View Single Post
Posts: 32 | Thanked: 94 times | Joined on Jun 2012
#13
So let me bounce that question back: what's keeping those security OS developers from already porting their work to the N900 ?
I'm not an OS developer, so I can only make assumptions.
Generally speaking about phones :
1) Maybe too time-consuming compared to the lifespan of a given phone ?
2) Maybe the number of non-free component in each phone requiring heavy retro-engineering ?
3) And why developing anything on a phone whereas user-friendly systems such as android already exist and have a wide community who probably wouldn't want to try another OS.
In our case, the n900 isn't anymore on the market, and at this state, neo900 is only vaporware.
Why would people outside of our community even consider beginning to hack anything for n900, in the case a phone they don't even heard about may (or may not) be released with a similar (but still different) hardware ?

That's why I propose to contact various developer teams to make them aware of the project, and send them prototypes if they are serious and interested, to make the project more concrete for them than "only vaporware". I don't know if it will lead to something, but I know not doing anything will not lead us anywhere.

RYF certification
I understand certain criteria of this certification could raise a debate in the community.
Actually, I'm not either 100% motivated by the "don't recommend non-Free software" clause (I consider myself more on the BSD-side of openness than GNU's). Anyway, the RYF certification exists and I don't see any phone more open than neo900. It would be sad if we don't even try to deal with it. About openness of baseband, telephony stack, etc., isn't the sandboxing of the modem (and the possibility to disable it) enough ?
Why not beginning a discussion about RYF certification and neo900 with FSF to put some light on what can or can't be allowed in the special case of a phone ?
Why not making two devices instead of one : The actual neo900 on one side, and the RYF-compliant neo900 on the other side, which would follow the rules discussed with FSF ?

Last edited by Bearserker; 2016-02-03 at 12:59.
 

The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Bearserker For This Useful Post: