Ogg Vorbis Chips for Neo3000? :-)
Hi, Thought http://hardware.slashdot.org/hardware/07/02/06/1931244.shtml was interesting - it would be cool to have an OGG decoder onboard a future Neo for iPhone style music-player/phone hybrid functionality in the free software context :-) -- Regards, Dave ___ OpenMoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org https://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Please no crossposting! Re: Information regarding theMessaging Support in OpenMoko
On 02/02/07, Gabriel Ambuehl [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Friday 02 February 2007 13:43:52 Dave Crossland wrote: For the recipients who are on Jabber (such as Jabber conversant phones) this is a good idea. For everyone else, MMS as the least preferred but available option is quite neccessary. Tho I do wonder how much GPRS traffic it would generate to constantly be connect to a Jabber server? I imagine that low bandwidth proxies will emerge for all kinds of protocols both as the developed-world power users like OpenMoko owners want cheap omnipresence, and as the developing world wants to make best use of very limited bandwidth available. www.loband.org is a web proxy that does this, designed for the 3rd world, and I use it on my mobile often. -- Regards, Dave ___ OpenMoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org https://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Another GPS post from a GL engineer
On 29/01/07, Sean Moss-Pultz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: OpenMokoids LOL I hope this phrase is somewhere in the official documentation :-) -- Regards, Dave ___ OpenMoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org https://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: GNU discussion (was re:Free your phone)
On 24/01/07, Gabriel Ambuehl [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: And besides, the BSDL predates the GPLv1 by a decade. This is simply untrue. I have done some research on this: http://books.google.co.uk/books?q=%22at%26t+source+license%22+BSD In 1989 the Networking Tape 1 was released; this was the first time that BSD UNIX code was available to anyone without a very expensive proprietary license from ATT. An ATT source license in 1988 could cost as much as $100,000, making it prohibitive for many would-be users of BSD. And many would argue (I certainly do, but obviously not the FSF) that the BSDL is much more free than the GPL. The freedom to become less free is a paradox. http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/why-copyleft.html explains why copyleft licenses like the GPL are better than permissive free software licenses like the revised BSD license. -- Regards, Dave ___ OpenMoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org https://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: GNU discussion (was re:Free your phone)
On 27/01/07, Gabriel Ambuehl [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Saturday 27 January 2007 12:23:52 Dave Crossland wrote: And besides, the BSDL predates the GPLv1 by a decade. This is simply untrue. I have done some research on this: http://books.google.co.uk/books?q=%22at%26t+source+license%22+BSD In 1989 the Networking Tape 1 was released; this was the first time that BSD UNIX code was available to anyone without a very expensive proprietary license from ATT. That does in no way proof me wrong. Before that, there was always some ATT code in BSD, so it wasn't completely BSDL and couldnt not be used without permission from ATT. THat doesn't say the BSDL didnt exist. I genuinely, sincerely would appreciate it if you found some reference for this, other than you saying it. Because the reference I just stated contradicts you: In June 1989 the Berkeley group took just this approach, releasing the TCP/IP code and a set of supporting utilities that had been written without any ATT code as 'Networking Release 1.' 'Networking Release 1 came with generous licensing terms. This was the first example of what would later be called a BSD-style license. http://books.google.co.uk/books?q=%22came+with+generous+licensing+terms%22 -- Regards, Dave ___ OpenMoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org https://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: GNU discussion (was re:Free your phone)
(offlist) On 27/01/07, David Schlesinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This is simply untrue. The fact is, as originally stated, that the BSD preceded the GPL (by two years or ten) I would really appeciate some evidence of this. Here my evidence that the original BSD license was first used in 1989, the same year as the original GPL: In June 1989 the Berkeley group took just this approach, releasing the TCP/IP code and a set of supporting utilities that had been written without any ATT code as 'Networking Release 1.' 'Networking Release 1 came with generous licensing terms. This was the first example of what would later be called a BSD-style license. - http://books.google.co.uk/books?q=%22came+with+generous+licensing+terms%22 -- Regards, Dave ___ OpenMoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org https://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Make it easy to voluntarily pay for free OpenMoko software?
On 26/01/07, Mikko Rauhala [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
to, 2007-01-25 kello 22:56 +, Dave Crossland kirjoitti:
Many free software projects accept donations, and if you are willing
to pay the developers after enjoying their software, I feel it is
important to donate a little.
Indeed. Which brings to mind that should/could OpenMoko provide some
framework to make it easier to pass a few bucks to a developer of a
nifty free app
I am totally all in favour of this - but I am not (yet...) a
developer, merely a user, and can't help things myself :-/
if successful, it would perhaps serve to make the distiction between
beer and speech free more apparent. ('course, it could be used by
non-free software developers as well, but whatever.)
