PDA

View Full Version : Licensing of Commercial OSs -- a thought...



MikeTheC
April 5th, 2009, 05:49 AM
MODERATORS: Please read this post and the thread before deciding to move it to the "Recurring Discussions" section. It may belong there, or it may evolve into belonging there. Give it a fair chance; I won't protest.

I was driving home this evening and I had this thought pop into my head, and it's a question which I'd really like to get the input of the community on.

There's a lot of people, Mac OS X, Windows and Linux users alike, who complain about the fact that Apple doesn't license their OS and de-shackle it from the bonds and bounds of their own hardware offering. Now, I'm not here to debate the relative merits of their policy in this -- that's been done ad nauseum here and elsewhere -- but there's something I'm not hearing, and that's complaints about Texas Instruments' business policies.

Let me explain the Genesis of this whole thought process.

I'm 36 and am a recent first-time entrant into college. (Yeah, I know, but better late than never, right?) Anyhow, so I'm in a remedial math class, and one of the things they're talking about is that the next class, which isn't remedial, is "Intermediate Algebra". It's the first level math class where they allow you to use a calculator -- and, in fact, actually require it. The calculator range in question is the TI-83 series, which as a practical matter includes the TI-83, TI-83+, TI-84+ (there is no "TI-84"), and the Silver Editions of each of these "plus" models.

So, in kind of mentally preparing myself to take on this next level class in the next few weeks, I decided to start researching the relevant TI product range, and lo and behold, I found a wealth of info on them. They can do all kinds of neat stuff, such as running TI-language programs, Assembly, contact management and daytimer apps, and so forth and so on. All of this in addition to their baseline functionality of being a graphing calculator. Now, I know there are various software-based calculator programs out there, and so I started thinking "Gee, I wonder if TI has a software version of their calculator for my iPod Touch?"

Short answer: They don't. I don't even think they have software-only versions of the calculator at all. Anyhow, so let's fast-forward to this evening, when all of a sudden, the following question (and the whole point of this thread) hit me:

There's an awful lot of complaining and consternation at Apple for not licensing and releasing their OS for other hardware. Where's all the anger and wrath and anger over TI not releasing their widely-used (perhaps even moreso than Apple's Mac OS X platform?) TI-83/84 (or heck, 89/93, etc.) OS platform for other hardware? Why is nobody screaming over that?

Honest, folks, I'm not trying to stir the pot or turn this into a flame war. It's just it suddenly hit me, and I am genuinely curious what you folks think about that...

Newuser1111
April 5th, 2009, 05:56 AM
It's because of the type of processor.
(By the way, HP doesn't make TI.)

Giant Speck
April 5th, 2009, 06:01 AM
There's an awful lot of complaining and consternation at Apple for not licensing and releasing their OS for other hardware. Where's all the anger and wrath and anger over HP not releasing their widely-used (perhaps even moreso than Apple's Mac OS X platform?) TI-83/84 (or heck, 89/93, etc.) OS platform for other hardware? Why is nobody screaming over that?

Is it even possible to install and run the Texas Instruments calculator software on non-TI hardware in the first place? If not, it's not much of a comparison, considering it is very possible to install and run Apple's OS X on non-Apple hardware.

What I don't understand is why Apple makes software for OS X that allows users to install other operating systems (specifically Windows) on their hardware, but at the same time does not allow their own operating system to be installed on non-Apple software.

MikeTheC
April 5th, 2009, 06:03 AM
It's because of the type of processor.
(By the way, HP doesn't make TI.)

Yeah, but hardware emulation is not exactly a "new" science, and surely what's inside an iPod Touch/iPhone is faster and more powerful than what's inside those TI units.

MikeTheC
April 5th, 2009, 06:05 AM
What I don't understand is why Apple makes software for OS X that allows users to install other operating systems (specifically Windows) on their hardware, but at the same time does not allow their own operating system to be installed on non-Apple software.

In the spirit of keeping this as non-flame as I'm certain you intended, let me respond by pointing out that you can install self-written applications that run in Assembly on TI's better calculators (83/84/89/92/93, etc.) Now, that's probably not quite the same thing as a full-up OS, but I'll bet it would be possible, especially on the TI-84 series which is faster and has more flash memory space available.

