"Anarchy! We want Anarchy."

January 13, 2009 10:12 PM

Palm is asking how to make the WebOS a hit. There are a lot of great comments here worth reading, and then, predictability, there's this one, which made me chuckle.
posted by jragon (44 comments total)

*predictably
posted by jragon at 10:13 PM on January 13, 2009

The 'Anarchy' option sounds pretty good to me, although I wouldn't expect Palm to distribute the apps for free.
posted by dunkadunc at 10:33 PM on January 13, 2009

It's a little sad that someone saying that they want to write their own programs for a general-purpose device is something to not just snicker about, but to post to the front page of Metafilter as startling and amusing enough to warrant the attention of thousands.

You can do this with your computer. Why shouldn't you be able to do it with your handheld computer that happens to receive phone calls?
posted by Malor at 10:39 PM on January 13, 2009 [10 favorites]

One day receiving any copyright protection will require publishing your source code, i.e. exactly the rule you'll derive if you follow Jefferson's original reasoning on copyrights and patents.
posted by jeffburdges at 10:51 PM on January 13, 2009 [9 favorites]

The 'Anarchy' option sounds pretty good to me, although I wouldn't expect Palm to distribute the apps for free.

Why not? How much could it cost? If I put up a 100 kilobyte PC app up on S3 I could distribute it to a million people for $10.
posted by delmoi at 10:54 PM on January 13, 2009

You can do this with your computer. Why shouldn't you be able to do it with your handheld computer that happens to receive phone calls?

Because phone companies bought off the bush administration. People often say "deregulation" but actually was precicely tuned regulation designed to screw the customer. True deregulation would mean no regulation of radio waves at all. That sounds like nothing would work at all (there would be just static as everyone competes for bandwidth) but in fact the radio spectrum for WiFi is totally unregulated other then simply setting a limit for the device output. It was originally allocated for things like garage door openers and cordless phones. (of course, with no power limit things might not work very well)

Anyway the new FCC chief is a big net neutrality supporter. Forcing device neutrality on carriers would probably give us what we want. Most people don't buy PCs that are locked down by choice, and they probably wouldn't buy cellphones with similar limitations.
posted by delmoi at 11:02 PM on January 13, 2009 [1 favorite]

I had a PalmPilot, and one thing I liked about it was that, yes, I could write code for it. I took an app someone else had written and GPL'd, and customized it to moe closely fit my needs.

In general, I've found Open Source apps to be better and more robust than their closed counterparts: I also owned an Archos MP3 player. The stock OS was just awful, slow and lacking in features. The Open Source replacement was literally two orders of magnitudes faster for some operations, had better battery life, and offered may more features. When it lacked a feature I wanted, I was able to add it to the code. The Open Source OS was better, quite simply, because the coders were users, and users had a personal incentive to make it run faster, longer, and better. I now run that same OS on my iPod.

The PlamPilot, lost after an embarrassing night out, was replaced by a Zaurus running linux, which has been superseded by a netbook running linux. The netbook's semi-closed version of linux has been replaced with a better working and more open distribution.

None of this because I'm some Open Source zealot; all of it because I want to use what works, and will keep working long after the company selling it has planned its obsolescence. To protect my investment, anything I buy needs to use modifiable software, and with a low-cost or free toolchain to make those modifications.
posted by orthogonality at 11:04 PM on January 13, 2009 [7 favorites]

Oops, actually the S3 thing would cost $20 because Amazon charges for gets and puts, as well as total bandwidth (the price is 100,000 gets for a dollar, and 10¢ per gigabyte)
posted by delmoi at 11:04 PM on January 13, 2009

It's a little sad that someone saying that they want to write their own programs for a general-purpose device is something to not just snicker about...

I don't think you're going to find anyone that thinks it's laughable that a person would want to write a program for a device. Of course he does. Of course releasing open source software should be possible and even encouraged on the webOS store. Of course I want to have the option to download it.

