Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Handhelds Iphone Ubuntu

Ubuntu One Gets iPhone App For Contact Sync 115

Posted by kdawson
from the plays-nicely-with-others dept.
oneone writes "Canonical is bringing its Ubuntu One cloud service (which we discussed last month) to handheld devices with a new mobile contact synchronization feature that is powered by Funambol. Canonical's Ubuntu One application for the iPhone is now available from the iTunes Music Store. Android and other mobile operating systems will be supported with Funambol's standard client application. The mobile sync feature is currently in the beta testing stage but will be generally available to Ubuntu One subscribers when Ubuntu 10.04 is released later this month. Canonical says that it is boosting its Ubuntu One server infrastructure in order to support what it anticipates will be record loads."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Ubuntu One Gets iPhone App For Contact Sync

Comments Filter:
  • Good for Canonical... a major pain in modern consumer electronics is data/metadata sync, and one that's worth paying to have solved properly.
  • What about the people who own an iPhone, run Ubuntu, but don't use iTunes?

    Is there going to be a way for them to install the application? Keep it up to date?

    • by darkgumby (647085)
      I installed it via the 'App Store' app on the iphone. No iTunes needed.
    • With iPhone/iPodTouch OS v1 you had to use the desktop iTunes to install apps. Since v2 (or maybe v3... I can't remember), you can install apps directly onto the iPhone/Touch.
    • So, basically I'll need an iTunes account. No way around this huh? I wonder if there are app store licence issues with publishing to the iTunes app store and Cydia.
      I just don't want an itunes account :(
  • by Beuno (740018) <argentina@[ ]il.com ['gma' in gap]> on Monday April 05, 2010 @07:22PM (#31742834) Homepage

    Just so everybody is aware, the servers are quite overloaded at the moment, so expect all kinds of timeouts. We didn't expect so many testers :)
    We will be slowly bringing it back in it's feet, so patience is welcomed.

  • How about being able to sync with machines in my house without having to go OUT of my house? Surely the average Linux user isn't so sold on 'the cloud' ?
    • by trapnest (1608791)
      Do you not have network access at home?
    • by VoltageX (845249)
      If I remember correctly, this is a layer on top of a SyncML server - install one on a local box and you'll have the syncing you want.
    • by Sporkinum (655143)

      Not that I give a rat's ass about anything mobile. Why would I want to put anything into a "cloud" that I don't own or control? I didn't see anything about encryption, and without a high level of encryption that only I own the keys to, it would be not for me.

      • This is exactly my point. As far as I am concerned, until there are standards restricting these guys on how they lock everything down when you upload your stuff to the cloud you might as well be posting it on YouTube
  • by nurb432 (527695) on Monday April 05, 2010 @07:43PM (#31743030) Homepage Journal

    Is this the beginning of their move to (mostly) pay product model, like Red Hat did after they used the OSS community for all they could?

    • by Beuno (740018) <argentina@[ ]il.com ['gma' in gap]> on Monday April 05, 2010 @07:58PM (#31743160) Homepage

      No. We partnered with Funambol to provide this service, and it carries a significant cost to both develop and maintain and scale this specific service, as the announcement says.
      Supporting hundreds of different mobile phones is an incredibly expensive task, and on top of that we've added a layer that saves those contacts to couchdb and replicates them locally for you, to be used with any application you wish.
      While we all love and use free software, it's completely unreasonable to demand that services be provided for free. The service also provides a 30 day free trial, where you can perform a one-time sync if you wish to have a backup of your contacts.

      I personally believe that allowing people to sync their contacts from almost any mobile phone into a Linux desktop is a huge step forward.

      • Supporting hundreds of different mobile phones is an incredibly expensive task

        It is? Why? Aren't they supposed to use all SyncML? Even if they don't support it natively (for shame!), there are usually apps for it.

        There are some SyncML servers, like https://www.mobical.net/ [mobical.net] . They seem to be able to provide the services for free.

        • by Macka (9388) on Monday April 05, 2010 @09:39PM (#31743986)

          There are some SyncML servers, like https://www.mobical.net/ [mobical.net] [mobical.net] . They seem to be able to provide the services for free

          Free to you, but not because it doesn't cost them. Their business model allows them to offer you a free service because you're their Guinea Pig. What they learn from servicing you, they sell on to other people. It took me about 30 seconds to find this explanation on their web site:

          "The purpose of Mobical.net is to introduce people all over the world to the benefits of using Tactel’s product Mobical for mobile synchronization. Tactel doesn't make any profit from this service; we only use it to develop, test and market new mobile synchronization technology that we sell to our customers: network operators, handset vendors, service providers, etc. That is how we can offer a free service and still make a business, and that is why we are committed to ensuring the privacy, integrity and security of your data."

          Canonical's business model is different and so they need to charge for the infrastructure (servers, disks, network, etc) required to provide this service. As they said, they have no problem with free software, but free services are a different beast all together. Don't be a tight arse. If you want them to succeed, then support them !!

          • Actually, I'm planning to do self hosting on my pentium III laptop that's running as a server.

            But my point was not that mobical was doing it from the kindness of the hearts, it's: if there are companies who offer the service for free, why does Canonical think they can get people to pay for it? I think most people will prefer to be mobical's guinea pig or better yet, they'll use Google's service [google.com]*

            * btw, isn't it odd that Google's own service supports every mobile except Android?

