Technology Liberation Front - Latest Comments in Not One, Not Two, but THREE Competing Open Source Mobile Operating Systems

Re: Not One, Not Two, but THREE Competing Open Source Mobile Operating Systems

learnhypnosis — Tue, 21 Apr 2009 12:47:01 -0000

I've yet to take the leap into the mobile world, living away from the maddening crowds and able to do things on my own pace. That's to say I don't have a cell phone and cable hookup, but my only tie to the guys from... "can you hear me now", are watching the ever widening pool of commercials they pump out. It's a 3g world, I'm just not living in it yet.

Re: Not One, Not Two, but THREE Competing Open Source Mobile Operating Systems

hypnosistrainingdevon — Mon, 23 Mar 2009 02:25:19 -0000

There's a reason this guy's an analyst and not something useful like an engineer.

How about starting off by grafting a melon to an albatross so your dessert can fly to you.

Re: Not One, Not Two, but THREE Competing Open Source Mobile Operating Systems

Kiba — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 11:17:03 -0000

You forgot OpenMoko....

Re: Not One, Not Two, but THREE Competing Open Source Mobile Operating Systems

dimitris — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 07:51:20 -0000

Hold the Mozilla comparisons. Symbian apps have to be signed, and to do anything interesting - like, say, change the S60 telephony app behavior for least-cost-routing - something, incidentally, built in with the UIQ flavor telephony app - is impossible.

For the most part, Symbian Signed is there to make sure developers behave like good kiddies and don't mess with Ma Telco's business models. Can ou say, pocket tivoization?

If something similar was (somehow) present in Mozilla, what are the chances the most popular Mopzilla extension would have existed?

Symbian Signed will live on under the new foundation, so although opening the code will help with the currently average-to-occasionally-atrocious API documentation, it will still be a disruption-hostile platform.