Myth Busting FTW

Mike Hodson mystica at
Sat Sep 1 01:48:32 CEST 2007

On 8/31/07, Daniel Eran <danieleran at> wrote:
>  Hi Mike,

Hi Dan, I am actually rather impressed you replied within a couple
hours;  I was honestly not expecting one so soon, if at all.

>> * Where did you get your totally wrong information about T-Mobile's
>> frequencies?
> TMobile only owns 1900 MHz  transponders, which are high enough to be
> problematic. That means subscribers have to roam on AT&T to use 850 MHz.
Sprint too only owns 1900MHz transponders, yet they have far better
coverage than AT&T's combined 850/1900MHz combined network in here in
Denver, at least.

To say that simply because AT&T is bigger and have banded together a
large number of companies' PCS and Cellular allocations, they
therefore are better, is a wrong point of view.  I don't know of any
T-Mobile phone that has any tendency to roam here.  I would say that
some areas the case is not the same, friends of mine from California
tell me the coverage is rather different.  However, even if you are
roaming, why should you care?  You are paying T-Mobile for apparently
much higher customer service and in my opinion a much better rate plan
with MyFaves.

It's not like you won't get coverage because the Neo -excludes- any
bands (short of UMTS but thats another ballpark.)

> TMobile also uses/plans to use a non-standard UMTS frequency with an even
> smaller market than AT&T's US version of UMTS. T-Mobile uses non-standard
Smaller, because they require new spectrum to add 3G.  Interestingly
enough, here in denver to add 3G AT&T will have to work on the same
AWS spectrum.  We here did not benefit from having Cingular+AT&T in
the market before that merger;  AT&T always had 2 blocks, 55mhz total,
and that hasnt changed.  AT&T 3G spectrum in some markets, notably
Denver, will actually equal those of T-Mobile.

Also, in the USA, it IS a standard.  A brand new one, but a standard
none the less.  It's been auctioned, and won, by a lot of people in a
lot of different markets.  T-Mobile however was the most needing of
this extra spectrum.

Please, don't blame T-Mobile for using 1700mhz frequencies, blame the
United States for deciding to totally bypass the European (and
worldwide) frequency recommendations/allocations when planning the PCS
band.  Apparently they were already using the 1800mhz band originally
designated by WARC-92 for PCS-like services.  Thereby, the upper-half
of our PCS spectrum infringes on the 1900MHz spectrum for UMTS.  So,
what do we do?  Create yet another new set of bands to make our phones
more and more incompatible with an outside world that follows set
standards. should show you
just how lacking the USA is on large amounts of spectrum.  Blame our
government for wanting to keep it for their own use.

> frequencies that only a quad band phone could use, and then only hitting on
> one cylinder out of four. I've been a T-Mobile customer for years, and

Incorrect, any dual-band(american-market, 850/1900) or tri-band
phone(900/1800/1900) sold worldwide can utilize this 1900MHz frequency
band.  As I have said, and will continue to say: AT&T also provides
GSM on a PCS band somewhere within the 1900MHz spectrum.  I guarantee
in Denver's case, they are using 1900 for GSM, and NOT UMTS.  The
markets where they have UMTS? I begin to think they have 3 frequency
blocks up their sleeves. 850=gsm/tdma/cellular on different channels.
1900=UMTS and/or GSM.

I would say that AT&T's deployment of UMTS in the 850MHz spectrum is
more non-standard than the 1700MHz spectrum everyone will soon have;
AT&T included.

> experienced the problems of trying to use the phone I wanted on their
> network. It's not good, and that's why TMobile has ventured into WiFi VoIP,
> unlike any other US carrier.

Lets see. Which exact phone did you try using?  I am very curious.  I
have seen many European tri-band and tri-band GSM and GSM/UMTS phones
that support ONLY the 1900MHz american band(among 900/1800
world-bands.)  When I worked full-time for RadioShack,  I remember
thinking about what phone I wanted to get to use with the Cingular
service we were starting to sell.  I didn't like any that the store
was selling; they all were rather small, featureless phones and none
were quarter-VGA like my trusty Sprint/Toshiba VM-4050 (a wonderful
phone that desperately needed a new OS to continue to utilize its
rather fast CPU for the this day no other phone I have found
boots up in 6 seconds.)

