4031897
story
Comments: 219 +- Mobile: No More OpenMoko Phone on Saturday April 04 2009, @05:37PM
Posted
by
timothy
on Saturday April 04 2009, @05:37PM
from the now-what-will-you-run-debian-on? dept.
from the now-what-will-you-run-debian-on? dept.
background: url(//a.fsdn.com/sd/topics/topiccellphone.gif); width:75px; height:74px;
cellphones
background: url(//a.fsdn.com/sd/topics/topiccommunications.gif); width:96px; height:62px;
communications
background: url(//a.fsdn.com/sd/topics/topichardware.gif); width:64px; height:55px;
hardware
TuxMobil writes "Bad news for FreeRunner fans: development of the first Open Source smartphone will be discontinued. (English translation via Google)
OpenMoko executive director Sean Moss-Pulz said at OpenExpo in Bern (Switzerland)
that the number of staffers will be reduced to be able to stay in business. OpenMoko
had high intentions: the offspring from Taiwanese electronic manufacturer First International Computer (FIC)
wanted to produce an Open Source smartphone. Not only with Open Source software pre-installed, but with
free drivers and open specifications of the hardware components. This would give programmers as well
as users complete freedom. Up to now the manufacturer has produced two models, the first has sold 3,000 units and
the second one 10,000. Both models were targeted primarily to developers. From the beginning,
OpenMoko had to fight with different problems. The smartphones came onto the market after a huge delay. Some phones
came with construction defects. Also, changes in the team slowed down the development. Software development
for the current smartphone will be continued but with fewer resources, Moss-Pultz said. He still hopes the
community will support the FreeRunner."
Related Stories
Technology: OpenMoko Schedule Announced 165 comments
Openmoko's Open Source Phone Goes Mass-Market 247 comments
Linux: Debian On the Openmoko Neo FreeRunner Phone 167 comments
Canadian Firms Get Behind OpenMoko/FreeRunner 140 comments
Openmoko Phone Not Dead After All 101 comments
Laugh at your problems; everybody else does.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest © 1997-2009 Geeknet, Inc.
Of course we will... (Score:3, Insightful)
That's the point of buying an opensource phone. To use it as our sandbox.
Re:Of course we will... (Score:4, Informative)
Parent
Re:Of course we will... (Score:5, Interesting)
Its not like they made millions of the things and couldn't sell them.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I was always confused on when and even whether an openmoko phone would emerge that's suitable for use by a normal end-user in the US. Between the GSM chipset only supporting tri-band, news of various hardware defects that would require developer-grade patience to work around, and rumblings over the years suggesting that there would soon be more openness in the mobile smartphone market, I just never saw any opportunity to give them my money.
Re:Of course we will... (Score:5, Interesting)
The problem was that the phone had some real glaring problems that were never resolved. Such as a one day battery life. And the inability to charge the phone after the battery wore out completely.
I was going to be first in line to buy one when the power management problems were sorted out. But years later... they were still there. I'm really saddened that the phone never truly got the support it needed to succeed.
So where does that leave us for free phones?
Parent
Re:Of course we will... (Score:5, Insightful)
The problem was that the phone had some real glaring problems that were never resolved. Such as a one day battery life. And the inability to charge the phone after the battery wore out completely.
I was going to be first in line to buy one when the power management problems were sorted out. But years later... they were still there. I'm really saddened that the phone never truly got the support it needed to succeed.
So where does that leave us for free phones?
Makes me wonder how many good ideas are ruined by poor implementation. I'm betting this is a very large number. The problem is that people throw out the baby with the bathwater and so they might conclude that open-source phones are inherently a bad idea, instead of concluding that this group failed to design/produce them correctly.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
You'd be betting correctly (Score:5, Insightful)
"Ideas" are worthless. Everybody has good ideas. It is actually implementing the idea that is the hard part.
In other words, the money (and the devil) is in the details.
I've not really followed this project, but aren't the design documents public? If so, some other company could pick this up and run with it, no?
Parent
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Thats what I heard, however said other company would need to spend some considerable effort and money in addressing some serious hardware design flaws as well as what is now nearly obsoleted network support before the phone is once again viable as a phone.
