×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

285 comments

First Post (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5338748)

Could It Be?!?!?!

8==(,,,)==D ~* ~o ~~O (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5338792)

Yes, you jerked off.

just to clarify ... (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5338772)

that's QT, not GTK

de Icaza is a punk!

FP @!@!@# (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5338774)

FP!! TODDLER VOMIT FOREVER!!

Re:FP @!@!@# (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5338815)

has it been 20 seconds yet

Why not Linux? (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5338780)

A bit confused here, wasn't IBM behind Linux? So why not embrace it in a feild it could very well dominate in the future?

Re:Why not Linux? (5, Informative)

WindBourne (631190) | more than 11 years ago | (#5338856)

Qtopia is qt on embedded Linux. Same environment as Sharp's Zaraus. Good Stuff.

Re:Why not Linux? (1, Informative)

Forge (2456) | more than 11 years ago | (#5338900)

"Don't bite the flamebait."
"Why not?"
"It might make you look dumb."
"It's OK. This one just needs a little clarity".

QTopia is a development environment for portable and embeded devices. It runs on embeded versions of Linux.

Re:Why not Linux? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5338960)

> "Don't bite the flamebait."
> "Why not?"

Because it will make you look dumb when someone already answered 4 minutes earlier than you, not to mention that you'll get modded -1 - Redundant.

Microkernal ROM limits (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5338970)

Actually the 64KB ROM limit in both OSs requisite this decision. I think Q has a limit of 128KB.

Linux footprint too general-purpose. (1)

AnonymousCowheard (239159) | more than 11 years ago | (#5339050)

Until Linux gets chopped-up and more logicall sorted, the Linux kernel will keep growing. Think of all the drivers people are downloading and will never use.

Last time I checked, Linux may not be desirable in handhelds because the kernel is growing, growing, growing and the new features don't realy put a dent in the desire for such computing that needs to be small and quick on the sleep and resume modes. Much of Linux' embedded features are added by special-interest companies and may or may not be free. This supposed fact proves IBM is looking for a beginning product that has all these features already built. We know Microsoft does the same: looking for startups with an interesting merit, buy them out, embrace, and extend. Or IBM is trying to keep the world competing by investing with other companies. It makes sense; in other related news, Linux wouldn't be any good without a competitor to compare it with. Now we can compare Linux with PalmOS, whatever else IBM may choose, and perhaps that is why so many operation-specific operating systems have spuriously appeared these last 5 years...trying to fill the gap Linux can't always fill, yet still every advancment is complimentary to eachother unless the destructivness of the patent system invades...

Re:Linux footprint too general-purpose. (4, Informative)

Sunnan (466558) | more than 11 years ago | (#5339246)

Most of that stuff can be removed at compile time.

Quite a shift (4, Insightful)

creative_name (459764) | more than 11 years ago | (#5338782)

I'd say IBM has made quite a shift since its inception. Moving from massive, room-filling mainframes to miniature gigabyte pocket drives and Qt-toting PDAs. It's nice to see that ol' Big Blue can still jump through the ever-moving hoops of technology.

Re:Quite a shift (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5338928)

Hooray for IBM!

Stifling innovation in the tech world for almost a century!

It was Microsoft who wrestled the computer world from the headlock IBM had it in.

You should be on your knees sucking their wangs and kissing their ass. Well two out of three aint bad.

Re:Quite a shift (5, Interesting)

swillden (191260) | more than 11 years ago | (#5339280)

It was Microsoft who wrestled the computer world from the headlock IBM had it in.

This is almost certainly a troll, but for those who might share the same misapprehension, it's worth pointing out that the above statement is completely false.

If there is a single cause of IBM's loss of control (and, actually, the company still is a monopoly in some spaces, though a relatively well-behaved one), it's the US Department of Justice. The consent decree IBM signed forced the company to stop bundling, which pretty much gutted the company's market strategy. If you want to add a second reason, it's the emergence of the personal computer, but the fact that IBM didn't retain control of that market is also largely attributable to the consent decree. At the time the IBM PC came out, IBM was deeply mired in red ink and floundering badly, which was a lot of the reason why IBM never put any real focus on the PC market and ended up giving it to Microsoft instead.

