Related
I'm just putting this in a new thread so that everyone can see it without having to accidentally come across it in the Hero Source Attempts thread... Some other users have realized that if everyone who has a twitter account messages HTC through twitter, it becomes bad PR for them because everyone sees it, and they are more likely to meet our demands at a speedier pace.
If you really want lots of cool ROMs and lots of options, we gotta get that dang kernel, and this seems to be the best tactic so far. Supposedly it worked in getting the GSM kernel. SO GET TO WORK PEOPLE! START TWEETING/Messaging THROUGH TWITTER @HTC!!
Here is the original post by another user:
I personally believe that these two methods would work fastest. If they get 1000 emails, no one hears about it. But if they get 1000 tweets, or an article on Engadget, it's bad PR. This is basically what happened with the GSM Hero:
slashdot article - tech.slashdot.org/story/09/10/16/1720224/HTC-Dragging-Feet-On-GPL-Source-Release-For-Hero-Phone
acknowledgement - twitter.com/htc/status/4928377685
compliance - twitter.com/htc/status/5071201112
admission of responsibility - twitter.com/htc/status/5071514606
(sorry, I've been a member for almost 3 years but this is my first post... can't post links)
I tweeted the following, please retweet or write your own similar: @htc When can we expect to see the CDMA (Sprint) Hero kernel source code? It's been 3 months, this is ridiculous! #gplviolation
I posted a tweet, lets hope this will push them to at least acknowledge the requests.
posted a tweet too hope it helps
Posted a Tweet, i pray engadet will pick up on this.
lol been posting at least 2 tweets a day for the last 3 days. glad to see others are joining in.
Yup. Tweeted
@HTC come on, it's long past the weekend.CDMA Hero sources please.#HTC get your act together #GPL #Violation #CDMA #Hero #Sources
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
to try and get as many tags in as possible...
EDIT: Well, a search for #gplviolation on twitter is certainly interesting! (Try it...)
if you search htc you get a lot of people asking how to update to 2.x reply tweeet them to get the word out if you can.
Done! I hope we see something soon.
Done! Tweeting twice a day.
If you post a tweet regarding this, please be sure to include @htc, @sprint, and add the #gplviolation hashtag for tracking purposes.
tweet sent!
Does it really matter much if we get the kernel? As I understand it, there's a load of closed-source proprietary software running under the hood on our devices.
It depends. If HTC compiled proprietary code into the kernel itself, they're between a rock and a hard spot. Under the GPL, anything physically compiled into the kernel MUST have its source released. If HTC licensed proprietary camera drivers from anyone (Qualcomm, most likely) under terms that forbid them from disclosing the source, it's *their* problem to worry about.
IMHO, if that's the situation HTC is in, the best thing they could do to at least get everyone off their back would be to just go ahead and release their best 2.1 internal build (officially, for testing with the Android Emulator, since they can't officially condone rooting) as a "developer's preview". If they did, the necessary files would be ripped and built into a working 2.1 heroc distro within days, if not hours, and pretty much everyone would forget about the source for now & give them some breathing room for a few months.
As I understand it, even if HTC's 2.6.29 kernel had bugs, as long as those bugs weren't with msm_camera itself, we could use THAT 2.6.29 kernel to bootstrap newer builds of 2.6.29 (kind of like how Microsoft used prerelease versions of Visual Studio 2010 and Windows 7 to build Windows 7 itself). The problem now is that there's a literal hole in the 2.6.29 kernel that we can't fill, because we have neither the include file's source nor a compiled binary to drop in place.
Now, it's important to remember that we can't actually demand the 2.1 kernel yet under the GPL, since it hasn't actually been released yet. I'm only mentioning that as an *alternative* that would satisfy pretty much everyone for now, to give HTC some constructive alternatives to consider if releasing the full 1.5 kernel source for heroc is, in fact, completely out of the question due to licensing problems arising from msm_camera. Regardless of whether or not HTC can release the source to msm_camera for heroc, they can obviously redistribute 2.6.29 binaries built from it... and one of those binaries would be more than adequate for our purposes right now.
miamicanes said:
, it's important to remember that we can't actually demand the 2.1 kernel yet under the GPL, since it hasn't actually been released yet.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I realize you are referring to a CDMA-specific kernel (I thought 2.0 and after would be GSM and CDMA ready?), but the kernel for 2.1 HAS been commercially released. It's running on the Nexus One. Demanding the code under GPL is perfectly reasonable.
