[PLUG-TALK] Rooting Android phone
bill at billbarry.org
Mon Mar 7 23:44:21 PST 2011
On Mon, Mar 7, 2011 at 9:55 PM, John Jason Jordan <johnxj at comcast.net> wrote:
> On Mon, 7 Mar 2011 16:02:46 -0800 (PST)
> alan at clueserver.org dijo:
>>The Motorola Atrix 4G has a signed bootloader, which means replacing
>>the OS is very difficult without bricking the phone. (A very
>>anti-open-source move for a company using an open source OS.)
>>This is why I will not buy Motorola any more.
> Given that Motorola sucks, what brand has Android phones that are the
> most open?
I don't think the problem is Motorola. My Verizon/Motorola Droid does
not have a signed bootloader. It was rooted shortly after it was
released and the new ones are still rootable as far as I know. The
problem is not Motorola, but AT&T.
In general smartphones are still just OK. Even though the Android is
based on Linux, it occasionally just reboots itself. My desktop stays
up months at a time and only has to be rebooted when I upgrade the
kernel. The Android phone has that crappy Java layer on top which
makes it slow and buggy. Overall, it's not nearly as good as it could
be. That said, my previous phone was much worse. It's only apps were
totally controlled by Verizon and they were not worth using. Even the
voice mail was not replaceable and it was really terrible. So even
though I don't totally like my phone it is a huge step up from
previous generation of phones totally designed by Cellular providers.
What I would really like is a phone with a nice lightweight window
manager that was compiled and fast, not interpreted and slow.
More information about the PLUG-talk