The reason that the DOJ hasn't had a similar effect on Microsoft's anti-competitive behavior, of course, is that Microsoft chose to ignore its consent decree and force the DOJ to make it stick in court, which has been so difficult, expensive and time-consuming that the US government has pretty much lost the will to press the charges home.

Re:Quite a shift (1)

4of12 (97621) | more than 11 years ago | (#5339035)


quite a shift since its inception. Moving from massive, room-filling mainframes to miniature gigabyte pocket drives and Qt-toting PDAs.

Yes and no.

I would venture to guess that today's PDA's are almost comparable in performance with the mainframes from 3 decades ago.

Not to understate the magnitude of their business refocus - the range of uses changes just as rapidly as the price, weight, power consumption change, even if there is little performance difference between a 360 and a PDA.

Re:Quite a shift (2)

jaoswald (63789) | more than 11 years ago | (#5339372)

Current PDAs may be comparable to old mainframes in CPU performance, but that is never really what mainframes were meant for. Try hooking up 100+ terminals to a PDA and see what happens.

I/O is the relevant performance metric for old IBM mainframes.

Re:Quite a shift (2, Interesting)

binaryDigit (557647) | more than 11 years ago | (#5339130)

I'd say IBM has made quite a shift since its inception

Well that's assuming you don't count their long lived involvment in semiconductor development. You could say that they've been at both ends of the size spectrum for quite a while now. Notice that it is their semiconductor involvement that is pushing this decision (pushing their PPC405LP). They've also been making drives for a great long while now as well, the pocket drive is a natural evolution. So in many ways, things haven't changed at all :)

Strange thing about IBM (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5338787)

Did you know the company was founded as a homosexual advocacy group?

Re:Strange thing about IBM (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5339025)

yes, the acronym's original meaning was Intellectuals Blowing Men.

Sorry for this Redundant post (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5338789)

Is it open source or not?

Re:Sorry for this Redundant post (1)

luzrek (570886) | more than 11 years ago | (#5338987)

The licensing agreement for Qt is quasi-open source. The summary is that if you are going to charge for the derivative products you have to pay Trolltech, but if you arn't going to charge for the derivative products then you don't have to pay Trolltech.

Re:Sorry for this Redundant post (1)

Locutus (9039) | more than 11 years ago | (#5339233)

one correction, you'll have to pay for the dev tool. As long as IBM pays Trolltech for putting the libs on the device, the developers either build free/oss applications or they build commercial ones. You can still give away the source but if you charge the customer, you've got to pay Trolltech for the tool you used to build it.

Seems like a good mix to me. Heck, the Qtopia SDK is what, US$100. Big woop. IMHO.

LoB

Yes and No (4, Informative)

burgburgburg (574866) | more than 11 years ago | (#5339071)

If you go here [trolltech.com], you'll see that they have three licenses: a Commercial Development licence, a Commercial OEM license and a GPL Development license. So it depends on what you're planning on doing with what you build. You can't build a commercial product with the GPL license.

Then that's not GPL... (0)

sterno (16320) | more than 11 years ago | (#5339112)

To say that the product is GPL and to say that it cannot be used for commercial purposes are mutually exclusive statements. If it's GPL'd, they can't add additional restrictions.

Re:Then that's not GPL... (1, Interesting)

vano2001 (617789) | more than 11 years ago | (#5339237)

I agree... I cannot see how one cannot use GPL qt library for linux to create commercial Linux apps. Apparently there is no GPL version of the Qt/Windows though.

Also it is odd that TrollTech's website says that one still needs a commercial license to use qt apps for internal use in a commercial company (that is even if you don't sell the product, but just use it).

Can anyone with more information regarding how TrollTech licenses Qt enlighten us?

Go Trolltech! (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5338798)

The trolls have given back a lot to the Linux community. KDE would be nowhere without Qt. Dual licensing seems to be one of the few open source business models that actually work (unfortunately, mostly for libraries). Plus, Qtopia is a great platform to work with, so good lock to Trolltech.

Re:Go Trolltech! (2, Insightful)

josh crawley (537561) | more than 11 years ago | (#5338849)

And If I remember correctly, Cinelerra is also licensed this way too. Good way to go with open licensing schemes. Pay X amount to get out of GPL virus code. Users are happy, along with software corps.

Re:Go Trolltech! (3, Insightful)

IamTheRealMike (537420) | more than 11 years ago | (#5339313)

The trolls have given back a lot to the Linux community. KDE would be nowhere without Qt.

