Comments on: Progress on the Treo 650 Linux Project

Linux working on the Palm Treo 650When I last wrote about Linux on the Treo 650, it was barely booting up the command prompt. Now less than 2 months later, developers have got the GPE graphical interface up and running. GPE is an open source user interface for using Linux on a handheld. It contains an environment of components for PIM, settings network access and other programs. So far people working on the Treo 650 Linux porting have got the keyboard, LCD, touchscreen, bootloader, SD slot, USB and some sound working. Phone and Bluetooth drivers are still under development. There is no word yet on how stable or functional this is, as only a batch of pictures have been posted.
Return to Story - Permalink

Article Comments

 (58 comments)

The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. PalmInfocenter is not responsible for them in any way.
Please Login or register here to add your comments.

Start a new Comment Down

These Linux Guys Amaze Me.

LiveFaith @ 2/6/2006 7:10:00 PM # Q
It takes a lot of time, energy and resiliance to hack one's way function by function onto these devices. The open source dynamic is amaazing to me. I wonder if they've gotten farther than Access?

Pat Horne; www.churchoflivingfaith.com
Me too
freakout @ 2/6/2006 8:08:41 PM # Q
They make it look so easy. If this can be done so quickly, how hard is it really for Palm to throw in PACE and make the GUI look like PalmOS?

If it's this easy, why isn't PalmLinux already available?

Tim Carroll
Your friendly customer service robot
(and big Treo fan)

RE: These Linux Guys Amaze Me.
joad @ 2/6/2006 9:50:17 PM # Q
Kinda makes you WinCE to see how innovation is going at Palm...

RE: These Linux Guys Amaze Me.
PenguinPowered @ 2/6/2006 10:17:55 PM # Q
I wonder if they've gotten farther than Access?

and why do you think Access is doing a port to the 650?


May You Live in Interesting Times

RE: These Linux Guys Amaze Me.
PenguinPowered @ 2/6/2006 10:20:23 PM # Q
If it's this easy, why isn't PalmLinux already available?

Because it isn't. The description is of a device that's approximately in the same shape as PalmLinux was in when it was shown at the developer's conference in early '05.

It is a testimony to the sheer determination of these guys that they've gotten as far as PSRC did in about the same amount of time, except for on a different system and without any hardware documentation.


May You Live in Interesting Times

RE: These Linux Guys Amaze Me.
The_Voice_of_Reason @ 2/6/2006 10:48:47 PM # Q
It is a testimony to the sheer determination of these guys that they've gotten as far as PSRC did in about the same amount of time, except for on a different system and without any hardware documentation.

Or some would say it's pathetic how little the PalmSource Kiddies had to show for all the time they spent developing PalmLinux. The smoke and mirrors trick at PalmSource's DevCon last May would have met with approval from the Mighty Wizard from The Wizard of Oz.

------------------------
Sony CLIE UX100: 128 MB real RAM, OLED screen. All the PDA anyone really ever wanted.
------------------------

The Palm eCONomy = Communismô

The Great Palm Swindle: http://www.palminfocenter.com/comment_view.asp?ID=7864#108038

NetFrontLinux - the next major cellphone OS?: http://www.palminfocenter.com/comment_view.asp?ID=8060#111823

RE: These Linux Guys Amaze Me.
rsc1000 @ 2/7/2006 1:12:21 AM # Q
>>Or some would say it's pathetic how little the PalmSource Kiddies had to show for all the time they spent developing PalmLinux. The smoke and mirrors trick at PalmSource's DevCon last May would have met with approval from the Mighty Wizard from The Wizard of Oz.

Or some would say that TVOR is a mean-spirited ****head. Yes TVOR, everything Palm is a BIG CONSPIRACY - uhhh we get it. Of course, when they aren't in CONSPIRACY mode, they are the WORLDS BIGGEST IDIOTS. Thanks for enlightening us!
You seem to know all about some big swindle at 'DevCon' - where's your proof? Where I come from you need proof when you say something. There is proof in your slander here.

I don't think Palm has great managment and I am certain they don't have a loaded deck of geniouses - but that is not the same as the slanderous angle you have on everything.

>>The description is of a device that's approximately in the same shape as PalmLinux was in when it was shown at the developer's conference in early '05.

Except: at Devcon they they had Linux running with a Palm GUI and linux versions of the apps. I'd say that means they were at least slightly ahead.


RE: These Linux Guys Amaze Me.
PenguinPowered @ 2/7/2006 2:41:25 AM # Q
The smoke and mirrors trick at PalmSource's DevCon last May would have met with approval from the Mighty Wizard from The Wizard of Oz.

Have you seen anyone about this compulsive need of yours to maintain a fantasy in the face of overwhelming evidence of reality yet Skippy?

There were no smoke and mirrors games during the palmlinux demo at devcon, Skippy, as you're well aware. Lefty showed exactly the state of the PalmLinux port, running on real hardware, and was very careful to accurately describe what was and wasn't running.

For those who don't recall the last time skippy dredged up this bogus assertion: Lefty showed the PalmOS launcher running on a TI Omap-730 development board (called a Perseus II) on top of the 2.6.9 Linux kernel He showed a couple of aps running and demonstrated the development environment that PSRC was using, including modifying and recompiling an ap and then running it under the remote debugger.

Everything Lefty showed was exactly as it appeared to be.

And no, I'm not defending my own work -- I didn't get directly involved with PalmLinux development until after the demo was done.



May You Live in Interesting Times

PalmSource selling Golden Gate Bridge? SHOCKER!!!
The_Voice_of_Reason @ 2/7/2006 7:57:12 AM # Q
Come back and spin us another story when the PalmLinux release date slips from Summer 2006 to 2007. And then 2008. And then 2009. And then...

We've gone through this nonsense and heard all the exact same "dramatic", indignant claims from the developers of Copeland and Cobalt.

Do us all a favor, Palm Apologists: cut the B.S. and admit it - PalmLinux is a pipe dream we won't be seeing any time soon (if ever).

***************************************************************************


Here's a challenge to Marty, Beersy, svrontis, rsc1000, Dr Opinion/Jeff Kirvin, and ALL the other Palm Apologists: post the exact date you feel PalmLinux will be shipped to licensees and also the date the first device running PalmLinux will be available for purchase by consumers. Step up and commit to a date, Palm Apologists. Otherwise, S T F U.


[Let's count how many seconds it will take until Marty posts yet another of his classic dumba$$ responses and runs away like a widdle girlee.]

TVoR

------------------------
Sony CLIE UX100: 128 MB real RAM, OLED screen. All the PDA anyone really ever wanted.
------------------------

The Palm eCONomy = Communismô

The Great Palm Swindle: http://www.palminfocenter.com/comment_view.asp?ID=7864#108038

NetFrontLinux - the next major cellphone OS?: http://www.palminfocenter.com/comment_view.asp?ID=8060#111823

RE: These Linux Guys Amaze Me.
rsc1000 @ 2/7/2006 10:00:22 AM # Q
>>Here's a challenge to Marty, Beersy, svrontis, rsc1000, Dr Opinion/Jeff Kirvin, and ALL the other Palm Apologists: post the exact date you feel PalmLinux will be shipped to licensees and also the date the first device running PalmLinux will be available for purchase by consumers. Step up and commit to a date, Palm Apologists. Otherwise, S T F U.

