What is Digg?131 Comments
- Kingoftherings, on 06/14/2008, -2/+80I don't see why Linux needs Nokia, obviously Nokia wants Linux, so I don't see why they think they can bend the rules.
- qwuinc, on 06/14/2008, -1/+61This particular /. comment caught my eye:
>> but we are not yet ready to play by the rules; but this needs to work the other way round too
> So you're not yet ready to play by our rules, but you want us to play by your rules so that you have an
> opportunity to take advantage of the work we produce and provide to you for free (beer/speech); when the only
> stipulation we have is that you provide it back for free? - shrewduser, on 06/14/2008, -2/+62why?
its unclear where he is coming from or even what exactly it is he's saying, but if nokia want a linux thats better for them and supports the things they want they had better dedicate some engineers to it. - n0odles, on 06/15/2008, -0/+52Educate meaning accept proprietary software, change open source licenses, develop DRM systems, restrict customization... All so Nokia can profit.
- localzuk, on 06/15/2008, -1/+43The problem is that the open source community is going to radically change the mobile industry. Just like the internet has radically changed the way music and movies are purchased. Applications will be available for the iPhone for free, the google android platform will have the same.
Nokia are attempting to maintain the status quo rather than moving with the times and developing their business models to accommodate what people want. ie. They are trying to do what the RIAA et al did.
It won't work. - grexeo, on 06/15/2008, -2/+42Linux needs to learn business? More like Nokia needs to learn customers. Or more to the point, the reason why things like DRM are so anti-customer.
Nokia want to profit from using community-developed software while restricting the rights of the community at the same time. Have fun trying, we're not in the 90's anymore. - qwuinc, on 06/14/2008, -0/+33Bruce Perens' reply is also worth reading: http://technocrat.net/d/2008/6/11/43198
- ToadLeg, on 06/15/2008, -2/+35There is nothing stopping Nokia from creating DRM systems for Linux. The only possible thing he could mean when he talks about "educating developers" is having those developers do his programming work for him.
I hope Nokia has fun trying to successfully create something in open source which has completely failed in proprietary systems. - Rabbittt, on 06/15/2008, -2/+29I disagree.. I think the Open Source community should rewrite the rules, not get on board with the "status quo." Of course the Big Boys want Open Source to play along, it would reinforce the current market paradigm.. I vote to set the standard, not follow the money..
- KevinJim, on 06/15/2008, -1/+26Nokia will see that when you take head on companies like LG, Samsung, Motorola, Intel, Google, AT&T ( I could go on and on but... ) and they are united for something ( that's of course making money ) by having a standard base ( Linux ) and THEY play by the rules I think Nokia might reconsider to stop whining and suck up. Come on Nokia you acquired Trolltech for a reason.
- inactive, on 06/15/2008, -2/+25I think he might by underestimating the numbers in the Linux army
- djbon2112, on 06/15/2008, -2/+24Precisely. Contrary to everything Linux stands for. I'll pass.
- inactive, on 06/15/2008, -1/+22Isn't the whole idea of open source is that it is open?
Not locked down? - aliguana, on 06/15/2008, -0/+18Nokia wants Linux, because they can have operating systems that can rival iPhones etc. However, they don't want an Android, they want Linux AND they want DRM etc, so they can monetise it through ringtone/music/video/ad sales. Sorry, I don't think it's going to work out that way for them. It is Nokia who has to adapt to the Linux ethos if they want to go down that route, not the other way around.
- JQP123, on 06/15/2008, -2/+20He's obviously suffers from the mistaken impression that Open Source cares about what business wants.
- indymike, on 06/15/2008, -1/+18 Dr Ari Jaaksi doesn't get it: DRM is already obsolete. Nokia is getting squeezed from all sides by more open platforms: iPhone, Window Mobile, soon Android. Nokia's big problem is that cell phones are distributed by carriers in many markets, so the carriers get a say in what goes in the phones or Nokia doesn't get on the shelf. Oh, then there's the concern of knock off products. Nokia doesn't want that, but the reality of the market is that chips are cheap, and cloning someone elses stuff is the engine that built the high-tech economy. Just like computers 20+ years ago with the IBM PC, mobile phones will eventually be dominated by a standardized platform that lets users maximize value by building applications. The question is does Nokia want to be relevent in that market or not?
Oh, and by the way, cell phone users HATE locked up features and nickel and dime for stupid eyecandy and rigntones. - maasox74, on 06/15/2008, -2/+19What exactly do they "need" to learn? I would say they have been pretty damn successful at what they were doing for the past 15 years or so. Just because it does not fit with some CEO's idea of short-term quick profit doesn't meen there is "need" to fix something that is not broken.
- samthurston, on 06/15/2008, -0/+17Not to be a jerk, but most Linux apps at v0.8 are better than most commercial apps at 1.0.
- smotpoker, on 06/15/2008, -0/+16It is an annoyance but it is also a good thing. Forking creates diversity and innovation. In most cases one branch dies off unless they both offer something substantial to end users.
