P.S. And after all, special f…off to nasty cell op’s who is covering their lame asses with security mumblings but actually are only restricting fair users, who is not willing to hack anything anyway.Just to be able to squeeze more moneys from ‘em for crappy apps from selected vendors.Definitely limiting people’s freedom of choice.It’s a real fun: someone still pays for … restrictions!What a moron.And how democratic.USA has so much laws protecting various rights.And so much evil corporations which are using a dozens of nasty tricks to force people to give up their rights.Funny.Huh.

The real question, thus, as the carriers/operators ultimately control the point of sale, comes down to whether or not the carriers are willing to ultimately give up the control that Adroid asks them to give up…

Russia is a special case ;-)
In Europe and most of the world we can do the same but still well over 90% of the people buy the locked down phones from the operators and sign the contracts.

> There is no virus on Java?Huh.At first, I’m tired updating Java on desktop.

There are security issues and there were proof of concept exploits these are not viruses. Trojans exist in all forms but you still get prompted with quite a few scary warning dialogs, I never meant to imply either Linux or Symbian had security issues… All I was saying is that Java provides more security on top of that. There was also a hole in quicktime which due to an Apple bug was exploitable through Java. Overall Java is very secure by its nature and design. Linux is pretty good too which is why Java running on Linux is even more secure. Every security layer is breakable, I like to use the onion analogy so when you break one layer another one should come in between.

> Actually as for me it looks like Nokia actually silently tests new
> mobile platform of future and gives it first wide run on mass market

This is probably true, although the purchase of Trolltech probably signifies their direction most of all…

The chart showing no Java apps on LiMo phones is incorrect–there’s in fact a Java Working Group in LiMo, and there’s no reason whatsoever that a phone based on the LiMo platform could not support Java and support it quite well. (We’ve already noted that Android supports Google’s version of Java, not the Java Community version: Shai’s comment, above, is spot-on here.)

Also, there’s no reason that desktop Linux apps can’t be readily adapted to run on mainstream Linux-based mobile devices. ACCESS demonstrated a port of GPaint, a pretty classic open source app, on an ARM development board at LinuxWorld last year. All we did was cross compile it for ARM, no code changes were required. Laying out the screen differently made it look better, but it ran perfectly well, completely unaltered.

Google’s insistence that everything be reinvented from scratch, using a peculiar and hitherto-unseen application development model, and no other language but their own special version of Java, is an unfortunate choice. It completely discounts the potential contributions of the tens of thousands of open source developers who already know how to write code for mainstream Linux-based systems. Too bad for Android, but ultimately good for the manufacturers and carriers who will be shipping phones based on the work being done under the auspices of the LiMo Foundation.

> Yes, it also ran on my old powermac
At least, Mplayer beats built-in n800’s player to the hell both in speed and wider understanding of MP4 subflavours, partially corrupted or bugged files, etc.Where built-in player fails, mplayer just works.And I’m actually using Mplayer on my x64 Kubuntu Linux desktop without any Windows stuff.Works pretty nice for me and handles virtually any codecs I can encounter.At very least, it’s great for all kinds of MP4 based stuff.Virtually no any built-in mobile players can compare in parsing bugged or semi-corrupted files.Very few can stream video over HTTP or FTP without downloading whole file.Mplayer can.

> Steve Jobs said that you can bring
> down the network with a hacked
> iPhone, you calling him a liar ;-)
At first, I have n800 with unrestricted apps and GSM phone attached via Bluetooth as modem.Is this enough?I can craft any IP packet.Or even mess with PPP layer.If this is not enough and you have to mess with GSM stack itself, only quite few people on this planet can bring network down.And even if iPhone is secure enough there is dozens of other phones which are not.So, such hacker can take a reasonable decision to hack not an iPhone but other phone.

Actually looks like Jobs just has it’s own interest in restricting users.And well, there is already dozens of jailbreaked iPhones in the world anyway and iPhone one of the most quickly hacked phones.You can install apache, MySQL, gain full root access or whatever else.So actually hackers are not affected by this crappy security idiocy.The only those who are in loss is just an usual users.Who is not interested in hacking at all so can’t jailbreak and enjoy with ALL features.And fair developers can’t develop fully-featured apps.So, as usually when security used in moron way, hackers can do everything, only fair and legitimate users are in loss.Surely, good idea how to grow even more hackers rather than turn them into a developers and network security experts.