I mention this because this problem is now beyond any specific device. The manufacturers and carriers are, in my opinion, abusing the GPL and we ought to have a united front on that fact.
5tr4t4 said:
I realize you are referring to a CDMA-specific kernel (I thought 2.0 and after would be GSM and CDMA ready?), but the kernel for 2.1 HAS been commercially released. It's running on the Nexus One. Demanding the code under GPL is perfectly reasonable.
I mention this because this problem is now beyond any specific device. The manufacturers and carriers are, in my opinion, abusing the GPL and we ought to have a united front on that fact.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The source for the kernel compiled for the Nexus One, which uses completely different hardware, is (or must be) available. HTC does not need to provide it, as they are not the company selling the device - Google is.
^^^ Just to add to what he said, the kernel for the Nexus One also lacks the compiled-in driver for the CDMA Hero's camera.
Here's an example to illustrate why the GPL places so much practical importance upon the availability of ALL source used to build the kernel... and why it's generally accepted that proprietary binary kernel loadable modules are OK (at least, among pragmatists like Linus). Suppose the maker of your PC used a proprietary NVIDIA chipset with no public documentation, and shipped it with Ubuntu Linux on the hard drive. However, suppose they compiled the video driver directly into the kernel.
Anyone who bought the computer would be put in a needlessly bad position -- unless someone reverse-engineered the chipset, you wouldn't be able to use any distro of Linux not officially blessed and released by the computer's maker. You might be able to use a slightly newer build of Ubuntu if someone did a binary diff on the newer kernel and pulled out the metaphorical duct tape. You might possiblybe able to get away with using the old kernel in a newer distro (enjoying some bugfixes in the other programs besides the kernel itself). You might even be able to diff a newer build of Linux on a newer, but similar, computer released by that maker that they happened to ship with a newer kernel. But you'd never really be able to build your own kernel the way God and Linus intended, because the kernel and proprietary video driver would be inseparable. If you tried, the compiler would complain because it was missing a very, very important #include file -- the proprietary video driver.
On the other hand, suppose the manufacturer bundled the proprietary video driver as a loadable kernel module (.ko file). NOW, things change significantly. Richard Stallman might still grouse because you don't have the source to the video driver, but in utilitarian terms, you're much better off than you were in scenario #1. Although you're still dependent upon the manufacturer for a newer video driver, because it's physically separate from the kernel itself, you can build your own newer, better, and different kernels whenever and however you'd like. As long as the low-level interface between the kernel itself and the kernel module doesn't change on your platform, the two are sufficiently abstracted from each other to allow one to change without affecting the other.
IMHO, the most disgraceful part of this whole thing is that we theoretically have phones running an open platform, but we're still reduced to ripping binary images and tacking them together with metaphorical duct tape, just like we were with Windows Mobile. If anything, it's gotten worse. At least Windows Mobile didn't have to be rooted, and the newer versions generally didn't break the previous version's device drivers. Sigh.
miamicanes said:
^^^ Just to add to what he said, the kernel for the Nexus One also lacks the compiled-in driver for the CDMA Hero's camera.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Right, I understand this. I was making the point that the fact that 2.1 has a commercial release means the we can demand the code under GPL. Shouldn't we be aiming for a unified android kernel source with GSM and CDMA support, adding binary drivers/libs (or setting device-specific compile flags) as needed? Nexus being controlled by Google (who seems to be releasing their modifications immediately on git) might be a starting place for this de facto Android.
I'm simply advocating for thinking beyond our own personal devices.
Holy shut!!! Welcome to the age of technology.... **** with us and we will tweet Ur ass to death. Lol. It's an all Twitter offensive. Were declaring Twitter war on HTC until we get source. ROFL
@5tr4t4: well, it was more for the benefit of others who might stumble on this thread and aren't quite sure why it's such a big deal
I think what Jonnythan was saying is that there's no need to get the source to the Nexus One's kernel from HTC, because you can download it right now directly from Google.
