Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Nokia to Acquire and Open Source Symbian

Posted by timothy on from the to-fight-an-android-you-must-become-one dept.

zyzko writes "Nokia has placed an offer on Symbian stock — it currently owns a 48% share and intends to buy the other shareholders out, 91% of the stockholders have already agreed. The press has already labeled this as an countermeasure to fight Android. Nokia has also created Symbian foundation — it might mean more open Symbian." Symbian is "currently the world's dominant smartphone operating system (206 million phones shipped, 18.5 million in Q1 2008)," writes reader thaig, who points out coverage in the Economic Times. If this deal goes through as expected, the Foundation says that selected components of the Symbian operating system would be made available as open source at launch under the Eclipse Public License (EPL) 1.0 , with the rest of the platform following over the next two years.

150 comments

  1. This merger will bring a new meaning. . . by smooth+wombat · · Score: 3, Funny

    to the phrase, "I'll just put my phone on vibrate."

    --
    We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
    1. Re:This merger will bring a new meaning. . . by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "I'll just put my phone on vibrate."

      No, no, no. Not "sybian". Symbian.
    2. Re:This merger will bring a new meaning. . . by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A new phone with Sybian technology would certainly make it easier to locate those flight passangers who merely put their phone on vibrate...

  2. They've been planning this for a long time by TuringTest · · Score: 5, Informative

    Nokia has been known for experimenting with open source in the recent years. This surely was a way to test the waters in community-driven development, to learn how to go along and specially what not to do.

    --
    Singularity: a belief in the "God" idea with the "demiurge" relation inverted.
    1. Re:They've been planning this for a long time by edderly · · Score: 1

      I don't think you should link pro or anti DRM measures implicitly to 'open-source'ness' as in GPLv3 (see Linus's concerns about this http://www.linux.com/articles/51826)

    2. Re:They've been planning this for a long time by abigsmurf · · Score: 2, Informative

      Actually this licence seems much more DRM friendly and I get the impression that's why it's chosen. Having the biggest phone OS released on a non-GPL open source licence could be seen as a big "up yours" to the increasingly restrictive 'free' licence.

    3. Re:They've been planning this for a long time by TuringTest · · Score: 1

      Actually, with the "what not to do" I didn't mean favoring DRM, but stating comments that upset the whole tech-savvy open source community.

      --
      Singularity: a belief in the "God" idea with the "demiurge" relation inverted.
    4. Re:They've been planning this for a long time by master5o1 · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      They buy Trolltech, then let us assume they are holding Qt ransom for DRM friendliness. Then they Open Source Symbian to try and gain our trust. I suppose.

      --
      signature is pants
    5. Re:They've been planning this for a long time by efence · · Score: 1

      The key here is "selected components [...] would be made available as open source".

      Both Nokia and Symbian still continue to offer paid "partner-only" API. Even though Nokia says they don't charge for licensing the APIs, only "processing fees", Symbian one is insanely expensive as you have to join their Platinum Program to access it.

      Anyone correct me if I'm wrong. Last I checked it was still the case.

    6. Re:They've been planning this for a long time by edderly · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I don't think it upsets the 'whole' community. It's obviously bound to upset the say-alot/contribute-nothing crowd and Stallmanites.

      Sure, perhaps it's not the best idea to raise issues which aren't popular with a certain body of people.

      In the real world we have plenty of products which incorporate open source technologies and DRM. DRM will die for a lot better reasons than not being open source friendly.

    7. Re:They've been planning this for a long time by superash · · Score: 2, Informative

      Selected components will be made available as open source immediately. The rest will be open source by two years.

    8. Re:They've been planning this for a long time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So basically the "whole tech-savvy open source community" is so immature that none of its allies can't do an upfront statement about his intention when they dont agree on some points because it could get upset?
      I don't think so, fortunatly.
      This is a very immature view of the situation.

    9. Re:They've been planning this for a long time by Ginger+Unicorn · · Score: 4, Insightful
      The GPL ensures the freedom of the all users, by restricting distributors from withholding the source from downstream users - a similar freedom those distributors enjoyed which allowed them access to the source code in their binaries in their first place. Do you honestly feel the minor "restriction" (more accurately a simple and easily fulfilled obligation) to not withhold what was freely shared to you is worse than the deliberate act of constructing DRM, to facilitate the imposition of any and every arbitrary whim of the distributor on all downstream users?

      In terms of the freedom of all users as a collective, rather than just the subset of users that want to insert DRM to restrict the freedom of all users, there is no Freer licence than the GPL. Having a set of rules to ensure freedom is a hell of a lot freer than a total absence of rules.

      take the example of the US constitution - what's freer - that set of "restrictions" or a total anarchy?

      --
      (1.21 gigawatts) / (88 miles per hour) = 30 757 874 newtons
    10. Re:They've been planning this for a long time by Constantine+XVI · · Score: 5, Informative

      Once again, if Nokia stops releasing Qt open source, the Free Qt agreement kicks in, and it's forced open (under BSD, IIRC) and given to KDE.

      --
      "I think an etch-a-sketch with an ethernet port would beat IE7 in web standards compliance."
    11. Re:They've been planning this for a long time by Darkness404 · · Score: 1

      increasingly restrictive 'free' licence.

      Ummm... How is the GPL restrictive? You can put DRM in a GPL'd application, you can't complain when they take it out though, you can't make a proprietary product from the source, making Nokia immune to other proprietary phone makers copying the source... The GPL offers the most freedom to the user, and really, that is what counts.
      --
      Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
    12. Re:They've been planning this for a long time by bob.appleyard · · Score: 1

      Who says anarchy doesn't have rules? It's mostly a matter of who makes em.

      --
      How dare you be so modest!! You conceited bastard!!
    13. Re:They've been planning this for a long time by Ilgaz · · Score: 2, Informative

      Yes they bought "your" Qt just to close the evil Qt which they have been using for years. It is a major evil Nokia conspiracy.Like, they didn't want a common, proven framework for OS/CPU neutral future.

    14. Re:They've been planning this for a long time by RiotingPacifist · · Score: 1

      What happens if they put OSS QT on lifesupport and it met the minimum requirements for the free qt agreement and released QT pro with most of the development?

      Not saying this will happen but im sure its easy for them to get out of free qt agreement if they want.

      --
      IranAir Flight 655 never forget!
    15. Re:They've been planning this for a long time by Abreu · · Score: 1

      Fork?

      --
      No sig for the moment.
    16. Re:They've been planning this for a long time by Plutonite · · Score: 1

      Off topic: Kingship is not like property. Property can be bought and sold, the individual's economic means enables them to maintain ownership. The individual's economic means, in turn, are determined (in a free society) by several factors related to the physical and mental capabilities with which they have been endowed by nature, or (as you imply) the simple material benefits bestowed by their parents. Either way, the receiver has little say in the matter, and life is not fair. Those who are willing to exert effort to utilize their natural abilities/luck/circumstances will usually do better, hence free society's greatest "properties" belong to people who did not have them to begin with.

      Kingship is different - revolution and conquest are how things change hands. They are not the norm. Property was made for, and is inevitably involved in, daily exchange.

      Free society can be beautiful.
      Communism always sucks.

