Apple has already made exceptions for "Enterprise."
Windows could easily be as locked down, if they make Home locked down out the gate and eliminate sale of Professional entirely (with the "unlocked" variant being Enterprise desktop only with a server license requirement.)
I guess I shouldn't be surprised to see that the carriers are going to be sticking their dicks into this one. I wonder what surcharges and fees will be associated with this. I also wonder what handset and device restrictions will be imposed as a result of this.
There's some MeeGo crap, but that's tethered to an "app store", so it's like buying a subsidized phone. ("Creates a direct connection between your wallet and our bank account.")
Wow. If I ever need something to highlight as an example of "talking out of your ass" then I'm going to use your post. MeeGo is a rather standard Linux distribution, and is in no way "tethered" to an app store. Frankly, if MeeGo is "crap" then so is every Linux distribution out there.
In operating systems there tends to be a natural monopoly and natural duopolies because of the scales involved and because people really don't crave that much choice. This is yet another example of this reality.
There is no "natural monopoly" or "natural duopoly" in the OS space. There is monopolistic and anti-competitive actions that make it very hard for 3rd party options to survive. Which is the goal of Apple and MS, since they have the desktop space to themselves and they want the exact same situation in the mobile space. This is not an example of a "natural duopoly" coming to fruition, but rather that HP could not compete on the business end of things.
Because Google didn't bother ensuring that it was open for you. They hyped up the "open" aspect to draw in developers who were otherwise interested in mobile Linux.
Well if I had an Android phone it would be rooted, but I won't buy into the iPhone precisely because Apple makes so many decisions for you.
Since you can root your android phone, (or iPhone, if you prefer a better experience), run whatever on your computers and stuff, you really have nothing to complain about.
Well, since Jobs is all about the "post-PC" era where PCs are high priced things few people have and instead most people use locked down devices like iPhones and iPads, I'm free to be critical.
I won't stop complaining, because I don't want such a restrictive approach to impact my ability to use my computers (of any form factor) the way I want to- and Apple's moves are making that highly likely.
This is the problem when the device vendor makes a fatal mistake in judging who their customer is.
Almost all cases like this they assume that some 3rd party, whether some junk software maker like McAfee or in the case of phones, the carriers, is the customer instead of the end user. So instead of getting a good, clean product (and paying what it actually costs) you get a subsidized version full of garbage.
This is one reason I refuse to buy devices on contract, and why I build my own PC. Perhaps if the handset vendors decided to push back against the carriers' bullshit, we might not have this issue.
It's not a bad idea, but they should prompt the user at least once to tell them. Hiding things in help files isn't a good way of doing things, especially not when the user goes and tries to do something and encounters different behavior.
I was under the impression that a lot of the configurability had been ripped out from the base. Even then, you shouldn't need to be familiar with Javascript just to be able to adjust the panel items (or color) or put items on your desktop.
Good thing they fixed that Input Indicator thing. Maybe they'll also fix it so that it's as easy as it was in GNOME 2 to actually install and activate the input methods. Or is using languages other than English too complicated for users and therefore we shouldn't be doing it?
An API is a huge set of interfaces with specific names and behaviors
And you can copyright the implementation of those APIs, and the shiny books that document them. But the APIs themselves cannot sanely be copyrighted (being arbitrary identifiers with specific parameters and expected outputs) otherwise reverse engineering of ALL kinds (WINE, etc.) would be illegal.
It's as "in development" as any Linux distribution and the components that it is composed of. Currently the last significant point release was 1.2, which stabilized the compliance rules and APIs. Work is underway on 1.3.
MeeGo is not tied to the Ovi Store. The Ovi store will be used only by MeeGo-Harmattan, which is a "compatible" OS based off Maemo that includes all the Qt APIs of MeeGo (but no others.)
Also, MeeGo needs a handset developer that isn't Nokia.
By and large it's a moot point for Android, thus far. Were the kernel GPLv3, this would impact any vendor whose bootloader checks the kernel for a signature. Since it's GPLv2 only, this is a moot point.
However, if someone implements a "protection" system for the device that prevented the device from operating if an unsigned module is put in place of what was previously there and that module is GPLv3, then they have to give you the key so you can replace it cleanly or they are in violation of the GPLv3. I don't know if any vendor is currently doing this, and it's not relevant anyway.
Where it might be relevant is the App Store for Apple's iProducts. Nothing gets run unless you jailbreak (and violate the EULA) or Apple approves and signs your application. And Apple will absolutely not give you their key, thus any and all GPLv3 software made available via the App Store is in violation (thus why they now bar it from the store.)
Maemo/MeeGo just uses plain Linux repos...it's not necessary.
That's assuming some security framework isn't laid on top of it that the vendor uses to lock the device down. MeeGo is just a reference platform upon which others are built, after all. As for Maemo, Nokia's Aegis uses a system very much like this on the N9 (even though it's gonna be so narrowly distributed.)
The GPLv3 prohibits the use of GPLv3'd software on devices that implement signatures as a means of execution control unless the user is given the key that is used to sign the binaries. (Not sure if supplying a means for registering a 3rd party key would suffice.)
So if you implemented a scheme where all binaries, before execution, were signature checked for your $private_vendor_key and denied if it was missing, then you'd be in violation of the GPLv3 if you didn't give the user $private_vendor_key. This was put in place to defeat the end-run that was TiVOization.
The hardware vendors isolate for a couple of reasons:
- Trade secrets - Performance (radios require an RTOS)
And yes, virtually all high end devices have a separate CPU, RAM, and storage space for the baseband stack, accessible only via GPIO or USB interfaces.
You -might- be able to install a real OS like Ubuntu.
The problem that follows is hardware support, and support for the GPU is immediately out the window, let alone anything else on it that might be dependent on binary blobs. I believe webOS used glibc, so you might have luck with them, in contrast to Android.
More like was, and in the blink of an eye. Every place around here is sold out and Best Buy took 'em all off the shelves to send them back to HP. I imagine there will be some slow firesales from HP later as they arrive.
Ubuntu is barreling down the path that Apple and Microsoft are. They may be pursuing Unity, but that's nothing compared to the outright crippling and heavy DRM that MS and Apple have eagerly pursued in the mobile space. They both want to displace cheap general purpose computers with cheap, crippled, and controlled platforms, while pushing general purpose hardware up into the multi-thousands (before you even get into the inevitable extra-cost development software.)
Slashdot Mirror
Unless you have an iPad 2, which has been out for months and still hasn't been jailbroken.
Apple has already made exceptions for "Enterprise."
Windows could easily be as locked down, if they make Home locked down out the gate and eliminate sale of Professional entirely (with the "unlocked" variant being Enterprise desktop only with a server license requirement.)
I guess I shouldn't be surprised to see that the carriers are going to be sticking their dicks into this one. I wonder what surcharges and fees will be associated with this. I also wonder what handset and device restrictions will be imposed as a result of this.
Wow. If I ever need something to highlight as an example of "talking out of your ass" then I'm going to use your post. MeeGo is a rather standard Linux distribution, and is in no way "tethered" to an app store. Frankly, if MeeGo is "crap" then so is every Linux distribution out there.
In operating systems there tends to be a natural monopoly and natural duopolies because of the scales involved and because people really don't crave that much choice. This is yet another example of this reality.
There is no "natural monopoly" or "natural duopoly" in the OS space. There is monopolistic and anti-competitive actions that make it very hard for 3rd party options to survive. Which is the goal of Apple and MS, since they have the desktop space to themselves and they want the exact same situation in the mobile space. This is not an example of a "natural duopoly" coming to fruition, but rather that HP could not compete on the business end of things.
Because Google didn't bother ensuring that it was open for you. They hyped up the "open" aspect to draw in developers who were otherwise interested in mobile Linux.
Well if I had an Android phone it would be rooted, but I won't buy into the iPhone precisely because Apple makes so many decisions for you.
Well, since Jobs is all about the "post-PC" era where PCs are high priced things few people have and instead most people use locked down devices like iPhones and iPads, I'm free to be critical.
Fine, they can go off in Apple's walled garden.
I won't stop complaining, because I don't want such a restrictive approach to impact my ability to use my computers (of any form factor) the way I want to- and Apple's moves are making that highly likely.
This is the problem when the device vendor makes a fatal mistake in judging who their customer is.
Almost all cases like this they assume that some 3rd party, whether some junk software maker like McAfee or in the case of phones, the carriers, is the customer instead of the end user. So instead of getting a good, clean product (and paying what it actually costs) you get a subsidized version full of garbage.
This is one reason I refuse to buy devices on contract, and why I build my own PC. Perhaps if the handset vendors decided to push back against the carriers' bullshit, we might not have this issue.