Nice attempt at deflection there - but here is a challenge to you: when accusing a company of 'scamming' people (as you have stated quite clearly here regarding an apparent 'smoke and mirrors show', give your proof. Otherwise you should **** - dig?

BTW: where's your version of PalmLinux TVOR? you know - the one that demos your obvious superiority to Palm / PalmSrc developers?

RE: These Linux Guys Amaze Me.
rsc1000 @ 2/7/2006 10:13:37 AM # Q
>>Otherwise you should **** - dig?

guess they've started censoring acronbymns here? OK - as my point was to throw back at TVOR, let me re-iterate that his way "Otherwise you should S T F U - dig?"

RE: These Linux Guys Amaze Me.
cervezas @ 2/7/2006 12:58:14 PM # Q
TVoR wrote:
Step up and commit to a date, Palm Apologists. Otherwise, S T F U.

That would be kinda like me stepping up and committing on a date that you finally seek the professional help you need, wouldn't it? I can't speak for the others in your bizarrely diverse list, but for my part I don't "apologize" on behalf of other people, nor (unlike you) am I so foolish as to make predictions about things I have little direct knowledge or control over.

I'm impressed with what these hackers have done, too. I do know enough as a software developer, however, to know that there's a big difference between hacking a Linux one-off on top of an existing system and creating a robust system from the ground up with the right hardware abstraction, internal and external interfaces/APIs that you can commit to over the long run, backward compatibility not only with PACE but with HotSync Manager, good development tools and documentation, AND patching the Linux kernel itself in the places where it is lacking (power management, telephony, real-time performance etc). We won't know when or how well PalmSource pulls it off until its done, but the promised delivery date is still months away, so perhaps you should take your own advice, hmmm?

Heh, that'll be the day.



David Beers
Pikesoft Mobile Computing
Software Everywhere blog
www.pikesoft.com/blog

RE: These Linux Guys Amaze Me.
PenguinPowered @ 2/7/2006 6:09:46 PM # Q
This is really hard for you, ain't it Skippy?

Lefty showed what he claimed to show. There's no 'spin' to that statement. And there were no smoke or mirrors involved in what he showed. It was exactly what he claimed it was.

Of course, you know this, which is why you never offer any arguments to support your empty claims. You just keep making empty claims. Guess what Skippy? Almost everyone here now knows that is all you do.

I'm not allowed, by NDA, to give my estimate of when PalmLinux will ship; sorry.

The funny thing here, Skippy, is that you're so fixated on your fantasy that you don't even see the actual negative implication in what I've said. As with our little discussion about PSRC's funding, you're missing what's really going on because you're stuck on your script. Again.

By the way, thanks for the laughs. I can't stop giggling anytime I think about how you swing back and forth between calling me a PalmSource apologist and berating me for bad-mouthing PalmSource. It's gotta be one powerful fantasy to allow you to hold both view points.

Unless you really are nothing more than the pathetic troll that you're giving every appearance of being.

HAND


May You Live in Interesting Times

RE: These Linux Guys Amaze Me.
ChiA @ 2/7/2006 7:03:02 PM # Q
Yes, these Linux guys do amaze me, the fact that they can get a usable system of Linux working on a Treo within two months despite not having any help or documentation from either Palm or PalmSource.

"It is commonly said, and more particularly by Lord Shaftesbury, that ridicule is the best test of truth".
Lord Chesterfield
Excuses Excuses
ChiA @ 2/7/2006 7:05:05 PM # Q
David Beers said
patching the Linux kernel itself in the places where it is lacking (power management, telephony, real-time performance etc)

I thought the whole idea of PalmSource buying ChinaMobileSoft was that most of this work had been done with its mLinux OS? If not then ChinaMobileSoft has become just another Be.

In defence of PalmSource:
- they're not just trying to run Linux on mobile devices but are writing the Palm OS to run on top of Linux on mobile devices.
- Windows Vista and Mac OS X have each taken several years to develop by companies which have much larger resources.

In criticism of PalmSource:
- what have they been doing with mLinux this past year?
- OS X has a compatibiliy environment which runs the old Mac OS 9 applications (ie the same thing PalmSource is trying to do with PalmLinux, in essence Cobalt on Linux). This was developed within the time Apple built the entire OS X.
- Vista and OS X are much larger and complex operating systems and yet run on a far larger range of hardware. OS X and to a lesser extent XP have been updated with greater regularity than the Palm OSes.

"It is commonly said, and more particularly by Lord Shaftesbury, that ridicule is the best test of truth".
Lord Chesterfield

RE: These Linux Guys Amaze Me.
PenguinPowered @ 2/7/2006 7:37:32 PM # Q
what have they been doing with mLinux this past year?

Selling it to customers who are shipping it on phones in Asia, I'm told.

The story of the CMS buy should end up in the Harvard Business Review as a cautionary tale.



May You Live in Interesting Times

RE: These Linux Guys Amaze Me.
cervezas @ 2/8/2006 12:51:53 PM # Q
what have they been doing with mLinux this past year?

Selling it to customers who are shipping it on phones in Asia, I'm told.

Interesting. When I looked through all the pretty phones on the CMS site I couldn't tell which, if any, were running mLinux versus their mFone platform: http://tinyurl.com/bezn5. Some look pretty "smart," at least based on the fact that they have touchscreens (really small ones). But even mFone (which I think uses Nucleus as an RTOS kernel) is referred to as a smartphone platform: http://www.palmsource.com/about/cms_mfone.html. So it hasn't been clear to me that any of those phones run Linux. It's interesting to me that when PalmSource describes their non-Palm OS software mLinux is never mentioned. They just mention that the acquisition of CMS gave PalmSource a "fast-boot Linux kernel": http://www.palmsource.com/about/cms_annc.html. I don't have much to go on, but if I had to make a guess I'd say the CMS engineers haven't been all that actively involved in the core development of Palm OS for Linux.

As for the CMS acquisition making a good cautionary tale for business schools, I have to say that broad, vague statements like this that you can't further explain due to your NDA are highly annoying, Marty.

On the other hand, it's hard to think of many computer tech mergers or acquisitions that weren't cautionary tales in one way or another isn't it, so why should I be surprised if this one was any different?



David Beers
Pikesoft Mobile Computing
Software Everywhere blog
www.pikesoft.com/blog

RE: These Linux Guys Amaze Me.
PenguinPowered @ 2/8/2006 9:49:53 PM # Q
I have to say that broad, vague statements like this that you can't further explain due to your NDA are highly annoying, Marty.

Ask Mike Kelley, he knows a lot more about CMS than I do.

May You Live in Interesting Times

Since the Palm Apologists apparently can't read:
The_Voice_of_Reason @ 2/8/2006 10:15:30 PM # Q
Maybe their mommies can read this back to them:

Here's a challenge to Marty, Beersy, svrontis, rsc1000, Dr Opinion/Jeff Kirvin, and ALL the other Palm Apologists: post the exact date you feel PalmLinux will be shipped to licensees and also the date the first device running PalmLinux will be available for purchase by consumers. Step up and commit to a date, Palm Apologists. Otherwise, S T F U.