    17. Re:They've been planning this for a long time by drsmithy · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Do you honestly feel the minor "restriction" (more accurately a simple and easily fulfilled obligation) to not withhold what was freely shared to you [...]

      But that's not what the GPL is about. The GPL is about sharing what was given to you and anything you've done as well that might be (by a ridiculously broad brush) considered a "derivative work".

      You license something under the GPL when you want to influence what other people can do with their code. If all you want to do is keep your code "free", then the BSDL does just as good a job.

      In terms of the freedom of all users as a collective, rather than just the subset of users that want to insert DRM to restrict the freedom of all users, there is no Freer licence than the GPL. Having a set of rules to ensure freedom is a hell of a lot freer than a total absence of rules.

      The "freedom from" argument can be used to justify pretty much anything. You just need to pick your pet cause that "people" must have the "freedom from" being subjected to.

      take the example of the US constitution - what's freer - that set of "restrictions" or a total anarchy?

      To use but one obvious example, the US consitution does not offer people the "freedom from" hate speech. Ergo, a Constituation that outlawed hate speech would be "freer" because of that.

    18. Re:They've been planning this for a long time by mr_matticus · · Score: 2, Informative

      Do you honestly feel the minor "restriction" (more accurately a simple and easily fulfilled obligation) to not withhold what was freely shared to you is worse than the deliberate act of constructing DRM No, but that's not the restriction (and it's amusing to see the hypocritical redefinition of 'restriction' to "restriction"--if that's not telling, I don't know what is).

      The very real restriction is that someone is giving you code, not for free, but with the attached strings that if you want to improve the code and you want to share that product with others, you have to share your code as well. This is offensive and no more or less free than proprietary software.

      Continuing to share that which was already freely distributed is one thing; parasitically leeching your own efforts so that you, the creator, no longer have a say...well that's totally different.

      In terms of the freedom of all users as a collective, rather than just the subset of users that want to insert DRM to restrict the freedom of all users, there is no Freer licence than the GPL. Horseshit. That's a packaged phrase from the RMS army, but it's not true.

      The freest license most people are conversant in is the BSD license in some ways (MIT also has some interesting consequences).

      The GPL just swings the pendulum the other way. If proprietary licenses are all about the developers, the GPL is all about the users. Neither generalization is strictly true, but you people complain about closed-source licenses without tolerating the exact same complaints in your holy GPL. Frankly, the GPL isn't free at all.

      If it were truly a free release, a person could do anything s/he wanted with that code, including making internal improvements and releasing it under a proprietary license. That has no effect on the original, open code. It still exists. It's still available to anyone who wants it. There's no harm if the original intent was to release "free" code--if you have an expectation of profit, even if it's in the form of gaining free access to the work of another, it's not free. Reciprocity is an economically and intellectually binding force, neither free in spirit nor in price.

      The delicious hypocrisy is that GPL zealots are also often the loudest preachers of "copyright infringement doesn't hurt anyone"--and yet, if you dare close off your GPL improvements, they cry havoc.

    19. Re:They've been planning this for a long time by TuringTest · · Score: 1

      You misunderstand the scope of the GPL. Despite its wording, the real effect it has is not on freedom of code, but on freedom of whole software projects.

      The intent never was to provide "free code", but to gather a group of people around the goals for which that code was created, and ensuring that those people has no artificial restrictions to use the code created to fulfill that goal. In this context, there is harm in someone modifying the code and releasing closed versions. Even if the original, unmodified code is still present, the new code is competing in the same environment, and people in the project has no longer access to the enhancements - they must rebuild it for themselves. The net result is that the free rider benefited from the community work, and now the community is left worse than it began.

      This is what the GPL restrictions avoid, and it *does* protect freedom for the people in the project (although it reduces freedom for the people outside it. Yes, the GPL is selfish in its nature; and that's why it works so well in practice, its economical principles are sound).

      If you value code created so that "a person could do anything s/he wanted with that code, including making internal improvements and releasing it under a proprietary license", be free to release under MIT and BSD. The GPL was NEVER intended for that purpose. If you find that offensive, well, what can one say about people being offended because others don't have the same exact intentions than oneself?

      The delicious hypocrisy is that GPL zealots are also often the loudest preachers of "copyright infringement
      doesn't hurt anyone"

      Now that was pure trolling. GPL supporters are ALL for copyright enforcement (at least within the present body of law), since the GPL requires it to work. We can hope for a reduced length truer to its original intent, or for enforcing the (legal) fair use provisions, but that's a different beast than "copyright infringement".
      --
      Singularity: a belief in the "God" idea with the "demiurge" relation inverted.
    20. Re:They've been planning this for a long time by mr_matticus · · Score: 2, Interesting

      You misunderstand the scope of the GPL. Despite its wording, the real effect it has is not on freedom of code, but on freedom of whole software projects. On the contrary, it is the supporters of the GPL who dramatically misunderstand its consequences. The GPL is not a project license, period.

      Your contention is interesting, but not supported by reality. The release of GPL code is not confined in any way to "the project", nor does the development of closed-off modifications have any impact on the fulfillment of the goal. Lack of progress is not the same thing as detriment.

      Even if the original, unmodified code is still present, the new code is competing in the same environment, and people in the project has no longer access to the enhancements - they must rebuild it for themselves. That is what freedom means. If you are releasing something into the wild for free, you must accept the possibility that someone will take it and improve it without sharing those improvements with you.

      The net result is that the free rider benefited from the community work, and now the community is left worse than it began. The community is no worse off. It simply isn't the recipient of benefits. Calling the licensee a "free rider" has the exact effect of proving that the license isn't about freedom at all, but merely a different sort of expectation of profit.

      The GPL was NEVER intended for that purpose. And thus it is not truly free, in any sense of the word. Excited zealotry notwithstanding, it's exactly as restrictive as a proprietary license, just in different ways to different people.

      Now that was pure trolling. GPL supporters are ALL for copyright enforcement You can't possibly say that with a straight face. Some of the biggest Slashdot GPL astroturfers are also vocal about copyright infringement not being a detriment, because those people never intended to pay for the product, ergo it is not a "lost sale", or that there is no loss because the creator still has everything he had to begin with (nevermind that that is demonstrably false, because the only thing the creator had was exclusivity, and that property has been taken without intent to return).

      That's not to say that there aren't those with a sane approach to the issue, but many of the posters in this thread are not among them.

      GPL advocacy crosses into demonstrably false zealotry when it proclaims to be the "freest" license. It simply is not even close. There's nothing wrong with the GPL or its goals, but there is no need to pretend it is something it isn't. The need to establish that false dichotomy seems to be preprogrammed into its supporters, though, because they can't seem to function without declaring proprietary licenses evil and theirs the Holy Lord of Software Licensing.

      The right tool for the right job. No software developer should begrudge any other the right to license their hard work and well-deserved property rights in the manner they see fit and to the extent they see fit. Trying to force GPL down everyone's throats is simply another kind of greed, no more or less noble than the peddlers of closed-source licenses.

    21. Re:They've been planning this for a long time by Ginger+Unicorn · · Score: 1

      yeah sorry, anarchy was a not the correct word to use there, i meant an absence of law

      --
      (1.21 gigawatts) / (88 miles per hour) = 30 757 874 newtons
    22. Re:They've been planning this for a long time by Ginger+Unicorn · · Score: 1
      The GPL is about sharing what was given to you and anything you've done as well that might be (by a ridiculously broad brush) considered a "derivative work".

      how is it a ridiculously broad brush? please justify this.

