An OEM friendly solution

**justchat_1** · 10-05-2010, 02:23 PM

carPC companies and law abiding end users have traditionally resorted to proprietary software products and expensive operating systems to deliver the typical carPC experience.
Auto manufacturers and OEMs on the other hand cannot afford to spend $200+ on software alone and still deliver a product end users can afford.

Enter openMobile . . .

openMobile is a completely self contained ecosystem requiring no external software or proprietary operating systems. End users can plug in a thumb drive and start playing music without relying on Windows Media Player, WinAMP, Bass, or any external software subject to instability, bloat, increased startup times or version conflicts. All plugins are fully self contained, requiring no "helper apps", external programs or anything other then the operating system they run on.

Data providers for openMobile allow access to dozens of web based services while on the go. When combined with openMobile's database framework, they can always provide the best possible information while minimizing bandwidth usage or operating with no internet connection at all. Most importantly though, they follow strict guidelines for their designs to ensure no companies TOS are ever violated and that all data is legally obtained.

The Raw Hardware Framework allows OEMs to integrate openMobile with even proprietary hardware effortlessly. The framework presents a consistent interface to other skins and plugins that allows existing plugins to interface with hardware they may never have seen before.

All of which allows openMobile to meet the needs of end users ranging from hobbyists to major auto manufacturers.

**tripzero** · 10-05-2010, 03:42 PM

how will openmobile address the OEM licensing issue? Specifically regarding the GPL3 and the "tivo-ization clause" that many OEMs fear will open them up for lawsuits later down the road?

**justchat_1** · 10-05-2010, 04:57 PM

Originally Posted by tripzero

how will openmobile address the OEM licensing issue? Specifically regarding the GPL3 and the "tivo-ization clause" that many OEMs fear will open them up for lawsuits later down the road?

Thats an interesting question... I think that would depend on how they implemented their hardware though. They really are free to design whatever hardware and components they want...they just can't put measures in place that prevent you from modifying or replacing the software at some point in the future. Nothing in OM prevents itself or the OS from being replaced...so any violations would have to be an intentional action by the OEM. In the case of tivo this was done for DRM protection of recorded content but I can't see any reasons why an OEM would need or want to do this for an IVI system.

**malcom2073** · 10-05-2010, 07:05 PM

Originally Posted by justchat_1

I can't see any reasons why an OEM would need or want to do this for an IVI system.

Yet a good number of current IVI systems are locked down.

**justchat_1** · 10-05-2010, 07:21 PM

Originally Posted by malcom2073

Yet a good number of current IVI systems are locked down.

and how many of those are open source? not closed source and proprietary....
They are forced by licensing agreements in many cases to lock down the hardware...we do just the opposite.

**malcom2073** · 10-05-2010, 07:24 PM

Originally Posted by justchat_1

They are forced by licensing agreements in many cases to lock down the hardware

I'd be curious to see your source for this information? Not that I doubt you, but I always assumed it was both the hardware and the software manufacturers that lock it down, not just the software. I assume for liability issues (If you reprogram your ford computer, and wreak, you can blame it for distracting you)

**justchat_1** · 10-05-2010, 07:51 PM

Originally Posted by malcom2073

I'd be curious to see your source for this information? Not that I doubt you, but I always assumed it was both the hardware and the software manufacturers that lock it down, not just the software. I assume for liability issues (If you reprogram your ford computer, and wreak, you can blame it for distracting you)

I can't give any public sources...just inside information I have about the ford microsoft license agreement which I was guessing was the common case. Microsoft has a very elaborate software encryption system that prevents anything third party from being added to the system or any existing files from being changed (that part should be documentated online somewhere but I just can't seem to find it-signed assemblies and all that).

I'm pretty sure the hardware part would count as a consumer tampering with safety systems which would be illegal for the consumer to do but the manufacturer would not be liable (like swapping out your own airbags). Since OEMs generate revenue solely off hardware sales, I can't see any reason for them to limit software choice.

**tripzero** · 10-05-2010, 09:16 PM

There are many existing sytems that use Linux or open source QNX. Also Garmin and Tomtom both use Linux readily in their systems. You won't find any gpl3 software included for the very reason I mentioned. Any single piece of GPL3 software essentially makes the entire system GPL3 and prevents any hardware or software locking. The Linux kernel will likely always be GPL2 for this very reason -Linus thinks gpl3 is unnecessary.

If I were you, I'd look into possibly dual licensing it GPL3 or GPL2 and maybe some lax or commercial license for OEMs. Of course, that becomes more difficult as I believe their are multiple contributors now to OM.

**justchat_1** · 10-05-2010, 10:21 PM

Originally Posted by tripzero

There are many existing sytems that use Linux or open source QNX. Also Garmin and Tomtom both use Linux readily in their systems. You won't find any gpl3 software included for the very reason I mentioned. Any single piece of GPL3 software essentially makes the entire system GPL3 and prevents any hardware or software locking. The Linux kernel will likely always be GPL2 for this very reason -Linus thinks gpl3 is unnecessary.

If I were you, I'd look into possibly dual licensing it GPL3 or GPL2 and maybe some lax or commercial license for OEMs. Of course, that becomes more difficult as I believe their are multiple contributors now to OM.

The linux kernal is GPLv2...if it was GPLv3 I have no doubt garmin would be using it still. Neither garmin, TomTom nor magellan use hardware locks or prevent you from installing a plain version of linux on their hardware. Garmin has even released multiple GPLv3 tools to the linux community.

The point isn't whether or not GPLv3 prevents hardware locking (it obviously does)...its do OEMs really care? Just because their existing systems allow it doesn't mean they have any need or want for it.

**tripzero** · 10-05-2010, 11:28 PM

Originally Posted by justchat_1

The point isn't whether or not GPLv3 prevents hardware locking (it obviously does)...its do OEMs really care? Just because their existing systems allow it doesn't mean they have any need or want for it.

MeeGo is strictly GPL2 for this very reason and the reference user apps are all Apache v2 to encourage the least resistive OEM acceptance. Android is the same (GPL2 and Apache v2) likely for the same reason.

Garmin, Tomtom, etc may not have hardware locks now, but using GPL3 prevents them from adding them in the future, which may happen as a result of a lawsuit or when some overzelous lawyer gets scared. They can easily change the license of their own apps in that case. It's a bit harder to change the license of other's apps :P.

Anywayz, I didn't mean to draw this out this long. I was just curious if you considered that part of the GPL3 and the impact it may have for OEM adoption. OEMs that may be interested in OM may not even care and for others, it may be a deal-breaker.