I have been looking at the Motorola A780 cellphone, specifically because it uses a linux OS. It advertises that it syncs with Windows programs and servers. Is anyone using it and can give me some background or advice? Specifically, are there linux programs it will sync and work with, like maybe Kontact or KOrganizer; did you get it with the GPS function, and if so, where? Thanks for any advice or suggestions. If someone can suggest to me that this is off-topic I will take my questions to that arena. Richard
Richard wrote:
I have been looking at the Motorola A780 cellphone, specifically because it uses a linux OS. It advertises that it syncs with Windows programs and servers. Is anyone using it and can give me some background or advice? Specifically, are there linux programs it will sync and work with, like maybe Kontact or KOrganizer; did you get it with the GPS function, and if so, where?
Thanks for any advice or suggestions. If someone can suggest to me that this is off-topic I will take my questions to that arena.
Richard
I'm interesting in cellphones which use Linux (internally and for syncing) also. I'm running gnome but use a number of KDE apps as well. -- "This world ain't big enough for the both of us," said the big noema to the little noema.
On Thu March 9 2006 2:33 am, ken wrote:
Richard wrote:
I have been looking at the Motorola A780 cellphone, specifically because it uses a linux OS. It advertises that it syncs with Windows programs and servers. Is anyone using it and can give me some background or advice? Specifically, are there linux programs it will sync and work with, like maybe Kontact or KOrganizer; did you get it with the GPS function, and if so, where?
Thanks for any advice or suggestions. If someone can suggest to me that this is off-topic I will take my questions to that arena.
Richard
I'm interesting in cellphones which use Linux (internally and for syncing) also. I'm running gnome but use a number of KDE apps as well.
<snip> Hmmm. So far yours is the only response I have seen. Motorola seems to have a couple of other products and Phillips has at least one also that I know little about. Apparently they use Linux as a base OS but all functions run under Java to give ability to be more or less "OS-blind", but still focus on MS use. One big question for me is whether the linux OS will be directly accessible so linux programs could be used. I have not seen whether this might be so on product websites or in user manuals I have downloaded. Richard
Richard wrote:
On Thu March 9 2006 2:33 am, ken wrote:
Richard wrote:
I have been looking at the Motorola A780 cellphone, specifically because it uses a linux OS. It advertises that it syncs with Windows programs and servers. Is anyone using it and can give me some background or advice? Specifically, are there linux programs it will sync and work with, like maybe Kontact or KOrganizer; did you get it with the GPS function, and if so, where?
Thanks for any advice or suggestions. If someone can suggest to me that this is off-topic I will take my questions to that arena.
Richard I'm interesting in cellphones which use Linux (internally and for syncing) also. I'm running gnome but use a number of KDE apps as well.
<snip> Hmmm. So far yours is the only response I have seen. Motorola seems to have a couple of other products and Phillips has at least one also that I know little about. Apparently they use Linux as a base OS but all functions run under Java to give ability to be more or less "OS-blind", but still focus on MS use. One big question for me is whether the linux OS will be directly accessible so linux programs could be used. I have not seen whether this might be so on product websites or in user manuals I have downloaded.
Richard
There's a lot of phones listed at http://www.linuxdevices.com/articles/AT9423084269.html, including the A780. The page on the A780 says you can mount it and (at least) read its filesystem. If it's possible to write to this filesystem, and if there's enough space available on this filesystem, then it should be possible to develop your own apps and run them on the phone. If that's not possible, I see any advantages to having the phone run Linux. ken -- "This world ain't big enough for the both of us," said the big noema to the little noema.
At 04:58 AM 3/9/2006 -0800, Richard wrote:
Content-Disposition: inline
On Thu March 9 2006 2:33 am, ken wrote:
Richard wrote:
I have been looking at the Motorola A780 cellphone, specifically because it uses a linux OS. It advertises that it syncs with Windows programs and servers. Is anyone using it and can give me some background or advice? Specifically, are there linux programs it will sync and work with, like maybe Kontact or KOrganizer; did you get it with the GPS function, and if so, where?