      You just need to pick your pet cause that "people" must have the "freedom from" being subjected to.

      i think you need to reread my statement and you'll find you have i clearly stated, and indeed my whole point was, that the GPL's "pet cause" is the freedom of users to have complete access to all derivatives of your work.

      --
      (1.21 gigawatts) / (88 miles per hour) = 30 757 874 newtons
    23. Re:They've been planning this for a long time by amorsen · · Score: 1

      No software developer should begrudge any other the right to license their hard work and well-deserved property rights in the manner they see fit and to the extent they see fit.

      Copyright isn't a natural right. It's just a restraint on trade. Many of us believe it has outlived its usefulness.

      --
      Finally! A year of moderation! Ready for 2019?
    24. Re:They've been planning this for a long time by mr_matticus · · Score: 1

      Natural rights don't have anything to do with anything.

      Creators do indeed have a fundamental right to that which they create, however, and that includes nothing short of complete dominion.

      Calling it a restraint on trade is a clever, but ultimately ineffective, approach. Any property right is by definition a restraint on trade. Further, the implication that trade should be wholly unrestrained is ipso facto invalid. Just look at what happens to water quality.

  3. symbian development by Keruo · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Is symbian devel environment still considered as form of S/M or has it evolved into something usable during last 3 years?
    Haven't tried it since.

    --
    There are no atheists when recovering from tape backup.
    1. Re:symbian development by efence · · Score: 1

      Well, at least one year ago, it still was the most painful platform I had to develop for. Didn't touch it since then. However, Nokia's Carbide C++ v1.2 was a major step-up from v1.1 (still far from perfect). Now that v1.3 is out I may give it another shot, though I don't expect anything spectacular.

      Windows emulator in S60 SDK is still consistently crap.

    2. Re:symbian development by PhrostyMcByte · · Score: 1

      If Symbian goes open source, maybe we can get good native code running on it instead of the bastardization of C++ it currently uses.

      Countermeasure to fight Android? Hah - Android won't even be in my sights until they let me write native code for it.

    3. Re:symbian development by blackpaw · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Its become much *much* worse. The number of classes has increased to over 1700. Documentation is terrible. Code signing has immensely complicated everything.

      However python has become very capable with solid support from Nokia - we're using it for a commercial project. I suspect Nokia are planning to use it in place of the abomination Java has become on smartphones.

    4. Re:symbian development by Yetihehe · · Score: 1

      Native code for what? You would need to write native code for all supported platforms versus java code for all platforms.

      --
      Extreme Programming - Redundant Array of Inexpensive Developers
    5. Re:symbian development by jimicus · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Its become much *much* worse. The number of classes has increased to over 1700. Documentation is terrible. Code signing has immensely complicated everything.

      That had me thinking, actually.


      It's all well and good open-sourcing Symbian but if nobody can run their own home-compiled version because their mobile phone refuses to run an unsigned OS image, then you'll have a lot of trouble getting anyone outside of Nokia to put in any development effort.

    6. Re:symbian development by edderly · · Score: 1

      The way to do this is to get an Open Signed i.e. limited to particular devices.

      http://developer.symbian.com/main/signed/

      Alternatively I wouldn't be surprised a port turned up for something like:

      http://beagleboard.org/

      or some such future variant

    7. Re:symbian development by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Yeah, in Java the same SKU would work everywhere just like that. No need to take into account bazillion different apis, implementation and hardware differences and myriads of bugs. Not to speak about working around things because the platform likes to pretend that devices are the same when they aren't. Oh wait..

      In all seriousness, I've found native code hell of a lot easier to deal with than J2ME.

    8. Re:symbian development by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      You can run your homemade code on selected terminals just fine. You just cannot run that code on ALL terminals. Like it or not, this restriction has largely accounted for the lack of viruses under Symbian.

    9. Re:symbian development by Hal_Porter · · Score: 1

      Is symbian devel environment still considered as form of S/M or has it evolved into something usable during last 3 years? Haven't tried it since.

      I'm sorry my code crashes on Arm with a KERN-EXEC 3 or sometimes a KERN-EXEC 0. I'll have to get back to you on that.
      --
      echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
    10. Re:symbian development by Ilgaz · · Score: 1

      Signing policy prevents viruses. Ask Nokia why they were forced to it. Lots of stuff can already run self signed, what Nokia and others doesn't want unsigned applications do is basically root access.
      Lets not confuse who to blame (Cabir) and the people who robotically accepts every warning their device displays.
      It is still better than draconian Apple policy, I hope one day those DRM whiners will figure Apple iPhone is a DRM providers dream and have balls to say it. Deep level firmware hacking doesn't count as openness,

    11. Re:symbian development by vhogemann · · Score: 1

      Android does not use the J2ME VM. Instead it uses the Dalvik VM (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dalvik_virtual_machine).

      One might expect that the Android API's will be more consistent across devices than the various J2ME implementations.

      --
      ---- You know how some doctors have the Messiah complex - they need to save the world? You've got the "Rubik's" complex
    12. Re:symbian development by skulgnome · · Score: 1

      C++ with a twist of horseshit, is the expression I've been hearing.

    13. Re:symbian development by digitalchinky · · Score: 1

      Stable door, wide open already sir. Symbian platform security is easily bypassed. http://www.symbian-freak.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=18252

      From a corporate perspective I would agree that the whole issue of certificates and signing is a tempting way to entice development, but it didn't work. It's dead.

      I think there is a whole bunch more to this story than Nokia or Symbian are prepared to say in public.

    14. Re:symbian development by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Its become much *much* worse. The number of classes has increased to over 1700. Well.. show me a system which covers approximately the same area and Ill count classes/functions for you :P Believe me, if you want to do many things you have to have many classes and functions... or you can become architecture astronaut and do one class doing everything.
    15. Re:symbian development by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hm do you understand what you are reading? they do this through debugger, everyting is in ram... what a hack :P

    16. Re:symbian development by CockMonster · · Score: 1

      Ya you're probably unaware of the memory alignment issues with ARM processors. Not Symbian's fault.

    17. Re:symbian development by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not necessarily as simple as that

      http://www.newlc.com/forum/kern-exec-3-error

      I actually spent a load of time debugging an error on Symbian. It was wretched. The bug only happened on an ARM and only if you turned of debug printfs. There was a huge gob of of third party code from various places that I only had a binary of. I could put some debugging information the source code which was above and below that code. There was no JTAG on the board and the place I worked dealt with errors like this by handing them over to contractors and then firing them if they couldn't fix it or blame someone else plausibly. I wrote some code to log integers to a ram buffer and used it to check which third party code was breaking a contract, in this case by not calling a call back.

      Eventually I found that out which part and passed it on to the appropriate third party.

      The problem with Symbian is that is very easy for bad programmers to produce code with horrible timing problems. Or that performs badly. I knew some code that run on Symbian which was tested and managed to saturate a modem at 115K baud. All seemed ok. When tested in a Lan, it topped out at say 300K baud. As in it was awful. It was based on active objects and someone wasn't calling Complete. But it was hard to see who, because it was all third party binary blobs.

