Slashdot Mirror
Verizon Joins Linux Mobile Foundation
An anonymous reader brings news that Verizon Wireless has announced plans to use a Linux-based software platform for phones on its network. Verizon is the first US mobile carrier to join the Linux Mobile Foundation, the goal of which is to "collaboratively develop a comprehensive Linux-based mobile software stack that can be modified easily and used at no cost on a wide range of hardware devices." Many had expected Verizon to go with Android, but according to the Register, Verizon feels Android "isn't as open as it would prefer." Continuing:
"Yes, Google bills Android as open. And, yes, it's backed by the Open Handset Alliance, another industry consortium calling for the open development of mobile apps. But [Verizon spokesman Jeffrey] Nelson argues that at this point, Google is calling the shots. 'Google said "Here's the plan. Sign on the dotted line if you support." It may end up being collaborative. It may end up being collegial. But it need not be.' He actually has a point. But maybe Verizon just wants more control over the situation. It should be noted that the company made sure it has a place on the LiMo board. In any event, Verizon says that customers will be free to attach any device and any application to its network by the end of the year - provided those devices and applications met certain minimum specifications. So, in theory, you'll have free rein to attach an Android phone even if you don't buy it from Verizon."
My blog
Of course, this will only be of any benefit to the users if they leave the 'modified easily and used at no cost on a wide range of hardware devices' aspect open to the users.
Judging by the past performance of Verizon, they will do anything possible to lock it down and maximise their profit stream/control over the platform.
At least it should make the devices more hackable though! :)
Is crushing a suspect's child's testicles illegal?
John Yoo: "No, [if] the President thinks he needs to do that."
Hans: Can you hear me now?
Linus: (pretending it's a bad connection) What?
Hans: Can you hear me now?
Linus: What? What?
Hans: Can you hear me now!!!!???
Linus: Sorry Hans, I can't hear you. Why don't you "have a talk" with that stupid Verizon guy.
I've been a Verizon customer now for about 5 years. The coverage is excellent here (Indianapolis) and the price is decent, so I've stuck around.
Really the only complaint I've had with them thus far is that basically every phone they sell is locked down and/or has it's interface completely changed when compared to the original phone, or the same phone sold to another carrier. Additionally, they are very choosy about how you can connect to their data network.
This "customers will be free to attach any device and any application to its network by the end of the year" seems like a complete 180 to that mindset. The only way I see them pulling that is if some huge charge is added to your data plan to allow it. They already nickel and dime you if you want to tether a phone instead of using their air card.
It just seems fishy to me.
Proudly supporting the Libertarian Party.
OK, so Verizon says you can BYO handset, but who actually makes CDMA handsets that are sold directly to end users, and not through Verizon or Sprint?
A friend and I were trying to have a conversation with an old friend via loudspeaker on a Symbian based phone. If you've ever tried this, you know how difficult it is to hear the each other. What's especially annoying is that we had more than one phone on hand, but setting up a three way call is painfully difficult and expensive, but more importantly, it's completely unnecessary. There's no reason why any number of handsets can not be linked via bluetooth and only one make the call to the third party.
This is one example of the creative ways communications problems can be solved.. but only if you have an open platform.
How we know is more important than what we know.
This isn't remotely funny.
What's funny about this?
Is crushing a suspect's child's testicles illegal?
John Yoo: "No, [if] the President thinks he needs to do that."
itsatrap? anyone?
c++;
For a fee.
Yep, Verizon built a US$20 million lab to 'certify' products submitted for use on their network, and expects to recoup that investment by charging for their certification services. So unless someone with reasonably deep pockets is gonna back your whatsmawhoseits it won't going on Verizon's network. Compare this to, say, T-Mobile whose policy is pretty much if it takes a SIM plug it in and they'll be happy to bill you for it.
What is Verizons real goal?
Getting out of the phone business.
No carrier likes to be in the phone business - it costs money for all of those stores & racks of phones & inventory management and huge support overhead, not to mention the complex subsidy plans that everyone loathes. So Verizon's plan is to outsource it all to the phone manufacturers. Sure, buy any Verizon 'certified' phone (same as the rest of the world using GSM enjoys) and plug it in. Got a problem?? Call whomever you bought it from, or the manufacturer, just not Verizon.
It's an easy way for Verizon to expand the offerings on their network, at no risk or cost to Verizon, while shifting the overhead of supporting those phones elsewhere. Verizon will charge for the service, that lovely pricey plan, just now you'll be buying from their list of 'certified' products, not their Verizon-branded phones.
Expect in a few years to walk into Verizon stores with minimal selection of phones, just enough range to cover the basics for those too out-of-the-loop to buy their phone elsewhere. Or even a sublet strategy where phone manufacturers pay for square footage and supply their own staff to sell their brand phones.
But innovative homebrew startups etc.? Not on big red it'll be expensively certified products paying for the Verizon privilage thankyouverymuch.
I don't read ACs: If a post isn't worth so much as a nom de plume to its author then I wont bother either.
Will android allow us to use the antennah for other uses than connecting to the service provider?
Would be awesome to have free walky-talky functionality (direct signals between the phones instead of relying on the infrastructure) with anyone that has an android phone!
...to replace my Treo 650. I've got a 'two-year upgrade' due, and I like PalmOS, despite its limitations. But a Linux-based phone - assuming it wasn't totally locked-down by Verizon - would be even better. Maybe I'll hold off a while. :->
PHEM - party like it's 1997-2003!
where I'll have a dual-boot phone?
