Linked by Eugenia Loli on Thu 29th Jun 2006 01:33 UTC
Linux Linux has one, last, chance to become the No1 OS in a particular consumer-oriented market (not counting servers): the mobile phone market. The open nature and yes, the hype around Linux has made lots of mobile-oriented companies to consider using Linux for their next-generation cellphones. But there is a major problem on the way to success, a problem which is created not by Linux itself, but by the greed and close-mindness of these same companies that endorse Linux.
Thread beginning with comment 138503
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
rhavyn is on cack
by gtada on Thu 29th Jun 2006 07:24 UTC
gtada
Member since:
2005-10-12

Why should all Linux based cellphones be compatible when (demonstrable) no other cellphones are?

That's the stupidest argument I've read thus far. That would be like someone in 1984 saying "why should Macintosh have a GUI when no other personal computers do?" I thought the idea was to challenge the status quo and not just accept what everybody else is doing.

Is there some advantage to the rest of the cellphones being noncompatible? Can you possibly see the advantage from a developer's standpoint of having compatibility within the Linux platforms? Do you see *some* overlap in effort here by the four competing Linux-based platforms? Can you imagine that collaboration could strengthen the four Linux smartphone platforms, and as a result benefit us all?

I'm glad you're shooting for mediocrity.

Reply Score: 4

RE: rhavyn is on cack
by rhavyn on Thu 29th Jun 2006 07:56 in reply to "rhavyn is on cack"
rhavyn Member since:
2005-07-06

That's the stupidest argument I've read thus far. That would be like someone in 1984 saying "why should Macintosh have a GUI when no other personal computers do?" I thought the idea was to challenge the status quo and not just accept what everybody else is doing.

Welcome to the real world. Cell phone manufacturers have no incentive what so ever to make their products compatible at this point in time. Until they do, don't expect them to bother standarizing. Do you think Apple would have developed the GUI if they didn't think it would benefit them?

Is there some advantage to the rest of the cellphones being noncompatible? Can you possibly see the advantage from a developer's standpoint of having compatibility within the Linux platforms? Do you see *some* overlap in effort here by the four competing Linux-based platforms? Can you imagine that collaboration could strengthen the four Linux smartphone platforms, and as a result benefit us all?

This is an industry which used to write a new OS for each and every model line. Cell phone providers are perfectly happy making things difficult for developers and developers are perfectly happy having things be difficult as long as they can continue charging 10x more than what a PC developer would be able to charge for an app. The fact that users are inconvienced is irrelevant. Users are far more inconvienced by poor coverage, dropped calls, incompatible networks, etc. And yet, for all that, people are continuing to migrate to cell phones. Of the list of problems regarding cell phones, source or binary compatibility across phones is about second or third from the bottom.

I'm glad you're shooting for mediocrity.

Mediocrity? I don't think so. Failing to provide cross platform phones doesn't mean the phones are mediocre, it just means they aren't compatible. Failing to provide decent coverage, dropping calls, those things make cell phones mediocre.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[2]: rhavyn is on cack
by Cloudy on Thu 29th Jun 2006 18:03 in reply to "RE: rhavyn is on cack"
Cloudy Member since:
2006-02-15

Welcome to the real world. Cell phone manufacturers have no incentive what so ever to make their products compatible at this point in time.

They have three incentives, and they're acting on all three of them:

1) They get to reduce development costs
2) They get to reduce return rates
and
3) They get to reduce training costs for customer support.

Motorola and Nokia are both making major efforts to reduce the number of OSes they support and to standardize on application frameworks, for example.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE: rhavyn is on cack
by diskinetic on Thu 29th Jun 2006 21:25 in reply to "rhavyn is on cack"
diskinetic Member since:
2005-12-09

I for one would ADORE a mediocre phone that had:

A) Great reception.
B) Infinite (or simply nigh-infinite) battery life
C) A simple, useful ringtone
D) Answering machine functions
E) Is good and cheap, considering it's high-hazard life.

None of these awesome features require an OS, per se.

Instead I see more and more $200 battery hogs that are plagued with dropped signals and play obnoxious hip-hop snippits through a .05 inch piezo and are marketed as high-dollar fashion accessories more than telecommunication devices. I have never, EVER caught anyone "working" on a cell phone. They mostly just talk on them and drive badly doing so.

Sheesh. FORGET an OS, I just want a PHONE!

By the by, the NOKIA 2115i that I use right now is the best phone I have ever seen. If it had better reception, I'd marry it.

Reply Parent Score: 2