On 8/31/07, Daniel Eran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 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. http://www.umtsworld.com/technology/frequencies.htm 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 time..to 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 drivers. 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. http://www.cradlepoint.com/ctr350/ctr350.php 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: http://wiki.openmoko.org/wiki/Neo1973:_GTA01Bv4_versus_GTA02_comparison 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 wrong. > 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 market. > 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 sets. 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 possible. 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 comparison. 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 Mike (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. (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/) _______________________________________________ OpenMoko community mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
