mazzortock on 18/4/2009 at 00:54
Quote Posted by Matthew
you're so fanatical you'll lie to improve your position.
I'm so *fanatical* that i explain my opinion without offending anyone. If you get offended for my "iLock" (to Apple and not to you or anyone) it's just bizarre to see people so indentified with a brand name and a product, and to get offended if someone make an hyperbole with his product name. Think about it. I don't think your name is "iPhone" o "Apple", you are far more then a brand name or the hi-tech device that you use, i hope.
Quote:
Don't put words into my mouth, that's not what I said and you are well aware of it.
And when you say "open-sourcing look like it's championed by a bunch of fanatics " what is it? An super cool *hyperbole* (you don't like it too much, but you use it, i see) or what exactly?
Quote:
Though come to think of it I've never seen Apple users make disparaging remarks about Openmoko at all.
You are not well informed, i think. I can report tons of links where Apple fanboy try to delegitimate and destroy Openmoko phone and the idea itself of an open phone. There are also videos on Youtube o Vimeo, you can watch, i think you can find it yourself.
However, i never reported *any* remarks on the features of the iPhone itself. I only said that *for me*, a locked phone, and the Apple business model, it's not what i want, it's a very bad thing, and it's bad also for the entire market and other people (creating trust, monopoly, absurd patent wars, always to get money and freedom from the users). This is only my opinion, nothing more.
Quote:
Yes I can, because there is no value-add to a phone that is open-sourced versus a phone that has a closed system. If there
is a value-add, you have singularly failed to show me what it is despite me asking you several times.
I said a lot of times about lock-in, but you always snipped. Lock-in it's not only about locking the operator contract for a user, but generally speacking is about locking the consumer to a proprietary technology to make more money on it and build some kind of monopoly around this technolgy. If you don't see a value-add, the bigger value, on using openplatforms that can literally *break* monopolies, it's not my problem. Otherwise explain me, in example, if there is some valueadd to *force* someone to buy MsOffice (hundreds of dollars license), to open or edit a docx file that is diffused all over the world with the force of the Ms monopoly. I can make a lot of examples like this, really, a lot, and more in the Apple world.
You got it yourself: what about Android??
I dont' like Google too, IMHO it's more or less like Apple, but on a different level of abstraction and really more pervasive way, but if you say that on the phone world it's *useless* (your words) to have an opensource platform, it sounds interesting to see how money they are investing on this openplatform for mobiles and phones. Maybe Google guys are totally stupid, ok, maybe. Or maybe your proposition it's totally not to connected to the reality.
Quote Posted by Ulukai
If there's one thing 99% of people don't want to do, it's modify the software on their phone. I'm a programmer myself, but I sure as hell don't want to tinker with my phone OS or substitute it for another one because of THE MAN.
If you say only "Modify the software on their phone" it's not the right approch to the problem, IMHO.
Modern smartphones, today, are, more or less, computer devices, not simple phones. Of course the majority of people don't change the GSM stack on his phone, but, like on a normal computer, people are interested on software and specifically to the software connected to hardware of the phone (GPS => navigation a map software, Wifi => Web software, accelerometers => interfacing software, etc etc). If you want to make *only* calls, you don't need a smartphone, of course, but if you like manipulate or use software on your pc, with these devices you can use very good software on it and sometimes also the *same* software that you use on PC (IE: on the OpenMoko now you can install Debian...).
Quote:
As you enjoy installing/deinstalling and modifying software on your phone,
I don't enjoy only on installing software, not at all. I like use the software that *i* want, it's a little bit different. On my Openmoko, i can boot with different distros, it's my choice. If i have to use it as everyday phone, as said, with QTopia it works pretty well. If i want to experiment i only connect it with an usb cable, and/or i reboot the phone from the microSD, i can use on it Debian, SHR, or what i want. Of course it's for geeks, not for normal people, but it's extremely important to have a platform and an hardware to allow people to experiment with at this stage, when it will be mature, it will be more usable and pervasive. But on the beginning, and without big money of some superbig company, you need this kind of platform, otherwise you can't evolve.
Quote:
But OpenMoloko is clearly not the right choice for most people
.
Of course, it's EXACTLY what i say in this thread. It's also the same announce from the vendor. And you know why?
Because, simply, the platform it's still *not* mature for the mass. Like Linux a lot of years ago, it was only for superuberGeeks. Today things are really changed and you can see Linux on a lot of consumer netbooks (and of course you see in more and more on the whole internet on the server, on the mission critical tasks in the world, etc etc).
Quote Posted by Kolya
If wasn't for people like him and rivaling products with a more open angle, Apple would suck even more of your money from your pockets with DRM and bloated bling-ware than it already does.
So cut the guy some slack, slackers.
:cheeky::cheeky::cheeky:
Quote Posted by Matthew
DRM has been mentioned a couple of times here and it's a bit of a fallacious argument - we're not talking about the music on the phone after all (and hey, iTunes plus and ripped CDs = no DRM on mine anyway).