PalmLinux is DEAD IN THE WATER. Another ambitious Cobalt-style debacle is about to unfold before our eyes. Here's a sobering thought: PalmOS 5 ("Garnet") might very well be the final OS the platform sees. And StyleTap + Windows Mobile may soon become the most intelligent answer to the question, "What is the best PDA/smartphone platform?".

Since the Palm Apologists have chosen to run and hide (as usual), I'll step up and answer the question for them:

PalmLinux will NEVER ship. Period.

------------------------
Sony CLIE UX100: 128 MB real RAM, OLED screen. All the PDA anyone really ever wanted.
------------------------

The Palm eCONomy = Communismô

The Great Palm Swindle: http://www.palminfocenter.com/comment_view.asp?ID=7864#108038

NetFrontLinux - the next major cellphone OS?: http://www.palminfocenter.com/comment_view.asp?ID=8060#111823

RE: These Linux Guys Amaze Me.
PenguinPowered @ 2/8/2006 11:57:51 PM # Q
PalmLinux will NEVER ship. Period.

Ah, Skippy. PSRC has already shipped CMS linux to customers who are shipping Linux phones.

You can do better than that.

May You Live in Interesting Times

RE: These BeOS Gals Frighten Me.
The_Voice_of_Reason @ 2/9/2006 3:12:10 AM # Q
>>>PalmLinux will NEVER ship. Period.

Ah, Skippy. PSRC has already shipped CMS linux to customers who are shipping Linux phones.

You can do better than that.


Ah, Marty. You know when we say "PalmLinux" we're talking about the FrankenPalmOS currently being hacked together by PalmSource with rancid pieces of Cobalt, PACE and Linux (and soon to be added: NetFront cream sauce!). Wow. Yet another pathetic attempt at more obfuscation from you.

You can do better than that.



------------------------
Sony CLIE UX100: 128 MB real RAM, OLED screen. All the PDA anyone really ever wanted.
------------------------

The Palm eCONomy = Communismô

The Great Palm Swindle: http://www.palminfocenter.com/comment_view.asp?ID=7864#108038

NetFrontLinux - the next major cellphone OS?: http://www.palminfocenter.com/comment_view.asp?ID=8060#111823

RE: These Linux Guys Amaze Me.
PenguinPowered @ 2/9/2006 1:16:51 PM # Q
OK, that one was too fast for you, so I'll slow it down:

Access is already shipping Netfront
CMS is already shipping a Linux phone package
PSRC is already shipping PACE.

Access is good at what they do.

NPL is merely Netfront+PACE/Linux.

Access will ship that. To customers who will ship phones to consumers.

If you're trying to say that no one will ship a smartphone with an OS that is Cobalt on top of Linux, you're right, that died the day Access bought PSRC. New owners often change the direction of projects.

If your "PalmLinux" is the more realistic NPL, you're flat out wrong. It ain't dead, and it will ship, all the way to subscribers.

And no, 2007 isn't too late for such a product. After all, there's still not a viable linux phone out there.


May You Live in Interesting Times

RE: These Linux Guys Amaze Me.
cervezas @ 2/9/2006 6:02:43 PM # Q
If you're trying to say that no one will ship a smartphone with an OS that is Cobalt on top of Linux, you're right, that died the day Access bought PSRC. New owners often change the direction of projects.

That's the first time I've heard you come right out and say that, Marty. And I'm surprised you don't figure on this violating your NDA.

So, just to be clear, you're saying that the project to port the Cobalt middleware to a Linux kernel has been cancelled and that only PACE is being ported, is that right?

David Beers
Pikesoft Mobile Computing
Software Everywhere blog
www.pikesoft.com/blog

RE: These Linux Guys Amaze Me.
PenguinPowered @ 2/9/2006 9:17:36 PM # Q
So, just to be clear, you're saying that the project to port the Cobalt middleware to a Linux kernel has been cancelled and that only PACE is being ported, is that right?

Nope. As far as I know, the project is still on going and still committed to the same schedule that was announced at the Devcon.

I just happen not to believe it's gonna happen that way.


May You Live in Interesting Times

Marty, you'd better ask Ryan to delete your comment.
The_Voice_of_Reason @ 2/9/2006 9:25:36 PM # Q
If you're trying to say that no one will ship a smartphone with an OS that is Cobalt on top of Linux, you're right, that died the day Access bought PSRC. New owners often change the direction of projects.

I said all along that PalmLinux (Cobalt leftovers + Linux kernel) was dead and that NetFrontLinux "NFL" (NetFront + PACE + even fewer pieces of Cobalt + Linux kernel) was the "new plan". Access realized PalmLinux was going to take too long and would not bring anything adequately competitive to the market. Thanks for confirming this, but you might want to re-read your NDA before PalmSource's lawyers rip you a new one.

Unfortunately, NetFrontLinux is not going to come close to meeting the original development timeline proposed for PalmLinux. The new roadmap will lead stralght to the Sea of Red Ink, right next to Cobalt Town. I feel Access weren't being realistic if they thought they could quickly integrate NetFront and PalmLinux into a STABLE OS in less than 2 years, especially with so few skilled codemonkeys.

If your "PalmLinux" is the more realistic NPL, you're flat out wrong. It ain't dead, and it will ship, all the way to subscribers.

NetFrontLinux will probably need another 18 - 24 months worth of development before being worth risking NetFront's good name on it. DoCoMo might be big enough to afford to blow $30 - 40 million on a gamble on such a long shot, but they aren't stupid and won't stick with NetFrontLinux when it becomes apparent that it's vaporware. Windows Mobile and less ambitious custom Linux platform development is not exactly going to stop over the next 24 months and they're already here NOW and shipping on REAL phones. NetFrontLinux is yet another pipe dream along the lines of Copeland, BeOS and Cobalt. PalmSource/Access don't even have enough codemonkeys to realistically take a shot at getting out a rock solid NetFrontLinux before the smartphone industry has standardized on other platforms.

And no, 2007 isn't too late for such a product. After all, there's still not a viable linux phone out there.

No, but there ARE viable Symbian and Windows Mobile phones out there, with more coming every month. Other Linux platforms with less grandiose plans than NetFrontLinux also have a better shot at actually ending up on REAL phones than NFL does. Why should anyone give a rat's a$$ about NetFrontLinux if it was only finally ready for prime time in 2008? Simple: they won't.


TVoR


*Marty, please be careful about what you're posting here. If you slip up, you might end up hurting PalmSource. And their lawyers might end up hurting you.



------------------------
Sony CLIE UX100: 128 MB real RAM, OLED screen. All the PDA anyone really ever wanted.
------------------------

The Palm eCONomy = Communismô

The Great Palm Swindle: http://www.palminfocenter.com/comment_view.asp?ID=7864#108038

NetFrontLinux - the next major cellphone OS?: http://www.palminfocenter.com/comment_view.asp?ID=8060#111823

Way to backpeddle, Marty. Smooth. Real smooth.
The_Voice_of_Reason @ 2/9/2006 10:18:02 PM # Q
>>>So, just to be clear, you're saying that the project to port the Cobalt middleware to a Linux kernel has been cancelled and that only PACE is being ported, is that right?

Nope. As far as I know, the project is still on going and still committed to the same schedule that was announced at the Devcon.

Heh heh heh.

Suuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuure, Marty.

