android (ars technica)
ars technica has some coverage of the long-rumored gPhone announcement, which is not a phone at all, as has also been rumored. It is, instead, a Linux-based platform for mobile applications. Google also announced the formation of the Open Handset Alliance. "Google's handset partners upon launch will include Motorola, HTC, Samsung, and LG, confirming many of the recent rumors that Google would not be developing the hardware on its own. Google has a number of carrier partners worldwide as well, such as T-Mobile and Sprint in the US, T-Mobile/Deutsche Telekom in Europe, and China Mobile in China, to name a few."
(Log in to post comments)
Effect on MontaVista? Posted Nov 5, 2007 19:05 UTC (Mon) by JoeBuck (subscriber, #2330) [Link] MontaVista had been supplying Motorola and others with embedded Linux support. How does Google's announcement affect them? It would seem that Google could offer a lot more to its partners, given their huge resources.
Effect on MontaVista? Posted Nov 5, 2007 21:56 UTC (Mon) by ajross (subscriber, #4563) [Link] Having working briefly with a Montavista platform/SDK at one point, I've never been really thrilled with their product. It's too much of an attempt to shoehorn the thing into a "shrink wrap" kind of metaphor, and tends to lag the core kernel by quite a bit. Hardware vendors like it because it looks more stable, but coming to it from a mainstream background it looks really clunky.
It's official: Google announces open-source mobile phone OS, Android (ars technica) Posted Nov 5, 2007 19:18 UTC (Mon) by xav (guest, #18536) [Link] Broadcom, NVIDIA and Wind River ... those people aren't specially known for their openness towards linux (Wind River was even a linux-hater not so long ago). Talk about a great alliance for making an open platform :(
It's official: Google announces open-source mobile phone OS, Android (ars technica) Posted Nov 5, 2007 19:44 UTC (Mon) by leoc (subscriber, #39773) [Link] I bet the actual end user phones will be locked down such that end users will not be able to (easily) hack them. I hope I am wrong, but from what I have read so far, this does not sound like it will be anything close to OpenMoko.
It's official: Google announces open-source mobile phone OS, Android (ars technica) Posted Nov 5, 2007 19:52 UTC (Mon) by jayavarman (subscriber, #19600) [Link] I diged a bit to find that Windriver sells some kind of Linux support services and even has a Linux distro for embedded devices. They claim that the kernel is a PREEMPT_RT kernel with some additions of theirs. Anyone knows more about it? I couldn't find a download link on their site[1]. I wonder if those modifications are GPL? [1] http://www.windriver.com/linux/
It's official: Google announces open-source mobile phone OS, Android (ars technica) Posted Nov 5, 2007 19:50 UTC (Mon) by einstein (subscriber, #2052) [Link] OK, put down the tar and feathers, folks - let's see what they actually come up with before we make a judgment.
It's official: Google announces open-source mobile phone OS, Android (ars technica) Posted Nov 5, 2007 20:08 UTC (Mon) by i3839 (guest, #31386) [Link] This link has some info. It sounds good, but if you read the FAQ it's clear that companies using Android can lock it up and load it with closed source crap if they want.
It's official: Google announces open-source mobile phone OS, Android (ars technica) Posted Nov 6, 2007 4:44 UTC (Tue) by drag (subscriber, #31333) [Link] Well that's normal for any Linux thing. Users and providers can add any amount of proprietary crap they feel like.. Currently on the desktop users load up ndiswrappers, nvidia drivers, google desktop, and all that sort of thing. It used to be common for distributions to do that sort of thing, until people got tired of it. The big examples that come to mind right now would be RealPlayer and Yast (before Suse was bought by Novell). Used to be marketted as 'value added add-ons' or some such thing. People have spent years and flame wars on flame wars and use licenses like the LGPL, Mozilla, and BSD for the specific _purpose_ of allowing non compatable and closed source licenses. The Linux Kernel folks derided the FSF goons for trying to prevent distributers from locking down the OS via hardware by pushing the adoption of GPLv3 license. So if google is allowing 'Android' to be used as a platform to lock down devices against users and allow carriers to add a lot of proprietary cruft then that is _exactly_what_the_copyright_holders_want_ to allow according to their licensing choices. Google is mearly taking advantage of OSS and Linux to provide a base for marketing and running their proprietary applications.. Exactly like how the licenceses used in Linux allow. So Android OS isn't going to do change the status quo. Now is this a horrible thing? Well yes and no. It's not because it's reality. Carriers won't adopt Linux without being able to lock down end users. They are assholes like that and I find that behavior very distastefull. But by allowing them to do this the Linux kernel developers are going to be able to get open source drivers for the various hardware bits in mobile devices. The end effect is that all a user has to do is find some way to break the DRM on these phones and then they can have these devices 'liberated'. Linux makes this much more easier, then, say, OS X does. And this lowers the bar for people like the OpenMoko/Neo1973 folks. They can use the same hardware, the latest and greatest stuff, as the big guys do but they don't have to do the DRM against end users. I know for a fact that many people dislike carriers for the locking down and the proprietary cruft they force down the throats on end users. Then it will be open market forces that leads to a more 'liberated' phone and handheld rather then licensing games.. although the GPLv3 can help a long way I think. Linux will help lower the bar dramaticly to competition between handheld makers and carriers... In a open market this usually means a big win for us.