As far as platform neutrality goes, we'd be 99.9% of the way there if HTC would just move the proprietary stuff out of the kernel proper and into loadable kernel modules so they'd simultaneously be in compliance with the GPL and not making our lives needlessly difficult by making us jump over hurdles that shouldn't be blocking our way in the first place
miamicanes said:
As far as platform neutrality goes, we'd be 99.9% of the way there if HTC would just move the proprietary stuff out of the kernel proper and into loadable kernel modules so they'd simultaneously be in compliance with the GPL and not making our lives needlessly difficult by making us jump over hurdles that shouldn't be blocking our way in the first place
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If they were to move some stuff to binary *.ko's they'd most likely move all non-boot-essential hardware support out there, which would actually make things much, much more challenging for us. That way they could have a "universal" kernel (and GPL source tree) that is used across devices, and each device just has its own *.ko's. They'd only have to release one (fairly useless) tarball for GPL compliance. Be careful what you ask for.
ok saw a post on the sprint hero boards and wanted to ask over here aswell since the g1 area has a lot more developers for it.
would porting webOS to an android phone seem possible? I had a palm pre for a bit was cool and fast, I like android more but the thought of running it would be cool
Noooooooooo
You mean porting over apps?
or running webOS on your phone?
In a word:
No.
In more words:
We need drivers. There are no WebOS drivers for Android devices. Many of the existing drivers that we need are proprietary, meaning (and I'm not sure on this part) most likely the hardware specifications necessary to write drivers are closed as well. If they are not closed, it would be possible--but not for a team of geeks like XDA. You'd need a major entity, like Google, to do it, which won't happen. Besides, not all of WebOS is completely open-source, just like not ALL of what goes into Android phones is. It's just not possible--even if the driver issue could be overcome, which it can't.
Yet another word:
This is a question, so it belongs in Q&A. Not to be a jerk or anything, but just letting you know, so next time you can post there.
Doesn't seem possible at this current time however I disagree with the post above if all of xda devs came together then it might be possible due to the fact cyanogen im guessing could make his own drivers etc. However as said above it would not be possible due to the fact it is not completely open-source
ps: Why would you want webOS it is nothing compared to android - IF you agree then post back with this a smile ^_^
xillius200 said:
Doesn't seem possible at this current time however I disagree with the post above if all of xda devs came together then it might be possible due to the fact cyanogen im guessing could make his own drivers etc. However as said above it would not be possible due to the fact it is not completely open-source
ps: Why would you want webOS it is nothing compared to android - IF you agree then post back with this a smile ^_^
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Have you ever written a device driver? You need detailed spec of the interfaces of the piece of hardware you're trying to talk to. Without them you're trying to build the Empire State Building blindfolded with a teaspoon and pair of pliers.
linuxluver said:
Have you ever written a device driver? You need detailed spec of the interfaces of the piece of hardware you're trying to talk to. Without them you're trying to build the Empire State Building blindfolded with a teaspoon and pair of pliers.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Okay so simply put we would need MacGyver to write the drivers...
you know, none of this is true, as the drivers for all of the HTC android phones have the drivers built into the kernel (as opposed to running as modules with the exception of wifi) because of GPL, they have released this information, albeit kinda late (*cough* CDMA hero) one stumbling block is how WebOS is going to interface with the drivers may be different, keep in palm has its kernel modifications "drivers" also available (once again because of GPL) so if interfacing is different, it COULD possibly be reverse engineered... the actual WebOS platform IS closed source however, making this all much much more difficult.
http://developer.htc.com/
http://opensource.palm.com/
dont let anyone tell you its impossible, its not. Are you going to port it? No, if you had to start this thread, then its not likely.
mbazdell said:
Okay so simply put we would need MacGyver to write the drivers...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
rofl..............
Napoleon said:
Impossible is a word only to be found in the dictionary of fools.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That said I like my android
linuxluver said:
Have you ever written a device driver? You need detailed spec of the interfaces of the piece of hardware you're trying to talk to. Without them you're trying to build the Empire State Building blindfolded with a teaspoon and pair of pliers.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Also yeah without knowing about the phone it is like building the empire state building. That's why you buy the phone open it up find details on the phone first off and try and figure it out by taking a long look and experimenting otherwise you will never get anywhere. It is like life without actually doing it and just saying about it you will never achieve it so you do it
If Cyanogen or another dev decided to do this it is not impossible as long as they know how to build a device driver which i know 4 of the devs on here can do it is not impossible. The question is would they actually do this project?