Re: (Score:2)
And every method by which anything would be implemented began as ... wait for it ... an idea. If you do not see the simplicity of that, it is because you don't want to. I'm not trying to be rude but "ideas are worthless" is a very strong claim and while it can be asserted, I do not believe it can be supported. A single idea that produced even the slightest worth for even one person would be enough
Re:You'd be betting correctly (Score:5, Insightful)
No, everything begins as an "idea", that part is obvious. But ideas in and of themselves are worthless until you implement them.
There are a lot of great ideas that never get implemented because it turns out the implementation is too hard to make it worthwhile. For example, I think it would be a great idea if you could have a lawn-mower sharing service. A neighborhood could share one lawnmower and not have to all buy their own. Since you dont usually use it more than once or twice a month, it would be a great idea, right? Well, I doubt you could ever successfully implement it.
By the way, in most cases, a good test of your idea is if others are doing similar things as you. If you are trying to create a business or product and nobody else is doing anything even close, odds are pretty good something is wrong with your idea. Not always, but usually...
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I can agree to that on the condition that we are speaking of "worth" in strictly materialistic or pragmatic terms. That is, however, an artificially narrow concept. Look at most forms of art and the ideas found there, or at philosophers who truly enjoy exploring the mysteries of life. Look at the idea of freedom and how very inconvenient and costly it can be, yet so utterly wor
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I said "similar". Not duplicate.
Wouldn't you be rather concerned if you were gonna try starting your hypothetical lawn-mower service and couldn't find a single example of anybody doing anything even remotely similar? I know I would be!
That said, pretty much everything in existence is a refinement of the stuff before it. Most TV shows are refinements of older ones--Family Guy was influenced by Simpsons. Aqua Teen Hunger Force was influenced by Family Guy and Simpsons (and Robot Chicken).
Beck influenced a
Re:You'd be betting correctly (Score:4, Insightful)
Flickr did what everybody else was doing--they created a photo album on the internet. Only they learned what all the other ones were doing wrong and made it better.
Very little is a wholly unique, novel idea. 98% of everything out there is a refinement of what everybody else is doing.
There is a technical term for things that are unique--disruptive technologies. And creating a successful plan to implement said ideas are far harder than usually. A lot of people with really good disruptive tech. fail to create an implementation that lets them succeed. See also: Crossing the Chasm [amazon.com].
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I wonder how hard it is to do a small-qty purchase of a cell-phone module. Just the bits that make phone calls and send/receive audio, over serial or whatever. Possibly also the simcard stuff, if that is necessary to be done by the radio hardware instead of software.
Bring your own computing device(say a gumstix), display, and power.
I'm sure that probably violates some FCC rules, so I haven't really tried to source one.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Makes me wonder how many good ideas are ruined by poor implementation.
You just described the history of computing.
Re: (Score:2)
Same here.
I would have bought it, if not for that. A phone with about a day worth of battery, which can't be charged if it discharges completely is unacceptable. Especially for a very experimental product made to be tinkered with.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
While I was working on Nokia 7710 [wikipedia.org] we had a batch of prototypes which had malfunctioning circuit in the charge control, which caused the phone to discharge the battery completely if left alone for long enough. We destroyed quite a load of batteries before a proto manager figured out what was going on.
(And yeah, Nokia had an "iPhone" years ago. Badly marketed, too expensive and touchscreen&scalable UI postponed for years because of internal s60/s90 politics war. Still pisses me off :))
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
There are certainly issues, but battery life isn't the main one. Actual issues include:
- some phones/networks experience a buzzing noise on p
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
So I don't know much about openmoko, but you're saying that if you let the battery go to 0% that would brick the phone?
Not "bricked", it just won't power on unless you put in a battery that is not completely discharged (you can borrow a Nokia BL-*C from someone if you don't have another battery). This only affects the first batch of units ("A5"), and can be worked around in software by programming the PMU to charge the battery at 100mA when the device is off.
Re:Of course we will... (Score:4, Insightful)
If sales reflect demand it appears that Joe Public doesn't see the value of an open source smart phone.
Since when did Joe Public ever do a good job of looking after his own interests? "Freedom? Who needs that? Ooh, look, something shiny and new!" People like this cannot possibly sustain an open, non-dictatorial government for the same reason they cannot sustain an Open Source phone. I know those two things may seem unrelated but if you understand one, you understand the other, for the principle in question is quite scalable.