Finally, I had decided on the Sharp ZX-20, bought unlocked off of
eBay.  However, at that point I was rather offset by the fact that
AT&T owned -2- frequency bands, including one that handset couldn't
use, the 850 band.  I didn't want to be left on a network with only
half of the frequencies open to me. Therefore I went and bought a
Sony-Ericsson S710a off of Craigslist.  QVGA and features. Yay.

Now, if you indeed had one of these 900/1800/1900 phones, and you
lived in a market where T-Mobile has rather few towers in place, then
there is a possibility your phone really wanted to roam to AT&T but
couldn't.  In this case, you would be using a tri-band phone made for
worldwide, not USA use.  However, strictly speaking, using T-Mobiles
towers, and their towers alone, ANY 1900MHz phone is able to connect
to the T-Mobile network.

Fact: Neither T-Mobile nor AT&T are any less nonstandard.  And our
government is to blame!

>> * Where on any official blogs/websites have you seen the OpenMoko team
>> or FIC say that they were making an "iPhone killer" or "anti-iPhone?"
> "Sean Moss-Pultz, architect of OpenMoko and product manager of First
> International Computer's mobile communication business unit, in an e-mail...
> Why buy a Neo rather than an iPhone? "While Apple delivers a polished
> experience, it's an experience that is exactly how you they want you to have
> it," said Moss-Pultz. "In other words, users really have no freedom to
> change the device if they don't like the way Apple chose to make things.
> OpenMoko is the anti-iPhone."
> Linux-Based OpenMoko 'Anti-iPhone' Debuts -- iPhone -- InformationWeek

This actual article, I personally missed.  I venture that a bunch of
of the OpenMoko community members have missed it as well, as a lot of
community members go on nearly as much as I did from time to time.

> Do a google search on Anti iPhone, and the majority of responses are all
> about OpenMoko. That's the kind of phrase you can't retract after it's said,
> even if you realize it wasn't a good thing to say in retrospect.

This may be one of a few times where it was stated by a core team
member, but yes indeed the media does take things out of proportion.
It is now a buzzwordy term, and everyone will probably say it at some
point or other.

Oh well.

>> * What makes you think that these phones as designed by the OpenMoko
>> team were initially meant to run windows mobile and that this phone
>> was already some mass-produced Chinese-government-backed phone created
>> and mass-produced before Sean Moss-Pultz had an idea, and a team of
>> approximately 10 people working at FIC decided to create OpenMoko?
> I linked to that source in the article. It also is unlikely that a ten
> person team is building its own supply line to accommodate a few hundred
> hobbyists. Are you saying that FIC's hardware is only designed to run
> OpenMoko?

While the basic design may have been built around components they have
used previously in their Windows smartphones, I venture to say that
the current Neo1973 designs past the original inception have been
custom designed primarily by the OpenMoko team, with 100% openness in
mind.  While FIC as a company may be trying to make all their products
open, I would be willing to bet that the OpenMoko project opened their
eyes to the possibilities of what could be done.  Being 100% open,
none of the hardware requires any binary proprietary software or

Unlike to your "using Linux on a Dell" (they DO sell dells with Ubuntu
now) comment, saying "that won't change the world," I venture to take
the stand where one community effort, based upon open standards and
input from the public, will create totally new capabilities never
before envisaged.  While the Neo1973 and OpenMoko platform may not, by
themselves, become the next hottest gadget, they have already spawned
MUCH more news coverage, magazine coverage (Popular Science for one
covered the Neo with much more detail than the iPhone) and a very
large community following.  Things that spark so much attention so
quickly, while being led by such a small effort, are bound to cause
change for the better.

