Please no crossposting! Re: Information regarding theMessaging Support in OpenMoko
jsuggs at murmp.com
jsuggs at murmp.com
Thu Feb 1 04:15:45 CET 2007
Sean Moss-Pultz wrote:
> You might be right. But I personally feel that MMS is fundamentally
> flawed. Costs aside, it's just not the way I think media should be
> transferred. The benefits are just too low for the end user. We're
> trying to fix this.
I agree. I have never used MMS, and very rarely use SMS. I use email for
just about any correspondence that I have (including to/from my phone).
Now, that doesn't mean that I am a representation of the *average* user,
but despite its drawbacks email is a much better means of transmitting
Now, MMS and SMS are *very* popular. However, I think that is also due
largely to the fact that you can only do some basic things with them...and
most of the phones these days are only capable of doing basic things. So,
Sean is correct that MMS is flawed and limited, but lets not shun the
One thing to consider) is that even if we can do amazing things, we are
still going to have to interact with people using "normal/whatever"
phones. So even if SMS/MMS isn't going to be the ideal platform for
sending messages we still need to be able to send/receive them. A
*better* way to approach the situation is to be able to do something new
and cool that "other" phones can't and then use that as a selling point
for the OpenMoko/Neo.
> Really guys, we're trying to rethink lots of things with OpenMoko.
> I don't want to do the same things just running under FOSS. We'd be
> missing out on a huge invitation to innovate both as a company and
> a community. Why not use the flexibility and rethink how we want
> these devices to work -- as end users -- not just for geeks but
> for everyone? I'm not saying we'll get things right the first time.
> Just that we're going to try our best ;-)
> _This_ opportunity is what makes me excited about OpenMoko. Not
> (simply) the fact that it's FOSS based.
True, but lets not get carried away either. FOSS doesn't make good
software by default. A good user community behind the platform has a
chance at making good hardware/software. But it is going to take time and
a lot of effort to make great software, and Sean is right that we may not
get it right the first time around...
What I mean by not getting carried away is. I don't think that there will
be many situations where you can "walk into a room full of people all
using the Neo's and...[insert cool idea]." There were over a billion
mobile phones shipped out in 2006, and there will be many more in 2007.
So even if we get a million of these devices in people's hands we are
still at less than 1 percent market penetration. So, we can't create a
self contained community that only looks to our selves for ideas. We
*must* be able to easily/effectively communicate with those other %99+ of
devices out there...even if they are inferior. Example: video calling
could be sweet, but if you can't talk to anyone, then whats the point?
All that to say, we've got to innovate within our realm, but we must also
be conscious of how things are done outside of the project as well.
More information about the community