Free software phone OS - Firefox OS
What do you think of it?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firefox_OS
Personally, I think it's good. iOS is obviously the complete opposite of free, Android is better but still a lot of issues (also has many privacy issues, ya know, being made by the biggest advertising company worldwide), while this seems much more free. Of course, it'll have the same problems Firefox did. Logo being copyrighted and all that. It won't be fully free but it'll be close I believe, at least closer than Android.
I am a member!
Firefox OS should be as free as cyanogenmod (basically Android without the Google malware). A step in the right direction, and something much more acceptable than any iOS jail based device.
It will still rely on non-free firmware, though.
The 'Trisquel equivalent' for a phone OS would be Replicant, a completely free mobile OS based on cyanogenmod which replaces any non-free firmware with liberated ones.
It only supports a few phones at the moment, but they are currently porting it to Android 4.0, and Galaxy Nexus / SII support is confirmed. This should help drive the project into public view, for sure.
I recommend visiting http://replicant.us/ for more information.
CyanogenMod, sadly, still has many things that invade your privacy.
For example, the default browser in CyanogenMod sends all keystrokes input to the URL bar to Google.
Replicant looks interesting.
I am a member!
>CyanogenMod, sadly, still has many things that invade your privacy.
For example, the default browser in CyanogenMod sends all keystrokes input to the URL bar to Google.
Whoops, what I perhaps should have said is that you have the option to disable these google services.
AFAIK, some of them are still enabled by default.
If you're talking about removing the Google services such as Market, YouTube, Chrome, Maps, GMail and other proprietary bits by Google, you can actually choose not to install them with CyanogenMod.
I have a Galaxy Nexus running CyanogenMod 10 (until Replicant gets released for it) and I didn't install any Google applications. I actually didn't even use any Google apps with this phone from day one. Yes, they were preinstalled on the phone, but I unlocked the bootloader and installed CM10 without the GApps package, effectively removing them.
Instead, I installed F-Droid, a Free marketplace. My phone is still quite functional without them, and all I can ask for is a Replicant port to my phone so I can have full freedom.
I am a translator!
Replicant unfortunately doesn't ensure full freedom since the modem has too much power on most phones (it can access the main CPU, the microphone and the GPS and can be flashed by the mobile operators).
I understand the modem is still a bit of an issue zone, but at least the main CPU can run a free operating system.
Why are those over specialised operating systems for small computers needed?
Is it because of how light they are? They still use the essential free programs and libraries, that are part of your average GNU system. Isn't it technically feasible to install a GNU system on a device with such hardware capabilities, but with a lighter desktop environment more suitable for touch screens and small keyboards?
I've used Android on another person's computers (I would not use such system on my computer). The system seems badly designed and written. Even simple things, like writing and saving a plain text file seems very inconvenient.
For example, with the default text editor, it's hard to highlight text, you can't change the font to a monospaced one, you can easily loose your progress because of a single simple misclick (happens constantly), can't change the encoding or EOL style and can't choose a place where to save the file. Also, it isn't obvious where files are even saved, so you can easily copy them, archive them, upload them or make a backup. These are very basic things, that even the most simple of text editors on GNU can do. Even Notepad can do those.
This is just a single example, but the whole system feels like this. Practically everything feels very awkward. Things like switching between opened applications:
You first minimise the current application, then open another application from it's shortcut for which you must browse trough all running and not running applications. It's hard to see which applications are running. You can't even run several instances of a single application. If you want to edit several text files, you must use the awkward interface specific to the editor, if it has such interface.
Even simple things like connecting a USB keyboard are needlessly complicated.
And I know how to use GNU. I don't want to learn the specifics of another system, which is obviously inferior in most aspects. GNU has a huge library of well written, well designed, well tested, stable and convenient free applications. And most importantly, the whole system is already free as in freedom.
The OpenPandora <http://openpandora.org/> is living proof that the reason for running Android instead of GNU is not because of power. The Pandora community is quite familiar with the fact that Android is bloated, and while a version of GNU/Linux has been running on this device from day one, Android seemed for the longest time to be flat-out impossible to run decently on it until one of the device's best coders came along and used some crazy hacking to get it to work.