Prisencolinensinainciusol. Ol Rait!
There have been some references to Google being the competition, but what about Apple? Certainly the fact that Google AND Apple plan to introduce a new, more open model to devices puts pressure on Verizon to follow suit, doesn't it?
I'm a Verizon customer who also doesn't like the control-freak mentality there. They may be dragged into OS kicking and screaming, but I think they finally realized they don't have the option of not opening their devices if they want to remain one of the top-tier providers.
With the iPhone, they only had to worry about a small segment of customers possibly defecting to one other provider (AT&T). With the Google phone coming, all bets are off, and Verizon has to - HAS TO - follow a new model of openness. I'm more optimistic than I was before.
Verizon isn't going to be making the phones, so who cares what they prefer?
My guess is their junky rebranded phones with their custom programming will just be a huge cash cow for them, since they can make sure you only have the ability to download music and ringtones from the Verizon Store.
Real "open". Gotta love how linux is being used to give even more control to people who already have total control. But hey, anything and everything is justified in order to stick it to Microsoft.
You can already easily use native libraries in Android, even though it is officially unsupported.
.NET application a Linux application.
I can use native libraries in Mono, too... that doesn't mean that the fact that Mono runs on Linux makes a
The Android API may well be a better one than the UNIX API for a cellphone, by the way, so I'm not saying that this is necessarily a drawback to Android. What I'm saying is that it doesn't matter all that much to the developer whether the OS below the Android runtime is Linux, Windows CE, Windows PE, whatever the Symbian OS is called this week, Palm OS 5, BeOS, or Amiga.DE.
The whole "Android is Linux" meme is just muddying the waters... Android isn't using Linux as anything but an implementation tool. Android isn't about Linux. Android is about Android.
I was flipping through my RSS reader, read the title, and I'm in complete disbelief! Wait...
Ah, I was flipping too quickly the articles it appears... Woman Indicted In MySpace Suicide Case makes far more sense...
Never mind, I'll resume my basement dwelling browsing.
I was with Verizon 3 yrs ago, and their high prices and policies of not allowing "unsupported" handsets on their network made me switch over to T-Mobile and I haven't looked back since. I've got 3 unlocked phones with T-Mobile SIMS and the great thing is, I'm using their HotSpot@Home service so all my calls made at any WiFi hotspot go through VOIP and don't cost me a penny or use up any of my 1000 minutes! Verizon will never be an open company.
Run on sentences much? Painful and confusing as shit to read x_x
I'm sure you could write a simple C compiler for a JVM, after all there was one for the Burroughs A series. It wouldn't be very useful, and would run like molasses with a big old byte array simulating memory (which is what the Burroughs one did). Writing one that generated code that ran fast enough to be useful requires solving problems that so far as I know nobody's really addressed, and all that work would be part of the effort...
And even if I'm wrong, and you could do it with only (say) twice as much effort as implementing Smalltalk on the JVM, the fact that it would require that kind of effort to run UNIX (or Linux) programs on top of Android is just proving my point. It's not providing a Linux environment, it's providing a Java environment, the fact that Linux is involved is irrelevant to either the end user of the Android application developer: the API would be the same if it was implemented on top of Windows CE. It doesn't matter to people who want a Java environment, because they don't want a Linux one, and it doesn't matter to people who want a Linux environment, because it doesn't provide one. It only matters to Google because they can muddy the waters by talking about Linux.
However Androids goal was to make the cell phone the device it should be, not to make a 'Linux phone'.
That's fine, but the whole thrust of the slashdot conventional wisdom here is that Verizon is doing something underhanded by going with a "different Linux phone" instead of Android. And that's where I'm coming from here: if you're looking for a platform to run Linux software on a cellphone, then Android isn't the platform you're looking for, and castigating Verizon is, well, not fair.
Getting out of the phone business seems all the rage these days.
I've been really suspicious of Verizon's sudden turn to openness since the original announcement. The contrast between its announced future plans and its past actual behavior is stunning.
I'm also wondering where OpenMoko falls into all of this. Are they just whistling in the dark while the carriers line up behind Linux Mobile, Android and Apple?
I use Verizon (with several phones) because I travel over large areas and they have the best coverage for me. I can't say if they are going to open things up as they seem to be saying. However, my father-in-law works on the actual cell equipment for VzW and he told me that they are supposed to roll out a nationwide GSM network. I can't remember the timeframe, but I think it was in the next two years. Don't quote me on that...
Be very aware. This is a tactic. Nothing more. Keep in mind who VZ is, keep in mind past. Keep in mind future.
This person thinks that Android will significantly stunt Windows Mobil plans.
1. Change the Linux kernel's license to GPL.
2. Sue Verizon.
3. Enjoy the source!
-- Darren VanBuren
Do you know that T-Mobile is a subsid of the German National Telekom? No? Well,have a look: http://www.telekom.de/
Martin
That I can buy a phone from Verizon without paying Microsoft for Windows Mobile?
That's my largest complaint against the major laptop manufacturers. They don't care if I load Linux myself, provided that I purchase a copy of Windows with the computer.
Forcing me to purchase something I do not want, do not need, and would not choose to purchase should be illegal.
This is a joke, most certainly it must raise a flag - "The enemy is exploring the building..."