But others were able to make these arguments here and elsewhere without opening with anarchy and closing with "Wheeeeeee!!!!!!"
posted by jragon at 11:14 PM on January 13, 2009 [3 favorites]

Yeah, well, as a long term Palm OS user (started with a Palm Pilot Pro, with frequent ventures into the magical land of Handspring), I expect not a damn thing.

Palm has been promising to revolutionize my user experience for too long, and all I have seen is just that: promises. Frankly, the only reason I still use Palm OS (Palm T|X - not all that interested in super-duper smartphone with tiny screens, restrictive data plans, and awkward interfaces) is because the Windows mobile solution (whatever it is currently called) really has made a poor impression on me, I don't like Apple's solution to software, and I haven't gotten my hands on Android yet to make an informed decision (I don't care what the reviewers say, I need one for a couple of days).

I would just about hazard money this project goes completely sideways, or we see a complete steaming pile of hacks on hacks on hacks of Palm OS 5.whatever.

Yes, I am a little cranky about this.
posted by Samizdata at 11:30 PM on January 13, 2009 [2 favorites]

Why shouldn't you be able to do it with your handheld computer that happens to receive phone calls?

You absolutely should be able to run whatever you want on your phone, so long as it doesn't interfere with my cell service. The moment you start spamming the cell tower with connections is the moment I punch you in your jailbroken babymaker.
posted by mark242 at 11:47 PM on January 13, 2009 [2 favorites]

It's a little sad that someone saying that they want to write their own programs for a general-purpose device is something to not just snicker about, but to post to the front page of Metafilter as startling and amusing enough to warrant the attention of thousands.

You can do this with your computer. Why shouldn't you be able to do it with your handheld computer that happens to receive phone calls?

My tech side agrees with your wholeheartedly.

My practical side is screaming "NO NO NO YOU GIT! PEOPLE CAN ALREADY INSTALL WHATEVER THEY WANT ON THEIR PC AND LOOK WHERE THAT GOT US! DO YOU REALLY WANT TO SPEND YOUR TIME INSTALLING ADAWARE IPHONE EDITION AND RUNNING SPYWARE SCANS FOR YOUR PARENTS?"

I'm not sure what side has won out yet. I use my iPhone on a daily basis without any trouble so I find it hard to give a toss during those periods. But then I get to the point where I'd kill to be able to turn my iPhone into a mobile Wi-Fi router (i.e. staying at a hotel that demands an amount for Internet access a normal person would deem extortionate) and I curse Jobs (praise be to him etc) to the heavens.
posted by Talez at 11:51 PM on January 13, 2009 [4 favorites]

Android already has the "Anarchy" option -- everything is open source, and if you buy one of the dev phones you can replace the OS, use it on any carrier, etc. Even the T-Mobile distributed one allows you to run any program you want (but there you can't replace the OS and there are a few restrictions on what you can access on the device, so the Android Dev phone would be the best example).

Palm should absolutely do that as well - the more phones and OSes that follow that model the better, and it will help to force Apple to hopefully open up their phone as well (not that I have one, but realistically its install base is huge and thus opening it up would make a much larger audience for independently distributed software).
posted by wildcrdj at 12:15 AM on January 14, 2009

I'm not sure anyone over the age of 12 should start a sentence with "Super excited to..."
posted by rhymer at 12:24 AM on January 14, 2009

One day receiving any copyright protection will require publishing your source code, i.e. exactly the rule you'll derive if you follow Jefferson's original reasoning on copyrights and patents.

I want to favorite this so hard I think I might actually be humping your face. Sorry about that.

ATTENTION PALM - A VERY SINCERE MESSAGE FROM A LONG TIME FAN WHO STILL OWNS ABOUT 8 OR 9 OF YOUR OLD POCKET HAPPY FUN TOYS LOVE YOU LONG TIME STILL CAN WRITE GRAFFITI SUCKY SUCKY FOR YOU FOR FREE WISH YOU WOULD RETURN TO FABULOUS GLORY ETCETERA:

The original awesomeness of Palm was exactly as quoted above - open software. Thousands of applications. Lots of free legit wares. A community. A community on your old servers that openly fostered all of the above.

It reminded me of a Mac Classic and then some in your pocket. I really still do own nearly a dozen nearly working Palms from a 1.0 IBM WorkPad to a few 3xIIIe and a 3xIIIc or two and a Vaio, a couple of 5s and other parts and docks and such. I keep them because they run a lot of old apps, they read texts, they play games, you can sketch on a touch screen, they act as data loggers and interfaces and robot brains and midi controllers and all kinds of totally awesome shit.

Where the fuck is that now? If you can't bring that - if you can't bring that back - I could give a fuck. You could be more awesome than an iPhone - but apparently you have too many lawyers and marketers.

You absolutely should be able to run whatever you want on your phone, so long as it doesn't interfere with my cell service. The moment you start spamming the cell tower with connections is the moment I punch you in your jailbroken babymaker.

While I appreciate the color of your language and cut of your jib - this is a server-side problem. Home-office routers produced in cheap plastic by the millions that cost less than $30 USD can balance a load between unhindered computers of nearly any variety that speak TCP/IP. That's what TCP/IP is fucking built from the ground up for.

The real problem here - as always - is hyper-maximum ROI versus public good and usability. Which is the same damn reason why we pay such a huge mark-up for a 160 character SMS message while paying the same rate for one minute of voice - an exponent of an exponent more data.

It doesn't matter which mobile network you choose. They're all trying to screw you.

Open up the networks and the ROI will be hyper-karmic.
posted by loquacious at 12:45 AM on January 14, 2009 [9 favorites]

The moment you start spamming the cell tower with connections is the moment I punch you in your jailbroken babymaker.

I'm certainly no expert on this, but surely the communications interface of these devices should be handled by the OS's API? Why would you need to give any app direct access to the antenna in such a way as to mess with the network? Just give apps access to the TCP/IP stack, let the OS do the work. I can't install software on my computer that would mess with my neighbour's internet connection (and, in my part of the woods, everyone's on 3G internet for their home connections, believe it or not), so why should software on a phone?
posted by Jimbob at 1:16 AM on January 14, 2009

Generally, the communications are performed by a separate card that controls sending and receiving the radio signal. I presume that the output power level is fixed, as it must be under FCC regulations.
posted by orthogonality at 1:22 AM on January 14, 2009

My practical side is screaming "NO NO NO YOU GIT! PEOPLE CAN ALREADY INSTALL WHATEVER THEY WANT ON THEIR PC AND LOOK WHERE THAT GOT US! DO YOU REALLY WANT TO SPEND YOUR TIME INSTALLING ADAWARE IPHONE EDITION AND RUNNING SPYWARE SCANS FOR YOUR PARENTS?"

You might try showing your practical side one of the Zarus Linux offerings. I think Ångström is the most current. It's possible to have openness and decent security.

One of the advantages of open source is that you can add your own technical expertise to the stone soup. Expertise comes in many forms; you might know how to test and fix 64 bit incompatible code, or build failures on ARM. Even better are the skills that improve dozens of soups. OpenChange promises to bring full mapi (Microsoft Exchange) support to any GPLv3 program. This sounds great -- I have no idea why but my PDA, a Windows Mobile system, currently won't connect to our Exchange server.

What this means is that a saner Palm doesn't have to start from scratch. I'm sure they will, because shareholders can't earn dividends on software Palm didn't have a massive hand in.
posted by pwnguin at 1:49 AM on January 14, 2009

The coffee hasn't kicked in yet, I seriously read the first part of this post as "Palin is asking how..." and I thought, "of course she's out there trying to involve herself in something too confusing for her."
posted by hellogoodbye at 4:31 AM on January 14, 2009 [1 favorite]

this may just prove the very last chance palm has at survival. approaching developers like this makes therefore perfect sense to me. you need to get them excited and do right what little mistakes apple has made with the iphone. (check out daring fireball if you want to learn about gripes of programmers with the app store, nda, api's and all that goodness. even apple sometimes sucks at communicating.)

