Google's Android Gphone mobile OS
 

Nokia is not part of the open platform alliance. So how does thing fit into the big scheme of things??

Re: Google's Android Gphone mobile OS
 

Android sounds like a competing open mobile platform. If you're an optimist, you can interpret it as validating the direction of the Maemo platform: open is good and that Maemo has a head start. (We'll hear those, I guess.) If you're a pessimist, you can start predicting doom for Maemo, as you can with the iPhone or with any other number of issues. (We've already heard a lot of those!) If you're a realist, you can say that wait and we'll see what happens: there is a long way from an announcement to anything real. :) (The boring people will then tell that.)

Re: Google's Android Gphone mobile OS
 

I think it'd be prudent for Nokia to join the OHA, and have a version of Android available for download/use on appropriate devices (phones and tablets).

BUT

I don't think it'd be appropriate for Nokia to bet the farm on Android by abandoning Maemo.

Support Android. Make Android available. Port useful features of Android to Maemo. Give some useful capabilities to Android (ie. genuinely support it, instead of just getting your name onto the list). But it's _way_ too soon to bet the farm on it.

(however, I will say: I _SO_ call it! (in another thread I said it'd be a software announcement, and not a hardware announcement))

Re: Google's Android Gphone mobile OS
 

Wait for the other shoe. ;)

Re: Google's Android Gphone mobile OS
 

I'm not too happy with the Google initiative: They chose the Apache v2 license, which is inferior to the GPL/LGPL used by, say, OpenMoko.
Citing the relevant section from the Open handset Alliance-FAQ:
They're not even trying to hide their intentions: Take from the community, but dont give back. (Apple does the samer, but is more honest about it.) This is not a good thing. I'm not happy.

Re: Google's Android Gphone mobile OS
 

Benny, I'm pretty sure Google wanted to make it LGPL or GPL... hell, even BSD, but the only way you get hardware manufacturers onboard is if you tell them "don't worry, we'll protect you from giving away your secrets".

Re: Google's Android Gphone mobile OS
 

Thats speculation. Maybe Google would have wanted it to be GPLed. Maybe not.

Trading GPL for some manufacturers goodwill doesnt seem like a good deal for me. You cant go half way to free software. Either you want it (then do it!), or what you want is only unpaid developers worldwide who'll never get anything in return - then go to hell with it.

Re: Google's Android Gphone mobile OS
 

Well, it's pretty much the only way it would have happened at all because there's no way they could have announced "it's GPL" and had even one of those manufacturers interested. Not even a single one. That's just how it works. Most of those companies have never been involved in anything remotely resembling open source development, so they know nothing about how it works. All they know is "we're giving away our secrets". I think what we'll see is that this is Google's way of warming them up to the platform and then later on going full GPL once the platform's gained some foothold in the market. At that point, we'll ultimately see if Android will succeed and actually convince the phone manufacturers (and providers - they see open source as a security risk) to join them and GPL their work.

Re: Google's Android Gphone mobile OS
 

Google is a smart company: they choose a license that will make firms like Motorola, Samsung, Qualcomm and Nvidia feel safe to contribute. I wouldn't also speculate that "if Google could decide" they would go GPL. They're very pragmatic, not idealistic, in this manner. But yes, that license isn't strictly up to what the marketing speak is at the Android site.

Re: Google's Android Gphone mobile OS
 

Thats probably not going to work. Big projects like this dont change their licenses, not if the new one would be less rewarding for the manufacturers than the old one. No. Apache v.2 is here to stay.

I agree: It wouldnt have worked with GPL. Manufacturers wouldnt have swallowed a GPLed framework. So what? There is a GPL-licensed platform. What use is a „commercial-friendly open-source license […] without the requirement to contribute those innovations back to the open-source community“ if what you wanted was contributions to the community? I'm afraid they'll rip of community-developers, happily accepting their code but never sharing further improvements they make themselves. Thats not how it works. I'd rather have no Google-Phone at all than such a semi-open-platform.