Yes, I think so. You might find
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/selling.html interesting on this subject
:-)
--
Regards,
Dave
___
OpenMoko community mailing list
community@lists.openmoko.org
https://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Reactions From Other People to News of OpenMoko
On 26/01/07, Ben F-W [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: if you tie that to a more specific example, it might help to get the concept across. I usually point out how the priorities of end users and those of operators differ: and it's the operators who are the manufacturer's biggest customers. For example, some phones put Send an MMS above Send an SMS on a menu Yes, totally - being able to reconfigure your menus to the order that you most commonly use (or even to have the option of the phone doing this automatically, so it 'naturally smooths' to your common usage) is an example I have used. I have also used the example of the 'home screen' having a simple graph of how many inclusive minutes your subscription plan has in total, and how many are remaining, and when you go to make a call, an indication of the cost per minute to that number at this time, if it is not in the inclusive minutes. Operaters would utterly, utterly, hate this kind of feature, but I can't think of any user who wouldn't want it :-) -- Regards, Dave ___ OpenMoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org https://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Possibilities for commercial software?
On 26/01/07, Dean Collins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Dave, whilst all software is free - rent isn't (oh and that nasty habit of eating every 6-8 hours is a real bitch as well). Of course there will be commercial software available for the OpenMoko community. If this is commercial free software, that is fantastic :-) If this is commercial proprietary software, that is a real shame :-( And once a developer puts a price on an application, should you 'share' or 'unauthorise copy' an application then you are a pirate. Are you seriously telling me that all your software is licensed, and you never, ever, do anything outside the license terms? :-) Unless of course you don't mind me coming over and 'sharing' your refrigerator. I would mind because you can't copy food in the refrigerator. If you took it without asking, that would be stealing, and stealing is wrong. But copying isn't stealing. If I shoplift some food from my local store, no one else can buy it. But when I copy software, no one loses it and another person gets it. There's no ethical problem. -- Regards, Dave ___ OpenMoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org https://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: A cool device must have a powerfull e-book reader
On 25/01/07, Ketut P. Kumajaya [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I have ported FBReader for Motorola E680i/A780 mobile phone and I am sure FBReader author only need a couple hour time to make it run on OpenMoko if he has access to OpenMoko device. http://only.mawhrin.net/fbreader I can't see a way to donate to your project. Perhaps you could consider setting up a way for happy users to donate to your project, in time for when the Neo is on sale? :-) -- Regards, Dave ___ OpenMoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org https://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Possibilities for commercial software?
-- Forwarded message -- From: Dave Crossland [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 26-Jan-2007 18:06 Subject: Re: Possibilities for commercial software? To: Peter A Trotter [EMAIL PROTECTED] (offlist) On 26/01/07, Peter A Trotter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: proprietary software. If you want to sell that through the market place then it should be just as easy. if you want drm to lock down your app then I don't want that in any way to impact ease of use of the market place - deal with that yourself. Could you explain the difference between proprietary software with a license that legally tries to get users to only use on one computer at a time, no studying, no sharing, and proprietary software that uses DRM to technically prohibit these things? -- Regards, Dave ___ OpenMoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org https://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Possibilities for commercial software?
On 26/01/07, Jonathon Suggs [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I really hate to get in on this discussion Talking about freedom is important, so thank you for your polite and rational contribution. Dave Crossland wrote: But when I copy software, no one loses it and another person gets it. There's no ethical problem. Sorry Dave, but you are wrong. There IS an ethical problem. Just because you CAN do something doesn't mean that you should. I agree that software (in most cases, but is still ultimately up to the creator) *should* be open and free as in speech. But whether or not it should be free as in beer is not your decision to make...it is the creators. So, just because you can share the software, doesn't mean that you should. If you do, then yes...you have an ethical problem...sorry. I'm sorry if my message was not clear. I totally agree with you. The original point was: It doesn't make sense to equate copying digital information with stealing physical objects. Of course, if you have an agreement not to copy, it is wrong to break that agreement. But it is more wrong to not share with your friends. Most people have an intuitive understanding of this, and share unauthorised copies. The agreement not to copy is based on copyright law, and this was originally created to benefit the public when they could not make their own copies. Now that we can make our own copies, a law prohibiting copying does not benefit us, so we break it. Most people have an intuitive understanding of this. How can we escape this moral dilemma, where we are being unethical with either choice? We can refuse to use proprietary software, and only use software that can share legally. That is the best thing to do. Besides, if you find the software useful don't you want to help in succeed? The software is only useful in so far as it benefits us. If it tries to divide our communities by prohibiting sharing, and makes us helpless to see how it works or change it, I don't think it benefits us. So I think it deserves to fail :-) -- Regards, Dave ___ OpenMoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org https://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Possibilities for commercial software?