Had they remained one project, it may have progressed faster or had better support but if the lead developer decides to sell out, something doesn't work right on some specific hardware/software configuration or a major bug becomes apparent, more people end up screwed because they are all limited to that one project. In many cases decentralization/redundancy is a good thing. - elvenrunelord, on 06/15/2008, -0/+15Uhh if mobile tech buyers are looking for the best products and open source providers are offering the best, then they better allow the creators to set the rules. Its time these control freaks learn that we the consumer could really care less about DRM. If DRM interferes with how we desire to use content we spent money on, one of 2 things is going to happen. One - we just won't purchase it, or Two - we will just hack the system where we can use it the way we want.
Ok this is not rocket science big corporate control freaks......if a lowly little peon like me can get it you should be able to comprehend it too - boobyman, on 06/15/2008, -0/+11How would locking down a song (example) provide value for their customers? If I buy a song, you better be damn sure I want to play that song on all of my devices.
Here's how I see it. You give me a choice to buy a song. Sure I'll buy it. Oh wait. It's DRM protected which means I can only play that thing in one device/program. Or, I could head over to thepiratebay, download it in an mp3 form and enjoy it in my car, iPod, phone etc. - init100, on 06/15/2008, -0/+9"Its time these control freaks learn that we the consumer could really care less about DRM."
I think you meant "couldn't care less". Anyway, I care a lot about DRM, in the way that I won't buy any media with DRM that hasn't got a well-known crack, such as DVDs (not that I buy DVDs either, but that is not becauser of principles). It's no DRM or no sale for me.
Main-stream users are also slowly starting to get why DRM is bad. More will start to get it when Microsoft's PlaysForSure license servers are turned off in a few months, and their tracks suddenly stop working. Any whiners will be met with "I told you so". - philz, on 06/15/2008, -0/+9People do it for free and for fun. So if it's a group who doesn't like it, they could chose to stop to do anything or to give us users more choice - what's so bad about it?
- Myztry, on 06/15/2008, -0/+9Nokia is just one of many network device OEM manufacturers. They are not a network provider. They are not a content provider. DRM would be of no interest to them if it wasn't for the collusion that exists. It's quite a profitable racket they have going.
Open network access (as spearheaded by Google) and Open source (as spearheaded by Linux) could simply void that racket by providing genuine alternatives.
Hardware/software manufactures are trivial to replace. Content providers are trivial to replace. Laying out a network is the difficult part. Applications such as Skype, or your favourite instant messengers could reduce the network providers to mere data pipes and allow peoples wildest communications dream to be realized at a very reasonable price. That is where the fears lay.
Nokia is easily replaceable is an open market.
Cheaper prices would be countered by quantity. It wouldn't necessarily be cheaper. You'd just get to do a lot more for your money. - InorganicMatter, on 06/15/2008, -0/+8...what? It's all open source. If they want to put in DRM, SIM locks, and the like, then put them in. Instead they are complaining that no one else will implement this for them? Nokia's still got a lot to learn about OSS. If you want something done, you just do it yourself.
I should also mention that OSS doesn't necessarily mean no commercial profiting, and no restrictive technologies. It is still very possible, legal, and compliant with the GPL to make money off OSS, or develop "unethical" OSS. Nokia has every right to do this; you can't selectively apply the spirit of open source to some software. They are simply complaining that they have to do it themselves instead of others implementing it for them. - AugustusOsari, on 06/15/2008, -0/+8>digital rights management
***** you, Nokia. ***** you. - secrity, on 06/15/2008, -0/+7The people who are crippled by the DRM are not Nokia's customers -- we are part of the product. It is the carriers who are Nokia's customers.
- mikelieman, on 06/15/2008, -0/+7It depends on how the words "obey" and "rules" are defined.
From whence do these "rules" emerge? Are they a created by the CUSTOMERS by consensus, or are they arbitrarily created in the head of some suit at Nokia or Microsoft?
It's important, because "The Customer Is Always Right" and the Customer HATES being nicked-and-dimed for ringtones, SMS, and the dearth of applications. The customer *wants* the handset to be just a platform for deploying useful applications. Like a pc is commodity hardware, so shall be cellphones.
If someone made up a "rule" that you couldn't return to your home after work, would you obey? - motters, on 06/15/2008, -1/+8If Nokia wants to use open source it has to play by open source rules (licences). It's Nokia which needs some education, not open source developers. Digital Restrictions Management (DRM) is completely unethical and should never be used under any circumstances, and monopolistic or subsidised business models belong to the 20th century, not the 21st.
- Snowdizzle, on 06/15/2008, -4/+11HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH
DRM HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA - smotpoker, on 06/15/2008, -0/+5Openmoko or bust!
- sybesis, on 06/15/2008, -2/+7One word, you don't know whats on linux. because there are games, there are innovative things. and most of all linux is growing and isn't only nerd OS anymore. Any ***** could use it. Bad package manager...something that doesn't exist on the other platform...thats a good one...