Personally I do not see a point in this project if you wanted a webOS why didn't you buy a palm sry if i may sound a little rude but it is the truth why buy a android?
If i may have sounded rude in the sentence above i am very sry you can shun me down
xillius200 said:
For linux once never went my way and stop having a go i was just voicing my opinion it is a free country im just saying with cyanogenmod, Wesgarner, Ctso, Kingklick etc. we stand a great chance at doing it and i bet cyan must have made a device driver before. so please don't go off on one i don't care if this get's made as stated below android is better anyway so get off my back linuxluver and stop being a jackass all I was trying to say is it could be done and not impossible you are making it sound like we have no hope in hell.
ps: I only wan't to come on here to chat and make friends not to be abused
ps2: Also yeah without knowing about the phone it is like building the empire state building. That's why you buy the phone open it up find details on the phone first off and try and figure it out without taking a long look and experimenting you will never get anywhere. It is like life without actually doing it and just saying about it you will never achieve it so you do it
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You really have no idea whatsoever as to how computer hardware works. Like the other person said, there just isn't a chance in hell of a small group of people working in their free time without the cooperation of hardware manufacturers to do what you're saying.
Look at AOSP, think of all the people working on it, and we still don't have everything working on it correctly. And that's with an open-source OS, not to mention Android was meant to use on these HTC phones anyway.
Web OS is really nice but doesn't seem very popular considering only 2 phones have it while. 10+ phones will come out with Android. I bet if this was done the person asking would use it for like a month then go to another ROM. Which means all that work trying to make drivers would go in vain.
xencor said:
You really have no idea whatsoever as to how computer hardware works. Like the other person said, there just isn't a chance in hell of a small group of people working in their free time without the cooperation of hardware manufacturers to do what you're saying.
Look at AOSP, think of all the people working on it, and we still don't have everything working on it correctly. And that's with an open-source OS, not to mention Android was meant to use on these HTC phones anyway.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So is a small group of people not good enough look at bill gates for example creator of microsoft started of with the apple man 2 people now we have microsoft windows and apple so are you saying a small group of people can't do something amazing every now and again?
Also i do not care about webOS i hate webOS in fact i just wanted to extract my opinion and further fourth nothing is impossible look at wireless electricity about a few years ago seen as a myth now look at it. This could be done one day maybe not now but sometime in the future. Most of webOS is in java anyway and most of it is using dbus.
I thought that emulating it on a jvm may be possible? like freedsb running over the top of windows in a vm.
Also all those who port drivers from windows to linux and max to windows etc. have no help from the manafacturers and they still manage to do it and they work alone.
Im not going to voice my opinion in this thread again i have had enough with people who don't let people talk their mind all it was was an opinion nothing more and a possible chance of it working instead of it sounding like it's impossible unless you try you will never know and that is that stuff this thread i have had enough with you people i am out of here don't bother replying to this because i will not read it.
xillius200 said:
So is a small group of people not good enough look at bill gates for example creator of microsoft started of with the apple man 2 people now we have microsoft windows so youre point is?
Also i do not care about webOS i hate webOS in fact i just wanted to extract my opinion and further fourth nothing is impossible look at wireless electricity about a few years ago seen as a myth now look at it. This could be done one day maybe not now but sometime in the future.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Do the developers on XDA have a source of revenue that I'm unaware of? Do they have billions of dollars in profits that spurn growth and encourage new, more experienced developers to join the business and help? Is there even a business at all?
The answer is no. There is no R&D department behind XDA. There is no venture capital firm supporting cyanogen or kingklick with money.
Again, you really have no idea what you're talking about. This isn't just a "take open the phone, look at the serial number on the board, and then write your own driver." This is something that computer manufacturers spend years developing their own proprietary code and then design specific chipsets to work with it. Years and money, lots and lots of money.
