3 ms·

We've yet to see any mobile device where running another OS than the bundled one have been anything but a nightmare. This is done everywhere, android manufactur

by tjoff 14y ago

We've yet to see any mobile device where running another OS than the bundled one have been anything but a nightmare. This is done everywhere, android manufacturers constantly try to lock users in their own android shell, not to mention apple. These devices are not multipurpose devices, they are built for a specific purpose and tailormade for that and nothing else. It is not in any sense equivalent to desktop/laptop-computers. Which is kind of apparent considering the limitations that Windows Phone, Android and iOS amount to. Since Microsoft have expressed that secure boot must be optional on x86 it is quite easy to justify this rationally without resorting to the popular "typical evil Microsoft tactics" argument.

liquidsnake 14y ago
Exception: HP Touchpad. ICS runs great on it.
- fpgeek 14y ago
  I've read that the Nokia N9 also does a good job of running ICS. Other counter examples: Boot2Gecko (runs well & generally demoed on a Samsung Galaxy S2), Ubuntu for Android, ASUS Transformers running various Linux distributions, ...
- recoiledsnake 14y ago
  That is because WebOS was running a Linux kernel and the hardware was similar to a HTC phone(Sensation?).
- tmzt 14y ago
  Because the touchpad had a fairly open bootloader and we built a more versatile one for it based on the same code base (moboot). The bootloader in the OMAP chip also allows booting from usb and does not require the second stage be signed.
PerryCox 14y ago
>This is done everywhere, android manufacturers constantly try to lock users in their own android shell, not to mention apple. And people still jailbreak/root their devices for numerous reasons. If you buy something, you should be able to do what you want with it. Just because it's designed for one thing doesn't mean it can't do others.
nathan_long 14y ago
I strongly disagree. >> "These devices are not multipurpose devices". These devices have chips which can run any algorithm you write. They are not hammers, or even calculators. They are computers. They also have GPS, motion sensors, cameras, and microphones. They are multipurpose enough to make phone calls, play games, run maps, and even power satellites: http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/station/main/spheres_smartphone.html http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/station/main/spheres_smart... >> Since Microsoft have expressed that secure boot must be optional on x86 it is quite easy to justify this rationally... Why does doing the right thing in once place give them license to do the wrong thing in another? I appreciate the security value of secure boot, but ONLY as far as its purpose is to serve the customer. Which means the customer must be able to disable it.
- tjoff 14y ago
  No, they are not computers any more than my clock is a computer. Yes, deep within there is a multipurpose chip that performs the calculations but that is abstracted away. Just as your car isn't a computer, it has multiple computers that aid it but it is not a computer and you have no real interface with the computer itself. Just as my clock, just as my phone, just as my fridge. I appreciate the security value of secure boot, but ONLY as far as its purpose is to serve the customer. Which means the customer must be able to disable it. If you can disable it it doesn't serve the customer, because the customer is incompetent and would gladly disable it in exchange for a picture of a cat. You don't buy a computer, you buy an android/windows/iOS device. Just as you don't buy a computer when you buy an Xbox360 or an PS3 - and because you haven't bought a computer you shouldn't really have any problems with the manufacturer locking you in. Oh, but you wanted a computer? Then buy a computer! Sigh. I never said I agreed with Microsoft, but it is a rational decision (a rational decision that Apple and pretty much all Android and WP manufacturers have made) that fits well withing the concept of all popular mobile OS's, if you don't buy into that then I guess your only bet is maemo/meego, because you surely don't run WP/android/iOS, right?
  - nitrogen 14y ago
    People who argue that phones are computers are arguing the nature of a thing is its identity. It seems you are arguing that the intent of a thing is its identity. Using your argument, if I wrap my desktop PC in a cardboard box with holes for air inlet, air exhaust, and the power cable, and call it a heater, it's no longer a computer, despite having all the bits inside that a computer would have. I'd much rather decide for myself what something "is", based on what it's actually made of, rather than what the manufacturer wants it to be.

by tjoff 14y ago

liquidsnake 14y ago

Exception: HP Touchpad. ICS runs great on it.

fpgeek 14y ago
I've read that the Nokia N9 also does a good job of running ICS. Other counter examples: Boot2Gecko (runs well & generally demoed on a Samsung Galaxy S2), Ubuntu for Android, ASUS Transformers running various Linux distributions, ...
recoiledsnake 14y ago
That is because WebOS was running a Linux kernel and the hardware was similar to a HTC phone(Sensation?).
tmzt 14y ago
Because the touchpad had a fairly open bootloader and we built a more versatile one for it based on the same code base (moboot). The bootloader in the OMAP chip also allows booting from usb and does not require the second stage be signed.

PerryCox 14y ago

>This is done everywhere, android manufacturers constantly try to lock users in their own android shell, not to mention apple. And people still jailbreak/root their devices for numerous reasons. If you buy something, you should be able to do what you want with it. Just because it's designed for one thing doesn't mean it can't do others.

nathan_long 14y ago

I strongly disagree. >> "These devices are not multipurpose devices". These devices have chips which can run any algorithm you write. They are not hammers, or even calculators. They are computers. They also have GPS, motion sensors, cameras, and microphones. They are multipurpose enough to make phone calls, play games, run maps, and even power satellites: http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/station/main/spheres_smartphone.html http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/station/main/spheres_smart... >> Since Microsoft have expressed that secure boot must be optional on x86 it is quite easy to justify this rationally... Why does doing the right thing in once place give them license to do the wrong thing in another? I appreciate the security value of secure boot, but ONLY as far as its purpose is to serve the customer. Which means the customer must be able to disable it.

tjoff 14y ago
No, they are not computers any more than my clock is a computer. Yes, deep within there is a multipurpose chip that performs the calculations but that is abstracted away. Just as your car isn't a computer, it has multiple computers that aid it but it is not a computer and you have no real interface with the computer itself. Just as my clock, just as my phone, just as my fridge. I appreciate the security value of secure boot, but ONLY as far as its purpose is to serve the customer. Which means the customer must be able to disable it. If you can disable it it doesn't serve the customer, because the customer is incompetent and would gladly disable it in exchange for a picture of a cat. You don't buy a computer, you buy an android/windows/iOS device. Just as you don't buy a computer when you buy an Xbox360 or an PS3 - and because you haven't bought a computer you shouldn't really have any problems with the manufacturer locking you in. Oh, but you wanted a computer? Then buy a computer! Sigh. I never said I agreed with Microsoft, but it is a rational decision (a rational decision that Apple and pretty much all Android and WP manufacturers have made) that fits well withing the concept of all popular mobile OS's, if you don't buy into that then I guess your only bet is maemo/meego, because you surely don't run WP/android/iOS, right?
- nitrogen 14y ago
  People who argue that phones are computers are arguing the nature of a thing is its identity. It seems you are arguing that the intent of a thing is its identity. Using your argument, if I wrap my desktop PC in a cardboard box with holes for air inlet, air exhaust, and the power cable, and call it a heater, it's no longer a computer, despite having all the bits inside that a computer would have. I'd much rather decide for myself what something "is", based on what it's actually made of, rather than what the manufacturer wants it to be.