**Things aren't changing fast enough for Linux and you had your BEST POSSIBLE opportunity during the release of Vista. **
too bad we prefer to make things as solid as possible. Because rushing something will always be the worst idea. I mean. look windows?! - Delta009, on 06/15/2008, -3/+8***** Nokia
- unitedatheism, on 06/16/2008, -0/+5Like when that Firefox forked from, let's say, Netscape Navigator? (not to mention mozilla)
Yeah man, that sucks more than making love to a Rhinocerus that doesn't love you anymore. - jay019, on 06/16/2008, -0/+4Yeah, cause windows invented using a mouse and 'point and click'
*rollseyes at the retard* - inactive, on 06/15/2008, -1/+5http://opensource.nokia.com - they arent only closed source they do actually pay for people to develop stuff. It is somewhat interesting though that they appear to be making contrary comments to a point.
- jay019, on 06/16/2008, -0/+4Hang on, you said "other ways to sell OSS" then you said "sell closed source versions"
My brain just exploded trying to work out what you are saying. - inactive, on 06/15/2008, -2/+6well in all fairness nokia does do some pretty impressive open source software that the community may use. So while linux itself may not need nokia, some applications do rely on them. Want a good, free, open source SIP stack that actually complies with the RFC? You wont find that with asterisk (it really isnt compliant) but you will with sofia (FOSS projects do use it).
http://opensource.nokia.com features what they give to developers free and even lists some of the engineers they pay to maintain and develop it. - beerden, on 06/15/2008, -1/+5Business people running large corporations cannot grasp what Open Source really is, and as such they fear it. Their reality is the corporate world, which, conversely, most of us familiar with OS products cannot begin to understand, because it's a reflection of the mind of the sociopath, and psychopath, and the conservative.
- Bulletbillx, on 06/15/2008, -1/+5If they want that, they should go with windows mobile.
- sybesis, on 06/15/2008, -0/+4hitler was elected democraticaly does that makes this system bad?
- opensourcer, on 06/15/2008, -1/+5Linux understands business and simply despise it. I think you need to learn open source, Nokia.
- AboveandBeyond, on 06/15/2008, -0/+4you laughed out of my screen man.
- WiseWeasel, on 06/16/2008, -0/+4I'll just point out that Jobs' letter to music executives was extremely hypocritical from a customer's perspective, as they turned around and created a completely locked down, DRM'd platform with the iPhone/SDK/AppStore. Apple is fine with telling music company executives to sell their content without DRM, but once we're talking about Apple's content (software), all bets are off.
Apple has NOT shown that it dislikes DRM, nor that it would make any effort to avoid it if given the choice. Jobs' message to record execs was not voiced out of concern for consumer's usage rights, but was in response to pressure from the EU to license their DRM to other manufacturers. As such, Apple made the business case that dropping DRM would be more PROFITABLE for everyone involved, never touching on the subject of customer satisfaction or the value of their product to those customers. As such, there is no evidence from that letter that Apple or Jobs has an actual dislike of DRM. If anything, their actions demonstrate that they are willing to promote and extend DRM if it's to their own perceived business interests. - jo21, on 06/15/2008, -1/+4apple got DRM all over their itunes store...
actually nokia phones are more free
AD2P stereo bluetooth, bluetooth file stranfer, wifi UPNP. - PatrickBrown, on 06/16/2008, -0/+3(D) goes against the spirit of OSS. Well-structured OSS licenses should prevent (D). Alsa, (D) reduces OSS to the status of a demo product. If it does not reduce it to the status of a demo product, then it will be forked and the "magic ingredient" will be added to a forked version, making the original version overpriced closed source software.
- maninalift, on 06/15/2008, -0/+3That is the point when you are supposed to explain what you think the point _is_
- opensourcer, on 06/15/2008, -0/+3Totally agree with you. Most business decisions are made by the upper management based on their "sense" or market research. Those things are usually a hit or miss. As for open source, it's a grassroot movement. The users are developing what the users want. If damn Nokia is telling the users to develop what they want for free and then charge them for it, they are just opening a hypocrite.
- gandhii, on 06/16/2008, -0/+3So.. your argument is that because Linux didn't surpass Window's user share these last two years .. it is a fail? So.. then Macs are a fail as well? even though their market has been increasing as well and also has a majority of the market for fields such as graphic design for print. I'm not buying your assumption that these things happen in two year blocks and what came before and will come after is of no relevance.
- gandhii, on 06/16/2008, -0/+3People keep saying that .. but doesn't communism (as well as socialism) require a central authority to dictate the social practice? The linux community seems to be more libertarian to me ... minus the traditional sense of what a "free market" is. Various individuals working together or independently doing their own thing for the public good (ie.. Linux). To be honest it doesn't seem that any political philosophy really comes close to describing how the Linux and OSS communities really work. Or maybe I don't really understand what those philosophies really mean. Anyone else got some thoughts on this?
If I am right... maybe we need to start the Open Source Party? ;] -
Show 51 - 100 of 131 discussions
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is