Don't forget the huge publicity boost KDE has given Qt. How many people here on Slashdot would have heard of Qt if it weren't for KDE? It works both ways.

no linux? (-1)

neal n bob (531011) | more than 11 years ago | (#5338799)

I guess they want a product that will actually make money and not suck. I'm sure some loser will eventually port linux to the device in his parents basement next year.

Re:no linux? (1)

vrone (135073) | more than 11 years ago | (#5338848)

Qtopia is just a GUI/Toolkit for embedded devices. It runs on Linux without a problem. For example, Lineo (now owned by Motorola/MetroWerks) used Qtopia for the Sharp Zaurus which is quite hapily running Linux.

This can hardly be a surprise (2, Insightful)

sydlexic (563791) | more than 11 years ago | (#5338804)

IBM is all about Linux and Java these days. Choosing otherwise would have been a fatal mistake both in terms of marketing and technology. The Zaurus is good technology and a powerful proof point. With IBM's resources, they should be able to take the technology all the way.

Re:This can hardly be a surprise (5, Funny)

dhovis (303725) | more than 11 years ago | (#5339195)

With IBM's resources, they should be able to take the technology all the way.

Yep,

Just like OS/2....

Re:This can hardly be a surprise (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5339327)

Or that counting machine they gave Hitler to keep track of the Jew count. Those bastards at IBM sure do engage in some evil practices. First they're killing Jews. Now they're having sex with Richard Stallman and not charging anything for it! What a bunch of jackoffs.

linux just won (2, Interesting)

mindserfer (209937) | more than 11 years ago | (#5338833)

There is lots of room at the bottom said - RF
And we know what happened that last time ibm released a pc reference platform.

I would say that linux just won the future.
and the future is wareable -peace yall.

- the final invention says that
" we'll make great pets."

Re:linux just won (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5338879)

Linux didnt win shit.

Did you fuck up during the reading, or the comprehension?

Re:linux just won (1)

binaryDigit (557647) | more than 11 years ago | (#5339145)

And we know what happened that last time ibm released a pc reference platform.

Do you mean PREP/CHRP. Oh, or were you referring to PS/2 ;)

Syncs with all OSes, opensource OS (2, Interesting)

jrockway (229604) | more than 11 years ago | (#5338854)

Looking at the Qtopia website, Trolltech seems to be dedicated to making desktop software for all major OSes, even Linux :) This is certainly better than WinCE which probably does not sync nicely with MacOS or Linux. Even PalmOS officially leaves out Linux/UNIX (but pilot-link works great!).

Also, Qtopia is open source... I think I want a Qtopia device now :-D (Although none really have the capabilities of my Clie NX70 :)

Broadening the user base (5, Informative)

bluegreenone (526698) | more than 11 years ago | (#5338871)

I am glad to see this since it should broaden the Qtopia user base significantly. You may or may not know that Qtopia is also used by the Sharp Zaurus Linux PDA (both the Sharp software and OpenZaurus distros use it). There is also the OPIE project [handhelds.org], which is basically a suite of PDA apps built on top of Qtopia. This bodes well for getting more Liunx PDA users on board, and provides some existing apps for those using Qtopia for the first time.

It says so..... (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5339099)

"You may or may not know that Qtopia is also used by the Sharp Zaurus Linux PDA (both the Sharp software and OpenZaurus distros use it). "

In the post: "the embedded version of their Qt library, used by the Sharp Zaurus PDA"

why not Symbian? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5338872)

maybe symbian is not made for PDAs, I don't know.

Anyone read that as sybian? (-1)

SlashdotTroll (581611) | more than 11 years ago | (#5339363)

I hope I'm not the only one thinking of hot girls riding a handrill-dildo installed in a beer keg.

maybe symbian is not made for PDAs, I don't know.

Sybian is a company/product [sybian.com] that is designed for lovin' those ladies, mostly ladies that are horny 24/7 or butt-ugly-untouchable 24/7.

I'm wating for the l8 and gr8 movies to come out featuring the latest product! I LOVE THEM GIRLS!

Huge! (3, Interesting)

RealBeanDip (26604) | more than 11 years ago | (#5338878)

This is a HUGE win for the Trolls.

They deserve this success too. They have given us QT, which IMO is THE BEST Application Framework for C++ ever developed.