I never liked palm devices much but I wish them well with this endeavor and hope they will produce a decent marketplace for apps. developers need another marketplace beyond the app store and apple needs to stay on its toes. remember that we got the current macs because scully fucked up and they needed to do something big to survive. the situation could not be any more different with the iphone, which is bound to breed complacency.
posted by krautland at 4:33 AM on January 14, 2009

None of this because I'm some Open Source zealot; all of it because I want to use what works, and will keep working long after the company selling it has planned its obsolescence.

This is also why Open Source "zealots" want to use Open Source. Your last reason is basically that you want to own the things you buy. Welcome to everybody else's same reason.
posted by DU at 4:48 AM on January 14, 2009

I want Palm to succeed. I was also a Palm/Pilot early adopter (and original Treo owner) and loved it even though it was never practical for me, in that the apps were not powerful enough... or something... to make me use it for much more than my appointment book... which I never did keep up to date anyway. But my Grafitti skillz were mad, baby.

I have long argued that the iPhone should be open to installing non-Apple approved software from some non-Apple mechanism, but their App Store certification process should still exist, since it has real value.

By which I mean: If you, the developer, want your app in their store, you go through their certification/security/whatever screening and therefore get in front of millions more users than if you home-brewed and self-marketed it. Apple is paying for that, and lending their brand name and label, and so it's fine with me if they charge a bit for it, or get picky about what gets in and what doesn't.

All of those users who want to be safe-safe-safe will buy from there and only there, the same way some (many? most?) iPod owners use the Apple store to buy legit music and movies, while other more technical do-it-yourself types also add their own downloaded mp3s and movies from torrents or whatnot. There are no instructions on downloading/installing songs from other sources onto your iPod, but it's three-click easy, anyway. That's a fine compromise for me.

Of course, if one of those illicit downloaded movies doesn't work, or that MP3 you downloaded has a loud squeal in the middle, nobody complains to Apple or asks for their iPod money back. Software is a bit riskier (a song can't brick your iPod), but the principle is the same I think.

As long as there's some big-red-button to "revert to Apple-approved software only", and Apple tells you do that before coming in for service.... heck, let people break their phones.
posted by rokusan at 4:54 AM on January 14, 2009 [3 favorites]

Man I loved my Original PalmPilot... and the fancy Palm IIIe that replaced it. That one's still in a box somewhere, gathering dust as I type this on my new iPhone tho, so... I honestly hope they succeed. Apple needs to not get complacent, yo.
posted by lonefrontranger at 5:26 AM on January 14, 2009

DU says: This is also why Open Source "zealots" want to use Open Source. Your last reason is basically that you want to own the things you buy. Welcome to everybody else's same reason.

This is very, very correct, btw. The earliest people in the process pretty much had to be zealots, because only a zealot could see something so ridiculously far from the mainstream and work steadily toward it. It takes zealotry to fight against such an overwhelming herd majority.

But, ultimately, they just wanted the same thing orthogonality wants: the ability to do whatever the hell they want with their own machines. They're zealous because they had to be, both to fight the system and to suffer with the early, fairly dreadful software, but the fundamental goal was always the same.

You don't see too many Free Software zealots anymore, just a nice comfortable congregation of people who think the same way, and who aren't all that threatened by mainstream thinking anymore. They've moved the mainstream far enough that the rabid conviction against all argument isn't really needed now.

pwnguin said: What this means is that a saner Palm doesn't have to start from scratch. I'm sure they will, because shareholders can't earn dividends on software Palm didn't have a massive hand in.

