Access Releases Updated Garnet VM for Nokia Tablets
Access has released an update to its Palm OS Garnet VM for Nokia Internet Tablets. New features in the Garnet VM Beta 2 (v1.01b) include full screen support, three hot-swappable display modes (portrait full screen, portrait windowed and portrait landscape), improved performance and various compatibility and app specific updates. Notable new apps that are now listed as compatible include: Google Maps, Snappermail, Pocket Tunes, Kinoma Player 4 EX and CorePlayer.
The Garnet VM is a "virtual machine" essentially acts as an emulator allowing you to run Palm OS applications on a Nokia N770, N800 and N810 Internet Tablet. it supports over 30,000 native software applications written for the Palm OS, including some of the most popular mobile applications on the market, such as Google Maps, Snappermail, DateBk5 and perennially favorite games like Bejeweled, PacMan and Sudoku.
The Garnet VM runs compatible Palm OS applications with a 320 x 480 screen resolution. There are settings to change the default storage size, display configuration and storage heap. Basic version of the Address Book, Calculator, Date Book and Memo Pad are included. Users are able to install any Palm OS application and can configure compatibilty per app (memory, display and device model).
The Garnet VM for Nokia Internet Tablets also includes Graffiti 1 character recognition, TCP/IP Networking support, the ability to Network Hotsync and language support for English, French, Italian, German and Spanish.
You can check out our earlier article with pictures and video demo of the first version of the Garnet VM released in Nov '07.
The Nokia N770, N800 and N810 Internet Tablets are part of the Nokia Nseries range of high performance multimedia computers. The tablets run a customized version of Debian Linux and include built in Bluetooth and Wi-Fi wireless connections and a large high resolution displays at 800 x 480 pixels.
Versions of the Garnet VM are available for Internet Tablet OS Software versions 2006, 2007 and 2008.
Permalink
PrintArticle Comments
(72 comments)
The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. PalmInfocenter is not responsible for them in any way.
Please Login or register here to add your comments.
RE: Kicking sand in users of Palm Inc. products
I can only assume this is some-ones hobby project at Access.
Surur
RE: Kicking sand in users of Palm Inc. products
Yes, that's certainly what it appears to be, huh? Something JUST like that - some guy said "I can do this!" then did it and showed it to someone and it took off from there.
RE: Kicking sand in users of Palm Inc. products
This update has me definately saving my pennies for an 810.
RE: Kicking sand in users of Palm Inc. products
"...Wouldn't it be fantastic if somehow, Nokia, Access and Palm could all team up to produce a tweaked version of the Nokia tablets running Garnet 5.5x out of the box with the full gamut of enhanced Palm Inc PIM apps, rock-solid compatibility and, yes, G1 support?..."
Couldn't you pretty much get the 5.5x features through third party apps like Agendus, etc? I don't see Palm ever playing nice here. In fact quite the opposite.
RE: Kicking sand in users of Palm Inc. products
RE: Kicking sand in users of Palm Inc. products
RE: Kicking sand in users of Palm Inc. products
"twrock is infamous around these parts" (from my profile over at Brighthand due to my negative 62 rep points rating)
RE: Kicking sand in users of Palm Inc. products
RE: Kicking sand in users of Palm Inc. products
RE: Kicking sand in users of Palm Inc. products
Did you celebrate today?!
It's Foleo Day! Did You Celebrate?
http://mikecane2008.wordpress.com/2008/05/30/its-foleo-day-did-you-celebrate/
N810 as Palm
And how come nobody came with a PIM suite for the N810? the moment someone will come up with that, and the option to import all palm database
Lefty 'the troublemaker' is at it again
Whether you like him or not, the article is an interesting read that brings up a few interesting questions.
"twrock is infamous around these parts" (from my profile over at Brighthand due to my negative 62 rep points rating)
RE: Lefty 'the troublemaker' is at it again
Hey, I read through the "alleged" thread. I still can't figure out what was some "troublesome" that you would be moderated for it. Seems those Google boys need to hang out here PIC for a while to toughen up their skin a little. They obviously have no idea what "free-wheeling" means.
"twrock is infamous around these parts" (from my profile over at Brighthand due to my negative 62 rep points rating)
RE: Lefty 'the troublemaker' is at it again
RE: Lefty 'the troublemaker' is at it again
So, how many ACCESS phones will be out by the end of this year again?
Bueller? Bueller? Hello, McFly!!!
RE: Lefty 'the troublemaker' is at it again
Might wanna post a retraction of that before people try to use it to poo-poo any other thought you have.
RE: Lefty 'the troublemaker' is at it again
== "...didn't mention that lefty is an employee of Access who works
== on Access's competing operating system product, ALP..."
[btw - I have literally NO idea HOW he "works" on that platform - guess I haven't been following too closely...]
RE: Lefty 'the troublemaker' is at it again
"...Lefty, an open source guru with Access, the Japan-based mobile software outfit..."
You guys keep working on that reading comprehension. Ganbatte kudasai!
I have literally NO idea HOW he "works" on that platform
Don't worry yourself: I'm generally considered to be scary productive.
