Slashdot Mirror
Qualcomm Adopts Linux for 3G Handsets
quan74 writes "According to an article at MacNewsWorld, it seems Qualcomm is the latest to add Linux to its handheld devices. 'By introducing Linux on the MSM, Qualcomm supports manufacturer partners who wish to leverage existing Linux applications, third-party developers and application catalogs to reduce their software development costs and improve time-to-market.' What I found interesting is that Linux will be the first third-party operating system supported by Qualcomm."
I'm all for pushing technology forward, but integrating so many functions into one device can have a downside..
I don't think we're too far off from having spyware for mobile phones that sends advertising SMS messages to everyone in your phone address book. Or even calls everyone and plays a pre-recorded message. As these things become more ubiquitous, they'll be a larger and larger target.
I'm a big tall mofo.
I remember reading somewhere that the cost of a single liscense of Windows Mobile is only a few bucks. What is the total cost saved by using Linux in handheld devices? It'd be interesting to compare.
Actually it's MACNewsWorld, it's actually a web publication that started out about MAC addresses (the raw addresses used by Ethernet, and more recently 802.11 devices, to identify physical network connectors), but recently branched into discussing CDMA on the off chance that they might get more readers that way. It worked, they doubled their regular readership figure, getting six hits every month. Although three of those have Google searches in their Referrer: headers.
i doubt the companys will release the source code for the software even if it is linux. and considering the applicatiosn that run on these devices are ususaly very small and take little input from the user it should be easy for the developers to make it pretty secure. they could probaly even use some kind of hashing system to check the images to insure you cant use a cellphone with modified OS image.
Let's be short and sweet about this. It's is a contraction of "it is". It's a beautiful day!
Its is a posssessive adjective, something belongs to it. The computer crashed again. Its program is wrong.
Mastering the natural language can be as hard as mastering C++. But it's all precision symbol manipulation necessary to understand subtle meanings.
Feel free to mock my intelligence for forgetting the 'address of' & operator or messing up the pointer structure, but I don't want to hear anything about being a grammar Nazi. I only do this to keep people from knowing that you were smoking sinse in 4th grade instead of paying attention in English period.
The letters CDMA have two meanings: they refer to an air-interface technology, and they refer to a particular standard built on that technology, also known as IS-95. The technology is good. The standard is awful.
The sentence "CDMA is better than GSM" can only be refering to the standard, because GSM is a standard, not an air-interface technology. It's completely false, as anyone who's used both can attest. CDMA isn't location/network independent and it doesn't support, in its most widely implemented form, support personal mobility. It's essentially stuck in a 1970's mobile phone network mindset. It's sole advantage over GSM is the use of a CDMA-technology air interface.
The sentence "All of Europe is moving to CDMA" is only true if you switch meanings and start refering to the air interface technology in place of the standard.
I don't know if you're confused, or you're a Qualcomm shill. Qualcomm shills were taking advantage of people's confusion throughout the late nineties to try and ensure exactly this kind of "argument" could be made. People would post, apparently sincerely, "Well, GSM is based on TDMA, and my friend has a TDMA phone and the sound sucks and he doesn't have any features that aren't on my flash CDMA phone!", and more recently "Oh yeah? Well if CDMA sucks, why is Europe switching to it?" It's slight of hand. Stop it.
UMTS incidentally, which is what we're talking about Europe switching to, is essentially GSM2. The system is more modular, so operators can use different air interface technologies depending on their precise needs. Most are choosing WCDMA ("Wideband Code Division Multiple Access"). There is no connection whatsoever between this and the system Sprint PCS and Verizon Wireless uses beyond a similar principle being used to transmit data between the towers and the handsets.
You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
"...and that, by its nature, makes your job much more difficult."
No it doesn't. Nothing you said makes any sense at all. Linux, compared to other products that may be used, is not "so well understood and documented that you can produce products much faster". It's all a matter of what your development team already knows. Linux is unlikely to be easier to work with than other products made specifically for the purpose and keeping secrets does not require extra work. Linux has been around long enough already that we'd see the migration if what you said was true. Linux has so far failed as a PDA platform. Phones will be even harder.
does this mean the will be releasing a driver for the airport card on macs for linux.
at least I think it is them that manufacture the card.
I think we start throwing our weight around a little bit - where if these companies are going to use open source to make money then how about making some drivers for the everday devices - i.e. why doesn't ibm make a dvd player for linux that can ship with their laptops. I know I would buy one if that was the case.
go here to clear up confusion on wcdma/umts vs cdma2000 standards
CDMA2000
W-CDMA
Universal Mobile Telecommunications System
Linberg wasn't the first to cross the Atlantic, but most people think he was, most of those who know he wasn't (such as me) have no clue who was first.
I once worked for a company making routers years before Cisco started, yet Cisco has convinced everyone they were first. (I don't think this was intentional on their part) That company often introduced a new technology that Cisco released about a year latter. We never went anywhere though, while Cisco made billions.
First is interesting. It is useful for those who need it now. However first is not the jump most people think it is. Quality, price, reputation and marketing matter at least as much.