However I'm wondering if there isn't another faction inside IBM that we haven't heard about... waiting to kill off anything that isn't Windows based (sort of like what happened with the IBM PC Co and OS/2).

Brace yourselves! (1)

mao che minh (611166) | more than 11 years ago | (#5338882)

*braces for impact against the ensuing "anti-KDE/Trolltech, pro gtk threads"*

Re:Brace yourselves! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5338927)

well at least an embedded version of gtk is free, unlike qt-embedded.

8==(,,,)==D ~* ~o ~~O (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5339058)

in YOUR ear!!!

pretty good: linux on embedded devices (3, Insightful)

fiiz (263633) | more than 11 years ago | (#5338890)

This has got to be a pretty good week for linux and opensource products on portable devices!
It also goes a step further than motorola's annoucement earlier this week as here we have an opensource product in the middleware as well as the OS--and the middleware/interface makes a real difference in this type of device. Note that they will use a Montavista kernel, just as motorola:
"Included in the software stack are the IBM Power Manager and the MontaVista Linux kernel. These two components will work together to lower the voltage and frequency of the device when they sense there is low requirement for processing power."
I guess the palm market is becoming so saturated that differentiation from competitors is also crucial at this stage--this will allow them to offer different apps etc than palm/pocket PC.
Goodie goodie, IBM is back on the handheld market with some fun stuff--we as consumers might see some great new apps.

X-less QT (2, Insightful)

Dr. Spork (142693) | more than 11 years ago | (#5338891)

I think TrollTech are onto a good thing. One thing that surprises me is that with all this QT running without X windows underneath is that it isn't giving people ideas about a better desktop GUI. I mean, a lot of effort has gone into a super-efficient X-less QT that requires minimal hardware to run well. Why not translate all that work to the desktop and start now on the plan of phasing out the X windowing system from unix GUIs. I'm not saying we take drastic steps now, but we'd be stupid to take no steps to transition the desktop to QT all the way down.

X windows reminds me of the space shuttle. It's big and old and we know it won't last forever, but we hide our heads in the sand and we don't want to hear about it. Well, that's a really stupid attitude, especially since there is such an inviting alternative.

Re:X-less QT (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5338961)

One thing that X has and QT doesnt is network transparency. This has always been a show-stopping shortcoming of all the "X replacements" out there.

Re:X-less QT (1)

PD (9577) | more than 11 years ago | (#5339047)

The problem with getting rid of X is that most people really like it, and nothing out there even comes close to the features.

Hint: it's not all about the pretty pictures on the screen.

Re:X-less QT (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5339068)

X windows reminds me of the space shuttle. It's big and old...

It doesn't have to be. The Pico X server running on my ipaq is tiny (I could tell you exactly how big, but the piece of junk's battery is dead - as usual). We're talking less than a megabyte. I've tried running Qt and for me, the lack of an X server makes it less than useless (I know you can run it over X, but it's a hack - and I know you can use VNC, but the client's not always available). The applications are pretty, the syncronization would be nice if I had any windows boxes (or Evolution) to sync against, but I prefer having X, the Matchbox WM and the applications that I want to run. GPE (like Qtopia) is all well and good, but all you need is a menu system to launch apps, you don't need to copy how Palm behaves.

Re:X-less QT (5, Insightful)

BESTouff (531293) | more than 11 years ago | (#5339088)

Here we go ! I was wondering how long before the first clueless anti-X cluebie would post its rant. Guys, there have already been tons of arguments on this very subject, and many attempted X replacements (Fresco, GGI, ..), none of which are ready to takeover XFree86 in terms of functionnality/performance, much less number of ported applications/frameworks. Moreover, some bright people are working now on improving X protocol and implementation where it sucks (e.g. Keith on XRender, XRandR, Xft, etc.).

But go on, just show us what you're up to and code something better. It will be adopted and enhanced if it's really good, the free software community is very good at joining well-thought projects.

Re:X-less QT: Build it yourself (1)

mbaranow (610086) | more than 11 years ago | (#5339173)

This is already possible thanks to the great GPL licensing by Trolltech. Here is what you need to get started

- Linux kernel with frambuffer support
- GPL version of Qt/Embedded
- GPL version of Qtopia SDK
- Lots of new apps ported and written for Qtopia

This is excellent to get your old 486s and old laptops going. You can also mix and match with uClib and some tiny linux distros. How long before we have a new linux Qtopia distro?

