Slashdot Mirror


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.

33 of 240 comments (clear)

  1. Bad Platforms Make For Good Business by GonzoDave · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.

    1. Re:Bad Platforms Make For Good Business by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      That's the worst table I've ever seen.

    2. Re:Bad Platforms Make For Good Business by wshwe · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I can do what I want only with Palm and Windows. Linux is intriguing, but fails the tests of functionality and compatability.

    3. Re:Bad Platforms Make For Good Business by Senior+Frac · · Score: 5, Insightful

      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.

    4. Re:Bad Platforms Make For Good Business by edward_mc · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Not knowing what to expect out of a PDA? How about reminding me of important dates and meetings; keeping a searchable contact list; allowing for short note taking; email.

      Fun extras that I can do with my new PPC Toshiba e755: Surf web with builtin 802.11b will on the toilet; show off some pics; listen to music; watch videos I've captured with my Radeon A-i-W and crunched with command line WM encoder 9 to incredibly small, smooth and clean files.

      Some "innovative uses" by "inspired thinkers" mentioned in article: Install Apache to show your webpage off to friends; ease of upgrade to new device by writing your own compatible SW (anyone ever hear of Export|CSV?

      Oh, and I love this: "If you are lucky, you can download a new version that runs on PalmOS 5. If you aren't, forget your beloved application."

      Yes! That's inspired thinking and innovation, being unable to move on from your beloved 1994 PDA apps.

    5. Re:Bad Platforms Make For Good Business by dubbreak · · Score: 5, Insightful

      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.

      --
      "If you are going through hell, keep going." - Winston Churchill
  2. Re:DivX...? by iCEBaLM · · Score: 4, Informative

    Not to mention DivX plays well on Palm and PPC. PocketMVP for Pocket PC and MMPlayer for PalmOS both play DivX just fine.

  3. A lot of sane arguments, those... by Elitist+Snob · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ...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?

  4. You can copy/paste!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

    Nice plagarism of Guylhem Aznar's 1/29/04 article at linuxdevcenter!

  5. Re:Slashdot by Snad · · Score: 5, Funny

    This is slashdot...don't we all already think opensource is right for handhelds?

    You're right - this is Slashdot, where we think open source is right for everything from servers through to electric can openers, from cellular phones to shoes.

    Coming soon to Slashdot - the open source cravat.

    I can hardly wait!

  6. Modify? by Iscariot_ · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

    1. Re:Modify? by Oliver+Defacszio · · Score: 5, Insightful
      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!"

      --

      -
      Inventor of the term 'pardon my French'.
    2. Re:Modify? by gid13 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      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.

    3. Re:Modify? by cgenman · · Score: 4, Insightful

      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.

  7. Complexity can mean power by boelthorn · · Score: 4, Insightful
    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.
    1. Re:Complexity can mean power by SlamMan · · Score: 4, Insightful

      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.

      --
      Mod point free since 2001
    2. Re:Complexity can mean power by swv3752 · · Score: 4, Funny

      You obviously have not tried a modern cell phone lately have you?

      Everytime I borrow someones cell phone, I need them to show me how to dial out.

      --
      Just a Tuna in the Sea of Life
    3. Re:Complexity can mean power by RevAaron · · Score: 4, Insightful

      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.

      --

      Working toward a usable PDA environment in the spirit of Newton OS: Dynapad
  8. Grrr!! by TheKidWho · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

  9. Really, I like barren... by cstec · · Score: 4, Funny

    Yeah Open Source is the ticket. Why would you want to be able to choose from some 17,000 PalmOS apps? Too many software choices, it's overwhelming! And PalmOS apps are designed for PalmOS. Why would you want purpose-designed handheld apps when you can get ports of apps designed for a 19" monitor? That's what scrollbars are for anyhow.

  10. Main advantages not relevent by edward_mc · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.

  11. Is he talking about the same article? by Oroborus · · Score: 4, Insightful


    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!

  12. From Palm to Zaurus to back to Palm by jaaron · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.

    --
    Who said Freedom was Fair?
  13. Uh I call bullshiat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

    Even better - you can stick to standards formats such as divx which are poorly supported on handhelds running proprietary software.

    Hardly. I have been playing DivX files flawlessly which were encoded with the latest codec off of divx.com on my Dell Axim handheld since PPC2002 and now I run it on 2003.

    I watch full length movies on it all the time after encoding them for smaller resolution and transfering them to my SD memory card. Divx support? Its available for any pda running windows PPC2002 or 2003.

  14. All about the UI by kisrael · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.

    --
    SO YOU'RE GOING TO DIE: The Comic for Dealing with Death
  15. Before you ask... by Realistic_Dragon · · Score: 4, Interesting

    No they won't put the girls off. My girlfriend stole my Zaurus SL5500 and refuses to give it back, so I had to go out and buy a C750 instead. Oh the pain.

