[SVHMPC] linux phone standard
michael at michaelshiloh.com
michael at michaelshiloh.com
Tue Jun 12 23:06:37 CEST 2007
Really well put, Matt. I agree with your analysis, and like you, for the past
24 hours have been trying to figure out why this doesn't seem like such a big
deal. You have nicely expressed my feelings.
On Tue, 12 Jun 2007, Matthew S. Hamrick wrote:
> Well... I used to work for PalmSource, one of the LiPS founding members. I've
> been trying to find something nice to say about LiPS for the last 24 hours
> and the best I can come up with is, "It's not Microsoft."
> But yeah... my impression has always been that some of the companies involved
> (PalmSource) always believed that the value of their offering was based in
> the software. I would argue that the value of PalmOS is not in PalmOS itself,
> but in the community of users and developers that surrounded it. Motorola is
> used to dealing with proprietary mobile OSes and is only slowly coming to
> internalize some of the benefits of open source. So... my take on this is...
> the guys involved have a mental model of how successful products are built,
> and it involves dealing with "the" software group. These businesses have
> processes based on a risk model that puts the software group in a distant
> location from the hardware group.
> In my experience, companies that pay dogmatic attention to API standards
> outside of customer requirements don't last long (Posix and Win32 being
> possible exceptions.) Companies that pay close attention to customer
> requirements spend more of their time solving their customer's problems than
> going to meetings to discuss which options of which API calls will be
> LiPS was formed by a group of software companies who, when given a kernel, a
> process model, a framebuffer device driver or two, and GTK, couldn't figure
> out how to make a compelling product, much less a platform. The LiPS guys
> will tell you that in order to create a development community, you've got to
> have a consistent API for developers to work with. I've always argued that
> given a compiler, an emulator, prototype hardware, a JTAG connector and
> enough stock options and coffee, skilled engineers can make anything work.
> What is difficult is for small, innovative companies to release their
> products in a market dominated by a few powerful players with long buying
> This is not to say that LiPS is irrelevant, just that as an ISV, I just don't
> see why it's that interesting.
> -Just my $0.02
> -Matt H.
> On Jun 12, 2007, at 8:22 AM, Paul A. Lambert wrote:
>> On Jun 12, 2007, at 6:53 AM, mtd wrote:
>> > hello,
>> > it seems that LiPS group tries to make linux phone specifications.
>> > http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070611-linux-phone-standards-
>> > group-to-publish-specifications.html
>> Yes .. the "specifications" are now available: http://
>> These are largely overviews, some doxygen output, and some header
>> files. No code. You need to be a member to get the code :-(
>> API standards are difficult to enforce, but could be useful to help
>> align some of the most basic services for a phone (like the phone
>> book). These specifications will be used for industry developed
>> 'closed' phones. The 'open' community will need to produce similar
>> parallel work.... not as APIs, but as code :-) The LiPS documents
>> could server as an interesting starting point for some designs.
More information about the community