On Friday February 15 2008 13:54:27 Brandon Kruse wrote: > In that case it is not an open phone or platform. It is well worth the > investigation to go fully open somehow IMO. > > But I guess we could be like olpc and have a MOSTLY open platform > (wifi chip is not, as you could have guessed) > Basically what I thought was:
a customer buys a phone with whatever firmware is in it and what ever mechanism the OS uses to upload it to the hardware on startup if necessary; if a customer wants to update/upgrade firmware then one has to download a binary update app (say from OM website) and the firmware update itself (from OM or a hardware vendor). Then install the app, the firmware and be happy about new features/speed and the fact that there is a (small) binary module on his/her system he/she knows nothing about. Alternatively, one can send the phone to OM and request an firmware update; Alternatively, one can refuse to put anything non-FOSS on the phone and live happily with (presumably buggy/malfunctioning) existing firmware and try to fix any problems the FOSS-way. I do not think OM can achieve *completely* (=absolutely) open OS with any sensible effort. Let's be realistic. What OM/community needs to decide is the degree (or ratio) of open to non-open soft. I would not even demand a certain, community decided API from firmware vendors -- just that they *open* whatever API they have. The greatest problem for community to produce software is not that some API has changed: it's when API is not available in the first place. So, let's get the functioning hardware in our hands -- there is plenty of things to do beyond firmware updates. M. _______________________________________________ OpenMoko community mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
