Slashdot Log In
Verizon Joins Linux Mobile Foundation
Posted by
Soulskill
on Fri May 16, 2008 07:22 AM
from the progress-is-progress dept.
from the progress-is-progress dept.
An anonymous reader brings news that Verizon Wireless has announced plans to use a Linux-based software platform for phones on its network. Verizon is the first US mobile carrier to join the Linux Mobile Foundation, the goal of which is to "collaboratively develop a comprehensive Linux-based mobile software stack that can be modified easily and used at no cost on a wide range of hardware devices." Many had expected Verizon to go with Android, but according to the Register, Verizon feels Android "isn't as open as it would prefer." Continuing:
"Yes, Google bills Android as open. And, yes, it's backed by the Open Handset Alliance, another industry consortium calling for the open development of mobile apps. But [Verizon spokesman Jeffrey] Nelson argues that at this point, Google is calling the shots. 'Google said "Here's the plan. Sign on the dotted line if you support." It may end up being collaborative. It may end up being collegial. But it need not be.' He actually has a point. But maybe Verizon just wants more control over the situation. It should be noted that the company made sure it has a place on the LiMo board. In any event, Verizon says that customers will be free to attach any device and any application to its network by the end of the year - provided those devices and applications met certain minimum specifications. So, in theory, you'll have free rein to attach an Android phone even if you don't buy it from Verizon."
Related Stories
[+]
Mobile: Verizon Embraces Google's Android 148 comments
An anonymous reader writes "BusinessWeek has up an article on Verizon's decision to fully support Android. After passing on the iPhone, the company says they're going to open their network to more devices, move their network to GSM-based radio technology (LTE), and now support Android. 'In an open-access model, though, Verizon Wireless won't offer the same level of customer service as it does for the roughly 50 phone models featured in its handset lineup. Though the company will insist on testing all phones developed to run on its network in the open-access program, Verizon plans only to ensure the wireless connection is working for customers who buy those devices.'"
Submission: Verizon and Mozilla go for a LiMo ride... by Anonymous Coward
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
Android not as open (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
By hanging onto the theory that people buy ringtones for $4.99 because there is no easy way to copy over the MP3 files because you disabled bluetooth OBEX... That's just crazy talk.
It's about time they were talking about openness. They've been a closed book for too many year
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I'd say they don't care about something until it costs them money, but here they don't know that there's any other way, since most Americans think other countries are fictional.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Android not as open (Score:5, Informative)
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
There's an accumulated 35 years worth of software written in "C" for the UNIX API that includes pretty much all the software that I'm personally interested in running, one way or another.
Writing a compiler for a subset of C that would make even a fraction of these programs work would probably be a bigger job than creating Android was.
Re:Android not as open (Score:5, Informative)
You can already easily use native libraries in Android, even though it is officially unsupported. Android has a perfectly good security system which makes it possible.
In future, it should even be possible to extend the Dalvik VM (its sources are not available right now).
Parent
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Android isn't about Linux (Score:4, Insightful)
I can use native libraries in Mono, too... that doesn't mean that the fact that Mono runs on Linux makes a
The Android API may well be a better one than the UNIX API for a cellphone, by the way, so I'm not saying that this is necessarily a drawback to Android. What I'm saying is that it doesn't matter all that much to the developer whether the OS below the Android runtime is Linux, Windows CE, Windows PE, whatever the Symbian OS is called this week, Palm OS 5, BeOS, or Amiga.DE.
The whole "Android is Linux" meme is just muddying the waters... Android isn't using Linux as anything but an implementation tool. Android isn't about Linux. Android is about Android.
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
It's not much, of course. But you can also argue that you can run Symbian OS applications on Windows if you care to port its API and binary loader.
Re: (Score:2)
That's interesting when one is considering the quality and details of the implementation, but unless it's exposed through the API in a way that depends on the fact that it's Linux under the hood that doesn't change my point. Android provides an Android environment, not a UNIX one.
But you can also argue that you can run Symbian OS applications o
Re:Android not as open (Score:4, Informative)
Partly correct, except it won't use the JVM. It will use a different virtual machine called Dalvik, so that they can get around Sun's ridiculous JME licensing, MIDP profiles [betaversion.org], and everything else that sucks about running midlets on phones today (such as the overzealous security restrictions that keep me from easily running a program I wrote on my own phone.)
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
They do have some performance reason for the change, but it's hard not to suspect some politics.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
The anti-Tivoisation is perhaps the most controversial clause of the GPL3, but as embedded Linux becomes more common, perhaps also one of the most important. It will be interesting to see how this sort of thing is affected in the longer term.
In the short term, they can probably stick with GPL2 software easily enough, if they feel they need to. But if and when a critical mass of FOSS is being released under GPL3, it will be harder to achieve full lockdown of the platform.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
2) I predict a "L/GPLv2 and later" fork of large parts of the GNU project, particularly glibc, fileutils, binutils, etc.
So, no, I don't think the anti-tivoisation clause will end up stopping Verizon in the near term or long term. Remember: Verizon is on the board of LiMo, so they, at
Verizon? (Score:5, Insightful)
Of course, this will only be of any benefit to the users if they leave the 'modified easily and used at no cost on a wide range of hardware devices' aspect open to the users.
Judging by the past performance of Verizon, they will do anything possible to lock it down and maximise their profit stream/control over the platform.
At least it should make the devices more hackable though! :)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Verizon? (Score:5, Insightful)
I was interested in the XV6800 (an HTC Windows Mobile device), but Verizon was delaying it for months and months after Sprint released the same device for "network certification issues".
I learned my lesson the hard way what "network certification issues" means from Verizon delaying the Treo 650 by 6-9 months from Sprint release - It means "the phone's software hasn't been crippled to our satisfaction yet".
So if the phone you want is released on Sprint but Verizon is delaying it for "network certification issues", find another phone or switch providers, because the phone you get from Verizon will NOT have the features and functionality that the Sprint variant has.
Parent
Hans and Linus meet Verizon (Score:2, Funny)
Linus: (pretending it's a bad connection) What?
Hans: Can you hear me now?
Linus: What? What?
Hans: Can you hear me now!!!!???
Linus: Sorry Hans, I can't hear you. Why don't you "have a talk" with that stupid Verizon guy.
Re: (Score:2)
What's funny about this?
US catches up with the rest of the World. (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
I'll try to be clearer after I've had coffee...
Re: (Score:2)
As long as the devices use that chunk of spectrum, Verizon may not have had a choice.
Very confusing (Score:5, Interesting)
I've been a Verizon customer now for about 5 years. The coverage is excellent here (Indianapolis) and the price is decent, so I've stuck around.
Really the only complaint I've had with them thus far is that basically every phone they sell is locked down and/or has it's interface completely changed when compared to the original phone, or the same phone sold to another carrier. Additionally, they are very choosy about how you can connect to their data network.
This "customers will be free to attach any device and any application to its network by the end of the year" seems like a complete 180 to that mindset. The only way I see them pulling that is if some huge charge is added to your data plan to allow it. They already nickel and dime you if you want to tether a phone instead of using their air card.
It just seems fishy to me.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The answer to this question is right there in your post: "you wouldn't have to go buy a new cable every time you got a new phone."
Re: (Score:2)
Then, when I started playing around with Bluetooth for the first time, I realized how much I couldn't do. My girlfriend and I had the same make and model phones, but we couldn't transfer files between them. In fact, I had to install BitPim (love it) on each computer just so we could transfer wallpapers and ringtones without having to pay for
Re:Very confusing (Score:5, Informative)
I'd love to see cell phones become like cell phone numbers: you can them whereever you go. Hardware should be carrier independent. It's not like my ISP makes me buy a computer which only works with their network. My TV works with any cable provider. But my cell phone?
