Why Open Source Makes Sense For Handhelds

Guylhem writes "Are you still wondering why you should prefer an handheld running free software over one running Palm OS or Windows CE? Here's a short article to explain the main reasons you should consider. The most important are sustainability and freedom: you don't want your applications to break when you update your handheld OS or hardware, and you certainly want to decide what *you* may do with your data. Palm and Pocket PC's DRM protected and obscure formats stand in your way. That's another good reason to prefer free software: you have the source code so you can develop plug ins to read such obscure formats. Even better - you can stick to standards formats such as divx which are poorly supported on handhelds running proprietary software." On the topic of handhelds, tanmay submits brighthand.com's small chart of some upcoming handhelds and smart phones that may be launched in the coming months.

Comments

Bad Platforms Make For Good Business

[GonzoDave]

Let's make a table: Handheld Platform: Porting Effort Linux/X11 (handhelds.org, Yopy): trivial (some layout changes) Linux-QPE (Zaurus): modest (reuse libraries, rewrite GUI) PocketPC: significant (lots of API limitations relative to XP) PalmOS: extreme (can't write all-native apps, memory limits, no file system, no resizeable windows, no layout manager, no multitasking, no standard APIs). Ironic, isn't it, that popularity is inversely proportional to difficulty of software development? Of course, that's a pretty general rule. Now, why is that? Well, look at this news item. When someone ports a Commodore 64 emulator to a Linux/X11 handheld, it's not news because it's so trivial. When someone ports it to PalmOS, it's big news. I once ported a web browser to a Linux/X11 handheld, and that wasn't news either. You still can't get anything of comparable quality for PalmOS, and so every junky PalmOS web browser is a news item. Bad OS platforms make for good press, lots of business opportunities, and lots of PR. Programmers feel proud when they have mastered a bad platform and managed to create the tiniest app for a bad platform. That's why PalmOS and Windows XP keep winning in the market. What to do about it, I don't know.

Re:Bad Platforms Make For Good Business

[Senior Frac]

That's great. If it does what you want.

Some people buy a new technology not knowing, yet, what they expect out of it. These are the inspired thinkers to come up with new uses. They are often disappointed with proprietary systems, finding that someone else is dictating the boundaries of use differently than they, such as draconian DRM. These people feel cheated.

Re:Bad Platforms Make For Good Business

[dubbreak]

Likewise people used to say that OS/2 was a better platform than Windows

It is. Is windows used in ATM machines? Can you choose your filesystem on windows? (ntfs or fat32, which both suck) OS/2 offers real multithreading support. Ah but as you said

OS/2 was largely useless due to the lack of applications

So I guess windows 3.11 was useless because of it's lack of applications. OS/2 will run 16bit dos programs more solidly than early windows or dos. Oh, OS/2 has a JVM, I guess nothing useful is written in java. Xfree86 has been ported too, but no one uses that for anything i hear.

I don't use os/2 nor do I care to, but just because you don't use it, or anyone you know directly doesn't mean it isn't a good operating system. Anyone that i know that uses, or used it is for it's stability, something windows cannot offter no matter how many applications you can get for it.

A lot of sane arguments, those...

[Elitist Snob]

...arguments that apply equally to handhelds and to full-sized computers. Why should it be any more important that you have the extra control/privacy that OSS provides on your portable than on any other computer?

Modify?

[Iscariot_]

That's another good reason to prefer free software: you have the source code so you can develop plug ins to read such obscure formats.

Somehow I don't think that 99% of handheld users are developers (or at least develop software for handhelds). Whilst modification is a good reason to use open source for people like myself (who program for a living), it's probably the least compelling reason for most.

Re:Modify?

[Oliver Defacszio]

Yep, and yet it's trumpeted around this place like the answer to all the questions of mankind. If you watch closely, it tends to be what is hauled out and dusted off when nothing else works to "win" an argument.

Obviously, I use the term "win" loosely.

It's like someone saying, "Here's a key." 99% of the known universe says, "What does it open?" Slashdot replies, "Who cares? You've got the key!"

Re:Modify?

[gid13]

Fine, but the 1% who ARE developers may save the other 99% of our collective ass when we desperately need to get the information out of a certain format into another one.

I can't think of anything about software that bothers me more than things that make my computer do things against my will, or stop it from carrying out my will. Other examples include MS making their office formats proprietary, spam, popup windows, and so on. I adapt and learn, of course, and many of these issues are no longer issues to me due to technical solutions, many of which are also open source. But it seems to me that the whole net would be nicer if we just stuck to open source in the first place.

Re:Modify?

[cgenman]

That's another good reason to prefer free software: you have the source code so you can develop plug ins to read such obscure formats.

I'd say the prevalence of drop-in replacements for the Palm Pilot's Date Book, Phone Book, Note Pad, and To Do List would imply that the format isn't actually that obscure.