> Writing a virus in Java would be impossible
Even in very old and defective Symbian you must install virus manually and confirm several times to allow it to run.Actually, system is not insecure.It is user who launched this stuff.So the only way to go is to educate users that they should not run each and every crap.There is no virus on Java?Huh.At first, I’m tired updating Java on desktop.It jailbreaked dozens of times.At second I’m aware that some guys are using Java midlets to break into the phones and run native code, bypassing even such paranoid things as secure bootloaders and firmware digital signatures (really funny, yeah?).And well, there is trojans written on Java already.These are fooling users to send SMS or MMS to special number, then user is charged for using this number some funny $2 per message or so.So this “secure” java is not so secure.And hackers were always able to mess with GSM stuff and always will be able.Moron things like restricting users are ineffective and restricting fair users only.Only those who hadn’t malicious intentions anyway.To make users really secured you have to educate them not to run each and every crap encoundered.No other way.

> This can be done with native applications
> too but its hard
Hmm, actually not so hard task, solved already.Just take a look how for example usual Debian or Ubuntu package management system works.It install apps from trusted sources (repositories).Apps are signed with digital signatures and installer will refuse to update or install apps if package signature failed check or key is not known as trusted, indicating that it is not a really package crafted by system maintainers or just package became corrupted\tampered with.Yes, user can add 3rd party keys and repositories if he trusts to certain vendor but this requires some sort of special action, effectively making things pretty secure while user is not restricted and can install even own apps(just add own key to trusted keys list and then sign package with your key).This scheme ensures that only packages signed by system maintainers (and optionally, trusted 3rd parties) are auto-updated.It is pretty hard to distribute virus in such manner since you can’t sign packages as system vendor without having private key and requesting user to add new public key to trusted list is rare and noticeable action which is hard to be done just occasionally by user without a good reason.If user is willing to go so far in shooting his own legs, nothing will save him anyway since he can be fooled by mentioned Java trojans as well (and it happens, so users should be educated not to run all stuff they see anyway).

> which is probably why Nokia never built it into phones.
Actually looks liks Nokia 770 was a try targeted to hardcore geeks and developers.Then, n800 has been a more wide try targeted to everyone who is a bit familiar with internet.Looks like all this succeeded and n810 looks pretty mainstream for me.Actually as for me it looks like Nokia actually silently tests new mobile platform of future and gives it first wide run on mass market.I will not be surprised if at some point they will abandon Symbian in favor of Linux-based systems.Why they acquired Trolltech, after all?;).Actually, if you reduce GSM stack and modem to one IC so it will appear to Linux as a modem on UART, Linux will just use this exactly as n800 uses GPRS enabled phone over bluetooth.In this way Linux can run on a real smart phones allowing to run any apps but without allowing to mess with lowest level of GSM stuff though (and everything else can be done from phone+notebook bunch for example anyway).

We aren’t talking about the user perspective… Operators and manufacturers are those who decide what goes on our phones, they have a complex status quo and they really wouldn’t like the complexities of the GPL to get in the way (which is why Android is not GPL above the Kernel).
They also don’t like getting sued and they all have strong presence in the most lucrative cell phone markets: US, Japan and EU where they can and do get sued over codecs.

> > and somewhat relies on ia86.
>Strange, but it runs quite decently on > my ARM-based n800

Yes, it also ran on my old powermac but many of the better codecs are just Windows codecs which were bundled in. Without them many videos just couldn’t play in the past. Haven’t tried the version without the codec pack in years though.

> so all this security stuff is
> actually idiocy intended to allow
> cell operators to choose which apps
> you can run.

Steve Jobs said that you can bring down the network with a hacked iPhone, you calling him a liar ;-)

Control of the GSM stack won’t bring down anything although its useful for very specific use cases. Java allows you access to SMS, MMS, networking etc… Android unlike Java goes even deeper.
Security isn’t stupid, but yes part of the reason is to hold control over the phone. It is still important since there is a very real fear of device based viruses. Writing a virus in Java would be impossible unless you find a really big hole and its been years since the last one (and all of them were very hard to exploit).

> As from security and OTA… er, I do
> not like idea that someone can update

OTA is Over The Air and is usually initiated by the user. This can be done with native applications too but its hard when you download an application from an untrusted web site.

>> However don’t forget that most Linux
>> desktop applications
>> are of little use for a cell phone
> This simply not true :).

You are not a typical everyday user… I would love an N800 too once they can actually make it into a phone, but we aren’t the target market of these devices.
We can compile applications and if the keyboard navigation doesn’t behave quite right and the softkey behavior isn’t what we expect its no big deal. For production level user experience, Linux on N800 is a far way off which is probably why Nokia never built it into phones. Which is a shame it does seem better than Symbian at least for my needs.

I also said “most” Linux has MANY applications and a very small subset of them are even practical on a cell phone. Can you imagine kdevelop on a cell phone ;-)

> and somewhat relies on ia86.
Strange, but it runs quite decently on my ARM-based n800 and I like it a way more than built-in player which is too picky in file formats it can parse and f..kingly slow in playback compared to Mplayer.

