Active Topics

 


Page 19 of 30 « First 91718 19 202129 Last »
Reply
Thread Tools
lma is offline lma
2009-09-26 , 12:33
Posts: 2,802 | Thanked: 4,491 times | Joined on Nov 2007
#181
Originally Posted by qgil View Post
In any case, feel free discussing the topic with them. Free software in the hardware adaptation layer is something that companies like Nokia would be also interested about.

See this blog post by Harald Welte, who has spent a lot of time discussing the topic with various chip makers. Selective quote:

So despite senior R&D management at the chip makers understanding those dynamics, and knowing that they could achieve superior product quality, reliability, security and encourage innovation - the companies don't do it until the requirements show up on the major buyers shopping lists.
[...]
As a chip maker, you first and foremost concern should be to sell as many units as possible. You don't care what kind of software your customers use. You don't care where they get their software from, or what development methodology they use. So if you can take any step to encourage more alternatives and more competition/innovation on top of your chip, you can only gain market share, but not lose it. And if you don't gain market share, well, you didn't have to make any investment. So no matter what you do, you can hardly loose anything.
Nokia may not be interested in licencing Maemo to third parties at the moment, however there are now several Linux-based options available for device makers and therefore increased pressure for hardware that works with Free drivers out of the box. There's also a manufacturer or two that makes their own chips as well as devices. I expect the situation to improve dramatically over the next year or two :-)
 

The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to lma For This Useful Post:
ysss's Avatar
ysss is offline ysss
2009-09-26 , 14:09
Posts: 4,384 | Thanked: 5,524 times | Joined on Jul 2007 @ ˙ǝɹǝɥʍou
#182
Yeah.. what does need to happen if, say, Motorola wants to make use of Maemo in one of their new device anyway?
 
lma is offline lma
2009-09-26 , 14:16
Posts: 2,802 | Thanked: 4,491 times | Joined on Nov 2007
#183
They would need to talk to Mer or roll their own distribution based on the open parts (and they couldn't call it Maemo for trademark reasons).
 

The Following User Says Thank You to lma For This Useful Post:
R-R's Avatar
R-R is offline R-R
2009-09-26 , 14:54
Posts: 739 | Thanked: 242 times | Joined on Sep 2007 @ Montreal
#184
Originally Posted by qgil View Post
They make their money licensing and selling to companies like Nokia, who actually play by the business rules and won't create a team to reverse engineer their work. If you introduce a free software license to the mix you do need to have a look to your business plan in order to keep your profits or increase them.

In any case, feel free discussing the topic with them. Free software in the hardware adaptation layer is something that companies like Nokia would be also interested about.
I'm just confused by what you mean by licensing? How do you license hardware? Don't you just buy it? Or do you actually pay less if you don't use part of the chip or something? That would really be an awkward business model! :-)
 
korbé is offline korbé
2009-09-26 , 14:59
Posts: 206 | Thanked: 72 times | Joined on Jun 2009 @ Switzerland
#185
Originally Posted by ysss View Post
Yeah.. what does need to happen if, say, Motorola wants to make use of Maemo in one of their new device anyway?
If Motorola wants to use "Maemo" on one of these phones, now they can.

For proprietary software/driver in Hardware layer:
They use their drivers for their hardware. This is not a problem.

For proprietary software in application layer:
They replace these proprietary software by FOSS equivalent. After Having redesigned the UI and, if required, add one or two fonctionalities and the same API.

In concluding, they will get a Maemo freer, more open and with more fonctionalities.

Nokia will not prevent copying of Maemo, even if it was 100% proprietary. The iPhone is an example: 100% proprietary and it exist Chinese copies.

Instead, Nokia should make "these copies" an advantage. This is why the GPL exists.
 
ysss's Avatar
ysss is offline ysss
2009-09-26 , 15:27
Posts: 4,384 | Thanked: 5,524 times | Joined on Jul 2007 @ ˙ǝɹǝɥʍou
#186
@korbe: Ok, you've lost my trust when you mentioned about chinese iPhone copies. None of those run Mobile OSX.

I'm not sure if this is the right soapbox to make use to shout out your agenda, btw.
 
R-R's Avatar
R-R is offline R-R
2009-09-26 , 15:36
Posts: 739 | Thanked: 242 times | Joined on Sep 2007 @ Montreal
#187
An interesting point is GPL vs LGPL vs Some BSD/Apache/... licenses.

GPL for Maemo can work like it did for Qt and force competitors using your platform to only produce GPL apps and thus opening all their work to you because you control the API. The LGPL wouldn't give that advantage when you own all the source and can dual license to yourself.

Android though went in the other direction and used the Apache license which will allow carriers to embrace and extend Android, locking it down however they see fit for their own profit disregarding any previous contribution whatsoever. This will just create more apple-like lock-down in various carriers market.

Which for me is the worst of both world in a made to be expanded platform ...
 

The Following User Says Thank You to R-R For This Useful Post:
korbé is offline korbé
2009-09-26 , 15:42
Posts: 206 | Thanked: 72 times | Joined on Jun 2009 @ Switzerland
#188
Originally Posted by ysss View Post
@korbe: Ok, you've lost my trust when you mentioned about chinese iPhone copies. None of those run Mobile OSX.

I'm not sure if this is the right soapbox to make use to shout out your agenda, btw.
For the end user, this is OSX mobile or not, if it has the same appearance and same functionalities, it will not change anything for him.
Last edited by korbé; 2009-09-26 at 15:45.
 
ysss's Avatar
ysss is offline ysss
2009-09-26 , 15:48
Posts: 4,384 | Thanked: 5,524 times | Joined on Jul 2007 @ ˙ǝɹǝɥʍou
#189
@korbe: I think you need to get your enlightenment\education elsewhere.. so I'm not going to continue this thread of conversation too long. But what you alluded as 'the same' in the chinese iphones example are just:

- casing appearance
- icons and home screen arrangement
- apps skins

That's about it.

I think that's a far cry from the serious licensing discussions we've had.
 

The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to ysss For This Useful Post:
korbé is offline korbé
2009-09-26 , 16:05
Posts: 206 | Thanked: 72 times | Joined on Jun 2009 @ Switzerland
#190
Originally Posted by ysss View Post
@korbe: I think you need to get your enlightenment\education elsewhere.. so I'm not going to continue this thread of conversation too long. But what you alluded as 'the same' in the chinese iphones example are just:

- casing appearance
- icons and home screen arrangement
- apps skins

That's about it.

I think that's a far cry from the serious licensing discussions we've had.
I have talked about the iPhone to demonstrate whatever restraint selected, we can not prevent copying.

Then thid is better transform copy to an advantage.

PS: I admit, the iPhone is not the best example.
 
Reply
Page 19 of 30 « First 91718 19 202129 Last »

Tags
balance, basic rights, defective by design, get your stink on, gpl holy crusade, open source, open source advocacy, sw wants to be free, try to correct an error, why isn't the gpl law?!, zealots be here

« Previous Thread | Next Thread »

 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 06:24.

Contact Us - Home - Archive - Top