It's not a bad idea, but they should prompt the user at least once to tell them. Hiding things in help files isn't a good way of doing things, especially not when the user goes and tries to do something and encounters different behavior.
Is it?
I was under the impression that a lot of the configurability had been ripped out from the base. Even then, you shouldn't need to be familiar with Javascript just to be able to adjust the panel items (or color) or put items on your desktop.
Use it for 5 days, get used to working around static elements in the UI you used to be able to change but now can't?
People can adjust to anything, that doesn't resolve the fundamental problems or arrogant attitude conveyed by the GNOME 3 environment.
Good thing they fixed that Input Indicator thing. Maybe they'll also fix it so that it's as easy as it was in GNOME 2 to actually install and activate the input methods. Or is using languages other than English too complicated for users and therefore we shouldn't be doing it?
And you can copyright the implementation of those APIs, and the shiny books that document them. But the APIs themselves cannot sanely be copyrighted (being arbitrary identifiers with specific parameters and expected outputs) otherwise reverse engineering of ALL kinds (WINE, etc.) would be illegal.
Why the hell should an API, the computer equivalent of a phone number, qualify for copyright protection?
Implementation behind those, yes. The actual API itself? Well, I guess it's a great end-run against 3rd party reimplementations...
It's as "in development" as any Linux distribution and the components that it is composed of. Currently the last significant point release was 1.2, which stabilized the compliance rules and APIs. Work is underway on 1.3.
MeeGo is not tied to the Ovi Store. The Ovi store will be used only by MeeGo-Harmattan, which is a "compatible" OS based off Maemo that includes all the Qt APIs of MeeGo (but no others.)
Also, MeeGo needs a handset developer that isn't Nokia.
By and large it's a moot point for Android, thus far. Were the kernel GPLv3, this would impact any vendor whose bootloader checks the kernel for a signature. Since it's GPLv2 only, this is a moot point.
However, if someone implements a "protection" system for the device that prevented the device from operating if an unsigned module is put in place of what was previously there and that module is GPLv3, then they have to give you the key so you can replace it cleanly or they are in violation of the GPLv3. I don't know if any vendor is currently doing this, and it's not relevant anyway.
Where it might be relevant is the App Store for Apple's iProducts. Nothing gets run unless you jailbreak (and violate the EULA) or Apple approves and signs your application. And Apple will absolutely not give you their key, thus any and all GPLv3 software made available via the App Store is in violation (thus why they now bar it from the store.)
That's assuming some security framework isn't laid on top of it that the vendor uses to lock the device down. MeeGo is just a reference platform upon which others are built, after all. As for Maemo, Nokia's Aegis uses a system very much like this on the N9 (even though it's gonna be so narrowly distributed.)
The GPLv3 prohibits the use of GPLv3'd software on devices that implement signatures as a means of execution control unless the user is given the key that is used to sign the binaries. (Not sure if supplying a means for registering a 3rd party key would suffice.)
So if you implemented a scheme where all binaries, before execution, were signature checked for your $private_vendor_key and denied if it was missing, then you'd be in violation of the GPLv3 if you didn't give the user $private_vendor_key. This was put in place to defeat the end-run that was TiVOization.
The hardware vendors isolate for a couple of reasons:
- Trade secrets
- Performance (radios require an RTOS)
And yes, virtually all high end devices have a separate CPU, RAM, and storage space for the baseband stack, accessible only via GPIO or USB interfaces.
Android could be GPLv3 even if the kernel is not. After all, it's Apache while the kernel is not.
You -might- be able to install a real OS like Ubuntu.
The problem that follows is hardware support, and support for the GPU is immediately out the window, let alone anything else on it that might be dependent on binary blobs. I believe webOS used glibc, so you might have luck with them, in contrast to Android.
To be?
More like was, and in the blink of an eye. Every place around here is sold out and Best Buy took 'em all off the shelves to send them back to HP. I imagine there will be some slow firesales from HP later as they arrive.
Interesting. This does wonders for blowing Motorola's justification for locking down their handsets to utter shit.
Now if only something could be done about all those Android-only userspace binaries...
Ubuntu is barreling down the path that Apple and Microsoft are. They may be pursuing Unity, but that's nothing compared to the outright crippling and heavy DRM that MS and Apple have eagerly pursued in the mobile space. They both want to displace cheap general purpose computers with cheap, crippled, and controlled platforms, while pushing general purpose hardware up into the multi-thousands (before you even get into the inevitable extra-cost development software.)