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?
Thread beginning with 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
shmerl
Member since:
2010-06-08

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

RE: Comment by shmerl
by dsmogor on Tue 8th May 2012 17:07 in reply to "Comment by shmerl"
dsmogor Member since:
2005-09-01

Community support is just too little to ensure OS viability in the break neck smartphone environment. They are simply moving too slow and lack UI competencies.
Look what happened with full OSS Openmoko, they had a year headstart before IPhone and haven't even managed to produce just a working phone basics, nevertheless working stable apis and killer apps.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: Comment by shmerl
by shmerl on Tue 8th May 2012 17:32 in reply to "RE: Comment by shmerl"
shmerl Member since:
2010-06-08

There is no need to equate community driven development, and the lack of support. Some companies can actively support community projects. Or base their derivative works on them, and provide support for the final product. My point about community was related to those who are in charge of the project direction. I have more trust in communities who use open development model, than in corporations who develop and decide stuff totally in secret (Tizen development is not open at all, and community has no say in any decisions).

Mer project proposed to develop community driven Linux core, on which others can build final products. Plasma Active for example already use it for their upcoming Vivaldi tablet, and they have several companies who participate in Plasma Active work. Providing support can be viable, but at least they rely on something that won't likely to be dropped, because MS bribes one of the parties (like Nokia), or they suddenly have change of heart (like Intel).

Edited 2012-05-08 17:39 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: Comment by shmerl
by Moochman on Wed 9th May 2012 11:59 in reply to "RE: Comment by shmerl"
Moochman Member since:
2005-07-06

Look what happened with full OSS Openmoko, they had a year headstart before IPhone and haven't even managed to produce just a working phone basics, nevertheless working stable apis and killer apps.


Yeah, but OpenMoko wasn't being developed by the number one smartphone maker in the world....

Reply Parent Score: 2