****************************************************************************


The PalmLinux development timeline:


http://tinyurl.com/apefn


------------------------
Sony CLIE UX100: 128 MB real RAM, OLED screen. All the PDA anyone really ever wanted.
------------------------

The Palm eCONomy = Communismô

The Great Palm Swindle: http://www.palminfocenter.com/comment_view.asp?ID=7864#108038

NetFrontLinux - the next major cellphone OS?: http://www.palminfocenter.com/comment_view.asp?ID=8060#111823

RE: These Linux Guys Amaze Me.
PenguinPowered @ 2/10/2006 4:21:55 AM # Q
Yup, Skippy, when one tells the truth, it ususally comes out smooth.

Day I left PSRC, managers were still telling everyone in Sunnyvale that Cobalt/Linux was the real deal and the job of the hour, and I haven't heard any different since.

Mike Kelley recently gave an interview in which he made some schedule claims about when PalmLinux would be in the hands of licensees, and it was the same schedule that was driving in house activity.



May You Live in Interesting Times

RE: These Linux Guys Amaze Me.
PenguinPowered @ 2/10/2006 4:28:43 AM # Q
I said all along that PalmLinux (Cobalt leftovers + Linux kernel) was dead and that NetFrontLinux "NFL" (NetFront + PACE + even fewer pieces of Cobalt + Linux kernel) was the "new plan".

You've said that, but it wasn't true then, and it wasn't true the day I left PalmSource. I think it's inevitable, but Access hadn't come around to that point of view when I left.

Access realized PalmLinux was going to take too long and would not bring anything adequately competitive to the market. Thanks for confirming this, but you might want to re-read your NDA before PalmSource's lawyers rip you a new one.

Nope. Access still believes that Sunnyvale can deliver, as far as I know. You can skip the NDA carping, skippy, I haven't confirmed anything or violated anything.

Unfortunately, NetFrontLinux is not going to come close to meeting the original development timeline proposed for PalmLinux. The new roadmap will lead stralght to the Sea of Red Ink, right next to Cobalt Town. I feel Access weren't being realistic if they thought they could quickly integrate NetFront and PalmLinux into a STABLE OS in less than 2 years, especially with so few skilled codemonkeys.

Skippy, your ignorance is showing. You've admitted yourself you have no idea what talent set exists in Nanjing. You also have no idea what talent set exists in Tokyo. (Take a look at what Access has done in the last five years, they ain't slackers.) And, although you haven't realized it, stuff you've said in the past few weeks indicates you have no idea what the current talent set in Sunnyvale is.

NetFrontLinux will probably need another 18 - 24 months worth of development before being worth risking NetFront's good name on it.

It is amusing to watch you pull random numbers out of thin air. Let see, in addition to not knowing what the talent pool is, you've demonstrated a fairly complete lack of knowledge of large software development projects, and you've got no idea what the current state of PalmLinux is.

Yet you baldly proclaim schedule numbers that are no more than SWAG.

No, but there ARE viable Symbian and Windows Mobile phones out there, with more coming every month. Other Linux platforms with less grandiose plans than NetFrontLinux also have a better shot at actually ending up on REAL phones than NFL does.

Symbian and winmob both have serious flaws and there's a big enough community of potential licensees who would pick a nearly-equal linux phone to play for one.

There are no other linux platforms to speak of in the competition. For the most part, the Linux guys are all farther behind than Access is, and the few that aren't have played out their opportunity.

Why should anyone give a rat's a$$ about NetFrontLinux if it was only finally ready for prime time in 2008? Simple: they won't.

And yet, DoCoMo invested in Access.

Makes one wonder what they know that you don't, Skippy. Well, it would if you didn't keep reminding us how little you do know.


May You Live in Interesting Times

Marty... Marty... Marty...
The_Voice_of_Reason @ 2/10/2006 4:27:27 PM # Q
>>>I said all along that PalmLinux (Cobalt leftovers + Linux kernel) was dead and that NetFrontLinux "NFL" (NetFront + PACE + even fewer pieces of Cobalt + Linux kernel) was the "new plan".

You've said that, but it wasn't true then, and it wasn't true the day I left PalmSource. I think it's inevitable, but Access hadn't come around to that point of view when I left.

Oh, so now you're claiming that PalmSource has not switched from PalmLinux to designing NetFrontLinux? Keep flailing, Marty. You're too funny.

Access realized PalmLinux was going to take too long and would not bring anything adequately competitive to the market. Thanks for confirming this, but you might want to re-read your NDA before PalmSource's lawyers rip you a new one.

Nope. Access still believes that Sunnyvale can deliver, as far as I know. You can skip the NDA carping, skippy, I haven't confirmed anything or violated anything.

"As far as I know." Heh heh heh. Marty, it's time for your enema. You're so full of shi* you're likely going th explode soon. Has anyone from Legal at PalmSource contacted you yet, Marty? Remember: never bend over to tie your shoes in front of them.

Unfortunately, NetFrontLinux is not going to come close to meeting the original development timeline proposed for PalmLinux. The new roadmap will lead stralght to the Sea of Red Ink, right next to Cobalt Town. I feel Access weren't being realistic if they thought they could quickly integrate NetFront and PalmLinux into a STABLE OS in less than 2 years, especially with so few skilled codemonkeys.

Skippy, your ignorance is showing. You've admitted yourself you have no idea what talent set exists in Nanjing.

When did I "admit" that, Marty? Links, PLEASE.

You also have no idea what talent set exists in Tokyo. (Take a look at what Access has done in the last five years, they ain't slackers.)

If my aging memory and my "limited" knowledge of Japanese serve me correctly, Access is a relatively small company with approximately the same number of employees (and codemonkeys) as Palm. Of course, the average Access codemonkey might be 10 times as productive as the average PalmSource codemonkey, but that's another story...

And, although you haven't realized it, stuff you've said in the past few weeks indicates you have no idea what the current talent set in Sunnyvale is.

Newsflash: There is NO talent in Sunnyvale.

>>>NetFrontLinux will probably need another 18 - 24 months worth of development before being worth risking NetFront's good name on it.

It is amusing to watch you pull random numbers out of thin air. Let see, in addition to not knowing what the talent pool is, you've demonstrated a fairly complete lack of knowledge of large software development projects, and you've got no idea what the current state of PalmLinux is.

Yet you baldly proclaim schedule numbers that are no more than SWAG.

Keep flailing Marty. Once again, you're going down swinging. Too bad you couldn't punch your way out of a wet paper bag...

>>>No, but there ARE viable Symbian and Windows Mobile phones out there, with more coming every month. Other Linux platforms with less grandiose plans than NetFrontLinux also have a better shot at actually ending up on REAL phones than NFL does.

Symbian and winmob both have serious flaws and there's a big enough community of potential licensees who would pick a nearly-equal linux phone to play for one.

Windows Mobile might not be perfect, but last I checked, neither is Windows XP. And what percent of the desktop market runs Microsoft's OS? Get a clue, Marty.

There are no other linux platforms to speak of in the competition. For the most part, the Linux guys are all farther behind than Access is, and the few that aren't have played out their opportunity.

The Nokia 770 shows you're wrong. It might not be a phone OS now, but it could easily morph into one. And Samsung, Motorola, Nokia etc could each commission a decent Linux-based OS if they get their act together. If all the cellphone manufacturers have there own OS, who will buy NetFrontLinux? DoCoMo? Dream on.