Newuser1111
April 5th, 2009, 06:06 AM
Yeah, but hardware emulation is not exactly a "new" science, and surely what's inside an iPod Touch/iPhone is faster and more powerful than what's inside those TI units.Ok, using emulation, you can put it onto PC.

but:

An emulator is useless without a ROM (Read Only Memory) image, which contains the software you use to operate the calculator. It's illegal to distribute these ROM image files; you must copy the ROM from your calculator using a link cable. See our Linking section for link cable and link software information.

Actually downloading a ROM image is tricky, but newer emulator software makes the process easier. Below are instructions for obtaining a ROM from each calculator.

IMPORTANT: Do not ask us, or anyone else, for ROM images. It is illegal to distribute them. The only way to legally obtain a ROM image is to download it from your calculator using the procedures below.

MikeTheC
April 5th, 2009, 06:17 AM
Ok, using emulation, you can put it onto PC.

but:

Yes, but it's legal for TI themselves to do it. They can choose to write their OS and distribute it by whatever means they choose.

Giant Speck
April 5th, 2009, 06:34 AM
In the spirit of keeping this as non-flame as I'm certain you intended, let me respond by pointing out that you can install self-written applications that run in Assembly on TI's better calculators (83/84/89/92/93, etc.) Now, that's probably not quite the same thing as a full-up OS, but I'll bet it would be possible, especially on the TI-84 series which is faster and has more flash memory space available.

Yes, I am completely aware that you can install self-written applications on TI calculators. Programs can be written in TI-BASIC (which I've did many a time in high school) and assembly code. It is also possible to write programs which Texas Instruments calls "flash applications." You can take this ability and create psuedo-OSes for the TI calculator. One of the more popular pseudo-OSes is called DoorsOS.

The reason why I didn't think that comparing Texas Instruments and Apple had much validity is because in the graphing calculator market, companies such as Texas Instruments, HP, and Casio are not interested in trying to run or emulate their competition's software. They make their own hardware and their own software to run on that hardware. The lack of interest is probably because the graphing calculator has only one intended use, and that is to solve mathematical problems. While it is very possible to use these calculators for purposes other than the intended use, graphing calculator companies do not try to market on this ability. In addition, in this market, there are no such things as commercial applications, other than the ones created by the hardware companies themselves. You don't see companies developing and selling applications for graphing calculators. There'd be no profit to make.

Unlike graphing calculators, personal computers don't have an intended use, because the number of uses a personal computer can serve is near infinite. You can type text documents, view and edit media, and send messages. There are hundreds, if not thousands of third-party companies that develop software for personal computers. There are also a few (e.g. Apple, Microsoft, etc) that create operating systems for which those third-party applications can run. Companies that manufacture personal computer hardware are much more interested in running as many kinds of applications as possible, so why not be interested in running as many kinds of operating systems as possible?

What makes Apple so different from other operating-system companies is that they not only develop an operating system, but the hardware that specifically runs it. Microsoft, Sun Microsystems, Novell, and other operating-system companies don't limit their operating systems to their own hardware, if they even make hardware in the first place. You can run almost any operating system on Apple hardware, because it isn't very different from ordinary hardware that companies such as Dell, HP, and Gateway sell. However, despite the fact it is possible to install Apple's software on non-Apple hardware, it is not permitted by Apple's license agreement.

It's not an all-negative situation, though, and Apple certainly isn't stupid for limiting its software to its own hardware. By allowing its operating system to only be installed on its hardware, Apple drastically reduces the amount of possible compatibility problems and can provide support for hardware problems much more easily than if their operating system was installed on, say, Dell hardware.

A little off-topic, but there is no such thing as a TI-93. It goes 89, 89 Titanium, 92, 92 II, 92 Plus, Voyage 200, and TI-Nspire

Newuser1111
April 5th, 2009, 06:38 AM
Yes, I am completely aware that you can install self-written applications on TI calculators. Programs can be written in TI-BASIC (which I've did many a time in high school) and assembly code. It is also possible to write programs which Texas Instruments calls "flash applications." You can take this ability and create psuedo-OSes for the TI calculator. One of the more popular pseudo-OSes is called DoorsOS.You can install other OSes.
http://www.ticalc.org/pub/83plus/os/

Marco A
April 5th, 2009, 08:54 AM
.