Thanks for any advice or suggestions. If someone can suggest to me that this is off-topic I will take my questions to that arena.
Richard
I'm interesting in cellphones which use Linux (internally and for syncing) also. I'm running gnome but use a number of KDE apps as well.
<snip> Hmmm. So far yours is the only response I have seen. Motorola seems to have a couple of other products and Phillips has at least one also that I know little about. Apparently they use Linux as a base OS but all functions run under Java to give ability to be more or less "OS-blind", but still focus on MS use. One big question for me is whether the linux OS will be directly accessible so linux programs could be used. I have not seen whether this might be so on product websites or in user manuals I have downloaded.
Richard
--
Altho I'm not a programmer myself, I have worked with programmers in the communications industry, and I am surprised that any "operating system" at all would be built into a phone. Normally the code would be written to do just the things you need to do, and no more, probably in C++, and then compiled and burned into a dedicated chip. There would be enough memory to store phone numbers, and, I suppose, a couple of graphics, nowadays. But I guess I could be wrong. --doug -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 268.2.1/277 - Release Date: 3/8/2006
Þann Fimmtudaguren den 9 mars 2006 20:46 skrifaði Doug McGarrett:
Altho I'm not a programmer myself, I have worked with programmers in the communications industry, and I am surprised that any "operating system" at all would be built into a phone. Normally the code would be written to do just the things you need to do, and no more, probably in C++, and then compiled and burned into a dedicated chip. There would be enough memory to store phone numbers, and, I suppose, a couple of graphics, nowadays. But I guess I could be wrong.
Basically you might say, it's because companies don't want to hire programmers anymore. They're expensive, and to be able to use technologies like "bluetooth" and such, its basically easier to have M$ do it, and then franchize.
--doug
-- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 268.2.1/277 - Release Date: 3/8/2006
Orn, On Sunday 12 March 2006 07:45, Orn E. Hansen wrote:
Þann Fimmtudaguren den 9 mars 2006 20:46 skrifaði Doug McGarrett:
Altho I'm not a programmer myself, I have worked with programmers in the communications industry, and I am surprised that any "operating system" at all would be built into a phone. Normally the code would be written to do just the things you need to do, and no more, probably in C++, and then compiled and burned into a dedicated chip. There would be enough memory to store phone numbers, and, I suppose, a couple of graphics, nowadays. But I guess I could be wrong.
Basically you might say, it's because companies don't want to hire programmers anymore. They're expensive, and to be able to use technologies like "bluetooth" and such, its basically easier to have M$ do it, and then franchize.
I don't think that analysis is valid. Firstly, the term "operating system" does not exclusively mean something like the Linux or Windows kernel (with or without the huge complement of extra-kernel software). Secondly, there are operating systems specifically designed for embedded and / or real-time device applications. These OSes are typically a little harder to program for, since less is provided, less of the hardware is hidden from the programmers and the abstractions and computational models are not as rich as those in desktop and mainframe operating systems. Basically, layering and modularizatino (of which the OS / library / application distinction is just one the high-level instance) is not just a good idea in software architectures, it's the only way to have any hope of making the process of programming anywhere near productive enough to accommodate the huge demand for information tools. If each piece of embedded software were to be written directly to the hardware and from scratch, cell phones and PDAs and the like (or, more accurately, their software) would be an order of magnitude more expensive at least. Furthermore, it would be buggier and would evolve much more slowly. Yes, programmers are expensive ('cause programming is hard) and the whole field is immature and lacking professional discipline. This will change, though probably not soon enough. Increasing computer power and advancements in the state of understanding of algorithmic, logical and information processes will move us towards less ad-hoc software and programming methodologies, but we have a long way to go! Even if you don't like capitalism, economics is a real force and it combines with technology and fundamental principles of information technologies to lead to the use of "operating systems" on small portable devices. Randall Schulz
At 08:46 AM 3/12/2006 -0800, Randall R Schulz wrote:
Content-Disposition: inline
Orn,
On Sunday 12 March 2006 07:45, Orn E. Hansen wrote:
Þann Fimmtudaguren den 9 mars 2006 20:46 skrifaði Doug McGarrett:
Altho I'm not a programmer myself, I have worked with programmers in the communications industry, and I am surprised that any "operating system" at all would be built into a phone. Normally the code would be written to do just the things you need to do, and no more, probably in C++, and then compiled and burned into a dedicated chip. There would be enough memory to store phone numbers, and, I suppose, a couple of graphics, nowadays. But I guess I could be wrong.