And you're still forgetting that webOS and even parts of android are not open sourced, which complicates it even further, even to the extent of making a webOS port technically illegal under copyright laws.
xencor said:
not to mention Android was meant to use on these HTC phones anyway.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
not 100% true, both android and WebOS run on top of the linux kernel, drivers are already written, like I said, its not a rewrite of drivers, rather interfacing with hardware may be different, but thanks to GPL, we can more easily figure out how the software interfaces with the drivers since we have drivers (albeit for some different hardware) for both Palm AND Android devices... obviously this would all be no easy task... but hell, android work tits on my Kaiser, with the radio/sms/wifi/camera/gps.... and it WASN'T designed to run android!
something else to mention I suppose is the work done to get Mer Linux (Open source replacement for Maemo) running on the Kaiser/Vogue, it booted and its X system worked enough to get to setup information, albeit the screen was too low of a res to do much and it has far too little ram to be useful... let me put it this way... it would be entirely possible for someone to port WebOS over, though the radio/BT/Wifi/accel/etc. may not work initially. I'd be stoked to try out test builds, and I think so would MANY other people.
*broken down: android wasnt meant to run on these phones, linux was meant to, and android was meant to run on top of that*
xencor said:
Do the developers on XDA have a source of revenue that I'm unaware of? Do they have billions of dollars in profits that spurn growth and encourage new, more experienced developers to join the business and help? Is there even a business at all?
The answer is no. There is no R&D department behind XDA. There is no venture capital firm supporting cyanogen or kingklick with money.
Again, you really have no idea what you're talking about. This isn't just a "take open the phone, look at the serial number on the board, and then write your own driver." This is something that computer manufacturers spend years developing their own proprietary code and then design specific chipsets to work with it. Years and money, lots and lots of money.
And you're still forgetting that webOS and even parts of android are not open sourced, which complicates it even further, even to the extent of making a webOS port technically illegal under copyright laws.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I have already said in my earlier post that it is not open-source so read b4 you post and even the smallest one man on his own can do someting incredible look at DA cracked the psp 14-15yo and wrote his own drivers and software and look at the ps3 hacker who has found exploit through the memory neither of them have a company or backing just normal people and are you saying that is not possible?
i will not talk any longer all in all webOS is a stupid idea it could be possible one day and end of
ps: I don't like but jmhalder is cool
jmhalder said:
not 100% true, both android and WebOS run on top of the linux kernel, drivers are already written, like I said, its not a rewrite of drivers, rather interfacing with hardware may be different, but thanks to GPL, we can more easily figure out how the software interfaces with the drivers since we have drivers (albeit for some different hardware) for both Palm AND Android devices... obviously this would all be no easy task... but hell, android work tits on my Kaiser, with the radio/sms/wifi/camera/gps.... and it WASN'T designed to run android!
something else to mention I suppose is the work done to get Mer Linux (Open source replacement for Maemo) running on the Kaiser/Vogue, it booted and its X system worked enough to get to setup information, albeit the screen was too low of a res to do much and it has far too little ram to be useful... let me put it this way... it would be entirely possible for someone to port WebOS over, though the radio/BT/Wifi/accel/etc. may not work initially. I'd be stoked to try out test builds, and I think so would MANY other people.
*broken down: android wasnt meant to run on these phones, linux was meant to, and android was meant to run on top of that*
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thank you for talking some sense on the subject that it is possible thank you very much i respect you because you think anything is possible you may go far in the world. the one's who never try may never know and for that will fall behind. You are the only one on here who talks sense and for that i applaud you
ps: Very Much thanks from Xillius200 for believing it to be possible instead of just shooting it down
ps2: It takes a true person to not give up and takes a less person to give up straight away so never give up
xillius200 said:
I have already said in my earlier post that it is not open-source so read b4 you post and even the smallest one man on his own can do someting incredible look at DA cracked the psp 14-15yo and wrote his own drivers and software and look at the ps3 hacker who has found exploit through the memory neither of them have a company or backing just normal people and are you saying that is not possible?
i will not talk any longer all in all webOS is a stupid idea it could be possible one day and end of
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
DA did not write his own drivers. "Cracking" and using existing drivers is not nearly the same thing, nor is using a loophole in a PS3 memory chip.
Again, i'm sorry, but you just have no idea what you're talking about.