>>>Why should anyone give a rat's a$$ about NetFrontLinux if it was only finally ready for prime time in 2008? Simple: they won't.

And yet, DoCoMo invested in Access.

And that was a smart move. It's called hedging your bets. Access (unlike Palm) at least has proven recently that they have codemonkeys capable of producing functional software that works as designed.

Makes one wonder what they know that you don't, Skippy. Well, it would if you didn't keep reminding us how little you do know.

Don't be a hater, Marty. Hate will eat you alive.

Take care.

TVoR



------------------------
Sony CLIE UX100: 128 MB real RAM, OLED screen. All the PDA anyone really ever wanted.
------------------------

The Palm eCONomy = Communismô

The Great Palm Swindle: http://www.palminfocenter.com/comment_view.asp?ID=7864#108038

NetFrontLinux - the next major cellphone OS?: http://www.palminfocenter.com/comment_view.asp?ID=8060#111823

As usual, Marty ran away, tail between his mangy legs...
The_Voice_of_Reason @ 2/16/2006 11:05:42 PM # Q








------------------------
Sony CLIE UX100: 128 MB real RAM, OLED screen. All the PDA anyone really ever wanted.
------------------------

The Palm eCONomy = Communismô

The Great Palm Swindle: http://www.palminfocenter.com/comment_view.asp?ID=7864#108038

NetFrontLinux - the next major cellphone OS?: http://www.palminfocenter.com/comment_view.asp?ID=8060#111823

RE: These Linux Guys Amaze Me.
PenguinPowered @ 2/16/2006 11:45:22 PM # Q
Sorry Skippy, nobody ran anywhere. But you're ranting again, so I'll wait until your meds kick in and your posts are at least coherent before I respond to any more of them.


May You Live in Interesting Times

Poor Marty
The_Voice_of_Reason @ 2/17/2006 1:16:50 AM # Q
Sorry Skippy, nobody ran anywhere. But you're ranting again, so I'll wait until your meds kick in and your posts are at least coherent before I respond to any more of them.


Whatever gets you through the night, Marty. Maybe eventually you can recruit Beersy for a folie a deux.


TVoR

------------------------
Sony CLIE UX100: 128 MB real RAM, OLED screen. All the PDA anyone really ever wanted.
------------------------

The Palm eCONomy = Communismô

The Great Palm Swindle: http://www.palminfocenter.com/comment_view.asp?ID=7864#108038

NetFrontLinux - the next major cellphone OS?: http://www.palminfocenter.com/comment_view.asp?ID=8060#111823

Reply to this comment

In all fairness

scstraus2 @ 2/7/2006 4:52:09 AM # Q
I think PSRC is trying to rewrite and port PalmOS to run under linux, not create a quick port of linux to a single palmOS device. There's a big difference between creating a stable UI and set of applications for an OS that runs against many types of hardware, and doing a one time port to one device (which doesn't necissarily have to work all that well).

I would be amazed if PSRC didn't have a port of linux running on a palm device or emulator a week or two after they started working on it. But a port does not a product make. Who would buy PalmOS if it was just another linux distro? I wouldn't- I'd just use a port like this.

But PSRC better have something good up thier sleeve, because they will face competition from the general open source community like this. Although you'll never really be able to buy a palm phone preinstalled with an open source port like this.

RE: In all fairness
PenguinPowered @ 2/7/2006 6:23:44 PM # Q
I would be amazed if PSRC didn't have a port of linux running on a palm device or emulator a week or two after they started working on it.

I would have been amazed if we had. Porting Linux to a new system, even one that's very similar to an existing system, requires writing and modifying device drivers for all of the devices that are unique to the new system. That takes a few weeks, rather than one or two.

On the other hand, if you happen to have a device in hand that there's already a linux port for, just as the TI Perseus 2 development board, and you're already familiar with it because of your own work, you put Linux on it and get to work porting your own stuff to Linux.

Besides, we'd much rather have ported to a dev board than a customer's already shipping product. Why? Because we can show dev boards to anyone we care to. Customers tend not to want you showing off ports to their systems to other customers for one reason or another. Wouldn't have made sense to start with a Palm device.



May You Live in Interesting Times

Reply to this comment

Flame PalmSource, not each other.

interlard @ 2/7/2006 9:48:00 AM # Q
I think we're ALL very frustrated with PalmSource's lack of progress on the Linux kernel for PalmOS.

No software project should take as long as this one has. It can't be this hard. The devices are tiny and can only take so much code. They must have written gigs of it by now. ;-)

If it's taking this long the project must just badly managed. Those of us who have worked in software industry have seen bad projects before. The cure is to just cancel it and start again with a new scope. I thought this is what PalmSource were doing with the Linux switch but here we are with very little to show for it except a bunch of open-source people trying to do it themselves (an honorable attempt).

When Palm start hedging their bets with Windows Mobile on the 700w, you know even the faithful are loosing faith.

I'm just about ready to switch to a WM5-powerd smartphone, if only they would get Vindigo working on it. Can we get some open source dudes to do that one? :-)

RE: Flame PalmSource, not each other.
PenguinPowered @ 2/7/2006 6:35:20 PM # Q
I think we're ALL very frustrated with PalmSource's lack of progress on the Linux kernel for PalmOS.

Why? The work on the Linux kernel has been done for some time, and much of it is already in the hands of the open source community.

No software project should take as long as this one has. It can't be this hard.

It is routine for software projects of this size to take in excess of 18 months. 18 months is, in fact, not a bad estimate of how long it would take a reasonably talented, dedicated team to port PalmOS non-kernel bits to Linux and polish them to the state where they should be released to customers.



May You Live in Interesting Times

RE: Flame PalmSource, not each other.
rsc1000 @ 2/7/2006 9:07:49 PM # Q
Penguin is dead on: this is nothing. Remember that for most of the last (what is it now, 4 years?) since Garnet was first released, they worked on Cobolt. A couple of years later it was - sort of - done (6.1 seeming to be the REAL 6.0). So compared to that, the new Palm flavor of Linux was only announced back in early Dec 2004 - actually only 14 months ago.
And somebody (further up the page - had the idea of comparing Windows Vista favorably to Palm Linux? Vista has been going since way before Garnet was a twinking in PalmSrc's eye - for 5 years now!
14 months isn't anything for any major software product. PC games seem to almost rehularly miss their announced completion date by years! Duke-Nukem Forever anyone?


RE: Flame PalmSource, not each other.
ChiA @ 2/7/2006 11:44:03 PM # Q
rsc1000 said
And somebody (further up the page - had the idea of comparing Windows Vista favorably to Palm Linux?

I think you failed to comprehend my earlier point in PalmSource's defence that software as complex as an OS takes time to code - just as Vista has taken quite some time to code.

However, do bear in mind that in those five years of developing Vista Microsoft has also:
- provided support and updates to: Windows XP including Tablet PC and Media Center Editions, Windows Server 2003, Windows Mobile 2003 and 5, Windows Embedded etc, each of which capable of running on hundreds of different hardware configurations.
- supported and updated countless other complex software packages and development tools including Office on both Windows and Mac platforms.
- developed the Xbox console and the Xbox360.