Re: X-less QT (1)

Brian Blessed (258910) | more than 11 years ago | (#5339190)

Why do people keep suggesting X is replaced? I'm not sure what sort of problems they have had, but it seems evident that they don't understand the nature of those problems and just blame X.

X abstracts out all of the messy hardware specific stuff that goes into rendering the desktop, providing optimized drivers for the cards and network transparency.

Also I'm guessing that Qtopia is either only accelerated for very specific embedded hardware, or just uses the framebuffer. This used on our desktop PC's would give awful performance, as anyone who has used the framebuffer X server on an unsupported chipset knows (I have a Sun Javastation Krups).

- Brian.

Re: X-less QT (4, Insightful)

infiniti99 (219973) | more than 11 years ago | (#5339371)

Why do people keep suggesting X is replaced? I'm not sure what sort of problems they have had, but it seems evident that they don't understand the nature of those problems and just blame X.

The problem is not X, but rather XFree86. XF86 is monolithic, and contains its own drivers. I realize this is mainly because *nixes don't have their own video, but Linux does. For years I've had problems with mixing Framebuffer Consoles and X, simply because they both fight over the same video. In a better designed system, Linux would provide the video and X would ride on top of it.

There is nothing wrong with the Linux Framebuffer except for lack of decent drivers. The DirectFB intends to solve this, but at this point XFree86 totally beats out DirectFB in driver support. Why does Unreal Tournament 2003 require XFree86? Because it needs OpenGL. Why the hell does OpenGL, something you're never going to use remotely, require XFree86? Because everyone uses X!

And that's where things have gone stupid. NVidia's drivers are for XFree86. Other closed-source vendor video drivers are for XFree86. This is a problem guys. What if we want to use the video drivers for something other than XFree86? Oops, you can't. We need to separate the hardware and X protocol layers from XFree86. This would lead to better compatibility and stability, and give ease to future expansion. At least on Linux systems, XFree86 should not be trying to roll its own drivers.

If you don't think we need to clean this up, consider that nearly every Linux crash is always due to XFree86. And please, don't tell me how you shelled in from your other box to kill XFree86, you may as well reboot if it comes to that.

So you are right, people wrongfully blame X when they should really be blaming XFree86. Before flaming me, please note that I am not against the X protocol, but the idea of an X server having its own drivers. Even so, I think using X for local applications is a bit redundant.

Which brings me to my next argument, which is about replacing X as a fundamental application layer. IMO, it should be possible to have locally running apps that access the video directly without having to go through some weird pile of extensions. 99.99% of the time, I am running apps locally. For me, and nearly all Linux users out there, "remote" should be the exception, not the rule.

The trouble, of course, is that there is a lot more to X than just a framebuffer. Try DirectFB sometime and you will realize this quickly. X has some very important things, like Window Managers, Input methods, hinting (for things like docklets), keyboard/mouse grabbing, etc. We'd need good replacements for all of these, along with X compatibility for it all. This is not trivial.

Qtopia (nor Qt/Embedded) is not the answer to the desktop. It is a really cool system, but is pretty much limited to the scope of PDAs. What we really need is a Qt/DirectFB (there is already such a port of gtk). This is just one step of many, though.

Re:X-less QT (1)

Bob Uhl (30977) | more than 11 years ago | (#5339213)

Ummm... While certainly X can be improved quite a bit,QT is not the way to go (it's C++, for Pete's sake!). X provides a lot of important things and does a pretty good job. It's not terribly broken, so don't fix it terribly.

Re:X-less QT (5, Insightful)

xchino (591175) | more than 11 years ago | (#5339269)

How did parent get modded to +5?

Yes, let's all move over to a windowing system with serious licensing issues that's designed from the ground up to be run on embedded devices. That sounds perfect.

And what is this "plan" to start phasing out X windows? Was there a meeting I missed? Last I checked X was still being heavily developed.

"I'm not saying we take drastic steps now, but we'd be stupid to take no steps to transition the desktop to QT all the way down."

This is ridiculous. We'd be stupid TO take steps to transition "the desktop" to Qt all the way down. You're the only one who wants this. Not everyone loves KDE, and even less people love Qt. The seperation of the windowing system and the actual desktop is what gives *nix users the configurability to give their desktops personality. If you want a one-size-fits-all desktop, get windows.