> * What makes you think a newly established grass-roots effort is able
> to -INSTANTLY- be at the same level as companies who have been around
> for decades?  What makes you expect the exact same from a
> multi-billion dollar corporation and a 10 person strong start-up
> division of a company paired with an ad-hoc community effort?  How
> skewed is your view on what Apple and other manufacturers are trying
> to produce in comparison with what OpenMoko wishes to do?
> I have no expectations.

Your article imply that it is doomed, that the company will never make
the phone because of shortfalls and oversights, that it will never
come to be.  You alternatively laud the iPhone because it is already
there as a complete product.

>What I criticized what not your efforts to do
>something you wanted to do (good for you, really), but rather the
> anti-iphone rhetoric and the comments in the OpenMoko FAQ that I quoted,
> which pitted the phone against the iPhone, saying "the FIC Neo1973 is
> 'fairly similar' to Apple's iPhone." To anyone who hasn't looked at the
> details, this gives the impression that FIC's phone is competitive.

You yourself give false impressions, on many occasions.  Some glaring examples:

"So much for the glorious freedom of choosing your own provider. Any
real choice is prevented by the proprietary differences between GSM
mobile providers like AT&T and the CDMA2000 providers like Sprint and
Verizon Wireless who don't offer GSM service at all."

You make it sound like this was a USA only device.  This is, in fact,
a fully worldwide capable handset, and has spawned a large amount of
interest in almost all countries in Europe, New Zealand, Australia,
and lots of other places.  If there is GSM, you can use it.

Fact: Until you get a hacked iPhone or Apple finally branches out,
you'll be hard pressed to find an iPhone, anywhere outside of the USA.

How long will it take Apple?  Only time will tell.

> Its not. I also pointed out that FIC promised the phone back in March, raised
> the price, then delayed it for months. It doesn't matter how small your
> group is, if you target a goal and can't make it, and then say you're doing
> about the same as Apple, well, you may get called on those claims.

You are again trying to compare small, ad-hoc and truly open with all
revelations, with the closed door environment of a corporation such as
Apple.  Everyone can clearly read how small the Moko group is, and
should be able to understand that a few very busy people may fall
behind, but as its project development was done in secret, nobody can
really say how many setbacks the iPhone has had.

The part you don't see in a corporation, that can be very visible in a
community effort,  are all the meetings and managers yelling at teams
to get busier and produce a product faster.

Also, something you may not have read, the community was actually the
cause of a few of the delays:  They wanted things like Bluetooth and a
user accessible JTAG port.  They wanted WiFi and finally lead the
developers to a provider of a truly open chipset, however, this was
not in-time for the developers preview.

As such, FIC and the OpenMoko team set out to add these before the
prevew release(with the exception of WiFi, which WILL come in the
Consumer release.)  After designing a flat-printed-circuit connector
for the JTAG,  their first production run came out with very low
usable yield and they had to order an entirely new batch.  This
delayed production by a month.
Furtherore, the initial revision of the hardware had more bugs, with
the power management, the GSM chipset firmware, and a few other
sporadic hardware issues.  All of these needed to be re-worked, and
all of these were fully documented on OpenMoko's site.

At the very least, these people are honest, hardworking, and let
everyone know why they are behind schedule.

> Japan's FOMA is mostly compatible with European UMTS, suggesting that Apple
> might release a UMTS world phone.
When? Will there finally be a developer kit for writing custom
applications without hacking the thing?  Will it be locked into each
carrier, or will you be able to choose your pick of either Vodafone,
3, or any of the other networks in Europe (for example) as your
carrier?  Or will you have to again, hack the phone to work on a
competitors network?

> Fact: the iPhone, in its current state, is unable to make use of the
> nearly 20-25x faster 3G-HSDPA download speeds AT&T offers in many
> markets. (Current HSDPA speeds are 3.6megabit, later up to 7.2mbit;
> EDGE maxes out in the upper hundreds of kilobits or about 0.15megabit)
>  This makes its promise of "full web browsing" just that much less of
> a reality.

