> Michele Manzato wrote: > > Don't get me wrong, I can guess (some of) the reasons behind the plain > words. But then I wonder whether there is really any transparency in the > development of Neo/OpenMoko?
One of the things I've seen while lurking on the list is the propensity for people to want Neo to be *exactly* what they want for their particular niche market/use. Whether or not it has a camera. Whether the accelerometers in GTA02 are accurate enough for inertial nav. Etc... When you design hardware by (large) committee, you don't get good results. Case in point is the Space Shuttle. Its design is a very non-optimal compromise between NASA's requirements for a manned medium-lift reusable shuttle and the US Department of Defense's requirements. NASA would probably have used a lifting body design had the DOD not required the ability to divert a planned Edwards landing to White Sands or one of the other secondary landing spots *after* reentry. And that's only one of the many, many compromises that made the shuttle more expensive and less capable than it could have been even with 1970's technology. Openness and transparency does not equate to everyone having a say in what the final feature set of the hardware is. It does not mean everyone on this list gets a vote. Nor does it mean that we get minutes of every meeting about new designs or even frequent status reports. What it does mean, to me, is that when they decide the feature set for the -03, -04, etc. handsets, that we know once they have crunched the features and cost and form factor to a point where they think they have something to plan for. It means this project where we have access to the entire phone stack, and are able to modify the software to tailor the phone to our niche markets. It means not having to get permission from the manufacturer to build an app for the phone (Hello Apple!). It means having a direct line of communication to the people actually building the thing for technical answers. I've been writing games on cell phones for four years. I'm now creating a lower level of software to be integrated at the OEM layer. I've seen just how hard (or impossible) it is to get this kind of support from the rest of the industry. This project is a unique collaboration between a manufacturer and open source. Let them do what they need to do to make the manufacturing decisions for their company. And thank them for the access they are giving within an industry that is extremely closed. By all means give them feedback, tell them your desires, etc. But please don't complain at them when they let you know that the GTA02 isn't the end of the line. That they're working on follow-up models. That they didn't put your must-have feature in the next rev. - John _______________________________________________ OpenMoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community