      And there's the overhead of bad C++ code. It's quite easy to write code which will perform OK an PC processort in the emulator. In fact the more C++ you know, the more you are likely to geek out and so that.

      Run it on Arm and it crawls. And if you at it you find that it spends all its time running contructors and destructors. On a PC the compiler is a bit better and the processor is 100x faster so you don't notice that your class hierarchy is enormously inefficient.

      The place I worked out had a bunch of permies who were self described C++ gurus who would spend a lot of time designing for the next generation platform and punt all the bug fixing off onto contractors, so they could hide themselves from the grim reality that the stuff they wrote was a mass of timing issues.

      Plus Symbian has cleanup stacks and string descriptors. In many ways it reminded me of Win16, and OS that was full of gunk that might have helped it run on really underpowered systems but is unnecessary now and just makes it hard to program. Essentially it shows the danger of premature optimisation.

      Active Objects are the absolutely epitome of Symbian's premature optimisation. The idea is that you can have a load of objects running in one thread and sharing one stack. Back in the old Epoc days this was apparently a big win, though I think even there some geek just politiced to get his favourite hack made into a design pattern.

      And of course this means your objects are then cooperatively multitasking, so if one is badly behaved you will have issues. That was the reason for the unscalable network code, if the system had spent the extra few KB for a bunch of stacks it wouldn't have been so hard to make it work. At the point I left I saw a very impressive presentation from one of the permies explaining how he used Ethereal to track TCP acks. But he couldn't say which object was failing to call complete. Essentially the error could be fixed, but not by anyone I n

      Symbian sucks basically. For the same reasons that Win16 sucked, i.e. it has a load of legacy baggage from the days where it run on crippled systems. And the focus on C++ tends to encourage posers to build obfuscated class hierarchies that are inefficient.

  4. Leaves by Reality+Master+201 · · Score: 1

    Yeah. Personally I'd rather just use something newer that isn't full of cruft.

    1. Re:Leaves by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Me too. Hence my commitment to Windows!

    2. Re:Leaves by aXi · · Score: 0, Redundant

      you do know that windows is layer upon layer of cruft, with even cruft that's crufted in a crufted layer of cruft.

    3. Re:Leaves by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Way to miss the joke...

  5. What about Sony? by neokushan · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Since UIQ is based on Symbian, how will this affect Sony Ericsson phones?
    Technically they're in direct competition with Nokia, so if they sell their stake in Symbian, will they come to some sort of licensing agreement or do you think we'll see Sony either develop their own OS or switch to Android/Windows Mobile?

    --
    +1 IDisagreeSoHeMustBeATrollOrAnAstroturferOrAShill
    1. Re:What about Sony? by edderly · · Score: 1


      They get Symbian OS for free (and Series 60 access too) plus they have thrown UIQ into the Symbian Foundation pot.

    2. Re:What about Sony? by janslu · · Score: 2, Interesting

      "Sony Ericsson and Motorola will contribute the UIQ platform, and NTT DoCoMo will contribute its MOAP platform". They have already laid off more than half of UIQ employees. Seems like the end of UIQ.

    3. Re:What about Sony? by superash · · Score: 5, Informative

      FTA: "Nokia will contribute Symbian and its S60 software assets to the foundation, while other members will put in their UIQ and MOAP software to create a new joint Symbian platform in 2009."
      So, basically Sony Erricson will submit their UIQ code base to Symbian foundation, Nokia will sumbit S60 code base and NTTDoCoMo will give MOAP. Anyone in the Symbian foundation can use each others' UI framework on top of Symbian!

    4. Re:What about Sony? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sony Ericsson and Motorola (50% stakeholders in UIQ) are both contributing their UIQ wares to the Symbian Foundation. The idea here to create an open royalty free development platform.

    5. Re:What about Sony? by neokushan · · Score: 1

      Is that what Android was meant to be?

      --
      +1 IDisagreeSoHeMustBeATrollOrAnAstroturferOrAShill
    6. Re:What about Sony? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Since UIQ is based on Symbian, how will this affect Sony Ericsson phones? Technically they're in direct competition with Nokia, so if they sell their stake in Symbian, will they come to some sort of licensing agreement or do you think we'll see Sony either develop their own OS or switch to Android/Windows Mobile?

      They have a Windows Mobile phone coming out

      http://www.adonismobile.com/2008/02/leaked-experia-x1-runs-on-windows.html
    7. Re:What about Sony? by holdenholden · · Score: 1

      The ETA of the UTF is ASAP AFAIK but NTTDoCoMo and MOAT just LOL because IANAL. FTFY.

    8. Re:What about Sony? by fredrik70 · · Score: 1

      judging from this (swedish) article in idg.se, they're pretty much toast... They're planning to get rid of 200 of their 370 employees,ouch....

      --
      if (!signature) { throw std::runtime_error("No sig!"); }
    9. Re:What about Sony? by Moochman · · Score: 1

      According to this press release, "Nokia, Sony Ericsson, Motorola and NTT DOCOMO announced today their intent to unite Symbian OS(TM), S60, UIQ and MOAP(S) to create one open mobile software platform." So actually they're not just contributing the separate code bases but actively attempting to create a new unified platform:

  6. Awareness... by superash · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This is an amazing move by the mobile giant(at least in Europe and Asia) and it again shows that they can and will react to what is going on around them. They accepted that they got their ass kicked by Apple/Google and they accepted the challenge which made them buy Trolltech(Qt) and now Symbian. And this buyout is understandable from Nokia's point of view as just last year they paid close to $250million to Symbian in licensing fees.

    Now the market is really heating up. After the whole Symbian OS and S60 goes open source Microsoft/Apple will be under lot of pressure to react to this. Even though lot of consumers will not bother if the platform is open or not, once touch devices are unveiled by Nokia, the number of applications that will be developed will be huge. Not to mention the contributions will be from all the major handset vendors (LG, Samsung, Motorola etc). For once I think we have all the evil corporates agree on something whcih looks like will make the consumers life easy.

    1. Re:Awareness... by glebd · · Score: 2, Interesting

      As far as ease of development is concerned, at least Apple has nothing to fear. When iPhone SDK was out, I tried it and was amazed at how pleasant mobile device development can be, in stark contrast to Symbian OS SDK.

    2. Re:Awareness... by dave420 · · Score: 4, Informative

      Got their ass kicked? Was that a joke? Check out the market stats on Nokia phones, and you'll see how ridiculous that statement is.

    3. Re:Awareness... by Poorcku · · Score: 1

      +5 everything. oh and +2 damage and 15% critical strike.

      --
      I take my children to see Madonna(..), but I never for once ever thought I was in the same business.Chris Rea.
    4. Re:Awareness... by Ilgaz · · Score: 2, Informative

      Not ass kicked perhaps and iphone is still a complete prison compared to Symbian and even Windows mobile but one must admit that iPhone changed lots of things at Nokia and Symbian scene.

      When you enter http://www.s60.com/ , it says "Open to new features" which is exactly true. Now Nokia and Symbian is way more open source friendly and they even ship a POSIX framework and openly support Pyhton development which already creates wonders. Nobody would even imagine Nokia releasing a web server running in mobile phones along with all open source frameworks. As owner of the first ever Symbian hit, 7650 I can easily tell you.