As someone else has pointed out by now, it might actually be possible to get webOS on an android phone, but that's only because the drivers already exist, not because cyanogen and XDA are gods and can do what you're proposing.
xencor said:
DA did not write his own drivers. "Cracking" and using existing drivers is not nearly the same thing, nor is using a loophole in a PS3 memory chip.
Again, i'm sorry, but you just have no idea what you're talking about.
As someone else has pointed out by now, it might actually be possible to get webOS on an android phone, but that's only because the drivers already exist, not because cyanogen and XDA are gods and can do what you're proposing.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I am not calling them gods writing different drivers seperate to a device is possible and DA did write some of his own drivers for the psp for addons and linking to the pc. Also to gain access to the memory he had to make a device and write a driver for it that devices already came wth a driver but he wrote his own. This was a different person XD
And i have had enough i am out of here dont know why the hell we are argueing you do not know much about android either so leave it at that and keep the forum open
I here by cease this fighting going on and say good day
Hello there,
I am a user of another Harmony tablet, the Advent Vega. As I suspected, ViewSonic has adopted the same stance as other Harmony tablet sellers: simce nVidia has no longer the initiative of providing new drivers, all development for our purchased tabs comes to a halt. The small vendors (Advent, POV, ViewSonic) have no own means of providing further ROMs and support, while the bigger brands (Toshiba) which could actually do something of the sort, are already bringing new tablets to the market and forsaking the old models.
Nevertheless, I know, as you all do, that the Harmony tablets CAN run Honeycomb. They have good enough specs to run it, and the main reason why they don't do it now is because of absurd market cycles.
Therefore, my idea is to have all Harmony chipset users unite for a big bounty seeking a team of developers who can create drivers for nvidia Harmony devices on Honeycomb. As it is a cross-device matter, we could even call attention to this iasue and publish this bounty on the XDA homepage. We know already that no commercial house will bring about any new ROM with said drivers. And I think I'm not alone if I say that I don't want my device to be forsaken after just 7 months in the market.
I think we need something like this if we don't want our tabs to turn into obsolete junk, which is what the big companies would like to make us think they are. The XDA community has injected a new breath of life into many devices long forgotten by their makers. I hope this macro-bounty idea can do the same for ours.
What are your thoughts on this?
Hy guys and gals, i have done some digging on the nVidia developers forums and have found a thread requesting info on if/when nVidia plans to drop the source for the HAL that we need so our amazing developers can get A2DP working
I'm posting the link below, maybe if enough of us go into the thread requesting this info nVidia will comply
EDIT: nVidia updated their forum and our topic was tossed into the archive and not brought over, to remind them that this is still a valid issue I have re-created the thread, please if you want to try at getting A2DP to work with non OTA based rom's go voice your opinion
New nVidia developers Forum
Sent from my Transformer TF101 using XDA Premium App
Link not working, im all for it a2dp would make cm7 perfect.
This would be great! Then I could finally buy a Bluetooth Stereo Headset.
Sent from my LG-P999 using XDA Premium App
I'd love to see this happen, but I don't see it anytime soon. Nvidia has been historically bad at releasing their source code.
fcisco13 said:
Link not working, im all for it a2dp would make cm7 perfect.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Link worked perfectly fine for me, both on my TF101 earlier and just now on my g2x.....not sure why it didn't work for u
Sent from my LG-P999 using XDA Premium App
Lets get this moving
Sadly, they aren't required by any license to release their source code, which is why I have no idea if/when it'll ever happen. Their drivers for their own chips are definitely not gpl, so bugging them will not put any pressure on them at all.
lawsuit??? Lol worked for lg...
It'll never work. You can't sue them because they won't release their source code. That's like saying "Hey let's sue microsoft because they won't release the source to their kernel." It's their property, and they can do what they like with it. If android didn't run on top of the linux kernel, which is gpl licensed, I'd almost guarantee that no vendor would ever release the source for it.
Not trying to be a buzz-kill or anything, I want the source code as much as anyone else. But no amount of threatening lawsuits, bugging them through email, forums, or phone calls will change their minds. If they intend on releasing the source, they'll do it in their own time, if not, we're SOL.
mstrk242 said:
Sadly, they aren't required by any license to release their source code, which is why I have no idea if/when it'll ever happen. Their drivers for their own chips are definitely not gpl, so bugging them will not put any pressure on them at all.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Then it is probably a bad move to use Nvidia hardware on an open source platform like Android.
