[9fans] Android / G1

[9fans] Android / G1

[matt]

Anyone got an Android / G1 phone?

I'm about to and wondered if there was any feedback, esp. re: Plan 9 ideas?

matt

Re: [9fans] Android / G1

[Anselm R Garbe]

2009/2/16 matt <mattmobile@proweb.co.uk>:
> Anyone got an Android / G1 phone?
>
> I'm about to and wondered if there was any feedback, esp. re: Plan 9 ideas?

A colleague of mine got one, but I'd wait for better hardware if I was you.

--Anselm

Re: [9fans] Android / G1

[Wes Kussmaul]

Anselm R Garbe wrote:
> 2009/2/16 matt <mattmobile@proweb.co.uk>:
>> Anyone got an Android / G1 phone?
>
> A colleague of mine got one, but I'd wait for better hardware if I was you.

I'm on the Android phone new product contact lists of a number of
Alibaba and Global Sources vendors (Asian manufacturers). Anyone is
welcome to help me organize the barrage of information I get from them.
A lot of it is "no Android yet, but check out these Symbian/WinCE/etc
phones..." That's starting to change however.

Wes Kussmaul

Re: [9fans] Android / G1

[Juan M. Mendez]

2009/2/16 matt <mattmobile@proweb.co.uk>:
> Anyone got an Android / G1 phone?
>
> I'm about to and wondered if there was any feedback, esp. re: Plan 9 ideas?
>
> matt


Hi, I have one that I bought through ebay, and updated the firmware to
have root access.
I'm quite happy with it.
Since it's the linux kernel what is underneath probably 9vx, drawterm
or inferno could
be easily ported.

--
http://vejeta.com/portal
Fidonet: 2:345/432.2

Re: [9fans] Android / G1

[hiro]

On Mon, Feb 16, 2009 at 6:24 PM, Juan M. Mendez <vejeta@gmail.com> wrote:
> 2009/2/16 matt <mattmobile@proweb.co.uk>:
>> Anyone got an Android / G1 phone?
>>
>> I'm about to and wondered if there was any feedback, esp. re: Plan 9 ideas?
>>
>> matt
>
>
> Hi, I have one that I bought through ebay, and updated the firmware to
> have root access.
> I'm quite happy with it.
> Since it's the linux kernel what is underneath probably 9vx, drawterm
> or inferno could
> be easily ported.
>
> --
> http://vejeta.com/portal
> Fidonet: 2:345/432.2
>
>

You could probably write some small java app to serve a fs to ported
inferno, and then use all of this little devices capabilities.

Re: [9fans] Android / G1

[Skip Tavakkolian]

probably need "Android Dev Phone 1" rather than G1.

the kernel tree includes firmware for several things.  it's not clear
how one would get around these:

http://android.git.kernel.org/?p=kernel/common.git;a=blob;f=firmware/WHENCE;h=66c51b275e9e8be1891b5c6c7d3d87ead9db9645;hb=HEAD

do mobile carriers allow (in a legal sense) unblessed device/OS on
their networks?

Re: [9fans] Android / G1

[ron minnich]

On Mon, Feb 16, 2009 at 11:26 AM, Skip Tavakkolian <9nut@9netics.com> wrote:

> do mobile carriers allow (in a legal sense) unblessed device/OS on
> their networks?

not really. that's why you can get linux source for your moto phone
but you can't build a working kernel, much less install it (that's
what they told me anyway).

That's what the firmware is I assume -- the firewall. That's good,
since on some of the "open source" phones it's not firmware, it's a
binary driver.

ron

Re: [9fans] Android / G1

[hiro]

> do mobile carriers allow (in a legal sense) unblessed device/OS on
> their networks?

Do you mean mobile phone manufacturers?

Re: [9fans] Android / G1

[Skip Tavakkolian]

>> do mobile carriers allow (in a legal sense) unblessed device/OS on
>> their networks?
>
> Do you mean mobile phone manufacturers?

i mean network service providers (e.g. T-mobile).

Re: [9fans] Android / G1

[Juan M. Mendez]

2009/2/16 Skip Tavakkolian <9nut@9netics.com>:
> probably need "Android Dev Phone 1" rather than G1.

My G1 wasn't a Dev Phone 1, but I put the firmware for a Dev Phone 1.
So that can be worked around.

> the kernel tree includes firmware for several things.  it's not clear
> how one would get around these:
>
> http://android.git.kernel.org/?p=kernel/common.git;a=blob;f=firmware/WHENCE;h=66c51b275e9e8be1891b5c6c7d3d87ead9db9645;hb=HEAD
>
> do mobile carriers allow (in a legal sense) unblessed device/OS on
> their networks?

I bought it from USA, and it works fine here with spanish phone
carriers. Just had to unlock the SIM.

--
http://vejeta.com/portal
Fidonet: 2:345/432.2

Re: [9fans] Android / G1

[David Arnold]

On 16/02/2009, at 2:26 PM, Skip Tavakkolian wrote:

> do mobile carriers allow (in a legal sense) unblessed device/OS on
> their networks?

In the Linux-based phones that I'm familiar with, the GSM protocol is
implemented as a separate module.  It uses a serial interface (and an
extended AT command set) to communicate with the application
processor.  This 'baseband' module has its own firmware, and the
source code for that is typically not available except under NDA and
license.  Bluetooth and WiFi modules are similar.

This neatly avoids the issue of unblessed devices: the module
manufacturer does the certification against the standard, and the
serial command set doesn't allow applications to override anything
that could cause bad interactions with the network.




d

Re: [9fans] Android / G1

[Skip Tavakkolian]

yes, but can the carrier prevent it (by legal means)?

Re: [9fans] Android / G1

[Anthony Sorace]

in the US, CDMA operators (notably Verizon) typically do restrict
unblessed devices (where, in many cases, those include supported
devices simply not sold by them). this is improving, but remains
common.

the situation for GSM operators is somewhat better. the GSMA
regulations (the industry association every notable global operator is
a member of) provide at least some protections for users to ensure
device portability.

the GSMA allows north american operators more latitude than most, and
the GSMA-NA is permitted to, essentially, override many portions of
the regulations. i'm not sure if they've done so on this point.
certainly from the point of view of a user in north america, the GSM
operators are perceived as open whereas the CDMA operators are (up
until about a year ago, when this started to soften) perceived as very
closed.