webOS Nation Forums >  webOS Discussion >  Open webOS General Discussion > Confused about Open webOS port
Confused about Open webOS port
  Reply
Like Tree19Likes

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 09/29/2012, 01:30 PM   #1 (permalink)
Member
 
mdram's Avatar
 
Posts: 218
What happens to app catalog access if Open webOS gets ported to say a Galaxy Nexus like in yesterdays article? Are we limited to stock and homebrew apps?
mdram is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09/29/2012, 01:48 PM   #2 (permalink)
Member
 
hagster's Avatar
 
Posts: 799
Good question. What i do know is that with the Touchpad Android port you have to add the google play app yourself.
hagster is offline   Reply With Quote
Thanked By: sq5
Old 09/29/2012, 02:05 PM   #3 (permalink)
Member
 
wMarck90's Avatar
 
Posts: 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdram View Post
What happens to app catalog access if Open webOS gets ported to say a Galaxy Nexus like in yesterdays article? Are we limited to stock and homebrew apps?
Preware isn't working in Open webOS because there isn't support of Mojo. The App catalog is supported only for legacy devices. So you can use only the defauls apps and additional apps installed by yourself.
And there isn't also Facebook, Google, Yahoo Synergy services.

What's missing from Open webOS 1.0: Nothing that can't be fixed | webOS Nation
wMarck90 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09/29/2012, 02:22 PM   #4 (permalink)
Homebrew Developer
 
Vistaus's Avatar
 
Posts: 1,493
Quote:
Originally Posted by wMarck90 View Post
Preware isn't working in Open webOS because there isn't support of Mojo. The App catalog is supported only for legacy devices. So you can use only the defauls apps and additional apps installed by yourself.
And there isn't also Facebook, Google, Yahoo Synergy services.

What's missing from Open webOS 1.0: Nothing that can't be fixed | webOS Nation
What you didn't acknowledge is that Mojo is easy to add to the port according to homebrew devs plus that we're talking about the *finished* port. We're not even alpha on this port.
Vistaus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09/29/2012, 02:27 PM   #5 (permalink)
Member
 
wMarck90's Avatar
 
Posts: 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vistaus View Post
What you didn't acknowledge is that Mojo is easy to add to the port according to homebrew devs plus that we're talking about the *finished* port. We're not even alpha on this port.
I know, but you forgot Mojo is closed source, you don't have the permission to do.
HP app catalog, Synergy additional services and apps isn't a part of the Port.
wMarck90 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09/29/2012, 02:59 PM   #6 (permalink)
Member
 
Posts: 1,617
Quote:
Originally Posted by wMarck90 View Post
I know, but you forgot Mojo is closed source, you don't have the permission to do.
HP app catalog, Synergy additional services and apps isn't a part of the Port.
Closed/Open, as long as one pulls from the webOS 3.0.5 doctor and does not distribute, no legal issues, App catalog along with the right palm build info will give you a palm account, which then gives one access to the app catalog.

FYI my pixiplus according to palm is webOS 2.1.0, but as the device responds as a pixiplus it knows. So one may impersonate an existing device..
John Steffes is offline   Reply With Quote
Liked by treodoc755 and RumoredNow like this.
Thanked By: RumoredNow
Old 09/29/2012, 03:09 PM   #7 (permalink)
Member
 
wMarck90's Avatar
 
Posts: 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Steffes View Post
Closed/Open, as long as one pulls from the webOS 3.0.5 doctor and does not distribute, no legal issues, App catalog along with the right palm build info will give you a palm account, which then gives one access to the app catalog.

FYI my pixiplus according to palm is webOS 2.1.0, but as the device responds as a pixiplus it knows. So one my impersonate an existing device..
Good for tech users, but from a commercial perspective and user, NO. If Open webOS want a future needs more.
wMarck90 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09/29/2012, 03:13 PM   #8 (permalink)
Member
 
Posts: 1,617
Quote:
Originally Posted by wMarck90 View Post
Good for tech users, but from a commercial perspective and user, NO. If Open webOS want a future needs more.
That is HP/Palm issue, I have an App that will grab the doctor from their web site extract and apply frameworks and app ipks.
John Steffes is offline   Reply With Quote
Liked by chalx likes this.
Thanked by chalx, sq5
Old 09/29/2012, 03:35 PM   #9 (permalink)
pivotCE Developer
 
RumoredNow's Avatar
 
Posts: 2,231
By all appearances and based on what I've read around this board - John Steffes has studied these issues in-depth and knows what it is that can be done in terms of Meta-Doctoring... Realistically, practically and legally.

His is an opinion worth listening to.

__________________
Lumia 1520.3 (the Beastly Unicorn): Windows 10 Mobile

Windows Central Senior Ambassador

Mobile Nations Devotee
RumoredNow is offline   Reply With Quote
Liked by Vistaus likes this.
Old 09/29/2012, 04:37 PM   #10 (permalink)
Member
 
HelmutsKohl's Avatar
 
Posts: 99
So as far as I can see it will not be possible to use Skype if there's open webOS on a Galaxy Nexus, right?
HelmutsKohl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09/29/2012, 04:55 PM   #11 (permalink)
Member
 
Posts: 370
Quote:
Originally Posted by HelmutsKohl View Post
So as far as I can see it will not be possible to use Skype if there's open webOS on a Galaxy Nexus, right?
its laggy as hell and wont even support any phone functions and you worry about the lack of skype?
Sonic-NKT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09/29/2012, 05:41 PM   #12 (permalink)
Member
 
Posts: 1,617
Quote:
Originally Posted by HelmutsKohl View Post
So as far as I can see it will not be possible to use Skype if there's open webOS on a Galaxy Nexus, right?
Even if we extract Skype from webOS 3.0.5, it is not enough, we attempted before we got webOS 2.2.4 on a PrePlus to get Skype, but only messaging was the result. It was to integrated into the video/audio system, but one can always pickup where we left, I will not say it is impossible, just a lot of work.
John Steffes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09/29/2012, 10:51 PM   #13 (permalink)
Member
 
Posts: 10
With the release of Open WebOS 1.0, I would expect some push to get an application distribution system ready for it. And honestly, writing an Enyo replacement for preware shouldn't be impossible. Given the pre-alpha state of everything right now, there's not much of a rush. I'm sure it's being looked at. As far as Skype, well, that's up to Skype in the future. Once a beta with cellular radio comes out, I'll be in line to test it out.
tonymac32 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09/30/2012, 12:26 AM   #14 (permalink)
pivotCE Developer
 
gizmo21's Avatar
 
Posts: 2,337
but honestly this all sounds like a lot of work for guys that have dayjobs.

Quote:
Originally Posted by myself
hhm i understand that HP can't provide these things in OpenSource manner, but the unique points of webOS are missing:

account and backup cloud sync stuff would just have been much better with in 2.x newly introduced db8 clouddb for apps - now kind of sensless without central account. Well iCloud sadly took the lead here with app backup...

PDK apps were an easy way for devs to port their games/apps - missing for now.

Synergy was the most outstanding part of webOS. Now missing.

App catalog missing, well without central account that's impossible, but how should this attract devs?

and finally even the vast majority of already available apps won't work anymore cause of Mojo missing.

And what about gestures on phones is there an replacement planned for back gesture (i don't want backbuttons).

Well i guest i have to use Pre2 a lil longer.
gizmo21 is offline   Reply With Quote
Liked by chalx likes this.
Thanked By: chalx
Old 09/30/2012, 01:30 AM   #15 (permalink)
Developer
 
rwhitby's Avatar
 
Posts: 10,569
Quote:
Originally Posted by wMarck90 View Post
Good for tech users, but from a commercial perspective and user, NO. If Open webOS want a future needs more.
Why do you keep talking about commercial perspectives?

Open webOS has no known commercial future. There are no known commercial partners for Open webOS. There are no known commercial partners even interested in Open webOS.

Seriously, if commercial support for webOS is what you are waiting for, then you should just stop holding your breath now. Move on and save yourself the bitterness you are displaying in your posts, and leave this forum bitterness-free for those who are interested in webOS regardless of commercial interests.

-- Rod
__________________
WebOS Internals and Preware Founder and Developer
You may wish to donate by Paypal to donations @ webos-internals.org if you find our work useful.
All donations go back into development.
www.webos-internals.org twitter.com/webosinternals facebook.com/webosinternals

Last edited by rwhitby; 09/30/2012 at 08:09 PM.
rwhitby is offline   Reply With Quote
Liked by andersondiaz, k4ever, khazoury and 1 others like this.
Old 09/30/2012, 04:09 AM   #16 (permalink)
Member
 
chalx's Avatar
 
Posts: 1,151
Quote:
Originally Posted by gizmo21 View Post
but honestly this all sounds like a lot of work for guys that have dayjobs.
Thats what I'm thinking! It looks like too much work for small group of people with their dayly jobs. I've started thread with question how HP imagine to bring more core OS developers to the party.
__________________
chalx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09/30/2012, 05:31 AM   #17 (permalink)
Member
 
Posts: 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by rwhitby View Post
Why do you keep taking about commercial perspectives?

Open webOS has no known commercial future. There are no known commercial partners for Open webOS. There are no known commercial partners even interested in Open webOS.

Seriously, if commercial support for webOS is what you are waiting for, then you should just stop holding your breath now. Move on and save yourself the bitterness you are displaying in your posts, and leave this forum bitterness-free for those who are interested in webOS regardless of commercial interests.

-- Rod
Rod, the interest for commercial purposes in Open webOS exists, for sure.
The prove is here: http://forums.webosnation.com/webos-...tor-webos.html - see my final post
Saddly, no one shows any interest, since today, to get involved in such a project...
saltsaint is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09/30/2012, 05:46 AM   #18 (permalink)
cgk
Member
 
cgk's Avatar
 
Posts: 3,868
Quote:
Originally Posted by saltsaint View Post
Rod, the interest for commercial purposes in Open webOS exists, for sure.
The prove is here: http://forums.webosnation.com/webos-...tor-webos.html - see my final post
Saddly, no one shows any interest, since today, to get involved in such a project...
Doesn't your last sentence invalidate your first sentence?
cgk is offline   Reply With Quote
Liked by Garfonso and SnotBoogie like this.
Old 09/30/2012, 06:02 AM   #19 (permalink)
Developer
 
rwhitby's Avatar
 
Posts: 10,569
Quote:
Originally Posted by saltsaint View Post
Rod, the interest for commercial purposes in Open webOS exists, for sure.
The prove is here: http://forums.webosnation.com/webos-...tor-webos.html - see my final post
Saddly, no one shows any interest, since today, to get involved in such a project...
I see no evidence of serious commercial interest in that thread.

-- Rod
rwhitby is offline   Reply With Quote
Liked by fixxxer1022 and khazoury like this.
Old 09/30/2012, 08:25 AM   #20 (permalink)
Member
 
Posts: 12
Fact is, nobody has answered our request in that post, quoted below:
"Thank you for your responses.
Our small project has become to be much more than it was supposed to be since a company has the ideea to use it in commercial ways.

First good news is that they are willing to use webOS instead of Android to be the "interface" with their clients in a new device that will be build.

Second, this company is willing to port webOS to arm-boards like Raspberry Pi and simmilar so that the integration with their appliance to be more fesable financial terms.

Since we are not prepared to handle such a task, is it possible to tell me who may be able/willing to start discussions with the company regarding this project? Me and my coleagues will be part only in the mechanical engineering part of the project so I will only pass the contact to the managers of that company for all the details."

@CGK
Sorry for my bad wording – what I ment was that after posting an invitation to everybody to join this project, we got no answers. There wasn't any intention of invalidation.

@Rod
From where your conclusion, Rod, that you don't see any evidence of serious commercial interest? Did you go further asking questions? Are you interested to be part of such a development? Then please reply to that request
If there is an opportunity, why not accept it?

Maybe, instead of this fatalism showed in manny posts in this forum, a positive attitude will bring a much deserved good faith to webOS. I guess that not only the company who hired us is or would be interested in using webOS instead of other OS's, and this because the decision is logical and makes sense if one wants to control an environment and offer a better user experience.
It takes time and effort (and maybe chance) to present a solution and eventually get someones interest but this means doing something.
saltsaint is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

 

Thread Tools
Display Modes



 


Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.6.0