My guess is there are only three reasons Android is used:
- It's touchscreen-centric, and that allows so-called "smart" phones running it to not have a keyboard.
- Many users act like mindless consumers with their phones and tablets. Android makes consumption easy.
- Google is a powerful corporation and used its influence to push Android.
Disclaimer: I don't routinely use Android and I'm not very familiar with its history, so what I think about it may be off.
I am a translator!
The main reason OEMs chose Android is because it is released under a non-copyleft license (which means they can change the code without releasing their changes allowing product differentiation).
The secondary reason is because Google managed to attract proprietary software developers to their proprietary app store * (Market) which made Android along with the Market an attractive platform for consumers since they believe that whatever common tasks they want to get done with the phone they will be able to find an application (among the tens of thousands) which does it. Of course the number of applications is a pointless statistic since most of those are useless (e.g. fart apps) or simply shortcuts to websites.
Also, GNU/Linux for phones is indeed technically superior to Android for non-phone related tasks (e.g. it has real multitasking and package management). There are also several phones that come shipped with GNU/Linux such as the Neo Freerunner (which uses only free software drivers) and the GTA04 (which is mostly free software compatible also aside from proprietary firmware required for wireless and bluetooth). These two phones also do not allow the modem to spy on the user (the modem cannot access the microphone, the CPU or the GPS).
* At the time Android was released Qtopia was available under the GPL (and was available for the Openmoko phones and for the Greenphone). However the developer tool (Qt) was licensed either under the GPL or under a proprietary license (for those who paid Trolltec). Only in 2009 was Qt released under the LGPL allowing also proprietary software development.
> Is it because of how light they are? They still use the essential free
> programs and libraries, that are part of your average GNU
> system. Isn't it technically feasible to install a GNU system on a
> device with such hardware capabilities, but with a lighter desktop
> environment more suitable for touch screens and small keyboards?
I use an Android tablet with a Debian chroot on a microSD card to run
Emacs and Mercurial (no free distro supports it yet). Except for bad
external keyboard layout support (e.g. no alt as meta) and the very slow
microSD card it works ok. X-based systems also have better support for
graphics without 3d acceleration (this was a significant problem for
Replicant). (I think my Loongson 2F laptop has a slower single CPU core
than the two ones in my tablet and phone, although I haven't compared
them; just comparing CPU frequency between ARM and MIPS might not be
ok.)
> I've used Android on another person's computers (I would not use such
> system on my computer). The system seems badly designed and
> written. Even simple things, like writing and saving a plain text file
> seems very inconvenient.
This probably isn't a common and simple thing for most people.
> For example, with the default text editor, it's hard to highlight
> text, you can't change the font to a monospaced one, you can easily
> loose your progress because of a single simple misclick (happens
> constantly), can't change the encoding or EOL style and can't choose a
> place where to save the file. Also, it isn't obvious where files are
> even saved, so you can easily copy them, archive them, upload them or
> make a backup. These are very basic things, that even the most simple
> of text editors on GNU can do. Even Notepad can do those.
Didn't know that there is a default text editor, there are free ones
available that are better.
> You first minimise the current application, then open another
> application from it's shortcut for which you must browse trough all
> running and not running applications. It's hard to see which
> applications are running. You can't even run several instances of a
> single application. If you want to edit several text files, you must
> use the awkward interface specific to the editor, if it has such
> interface.
There is a list of recently used applications. I agree that it's a
problem with knowing what applications are running, especially since
some don't save their state well and provide no option to close them.
> As I understand, even simple things like connecting a USB keyboard are
> needlessly complicated.
It just works with my tablet, although I haven't found free software for
changing its layout.
> I know how to use GNU. I don't want to learn the specifics of another
> system, which is obviously inferior in most aspects. GNU has a huge
> library of well written, well designed, well tested, stable and
> convenient free applications. And most importantly, the whole system
> is already free as in freedom.
This is a reason for companies to reimplement inferior systems instead
of using GNU.
It is because Mozilla's current business model with Firefox is threatened. On the desktop, the marketshare is declining along with low usage on phones and tablets. They are looking for ways to adapt to current market trends and for them, a full fledged OS to keep you in the Firefox and related ecosystem to use their services is important. Important if they still want to be relevant and therefore have others willing to donate to them.