Talk:List of open-source mobile phones
|WikiProject Lists||(Rated List-class)|
Answer: 1. Firefox OS definitely should be added, as well as be returned vandalized Nokia's N900 and others. Possibly HP webOS could be included also, since it seems its code was finally fully opened (this needs recheck). And anything else that holds the criterias can be added. Android doesn't hold the criteria of opennes, because it has closed source kernel with wiretapping components, alas.
This list only includes phones that run 100% free software on their main CPUs.
Why is this the criteria for "open source"? Open source is not "free software" and should use the criteria for open source. (http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-software-for-freedom.html) TheKingRat (talk) 17:53, 27 August 2013 (UTC)
I see the mention of Android on Freerunner for the GTA02 was removed. Android on Freerunner is free software--Apache 2.0 and GPL license, no binary blobs, no proprietary apps. What is the rationale for removing it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Scarhill (talk • contribs) 17:14, 2 February 2016 (UTC)
The page title is too vague: what does "open-source mobile phone" actually mean? That the phone runs Free Software, that it runs only Free Software, or that the phone has an "open source hardware" design (according to some reliable definition)? Or is it that both the software and the hardware uphold their own respective openness/transparency principles? PaulBoddie (talk) 12:31, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
"Proprietary baseband firmware"
Currently the article contains the sentence:
- All mobile phones have proprietary baseband (GSM module) firmware.
The sentence has had a citation since 26 September 2013, but I'm not totally happy with it. First off, it links to osmocomBB wiki — I personally have no issues with wikis being used as references, but I know that some people might. Secondly, according to that very page, it was "Last modified 4 years ago". Four years ago companies like GeeksPhone or Jolla didn't exist, and neither did their respective operating systems (Firefox OS and Sailfish OS) or other competiting free and open source software mobile operating systems. As such, I think that this claim could either use a re-evaluation or a more recent source that would reflect today's situation — even if the situation remains unchanged. --Jack Phoenix (Contact) 13:43, 12 October 2013 (UTC)