As for you're space shuttle comparison, X windows is not inherently big (at least is doesn't have to be). It's not old. As I said, it is still under development, and there have been recent releases. Having history doesn't make software old.

As far as I can see, you're the only one with your head in the sand. It sounds like you're regurgitating all the inaccurate FUD-based trolling that goes on any time an article related to X is posted.

Qt is in no way a replacement for X, and it never will be, in it's current form.

Re:X-less QT (1)

WindBourne (631190) | more than 11 years ago | (#5339304)

You are in luck. Please write your own and when it is better than X, I will be happy to try it.
Likewise, many others will try it as well.

Re:X-less QT (2, Insightful)

Squarewav (241189) | more than 11 years ago | (#5339336)

I dont think X needs to be replaced just improved, a lot. for one it needs a native codac server so that when someone writes a video app they dont need to write ther own codac server. It also needs a much better way of cut&paste for exmple you cant highlite one piece of text and then select copy then highlite another and select paste, that whole middle click paste thing sucks ass. It also needs a way to change res on the fly but I hear thats going to be in 4.3 . kde adds much of these things but they only work within kde not to mention kde is too much of a mem hog on slow systems

Re:X-less QT (1)

IamTheRealMike (537420) | more than 11 years ago | (#5339368)

Why not translate all that work to the desktop and start now on the plan of phasing out the X windowing system from unix GUIs. I'm not saying we take drastic steps now, but we'd be stupid to take no steps to transition the desktop to QT all the way down.

You're ignoring the fact that Qt is only GPLd when using X11. You're ignoring a lot of facts actually.

X windows reminds me of the space shuttle. It's big and old and we know it won't last forever, but we hide our heads in the sand and we don't want to hear about it. Well, that's a really stupid attitude, especially since there is such an inviting alternative.

If you're going to compare X to the space shuttle. then the Linux framebuffer would be a light Cessna aircraft. X has features, it has hardware support, it has apps. DirectFB (presumably what you are talking about) does not.

Finally, remember that it's actually GTK that works on the Linux framebuffer - not Qt. See for yourself [directfb.org]. Qt is only GPLd when running on X, the code to make it work on the framebuffer isn't under the GPL afaik.

How (3, Insightful)

gearheadsmp (569823) | more than 11 years ago | (#5338899)

is this suprising? IBM's a big supporter of Linux in pretty much every area that it can be. Embedded, desktop, server, mainframe, etc.

Still no sync for Mac (2, Informative)

mrklin (608689) | more than 11 years ago | (#5338909)

Apple, Sharp, and Trolltech do not offer any syncing solution for Mac OS X. It's... like... beep beep beep.. a bummer.

Re:Still no sync for Mac (1)

james_marsh (147079) | more than 11 years ago | (#5339072)

Bzzt. Wrong.

'Qtopia Desktop is a Windows, Mac OS X, and Linux-based PIM center for storing information, entering data, loading applications, and transferring documents to Qtopia-based devices. Qtopia Desktop features include: A unique synchronization algorithm that provides rapid information back-up and document transfer to Qtopia-based devices; A Palm(tm) Desktop import tool for PIM information; and provide "conduits" for custom plug-in of 3rd party applications.'

Re:Still no sync for Mac (4, Insightful)

Wesley Felter (138342) | more than 11 years ago | (#5339076)

Hopefully Trolltech/IBM will support the standard SyncML protocol, which would give them iSync support "for free".

QuickTime...How does it work? (3, Funny)

AnonymousCowheard (239159) | more than 11 years ago | (#5338917)

Entrepreneur: QuickTime is the latest business machine that lets you go back in time and correct all the bad business decisions you made.

Boss Hog: We need to go back and dump sugar in them Duke Brothers' gas tank. Get onto it, Rosco!

IBM HINT: There is no QuickTime...

crazy (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5338926)

Wow, great to see IBM getting into the PDA market. For those who don't remember, they pretty much set the gold standard in the laptop industry, and we still live with the benefits today. But while this sounds like a good toy for geeks, I have to wonder about some of the choices made in the design of this device.

PDAs typically use processors designed specifically for embedded environments. They're built from the ground up for low power consumption in preference to blazing speed. The PowerPC is exactly the opposite, as anyone who has sat down at a recent G4 can tell you -- these things scream.