In comparison from PalmSource:
- we've seen Garnet hacked and hacked in order to run on what has been no more than twenty-five devices (and I'm including all those Sony devices to keep TVoR happy in the tally)
- what few updates there have been have been released by the manufacturer of the devices rather than the creator of the OS. Still no sign of updates for the Tungsten T, T2, T3 etc to the latest version of Garnet.
- the one OS (Cobalt) which PalmSource has cobbled together is so fantastic that it's sitting on a shelf gathering dust a year after it's been "completed". I guess the fantastic is derived from fantasy.
- Cobalt is so fantastic that PalmSource decided to develop Palm Linux and promote that instead.

True, Microsoft is a much larger company but on the face of it, their mobile and embedded device division alone appears to be more active than PalmSource.

By the way, it's notable that the Research in Motion's (RIM) Blackberry OS was a multitasking and multithreaded OS way back in 2001 at a time when the then Palm was a much larger company:

http://www.wirelessinternetmag.com/news/0106/0106_devbiz_blackberry.htm

"It is commonly said, and more particularly by Lord Shaftesbury, that ridicule is the best test of truth".
Lord Chesterfield

RE: Flame PalmSource, not each other.
PenguinPowered @ 2/8/2006 1:27:32 AM # Q
Comparing company sizes is meaningless with respect to comparing software projects. GE, after all, is one of the world's largest employers, and hasn't accomplished anything with its operating systems in over 30 years.



May You Live in Interesting Times

Holy Garnet! It's one unholy FrankenCobaltLinux!
ChiA @ 2/8/2006 3:01:09 PM # Q
rsc1000 said
PC games seem to almost regularly miss their announced completion date by years! Duke-Nukem Forever anyone?

Most PC and console games companies, unlike PalmSource, don't spend their time coding on just one project, at least those which are successful and don't end up being taken over or going broke.

Face the facts, PalmSource was trying to run a one trick pony fairground attraction. PalmSource had to sell up shop (and sell itself) when Palm, Sony and other licencees took one look at that ugly pony (mule) that was Cobalt and choked it to death to put it out of its misery.

Let's face it, PalmLinux is the effort to reanimate the carcass of that dead pony Frankenstein style: they've gutted its body and are putting and taking parts from mFone, mLinux, NetFront, (maybe even BeOS) in an effort to get Cobalt breathing again.

With all those bits and pieces cobbled together let's hope it's not one unholy sight when they flick the switch and shock that Frankenstein pony into life!

"It is commonly said, and more particularly by Lord Shaftesbury, that ridicule is the best test of truth".
Lord Chesterfield

Make LOVE, not WAR
The_Voice_of_Reason @ 2/9/2006 2:58:05 AM # Q
It is routine for software projects of this size to take in excess of 18 months. 18 months is, in fact, not a bad estimate of how long it would take a reasonably talented, dedicated team to port PalmOS non-kernel bits to Linux and polish them to the state where they should be released to customers.


Unfortunately, if you DON'T have a "reasonably talented, dedicated team" then you're S.O.L. and your development times increase exponentially. 18 months -> 24 months -> 36 months -> 18 YEARS -> ??? The China MobileSource relief pitchers won't be able to save this game.


------------------------
Sony CLIE UX100: 128 MB real RAM, OLED screen. All the PDA anyone really ever wanted.
------------------------

The Palm eCONomy = Communismô

The Great Palm Swindle: http://www.palminfocenter.com/comment_view.asp?ID=7864#108038

NetFrontLinux - the next major cellphone OS?: http://www.palminfocenter.com/comment_view.asp?ID=8060#111823

RE: Flame (flambť) Gassťe, not each other.
The_Voice_of_Reason @ 2/9/2006 3:07:07 AM # Q
Face the facts, PalmSource was trying to run a one trick pony fairground attraction. PalmSource had to sell up shop (and sell itself) when Palm, Sony and other licencees took one look at that ugly pony (mule) that was Cobalt and choked it to death to put it out of its misery.

Let's face it, PalmLinux is the effort to reanimate the carcass of that dead pony Frankenstein style: they've gutted its body and are putting and taking parts from mFone, mLinux, NetFront, (maybe even BeOS) in an effort to get Cobalt breathing again.

With all those bits and pieces cobbled together let's hope it's not one unholy sight when they flick the switch and shock that Frankenstein pony into life!

I hope there's a little bit o' Atari 2600 code mixed in there to add some much-needed stability...


TVoR

------------------------
Sony CLIE UX100: 128 MB real RAM, OLED screen. All the PDA anyone really ever wanted.
------------------------

The Palm eCONomy = Communismô

The Great Palm Swindle: http://www.palminfocenter.com/comment_view.asp?ID=7864#108038

NetFrontLinux - the next major cellphone OS?: http://www.palminfocenter.com/comment_view.asp?ID=8060#111823

What would we do without TVoR?
cervezas @ 2/9/2006 8:43:36 AM # Q
Voice, I just wanted to say how grateful I am that PalmSource brought you in to perform a complete code audit on Cobalt for Linux so you could supply us with your judgment on the state of the Palm OS based on your years of experience as a software systems engineer. Really, if it weren't for you PIC readers would never have known the truth.

It's such a tragedy that your prodigious talent is otherwise wasted now working at that help desk. Life is so unfair!

David Beers
Pikesoft Mobile Computing
Software Everywhere blog
www.pikesoft.com/blog

RE: Flame PalmSource, not each other.
rsc1000 @ 2/9/2006 9:39:19 AM # Q
>>I think you failed to comprehend my earlier point in PalmSource's defence that software as complex as an OS takes time to code - just as Vista has taken quite some time to code.

I hear you, but point stands:
14 months isn't anything for any major software product.

Comparing MS to Palmsource is obviously an apple and oranges comparison - with MS having many divisions, each with much more resources than PalmSource. Of course they can also develop multiple products in parallel! But what OS or major project have they taken from concept to products in 14 months? I am not saying that is impossible or that it has not been done. My point is simple, obvious, and factual: 14 months is nothing for a major software project. For an OS, i bloody hope that take longer than that to ensure it is a solid product!

>>what few updates there have been have been released by the manufacturer of the devices rather than the creator of the OS. Still no sign of updates for the Tungsten T, T2, T3 etc to the latest version of Garnet.

Yeah - and where is the link to that MS download to update my 3 year old ipaq to Windows Mobile 5?

>>True, Microsoft is a much larger company but on the face of it, their mobile and embedded device division alone appears to be more active than PalmSource.

Yes, but how big is the mobile division and how much budget do they recieve from MS? We don't know the full details of course, but we do know that it was just announced they they have finally turned a profit. It clearly is an advantage to receive unending resources for years (as in, over 6) while being able to lose money. PalmSrc does not have that luxery.

I am not an uncritical fan of PalmSource - I just think it is not fair to jump on the criticism bandwagon and complain about non-existent problems. The length of time to develop PalmLinux is a non-existant problem from an individual project development standpoint. Of course, it is a problem - even if it only took 2 months - from the point of view of needing to have something in the market fast to replace Garnet.

PalmOS and Windows Mobile 5 upgrades
ChiA @ 2/9/2006 8:30:51 PM # Q
rsc1000 said
Yeah - and where is the link to that MS download to update my 3 year old ipaq to Windows Mobile 5?

