Jason wrote: > Sean McNeil wrote: > [...] > >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >> >>> Excuse me if I'm going a little out of topic, but, will some polemic >>> features like [1] and [2] be removed, so the platform is a bit "more >>> free"? >>> >>> [1] >>> http://alsutton.wordpress.com/2008/10/22/android-the-not-so-open-open-platform/ >>> >>> >> This is related to phones from companies that need or want to control >> access to their hardware. Google has nothing to do with this except to >> provide for security through certificates. This is a good idea and I >> think OM will have one, but it doesn't mean there will be anything >> closed source on the OM phones. It will remain open. >> >> > > We have different definitions of open, then. ;-) By yours, Tivo is > open because it uses linux. By my definition, open means you can change > the device to your liking. My main concern is this article: > > http://www.eetimes.com/rss/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=211300198&cid=RSSfeed_eetimes_newsRSS > > Which led me to discover this: > > http://www.mocana.com/NanoPhone-Android.html > > In particular: > > "NanoBoot™: Provides all the tools and firmware source code needed to > perform pre-boot verification. NanoBoot uses strong cryptography to > validate the BIOS, firmware, and boot loader images and can run in > memory-constrained environments (depending on cryptographic > configuration), requiring less than 8 KB uncompressed firmware space and > less than 2 KB of RAM." > > Please understand, I'm not opposed to Android at all. The more open > (viewable) code, the better. I'm just getting frustrated with getting > my hopes up, then seeing the crap I referred to above. > > Note: the EETimes article was put out only one day before the G1 hit the > streets... > > >>> [2] >>> http://www.engadget.com/2008/10/16/google-implemented-an-android-kill-switch-those-rascals/ >>> >>> >>> >> I'm not sure exactly what is being discussed here. Since Android is open >> source, if there is a kill switch it can be removed. I think they are >> talking about removing things from their version of the application market. >> >> > > I don't mind a kill switch for apps downloaded through Google. There > needs to be a "safe download zone" for users who have no desire to hack > their phone. But if I compile it and load it myself, they should leave > it alone. > > If the kill switch is NanoBoot, you're going to have a hard time > deleting that. >
Don't forget, this is OM. You are free to use whatever you like on them. You don't have to use NanoBoot to run Android. _______________________________________________ devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