Furthermore, Linux is specifically architectured for the server market, which is why it's seen so much success in the enterprise. Trying to tweak it to run on a PDA is an excercise in feudalism. The choice could also be bad news for Linux, as people will start to think of the OS as suitable for only small devices.

It's a good idea, but I'd like to see them take a more sensible approach.

Re:crazy (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5339110)

I'm not sure if you're trolling or just clueless. (Also, I could swear I've read this comment before...)

The PowerPC 405LP was designed for embedded applications; it has no similarity to G4s other than the instruction set.

This is probably not needed, (3, Informative)

euxneks (516538) | more than 11 years ago | (#5338929)

But I didn't know and that means there is probably a bunch of others out there too..:

Qt is a multiplatform, C++ application development framework. One source runs natively on Windows, Unix/Linux, Mac 0S X, and embedded systems.

Go here [trolltech.com] for a brief overview from Trolltech.

Pretty cool with the customization aspect.. Is there any programmers out there who have some real experience? This is pretty interesting to me, and I wouldn't mind hearing some feedback and maybe links or something. =)

Re:This is probably not needed, (1)

Osty (16825) | more than 11 years ago | (#5339203)

I'm sure there are plenty [kde.org] of [freshmeat.net] projects [google.com] out there that use Qt. Qt has been around for a very long time, and is quite mature. This isn't something that just sprang up overnight.

GEORGE BUSH YOU ARE A FUCKING MORON!!! (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5338933)

How the fuck do you expect to nuke Afghanistan when all of your cruise missiles rely on GPS, so what happens when that goes EH? EH? EH? EH? YOU DON'T KNOW DO YOU?!!?!!? WELL I'LL TELL YOU WHAT HAPPENS, YOU'RE FUCKED!!!!!!!!!!

correction (3, Informative)

scm (21828) | more than 11 years ago | (#5338975)

QT/Embeded is the embedded version of the QT library. Qtopia (formerly QPE) is a PDA operating environment based on QT/Embedded.

After Sharp decided to use Qtopia on the Zarus, TrollTech seemed to lose interest in the Qtopia version for Familiar on the iPaq, so an open source fork was started called Opie http://opie.handhelds.org/

One of their goals is binary compatabilty with Qtopia though.

Re:correction (1)

scm (21828) | more than 11 years ago | (#5339039)

I guess the crack still hasn't worn off from having mod points. That should be Zaurus, and "open source fork" is a stupid thing to say, since both Qtopia and Opie are GPLed.

Hint to micheal de incasa (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5338980)

Fix the fucking file dialogue if you wan't people to take your shitty gnome desktop seriously. Its not rocket science, its true. KDE is way ahead of gnome, and gnome is probably catching up to kde 1.2, but as a long term linux user, I DO KNOW WHAT IM TALKING ABOUT!

Want to know why apple picked khtml over gtk/mozilla, its because people want proper file dialogues!

Quick Question (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5339333)

Without going through the FAQ, how do I mark one as Troll or even try and remove a point from one like this. This person is a total lou-lou.

I would have been first! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5338982)

I had to put dinner in the microwave so I missed it, damn!

Re:I would have been first! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5339382)

You are such a loser.. In case you haven't heard. People are moving back to the Toaster Oven. If you want superior tasting food at 1/2 the electrons, go with a good ol' toaster oven.

Microwaves are only good for de-thawing frozen parrots!

Trolltech (-1, Offtopic)

intermodal (534361) | more than 11 years ago | (#5339002)

Every post they get on slashdot creats an undescribable urge to post goatse links and IN SOVIET RUSSIA jokes...must...resist...

Seems like a no brainer. (2, Interesting)

SatanicPuppy (611928) | more than 11 years ago | (#5339053)

Lets ignore all the security issues for a moment. Let's just imagine that MS finally makes something truly secure, and no one is going to be hacking your phone or PDA.

The primary issues then become functionality and memory footprint. In terms of low cost buying power, you can't beat linux. In terms of memory scalability, you can't beat linux.

Add in stability, and the reality of security, and it seems wierd that anyone would go another direction.

Re:Seems like a no brainer. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5339189)

In terms of usability, linux sure as fuck can be beat.

"Look my PDA's OS runs from a 64k ROM"

"What does it do?"

