They've said: they're releasing their own device & it won't be a concept, & they intend to make the OS usable by others AFTER they've at least revealed availability info about their device.
And AFAIR they've never said they plan to charge licensing fees for their OS....
I don't get that 1st sentence in the quote, almost sounds like they're targeting pre-existing Android devices, or perhaps low-end Android hw using Libhyris? But surely it's far from primetime?
They've said: they're releasing their own device & it won't be a concept, & they intend to make the OS usable by others AFTER they've at least revealed availability info about their device.
And AFAIR they've never said they plan to charge licensing fees for their OS....
I don't get that 1st sentence in the quote, almost sounds like they're targeting pre-existing Android devices, or perhaps low-end Android hw using Libhyris? But surely it's far from primetime?
Regarding libhybris, even openwebos are testing it on various HW. But yes, it's not ready for primetime, but it sure it looks good already (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lb3Jz...&feature=g-upl , font issue and touch coordinate reversal known)
Not sure what you mean here, but if the standard hosts approach doesn't work, writing a daemon that activates (through hosts to a local apache server for example) when ad needs to be served and providing 'Long live maemo!' jpg instead might be an option... This is never ending game of thieves vs police, police never wins
Police wins quite often. Sometimes even for long enough that the device is no longer relevant when the "thieves" eventually win back (IF they do).
This is basically a _very_ dangerous position. If "platform security" is any worse than the N9 this will basically not be the device that most people on this forum want. Because if it ls like the N9 it will already alienate quite a lot of the current N900 users....
And if they embrace "ad-supported" stuff they will surely embrace "carrier-supported" stuff. Which so far has implied heavy lockdown.
"Jollan toimitusjohtaja Jussi Hurmola arvioi It-viikolle, että uuden älypuhelimen julkistuksen tarkka päivämäärä julkistetaan torstaina."
Rough translation: Jolla's CEO Jussi Hurmola estimated (for IT-viikko) that the exact day when they publish their new smartphone will be published on next Thursday.
Just a question... I'm simply wondering out loud so don't attack me please.
Would Jolla have been wise in licensing all remaining meego hardware tech and developing and marketing n9, and the lauta until they have the new stuff ready? Obviously I wouldn't have wanted them to use the majority of their startup money to rehash the past. However it seems they would have gotten financial backing if they continued a limited (100,000 maybe) n9/lauta production line from people interested in meego.
Would Jolla have been wise in licensing all remaining meego hardware tech and developing and marketing n9, and the lauta until they have the new stuff ready? Obviously I wouldn't have wanted them to use the majority of their startup money to rehash the past. However it seems they would have gotten financial backing if they continued a limited (100,000 maybe) n9/lauta production line from people interested in meego.
Oh, absolutely! They'd be able to immediately take advantage of all the research and effort Nokia put into their Meego product, as well as pick up the existing Maemo/Meego user base.
Which is why it would never happen. Nokia invested mucho time and money into their internet tablet series, and even though the current leadership has decided to axe anything that doesn't have a Microsoft stamp on it, most companies are loathe to just give away their work. I imagine that Nokia soon might be willing to part with the technology at fire-sale prices (as the Microsoft partnership now seems to be going the same way every hardware partnership with Microsoft goes), but soon is just a little too late...
China is an enormous market, with very few patents. In that sense it makes a lot of sense to launch things there if you are a start-up with non copyable things (know-of and expertise).
A 95% open phone with a half-closed UI cannot be protected against porting.
A copy cat won't spend the resource to maintain the last 5% (not competitive against using android), and while the community can, whatever the community produces is rarely fit for commercial purpose.
All in all, I think that way you can go mostly open source and fully community friendly, while being not too much of a target for both giants and copy-cats.
Still a risky plan, but let's hope for the best.