If by obscure formats they mean DRM'ed eBooks... What were you expecting buying eBooks? You don't have that option on Linux and if you did, it probably wouldn't be upwardly compatible either. You're saying they've cracked the format? That's most of the work. They could do a Palm app just as easily. And how many people watch DIVX movies on their handheld?

While I would personally prefer an Open Source PDA OS, the reasons this person has given are blown all out of proportion. As a developer, it is easier to get a Linux license for weird hardware, but how does that effect the user? Why is running Zarus software any better than running Palm software from any number of handhelds? How many desktop programs from the legendarily clean and uncluttered Linux desktop would you want to use on a tiny screen? And Linux users are in for a real eventual shock if they think an OS will run on anything forever just because it is Open Source. How quickly has it been adopted to new WinCE devices?

It is great that certain things have already been written and done for Linux handhelds, and that makes them good for power users. That doesn't mean that it is impossible to, as the article implied, AIM over a Palm Pilot. While I reiterate my support for OS OSes, this article is full of FUD.

Complexity can mean power

[boelthorn]

They have all the complexity and failings of UNIX with no software and limited compatibility.

I would love to get a Handheld or (way more important) mobile phone which I can adapt to my needs. And most free UNIX-like operating systems are very flexible in contrast to Windows CE etc.
Just because a Linux-based PDA is not as "friendly" to newbies as PalmOS or Windows CE means nothing. "No software" is just a plain lie, btw. Look here for evidence.

Re:Complexity can mean power

[SlamMan]

Complexity is the last thing I was in a phone or PDA. I like having options, but when i want to take a note or make a phone call, it should be brainlessly simple. I want to think about what I'm taking notes one, not how 'm supposed to take notes.

Complexity as far as configurability and programability, sure, but not in usability.

Re:Complexity can mean power

[RevAaron]

The existence of Unix software says nothing about the existence of quality Zaurus or other Linux PDA software. You can get a lot of programs for the Zaurus that are simply something for desktop Linux recompiled for the ARM arch- but that hardly counts as a "Zaurus port." That isn't a PDA application, it's a desktop port that happens to run on the PDA. Not really workable, and the number of desktop ports that haven't seen any real porting or adaptation work to the Zaurus is partially responsible for inflating the percieved number of "apps" for the Zaurus and other Linux PDAs.

Grrr!!

[TheKidWho]

You seem to forget the fact that PDA's are very open to development. There are Divx players for both Palm and PocketPCs. People have ported version's of GCC that run on the actual device. Open Source is one of the greatest achievements of PDAs, how do you think we got quake running on pocketpc's? You also seem to forget that if these closed source Operating Systems never existed, these PDA's would never exist either, You cant depend on Open Source nuts to develop an intuitive User Interface. Look at Mac OS X vs Linux. Yeah, both are just as powerful as each other, but Mac OS X's UI is light years ahead of any GUI for linux, and you know what, Aqua is a closed source GUI developed by a commercial company. For PDA's, The UI is even more important then the power of the OS, people want a UI that allows them to get their work done as efficiently as possible, they dont give a rat's ass if its open source or not. People wouldnt buy PDA's if they had clunky UI's, thankfully because of Palm, they managed to develop a GUI that is semi-decent, yet its not amazing yet. The good thing is though that these companies have money they can burn on R&D to develop the OS and make it more intuitive. Open Source is not the greatest thing for PDAs. Not to mention, there is a Linux port for some PocketPCs, and you know what? It sucks compared to Windows Mobile 2003, in every regard. Open Source this, Open Source that, you people forget why people actually use computers.

Main advantages not relevent

[edward_mc]

All the main advantages pointed out are irrelevent. I buy a new PDA every 2 years minimum and pass my old one to family or friends. They don't want to monkey around with open source. I don't need to be get their phone calls asking for help.

More to the point: How long do people actually plan on using a PDA? Who is still carrying around a five year old Palm?

This article is unabashed ideology over smart tech info. Just more incestous amplification for those socially clueless folk who occupy the open source echo chamber.

Re:Main advantages not relevent

[edward_mc]

This article made me remember to pull my old Handspring platinum out of a drawer and give it to my sister. I'm glad it comes with a solid and simple OS so that she can stay focused on her chosen field, anthropology, and just use its PIM functions. Also important is the fact that her Dell runs XP.

If the Handspring can run both, its own solid OS, or alternatively, linux, is it the best solution? Let's the early adopter poke around, but let's the inheriter stick with solid CSS OS.

I'd certainly never want to pass a Taurus, or other dedicated OSS PDA down to a non-techie relation

Is he talking about the same article?

[Oroborus]

Though I can't say that I'm surprised, this story is 100% pure troll.