This is the sole reason why I'm sticking with T-Mobile. I get a Verizon discount at work, but for the value of the discount, it only brings the phone bill down to what I'm paying with T-Mobile. I'll use the discount on FiOS and a landline, maybe TV as well, but Verizon is staying hella far away from my mobile.
Parent
Why I'm excited about Android (Score:5, Interesting)
This is one example of the creative ways communications problems can be solved.. but only if you have an open platform.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
The SDK is free and I'm fairly sure you can do that sort of functionality. Of course, you have the SymbianSigned gauntlet to go through, and you will if you want to do that sort of thing, but I would say it's possible.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
itsatrap (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Yeah, I've been with Verizon for years and this sounds way too "nice guy" for them. It would be incredible if it was true, and maybe Verizon is feeling the pinch from iPhone subscriptions and the prospect of future Android defectors, but I doubt it. Think Microsoft OOXML vs. ODF: I think its similar.
Outsorcing phones while charging for the privilage (Score:5, Insightful)
For a fee.
Yep, Verizon built a US$20 million lab to 'certify' products submitted for use on their network, and expects to recoup that investment by charging for their certification services. So unless someone with reasonably deep pockets is gonna back your whatsmawhoseits it won't going on Verizon's network. Compare this to, say, T-Mobile whose policy is pretty much if it takes a SIM plug it in and they'll be happy to bill you for it.
What is Verizons real goal?
Getting out of the phone business.
No carrier likes to be in the phone business - it costs money for all of those stores & racks of phones & inventory management and huge support overhead, not to mention the complex subsidy plans that everyone loathes. So Verizon's plan is to outsource it all to the phone manufacturers. Sure, buy any Verizon 'certified' phone (same as the rest of the world using GSM enjoys) and plug it in. Got a problem?? Call whomever you bought it from, or the manufacturer, just not Verizon.
It's an easy way for Verizon to expand the offerings on their network, at no risk or cost to Verizon, while shifting the overhead of supporting those phones elsewhere. Verizon will charge for the service, that lovely pricey plan, just now you'll be buying from their list of 'certified' products, not their Verizon-branded phones.
Expect in a few years to walk into Verizon stores with minimal selection of phones, just enough range to cover the basics for those too out-of-the-loop to buy their phone elsewhere. Or even a sublet strategy where phone manufacturers pay for square footage and supply their own staff to sell their brand phones.
But innovative homebrew startups etc.? Not on big red it'll be expensively certified products paying for the Verizon privilage thankyouverymuch.
I was thinking about a Centro... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
In addition, previously only Sprint had an ESN whitelist that would prevent them from activating phones not sold by them. I have heard that Verizon also does this now in order to prevent feature-superior uncrippled phones from using their network (bypassing the overpriced replacements for the features removed from Verizon's version of said phones - see Treo 650 Bluetooth DUN as an example.)
Re: (Score:2)
Nokia has almost no cdmaOne/CDMA2000 phones
Keyword *almost*.
;)
Oh, you want a *choice*. I see
I would also imagine that this would change, if there were a sudden market for them. I notice that Nokia CEO claims [infoworld.com] the market isn't viable (for them) and that's the reason - of course that was a couple of years ago, so things are undoubtedly different these days.
If this move is as it seems, then I guess it will change a lot of things. I guess we'll have to wait and see.
Re: (Score:2)
Nokia has almost no cdmaOne/CDMA2000 phones. They're a GSM/UMTS shop.
Then look for Nokia's other countries that use CDMA. I know that Japan uses/used CDMA (don't know if they completely got rid of it now that they're 3G.) Hong Kong uses CDMA as well, and their Nokia site is in both Chinese (I'm guessing Mandarin, but I really have no clue) and English. Just go to http://www.cdg.org/worldwide/index.asp [cdg.org] and check out what other countries use CDMA, and then check out those countries' pages for Nokia or any other large company like SonyEricsson