That's not so simple. On the recent past iTunes was not so, and anyway, now iTunes use watermarking on songs. It's more or less a profiling system, it's absurd.
And for AAC system, only iPod can play directly these songs, there is not interoperability with other hardware. Also this one is lock-in, my friend.
Quote:
I don't want to spend $300 on a phone that might or might not end up working with my UK telco,
???
Openmoko it's normally used on UK, i see it on the forums.
Quote:
I want a phone that is guaranteed to work out of the box and has been beta'ed by someone who, unlike me, knew what they were doing.
Well, i can say that, at this stage, Openmoko it's not for you. But it will be good, like you want, only if other people get involved. Otherwise the rest will use always Locked systems, it's a loop.
Quote:
I applaud open-sourcers for their work (I use Firefox and Thunderbird after all), but there are some places where open source software is pretty unnecessary and I think phones are one of them.
As said, smartphones are *not* simple phone, this is a base misunderstanding of the problem. Today they are computer devices, but ultra mobile. So what you see on computer, is absolutely valid also for mobile computers, it's always software, exactly same approch.
Quote:
Plus, you're well aware that we're not calling mazz an idiot. We're saying that spouting all that 'iBlob' nonse makes him
sound like an idiot.
This only a softly and invisible method to say me "idiot", congratulation.
Quote Posted by Kolya
I don't see what difference it makes that we're talking about software running on a mobile phone now. In fact since it doesn't have to deal with being an app in a closed software environment (like Firefox on Windows) it should be easier and faster to develop such an OS.
I totally agree :thumb:
Quote Posted by dethtoll
I don't even like Apple and I think you're being a retard.
You can call me retard or idiot, as you want. If you guys are happy on offending people, that's not problem for me, go on :p
Renzatic on 18/4/2009 at 03:23
A semi off topic aside on open sourceness, or rather, something that's always bothered me
Quote:
OpenMoko spend exactly ZERO budget for advertising and Marketing.
This...THIS is the reason why open source won't catch on with the great unwashed masses. See, sometimes I like getting free neat stuff, and I'll hit up the open source pages to see what cool open source stuff the open source guys have lying around. Let me tell you, unless you read the a lengthy description beforehand, you will NOT figure out what these programs do by name alone. Even worse, they usually have some self referential or godawful name that'd drive people away more than bring them in.
Like I want a good free alternative for Photoshop. What do I use? HAVE I TRIED THE GIMP? What? Gimp? That's a guy with a bum leg isn't it? Or one of those guys that likes to get beat up for shits and giggles, right? That doesn't sound like a good product at all. And WINE? At first glance, all I know it does is not emulate something. Those are the best known. But go through any list of open source software will net you tons more goofy ass names.
On the opposite side of that you have OpenOffice. You can basically tell what it's all about by the name, and you don't have to worry about getting fired for downloading something that sounds totally NSFW at work when all you wanted to do was get the OpenHandFistFuck suite of calculator tools to help with your productivity.
The open source guys needs to swallow their pride and pony up on at least some basic marketing savvy if they want their programs to be used widely. It doesn't have to be anything big, just a descriptive name will do. Pithy anagrams and clever names might garner you fans in the scene, but it won't get maw and paw to move away from Office 200x.
RavynousHunter on 18/4/2009 at 05:52
Quote Posted by Matthew
This is the sort of answer that makes me not take the proponent at all seriously, by the way.
Of course, I was using a hyperbolic metaphor there, albeit a somewhat sophomoric metaphor. It's the same reason I don't buy a Mac computer: I like to be able to develop my own programs for my phone, should I feel the compulsion, and be able to put them on my phone with as little interference as possible.
That said, it seems as though Mac won't let you put just -anything- on their phone unless you send it to -their- people for approval. I may be wrong, I don't know, but that sounds like something ol Stevie would do; make his platform as proprietary as possible, thus making his platform unappealing for many developers.
Its one of the reasons I've always stuck with Windows, I don't have to worry about having to go buy a whole new computer if the thing decides to go tits up or I want an upgrade. If I want more RAM for my PC, I can just go down to the local PC hardware shack, get a new stick of RAM, and plug it in.
Also, on the topic of Linux, I wouldn't trust it as far as I could throw Linus Torvalds or his condescending look. Not only would I have to compensate for all it's different kernels, but I also don't like the idea that my drivers could've been written by some adolescent kid in his mother's basement over a weekend, unless I knew that kid personally and had some pretty serious faith in his abilities.
I like Windows because its right there in the middle between Mac and Linux; it's not as proprietary as Mac, but it also has one kernel, which was developed by professionals, and professionally-written and tested drivers. Granted, it may not have the degree of freedom for programming and customization that Linux has, but a lot of that Linux customization is, in my opinion, largely needless. Do I really want to change my kernel? No. It works fine, and doesn't really need to be changed.
Nice mid-ground there, a place I feel most at home, and see no reason to switch to either extreme.