Basically you might say, it's because companies don't want to hire programmers anymore. They're expensive, and to be able to use technologies like "bluetooth" and such, its basically easier to have M$ do it, and then franchize.
I don't think that analysis is valid. Firstly, the term "operating system" does not exclusively mean something like the Linux or Windows kernel (with or without the huge complement of extra-kernel software). Secondly, there are operating systems specifically designed for embedded and / or real-time device applications. These OSes are typically a little harder to program for, since less is provided, less of the hardware is hidden from the programmers and the abstractions and computational models are not as rich as those in desktop and mainframe operating systems.
Basically, layering and modularizatino (of which the OS / library / application distinction is just one the high-level instance) is not just a good idea in software architectures, it's the only way to have any hope of making the process of programming anywhere near productive enough to accommodate the huge demand for information tools. If each piece of embedded software were to be written directly to the hardware and from scratch, cell phones and PDAs and the like (or, more accurately, their software) would be an order of magnitude more expensive at least. Furthermore, it would be buggier and would evolve much more slowly.
Yes, programmers are expensive ('cause programming is hard) and the whole field is immature and lacking professional discipline. This will change, though probably not soon enough. Increasing computer power and advancements in the state of understanding of algorithmic, logical and information processes will move us towards less ad-hoc software and programming methodologies, but we have a long way to go!
Even if you don't like capitalism, economics is a real force and it combines with technology and fundamental principles of information technologies to lead to the use of "operating systems" on small portable devices.
Randall Schulz
Randall, you have clarified things for me, and I thank you. I hope programmers are not out of date. I know a few for whom I have great respect and admiration, and I am copying this message to one of them. I guess I was not thinking of embedded _dedicated_ systems, which I guess is what they are. (I don't know what the pro's call them. [C.S_R.?]) And I have to confess that I have been retired for three years, and I'm certain that things are quite different. I _do_ know how fast things change in the industry, having been bitten by it so many times! --doug -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 268.2.1/279 - Release Date: 3/10/2006
Þann Sunnudaguren den 12 mars 2006 17:46 skrifaði Randall R Schulz:
Yes, programmers are expensive ('cause programming is hard) and the whole field is immature and lacking professional discipline. This will change, though probably not soon enough. Increasing computer power and advancements in the state of understanding of algorithmic, logical and information processes will move us towards less ad-hoc software and programming methodologies, but we have a long way to go!
Even if you don't like capitalism, economics is a real force and it combines with technology and fundamental principles of information technologies to lead to the use of "operating systems" on small portable devices.
Well, you said the magic word. <philosophy mode> Capitalism: Doing the least amount of work, for the greatest amount of pay. Another anology of Capitalism would be "Monopoly". And even though these are extremes, they prove that Capitalism alone is not a good idea. And although there is a greater profit in "capitalism" than there is in "communism", both will eventually lead to disaster on their own. Capitalism on its own, will lead to another "aristocracy" of sorts. Where even though our great society has "education" and "exams", even as we speak there are differences between people in education, that has little to do with their intellect or ability. One is a favorit, and can get a doctorate because no one asked "questions" that "challenged" the others knowledge, while another will always be faced with hostile and terminating opposition. Only the paying fool, thinks that there's fairness in any game. The only sure winner, in any lottery weather it's "capitalism" or "communism" ... is the holder of the lottery.
Randall Schulz
participants (5)
-
Doug McGarrett -
ken -
Orn E. Hansen -
Randall R Schulz -
Richard