> WiFi is also useful.
WiFi -will- be in the consumer Neo1973 release.  Unfortunately it
appears EDGE will not be.  However, as an interesting aside, if you
own a USB aircard you are in luck: It seems someone has come up with
an aircard to wifi battery-powered hot spot.  Its the size of a deck
of cards.
Owning a U720 Sprint Aircard, I am definitely picking one of these up
to use the Neo on-the-go for internet.  And finally get a lot more use
of my almost stagnate account.

Along with WiFi, are a plethora of other goodies, all of which you can
find here:
Short list:  2 3d accelerometers, a 3D graphics processor, 4x the
flash ram, WiFi, a faster CPU, and  sadly 1 less speaker, possibly
eliminated to make room for the chipsets to make everything listed
above work.

> Third: You claim that the "company is a knockoff hardware cloner
> infatuated with Microsoft" and is re-using some mythical Chinese
> government backed phone that was pre-made before they even got the
> idea.
> Incorrect.
> I'm sure you don't like this article, but are you saying it was faked? Or
> have you simply changed what you want to be said? Seems like your problem is
> with FIC saying too much:

I am not saying disputing about this article's validity, at the time
of publishing.

I am saying that the same people who are on the OpenMoko team,
designed the current hardware, that the Neo1973 as marketed to the
world will use.  Whether or not this same newly revised hardware also
goes into the Chinese PHS phone is to be seen.

The fact that it was based on a design someone had already
commissioned and that it also runs Windows Mobile is inconsequential;
This means that they have developers able to write drivers.  I bet
with enough time someone could hack OSX to work on it as well.  As I
have stated, Wireless is all ARM CPUs.  If you can hack around the
bits and pieces, you can get just about anything to work on any
smartphone device nowadays.

What I AM however disputing, is that you claim FIC is windows
infatuated and makes "knock off" hardware.  This purely and simply

> I don't know why you're trying to contradict me on phones being ARM based,
> as I never said any weren't. I've noted that the majority of all devices are
> ARM based.

I am not contradicting you; I am providing evidence to the fact that
while certain devices are "built for windows mobile," they along with
many other devices can indeed run much more than that.  I was saying
that the ARM CPU was commonplace, and fostered this interoperability
more than you give it credit for.

>> This is FAR from your claim of being "merely a version of Linux
>> designed to run on a specific vendor's proprietary implementation of
>> Windows Mobile."  Your misinformation makes it seem like Linux is
>> being forced to run AT THE SAME TIME as Windows Mobile, which this
>> phone WAS NOT designed to ever use.  The Windows Mobile reference
>> platform is simply a hardware spec, akin to "Centrino" for laptops.
>> The laptop does not care what it runs, although monopolistic licensing
>> deals give Microsoft more money any time a device is sold preinstalled
>> with Windows.

> I don't think anyone would reasonably get the impression that FIC's phone
> requires Windows to run Linux. What I said was that it is like going to Dell
> to get a Windows PC to run Linux; it's supporting Microsoft, not "taking the
> company on."
But, your words, mangled as they were, come out to be:
"OpenMoko therefore isn't a new "open phone," it's merely a version of
Linux designed to run on a specific vendor's proprietary
implementation of Windows Mobile."
The way you word this, someone could think that the Windows Mobile
operating system was running a version of linux.  You need to be more
clear defining hardware platform versus software frameworks.

While OpenMoko is a version of Linux, based upon a phone that FIC
created, this phone was later revamped and added on to by the OpenMoko
team themselves, trying to get the hardware just right and to include
most of the community requested features.

The Neo1973 is just about as proprietary as any other device, this is
true.  Except no other device has every specification, schematic, and
component laid out for you to work with.  This in and of itself makes
this platform a much more compelling device than its competition.

>> And in that sense, the Neo1973 hardware was NEVER based on any
>> preexisting platform; it rather was assembled from the same parts a
>> variety of phones are made from currently, all based on off-the-shelf
>> components.  The design was custom and members from the core OpenMoko
>> team lead the development.  Surely this was a cost-effective way to
>> build what has undoubtedly become the first of a long line of OpenMoko
>> devices, phones among other things.  Apple based their iPhone on some
>> rather new custom hardware, adding of course to the expense of R&D,
>> testing, debugging, coding, and everythig else
> Not according the the team lead at FIC.
Redacted.  I still submit however, that modifications past that which
FIC created for their customer, are entirely those of the Neo1973 /
OpenMoko team.  And indeed, off-the-shelf available components which
are available to just about anyone have been used on this product,
short of the curcuit boards and cases and whatnot.  Indeed, many
smartphones are based on the commodity parts = lower cost model.
Except for the iPhone, who while creating a very cool multi-touch
product, had to bear the R&D on the entirely new technology itself.
This indirectly increases the consumer's cost, and increases time to

> While most smartphone devices nowadays are based upon Windows Mobile,
> they in fact are not terribly different than those running Palm OS, or
> even phones using proprietary RTOS systems running on these ARM cpus.
> How do you think that OpenMoko has been hacked to run on to port to
> the Palm Tungsten, a Palm 650 phone, and a couple of HTC smartphones?
> Because the base hardware nowadays truly is not terribly different.
> Well Palm Treos are built by HTC. They are essentially Windows Mobile phones
> now. I see your point, but I don't see how I've misrepresented anything,
> since it was based on comments from FIC.

You are saying that even by buying a Neo, you are supporting Windows
Mobile and indirectly Microsoft.  I conversely say that these devices
are open to doing much more than just windows mobile, linux, and the
combined set of hardware inside is capable of running anything you can
hack to work on it.  I am rather sure that no OS licensing fees are
paid to Microsoft on this phone, as it wont ship with WM OS.  By this
fact, this device dos not support either side greater than the other.

> Building and designing are not the same thing. BMWs aren't nice cars because
> they come from a specific factory, but because they are designed well.

You've missed the point.  You claimed that FIC were a one trick pony,
making knockoff hardware.  I rebut that they are a multi-faceted OEM
that has taken on many challenges in the past, and is more than
capable of matching any other key players in their industry.
Conversely, the design of the phone software will come more so from
consumers and the community than the OpenMoko organization themselves,
which allows many more voices to be heard.  Apple is Steve's way or
the highway.  You want some change? tough luck.

Good designs are ones that can expand to fit new roles in my opinion.

> And--not a personal attack--but the FIC phone looks like ass and offers the
> features of a 1995 phone. The fact that they want volunteers to complete the
> software for them is the basic premise of the article.

You make it sound like a personal attack.  I would never use the word
"ass" if it was not personal.

Plus, are you comparing the developers preview hardware, something
given to dedicated people who really want to work at making something
better, with that sold to consumers?  The new hardware, and old
hardware alike, while still looking like an oversized bar of soap
waiting for a rope, comes with features you never would have dreamed
of in 1995.  What can you do with an accelerometer?  Not sure? Just
wait.  How much can a GPS actually effect a better quality of life?  I
bet a whole lot.  Keep watching.

Now, please, check your years before you come up with quick remarks to
put down something that doesn't look as sleek as glass on stainless
steel.  Did phones in 1995 have touch screens? Color? WiFi? Bluetooth?
Accelerometer? 3D? WTF? we have ANALOG in full-swing still in 1995.
PCS was a year and some later.  Early digital services, while
providing more voice concurrency, still had horribly limited feature

Please, i think you really need to re-check your facts sometimes.  I
admit, sometimes I do as well, but these are simple facts that are so
easy to get right.

Furthermore, you have also missed the point of an open-source project:
 it starts with a small piece of code, and nearly overnight grows into
a massive entity that is coming out with much greater quantity of
innovative code much faster than apple will start to write for new
releases of their iPhone software.