      What they had to do is discipline the known 3rd party commercial developers and popular symbian shops to prevent them from shipping trivial software for ridiculous prices. The open source Symbian will generate a flow of good quality software to the OS and their smart phones.

    5. Re:Awareness... by trawg · · Score: 1

      I assume GP is referring to Nokia in the US where - according to what I've read on Slashdot, anyway (I'm not in the US) - they don't have as big market share.

  7. More Linux friendly.. by s0litaire · · Score: 1

    Hopefully access to the source will make the Nokia Symbian phones a bit more Linux friendly :S

    --
    Laters Sol "Have you found the secrets of the universe? Asked Zebade "I'm sure I left them here somewhere"
    1. Re:More Linux friendly.. by Radical+Emu · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Imagine, a full Linux install (at least on phones like the N95 etc), running skype over wifi... I don't think the phone companies would like that.

      --
      I know there's a Hell, I've worked in retail.
    2. Re:More Linux friendly.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can do that today. I didn't see anything about Linux, though.

    3. Re:More Linux friendly.. by Radical+Emu · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Skype currently runs on the N800 etc Internet Tablets (which don't handle calls or SMS), not on the average cellphone It's a dream, but a Linux friendly Nokia, that could handle apps such as skype could mean people on bad/expensive/silly tarrifs have the ability to use skype from a normal cell/mobile phone, thus eliminating a lot of cost. Though, mentioning the idea to the world at large gives cell companies a headstart into stopping such developments! Still, would be nice to see 'Nokibuntu' or something one day!

      --
      I know there's a Hell, I've worked in retail.
    4. Re:More Linux friendly.. by TuringTest · · Score: 1

      Still, would be nice to see 'Nokibuntu' or something one day!

      How about... today?
      --
      Singularity: a belief in the "God" idea with the "demiurge" relation inverted.
    5. Re:More Linux friendly.. by dwater · · Score: 1

      iinm, you can already do that on any s60 phone with wifi (eg n95) using an application called Nimbuzz - http://get.nimbuzz.com/

      I think it does msn and yahoo voice too (no video though).

      --
      Max.
    6. Re:More Linux friendly.. by ketilwaa · · Score: 1

      On my Nokia N82 mobile phone VoIP has its place in the connection settings by default. I'm sure there is loads about it in the manual, which I haven't read yet.

    7. Re:More Linux friendly.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >not on the average cellphone It's a dream

      What are you talking about? Skype runs on Symbian phones for several years now.

    8. Re:More Linux friendly.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The phone companies would love that as they could then easily buy Skype and they would own all calls forever.

      Perhaps you know there is a ten year old standard for VoIP called SIP? That's an open standard which you can use against any provider you wish, or no provider at all if both ends are on IP.

      TODAY if you buy a Nokia S60 phone, there is SIP calling over wifi AND 3g built in. That's a bit more serious competition.

  8. I dont understand...... by Lumpy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    First breath, " OSS needs to be more DRM and hate the customer attitude friendly. We need to lock this stuff up so the customer can not do what they want!"

    Second Breath, "WE are buying the Symbian Phone OS, can we get some free developers on this? we will Open source it! Mmkay? thanks!"

    So which is it? did they retract their previous standce that DRM and locking was wonderful and needed?

    --
    Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    1. Re:I dont understand...... by abigsmurf · · Score: 4, Insightful

      They're using an open source licence that has no qualms about integration with DRM measures. OSS != free from DRM measures despite what some people would have you believe

    2. Re:I dont understand...... by unfunk · · Score: 2, Interesting

      "Open Source" and "Digital Rights/Restrictions Management" are not mutually exclusive things - after all, isn't DRM on your iTunes library or whatever metaphorically the same as not allowing other users of your Linux box access to your files, or making them read-only for anyone that's not you?

      ...just... more restricted...

    3. Re:I dont understand...... by Candid88 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      DRM and closed/Open Source are not the same thing. As far as cellphone makers go, Nokia are one of the few advocates of open source software.

      They never said DRM was "wonderful", they said it was "necessary". They have a platform they want to bring content to, it's plainly obvious it's the content providers who are the cause of the "necessary" bit.

    4. Re:I dont understand...... by morgan_greywolf · · Score: 1

      after all, isn't DRM on your iTunes library or whatever metaphorically the same as not allowing other users of your Linux box access to your files, or making them read-only for anyone that's not you?

      No. The people for whom I'm blocking file access didn't pay for my files. I paid for the DRMed music/videos. You are putting restrictions on what I can and cannot do with something I paid good money for.

      It's like if I sell you a car and then throw in a EDLA (End Driver License Agreement) that prevents you from lending the car to others or to resell it. You would be stupid to agree to any such thing. Hence, I recommend all people do not purchase things that use Digital Restrictions Management.

      --
      My blog
    5. Re:I dont understand...... by Yetihehe · · Score: 1

      Open source is like "Please look at our sources and if you can, try to make better"
      DRM is like "No, you can't have our files, you may view this if you pay (but we can revoke your rights any time we want)"
      I don't know itunes, but this is probably "you can view these files only on APPLE ipod, not other players. If you lose your files, you should have made backup (oh, you can't? hahaha!)"

      --
      Extreme Programming - Redundant Array of Inexpensive Developers
    6. Re:I dont understand...... by Ash+Vince · · Score: 1, Flamebait

      People who espouse your point of view are usually naive little students who are still living off mommy and daddy. After glancing at your blog long enough to notice a typo in the first paragraph I can see that is probably not the case.

      The reality is that DRM is forced upon nokia by the mobile phone companies who subsidise all their products. Mobile phones are not free to manufacture, they are paid for by AT&T, Singular, Vodaphone, Orange and all the other networks. they pay for them, so they choose the features that the phones include.

      --
      I dont read /. to RTFA, I read /. to offend people in ignorance.
    7. Re:I dont understand...... by charlie763 · · Score: 1

      That's why we need opensource hardware. http://wiki.openmoko.org/wiki/Main_Page

      --
      Welcome to the land of the free...pay toll ahead...no photography...please open your bag...
    8. Re:I dont understand...... by gwniobombux · · Score: 1

      "Open Source" and "Digital Rights/Restrictions Management" are not mutually exclusive things
      Yes they are. As long as Open Source means I'm allowed to inspect/modify the software, what's stopping me from changing the software to bypass the drm scheme?
    9. Re:I dont understand...... by mrchaotica · · Score: 1

      I really want to like the OpenMoko stuff, but I can't yet because of things like this:

      At the moment, almost no 'end-user' applications are present and working in a usable state. It is possible to make and receive calls in some software revisions, this frequently breaks though.

      I'm sorry, but there's really no use talking about a "phone" that can't even reliably make phone calls yet!

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    10. Re:I dont understand...... by Ilgaz · · Score: 1

      DRM goes away when customer gets rid of it and market gives up as result. In current scene nobody can start a crusade against DRM and go chapter 11 in matter of months. Nokia or others can't say "We removed DRM, down with establishment". It is up to CUSTOMER to reject DRM for alternatives. E.g. iPhone people won't buy from iTMS, they will go for emusic or whatever is open.
      You guys expecting Nokia, Sony, Apple to do heroical things. No. It is up to customer.

    11. Re:I dont understand...... by dwater · · Score: 1

      oh come on mods. Surely that post was insightful?!?

