[Tilt, TyTN II, MDA Vario III Windows Mobile ROM De] bengalih:
@sess

I think you have either not read all my posts here or else have misunderstood (or I have not been clear enough).

Firstly, I do not have a preconcieved notion that everyone thinks like I do. Nor have any of my posts been negative. Yes I state my opinions, but in the process i have asked others "why?" to get a genuine sense of what would be the advantage to various people. (in fact, see previous threads where I state that my questions are

genuine

to actually understand the needs of others)

There was a misunderstanding at the beginning of the thread (perhaps all on me) between the difference of:

a) Running Linux on your phone

b) Having a phone that runs on linux

There is a difference between the two. For a) I don't see any point unless, as you state (AND I already pointed out in an earlier thread) you are using it for development purposes. I imagine this as just being able to BOOT linux on your phone, use it like a mini workstation, but not necessarily being able to use all your phone's features. This is what I initially thought the OPs were talking about. While there is a small segment who might find this useful (like yourself who would use it for development on the go) I can't really see the need for the vast majority OTHER than novelty. Does that mean it shouldn't be developed? By no means. It just means there is less a chance it will be developed unless people like you work on it.

With b) a phone that runs ON linux, it would mean that the ROM kernel is linux, it has a full suite of applications and drivers that can give us the same feature set that we currently have. This would include a large community of user created applications like we currently have on WM. I am FULLY in support of that I am just sceptical of it happening any time soon if at all. This isn't to say that I wouldn't be excited about it, nor supportive of it. I am just being realistic.

I am not being a WM fanboy, but anyone who bought a WM device obviously did it because they thought the functionality on it was superior to anything out there (or they would have bought something else...like a normal phone and one of those nokia tablets that can run linux). To have bought one with only the hope that someone would develop an alternate OS for it would just be wishful thinking.

@gthing

Well firstly I wouldn't want any bastard child of WM and OSX :)... I'd prefer just to go the straight linux route. And what you state is valid and true for most users (not just of WM) is that we tolerate it for the features. This is the case with linux on the desktop too. The vast majority of people continue to tolerate Windows because of the features even though they might get a little more speed and stability. But please do realize (w/out this turning into a classic Linux vs MS debate), that if you tried to do all the same things on a linux system (like an in-depth GUI, game support, wide compatibility options, feature rich etc..) you would start to bog down just like windows.

Again please let me state I am not being a MS fanboy...I run linux as well. But I disagree that doing things under my linux system are that much faster or stable then doing them on MS system. For day to day activities I much prefer my windows system because I find the years and years of GUI interaction (and yes...BLOAT :) ) make it easier to navigate. This may be a personal choice as I have worked with GUIs on Windows longer than GUIs on linux. However there are tools i need that Windows won't run (or won't run well) and so i use linux for these.

It is the age old debate of features, vs. performance, vs usability and it certainly won't get settled here, so i don't want to debate it further. My final point is that I wanted to distinguish from the a/b scenarios above. If you find my a/b argument flawed please advise.