Parent
What a fucking surprise (Score:5, Informative)
As a pissed off Freerunner owner I have this to say -
OM has been badly managed for some time now. Rather than concentrate on getting basic functionality going they wasted time and money doing things over and over and over again. They must have reinvented the wheel at least three times by now.
No disrespect to the developers, but OM the company was a failure. In what they did and in how they failed to communicate properly with their community, ultimately ensuring there wasn't much of one.
The only hope I have for getting a useful device out of the freerunner now is the (independant of OM) Android port.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I agree. The OS bundled with the phone (Om.2007) has been obsolete since at least September (when I got mine), yet the official successor (Om.2008) hasn't really come out of testing yet.
I've currently got Android on mine and Qt Extended on the MicroSD card. As far as I'm concerned the official software should've been abandoned long ago, but (ironically for a Free phone) they were too reluctant to give up control.
Om.2008's a nice system to play with, but all of the bits that actually make it a phone (dialer,
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
You know what would be really great?
Well in my head anyway - android as a set of packages for debian, all on OM.
Re: (Score:2)
How free is Android? I somehow was under the impression that it has closed parts. But perhaps I'm just confusing this issue with the locked-down phone issue (which, while arguably obnoxious, can be circumvented by making your own phone).
But yes, I must say that to me too Android seems much more promising merely because it has a stable company like Google behind it and other commercial adopters. Hope there will be an effort to develop a truly free and open hardware for it (although personally I would be quit
Re:Android vs OM - Grown Ups vs Kiddies (Score:5, Insightful)
No, I'm sorry, but now you can just fuck off too.
The "GPL is viral" meme was lame ten years ago, the fact that you still spout it now is basically proof of mental deficiency.
OM was developed by a company full of people that also get up and go to work every day.
It was managed badly. That has nothing to do with the license. Grow up.
Parent
Not total abandonment (Score:5, Informative)
If you RTPT (read the poor translation) they are laying off some employees and putting the ones that are left to work on a different electronic device (it didn't say what) that has been under development. They will continue to sell the freerunner and that they eventually want to return to mobile phone development. They hope that independent developers will continue to work on the phone in the meantime.
Re:Not total abandonment (Score:5, Insightful)
Which might have been more of a possibility if they'd effectively built a community rather than failing to communicate very well.
It would also be easier if they'd got the basics (reliable kernel, GSM firmware, graphics acceleration) going rather than making eye candy, abandoning it, making more, abandoning it again...
Parent
Still working on it = No more? (Score:3, Insightful)
How is "downsizing" the equivallent of "no more"?
Een-gleesh?
Not even 101. Maybe 50.5. Maybe even 25.25. If worse comes to worst 12.625 (See Dick run. Run Dick run!)
Re:Still working on it = No more? (Score:4, Funny)
Een-gleesh?
Do you speak it motherfucker?!?
Parent
Android is the Open Source replacement (Score:5, Insightful)
With the advent of Android on Linux, OpenMoko can safely retire. There will be a flood of Android hardware out soon in addition to the G1 and at least some of it will be hackable or open enough for developers to delve into the stack if they want. For example, you'll be able to improve the hardware drivers, add functionality left out by the original makers because they feared patent infringement, and take advantage of hardware acceleration that didn't make it into the shipping product. Perhaps the only sacrosanct portion kept off limits will be the radio stack itself, which if hacked could invalidate the CE mark, FCC, GCF, PTCRB, etc.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
With the advent of Android on Linux, OpenMoko can safely retire. There will be a flood of Android hardware out soon in addition to the G1 and at least some of it will be hackable or open enough for developers to delve into the stack if they want. For example, you'll be able to improve the hardware drivers, add functionality left out by the original makers because they feared patent infringement, and take advantage of hardware acceleration that didn't make it into the shipping product. Perhaps the only sacrosanct portion kept off limits will be the radio stack itself, which if hacked could invalidate the CE mark, FCC, GCF, PTCRB, etc.
Android is software, not hardware. There is no guarantee that you will be able to write drivers, because not all manufacturers will give you datasheets without an NDA. There's no guarantee that you would get the source code to hardware drivers, since those can be non-GPL (resulting in a tainted kernel, but who cares, right?).