"Nothing!"

But will IBM actually make PDAs? (1)

hirschma (187820) | more than 11 years ago | (#5339188)

Nice that they are putting out a reference platform for others, but will they take the risk of putting one out themselves?

IBM may have what it takes... (1)

peterdaly (123554) | more than 11 years ago | (#5339191)

I hope IBM has what is takes to fix the major flaw in the Sharp unit, which is battery time with wireless. That's where this OS will really shine, but currently get a black-eye due to the power requirements.

Wireless devices like this I would think would be right up IBM's alley, it's the next logical step.

-Pete

Bill Gates is a jew?!? (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5339208)

Just check out his schnazz.

x-windows (-1, Troll)

MisterFancypants (615129) | more than 11 years ago | (#5339214)

x-windows SUCKS. Yes, it DOES!

Don't give me that shit about network transparency either. That's something that should ride on top of the APIs as with a Windows Terminal Services solution... Not something that should be part of the core windowing solution, slowing every part of the GUI down to a fucking crawl even for people who will never use it.

Re:x-windows (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5339349)

What!?

What d'ell you talking about?

Is IBM serious about the PDA market? (3, Interesting)

binaryDigit (557647) | more than 11 years ago | (#5339218)

I don't think so. How do they benefit by coming out with a pda that does not support the two major pda os's out there (PalmOS, WinCE)? How could they hope to ever be something other than a niche player? How many other companies that don't currently have pda's are going to come out with a pda that currently has little market support. Will any existing pda manuf. hop on the IBM bandwagon (e.g. Compaq/HP, Sony, etc).

Nope, this looks like IBM pushing their PPC405 into the embedded market, any resemblence to a pda is purely incidental.

From the same guys who brought us OS/2... (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5339222)

How is it IBM always seems to miss the trolley when it comes to picking the right platform? Yes indeed, why should IBM use a proven, well-supported platform like Windows CE/PocketPC based on the same technology as the leading desktop operating system, or a truly innovative platform like the new Palm OS, based on BeOS technology and built from the ground up for the handheld market, when they can grab some tacky warmed-over open-source products designed for the desktop with an outrageous memory footprint and an unfriendly, rough design, as they have done with Linux and QT?

Its a good thing there are industry leaders like Palm and Microsoft that continue to promote true innovation against the tide of inferior products from the likes of IBM. Now lets hope this fails quickly so embedded linux can die the quick death it deserves, and IBM can quietly sign on to sell OEM PocketPC systems afterwards without losing too much face.

Good for Zaurus? (2, Insightful)

connsmythe96 (576445) | more than 11 years ago | (#5339234)

I hope this means that the Qtopia will get a lot more commercial support. Other than tK, there aren't many commercial programs out there. Not that I WANT to have to pay for software, but a lot of specialty programs aren't going to be developed by freelance open-source programmers. Hardware support has also been a problem for me with the Zaurus. Maybe another linux PDA (or another person in charge or the Zaurus) will help create more interest in developing hardware drivers for it. I sure hope so.

This is the new battlefield (3, Informative)

tom_conte (108067) | more than 11 years ago | (#5339267)

Yeah, well, is IBM really going to be able to compete with Symbian and Microsoft? Sure, it's nice to see a dinosaur company like IBM making bold moves, but they're just one step behind the other guys. I would say IBM is an outsider in the new battle for the "pervasive OS". Today, the big contenders are Nokia/Sony Ericsson + Symbian and (as usual) Microsoft. Sure the Zaurus is nice, but check out the 3GSM news and all you will see is Symbian and M$.

Here we go again... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5339271)

And IBM will put the same amount of marketing as to what went into OS/2.

What's up with that ad for MS Visual Studio .Nyet (1)

Locutus (9039) | more than 11 years ago | (#5339282)

Do they get to pick what story their ads get tied to?????

Spam sucks (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5339319)

ttimeshare100@firemail.de mailto:ttimeshare100@firemail.de

Good For The Zaurus (1)

zackZ (649657) | more than 11 years ago | (#5339322)

This is definetely good news for Sharp's Zaurus PDAs. With Palm and MS being the other players, IBM's support would definitely help! But again, knowing IBM, they once got into the Palm platform too! Nothing came of it! Hopefully IBM has learnt something from its failures.

Untitled (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#5339398)

I shit my pants
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...