On 26/01/07, David Schlesinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: See whether you get charged with something like theft (or infringement of copyright, which is tantamount to theft...) Infringement of copyright is very, very different to theft. If I shoplift some food from my local store, no one else can buy it. But when I copy software, no one loses it and another person gets it. There's no ethical problem. Um, wow. There's no ethical problem, perhaps, as long as the author's agreed that you can give away copies of his work. Yes, I agree. Otherwise, there's a very large ethical problem, which you seem to be inexplicably unaware of, somehow. No, I think we are discussing at cross purposes. If it's not the author's wish that the software be freely copy-able, which is certainly a desire the author's quite entitled to have I am less certain, and judging from most people's actions, I think you are in quite a minority with this belief. I mean, most iPods are full of unauthorised copies, even if some of their tracks are licensed from the iTunes Music Store. you simply have no right whatsoever to make (i.e. publish) copies of a copyrighted work and give them away. It's illegal. I'm astounded that breaking the law this way presents no ethical problem for you. It is illegal, but the law is not an authority on ethics. It is, at best, an attempt to achieve justice. You seem to be saying, If copying is forbidden, it must be wrong. But the legal system - at least in the US - rejects the idea that copyright infringement is theft. You are making an appeal to authority, but misrepresenting what that authority says. The idea that laws decide what is right or wrong is mistaken in general. To say that laws define justice or ethical conduct is turning things upside down. If you copy software (music, books, other media, etc.) without permission of the author, there most certainly _is_ an ethical problem: you're stealing the possibility of selling a properly paid-for copy from the author. I'm not sure you can steal a possibility. Or do you believe that it's unethical for an author to a) want to be paid for his work No, it is totally legitimate for them to want payment, and for us to pay them. and/or b) be able to set the terms under which his work is made available...? No, I am not against this. Afterall, without authors being able to set the terms under which their work is made available, we would have no free software :-) As always, thanks for taking the time to discuss issues of freedom and community with me. -- Regards, Dave ___ OpenMoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org https://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Free This Mailing List!
On 24/01/07, Richard Bennett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wednesday 24 January 2007 21:05, David Ford wrote: Please do not personally CC: me on this silly thread. I am subscribed to the list. I think this is a problem for people using Outlook or Gmail Yes, I am a GMail user, and apologies for this if it has annoyed people. Proprietary webapps, eh? :-) -- Regards, Dave ___ OpenMoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org https://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Reactions From Other People to News of OpenMoko
On 25/01/07, Bryan Fink [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Also surprisingly, the one truly negatively-excited person I met said exactly this, Great, so I'll have a phone that just randomly crashes for no reason. I know that he has run Red Hat Linux, and codes for a living. But, he has had poor experience with linux stability - specifically around crappy drivers for new graphics accelerators. Maybe you could point out that those drivers are proprietary software, which is why they are so buggy? :-) -- Regards, Dave ___ OpenMoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org https://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Reactions From Other People to News of OpenMoko
On 25/01/07, Wil Chung [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'd imagine if you draw parallels to the internet, the issue of malware and viruses inevitably crop up. Just telling people Linux is more secure probably doesn't alleviate fears. I probably wouldn't know what to say. Anyone wanna take that one? Malware and viruses occur in proprietary software, because they rely on problems that go unfixed. When software is free, the problems get fixed very quickly in the short term - like in hours or days instead of week or months. In the long term, smart ways to do things in general are used, and these mean problems are not even possible to arise in the first place. That's basically how I field this question when it comes up in my GNU/Linux speeches :-) -- Regards, Dave ___ OpenMoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org https://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Reactions From Other People to News of OpenMoko
On 25/01/07, Robert Michel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I was thinking, if the OpenMoko phone had an easy way for people to add applications like the Widgets, the average user would like it. ( I would be willing to pay the developer after a trial). I guess the most software will be free... Many free software projects accept donations, and if you are willing to pay the developers after enjoying their software, I feel it is important to donate a little. Free software is about 'without restrictions' not 'without paying,' like free speech instead of free beer :-) -- Regards, Dave ___ OpenMoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org https://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: GNU discussion (was re:Free your phone)
Hi Sean, On 23/01/07, David Ford [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You must be reading a different link. Sean's email most clearly states in the form of a user's manual that will give credit to GNU. He also clearly stated We'll just call it OpenMoko. Could you confirm that if FIC writes that OpenMoko is based on a popular free software operating system, that will be described as GNU/Linux instead of Linux? -- Regards, Dave ___ OpenMoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org https://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Ready For Prime Time?