True, you can't upgrade your 3 year old iPaq but you can upgrade your 14 month old iPaq to Winmobile 5:

http://tinyurl.com/a7cag
and
http://www.hp.com/hpinfo/newsroom/press/2005/050510b.html

Is there anyone who can upgrade their 14 month old T5 to the latest version of Garnet, nevermind Cobalt?

A trip down PIC's memory lane via Groundhog Day
ChiA @ 2/10/2006 8:21:07 AM # Q
rsc1000 said:
My point is simple, obvious, and factual: 14 months is nothing for a major software project. For an OS, i bloody hope that take longer than that to ensure it is a solid product!

Garnet shipped to licencees in June 02 and handhelds which used it started appearing 4-5 months later - Oct 02 - ie the Tungsten T:
http://www.palminfocenter.com/view_story.asp?ID=5339

Cobalt shipped to licencees in January 04 - according to PalmSource
http://www.palminfocenter.com/view_story.asp?ID=6409
yet 24 months later we've still not seen one single shipping device with Cobalt!

The gap between Palm OS 5 shipping and Palm OS 6 "shipping" is 18 months.

The gap between first handhelds on the market with Palm OS 4 (Mar 01) and Palm OS 5 (Oct 02) is 18 months. By that alone, we can see something has gone wrong with the Cobalt schedule especially when the transition from OS 4 to OS 5 was a greater technical challenge (moving onto a different processor architecture) than from OS 5 to OS 6 where they were keeping the same architecture.

We shall wait and see if:
- PalmLinux is released to licensees in Oct 06
- We see devices using PalmLinux in May 07

RE: Flame PalmSource, not each other.
rsc1000 @ 2/10/2006 1:08:19 PM # Q
>>The gap between Palm OS 5 shipping and Palm OS 6 "shipping" is 18 months.
>>The gap between first handhelds on the market with Palm OS 4 (Mar 01) and Palm OS 5 (Oct 02) is 18 months.
>>By that alone, we can see something has gone wrong with the Cobalt schedule especially when the transition from OS 4 to OS 5 was a greater technical challenge (moving onto a different processor architecture) than from OS 5 to OS 6 where they were keeping the same architecture.

I think we are talking about different things here CHiA.
First, we were talking about PLinux - not original Cobolt.
PalmSrc delivered Cobolt kind-of on time - though not fully on time as it wasn't until the 6.1 version months later that there would have been a compelling reason for OEMs to adopt. Cobolt was built /finished - but nobody wanted it (i won't get into that whole debate about why).

But in this case we aren't talking 'original' Cobolt - we're talking about P-Linux which - yes - does utilize 'upper' layers of Cobolt and APIs, but is fundamentally different under the hood and those differences will most certainly have to extend to the upper layer APIs - at least some, to accommadate the difference in kernal / OS paradigm of Linux.

>> the transition from OS 4 to OS 5 was a greater technical challenge (moving onto a different processor architecture) than from OS 5 to OS 6 where they were keeping the same architecture.

Huh? Garnet is just OS 4.1 re-compiled for ARM (literally the same API's, mostly the same code under the hood with new device drivers and a re-write of some of the lowest levels of OS (stuff that touches the hardware), but the OS archetecture, the APIs and most of the OS code was largely OS 4.1. Garnet was the most direct port of 68K -> ARM possible (well, they did add wav playback API and 'Notifications' to kind-of make up for the fact that the shift in underlying architecture lead to the breaking of system patches / hacks and PACE 68k -> ARM instruction set translation).
Cobolt on the other hand (and Cobolt/P-Linux) are completely different than OS 5 / Garnet: different architecture, different memory handling, multi-tasking/threading, different APIs, (exposed as native ARM APIs this time and not emulated 68k like Garnet).
Cobolt is a different OS - while Garnet was the minimum required to port OS 4.1 to ARM. Thats all Garnet is - and that's WHY a new OS was/is needed - because Garnet has the identical shortcoming of OS 4.1.

Don't believe me? Look at the API documentation for 4.1, 5.x and Cobolt - all publically available. In addition to the functamental changes to archetcutre, look at all of the Cobolt APIs for graphics/drawing/compositing stuff, the font system, the media player APIs, etc. It's a new OS that has PACE (essentially PACE = Garnet, Cobolt = new OS + PACE/Garnet; well sort of, but thats the easy explanation) 'tacked on' for compatibility.

Check out the docs and download the Cobolt 6.1 Simulator. It looks familar but take a close look and pour of the docs and you'll see it's a different beast.


Reply to this comment

Can PalmLinux ship before July? - the clock is ticking!

ChiA @ 2/7/2006 6:51:29 PM # Q
A few regulars here should recall this interview with Michael Mace on www.allaboutpalm.com :
http://tinyurl.com/9jdka

>>When is PalmLinux REALLY expected to be finished as a stable OS?<<

We're targeting Palm OS for Linux shipment to licensees in the first half of 2006. Please also read my comments above about the difficulty of predicting shipment dates.



"It is commonly said, and more particularly by Lord Shaftesbury, that ridicule is the best test of truth".
Lord Chesterfield
RE: Can PalmLinux ship before July? - the clock is ticking!
rcartwright @ 2/7/2006 10:30:11 PM # Q
This is a real good point. While i am not privy to the FCC's approval schedule, I understand that its about a 12 month process. I do not see how we will see "Hollywood" (FWIW I think (hope) that "Lowrider" is the 700p) in anything other than Garnet if they plan to release in 2006.

Any of you FCC mavens care to chime in?

"Many men stumble across the truth, but most manage to pick themselves up
and continue as if nothing had happened."
- Winston Churchill

A few questions for Michael Mace:
The_Voice_of_Reason @ 2/11/2006 2:06:05 AM # Q
Voice_of_Reason 06-10-2005 02:43 AM

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A few questions for Michael Mace:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ewan
Michael Mace
Chief Competitive Officer - PalmSource, Inc

As Columbo would say, just a few more questions, Mr. Mace...

- When is PalmLinux REALLY expected to be finished as a stable OS?

- When is PalmLinux REALLY expected to reach the hands of consumers in a real device?

- How many PalmSource employees have left the company in the past 6 months?

- When will PalmSource fix its DataManager ("DataMangler") bugs?

- When will PalmSource apologize to developers for its behaviour over the past 2 years?

- How much more hacking can PalmOS 5 withstand before it blows up?

- When will PalmSource include the following apps in the ROM: a backup app, a good multimedia app (license The Core from Picard!), a good security app (e.g. TealLock), a STABLE email app, a remote access file deleting app for smartphones, etc, etc.

- When will PalmSource improve file management for the platform?

- Will clipboard and memo sizes ever be increased for PalmOS 5?

- When will PalmOS 5 be EOL?

- Does PalmSource have any significant new licensees?

- What will happen to PalmSource when Palm releases a PPC-based device?

- What happened with the telephony stacks for Cobalt in 2003/4? (And remember: this was supposedly an OS tailor made for smartphones...)

- How many major development tools support creating Cobalt-specific apps?

- Does CodeWarrior support Cobalt? (And did you notice how Metrowerks sold out to Nokia and has now pulled CodeWarrior from their site? What's going on?)

- When was Palm OS Developer Suite released?

- How long have licensees had access to Cobalt?

- Why would a company like TapWave choose Cobalt over its own custom OS?

I look forward to hearing your HONEST, SPIN-FREE replies to these questions.