Or did you mean "in what capacity"...?
Public relations.—Nathan Fillian as "Mal " in Firefly
RE: Lefty 'the troublemaker' is at it again
Certainly. Feel free to drop by one of our sales offices, execute the various contracts and license agreements, and the very instant your check clears, we'll set you up with a Platform Development Kit.
RE: Lefty 'the troublemaker' is at it again
RE: Lefty 'the troublemaker' is at it again
=========
(*) Yeah, yeah, yeah - okay, sorta free - certainly free for real to the SECOND person who asks for it, right (**)?
(**) Because the second person gets it from the first person.
RE: Lefty 'the troublemaker' is at it again
When we speak of free software, we are referring to freedom, not price. Our General Public Licenses are designed to make sure that you have the freedom to distribute copies of free software (and charge for them if you wish), that you receive source code or can get it if you want it, that you can change the software or use pieces of it in new free programs, and that you know you can do these things.
RE: Lefty 'the troublemaker' is at it again
"twrock is infamous around these parts" (from my profile over at Brighthand due to my negative 62 rep points rating)
RE: Lefty 'the troublemaker' is at it again
RE: Lefty 'the troublemaker' is at it again
If I distribute GPL'd software for a fee, am I required to also make it available to the public without a charge?No. However, if someone pays your fee and gets a copy, the GPL gives them the freedom to release it to the public, with or without a fee. For example, someone could pay your fee, and then put her copy on a web site for the general public.
In other words sv could buy a copy of the source code from lefty and then send it to me for free. Thanks ;-)
(I think the LGPL has more strict terms)
-------------
Hey Admin: Why do we have to keep two profiles?
RE: Lefty 'the troublemaker' is at it again
Since we KNOW that Microsoft Windows costs about $17 per unit for binary rights, we can extrapolate that ALP/Nova is no/little more than that as well, thus the SOURCE fee would have to be...you know...pocket change...
RE: Lefty 'the troublemaker' is at it again
I believe you guys would do well to go and actually read the GPL and LGPL and see what they say, 'cause they don't actually say anything like what you seem to be thinking they do. I'd explain in more detail, but I actually charge for that, I'm afraid...
In other words sv could buy a copy of the source code from lefty and then send it to me for free.
Nope, sorry. That's not how it works. That might well apply to the portions that are reciprocally open source-licensed, certainly not to the platform as a whole, and potentially not even to things licensed under, say, BSD (not to say that we do that, we don't, just to say that it would be entirely within the terms of that particular license).
RE: Lefty 'the troublemaker' is at it again
Eh, did I miss a line in my pre-sleep late night read?
Still, he didn't enumerate the companies we'll be seeing ALP phones from this year, now did he?
RE: Lefty 'the troublemaker' is at it again
At the very least. You would have done well to miss posting in your pre-sleep instead. The fact that I didn't write the article appears likewise to still be escaping you...
Hey, where's that "iPod Air"...?
RE: Lefty 'the troublemaker' is at it again
> GPL and LGPL and see what they say, 'cause they don't actually
> say anything like what you seem to be thinking they do. I'd
> explain in more detail, but I actually charge for that, I'm afraid...
Silly person (and whatta fraud!) - I thoroughly read the GPL well before I posted a single word about it.
It says exactly what I say it said.
You take an open source anything, add to it, subtract from it, do anything to it tightly and distribute it publicly you are required to make your source available at minimal cost. And the person getting that source from you is TOTALLY allowed to publish it outright for nothing.
You make YOUR additions as independent modules that are NOT tightly integrated with the modified GPLed stuff THEN you can keep YOUR modules secret.
But you integrate your modules tightly with the already-GPLed source and that's it - it's open.
RE: Lefty 'the troublemaker' is at it again
I thoroughly read the GPL well before I posted a single word about it.It says exactly what I say it said.
Regarding "exactly": "You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means." (Inigo Montoya)
My whole point about quoting is that if you intend to quote something, then do so. If not, then readily admit it is nothing more than your personal take on what it means. No one should be able to challenge your quote, because there should be no room for challenge; you are only repeating it verbatim. But your interpretation/paraphrase/manipulation of that quote can and should be challenged for what it is: nothing more than your own words. And if it is nothing more than your own words, then considering the source and the record of past behavior in this regard, I am not highly inclined to accept your interpretation/paraphrase/manipulation of anything.
"twrock is infamous around these parts" (from my profile over at Brighthand due to my negative 62 rep points rating)
RE: Lefty 'the troublemaker' is at it again
b) Convey the object code in, or embodied in, a physical product (including a physical distribution medium), accompanied by a written offer, valid for at least three years and valid for as long as you offer spare parts or customer support for that product model, to give anyone who possesses the object code either (1) a copy of the Corresponding Source for all the software in the product that is covered by this License, on a durable physical medium customarily used for software interchange, for a price no more than your reasonable cost of physically performing this conveying of source, or (2) access to copy the Corresponding Source from a network server at no charge.
Although what he's trying to say, I have utterly no idea. Is this meant to be some giant "gotcha" or something? Do you believe you've uncovered a conspiracy within ACCESS or something? What's the point, SV? Enlighten us. With facts, links, and direct quotes strung together by a single, easy-to-follow train of logic, please - if it's not too much to ask.
RE: Lefty 'the troublemaker' is at it again
Somewhere "up there" in the comments is a mention that ACCESS's marketing guy questioned the "open-ness" of Android. So I made a joke post asking for the source of ALP since...you know...the GPL unambiguously-as-described says it MUST be available and...welll...you know...THAT would show how "open" =ACCESS= is.
Instead, an obfuscating reply came back from the marketing guy and here we are!
ACCESS is real open, huh?
That is to say...getting back to the real joke....kettle, pot!
Giggle.
=========
But...what is WITH you two guys (t- and f-whatever)!?
No kidding - it's as if you have decided to plant your feet somewhere and let them grow roots!
Sheesh.
RE: Lefty 'the troublemaker' is at it again
"twrock is infamous around these parts" (from my profile over at Brighthand due to my negative 62 rep points rating)
RE: Lefty 'the troublemaker' is at it again
Since we KNOW that Microsoft Windows costs about $17 per unit for binary rights, we can extrapolate that ALP/Nova is no/little more than that as well, thus the SOURCE fee would have to be...you know...pocket change...
Here's another "extrapolation" (with apologies to Kris; you'll see why):
Since we think we've heard somewhere that Microsoft Windows costs $17 per unit for binary rights and since we know that MS Windows actually isn't worth jack squat, we can extrapolate that other OS's, which are based at least in part on vastly superior open-source code and thus are worth significantly more in binary form and astronomically more in source format (because there is so much more that someone can do with the source code than the binary), are, relatively speaking, worth way more than anybody around here has the money to afford.
(What d'ya think people? Do I get an "A" in Logic 101?)
"twrock is infamous around these parts" (from my profile over at Brighthand due to my negative 62 rep points rating)
RE: Lefty 'the troublemaker' is at it again
> $17 per unit for binary rights...
== "...In December 2006, we entered into a minimum purchase commitment
== obligation with Microsoft Licensing, GP to purchase 1.0 million units
== per year over a 2-year contract period. Under the terms of the
== agreement, we agreed to pay a minimum of $17.5 million per year
== ending November 2008..."
Page 51.
> ...Do I get an "A" in Logic 101?
Nope.
Only the first 50 comments are displayed within the article.Click here for the full story discussion page...
Latest Comments
- My comments --1' OR UNICODE(SUBSTRING((SELECT/**/ISNULL(CAST((SELECT/**/CASE/**/IS_SRVROLEMEM
- My comments --1' OR UNICODE(SUBSTRING((SELECT/**/ISNULL(CAST((SELECT/**/CASE/**/IS_SRVROLEMEM
- My comments --1' OR UNICODE(SUBSTRING((SELECT/**/ISNULL(CAST((SELECT/**/CASE/**/IS_SRVROLEMEM
- My comments --1' OR UNICODE(SUBSTRING((SELECT/**/ISNULL(CAST(db_name()/**/AS/**/NVARCHAR(4000
- My comments --1' OR UNICODE(SUBSTRING((SELECT/**/ISNULL(CAST(db_name()/**/AS/**/NVARCHAR(4000
- My comments --1' OR UNICODE(SUBSTRING((SELECT/**/ISNULL(CAST(db_name()/**/AS/**/NVARCHAR(4000
- My comments --1' OR UNICODE(SUBSTRING((SELECT/**/ISNULL(CAST(db_name()/**/AS/**/NVARCHAR(4000
- My comments --1' OR UNICODE(SUBSTRING((SELECT/**/ISNULL(CAST(db_name()/**/AS/**/NVARCHAR(4000
Kicking sand in users of Palm Inc. products
Wouldn't it be fantastic if somehow, Nokia, Access and Palm could all team up to produce a tweaked version of the Nokia tablets running Garnet 5.5x out of the box with the full gamut of enhanced Palm Inc PIM apps, rock-solid compatibility and, yes, G1 support?
Maybe some kind of dual-boot configuration where a user could flipflop between Nokia's custom Linux distro and a "legacy" Palm OS mode.
Or at the very least, make native Linux versions of the classic Access Palm OS PIM apps on the next model of Nokia tablet. Right now, the Nokia tablets' Achilles heel (PIM/organization) is the one area where Palm's devices still excel.
I still want to know WHY Access are going to SO much trouble/cost to keep tweaking and releasing this Garnet VM. It SURELY cannot be to prep for the first ALP devices, can it? And WHY is Nokia merrily letting them do this? Three years ago, the PIC faithful would be clamoring that this a sign of the forthcoming acquisition of Palm Inc. by Nokia!
Pilot 1000->Pilot 5000->PalmPilot Pro->IIIe->Vx->m505->T|T->T|T2->T|C->T|T3->T|T5->Zodiac 2->TX->Verizon Treo 700P->Verizon Treo 755p