On 24/01/07, Duncan Hudson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm starting to get excited about the phone, and I really don't want to see my hopes dashed. Has an FCC filing been made, is the phone ready to go? I believe so. From http://lists.openmoko.org/pipermail/community/2007-January/001586.html : 2007-03-11 Phase 1: Official Developer Launch We will sell the Neo1973 direct from openmoko.com for US$350 plus shipping. Sales and orders will be worldwide. We are specifically targeting open source community developers. What about the multi-point touch screen? It's wonderful, but doesn't Apple have a patent on that? Kinda. http://hrmpf.com/wordpress/48/new-apple-patents/ http://hrmpf.com/wordpress/51/apple-multipoint-touchscreen/ Of particular interest to OpenMoko developers will be http://www.fingerworks.com/gesture_guide_mouse.html :-) Good background story at http://crunchgear.com/2007/01/15/multi-touch-technology-and-where-its-going-nextoh-and-apple-didnt-invent-it-either/ -- Regards, Dave ___ OpenMoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org https://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: When Good Agendas Turn Bad - Linux/GNU, etc
On 24/01/07, Richard Franks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If we were to lose the FSF perspective at any stage down the road, then we could end up only able to buy highly sophisticated yet crippled devices which actively impose upon our Freedoms. Like now, but worse. In that sense, I imagine the Neo1973 as a platform which furthers the aims of the FSF through its success.. and retains its integrity through that symbiotic relationship. Calling the operating system GNU/Linux says a lot about the values of a company in relation to the FSF. The presence of a proprietary userland binary in the main/official distribution makes it a crippled device which actively impose upon our Freedoms. This may be okay if it can be simply removed without effecting the rest of the system, ipkg remove proprietary-agpsd-style, especially if the software is for a subscription service that many users will not use anyway. -- Regards, Dave ___ OpenMoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org https://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
T Shirts (WAS: Re: Free Your Phone)
On 22/01/07, Sven Neuhaus [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Sean Moss-Pultz wrote: On 1/22/07 4:46 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Reason I ask is I'd like to propose an OpenMoko T-shirt, with the now-official tag-line. I'd buy and where that right away. Michael, wishing for Free Your Phone T-shirts and stickers Coming soon... ;-) I hope I can order one together with the phone, lowers cost of shipping :) LOL Yes that's a fanstastic idea! Sean, will there be a community competition on the design of the shirts? If not for the first edition, which is understandable for reasons of expediency, I hope there will be one later this year :-) The Open Clip Art Library has run design contests, for the Inkscape logo for example, and *example* details are at http://www.openclipart.org/wiki/Contests that might give you some ideas about how to run things. -- Regards, Dave ___ OpenMoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org https://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: GNU discussion (was re:Free your phone)
On 22/01/07, Andreas Kostyrka [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: * Renaissance Man [EMAIL PROTECTED] [070122 01:38]: I actually become aware of the FS movement via the GNU moniker, so it worked on me. For many years I was only aware of the OS movement (through knowing about Linux). Guess you wasn't to much interested in the license of the software you use? Well, I'm certainly a freak for checking the license of anything new first. *g* Yes, and the GNU GPL's introduction text is a very well written introduction to the GNU project. However, there are many people who have heard of Linux and open source and have never read any software licenses. Proprietary EULAs are so full of legal language non-sense, the idea that a software license could be interesting is very strange :-) The only way that people hear about GNU is by other people talking about it. This is why it is important that the operating system we love, which was started by the GNU project, makes -- Regards, Dave ___ OpenMoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org https://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: GNU discussion (was re:Free your phone)
(sorry for the premature post) On 22/01/07, Andreas Kostyrka [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: * Renaissance Man [EMAIL PROTECTED] [070122 01:38]: I actually become aware of the FS movement via the GNU moniker, so it worked on me. For many years I was only aware of the OS movement (through knowing about Linux). Guess you wasn't to much interested in the license of the software you use? Well, I'm certainly a freak for checking the license of anything new first. *g* Yes, and the GNU GPL's introduction text is a very well written introduction to the GNU project. However, there are many people who have heard of Linux and open source and have never read any software licenses. Proprietary EULAs are so full of legal language non-sense, the idea that a software license could be interesting is very strange :-) The only way that people hear about GNU is by other people talking about it. This is why it is important that the operating system we love, which was started in the GNU project, says that it is a variant of the GNU system plus the Linux kernel. This is well explained in the essay at http://www.gnu.org/gnu/why-gnu-linux.html -- Regards, Dave ___ OpenMoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org https://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: GNU discussion (was re:Free your phone)
On 22/01/07, Marcel de Jong [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 1/21/07, Dave Crossland [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If more people are aware of why freedom and community matter, then they will buy more products that support freedom and community, like more Neos. How does adding three more letters and a / increase people's knowledge on free and open software? I like to be accurate and know what I am talking about, and I like others to be too :-) If you name the system Linux, you suggest a version of the system's origin, history, and purpose that is not true. If you call it GNU/Linux, you present a more accurate idea. This is explained in depth at http://www.gnu.org/gnu/why-gnu-linux.html Joe Schmoe goes into a store to buy a new phone. He sees a large selection of phones in the store. He's in the market of a smartphone, so he choses the department of smartphones. And then goes looking at the specs and the software bundled with the phone. He sees that he can choose between phones that run Microsoft Windows Mobile, Symbian, PalmOS, Nokia