|
2010-10-22
, 18:31
|
Banned |
Posts: 974 |
Thanked: 622 times |
Joined on Oct 2010
|
#82
|
|
2010-10-23
, 04:44
|
|
Posts: 1,789 |
Thanked: 1,699 times |
Joined on Mar 2010
|
#83
|
One main difference is that the Symbian kernel also includes the baseband, the EKA2 kernel. Other phones, like all Androids and the iPhones need a separate baseband RTOS and a separate baseband CPU. This opt for less power consumption and simpler HW design already from the start.
Makes me wonder, what baseband RTOS does Maemo use? and Nitdroid (if it ever will function)?
The Following User Says Thank You to Kangal For This Useful Post: | ||
|
2010-10-23
, 05:22
|
Posts: 32 |
Thanked: 94 times |
Joined on Dec 2009
@ Pärnu, Estonia
|
#84
|
|
2010-10-23
, 06:50
|
Banned |
Posts: 974 |
Thanked: 622 times |
Joined on Oct 2010
|
#85
|
So, separate = less power consumption + simpler?
OR
separate = more power consumption + complicated?
I have no clue how you came to the conclusion that the iOS has separated kernels since it's closed down like Fort Knox?!?!???
|
2010-10-24
, 10:25
|
|
Posts: 4,672 |
Thanked: 5,455 times |
Joined on Jul 2008
@ Springfield, MA, USA
|
#86
|
The kernel may be closed, but the information is "open"
http://rtos.com/images/uploads/EL_Ne...mber_2010.html
The iPhone 4 use ThreadX RTOS in the Infineon PMB9800, or X-Gold 618 baseband chip/cpu.
Separate = higher cost, more complex HW and higher power consumption.
The Following User Says Thank You to danramos For This Useful Post: | ||
|
2010-10-24
, 10:35
|
Banned |
Posts: 974 |
Thanked: 622 times |
Joined on Oct 2010
|
#87
|
The information may be open, but iOS isn't open. To claim that iOS is a more open operating system (or even a more open platform) doesn't really clear fact that neither the source for the operating system (not even most of it) nor even the development process of the operating system is open.
iOS can't even claim to be open so long as they have the ability to limit who can publish to the device or reach in and remotely uninstall/delete applications that they deem unworthy of distribution.
Even in terms of published information, iOS development documentation is still a very recent affair (anybody remember when iOS FINALLY release an SDK after people waved pitchforks for a long time before it finally came out?) Then it was pointed out that a LOT of things weren't documented (Apple didn't allow you to know about a lot of API's). Eventually, they trickled out more and more about those API's that Apple's apps used but nobody else could use until they allowed you to. Lately, they've been far more open with telling you their available API's, but I have to wonder if this was the result of trying to compete with the Android OS and its far, far more open platform (in every regard) than Apple's iOS.
Sorry, but iOS fails on every definition of "openness".
|
2010-10-24
, 13:22
|
|
Posts: 4,672 |
Thanked: 5,455 times |
Joined on Jul 2008
@ Springfield, MA, USA
|
#88
|
The Following User Says Thank You to danramos For This Useful Post: | ||
|
2010-10-24
, 13:53
|
Posts: 376 |
Thanked: 511 times |
Joined on Aug 2009
@ Greece
|
#89
|
No he didn't, my old Nokia had a 'download' section built-in before the iPhone came out.
The Following User Says Thank You to v13 For This Useful Post: | ||
|
2010-10-24
, 15:38
|
|
Posts: 4,384 |
Thanked: 5,524 times |
Joined on Jul 2007
@ ˙ǝɹǝɥʍou
|
#90
|
Debian systems had software repositories since the beginning of time... (even slackware had).
Mac^H^H^HIphone users discovered them just a couple of years ago...
Windows users are still looking/hoping...
Tags |
chair throwing, steve balmobs |
|
Pretty much the only handsets I've seen that use an RTOS are dumbphones with very small amounts of RAM and very weak CPUs.
I will admit that I've not used a Symbian-based device, but from where I stand I'm not seeing something that provides any advantages over Linux that can't be merged in over time. I do see an OS that until recently was closed, which has undoubtedly hindered its adoption.