      --
      Max.
  9. THIS IS IT! The year of Linux on... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... ehem, I mean... in you pocket!

    Who needs a desktop-system anyway, when a pocket-device can do 90% of what a normal pc can do, which will happen soon.
    (The other 10% will need. But, that's like with everything... pro gear for professionals, normal gear for the rest.)

  10. nVidia should follow Nokia's lead by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    and open source its drivers.

  11. A server to go with it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We recently open-sourced our browser and server software specifically with the hope that mobile devices would be able to run directly from it.

    SupraBrowser

    The goal is for people to be able to create their own personal cloud/personal server where their mobile device does not sync with it, so much as it runs directly off of it. So, taking a picture would automatically be saved into the user's own private server. Contacts would be saved and viewed directly from the server.

    1. Re:A server to go with it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So, taking a picture would automatically be saved into the user's own private server.

      I wish you luck, but that is definitely not what I want on my mobile device. Sounds like it would eat up what little bandwidth there is, not to mention that I don't want *my* data stored on someone else's server.

    2. Re:A server to go with it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That is exactly the point!! You create your own server (dedicated, virtual dedicated server) and run the software off of it. We eventually hope that the servers themselves can be peered so that you can have redundancy between providers and across data centers (perhaps using something like http://www.allmydata.org). The bandwidth is a concern, but the more people demand their own private server and ability to store their files and media privately, the more it will drive the development of the infrastructure.

    3. Re:A server to go with it by ryszard99 · · Score: 1
      erm:

      So, taking a picture would automatically be saved into the user's own private server
      --
      -- $_='ab-bc ratvarre';tr"'a-z'"'n-za-m'";print
  12. Nokia had better talk to Blackwater by smittyoneeach · · Score: 2, Funny

    I hear the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Symbionese_Liberation_Army is even now plotting their counter-attack.

    --
    Get thee glass eyes, and, like a scurvy politician, seem to see things thou dost not.--King Lear
  13. My moneys by Gewalt · · Score: 1

    My Moneys on google. I haven't seen Nokia do anything right in years.

    --
    Modding Trolls +1 inciteful since 1999
    1. Re:My moneys by Bandman · · Score: 5, Funny

      There's something wrong with my brain.

      Every time I read "Symbian" I see "simian" mentally...

      which of course lead to my reading your post as "My monkey's on google"

      I need to go back to bed.

      --
      Check out my sysadmin blog!
    2. Re:My moneys by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I guess 'simian' is better than 'sybian'..

    3. Re:My moneys by ozmanjusri · · Score: 1

      You prefer to spank the monkey?

      --
      "I've got more toys than Teruhisa Kitahara."
    4. Re:My moneys by Poorcku · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Mod me down on this, but my money is on Nokia. I haven't seen a Google / Android phone yet.

      --
      I take my children to see Madonna(..), but I never for once ever thought I was in the same business.Chris Rea.
    5. Re:My moneys by sky289hawk1 · · Score: 1

      That's funny, I always see sybian.

    6. Re:My moneys by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Go ask their web tablet users. There are plenty of people using the N700/N800 and N810s. Did you know they're running Linux with a debian like distro?

  14. Update the Series 5 by PowerEdge · · Score: 1

    I hope Nokia updates the Series 5. Imagine a hybrid 5 / N700. Anyways, I love my 5, I still use it religiously. No one has been able to match it's keyboard in such a package yet.

    1. Re:Update the Series 5 by edderly · · Score: 1

      Sadly I think the Series 5 design belongs to Psion and is loaded with patents Don't expect David Potter (Chairman of Psion) to not ask for a large amount of cash up front rather than taking a per unit bit of cash.

      It is a very cool design though

  15. I remember the Psion Series 3... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...I still have a working 3a which took me through my 12-16 period at school. Forming the foundation of the Symbian platform, it was a joy to develop for, as well as sturdy hardware with a quality screen and beautiful keyboard.

    Psion was one of the later companies to die as part of the Acorn/Atari/Amiga/etc non-Wintel conspiracy that caused all these firms to magically think they could make more money from "digital convergence!" than their forte - computers.

    Give me a 3a with Blueto.. no, wait, I have that already with an RS232-to-Bluetooth adapter. Give me a portable solution that doesn't come at the end of a looong cable and I have as much as I really need in a modern pocket computer: something that I can enter plain text with, and uses my mobile to dial out so I can use ssh.

    Things are more colourful and shiny since 1991, but the information I need on-the-go is just as easy to access and read with 1991-era equipment. Everything else is just cruft to get you to buy! buy! buy!

  16. Observations by edderly · · Score: 5, Insightful


    1. Symbian OS is shipped in a whole bunch of phones and this move will ensure that current development projects based on the OS are more likely to continue because it became a whole lot cheaper to make a Symbian phone. $4 per unit doesn't sound like a lot but that is a huge margin for a phone manufacturer.

    2. The licensing issues for Symbian OS and various UI components will become vastly easier to resolve and make it easier to start a phone project. Symbian OS is currently a web of various source categorizations depending on your partner status level (developer/device creator/semi conductor partner), that doesn't even consider the semi-co base port components, multimedia infrastructure/codecs and the UI (Series 60, UIQ etc).

    The UI for Symbian products contains an extremely large amount of functionality you would expect in the base OS.

    In the end it's a damn sight easier to do business with tech companies on an open source basis.

    3. It raises interesting questions about whether there will be continued investment in Symbian oriented technologies. One technology question area that stands out is the kernel. The current Symbian OS kernel (called EKA2 by the way) is microkernel design optimised for the various ARM architectures with low latency features and a small memory footprint.

    Application processors for mobile processors are starting to look towards SMP designs in order to increase performance without incurring large power consumption penalties. The Symbian kernel and OS design doesn't currently support SMP, so it is possible that the Linux kernel is the direction to go in - obsoleting the EKA2 kernel at some point in the future for high end mobile devices.

    However it is probably worth pointing out that whilst the Linux kernel works well for SMP systems for scalable performance whether it does this AND manages to be good for power saving/consumption is possibly less proven.

    4. There are questions over how open is this environment? If a $1500 dollar license is required to get the source, is this open? Doesn't quite sound like it.

    5. How will this open source environment operate? There appear to be problems with open source projects which involve a dominant partner. IBM - Eclipse, Sun - Java,OpenOffice,MySQL are notable examples.

    Being open source is good for doing business but there are many practicalities to work out which make a technology good or bad open source.

    1. Re:Observations by dwater · · Score: 2, Informative

      > 4. There are questions over how open is this environment? If a $1500 dollar license is required to get the source, is this open? Doesn't quite sound like it.

      I think you'll find that this is only while they go through the opening procedure/etc.

      http://www.allaboutsymbian.com/news/item/7528_Symbian_Foundation_Says_Open_S.php

      --
      Max.
    2. Re:Observations by edderly · · Score: 1

      Thanks, that explains that

    3. Re:Observations by Creepy · · Score: 1

      I'm curious on how they are going to enforce strict memory standards, both in footprint and in leak tolerance (which is currently 0 according to a developer I know there).

    4. Re:Observations by edderly · · Score: 1

      I'd assume that the Symbian bit which becomes part of Nokia will continue to do this. Whether the licensee does this or not has always been a little vague i.e. Symbian would recommend this as 'the way to do things' whether that advice is taken is a different matter.

