Talk:Neo FreeRunner: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 20:06, 27 November 2010

Train Wreck?

I fail to see the point of posting a single, low-quality, obviously biased user-review. There are far more accurate reviews out there. Removed. 213.250.61.38 (talk) 20:28, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I completely agree with the above comment. More videos that show the true nature of OpenMoko and the Neo Free Runner hardware are required. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.167.148.33 (talk) 14:55, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have one, it is a train wreck.. LOL! but yes, the article should be cleaned up!

Noserider (talk) 15:23, 16 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It *is* a train wreck, and there lots of posts on the mailinglists saying more or less "you made me think I was buying a working smartphone, but all I got was this developers oriented alpha release with buggy hardware". Perhaps we should make criticism section? gromgull (talk) 12:45, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Mistake?

From the article: "It is the successor to the first development phase smartphone Neo 1973, ..". I guess the year is not correct. I don't know the real one.Orimosenzon (talk) 06:56, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm.. googeling it revealed it was actually my mistake..funny name for a modern phone, though (o: Orimosenzon (talk) 07:04, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The name is explained here:

http://lists.openmoko.org/pipermail/community/2007-January/001586.html

At this point, we should tell you why we chose the name "Neo1973." "Neo" means new. Dr. Marty Cooper (the inventor of the mobile phone) made the first call ever in 1973.

We believe that an open source mobile phone can revolutionize, once again, the world of communication. This will be the New 1973.

Join us. "Free Your Phone." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.125.78.213 (talk) 02:17, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

So, what's still restricted?

Lotsa things in this phone are accessible, what parts still aren't? This is probably the single most interesting fact this article can provide. 85.77.208.230 (talk) 06:16, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This is by no means exhaustive, but I know the GSM firmware is non-free. ThorinMuglindir (talk) 20:06, 27 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

See for example this page on the openmoko wiki: http://wiki.openmoko.org/wiki/Neo_FreeRunner_Hardware#GSM.2FGPRS_2. Also, I can't seem to find it anymore, but I remember reading some discussions about this topic a while ago. The reason that they can't have a free GSM frimware has to do with US regulations. Some claim the FCC (I think) would ever refuse to approve a free gsm firmware, others say that it's just circumstancial: all the existing approved ones are proprietary, so getting a free one to be developed and approved would be a long process. ThorinMuglindir (talk) 20:06, 27 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 34: / Line 34: @@
 Lotsa things in this phone are accessible, what parts still aren't? This is probably the single most interesting fact this article can provide. [[Special:Contributions/85.77.208.230|85.77.208.230]] ([[User talk:85.77.208.230|talk]]) 06:16, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
+: This is by no means exhaustive, but I know the GSM firmware is non-free. [[User:ThorinMuglindir|ThorinMuglindir]] ([[User talk:ThorinMuglindir|talk]]) 20:06, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
+See for example this page on the openmoko wiki: http://wiki.openmoko.org/wiki/Neo_FreeRunner_Hardware#GSM.2FGPRS_2. Also, I can't seem to find it anymore, but I remember reading some discussions about this topic a while ago. The reason that they can't have a free GSM frimware has to do with US regulations. Some claim the FCC (I think) would ever refuse to approve a free gsm firmware, others say that it's just circumstancial: all the existing approved ones are proprietary, so getting a free one to be developed and approved would be a long process. [[User:ThorinMuglindir|ThorinMuglindir]] ([[User talk:ThorinMuglindir|talk]]) 20:06, 27 November 2010 (UTC)