Spread the word...
I was kidding about it, we can wait for 2.3.4-5 ota...
It may be Nvidia's right to keep it's code proprietary, but I can't imagine buying another Android device with one of their chips in it unless something changes.
We are evolving very fast, I don't know if nVidia can assume the Windows GPU market will always be there for them. If Android dominates the next decade or so the way that Windows did the last then manufacturers are obviously going to have to adapt or perish.
No way, there will always be a market for high end video cards on windows, simply for gaming if nothing else. Sure, they may not make it in the cell phone market (although I doubt that too, just because they are very good with hardware, they'll work out the kinks.)
You have to remember, the vast majority of people who buy these phones don't even know what a rom is, let alone the fact that they can customize it. The modding community is a small (albeit very vocal,) minority.
Also, please no one read between the lines on these posts I've made. I'm no insider, I have no information what so ever from nvidia. I'm really only basing these educated guesses based on my experience with nvidia and linux drivers. They may very well open the source, but I'm just trying to say don't hold your breath, and screaming at nvidia is absolutely pointless.
bump for updated link
None of the companies release their proprietary drivers to the public. It is their right as the intellectual property owner to keep it secret. The only thing that is open source is the Android Kernel and the AOSP files. Everything else is proprietary and not made public. Even Google Apps are proprietary and Google never releases the source code for them. Also, only members of the Open Handset Alliance can license them and legally put them into their rom builds. Any efforts contrary to this (i.e., getting companies to release proprietary driver source) is simply futile and a waste of time. They could care a rat's ass about hackers. If you don't like it don't buy their products, but then you have to stop buying everyone's product as they all have proprietary code that is never released.
Spyvie said:
Then it is probably a bad move to use Nvidia hardware on an open source platform like Android.
Spread the word...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You are right-on here. I will be looking at this when I eventually upgrade down the road, and will probably select a lesser device with different hardware (as long as the manufacturer doesn't ship it with a locked bootloader - lol).
Real open source is the only way to go. But as many posters have mentioned. we represent a very small group of potential customers - most whom would never dream of messing around with their devices.
gaww said:
You are right-on here. I will be looking at this when I eventually upgrade down the road, and will probably select a lesser device with different hardware (as long as the manufacturer doesn't ship it with a locked bootloader - lol).
Real open source is the only way to go. But as many posters have mentioned. we represent a very small group of potential customers - most whom would never dream of messing around with their devices.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Then you want to get the MI Millet MIUI phone when it is available in your country. It is a dual core 1.5Ghz Scorpion processor and they expect you to update it weekly with new MIUI builds. It is an awesome device for the low price point (1,999 Chinese Yuan or about $300.00 US).
http://product.xiaomi.com/features.html
Go salivate.
jboxer said:
None of the companies release their proprietary drivers to the public. It is their right as the intellectual property owner to keep it secret. The only thing that is open source is the Android Kernel and the AOSP files. Everything else is proprietary and not made public. Even Google Apps are proprietary and Google never releases the source code for them. Also, only members of the Open Handset Alliance can license them and legally put them into their rom builds. Any efforts contrary to this (i.e., getting companies to release proprietary driver source) is simply futile and a waste of time. They could care a rat's ass about hackers. If you don't like it don't buy their products, but then you have to stop buying everyone's product as they all have proprietary code that is never released.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not refuting what your saying but why do other phones seem to not have this problem if they all do this. Only tegra 2 devices have development ****ed because of this.
Sent from my LG-P999 using xda premium
They deleted my account. WTF?
xsteven77x said:
Not refuting what your saying but why do other phones seem to not have this problem if they all do this. Only tegra 2 devices have development ****ed because of this.
Sent from my LG-P999 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'd imagine its for the same reason our devices and other tegra devices can only play the tegra games hence incentive tobuy a tegra phone. I think if they released code then any dev could hack their phone and play tegra games without having a tegra chip. Just a hunch.
Sent from my LG-P999 using XDA App
I hope this post does not get too long and you bear with me...
This idea came to me recently - thinking about ICS and what the vendors are calling "legacy" devices. I even started a thread at qualcomm developer forum, asking them nicely to give us the needed binaries, or even better source code for the user space drivers. I really doubt that it will happen, but it does not cost much to try.