Trying to write the entire environment from scratch, when you're a small player, is suicidally foolish. Apple leveraged free software to make OS X; there's no way they could have written all that software PLUS all the code on top in any kind of reasonable time frame, with a team they could afford to pay. It let them leverage their small dev team against Microsoft's enormous one, and actually compete extremely well.

But the iPhone is mostly closed, and quite developer-hostile. The more open Palm is, the more they can leverage their small dev team against Apple's much larger one. A closed ecosystem probably would be more profitable, both for Palm and for individual programmers. If everyone wants into the garden, and you can put walls around it and charge admission, you can make more money, at least over the short term. But Palm probably doesn't have the resources left to create a walled garden that's competitive with Apple's.

It strikes me that abandoning the walls and inviting everyone in would be a good idea: a small dividend on a big pie is much better than a huge dividend on nearly nothing.
posted by Malor at 5:31 AM on January 14, 2009 [2 favorites]

I wonder if Palm is finally leveraging their BeOS source-code/IP with this one?
posted by jkaczor at 6:24 AM on January 14, 2009

But the iPhone is mostly closed, and quite developer-hostile

Keeping in mind my "open would be better" comment above, I have to say that the development kit for iPhone is the same as the kit for OSX. It's a very mature, robust and easy to use bunch of tools and SDKs because it is the old reliable OSX suite. The iPhone is an OSX computer, remember.

The only thing closed or hostile is the publish-to-iTunes-store process, which is annoyingly black-boxy.
posted by rokusan at 6:31 AM on January 14, 2009 [1 favorite]

I wonder if Palm is finally leveraging their BeOS source-code/IP with this one?

All the BeOS stuff ended up at Access Co during the PalmSource firesale. Palm did buy back perpetual rights to the Garnet source code, so who knows which bits ended up where. Add into the mix the Be Inc people who are still at Palm, and I'd say any remnants of BeOS are probably leveraged as far as they can go at this point.
posted by mikepop at 7:48 AM on January 14, 2009

The only thing closed or hostile is the publish-to-iTunes-store process, which is annoyingly black-boxy.

Here's an ignorant question: can anyone download the iPhone SDK and use it to develop apps that could be installed on a jailbroken phone?
posted by exogenous at 8:40 AM on January 14, 2009

It's possible to have openness total obscurity and decent security.
posted by bonaldi at 9:05 AM on January 14, 2009

I think the comments here on MetaFilter are better than the ones in the original thread.
posted by msittig at 9:13 AM on January 14, 2009

I'm not sure anyone over the age of 12 should start a sentence with "Super excited to..."

He's just overcompensating for secretly not being excited about this at all.
posted by cytherea at 9:15 AM on January 14, 2009 [1 favorite]

The iphone is the furthest thing in the world from "developer-hostile" if you're trying to make a living selling software.
posted by Wood at 9:20 AM on January 14, 2009

Post Removed. A summary for those who missed it?
posted by fantabulous timewaster at 10:02 AM on January 14, 2009

I wonder if Palm is finally leveraging their BeOS source-code/IP with this one?

I could be losing track of where the BeOS went in the shuffle, but I think Palm lost it after they forked into PalmOne and PalmSource and the latter morphed into Access Co and started focusing on Linux as a mobile platform. I suppose the BeOS assets are still out there somewhere, but it's not clear to me how they're being used by Access or if Palm has any relationship with them at all.

But the iPhone is mostly closed, and quite developer-hostile.

It's developer hostile in the sense that there are locked doors, but as rokusan points out, the development kit is pretty darn friendly. Where they want you to develop, Apple makes it pretty easy, and I don't think openness alone is going to make another mobile platform competitive for the near future. Now, openness + a kickass dev platform -- that's something else, and it's one of the things I think is exciting about the Pre...
posted by weston at 10:04 AM on January 14, 2009

"The popularity of my post has caught me and Palm by surprise, and my boss has asked me to hide the post while management decides what they want me to do about it. I want to make it clear, as always, that I wasn’t speaking for Palm about what we are or are not doing, just collecting input. I really appreciate everyone who responded."