Again, all of this is speculation at this point. - Except that lawyers say Apache v2 ist not compatible to GPLv2. So dont try using existing, GPLed code for projects on Android... (except there's a GPLv3 version; GPLv3 and Apache v2 are compatible)

Re: Google's Android Gphone mobile OS
 

I think they said it was based on Linux, though. Doesn't that mean some parts have to be GPLv2?

My biggest hope for Android: the bluetooth DUN profile it has will work with the N800. :)

Re: Google's Android Gphone mobile OS
 

No. While Linux is GPLv2, yes, it doesnt require applications that run on top of it to be GPL. In fact, they could be any license, proprietary, from the kernels point of view, it doesnt matter. It could well be that the kernel is the only GPLed piece of code on the device.

Re: Google's Android Gphone mobile OS
 

Here are a couple of videos:
http://gizmodo.com/gadgets/gphone/go...one-318878.php
http://gizmodo.com/gadgets/gphone/go...oha-318887.php

And a link:
http://gizmodo.com/gadgets/gphone/ev...nce-318882.php

And watching the first video (regarding their wants) really makes me think of the N800. :)

H.

Re: Google's Android Gphone mobile OS
 

I'm not worried about the license so much as being able to get a platform with easy access. The downfall of iPhone isn't that development is closed so much as they actively make it difficult for those using alternative development environments. One shouldn't have to jump through hoops to get your code on the machine.
I'm not sure where this attitude comes from. Apple has given much back to the community. Sometimes the community isn't real good about accepting what comes back (webKit) so it is a two way street.

Frankly I think we will have to see what the companies deliver. All we need is one of the handset manufactures to deliver a platform with little in the way of restrictions on the hand set. If that happens in an acceptable form factor I see a lot of success.

Dave

Re: Google's Android Gphone mobile OS
 

You're being pragmatic...! :eek:

Re: Google's Android Gphone mobile OS
 

Android makes me both happy and sad. Google seems to "get it" providing a good API and a development platform that doesn't require linux or several hours of digging and fidgeting to get everything set up. I am sad because nokia could have done this years ago. By keeping it from being a media player or PDA etc. developers have spent their time on projects which IMO should be basic functionality and not on projects that are truly innovative. Is there a popular maemo app that isn't done at least as well by a closed source solution?

Re: Google's Android Gphone mobile OS
 

So the Android platform has optional hardware 3d acceleration. Use of chipsets incorporating Imagination Technologies (PowerVR) technologies will be unavoidable, especially considering that Texas Instruments, Marvell and Intel (all Open Handset Alliance partners) license PowerVR IP. Android has been developing their system for years now. Following this logic, PowerVR acceleration must have been available for Linux 2.6 for some time now.
So why is it that Nokia does not leverage the hardware video acceleration, present in the TI OMAP processor, in their Internet Tablets? Even the 2008 IT OS fails to enable it (link <--14th comment from top). If Nokia is not at fault, then who? I cannot imagine that Nokia passed up this opportunity due to NDAs or closed-source drivers. I Googled this topic one evening before considering an N800 purchase (just before I got wind of the N810) and found mostly passing references to the issue, and one rant. Shouldn't there be more developer outrage? It almost seems as if no one wants to discuss it :confused:
Or am I missing some key point or have my facts wrong (quite likely)?

Re: Google's Android Gphone mobile OS
 

There is exactly one reason the PowerVR driver is not available: cost.

Will the not inconsiderable licensing/development cost be outweighed by the benefit?

Re: Google's Android Gphone mobile OS
 

I never considered that a driver would be licensed separately from the chipset. I can't fathom how Texas Instruments can sell a processor and then charge extra to fully utilize it. Oh well, hopefully the Android platform will allow some neat UI tricks, 3d gaming and such, thereby forcing Nokia's hand.