> It wasn't an attack
> on open source development, but rather a critical look at a hardware
> manufacturer trying to sell garbage by throwing a "Linux" cloak over it and
> expecting someone else to do the work. The only reason I made any deal about
> it at all is because the phone is repeatedly compared against the iPhone,
> and people have asked me how realistic that comparison is. I'm not trying to
> derail your project or sponsor, just trying to balance the report.

Perhaps not a direct attack on open source development in general, but
you are simply comparing what now are a Ripe Apple and a Green Tomato.
 The comparison cannot be completely made until the Neo is fully
released as a consumer product.  The capability and possibilities
behind the Neo1973 hardware are in some ways worse, (style if you care
about such things, smaller screen, and lack of higher-speed mobile
data) but are in other ways far superior (Full VGA resolution 235DPI
screen, allowing for crisp-as-paper text, a fully integrated and
location aware GPS device that can interact automatically with the
software, and accelerometers allowing for intrusion detection (if
someone steals your phone) or even adaptable to play cool new games.
More uses are sure to follow, if there are as many creative minds out
there as it would seem.

> So are they also going to call the OpenMoko phone "Windows Mobile-featured"?
> Or is that just BS?
No, they are not going to market it as such.  The press release simply
stated that the manufacturer has a precedent to make hardware capable
of both. My Macbook was made to be compatible with Windows as well,
but using this as a key selling point.  For the Neo/OpenMoko these are
simply afterthoughts.  Will any effort be put into the WM aspect of
this particular device?   From FIC/OpenMoko: not a bit on this
particular device.  Does this preclude some intrepid Windows Mobile
enthusiast from doing it?  Nope.  And thats why this platform, being
truly open, is so exciting.  Anyone can try to do whatever they want
with it.

> I mentioned several Linux phone distros, including Trolltech's similar
> Greenphone project. I think you are happy to point to Linux' ~15% share of
> the smartphone market, despite knowing that the majority of those are closed
> Motorola phones for China. Can't have it both ways.

I am not happy to point to linux in general; infact I condemn motorola
for making their specific platform closed.  The Trolltech greenphone
is a nice idea, but has had no marketing effort, a rather small
community response, and I consider it a phone for people who want to
learn how to code for qtopia and not much else.  They also do not
entirely open up the hardware aspect of the phone.

I do however applaud the OpenMoko team for striving in -every regard-
to provide a -completely open- phone from both the software as well as
hardware perspective.

This is not having it both ways: this is having preference for one way
that at the moment is doing it better than anyone else previous has,
with regard to making a completely free platform for anyone to utilize
to its fullest.

> No I'm not. I had more to say about FIC than OpenMoko. I'm just pointing out
> that buying an FIC phone isn't sticking it to Microsoft in any sense beyond
> buying a Dell Windows PC and then installing Linux. It has no market effect
> at all.

But you point out delays and price increases.  What you are not
getting is that FIC as an OEM has a rather small part in this
particular effort; they manufacture the hardware.  The design,
planning, coordination, and all the problems you discuss are in fact
because the team working for FIC on this is rather small, and is
working in a design style so far outside that of closed-source
solution providers.

The intrinsic way this project works influences the way the schedule
happens, and what happens next with hardware and software.  By
comparing this paradigm with that of a well oiled software and design
machine, you fail to substantiate your claims.

> Yes that is part of why things were delayed, because as you are aware, Apple
> is fighting against the same monopoly. Leopard does do A2DP, and should
> support BT better.

Yes, it does do A2DP, but the setbacks on the iPhone are delaying my
ability to use a feature that the Bluetooth 2.0/EDR chipset in this
mac could physically perform the day I bought it.  This is a software
limitation that should have been addressed prior to inclusion of such
a new piece of bluetooth hardware.  Steve Jobs said that you cant
create what people want now, but to create what they want years from
now.  Perhaps when A2DP was in its infancy, they themselves could not
scope how many people might want to utilize this feature.

Windows has had A2DP for a while based on proprietary solutions, but
the Alsa stereo-bluetooth interface is coming along rather nicely, and
works today.  Still a few bugs perhaps, and by the time the Neo is
released to customers, A2DP will be there.