    --
    Beep beep.
  16. An Insightful No. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful
    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.
  17. I do by GomezAdams · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Freedom of choice is always better, Dude (or Dudette).

    I just bought the Sharp Zaurus SL-5600 and it kicks the snot out of my Palm Pilot. It's a few years newer but is still a better machine than the most recent Palms. And when I get the addons sneaked in past the lovely but untrusting Morticia, then I will have far more than had I upgraded the Palm.

    Mine came from Amazon.com @ $300.00 - new in the box. This is the best techno trinket I've had years.

    Original poster has to be a troll - or his significant other won't let him get the better toy and it's just sour grapes talking.

    --
    Too lazy to create a sig...
  18. Considerations by NixLuver · · Score: 5, Informative
    I've owned a Zaurus SL5500 and innumerable (ok, well, 5, actuallly) palm based PDAs. Recently, I purchased a Palm Tungsten E.

    The Zaurus was an amazing critter; but most of its value was in pure Geek Factor. In Windows or in Linux, the Zaurus was interesting but plagued by ongoing random minor issues with synchronization, what version of QPE I was using, what the date was, and how I held my mouth. In Windows or in Linux, the Palm is nearly effortless.

    The Zaurus had many neat things. I could log in to it over the network (wireless); I could run a webserver on it; I could do all kinds of system things. But in the end, the actual D of the PDA is much more usable in the Palm. I'd love to have the time and the money to develop replacements for the Palm software to run on the Zaurus, but I simply don't; I need something that works, and works well, right now.

    Not to mention the fact that, comparitively, the Zaurus is enormous. It's easily half again as heavy, and an inch longer, and a little thicker, than the tungsten E.

    If you go with the commercial QPE (that synchronizes well) functionality is low; if you go with the free embedded GUIs, functionality is high, but interoperability (in the form of synchronization with outlook and evolution) is low. Even with all the objections fielded in this discussion, the Palm is like a Sound Blaster - it just works.

    And it's sad, too. I love Linux, I love free software, I love the entire Opensource movement, and I wanted to be much more pleased with the Zaurus. I would say, all in all, PDA linux is where desktop linux was at RedHat 5.2. It will get there, eventually.

  19. the art of small programs by firewood · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Ironic, isn't it, that popularity is inversely proportional to difficulty of software development?

    Not ironic at all. When designing for a system with constraints (limited MIPs and RAM for early mainframes and PC's, mAH of battery and viewable kilopixels in handhelds, etc.), a developer who is capable of hand crafting an application to fit in that environment will be able to produce something far more usable than a trivial port of some bloatware meant for a system many times larger.

    Technology advances will help out some types of bloatware (e.g. Mr. Gates depends on Intel keeping up with Moore's law). But advances in battery energy density are very slow; so, in some ways, the constraints for optimal applications for handhelds will always be different than for PCs.

    One of the main failings of PocketPC handhelds is that a large portion of the applications for it are ports of applications meant for hardware with bigger displays, larger caches, and unlimited power (AC wall plug plus noisy fans).

  20. Interesting. by fireboy1919 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I have a Palm Pilot - specifically, a Tungsten E, their newest low end model, which I got for $170.

    So far, I've gotten movies to play in divx format with mmplayer (which means they're about 1/10 the size they were with the included app); 15 books to be stored in 3MB with plucker; a better light dimming system (you could hardly affect the light before) with dimmer, a NES emulator from nesem, and a remote control system (using your palm as a remote) through Omniremote.

    It also comes with Documents-to-Go, which can read and write word, excel and powerpoint documents (the same kind you find on the PC, not an import).

    What exactly am I missing in freedom of choice? All the stuff I chose didn't come with my Palm device, with the exception of Documents-to-Go, and one app is even GPL (plucker).

    I think I'm limited only by the speed of the processor, and for wireless stuff. I could have gotten the faster ones, or wireless, but I'd have paid more for those. I got a lot of bang for my buck, without paying the extra $130 that you did.

    --
    Mod me down and I will become more powerful than you can possibly imagine!
  21. Get Real... by cmay · · Score: 4, Funny

    I guess this story is true. It explains why the Palm and the Pocket PC have had no luck with sales, and the Zaurus has done so well. /sarcasm

    People want something that is easy to use, has lots of add of parts (camera, CF readers, network cards), and runs the software they want.

    I don't see any reason anyone should buy an OSS handheld, unless they hate MS and Palm that much, or are going to port some of their apps to the device.

  22. Ugh. by autechre · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.

    --
    WMBC freeform/independent online radio.