It's official: Google announces open-source mobile phone OS, Android (ars technica) Posted Nov 6, 2007 10:46 UTC (Tue) by i3839 (guest, #31386) [Link] I guess my original point was that it is a good start and that the idea of an open phone stack is great, but because it can be locked up, it doesn't mean that the companies supporting Android als support the openess. Otherwise the list would be highly impressive, now it doesn't say much at all.
It's official: Google announces open-source mobile phone OS, Android (ars technica) Posted Nov 6, 2007 14:26 UTC (Tue) by drag (subscriber, #31333) [Link] Well your defiantely right with that. What I like is the fact that Google is being open about the OS. The carriers in the USA like to lock down phones and such, but I suspect that the actual phone manufacturers do not. This means that as long as the Linux kernel folks are able to impress on the hardware makers that closed source drivers are unacceptable then that means as long as I avoid buying the carrier-subsidized phones then I can run whatever software I'd like on it. AGain the importance of Android hinges on the ability for consumers to be able to find and purchase unlocked phones and wheither or not the drivers for the phone are open or not. If we end up with nothing but closed source video drivers and closed source kernel modules for controlling the hardware on these phones then Android is a complete bust and worthless. (that being said.. I am eagerly waiting the final hardware revision of the Neo1973 to be put to market. Now I'll have 3 operating systems to run on it.. OpenMoko, Qtopia, and Android )
It's official: Google announces open-source mobile phone OS, Android (ars technica) Posted Nov 6, 2007 14:33 UTC (Tue) by drag (subscriber, #31333) [Link] Another thing to keep in mind is that a huge barrier to totally open phones like the Neo1973 is the lack of support for the end user. Sure there is going to be good GTK and QT software for the Neo1973, but normal functionality and applications that consumers are used to on their regular handsets are going to be totally missing on the Neo197. If Google's Android has the ability to provide for a common unified platform for mobile handsets then the ability for regular folk to migrate from a nasty locked-down carrier phone to a completely open phone will be much increased. All the creature comforts of one phone should work just fine on another. If then consumer demand is for openness and the ability to use their fancy unlocked phones then you'll see the gradual minimization of the current proprietary horror that is the cell phone industry.
It's official: Google announces open-source mobile phone OS, Android (ars technica) Posted Nov 6, 2007 19:48 UTC (Tue) by robilad (guest, #27163) [Link] The whole point of Android is to be open ... enough for the proprietary vendors, so that they can close it off again, in order to differentiate themselves. And with differentiation come applications that only run on one phone, but not on the other. It's funny to see Google repeat the story of Java ME, though, with all the beaming, good intentions, hooray for proprietary software built on open source/standards, and all that.
It's official: Google announces open-source mobile phone OS, Android (ars technica) Posted Nov 7, 2007 11:23 UTC (Wed) by k8to (subscriber, #15413) [Link] Wind River did not hate linux but thought the gpl didn't work in the embedded space. Depending upon definitions that would be accurate. The embedded space of yesteryear where the entire image was a single linked app, it wouldn't work. Things changed.
It's official: Google announces open-source mobile phone OS, Android (ars technica) Posted Nov 7, 2007 19:24 UTC (Wed) by BenHutchings (subscriber, #37955) [Link] Wind River spread FUD about embedded Linux for years while it was slowly taking market share from VxWorks. Now they've given in to the inevitable, but I would hardly see them as enthusiastic Linux supporters.
It's official: Google announces open-source mobile phone OS, Android (ars technica) Posted Nov 8, 2007 1:32 UTC (Thu) by k8to (subscriber, #15413) [Link] I was one of the people who ported Tornado to Linux. A royal pain in the days of redhat 6.0. If you look at what WRS actually said, they were talking about the issue of linking proprietary code with GPL code, which *really* does not fly for lots of embedded vendors. I love open source, I release stuff I develop myself as open source, and I believe it is ultimately essential for software infrastructure. However, it is not always appropriate, and for single-image designs on limited hardware, the GPL is a real embedded space issue. This is what WRS talked about and it was not FUD it is a practical concern. What turned out to be the case was: the embedded market got less embedded, and single-image became the exception not the rule.
Security, anyone? Posted Nov 5, 2007 22:17 UTC (Mon) by ineiti (guest, #13626) [Link] When I'm reading stuff like: Android does not differentiate between the phone's core applications and third-party applications. They can all be built to have equal access to a phone's capabilities providing users with a broad spectrum of applications and services. it sounds like Windows 98 (or even XP) with all it's wonderful possibilities for virusses. Let's see when the development kit comes out, they must've thought better about that, no?
Security, anyone? Posted Nov 5, 2007 23:46 UTC (Mon) by vmole (guest, #111) [Link] I think you're reading too much into that. You could replace "Android" with "Linux" (or even "Red Hat Linux") and "phone" with "computer" and it would be equally true.
It's official: Google announces open-source mobile phone OS, Android (ars technica) Posted Nov 6, 2007 3:16 UTC (Tue) by svkelley (guest, #37299) [Link] So are applications limited to being Java based only? Or I wonder if their SDK will actually let you compile ARM based applications.
SDK ? What THE PHONE will allow ? Posted Nov 6, 2007 4:35 UTC (Tue) by khim (subscriber, #9252) [Link] I think you'll be able to hack SDK and install ARM application there, but what about actual phone ? To know THIS we'll be forced to wait year or so...
|
|||||||||||||