Anyway - here is the idea - instead of begging the vendors to release the source (or binaries, or unlock the bootloaders) lets give them an incentive to do so by introducing community (XDA) certified devices. We could come up with lets say 3 levels of community compliance for the devices - with grades:
A - the vendor has made it possible to unlock the bootloader of the device
A+ - the vendor has made binaries needed for compiling AOSP, Cyanogenmod and other open source projects for the device available and made the bootloader unlock-able
A++ - the vendor has released source code and binary drivers for all of the hardware components of the device, and made the bootloader unlock-able
A committee of recognized developers and community members (I am thinking guys like tytung, texasice, azrienoch, etc... - do not feel left out guys) - would receive sample devices from the manufacturers to test and certify the level of community compliance.
A special section of the XDA site would be set up showcasing the community certified devices, and ad space on the portal would be dedicated to showcase latest devices to recieve certification.
Heck, the community could even make money - by allowing (selling the right to) the vendor of the certified device to put an XDA certified device on the packaging or on the device itself (the money could be used to help support the website costs or fund development projects - bounties and such...)
It may sound like a lot work, but this way we could allow the community friendly vendors to get a chance to show their devices, and smaller vendors trying to ways to differentiate themselves could find a fast-track to the hearts of enthusiasts. The community members looking for a new device would make their minds easily by browsing the certified devices section.
I know I would participate in a program like this (Samsung if you are reading this I am willing to certify the N7000 right now - please PM me so I can send you my address)
It's a cool idea, but I think it's a tough sell to device makers.
If we get the community on-board, the vendors will come by themselves.
If the community showcases these devices, and the community members buy devices based on these grades - the vendors will want to come on board.
The vendors like Xiaomi and Meizu could be the first to be interested in this type of publicity - and this is really the type of vendors we should try to get interested.
Once the smaller ones are in, the bigger ones are sure to follow
But community awareness is the first step - we need to choose for ourselves and recommend to others devices that already fall into this category - like SE and HTC devices that are already bootloader unlock-able, and to not buy and not recommend devices like the locked-down Motorola's.
srle said:
If we get the community on-board, the vendors will come by themselves.
If the community showcases these devices, and the community members buy devices based on these grades - the vendors will want to come on board.
The vendors like Xiaomi and Meizu could be the first to be interested in this type of publicity - and this is really the type of vendors we should try to get interested.
Once the smaller ones are in, the bigger ones are sure to follow
But community awareness is the first step - we need to choose for ourselves and recommend to others devices that already fall into this category - like SE and HTC devices that are already bootloader unlock-able, and to not buy and not recommend devices like the locked-down Motorola's.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This will be hard to do as each OEM will need to get all the source from other manufacturers and they will never release the source for their drivers. Not to mention alot of peoples choice on buying a device is the price from their carriers. The carriers won't jump on board as any Modding voids warrenty and they will refuse to support it. Not to mention their stand on how not everyone should have access to certain things. (Can't say I disagree with them). Then you mentioned the MIUI phone. They won't get far as alot of people are upset they stole most of the coding from CM and are now trying to make money off of it. Not cool. Don't get me wrong I would love to see an XDA approved phone. Just don't see the OEMs having any interest as there will not be as much money to be made and in the end that is all they care about. Besides once Samsung finishes buying MIUI then that will be a proprietary os. They already have CM. Notice the bot went down shortly afterwards? Odd? Just a little lol
I would not worry a lot about that - the Apache 2.0 licence allow reuse of code in closed source projects - it's a choice Google and OHA made.
Project and ROM makers will come and go - today it's Cyanogenmod, tomorrow it will be someone else with a different project (think WebOS on our Android devices). The point here is to have an option to buy a device that's free to be modified and free to support which ever OS the community decides to run on it (maybe some new version of Ubuntu even).
Phones are also only a part of this problem (and the part that's dependent on carriers) - there are also tablets and probably media players to consider here.
I think that this certification could help the vendors and even carriers which want to stand out and show that they are different by giving them means to do so. In the end, even subsidized devices are payed by you - and not the carrier, so you should have a choice to do what ever you want with it.