Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 8th May 2012 11:56 UTC, submitted by nej_simon
PDAs, Cellphones, Wireless Tizen reached 1.0 only recently, but there's already a Tizen Conference going on - and during that conference, Samsung had a relatively barebones reference device running Tizen 1.0. The Handheld Blog has a seven minute video of the device in action, and while I'm very happy big players are investing in all these alternative platforms, I do have to wonder - how viable are they?
Permalink for comment 517333
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Comment by shmerl
by shmerl on Tue 8th May 2012 15:39 UTC
Member since:

I'm also wondering if it's a wise strategy at this point in the smartphone market.

Honestly, I don't really care how Tizen looks like. I'd rather avoid corporate controlled OSes. On the other hand, Tizen project serves a good cause - having open devices which can run normal (non Android) Linux is good. As far as device can run normal Linux, whether it's corporate Tizen, or community Nemo or any other distro it's already a win. So far vendors limit Linux adoption with side means, like not providing drivers and specs for their devices. Therefore the more Linux compatible devices - the better. So let Tizen give some kick to the market, may be it'll help more manufacturers to start supporting conventional Linux besides Android.

I have to conclude it would make far more sense for these parties to work together on a single, well-supported open source mobile operating system, based on Linux, incorporating ideas from the current myriad of disparate efforts.

This is reasonable, but when applied to committed community, not to corporate "parties". One should learn from history. Corporations give promises, and easily break them. Nokia was "solidly behind Meego", Intel was "committed to Meego no matter what". We know what happened. Do you really have more trust in Samsung for some reason? I don't. So if they make more devices - great, it helps. But the combined OS effort which you mentioned (software side of things) needs to be free of corporate control.

Edited 2012-05-08 15:49 UTC

Reply Score: 4