TVoR

;-O

It's interesting to see how things have devolved since that fateful interview. Mace was actually fired soon after this was posted.

------------------------
Sony CLIE UX100: 128 MB real RAM, OLED screen. All the PDA anyone really ever wanted.
------------------------

The Palm eCONomy = Communismô

The Great Palm Swindle: http://www.palminfocenter.com/comment_view.asp?ID=7864#108038

NetFrontLinux - the next major cellphone OS?: http://www.palminfocenter.com/comment_view.asp?ID=8060#111823

Reply to this comment

What's the point?

tipds @ 2/8/2006 1:47:18 AM # Q
All,

Forgive my ignorance, please. (For my critics, I hope my admission of ignorance will spare me some grief.)

What is the point of the Linux project for PDAís? There are already working operating systems for PDAs in the form of Palm OS and Windows CE/Mobile. For each, there is already a large base of support in the market. By that, I mean there are tons of programs ready-made, good SDKs and many developers already familiar with them. Thatís a great deal of momentum for Linux to overcome. Even so, for argumentís sake, letís assume the same is true for Linux. Why would consumers embrace it? Historically, Linux has consistently been far less useable than competing platforms. I mean, most consumers arenít ďsmartĒ enough to use Linux. Itís too configurable and too unforgiving of misconfiguration/lack of configuration. Besides that, different Linux applications rarely integrate well into a set of tools a user can work with. (Contrast the workflow in a Windows environment with that of a Linux/X-Windows environment.) Useability aside, there is no perceivable performance bonus. Linux proponents have always touted the power of Linux, but I have not seen anything that leads me to believe this is true, or that it offers any benefit. Even where there is a speed increase, the benefit is lost in wasted time due to endless research needed for, and used in, configuration & tweaking.

That being said, I should admit there was a time that I was a Linux aficionado. It was a period of time that I bought into the hype that Linux was a superior operating system that was destined to take over the world of computing. (That started in the early Ď90s and ended less than a decade later for me.) Since then, Iíve noticed the recurring trend wherein Linux tries to overtake an established market and fails Ė relegated to a novelty for the techno-snobs of the tech industry in point. True, there are some applications where Linux is better suited than many competing platforms. The appropriate applications are in a server setting where, upon completion of configuration, the system can be run for long periods of time without the need to start and stop applications or reconfigure hardware. i.e. Web servers, file servers, POS systems, and some embedded systems (i.e. telecom serving) This is really the same niche that one would find other flavors of UNIX or an embedded/RTOS. The appropriate applications are not in single user environments. i.e. Systems where there are no more than one concurrent user and/or applications and hardware configurations are switched frequently, as on a PDA or home/office PC.

Why? An IT professional doesnít and shouldnít mind putting months of time into setting up a system that will be set in a closet for months or years to run a single application or set of applications. End users donít want to spend that kind of time to begin working on a job that will only last a couple of days, at most. End users want a system they can take out of the box and use right away with a minimal learning curve. Thatís why Windows and Mac OS has completely obliterated the various versions of UNIX for most applications.

I think what the Linux community is doing is commendable, and the open source concept is noble. Unfortunately, I donít think the movement reaches much further than a good multi-generation college development projectÖ Itís good work, by intelligent people for a good cause. Unfortunately, it lacks the mass appeal, industry support and consumer focus needed to be a successful market force. Of course, someone here could answer my opening question and address all my points. If that were the case, then my assertion would be wrong, and Linux might take over the PDA OS market, and possibly all other computing OS markets.

Tip DS


RE: What's the point?
PenguinPowered @ 2/8/2006 2:16:50 AM # Q
What is the point of the Linux project for PDAs?

It's trite, but it's true, and Hillary said it best: Because it's there.

The people who hack Linux onto various devices do it because they like hacking Linux onto various devices. Like any hobby, that's all the justification that they need.


May You Live in Interesting Times

RE: What's the point?
joad @ 2/8/2006 2:50:05 PM # Q
It seems to me at the rate Palm has been supporting the PalmOS (seems to be dwindling), and the cruddiness of PocketPC for smartphones, having SOME way of keeping innovation going for our beloved Treo hardware is heartily welcomed.

Open source software tends to be designed to work better with less RAM (hint hint), bugs are often admitted to and addressed faster, enterprising developers can tweak and customize the OS, and usually it's not highway robbery to pick up a good application.

Compare TCPMP to Pockettunes and other multimedia players for the Palm, and the potential for revolutionary advances for these things through open source is apparent. I'm fairly certain that the 4K limitation in the Palm PIMs would not still be with us if the OS were designed by a wide community of actual end users.

And a range of opinions like the Open Source crowd would have better foresight and strongly push Palm not to put a measly 32MB chip (~20MB available) in an all-in-one device like the Treo 600/650 that plans be the only available Treo for 2-1/2 years.....

...and Because It's There.

RE: What's the point?
joad @ 2/8/2006 3:02:43 PM # Q
Oh yeah- another example of the potential of open source on these devices:

http://tinnus.gp32z.com/ljp/ (Little John PalmOS Emulator)

RE: What's the point?
parambyte @ 2/9/2006 3:43:33 AM # Q
hello all! I like using Palm but I know nothing about software/programming, BUT have always wondered that Mobile Devices CAN become better, especially those running Windows.
Just a curious question :
Someone has managed to make Linux run on a Treo 650. Why not the newer Treo700w? It has far better features and a more powerful chip? ISnt it so?
also if someone has coded Linux for Treo AND its working, why isnt someone marketing it as an alternative install?

Why isnt someone marketing Linux Mobile Devices (justa a name) or a similar suite for all those Windows based PDAs out there as a cheaper, lighter, stable-r, faster, more powerful alternative OS? Maybe companies which are already distributing Linux should try it, as the Mobile deviec is becoming more and more the next Technology Revolution with all our lives seemingly rotating around it? Companies like Monta Vista, Novell etc???

In any case I Would like to see someone install and sell Linux on a Treo700w AND give a Mac Sycn solution with it

RE: What's the point?
rsc1000 @ 2/9/2006 7:16:10 PM # Q

>>Why not the newer Treo700w? It has far better features and a more powerful chip? ISnt it so?

It isn't so: the treo 650 and treo 700w have basically the same processor: 312mhz intel xscale. As far as the rest of the hardware, the big advantage of the 700w are the 128mb flash/32mb ram verus 32 mb flash of the treo 650. The 700w also has 1.3mp camera verus a vga camera on the 650. However, the 650 actually has nicer 32 x 320 res screen - the 700w has a 240 x 240 screen (i would not get the 700w for that reason alone - i can't go back to lower res!).


700w
312mhz XScale
128 MB Flash ROM / 32 MB RAM
screen 240 x 240
1.3mp camera
1xEV-DO

650
312mhz XScale
32 MB Flash ROM
screen 320 x 320
camers vga
cdma/1x, gprs/edge


RE: What's the point?
rsc1000 @ 2/9/2006 7:21:52 PM # Q
>>32 x 320 res screen

that's 320 x 320 obviously.

Reply to this comment

Pproject Homepage

DrAxeman @ 9/11/2006 9:58:53 PM # Q
This would be extremely awesome. Who has a link to the project homepage?

Alex

http://www.vi411.org/

Reply to this comment
Start a New Comment Thread Top

Account

Register Register | Login Log in
user:
pass: