[Marc_PIC]

Unfortunately, I believe that INITIALLY the beta testing will have to be closed under NDA. The purpose of the beta is to find and fix as many previously undiscovered bugs or issues as we can, and we don't want the software to be judged based on issues that we correct before the final version is completed. Beta testers will be provided with a copy of the final version before it is released to market so they can check to see whether all the issues they found have been corrected, and then can publicly share their experiences at that time, allowing the potential purchasers to have the most accurate picture of exactly what their hard earned money will be getting them.

The truth of the matter is that on the 'net negative impressions travel faster, further, and are more persistent than positive ones, and it would not be fair to us to have people's opinions about the product warped by an early report that never gets updated, or where the update does not reach as many people as the original report. It's not like we have the resources to embark on a huge marketing campaign to correct any no longer accurate information.

[Marc_PIC]

I've only had one thread of communication with PIC, and information about licensing was not shared.

I could not see OM giving modification rights for only $35K (less PIC expenses) unless it was a last ditch closure fire sale scenario.

-- Rod

This is correct - we do not get the rights to the software - just like this one, future projects based on ACL will involve OpenMobile.

[geekpeter]

Now it is my turn to ask a question that the polite society would prefer to neither hear nor know the answer to, but i feel is important to bring up..

Assuming the project does pan out in the best way possible, and a cracked copy of the ACL VM becomes available for download (as it inevitably will), who is left holding the bag? Or is the 35K the threshold where the product has been largely paid for and no-one is expecting much of a profit past that?

I say this, because there's so much enmity and distrust towards OM, that has built up over the years they've been dangling their product in front of our faces, and only a fraction of the webOS userbase will consider forking over the $35 for a product license

I'm not the pirate here, but yes, there are plenty..

PS, the real reason I ask this, is because the 35 grand goes into the pockets of OM and not towards an open-source solution that will stay with us forever and can be improved over time... Yes, the Dalvik VM, a derivative of Java, was/is originally free and open, and not a bottomless pit of for profit motivations... So I'm not the only one questioning the value of this investment.. I hope I have made my point.

PPS, maybe people are looking for instant gratification in choosing OM over a homegrown solution, but IMHO, any work done by them has been far from instant

its just a shame that OM in general are a seperate floating entity, imo projects like ACL should be an integral part of competitor OS's, if only they had divisions or so that joined device/os manufacturers to help integrate their ACL mechanism nativly into webOS/meego/ubuntu/firefox/etc/<insert any non android platform here>.

In my mind being able to stand up and say "our os runs pretty much any non apple app you may have bought previously or in the future" is a good selling point or just plain useful feature.

Its probably why some are excited to hear of upcoming open webOS projects, but a little deflated that the "new" OS would take a backward leap IF ACL is made available for the touchpad/classic 3.0.5 when they would suddenly lose the feature and go back in the soon(tm) grinder.

I dont know how OM have been pitching to OEM's etc but id have thought that trying for an integration of their app at the OS level would be more preferable for a company than trying to sell them a 1 off 3rd party package.

Its still frustrating, i WANT ACL or something amazingly like it, i want my fave OS / device combined with a better app selection so i get the best of multiple worlds i 1 hand without having to take a small bag of assorted odds and ends and multiple devices. I personally just want to pick up 1 device and use just that.

Instead I currently have to take my pre3 for "phone/normal" stuff at which i find it excels and also taking either my touchpad or alternate phone just to watch netflix, I dont know about others but for me i take an extra device just for access to one damned app, i find that rather comical and sad that i have to do that in the first place.

Why dont i use the device that gives me all? because i find it an annoyance to use in general, yeah its got a variation of all the apps i want but they whole damned thing and OS makes me want to throw it up against a wall sometimes, thats not what i want to use daily or force myself to get used too.

summary of a long rant....... ACL, yeah i want it, always have and always hope ittl happen 1 day (or similar acl variant).

[Marc_PIC]

pic has so far answered all but one of my questions, maybe rod can help since hes apparently communicating with them more -- my big question is, who owns the rights to tjis, when its all said and done? Does openmobile still own it, or does pic own the webos version after that? I know that neither of them can or will promise a release for anything other than touchpad 305, at this time, but id really like to know if its pic that will have the code, if they were to want to go ahead and do that in the future, or if openmobile will retain all of that. Because pic has a lot better record than open mobile does right now, and a lot more incentive to support us than openmobile does, as well.

OpenMobile will retain ownership of their technology, and so future ACL projects will have to involve them as well.

This is not the only ACL project PIC is committing to - we have already been discussing the next steps to include other webOS devices. I'd be interested in getting input from all of you on this - after the TP, what 2 devices do you think should get ACL next, and why?

[geekpeter]

OpenMobile will retain ownership of their technology, and so future ACL projects will have to involve them as well.

This is not the only ACL project PIC is committing to - we have already been discussing the next steps to include other webOS devices. I'd be interested in getting input from all of you on this - after the TP, what 2 devices do you think should get ACL next, and why?

id pick a classic like the pre3, seeing as its a distant cousin of the touchpad, i mean some touchpad created pdk apps run fine on the pre3, for another id pick whichever device the webos ports team are pushing hardest so that the first "new" open webOS device/OS release has access to a large app catalogue from the start so to speak.

Hell even if open webOS could debut with a non optimised, not tailored to any particular device version of ACL, it could mean that when a certain future device is picked (incase the ports team found a better target part way in) and worjks perfectly then ACL has a headstart and need only some minor tweaks to get it running decent instead of slow.

EDIT: now i think about it, couldnt ACL be bundled as standard with their target OS's in demo form, only allowing a time limited use of android apps, possible denying internet access to android apps while in demo form and needing "purchased" to unlock full features, this means apps could be downloaded, used for say 5minutes and even then only use apps which dont rely on downloading/accessing the net, IE news apps wouldnt do squat in demo mode but angry birds etc would be fine.

This way ACL is "out there and available" its preloaded on devices ready to rock, people can try and see if its their thing and buy outright if they want it.

or are there still complications all-round getting support from the powers that be.

[Greg Mair]

I think it would be best to wait and see what open webos will be ported to.
The Touchpad has the bigger userbase and was your best bet to get funded.
but the Pre3 or 2. not many people are going to be putting up 35k in the future for those phones for some apps.
unless the fund raiser get cheaper and cheaper with the software becoming easier to port over to other devices.

I'm sure the best thing would be to ask webosnations to have a poll or something on the main page when the time comes and see what the community is using at that time.

but personally lets more forward and use Open webOS with Galaxy Nexus and nexus 4

[bluenote]

If $35k has to be raised at least for each hardware device. And we don't know if more would have to be raised for an open webOS device, if the Touchpad succeeded--ie if open mobile would raise their price.

I don't see the current webOS users going away so soon. I would vote to skip the TouchPad, which has the android dual boot, and go straight to the device that WebOS Ports is trying port open webOS onto. I would think the money could be raised here from webOS fans as it is going towards the future of webOS on mobile devices.

[geekpeter]

If $35k has to be raised at least for each hardware device. And we don't know if more would have to be raised for an open webOS device, if the Touchpad succeeded--ie if open mobile would raise their price.

I don't see the current webOS users going away so soon. I would vote to skip the TouchPad, which has the android dual boot, and go straight to the device that WebOS Ports is trying port open webOS onto. I would think the money could be raised here from webOS fans as it is going towards the future of webOS on mobile devices.

surely that would only mean people would keep harassing the ports team for an open webOS release date non stop peeving them off, suddenly the "hold up" and "soon(tm)" would be redirected from OM to the ports team which is a bit harsh.

I think their original choice of the touchpad was a safe bet for them tbh, i mean its a wifi device that anyone can use, had they instead targeted phones, they would have cut their target audience a lot as not as many could potentially use a webOS phone for contractual or availability reasons. Plus in ye-old america werent you limited to certain few providers? again people may not aquire the phone because they may have better reception etc elsewhere that didnt offer a webOS phone.

Either way id imagine theres far more touchpads in circulation than there is say pre3's.

[horzel]

4. Why are there no pledges (over 5USD) that do not require worldwide shipping (for an additional fee)? - Honestly, I don't need a LED flashlight keychain, a special custom made thank you postcard or my name listed on the internet. What if I just want to support through 'pre-ordering' the product?

International shipping is a very real cost that has to be accounted for. If it isn't, there is a very real chance that a Kickstarter project could succeed but still be short of the funds actually needed due to costs of rewards being too high

Marc, maybe you misunderstood?

What is missing is a pledge for $30 or more, for just the software, no goodies, in which case there would be no postage at all?

I will happily back your project, as long as I get the software, but I do not want to be bothered by all the extra hassle of international shipment of the goodies.

Example;

Pledge $30 or more

Get a copy of the ACL software when it is released on the market and your name listed as a project supporter on our website.

Still great project and I will chip in, so get this extra option up on Kickstarter!

[Preemptive]

OpenMobile will retain ownership of their technology, and so future ACL projects will have to involve them as well.

This is not the only ACL project PIC is committing to - we have already been discussing the next steps to include other webOS devices. I'd be interested in getting input from all of you on this - after the TP, what 2 devices do you think should get ACL next, and why?

Hello Marc,

Thanks for you input. I think you are clearing up a lot of questions. People here can see what they can and cannot expect. Your straight and open approach is more likely to bring you the support you need. It's a shame PIC cannot profit even a little from app sales as it implies the next step will also require a funding round - hopefully of lessening amounts as porting gets easier, but I don't think the money supply will be endless. I hope therefore you can bring the best product you can from this project to make the splash you'll need to maintain enthusiasm/momentum. Delivering ICS compatibility would turn around most sceptics here as it would match the CM offer without the hassle of a reboot.

Regarding future devices, the problem you have is availablility. Personally, I'd guess The Pre2 & Pre3 are the obvious candidates - depending I suppose on which model has the most users, although I guess the Pre2s will be ending their lives sooner on average.

For the sake of webOS as a whole, (assuming no move by LG) I'd say the best scenario is for a successful port of Open webOS to a newer device and therefore an ACL for OwOS. As PIC is in the new hardware game, you could become a reseller - buying say, Nexus4s in bulk, then putting them out at a roughly equivalent price to the Android version with OwOS pre-installed & maybe an extra fee to bundle the ACL as well. This is of course dependent on a successful port in the reasonably near future. It would of course be a niche market, but one that wouldn't require users to root, hack or sideload. This might be enough to win back former webOS users in addition to bringing a new device to the existing community. Such a package might also attract xdadeveloper types who might then see a percentage in webOS development. Some complaining about the quality of Android apps might create better versions in Enyo.

If all of that happens, then perhaps PIC could find investment for a bespoke webOS device or perhaps an existing manufacturer will see potential and jump in.

Sounds great, doesn't it? But so many things will need to fall into place.

I wish you luck.

[geekpeter]

Marc, maybe you misunderstood?

What is missing is a pledge for $30 or more, for just the software, no goodies, in which case there would be no postage at all?

I will happily back your project, as long as I get the software, but I do not want to be bothered by all the extra hassle of international shipment of the goodies.

Example;


Still great project and I will chip in, so get this extra option up on Kickstarter!

considering all the $30 offers sold out near instantly the next best offer is $50+ and yeah some of us international non usa could do with a $30+ without the extra physical extras, for some of us it just means we could/may get stung more later with an import tax bill from the courier service involved.

[Grabber5.0]

Is it possible to add a trinket-free option at this point?

[Misj']

Marc, maybe you misunderstood?

What is missing is a pledge for $30 or more, for just the software, no goodies, in which case there would be no postage at all?

Yes, sorry, that was what I meant.

@Marc_PIC
another question. You've mentioned that the software has to be optimized for the hardware and webos 3.0.5. But I was wondering, whether you could say anything about compatibility with lunaCE, different kernels, or other patches; or should none of these (negatively) affect the performance of ACL?

[ananimus]

id pick a classic like the pre3, seeing as its a distant cousin of the touchpad, i mean some touchpad created pdk apps run fine on the pre3, for another id pick whichever device the webos ports team are pushing hardest so that the first "new" open webOS device/OS release has access to a large app catalogue from the start so to speak.

I agree the Pre 3 is a good next target. Probably fewer were made, but many still in the community have them now. And technically, it has a screen resolution that should make some rendering issues easier to deal with, especially coming from the TP. And honestly, the Pre 3 hardware is still on par with any other modern, single-core Android phone.

However, targeting the Pre, Pre Plus and Pre 2 might be bigger effort, bigger reward. They're likely more of a challenge, but if you did any one of them the other two should be very minor to include.

And though dignitary gave some good history on Android, could Marc or OM comment at all on specifics for the previous question?

The point was raised that this is 2.3, a.k.a. not a tablet version of Android. Okay, that's the promise and that's the expectation at this stage. Still, have PIC or OM offered any insight yet into the question of what particular technical barriers currently prevent updating to ICS or JB? Base kernel incompatibility with webOS, etc?

Really, a lot of the tabletifying of Android seemed to go more with user interface of the full OS than it did for apps alone. Curious what real blocks there may be on this front, however, as to this minor note on long term viability.

[horzel]

Is it possible to add a trinket-free option at this point?

Also notice that the $ 50+ option with the software is attracting way more attention than the one without.
For international backers the extra shipping cost might scare them away, not to mention custom problems...
Now with the suggested price range of $ 20 to $ 35, I think a $ 30+ software only option might attract more backers.

In the end the project is about the software, not the goodies, is it?

[RumoredNow]

...but personally lets more forward and use Open webOS with Galaxy Nexus and nexus 4

...go straight to the device that WebOS Ports is trying port open webOS onto...

Except -

WebOS Ports makes no guarantees of anything until they have something worth releasing.

You can't put the Open webOS cart before the (phone) horse. That isn't how it works around these parts.

[Remy X]

The problem with this approach is that people are already moving on.A home grown solution that you are describing is going to take a lot of time and resources, and by the time such a solution delivers something usable, webOS will have fallen far behind when compared to other mobile operating systems. As the number of active users drops it becomes more and more difficult to raise the funds needed to do the bigger things, such as produce hardware. If we do not preserve the existing user base by addressing the apps availability issue very soon, and then follow it up by getting new hardware out there reasonably quickly (hardware that also has the ability to run Android apps in webOS) we can forget about ever seeing new webOS hardware, and porting to hardware shipped with Android becomes the only option.

I appreciate your response and you do have a great point (about the users moving on), however with OM in the picture, your words become more like an excuse for flushing 35 grand down the toilet. If you were to pick a more reputable company like Myriad, you'd have my 100% agreement.

The thing about taking time to deliver a working solution, that is true in any case... But the truth is that getting the VM to run is only a fraction of what needs to be done to deliver a working product, the largest hickup being the lack of graphics acceleration.

To transplant Android's VM to another OS, all you really need to do is to look at the source code, and documentation to diagram everything and trace dependencies. Then you know which pieces to can be discarded, where and when you need to write compatibility modules or borrow pieces of existing libraries. This is all a whole lot easier than blind reverse-engineering or writing everything from scratch. Should only take a few weeks.

The issue of graphics acceleration on the other hand, it affects every project that is even remotely involved in reusing Android components, be they software or hardware. I definitely mean *everyone*, it affects Ports as much as it affects OM.

So the $35,000 being raised here is misspent money... rather than addressing the common stumbling block, clearing which would set us all free (and free to run webOS on almost any device we please), it is money going towards leasing stale, outdated code from a disreputable company.... A company which, if it develops a solution to the graphics problem, will not share it with us.

So come on, mind your priorities. The community's money is not infinite. You can go ahead and hate me forever for saying this, but I will stand by my point.

[geekpeter]

nothing wrong with voicing opinions/concerns on any subject imho.

[RumoredNow]

I appreciate your response and you do have a great point (about the users moving on), however with OM in the picture, your words become more like an excuse for flushing 35 grand down the toilet. If you were to pick a more reputable company like Myriad, you'd have my 100% agreement...

I agree with that 100%.

I would definitely back this project if it had a different parent company for the tech.

[bluenote]

Unfortunately, I believe that INITIALLY the beta testing will have to be closed under NDA. The purpose of the beta is to find and fix as many previously undiscovered bugs or issues as we can, and we don't want the software to be judged based on issues that we correct before the final version is completed.

This troubles me that the community is being asked to commit funds to a project, backed by entities who are not identified by name and/or who have not completed any project to date. That this entity is unwilling to have an independent party under nda trusted by the community evaluate the software initially as to viability of undertaking the project (statement about beta testing above I am assuming would also cover the case I described) because they are afraid the report will come back negative.

Software development is very difficult, Webos Ports for example still toiling on open webOS for months and months.

I'm noticing the Blackberry devs are hinting they will update their runtime for the phones (not even the tablet) to jellybean soon.

There was some guy on these forums who thought he could port open webOS to the Touchpad and i am wondering about him and if anyone has gotten an update. We haven't heard from LG in a few months and I'm wondering how that is going. I am starting to look ahead...