proprietary OS, Sony/Ericsson proprietary OS, and GNU/Linux. Then looks at the software. Okay, Windows has a nice layout, and has some really nice apps. PalmOS' UI is nicely integrated, all apps look decent, though the input system is something to get used to. Symbian looks dated and both S/E's as well as Nokia's system look clunky. The GNU/Linux package looks nice too, and look this one even has GPS built-in, and has all accessories added in the bundle for merely $350! That looks like a great system. I'll take it. Joe is judging these phones on purely practical values. The Free Software concept is that there are things more important than practical values - although it does not say that pratical values are unimportant, they clearly are very important. What is more important than practical values? Community and freedom. Joe Schmoe doesn't care whether it's GNU/Linux or 'just' Linux. It's not as if he's going to Google GNU/Linux while he's in the store to find out the core-principles of the software. It is exactely as if he is going to do that :-) RenaissanceMan has posted in this thread that he has done just that. What he does care about is that It Just Works(tm). If he has never had a smartphone before, he is likely to only care for practical values like if it just works. But if he has owned a smartphone before, he will likely be frustrated with the restrictions that it has imposed on him, because of its proprietary nature. That is why there is such buzz around OpenMoko: At last, a chance to escape proprietary restrictions and get the same freedom and community we are used to with our desktops and laptops :-) If he takes it out of the box, and charges the unit does the phone work, can he call his buddies to tell about his new acquisition, can he text his mates, can he use the calendar? It should just work, and easily without having to hack the system. (this should especially hold true for the 'consumer phone' that was announced in Openmoko's press release) Calling the system GNU/Linux instead of Linux will not effect this, at all. Sure, credit where credit is due, and I don't see any problem with having the manual refer to GNU/Linux (but I also have no qualms if it doesn't). It would be unfair if it didn't. I like to be fair. But I think it's a bit farfetched to attribute 3 letters and a / to all-customer awareness of the principles behind it. For many years the idea of a free software operating system was far fetched. These principles are quite potent, I'd say :-) If someone buys the phone merely on the grounds that it runs Linux, chances are he or she is already aware of the history and ideals behind GNU and Linux. I disagree. The ideas behind the GNU system and the Linux kernel are very different, and many GNU/Linux users believe the system was started in 1991, by a student, for fun. This is sustained by calling the system Linux instead of GNU/Linux. Let's not get lost in this bottomless pit of misconceptions and well-intended suggestions. Yes, by remaining polite and rational :-) And let's focus our efforts on making this phone a device which Just Works! :) I have no doubt about that :-) -- Regards, Dave ___ OpenMoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org https://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: how to get the video Re: Sean interview
On 22/01/07, Robert Michel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Is it available in a downloadable format for people who can't view Flash movies? (I'm running Linux on a PPC machine here, so nothing from Adobe...) hmm I found this http://www.arrakis.es/~rggi3/youtube-dl/ www.keepvid.com does what this does :-) -- Regards, Dave ___ OpenMoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org https://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: GNU discussion (was re:Free your phone)
On 22/01/07, MR [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I just joined the mailing list but if the point of this thread is about whether the manual/box/website for openmoko should refer to it using Linux or GNU/Linux then I am 100% whole heartedly behind GNU/Linux. That's originally what this thead was about, yes. It's not clear which term FIC will adopt for their release at this point. But they did say that they will promote OpenMoko more than anything else as the name for the system, probably for the reasons you cited :-) If there were the possibility of replacing the kernel with say a cut down bsd kernel (just an example) but keeping all the GNU tools There is this possibility: http://www.gnusolaris.org and http://www.debian.org/ports/kfreebsd-gnu/ :-) -- Regards, Dave ___ OpenMoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org https://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Free Your Phone
Hi Sean! On 21/01/07, Sean Moss-Pultz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 1/21/07 4:57 AM, Dave Crossland [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 20/01/07, Sean Moss-Pultz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: the OpenMoko Linux Distribution Can the FIC marketting department call it 'the OpenMoko GNU/Linux Distribution'? We'll just call it OpenMoko. Okay cool :-) I think short simple branding will be key for us if we want main stream appeal. I agree Don't worry though, I have something special in the form of a user's manual that will give credit to GNU. Given the quality of the OP, I look forward to reading this! :-) Given that the free software nature of the phone is its primary feature, it seems strange not to acknowledge the GNU project, which is the whole reason there is free software at all... We will definitely acknowledge this. Awesome! Join us. Free Your Phone. I totally love this catch phrase! I hope that the FIC marketting uses it as the official tagline of all its openmoko devices! It will for sure! This just popped into my head one day while taking a shower. I think it's really started to stick. Plus somebody who knows _nothing_ about Free Software can still related to it. Yes yes yes :-) Best, -- Regards, Dave ___ OpenMoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org https://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Free Your Phone
On 20/01/07, Declan Naughton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Join us. Free Your Phone. I totally love this catch phrase! I hope that the FIC marketting uses it as the official tagline of all its openmoko devices! If freedom is a real goal then I agree. And I'm not so sure that is is. It seems this is more about the technical merit of being community developed, to anything else. Is this because the GPS daemon is proprietary? Other than that, Sean and the FIC team seem to value freedom very much, and for that I am grateful :-) -- Regards, Dave ___ OpenMoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org https://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Free Your Phone