The article makes some legitimate arguments about the benefits of Linux on embedded devices (not Open Source in general), and though it's definitely written with a bias at least that's not disguised.

I don't think the poster even read the article however; the claim that you can't see the source code to WinCE is incorrect, thinking that your applications are any more likely to survive an upgrade intact is laughable (WinCE & PocketPC go through extensive AppCompat testing, who does that for embedded Linux?)

I know, I know, slow news day and a Pro-OSS post came up on the radar, but for cripes sake if you're going to be brutally biased at least try to hide it, you're making the cause look even worse!

Re:Is he talking about the same article?

[chromatic]

I don't think the poster even read the article however;

Actually, he wrote the article.

From Palm to Zaurus to back to Palm

[jaaron]

Okay, I haven't yet RTFA but I do have a couple of comments. I went from Palm (a Palm III, then a Handspring Visor) over to a Zaurus and now back to Palm with my new Treo 600.

First off, I loved my Zaurus. Still do. I was a college student and it was like having a small laptop with me at all times. I could jump on WiFi networks, play games, listen to music, whatever. What I couldn't do very well was use the Zaurus as an organizer. Sync support varied and was often horrible for Linux. The standard PIM apps were poor and everyone knows it. It was great having tons of free software and even new operating systems to play around with (Opie and OpenZaurus were great), but the Zaurus ended up just being another hobby and toy, not a tool that I could consistently use and rely on.

I went back to a Palm and the Treo600 because I wanted something that would just work. I work on plenty of other open source software. I wanted something that did it's job well and the Treo is amazing. It doesn't have quite the power of the Zaurus or even the screen resolution, but I'm using it as an organizer more than I ever used the Zaurus.

So in the end, I personally think that open source PDA software is still only appropriate for a small niche of technically savvy users. There's nothing wrong with that, but I know when my sister asks me about a PDA for medical school, I'll be suggesting a Palm, not a Zaurus or other open source system.

All about the UI

[kisrael]

PDAs are all about the UI. Once certain other standards are met (i.e. not losing data, synching ok) then everything else is secondary.

Palm realized this, and built a very friendly UI from the ground up. Microsoft tried to capitalize on its desktop monopoly and scaledown its desktop interface, which was a disaster. I think Microsoft finally started doing a bit better by copying Palm... ...not sure how the Opensource options are doing, I'm not sure I've ever even seen one in the wild, come to think of it.

An Insightful No.

[Anonymous Coward]

That's another good reason to prefer free software: you have the source code so you can develop plug ins to read such obscure formats.

No, I can't. I do not "code apps", "develop plug-ins", or otherwise design or build software. Nor do I "compile from source". I, like most of the market, am strictly a consumer.

If you would like to see OSS thrive, you do the work. I guarantee that you will get satisfaction. Double, in fact, because not only will your OSS thrive in a competitive market and reduce the power of CSS, but you and people like you will be able to earn a comfortable living along with a well-earned sense of pride.

Go for it. Just don't expect the Great Unwashed like me to be able to code along with you.

Ugh.

[autechre]

I look at what this article and the resulting discussion are talking about, and I can't help but think that I must be crazy. Everyone else seems to want a completely different device than I do.

Playing movies on a PDA? Browsing the Web from it? MP3s? Who cares!? I don't even want to read stuff on a PDA. If I want a book, I'll buy a book. If I want to do just about anything else computer-related, I'll use my computer.

What I want a PDA to do is to remember my contacts, appointments, and lists of stuff (movies I want to see, etc.). THAT IS ALL. I don't want color, sound, video, Bluetooth, or anything like that, and I probably don't even want a keyboard. I just want something with its own rechargable battery that lasts a good long while between charges and syncs to Linux reasonably well.

From what I've seen, I'm going to need to buy an old refurbished Visor Edge, because absolutely no one makes a PDA like this anymore.

Re: open source and PDAs

[King_TJ]

Honestly, I think the *real* question is more about the quality of the "user experience" with a given PDA. On a device that's under $500 or so, and used as a glorified calendar/contact list/address book + way to play with assorted games, calculators, and misc. applets - I'm looking for ease of use, above all else.

If it's open source and has a great user interface, then that's awesome! If it's some commercial, closed-source OS, but still offers the easy to use and friendly UI, plus all the little apps and applets I want, then that's awesome too!

Right now, I find the Windows CE based handhelds to be less desirable than the PalmOS counterparts, but that's really because I've grown so familiar with the PalmOS interface. It does what I want, keeps getting refreshed with new versions, but doesn't make me relearn everything to use the updated devices. If all I owned was WinCE stuff, I'd probably be just as biased towards it.

I'm not opposed to alternatives - but on a PDA, I'm not switching products simply because it offers more "potential" by being "open source". I have to see concrete improvements that are immediately there for me.