Nokia N900 hacked for dual boot-up of Maemo and Android

4. macron2000 posted on 24 Jan 2010, 18:07 0 0

Uh, this is really huge, although not surprising. Nokia phones, like em or not, have always been extremely versitile (s60). But I think things like this put us that much closer to a world of just purchasing a phone and then activating it with whom we want. Hardly do we find the perfect piece of hardware, OS, and network all in one package. Id love to have the features of the N900 inside the hardware of the Touch Pro2 running Android OS with BB messaging skills activated on the network of my choice. Incredible. I will wake up soon, but for now, what a dream.

5. Jeromeo posted on 24 Jan 2010, 18:59 0 0

Isn't the point of purchasing an item to make it yours? To be able to do whatever you want with it? Whether you want to put rhinestones all over the cover, throw it on the ground, or hack it, YOU paid for it-YOU should be able to do anything you want to it. Congrats to Nokia/Maemo for not limiting the enduser & encouraging advanced development. Note to dmberta: what a stupid thing to say... Macs used to be limited to iApple OS; now users have the choice to boot up with Mac OS, Windows, or Linux on the same device. Options inspire change & innovation... Would a car be more productive if it could only drive from home to work to friend's houses? What if it could drive to any destination of the drivers choice? What if the driver could change the headlights or settings before the headlights auto shutoff/autolevel, the seat's material, the paint color, the rim size/finish, navigation option, speaker output, or the entire drivetrain? The iPhone is one of the best electronic devices to ever hit the market ever, but because of its limitations it still cannot do things like transfer any type of file or data over bluetooth when monochrome devices could send any file type to any other bluetooth device back in 2002. These restrictions help large corporations bottom lines and squeese money out of the consumer. E.g. if an iPhone user bought a song, ringtone, or video and transferred it to the friend sitting across the couch from them, it would subtract from iTunes overinflated prices and therefore detract from sales. Why send a photo or contact via bluetooth for free when one user could pay the app store for a retarded bump transfer application which incidentally requires the recipient to also pay for that same app to complete the transfer process? Because it is simply more profitable to limit the consumer. *Choice is better for the market & whether the consumer realizes it or not!*