On 20/01/07, Richard Franks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Changing the system title to include GNU/Linux, would increase public awareness of GNU, but I don't see how it would directly improve the technology or how it would sell more Neo's If more people are aware of why freedom and community matter, then they will buy more products that support freedom and community, like more Neos. These concept emanate mainly from the GNU Project. We're the ones who talk about freedom and community as something to stand firm for; the organizations that speak of Linux normally don't say this. The magazines about Linux are typically full of ads for non-free software; the companies that package Linux add non-free software to the system; other companies support Linux with non-free applications; the user groups for Linux typically invite salesman to present those applications. The main place people in our community are likely to come across the idea of freedom and determination is in the GNU Project. - http://www.gnu.org/gnu/why-gnu-linux.html and thus it feels more like agenda-pushing. The whole Free Software concept is an agenda, and it needs pushing badly. Without that agenda being pushed in two decades ago, before a whole free software OS existed, there would probably be _zero_ free software today. With these upcoming DRM/Palladium stuff, unless this agenda is pushed, there will probably be no free software in two more decades. PS. Are there people who actually say GNU/Linux in conversation and/or correct themselves if they forget the GNU part? I don't forget ;-) And I tend to say 'guh-noo plus lin-ucks' out loud :-) -- Regards, Dave ___ OpenMoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org https://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Free Your Phone
On 20/01/07, Andreas Jellinghaus [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Credit whom credit is due. Either they accept that credit is givin to everyone, and that this is a long list, and that if people highlight some feature of their choice it is freedom of speach, or they don't. but the gnu way of placing themself before everone else is disgusting. I'd prefer if gnu was not given any special treatment. The GNU Project is the reason we have any Free Software in the first place. That it _was_ first, is why it comes first, why their contribution is so important. p.s. gnu also mentions on one cd they claim to have had the biggest contribution with about 28%. I doubt I can find more gnu code than kde code on my kubuntu. The KLOCs is a secondary concern, which points to the primary concerns: The system's origin, history, and purpose. -- Regards, Dave ___ OpenMoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org https://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Free Your Phone
On 21/01/07, Richard Franks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Although I support the goals of the FSF, I hold progress ahead of my political philosophy. To value a political stance over practical progress does go counter to our general culture, which encourages us to dismiss any philosophy that differs from its own as 'impractical'. But the FSF's political philosophy is extremely practical: it is why we have the GNU/Linux operating system at all. Again, I really recommend reading http://www.gnu.org/gnu/why-gnu-linux.html about this specifically, and http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/why-free.html in general. -- Regards, Dave ___ OpenMoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org https://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Free Your Phone
On 21/01/07, Corey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Personally, I never actually use the GNU/Linux identifier - but I can understand the logic and reasoning behind it, and it certainly doesn't bother me when other people use it. If you understand the reasoning, I'm curious why you don't use it..? :-) At any rate, it looks better written out, than how it sounds verbally. Verbally I say guh-noo plus lin-ucks, but GNU+Linux doesn't look at good when written out :-) -- Regards, Dave ___ OpenMoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org https://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Free Your Phone
On 21/01/07, David Ford [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: p.s. it's religious and for every one that feels GNU should be the sole title bearer, there is another that feels they should not. No one is advocating that GNU be the *sole* title bearer, although plenty of people are advocating that Linux be the sole title bearer. For the GNU Project to claim credit for the kernel would be unfair, just as for the Linux kernel project to claim credit for the operating system is also unfair. -- Regards, Dave ___ OpenMoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org https://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Free Your Phone
On 21/01/07, David Ford [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: in the near future someone else will ask openmoko to prefix their name with GNU and it'll start all over again. I did not ask OpenMoKo to prefix their name with GNU. I apologies if that was not clear. -- Regards, Dave ___ OpenMoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org https://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Free Your Phone
On 21/01/07, David Schlesinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Both my girlfriend and father are aware of Free Software and what it means. This is due to me coming across the FSF out of curiosity about GNU, and then passing that knowledge onto them. That's nice. I simply doubt that they'll be making cell phone purchasing decisions based on that knowledge. Runs free software doesn't appear on the checklist of features that the average person is looking for or cares about. That's unlikely to change. With the recent surge in very restrictive proprietary software - DRM/Treacherous Computing, especially in HD-DVD and BluRay devices like the PS3 and Vista - I think that this is very likely to change. -- Regards, Dave ___ OpenMoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org https://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: [OT] aims ( was Re: Free Your Phone )
On 21/01/07, Corey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sunday 21 January 2007 13:58, Milan Votava wrote: It would be nice to know if Sean's aim is 1. to satisfy his and our need for open source toys like Neo or 2. to earn money like almost everybody on this planet while exploiting geeks like us to achieve his goal :-) I bet the second will prove as true... What makes you think that both of those aims cannot be satisfied at the same time? Yes, I really think that both aims can be aligned, and that OpenMoko is looking like a good example of just this :-) -- Regards, Dave ___ OpenMoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org https://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: [openmoko-announce] Free Your Phone