Post Not Found.
posted by mrgrimm at 10:40 AM on January 14, 2009

The popularity of my post has caught me and Palm by surprise, and my boss has asked me to hide the post while management decides what they want me to do about it. I want to make it clear, as always, that I wasn’t speaking for Palm about what we are or are not doing, just collecting input. I really appreciate everyone who responded.

Bwahahaha. So much for openness, transparency, community, etc. "OMG PEOPLE CARE ABOUT OUR PRODUCT!? WE'RE GETTING FREE MARKETING!? WHAT DO WE DO!?"

Talk about clueless!
posted by delmoi at 11:53 AM on January 14, 2009 [1 favorite]

oh of course, google remembers everything
posted by fantabulous timewaster at 1:05 PM on January 14, 2009

Jonathan
Posted 13Jan09 at 16:10 | Permalink

I love your openess with this matter. I wish Apple allowed posts like these.

Be nice if Palm did, too, I guess.
posted by fantabulous timewaster at 1:08 PM on January 14, 2009 [1 favorite]

Both of the links posts have been "unpublished":

Post Removed
The popularity of my post has caught me and Palm by surprise, and my boss has asked me to hide the post while management decides what they want me to do about it. I want to make it clear, as always, that I wasn’t speaking for Palm about what we are or are not doing, just collecting input. I really appreciate everyone who responded.

posted by camcgee at 1:13 PM on January 14, 2009

On preview, seems this has already been noticed.
posted by camcgee at 1:13 PM on January 14, 2009

But the iPhone is mostly closed, and quite developer-hostile.

The iPhone's toolchain and development environment is so far ahead of Windows Mobile's it's embarrassing. Not because the tools are better (I like XCode better than Visual Studio, but there are definitely pros/cons), but because of the clarity of the API structure and presentation of that structure to third-party developers. The actual AppStore publishing process is a bit arcane, but the end results are extremely favorable to third-party developers.

Your comment appears to be based on hearsay or ignorance. If you've spent substantial amounts of time developing for the iPhone then I apologize in advance, but I'd be highly surprised if this were the case.
posted by Ryvar at 2:23 PM on January 14, 2009

original post
Palm WebOS and Third Party Applications
Super excited to be able to talk at least a little bit about our new Palm WebOS platform and the Palm Pre smartphone.

The main thing I’m responsible for is third party application distribution, and although we’re fairly far along in this area, its not too late for your input to count. So let me know what you’d like to see and/or not see. Here are a few questions to get things rolling, in no particular order:

• how would you like to see application installation work? Application updating?
• should palm provide a complete payment processing story or stay out of everyone’s way?
• should payment be handled in-application or prior to download or both?
• how should trials and tryouts work?
• do you want to host your application “binaries” on your servers or on ours? Why?
• should we treat open source applications differently? If so, how?
• how should palm handle “featured” applications?
• how should users be able to find/browse for your application?

These are intentionally leading questions, and I can’t promise that we’ll address any or all of these in our distribution system - all I can say is that these are things I think about and want to hear from developers about.

** dude's address removed to reduce embarassment **
posted by imperium at 4:23 PM on January 14, 2009

Here's an ignorant question: can anyone download the iPhone SDK and use it to develop apps that could be installed on a jailbroken phone?

Although I'm not 100% certain, I'm going to go ahead and say yes, but doing so probably violates the license agreement or whatever you sign before downloading the thing.

I'm pretty sure the jailbreaker kids have their own little development stack, etc. that you can use in the clear.
posted by sparkletone at 6:19 PM on January 14, 2009

Palm is asking how to make the WebOS a hit.

Call it OS XI Liger.
posted by MikeMc at 7:06 PM on January 14, 2009