    5. Re:Observations by suggsjc · · Score: 1

      The Symbian kernel and OS design doesn't currently support SMP, so it is possible that the Linux kernel is the direction to go in - obsoleting the EKA2 kernel at some point in the future for high end mobile devices. However it is probably worth pointing out that whilst the Linux kernel works well for SMP systems for scalable performance whether it does this AND manages to be good for power saving/consumption is possibly less proven.
      Linux generally evolves around needs. So, if the need (and funding) for the ability to do SMP AND low power arises, then I'm sure it will happen.

      That isn't to say that linux is the answer for every technical problem, but it is already a good/great solution for a wide range of applications, and as it moves forward I think the areas it will influence will only grow.
      --
      When I have a kid, I want to put him in one of those strollers for twins and then run around the mall looking frantic.
    6. Re:Observations by Ilgaz · · Score: 3, Insightful

      In Symbiand, if your application floods memory, it gets ass kicked by low memory framework. Only System Application marked applications are free of it but that marking requires a very strict certification process.
      Also lets not forget the user factor. If your app uses lots of ram and CPU, it doesn't have future in users handset. User says "oh crap" and reaches to "Application manager" to get rid of it.
      It is all open market with Symbian Inc. (foundation) governing the borders. It is how those die hard rivals work on same OS even before the "foundation". It is more like Java scene.

    7. Re:Observations by CockMonster · · Score: 1

      There'll be Symbian SMP phones from 2010.

    8. Re:Observations by CockMonster · · Score: 1

      Have you any idea how difficult this is to do? Battery life is a huge factor for phones, if one company (who uses Linux) really figures out a cool way that saves shit-loads of power do you think they'll just give it away to their competitors?

    9. Re:Observations by suggsjc · · Score: 1

      Are you talking about the kernel or userspace? If its kernel you are talking about, then they don't really have that much choice...

      --
      When I have a kid, I want to put him in one of those strollers for twins and then run around the mall looking frantic.
  17. Perhaps they're just a step ahead. by Colin+Smith · · Score: 1

    Haven't you been watching what Nokia has been doing for the last couple of years? What gets me is just how much smarter than Motorola these guys are.

     

    --
    Deleted
    1. Re:Perhaps they're just a step ahead. by tb3 · · Score: 1

      That was a joke, right? My cat is smarter than the combined intelligence of Motorola.

      --

      www.lucernesys.comHorizon: Calendar-based personal finance

  18. +1 Insightful by TuringTest · · Score: 0

    For moderators with mod points

    --
    Singularity: a belief in the "God" idea with the "demiurge" relation inverted.
  19. Too little, too late by Etherized · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Nokia is in a tough spot here. They're still the market leader for smartphones world wide, but Windows Mobile has been biting into that for a while now, and Android is just around the corner. I can't help but equate Symbian to PalmOS - a technical jumble that's frustrating to develop for and nearly impossible to maintain, being attacked by rapidly growing and technically superior competitors.

    In the case of Palm, they couldn't fix PalmOS *or* spool up a replacement in time, and they were thus relegated to Yet Another Windows Mobile vendor. I suppose Nokia is trying to avoid that fate by taking over Symbian and throwing enough resources at it to keep it alive and moving forward, but that can't be easy. Nokia also seems to take the Sun view of open source: if you can no longer make money from something, open source it for good will. That's fine, but given how crufty Symbian is and how many alternatives there are now I'm not sure what good that code is going to do anybody.

    Either way, I'm sure the other Symbian partners are happy to have it off their hands. Android is clearly the superior platform in the near-term, and divorcing themselves from Symbian allows them to focus their efforts there. Despite that, it's clear that Nokia is resisting Android - maybe to differentiate themselves from the competitors, maybe just to prevent obsoleting all of their existing Symbian resources - but it will be interesting to see if they can ultimately avoid becoming Yet Another Andriod Vendor themselves.

  20. Thanks Nokia! by tangent3 · · Score: 1

    Now, how about relicensing Qt under BSD or LGPL...

  21. SMP support by thaig · · Score: 2, Informative

    They are already working on SMP support as can be seen here:

    http://www.symbian.com/news/pr/2007/pr20079433.html

    --
    This is all just my personal opinion.
    1. Re:SMP support by edderly · · Score: 1

      Yep, but it hasn't manifested itself in a product as of yet. Semicos have plans and there is an NEC test chip to start work on (Linux runs SMP on this already of course)

    2. Re:SMP support by Ilgaz · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Near all Symbian phones have dual CPU but you wouldn't want a SMP aware Symbian phone. Why? Because the main CPU does a very critical thing, call handling. Whatever happens in background must not prevent user from calling and especially emergency calls.

    3. Re:SMP support by CockMonster · · Score: 1

      Symbian can be run on one CPU, this includes the baseband and applications. Linux cannot.

  22. Crippling Open Source Operating System by GNUPublicLicense · · Score: 1

    If it's not under the GPL license, it will end like MacOS and BSD: the open source version will be crippled and hardly usable/installable on terminal hardware...

    1. Re:Crippling Open Source Operating System by dwater · · Score: 1

      I don't see where it says that there'll be *two* versions....afaict, there's just the one.

      --
      Max.
    2. Re:Crippling Open Source Operating System by RiotingPacifist · · Score: 1

      But if it is on GPL thanks to v3 they cant lock it down like they have to for the providers (like say tivo had to)

      --
      IranAir Flight 655 never forget!
  23. This means nothing by jonwil · · Score: 5, Interesting

    All the code in the world is useless until I can actually change the software on my phone and make it do what I want and not what some phone company thinks I should and shouldn't be able to do.

    Which is why the OpenMoko Neo FreeRunner is so good. Decent hardware for a phone (including touch screen, GPS, tri-band GSM, WiFi and Bluetooth) with almost all of the source for the phone being 100% open (and replaceable).
    The only closed bits are the GSM stack (which runs on a seperate baseband processor and talks to the host CPU via 100% documented open standards, all the stuff you need to know to talk to the baseband is documented and open), the driver for the GPS chip (people are reverse engineering it and making an open source replacement) and some of the fancy stuff to do with the GPU.

    And with regards to the GPU (which is aparently being dropped from the next model), the only closed thing is the official docs and specs provided to the OpenMoko team from the GPU vendor. The GPU vendor is quite happy for the OpenMoko team to produce and open source a driver for the GPU (and even a new set of specs for it), they just dont want any code or specs created by THEM being released publicly (having everything that goes public created by a 3rd party helps with legal issues I guess)

    The hardware is as open as they can legally go too. For example, they have released the same CAD drawings for the case and such as they themselves used to produce the molds for it. So if you want to make a new case in a color (or material) they dont offer (such as a rubber case so it can survive being dropped on the ground), the info is there.

    1. Re:This means nothing by BlackCreek · · Score: 1
      You know, I've been waiting for a good while for OpenMoko to leave alpha stage, and start shipping units actually meant to be used as modern phones, instead of just meant to be "hacked upon at low level". I used to check their pages every week, now I do it every 2 months or so.

      In my dictionary the word for a proprietary project that promises and doesn't deliver is vaporware. Regardless of the reasons for not shipping. Incidentaly, the word for a OSS project that promises and doesn't deliver is also vaporware.