Unlike Android, OpenMoko is software and hardware.
You can also run Android on the OpenMoko hardware if you like (or Debian, or at least two other tailored distributions).
To the others
Open software != Open hardware (Score:2)
There's a huge difference here - while Open source software can be produced by one or two guys in a basement, and be surrounded with joyful celebration of Free ideologies, hardware is material. Blueprints are data but nobody guarantees they will work until they're materialized. And this requires: factories, materials, go-betweens between all of them, legislature to comply to (FCC interference and wattage rules). In short, a whole bunch of people and organizations.
In a philosophical mood, this could be tied
O noez, it was the GNUphone! (Score:5, Funny)
You realise of course that this was the real-life GNUphone [today.com].
...
The Free Software Foundation (NASDAQ: RMS) has announced the Free Software alternative to the evil, DRM-infested, locked-down, defective-by-design iPhone: the GNUPhone.
The key technical innovation of the GNUPhone is that it is completely operated from the command line. "What could be more intuitive than a bash prompt?" said seventeen-year-old Debian developer Hiram Nerdboy. "The ultimate one-dimensional desktop! Just type dial voice +1-555-1212 -ntwk verizon -prot cdma2000 -ssh-version 2 -a -l -q -9 -b -k -K 14 -x and away you go! Simple and obvious!"
The phone will also serve as a versatile personal media player. "I can play any .au file or H.120 video with a single shell command! The iPod could never measure up to this powerful ease of use." Video is rendered into ASCII art with aalib. "If blocky ASCII teletype softcore pinups were good enough for 1970s minicomputer operators, they're good enough for you. Respect your elders."
The KDE project will be bringing its next-generation KDE 4 desktop to the GNUPhone. "you can flip, twirl, dice, blend, fold, spindle and mutilate your terminal windows to your heart's content," said developer Aaron Seigo. "look at that cool effect! any complaint that basic functions don't actually work is ignorant of the intrinsic beauty of the plasma api and is just more fun spread by haters like stevie ray vaughan-nichols and novell corporation."
Actual successful voice calls are expected by 2011 to 2012. Regulatory approval is proving problematic in the corrupt, corporate-captured US environment. "The FCC said that if we dared switch on this, uh, 'piece of shit' in a built-up area in its present form, they'd break all our fingers with a fourteen-pound cluebat," said Nerdboy. "They're obviously shilling for Apple, Nokia and Microsoft."
The second version of the GNUPhone will run EMACS on the HURD kernel and be operated by writing eLisp macros on the fly. "It's the clearest, most elegant and natural operating environment anyone could conceive of," said Nerdboy. "Really, we're not out to destroy Apple; that will just be a completely unintentional side effect."
Funny, but insightful (Score:3, Insightful)
I had to chuckle every time I read a FOSS zealot's dismissal of the iPhone as "bling," defending OpenMoko as a superior alternative.
As an ideal, yes, an open phone OS is superior. But for actually using a phone, for actually running mobile applications, for actually keeping a calendar and a directory of contacts and syncing it and calling people when you need to and actually talking and getting things done, there is no comparison. OM isn't even in the same league as the iPhone OS.
What it comes down to, of c
Fantastic Opportunity, Failure to Execute (Score:5, Insightful)
The Buzz generated by OpenMoko was huge; several people at my work were just waiting for something that could be used as a phone before they purchased one. We waited three months, then six months, and then finally gave up expecting anything. That was a year and a half ago.
I got the Neo 1973 and used it in my autonomous boat project [youtube.com], as it had GPS, GPRS, could run Python and connect via USB to many types of devices. At this point while late there was still some promise.
One issue was the desire to please the techies. In order to be a real success it would always have needed to operate well as a phone. It never really achieved that. I would have preferred to see development limited to providing basic phone functionality first, then once that was stable extending it.
Instead it seemed that the Neo became a techie plaything, which was cool for me wanting a small device for my robotics, but not so good for a company trying to compete in the phone market where millions of units are sold. OpenMoko didn't deliver working software. The first rule of Open Source is to deliver something that works early.
Although there is a community around OpenMoko I suspect it will move to platforms that have a real future on mobile devices now. The Android platform may not be perfect yet, but it holds far more promise as a polished product that techies can extend, yet is still a viable mass market phone.