> Java ME is not Java SE its designed for small
> size and ARM specifically.
Yep, and there is already plenty of such phones.Without Linux but who cares?

> Don’t forget this is a mobile phone
> and security/OTA also matters.
And again, there is bunch of “secure” phones running Java already.As from security view I have to admit that there is pretty much “classic” phones you can pwn to run plain binary code with direct access to GSM stack, so all this security stuff is actually idiocy intended to allow cell operators to choose which apps you can run.Surely these you’ve paid for.If someone will need to hack GSM\3G network, he will come on and break in as long as network is not secured.This idiocy with restricting users from running real apps will not prevent this.It will only restrict users.And well, there is bunch of smart phones anyway where GSM\3G is reduced to a modem IC and Linux just dials a number (something that any PC+phone can do for years) so it is quite safe(at least PC+phone bunch is a way more powerful toy for hackers).

As from security and OTA… er, I do not like idea that someone can update my device remotely without my request.It rises privacy, security and freedom concerns.After all it is I am who payed for device.Let’s it be me who decides how to use it, then.Why should allow someone else to make decisions instead for my moneys?This looks pretty strange.

You are correct. However don’t forget that most Linux desktop applications are of little use for a cell phone. The input is completely different and screen semantics (windowing behavior/desktop integration) just don’t fit as well. Pidgin will have issues with it.
MPlayer has a whole other issue, it doesn’t pay codec license fees and somewhat relies on ia86.

> 2) When system is multi-tasked and
> lots of featured apps, speed and RAM
> is what matters…

That is why Java is important, no you will not implement a codec in Java you will implement it in assembler.
Java ME is not Java SE its designed for small size and ARM specifically. Don’t forget this is a mobile phone and security/OTA also matters.
Furthermore remember the 90-10 rule a codec falls under the 10 where most of the system should probably be written with a system better suitable for security/reliability.
I suggest you read this and the followups Mark can help with some of your misconceptions about Java:
http://weblogs.java.net/blog/mlam/archive/2007/04/why_choose_java.html

> 3) When talking about openness…

Again Android is not Java, it is Dalvik which is a huge part of its problem.
I agree with you that Googles reinvention of “everything” was dumb, but not just dumb… Difficult.
Linux programmers can’t leverage their Linux skills and Java developers can’t leverage theirs since Android is not Java. At least not “proper” Java.

As developer and user, I want interoperability between my PC, notebook, subnotebook, PDA, (smart)phone, portable-media-player, TV, etc.

I want to use one, really open platform across all digital devices I own.

This is not Linux vs Linux. I think this is more of a struggle of the carriers trying to keep control of some of the revenue source. The carriers fear becoming just a pipe. They are being forced to open their networks more in order to compete. When the networks are open then the Yahoos and Googles take most of the revenue. Compare Google’s market cap with any of the internet service providers. The handset makers are looking to keep their slice as well with Symbian.

LiMo is truly a collaborative effort among companies who’ve shown a demonstrated ability to produce not only cell phones, but Linux-based cell phones. Android from all appearances, and the OHA membership notwithstanding, seems to be entirely driven by Google (to the point where the license you agree to in order to get the Android SDK is with Google rather than the OHA).

SDKs for LiMo devices are currently being developed–I’m a member of the group working on the native SDK–and we hope to have something available for developers in the near future.

However, I want to stress the most important point here: for the largest part, the APIs used to develop code for LiMo devices are the same ones that developers currently use on Linux-based desktop systems.

LiMo devices are based on mainstream, community-supported components, such as GTK+, Gstreamer, BlueZ, D-Bus and the like. Android represents not only an entirely idiosyncratic development environment, but also a significant learning curve for developers, since it’s a) Java-only, and b) uses Java within an “application framework” which is substantially different than anything anyone’s ever seen before.

The point here is that existing code can be repurposed, with relative ease, to run on LiMo devices. Code must be pretty completely rewritten from scratch to run on Android. Similarly, developers don’t need to learn an entirely new development and design paradigm to write code for LiMo devices.

Google has said, many times, that the current efforts of the open source community weren’t good enough for them to use, and that they were thus obligated to essentially rewrite the entire system from the ground up. I don’t believe–and the other members of LiMo don’t believe–that this is actually the case. Certainly the mainstream open source development community doesn’t believe this is the case, either.

The members of LiMo believe,in contrast with Android, that we can make better progress and produce better devices by working _with_ the open source community than by going back to square one and independently reinventing wheels where perfectly good ones already exist.

David “Lefty” Schlesinger
Director, Open Source Technologies
ACCESS Co., Ltd.