      So OpenMoko will be open hardware, with free software. So what? So is my laptop. Guess what? I can't use neither of them as a full replacement for the (cheap) mobile phone I currently have.

      All the code in the world is useless until I can actually change the software on my phone and make it do what I want and not what some phone company thinks I should and shouldn't be able to do. As far as I am concerned, all outstanding promises of freedom by OpenMoko are useless if the project never actually releases.

      (Oh, and please, don't get me wrong. I would have already bought an open moko phone had they left the alpha stage.)

    2. Re:This means nothing by Debaser42 · · Score: 1

      I read yesterday that they're finally going to ship the Freerunner in a few weeks. Although I'm dissapointed that they didn't include 3g support, I'm highly considering picking one up. I'll probably wait a few weeks and see how well it goes - the concept is great but its taken so long that a lot of people have gone from "wow" to "meh". Until then, I'm using a Symbian powered N95 and would love to see the day that it is open. Nokia is lining up for the next generation of mobile tech and its nice to see they've seen the light that opensource is the way to go.

    3. Re:This means nothing by cxreg · · Score: 1

      I don't suppose you read that it's currently in the initial production run, and is supposed to go on sale in a week or two?

      http://wiki.openmoko.org/wiki/Community_Updates

      --

      God Fucking Damnit
    4. Re:This means nothing by daveon · · Score: 1

      All the code in the world is useless until I can actually change the software on my phone and make it do what I want and not what some phone company thinks I should and shouldn't be able to do.

      Which is why the OpenMoko Neo FreeRunner is so good. Decent hardware for a phone (including touch screen, GPS, tri-band GSM, WiFi and Bluetooth) with almost all of the source for the phone being 100% open (and replaceable). The only closed bits are the GSM stack (which runs on a seperate baseband processor and talks to the host CPU via 100% documented open standards, all the stuff you need to know to talk to the baseband is documented and open), the driver for the GPS chip (people are reverse engineering it and making an open source replacement) and some of the fancy stuff to do with the GPU.

      And with regards to the GPU (which is aparently being dropped from the next model), the only closed thing is the official docs and specs provided to the OpenMoko team from the GPU vendor. The GPU vendor is quite happy for the OpenMoko team to produce and open source a driver for the GPU (and even a new set of specs for it), they just dont want any code or specs created by THEM being released publicly (having everything that goes public created by a 3rd party helps with legal issues I guess)

      The hardware is as open as they can legally go too. For example, they have released the same CAD drawings for the case and such as they themselves used to produce the molds for it. So if you want to make a new case in a color (or material) they dont offer (such as a rubber case so it can survive being dropped on the ground), the info is there.

      The thing is that's all well and good for a tech based community who want that, but at the end of the day a Mobile Phone is a fast moving consumer electronic product. People buy for a lot of reasons, colour for example, or "shiny". Most people want something cheap, that does the job. This is a spoiler for MS and Google.
    5. Re:This means nothing by BlackCreek · · Score: 1

      I don't suppose you read that it's currently in the initial production run, and is supposed to go on sale in a week or two?

      http://wiki.openmoko.org/wiki/Community_Updates

      I hadn't read it. Glad to hear it.
    6. Re:This means nothing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      All the code in the world is useless until I can actually change the software on my phone and make it do what I want and not what some phone company thinks I should and shouldn't be able to do. And all of the rights to change the software on your phone is useless if every service provider in existence shafts their customers with absurd hidden fees and invasive lock-in contracts, some of which automatically renew themselves without your knowledge or explicit consent.
  24. Check your spelling! by sharkey · · Score: 1

    With or without the "M", the product still vibrates.

    --

    --
    "Outlook not so good." That magic 8-ball knows everything! I'll ask about Exchange Server next.
  25. Half the staff, around 200 people get layed off. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    More than half of everyone working with the UIQ gui is layed of. Much of the development is appriciated to be done for free instead.

  26. Interpreter overhead? by tepples · · Score: 1

    Native code for what? You would need to write native code for all supported platforms versus java code for all platforms. So how much speed penalty will the JVM's interpreter impose on a program?
  27. Code signing by pclminion · · Score: 1

    I've always thought of code signing as a way to prevent malware from running on your phone, not some sort of DRM mechanism. Surely somebody can figure out how to install a new code certificate, so that we can all sign our own code? I don't see why this is such a big deal.

    1. Re:Code signing by sznupi · · Score: 1

      Yeah, you can self-sign apps already.

      --
      One that hath name thou can not otter
  28. I hate Sybian by pw1972 · · Score: 2, Funny

    My wife loves her Sybian, and prefers it to me sometimes.

  29. +1 Interesting by TuringTest · · Score: 1

    Someone with mod points left?

    --
    Singularity: a belief in the "God" idea with the "demiurge" relation inverted.
  30. Worst ever API / proprietary C++ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sorry Nokia - too late. I hope Symbian dies. It is the worst ever API / proprietary C++ you will ever have the misfortune to use. Been writing code for 15 years and I think writing 6502 assembler is more developer friendly than Symbian... Ok maybe I'm going a bit far but you get the point! hehe

    1. Re:Worst ever API / proprietary C++ by fredrik70 · · Score: 1

      I second that. Built a SIP instant messenger for our work on Series 60, It's absolutely horrible, I believe they cleaned it up a abit with v. 9 but i was already gone by then and have never looked back. Someone said they now have python bindings, so all might not be lost....

      --
      if (!signature) { throw std::runtime_error("No sig!"); }
    2. Re:Worst ever API / proprietary C++ by Clueless+Moron · · Score: 1

      The python for S60 documentation is here.

      It is very well documented, and they have bindings for pretty well everything the camera does, including stuff like GPS and OpenGL support on fancier phones like the E90 communicator.

  31. Nokia + Sybian? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Oh, great! I'm going to get my girlfriend* a new vibrating cellphone!

    (*girlfriend reference for entertainment purposes only)

  32. SMP is critical and Symbian will have it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Call handling has nothing to do with it. With 4 application CPUS, call handling will be even less of a problem than it is now.

  33. Nokia OS vs Symbian by mdu · · Score: 1

    Hopefully this means that low-end Nokia phones will finally use Symbian instead of Nokia's own OS. Right now unless you buy one of their high-end phones, you do not get a Symbian-based phone. I did like the one Symbian-based phone I had (6620) although it was a bit bulky.

    Now Nokia just needs to work on power consumption and/or batteries so I don't have to continuously charge my phone. I like my 6555, but it drains the battery far too fast (2-3 days) and has a bug that sometimes causes it to drain the battery within 30 minutes after I use the built-in web browser. I remember the good old days when Nokia phones used to go a week or longer without needing to be charged.

  34. Not saying much by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    An amoeba is smarter than Motorola these days.

    But Nokia is pretty dumb by conventional business standards. Paying 8 billion Euros for maps? Google or Map24 do the job well enough. Far smarter to license the maps (which don't have pedestrian informaiton) and add value.

    How's Intellisync doing?

    Or the Nokia Music Store?

    All Nokia knows is how to take a promising company and bury it in a Soviet-style bureucracy.

     

  35. re: Open Source Symbian by Mumia · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    I read that as "open source Sybian".