Personally I feel that Sean was too idealistic, and that OpenMoko needed someone stronger that could make some hard headed business decisions rather than making decisions that would see the total reworking of the platform when the first one wasn't even working.
I am very disappointed that such a great opportunity has failed because those in charge misunderstood that the tech people were his market. Certainly a healthy community is a good thing, but you can't create a polished product by trying to please every man and his dog.
Sean's speech at ESC about making a 3G devic (Score:5, Informative)
Reposting from http://lists.openmoko.org/pipermail/community/2009-April/044915.html [openmoko.org]
Sean's speech at ESC about making a 3G device:
Since I worked on the presentation with Sean for the days he was here in
SF, let me give you my view and sean's view. That way we won't get into
some version of the telephone game.
Sean discussed three things at OpenExpo.
1. Our successes.
2. Our mistakes.
3. Our challenges
I won't go over 1& 2 but I'll cover #3 since rasters perception has
a bit of color added to it. Only a tiny bit and he's entitled
to that color commentary, I'll just add what Sean and I, as authors
of the presentation, had as our message.
Our biggest challenge was to make a choice about how to spend the
balance of 2009.
There were two paths:
A: Fulfill our promises on FreeRunner and launch GTA03
B: Fulfill our promises on FreeRunner and launch project B.
We will talk more about project B in the coming months, but these
salient facts should be able to guide any budding executives out there.
1. GTA03 was in constant flux as a design.
2. GTA03 schedule was consequently always slipping.
3. The resources required for GTA03 are 3X those required for Project B.
4. We don't have 3X.
So, we picked plan B.
Now comes the question, what about GTA03? how do we get there? And when?
and what is it?
Well my basic argument was and is this:
First we attend to the issues that still remain with the GTA02. That's
why the VP of marketing ( of all people) is working on the buzz fix
problem. Second we complete project B. When we've done that, then we
get to eat dessert. Essentially, I made the same argument I heard so
many times on this list: "How do expect us to buy a GTA03 when you've
yet to deliver on all the promise of FreeRunner?" And I took the
arguments I heard from disty seriously, "how do you expect us to buy FR,
when GTA03 is right around the corner?" And I accepted the arguments I
heard from Engineers I respect who questioned the viability of the GTA03
in the market place. All of those arguments said "put a bullet in its
brain pan!"
So, what about GTA03? As it was defined, it is dead. So how do we
get to a new GTA03? Two requirements: continue to improve GTA02; deliver
on project B. What is GTA03 and when do we get there? There are a number
of independent efforts out there that are pitching me ideas for GTA03.
I talked to sean a bit about this and I'd like to try to open up more
of the design process and the marketing process to the community.
Perhaps on a separate list. Some of these discussions have already started.
What can you do to help?
1. Move GTA02 code upstream.
2. Stay Involved.
3. Continue work on applications
4. Buy a FreeRunner.
5. Get involved in GTA03 discussions
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I'm sorry, I know this story needs some influx from people higher up in the know, but to me that's an awful lot of buzzword bingo.
I think I read it as someone's working on the buzzing issue, making a new model would be prohibitively expensive and would hurt sales of the current model, there's an announcement coming?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Not a Good Year for Open Hardware Projects (Score:4, Informative)
Abandon ship date, abandon ship (Score:4, Insightful)
1) The 10,000 phones are mostly of the 900mhz variety, which has a "buzz" issue that makes the phone unusable. You need to go to a "buzz fix" party to do a non-trivial hardware mod. The "A7" version that fixes these issues is in perpetual delay, with no release date in site.
2) The only two paid kernel developers have left this last month or have announced they are leaving, some key hardware guys have left in the last two months. Some key UI people have left over the last 6-8 months.
3) They've abandoned the next model, the GT03, and they have publicly stated no 3G without a guaranteed sales of 50,000 units.
I like the idea of Free software on mostly open hardware - only they can't for whatever reason get the hardware part right. I think the software is not the problem, its the hardware. The Freerunner has been described as a Porsche body with a lawnmower engine, and looking at openPandora, I scratch my head and wonder why its like that.
IMHO its like any project that is going down the tubes - far too few developers on a project changing scope too often.