> Yes, and that's why I defend the iPhone; because I think it will do more to
> open up service plans and change the closed WM/cell providers than anything.
> Actually, beyond open groups (which I think are laudable in intention, but
> won't change anything in the short term), there is no other competition. I
> think once the iPhone rips the system open, there will be more opportunities
> for Linux and other platforms.

I too like the iPhone for these capabilities, however, I dislike how
you downplay the efforts of a company who obviously started a year and
some later, to where they have come with their newest software beta in
only a short 6 months.

> On the desktop, Linux has made little progress. But once the dominant
> position of MS is pulled back, I think Linux will be able to rapidly expand
> into low cost PCs and then accelerate gains rapidly. But it's never going to
> make any progress without a commercial backer. Apple has the
> funds/marketing/capacity to make a change.

Little by little, more people will come to realize that the market
needs more competition and more development will come from that.

If you consider how Apple and Microsoft both had to try and win their
marketshare, in the beginning it was a draw.  Compare their positions
with Linux now, and it only takes time.

> That's why I find it strange to see Linux OpenMoko users attacking the
> iPhone and suggesting that the Neo1973 is in the same ballpark. It is not.
> It gets idiot sites like Gagmodo to print ridiculous stuff.
Not yet, but it will be.  Give it time.  I ask you to look over this
article and the iPhones progress, by the time the consumer release is
out, and has had the same length of software development as apple had
in-house before their full consumer release.  After this, then we can
compare ripe fruits.

> Sun talks; it has no intention of doing anything. LG's Prada is also a great
> disappointment. I'm all for competition, I just want to see better products,
> not false comparisons. I took the Prada apart as well.

And, as I keep reiterating, with the large effort underway by the
community, better things will come in time.  A successful PDA was not
invented with 1 device, there are constant revisions to make it better
and constant competitors to offer new perspectives.

Who's to say what has and hasn't been done with a touchscreen phone as
of this very instant is any more or less important than what people 1
year from now, or even 5 years from now will imagine and make

Keep in mind that there are about 5 different OpenMoko devices on the
horizon, not all phones.  You limit your scope to 1 completed,
shipped, entertaining thousands nationwide phone compared against
another phone that isn't even mature yet.  I find this a rather unfair

Plus seem to base a lot of your opinion on the looks and the now,
rather than what it will be capable of in the future.

> I believe Apple said it began work on the iPhone mid 2004.

Then that would make them about a year and a half ahead of FIC for
hardware and basic firmware stuff, and approximately 3 years ahead of
the community effort that will create its software.  Please re-visit
this comparison in about 2 years.

> I appreciate your comments.

I appreciate your reply.

> Let me know whether you refute the quotes from Sean about the "anti-iPhone"
> and "dual bootable WM phone," or have just changed positions, and I can
> write a followup clarification.

I have changed my position on the "anti-iPhone" quote.  This was a
quote made, but the whole community doesn't really see it as such,
because in time it can be so much more: a start of a whole new
portable computing, life-enhancing experience.

Regarding dual booting, while I no longer dispute that they said the
design was originally intended for China, and that it matches FIC's
position on making sure the hardware is compatible with both systems,
I DO dispute your claims that buying this phone supports windows
mobile, and that FIC is little more than a cheap knockoff making
company  in-bed with Microsoft.

This is quite far from what FIC actually does, and who they actually
are in the OEM/ODM market.

> Dan


(DISCLAIMER: I am a member of the community, with no actual phone
hardware yet.  I do not attempt to speak on official behalf of FIC or
the OpenMoko core development team.   I simply see disinformation, and
wish to rectify it, so that a broader spectrum of people are able to
get a clear view on what OpenMoko is trying to accomplish.)

I am waiting for the release with the faster cpu/3d/wifi, as I require
these features for what I wish to create for this device.

(C)2007 Mike Hodson under the Creative Commons Attribution v3.0
License. (

More information about the community mailing list