On 20/01/07, Simon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Is there any code that would be running on the phone that won't be FOSS (ie. GPS daemon/driver )? If so, how easy will it be to find out which code is closed-source, and how dependent would the phone's functionality be on the closed-source code? This is the first thing I asked; you hit the nail on the head with the GPS daemon. That's the only thing, apparently, and so only the GPS functionality would depend on that daemon being there. Ideally just 'apt-get remove --purge'ing it away won't break anything... -- Regards, Dave ___ OpenMoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org https://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Free Your Phone
Hi Sean! On 20/01/07, Sean Moss-Pultz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: the OpenMoko Linux Distribution Can the FIC marketting department call it 'the OpenMoko GNU/Linux Distribution'? Given that the free software nature of the phone is its primary feature, it seems strange not to acknowledge the GNU project, which is the whole reason there is free software at all... Join us. Free Your Phone. I totally love this catch phrase! I hope that the FIC marketting uses it as the official tagline of all its openmoko devices! -- Regards, Dave ___ OpenMoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org https://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Free Your Phone
On 20/01/07, Koen Kooi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Dave Crossland schreef: Can the FIC marketting department call it 'the OpenMoko GNU/Linux Distribution'? How much GNU software must be present to call it a GNU/linux distribution? Do I still need to call it gnu/linux if I use uclibc and busybox? Looking back at the annoucement, I see: * gcc 4.1.1 * binutils 2.17.50.0.5 * glibc 2.4 * glib 2.6.4 * gtk 2.6.10 So IMO this is clearly a GNU/Linux system. -- Regards, Dave ___ OpenMoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org https://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: [openmoko-announce] Free Your Phone
On 20/01/07, Koen Kooi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This is the first thing I asked; you hit the nail on the head with the GPS daemon. That's the only thing, apparently, and so only the GPS functionality would depend on that daemon being there. Ideally just 'apt-get remove --purge'ing it away won't break anything... Especially since there is not apt or dpkg on the device. Yes you are right, I meant ipkg :-) http://handhelds.org/moin/moin.cgi/Ipkg -- Regards, Dave ___ OpenMoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org https://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Free Your Phone
On 20/01/07, Declan Naughton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What we say is that you ought to give the system's principal developer a share of the credit. The principal developer is the GNU Project, and the system is basically GNU. ... How about calling it the Open Moko *Operating System*? I don't think that's a good idea, because you ought to give the system's principal developer a share of the credit, hmm? :-) -- Regards, Dave ___ OpenMoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org https://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Free Your Phone
On 20/01/07, Declan Naughton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Open Moko Operating System, based on GNU/Linux. I think its safe to assume that the shorthand for the system will be plain 'OpenMoKo.' I was requesting that FIC's full title for the system replaces Linux with GNU/Linux for the good and clear reasons that we are familiar with, if it includes that name at all. -- Regards, Dave ___ OpenMoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org https://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Idea: Human screenning
On 15/01/07, Gervais Mulongoy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Heh, until the phone spam operators start using basic voice recognition and to defeat the simple riddle :p Spammers don't do email address de-obfuscation because it takes too much processing time; I can't see them doing this in practice :-) -- Regards, Dave ___ OpenMoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Apple iPhone
On 10/01/07, Attila Csipa [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Conceptually very similar to the FIC1973, with of course the added Apple candy and design team efforts. I wonder how the FIC1973's graphics capabilities will compare - all the slick XGL style swooshing around and zooming in makes the multitouch interface really 'wow!' -- Regards, Dave ___ OpenMoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Is it portable? [scanned]
On 05/12/06, Robert Michel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: AFAIK FIC is supporting OpenMoko to build a plattform for their hardware - so why should FIC support developer to publish drivers for Motorola devices inside the OpenMoko SDK? Is this similar to the idea that Apple should license OS X for generic computers, not just their own hardware? -- Regards, Dave ___ OpenMoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Can The Proprietary GPS Daemon Be Removed?
On 30/11/06, Sean Moss-Pultz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 11/30/06 1:17 AM, Dave Crossland [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm essentially asking if its theoretically possible that this phone might be FSF endorsed - non-free firmware is fine by the FSF as long as it is burned onto a ROM and can never present an ethical problem. I really don't know. But I sure hope so. That would be incredibly cool. :-) Is there any documentation somebody can point me to that would tell me about how to get their endorsement? No, excuse me while I write something similar :-) Firstly, I hope you're familiar with the actual FSF philosophy, and have read at least the first few essays on gnu.org/philosophy like say http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/shouldbefree.html - because I find a lot of people think they know what the FSF is about, without having read their essays first hand. Supposing this... :-) ...I'd say the best thing to do is to contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] directly. I bet they haven't heard what FIC is up to here, and, depending on if you see OpenMoko as a platform for 'mixed source innovation' or something, or as a 100% Free Software embedded device, I bet they could be very interested. However, straight up, while the proprietary GPS daemon is included by default, or in fact recommended/mentioned by OpenMoko, its not going to be endorsed by the FSF: We would especially like to know of other GNU/Linux distributions that have a policy not to include, or recommend, non-free software. Developers of such distros that wish us to be aware of their distributions should contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://www.gnu.org/links/links.html And a bit more of the reasoning behind this: When major institutions in our community develop non-free software, they tell the public that non-free software is ok. This weakens our community's resolve to maintain our freedom, and that weakness hurts our chances of surmounting each of the various obstacles that we face: hardware with secret specs, non-free tools and libraries such as Sun's Java platform, software patents, the DMCA, and the proposed SSSCA. When they make it tough to obtain free software for a certain job, will we persevere, or will we give in? Those who are willing to take the easy way out and use non-free software will not help us prevail. - http://www.softpanorama.org/People/Stallman/interviews.shtml However, for me, if the proprietary components are non-essential and easily and cleanly removable, I'll accept and wildly advocate OpenMoko because there simply isn't any alternative, other than not having a mobile phone. And I hope that as Moko starts delivering the industry-change it smells of, and starts to become a Free Software Movement success story like Wikipedia, the proprietary components can be replaced with Free ones in the next version, and then this won't be a problem for the FSF. Generally, I think the trend is that all proprietary components of all GNU/Linux systems are being replaced with free ones. When I started using GNU+Linux in 1999-2003, I used many proprietary components, and didn't appreciate what software freedom was or why it was important. I used an Apple powerbook 2003-2006 and For a while, the FSF couldn't recommend a GNU+Linux distribution because there wasn't one that didn't include or recommend non-free software. Debian is often thought of as the 'most free' mainstream distribution, but this isn't actually true, because it does both, and isn't going to stop doing either any time soon. Instead, Fedora has been on a mission to be 100% Open Source - so unlike Debian it doesn't have any non-free package repositories or refer to 3rd party ones in any way. But its policy is to accept OSI approved licenses which are not FSF approved, so it lacks FSF endorsement for the moment. This is turning towards Free Software though, with a recent Free Software Analysis - http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/FreeSoftwareAnalysis Compare this to say, Ubuntu, which tells a lot of noisy lies about how it is 100% Free, but is actually increasing the amount of proprietary software it includes year on year: No part of it will ever be proprietary, and we encourage people to use it, improve it and pass it on. - http://www.canonical.com/projects A large proportion of people using Ubuntu -- including 70%-80% of people with new computers -- need a non-Free driver for reasonable performance from their graphics card, wireless card, or modem, because there is no Free driver available, they had little choice in the matter. - http://www.desktoplinux.com/news/NS7895189911.html Ubuntu's contrary nature resulted in gNewSense 1.0, released last month and announced by the FSF, which is a Ubuntu derivitive that is a 100% Free Software operating system - and its important to know and remember that this is the *whole point* of Free Software :-) gNewSense firstly mirrors the 'free' sections of the Ubuntu repositories, and secondly, packages a custom Linux kernel with all the non-free
Re: Can The Proprietary GPS Daemon Be Removed?
On 28/11/06, Koen Kooi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: There are some minor, self-contained proprietary bits on the back end side in userspace. - http://gnumonks.org/~laforge/weblog/2006/11/08/ which appears to contradict In userspace, there only one single component that is not going to be under a Free Software License - http://gnumonks.org/~laforge/weblog/2006/11/08/ It isn't contradictory, since the complete GSM stack is on a seperate SoC Sorry, what is a seperate SoC? :-) and userspace only talks to it via AT commands (probably wrapped by gsmlib and Harald's line discipline). Okay, so all the GSM stuff is done in ROM? Or is this non-free firmware? -- Regards, Dave ___ OpenMoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Open Moko - GPL?
On 29/11/06, Ole Tange [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Optimal for me: Pay USD 350 for v1. When v2 is out: Return v1 and get a deduction of the price of USD 350. But I will assume that this will not work for you: The returned v1s are probably worthless to you. So a better way might be to include a voucher with a serial number in the v1 package. Any such discount would be excellent, but I'll be buying a v1 regardless of price. Because its about freedom, not price! :-) -- Regards, Dave ___ OpenMoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Can The Proprietary GPS Daemon Be Removed?
On 29/11/06, Sean Moss-Pultz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Okay, so all the GSM stuff is done in ROM? Or is this non-free firmware? It's a completely separate system. It's got it's own (proprietary) OS, middleware, AT command layer, etc... Our (open) application processor -- the 2410 -- talks to this using standardized AT commands over UART. Okay cool. I'm essentially asking if its theoretically possible that this phone might be FSF endorsed - non-free firmware is fine by the FSF as long as it is burned onto a ROM and can never present an ethical problem. -- Regards, Dave ___ OpenMoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/community
Can The Proprietary GPS Daemon Be Removed?
Hi, In userspace, there only one single component that is not going to be under a Free Software License: It's our GPS daemon. The reason for this is, that the specific high-sensitivity assisted GPS that we wanted is only available in something like a soft modem GPS, e.g. one that does most of the GPS signal processing in software. - http://gnumonks.org/~laforge/weblog/2006/11/08/ Can this proprietary, unethical, unsustainable GPS daemon be removed simply and cleanly while not effect any other functionality that's not GPS-dependent? Are there any plans to write a Free GPS daemon in the future, once the phone is successful and the next version is being developed? :-) And can someone confirm the GSM part is Free? :-) -- Regards, Dave ___ OpenMoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/community
Re: Can The Proprietary GPS Daemon Be Removed?
On 28/11/06, Dave Crossland [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: And can someone confirm the GSM part is Free? :-) Reason I ask is: There are some minor, self-contained proprietary bits on the back end side in userspace. - http://gnumonks.org/~laforge/weblog/2006/11/08/ which appears to contradict In userspace, there only one single component that is not going to be under a Free Software License - http://gnumonks.org/~laforge/weblog/2006/11/08/ -- Regards, Dave ___ OpenMoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/community
