Qtopia coming for Neo1973

thomas.cooksey at bt.com thomas.cooksey at bt.com
Wed Sep 19 15:03:43 CEST 2007

>My thoughts that competition has it's advantages and both of the
>technologies will find their fans. But Trolltech and Openmoko should
>cooperate with each other first of all in terms of integration of PIM
>data. Do you really need dual-booting (or other possibility to start
>either Qtopia or Openmoko) without possibility to synchronize address book
>etc between them? Of course, the best case from my point of view is to
>have the same low-level infrastructure (I mean API's to GSM-part, to
>PIM-part, etc.) for both Qtopia and Openmoko, but differ in the GUI part.
>But it is too late to talk about this as I can see :).

This is something someone else touched on. If you're writing an application, abstract all the complicated stuff away from the UI code, then you can make whatever kind of UI you want. NetworkManager I think is a perfect example of this. It would be good to have a defined interface to access PIM info, make calls etc. I believe LiPS has been set up to do just that. So perhaps it would be better to make moth OpenMoko & Qtopia PE LiPS complient. I heard that the LiPS forum hired a load of GPE PE developers to develop a reference implementation. It might be worth looking at GPE PE and lifting some of the standardised bits. I don't know, perhaps this is happening already?

One more thing on duplication of effort... It's nice to see OpenHand developers working on OpenMoko, are there any plans to merge Sato into OpenMoko? There's currently 4 GTK+ mobile phone frameworks I know of (GPE PE, Sato, OpenMoko & Hiker). Surely no one can claim that much duplicated effort is a good thing? I can see the argument for KDE/Gnome, GTK+/QT, but not 4 projects all relying on the same technology all doing exactly the same thing.

More information about the community mailing list