Hardware's not easy - I damn near went insane from the politics of embedded linux projects myself - but I can't imagine working with a constantly changing hardware scope while everyone is leaving. I'd be pleasantly surprised if openmoko makes a comeback at this point - the first problem is I wonder how they could attract talent in the future, even if they could afford it.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:open source (Score:5, Insightful)
The GP has a valid point. Sure, OpenMoko dying is sad. But to people writing open source software who *also want their software to be used by people*, there are important lessons here. Listen to users. Prioritize so that basic functionality (oh, I dunno, battery life) is working before getting carried away with GUIs, etc. Aim at a user community which is not just developers from day one if you want a product that non-developers can later use. Too many projects act as if being open-source is the most important thing that matters for success, and this just leads to wasted effort within the community.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
There is nothing wrong with initially aiming for developers. In fact, I'd say if you are a startup company doing anything tech, targeting developers is a great way to get started. You want your product to generate buzz with blogging nerds like that Schobel guy (aka tech evangelists). It would be a huge mistake to try to cast your net to large and target "everybody". Gotta start somewhere, and nerds, even a specific type of nerd, is a safe bet.
Remember how many bloggers were hyping the Razr when it came
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
OpenMoko failed because it was a phone that couldn't make or receive phone calls reliably, and when you did connect to someone they were often inaudible because of a hardware flaw that created a loud buzzing noise. Also, its core technologies were years behind the cutting edge (barely-functioning 2G in a world where 3.5G is giving way to 4G). No mystery here. It failed because it was a terrible, terrible phone.
Open Source's inability to deliver any sort of consumer-level device that isn't an expensive, misf
Re:open source (Score:5, Insightful)
Having open source does not alone make a product awesome. However, one thing having open source does is make it so, even if the product fails, the knowledge put into making that product is not lost. And that's pretty awesome.
Parent
Re:open source (Score:4, Insightful)
Wake up dude. It is easier to rewrite, than to read code.
I don't know much of OMoko. But from what I see from the mess they made, never actually getting the thing to work as a phone. I don't expect much of their code to be on a level of maturity that would grant the time investment to get acquainted to it.
My honest guess, as developer, is that the code produced by these guys that did not get merged into other active projects will just die.
Parent
Re:open source (Score:5, Informative)
See,
If it was me running that company, I'd be pimping it to these [themotoguide.com] guys [howardforums.com]. Give them a phone you can mod the shit out of, you'll get sales.
Now, in order to do so, you'd have to realize those guys aren't developers. They know just enough programming to get into trouble. Therefore, "open source" isn't what they want. They just want an easy way to bling their phone or run some program their cell phone company won't let them. That is their pain, and something like OpenMoko could have cured it.
Granted, if you ever wanted to expand outside that niche market, you'd have to cure pain felt by a lot of people. Most people don't mod their phone. However, I'd bet a lot of people are dissatisfied with how restricted their service seems. You'd have to do something to lessen that pain.
This is a means to an end. You don't sell people on the fact it is "open", you sell them on the fact you can use any wallpaper you want. You sell them on the fact they can install games the mobile provider doesn't want them to.
Parent
Re:open source (Score:5, Interesting)
I bought a Qtek 9100 (aka HTC wizard) some years ago (~4~5). It came flashed with wm5.
Guess what? Qtek is killed, the official firmware updates went from a very reduced quantity to null.
So, right now - Zero support.
Fortunately there are groups of people constantly cooking their own ROMs with updated stuff.
www.xda-developers.com
Although, rom cookers have a hard time looking for a way to flash these phones that are usually locked down.
For those looking to have Linux on their phone, (I found http://linwizard.sourceforge.net/ [sourceforge.net] for the HTC wizard and I'm part of the development team for a long time now) the task is even worse, there is absolutely no documentation about the hardware.
My point is that with opensource hardware, if the vendor dies, "supporting" the device by the community is much easier.
Parent
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Only has the older, slower 2G technology, doesn't have 3G.
... and with AT&T poised to roll out 4G already and rumors of already crappy service using the OpenMoko on AT&T networks before that it seemed doomed from the start. Personally I would have bought one anyway if it wasn't for the forum posts I read suggesting that the phone boots Debian great and runs anything in the ARM port but had such abysmal audio quality you could barely actually use it for a phone. Basic functionality was clearly a neglected priority. :(