When is the next and more powerful openmoko releasing
bneil at rochester.rr.com
Thu Aug 12 23:35:22 CEST 2010
On Thu, 12 Aug 2010 15:55:21 +0200
"Dr. Michael Lauer" <mickey at vanille-media.de> wrote:
> Hi Sriranjan,
> as far as i know, openmoko is no longer working on phones.
That does seem to be the case and it is a shame.
> Unfortunately the freedom loving people are doomed to either work on
> anti-vendor-ports (such as HTC devices etc.) or live with one of the
> semi-free alternatives (Palm Pre, Nokia N900). Right now there is no
> device rivaling the FreeRunner's openness, nothing comes close.
I wouldn't necessarily color all ports of FOSS as anti-vendor. In fact
don't they demonstrate the versatility and adaptability of FOSS in
relation to all hardware, especially hardware that isn't open? That's a
good thing if the goal is to strive towards choice for consumers.
Granted it's not the ideal situation but it is a step in the right
> I don't see that changing soon.
Call me a glass half-full person but I have to disagree with you here.
The fact that more ARM based mobile devices are becoming ubiquitous is
going to drive prices down and will also drive innovation and quality up
right? That's a good thing in my book, just as MS-DOS and Windows drove
down the cost of hardware in the PC field. I do not however use or
endorse Microsoft products but I do give them credit for helping to
accelerate hardware development and make it more affordable.
I'm not a lawyer and I wouldn't wish that upon my worst enemy but the
international maze of patent and trade agreements must cost an absolute
fortune to feed. It's ironic in a way, since the whole concept behind
patents is to protect the inventor and allow them to recoup R&D costs.
It certainly wasn't envisioned as a means to create an unlimited cash
cow that stifles innovation by threat of lawsuits which lead to
bankruptcy. Correct me if I'm wrong but that's the sort of thing people
like us that champion openness argue against right?
The only reason why FOSS exists and will continue to exist is because
there's nobody to bankrupt or buy out. We already know FOSS pays in
spades just ask Google, IBM, Redhat etc. So why haven't the hardware
manufacturers figured this out yet? I think they've come to the
conclusion that the status quo suits them just fine.
Too bad, it's stories like this one that illustrate what open hardware
can accomplish that inspire me:
Industrial collusion can be dangerous; it isn't always a bad thing
provided it's monitored, sanctioned, and most of all open. That story
is inspiring mainly due to it's human interest aspect. I'd like to see
this sort of collusion in industry especially in aspects that affect
all of us like pollution, food production, medicine etc. It's still
baffling to me that industry just doesn't get it yet.
More information about the community