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by stephanruby (542433)

        I personally believe that allowing people to sync their contacts from almost any mobile phone into a Linux desktop is a huge step forward.

        Not really. gmail or syncml could already do this, and do it for free (at least, the synchronization worked fine between my Nokia E71, my Droid, and my linux boxes). Your service apparently can't do it for free, and can't even stay up right now. May be, you just meant to say "a huge step backward", so if that's the case, I'd say yes, this service is taking at least a couple of little steps backwards.

      • Parent is correct.

        I'll be happy to cough up some dough for quality services that integrate well with my free Ubuntu desktop. PIM-syncing type operations have been a headache for me, and I am sure other users, and it's excellent to see the need being addressed. Although I won's need this, as I'm all Googly now, I look forward to trying out the music store.

        Charlie

    • When you find a better way for a company to make money than by having people pay them for a product, let me know. (And counterfeiting does not count.) Besides, they've already promised [ubuntu.com] that "Ubuntu will always be free of charge," so I don't know what you're concerned about.
      • by PopeRatzo (965947) * on Monday April 05, 2010 @08:28PM (#31743450) Homepage Journal

        When you find a better way for a company to make money than by having people pay them for a product, let me know.

        OK, you asked...

        Lots of companies make money by selling us a "license" to use the products they provide, rather than letting us buy the product itself. It's becoming more common, so apparently, someone out there has found a "better way for a company to make money than by having people pay them for a product".

        • Lots of companies make money by selling us a "license" to use the products they provide, rather than letting us buy the product itself. It's becoming more common, so apparently, someone out there has found a "better way for a company to make money than by having people pay them for a product".

          Ok, you guessed wrong.

          Sure, Google, Volkswagen, Boeing, 7-Eleven, Ace Hardware, Sherwin-Williams, and countless others write or customize software. Some even return improvements back to the FOSS community. However, these companies use software to make their money. The list goes on and together they make up the GDP.

          Lots of companies, perhaps in absolute numbers 'sell' software. But compared to the companies that make their money in other ways, those that sell a license are functionally zero percent

          • by PopeRatzo (965947) *

            functionally zero percent

            Microsoft, Apple, the game industry and the entire music and movie industry would disagree with you.

            So stop yapping about business models that 'sell' licenses and let that meme die.

            No.

            • Those examples support the point I made that software is a means to the end and that 'selling' it is largely irrelevant to the GDP.

              Apple sells hardware with software as an enabler, some nasty blobs on top of FOSS. The music and games [wikipedia.org] industries sell data, not software. So let that meme about 'selling' software die. It's done. Stick a fork in it.

              No one 'buys' software or 'licenses', that's 1980's talk. Software is a tool that you download to get your real money-making work done.

              • No one 'buys' software or 'licenses', that's 1980's talk. Software is a tool that you download to get your real money-making work done.

                Really? Then what do you call it when people buy apps that serve no money-making purpose for the end user for their phones and other devices?

                • Then what do you call it when people buy apps that serve no money-making purpose for the end user for their phones and other devices?

                  Usually it is called stupid [businessinsider.com]. (Re-)read my previous comment. You will find in absolute numbers many such stupid practices. However, in terms of percentage of the GDP in any given country, it is insignificant enough to be inappropriate to bring up.

                  Most software is written by companies and agencies as a means to an end. Some write FOSS. Some build upon FOSS and even return improvements back to the FOSS community. These companies use software to make their money. The list goes on and together they mak

      • by nurb432 (527695)

        When you find a better way for a company to make money than by having people pay them for a product, let me know. (And counterfeiting does not count.) Besides, they've already promised [ubuntu.com] that "Ubuntu will always be free of charge," so I don't know what you're concerned about.

        1 - Ever hear of support? Product for free, support for $. Lots of companies solely thrive on this concept of support ( of others products ). They often call it 'professional services'. I suggest you look it up sometime. There is no reason it cant work if you support your own products that you give away.

        2 - Promises from companies have been broken before. Quite often actually. You might want to trust some corporate entity who's directors can change and thus the direction of the company, but i dont.

        • by laughingcoyote (762272) <barghesthowlNO@SPAMexcite.com> on Monday April 05, 2010 @08:48PM (#31743624) Journal

          Promises from companies have been broken before. Quite often actually. You might want to trust some corporate entity who's directors can change and thus the direction of the company, but i dont.

          And the moment that Ubuntu becomes nonfree and/or pay-to-play (either in a de jure or de facto sense), I have my data backed up. I'll move away without a regret or a second thought. And yes, free (free as in beer AND speech) software has existed for quite some time. No one needs a company for it. If you can figure a way to make money off it, great. If you can't, then to be honest, fuck yourself. It's not there for that purpose, it just allows for that purpose if you can pull it off.

          That, however, is the exact reason that I absolutely insist on local storage of my data. If you control the data that I generate using my software, you control my use of it. I will not concede that control to even an entity that is now entirelty benevolent. That data is mine. If I wish to migrate it away, for any reason from malevolence to a simple wish to experiment, that's my right to do as well. I will not allow external storage or control of critical data.

        • 1 - Ever hear of support? Product for free, support for $. Lots of companies solely thrive on this concept of support ( of others products ). They often call it 'professional services'. I suggest you look it up sometime. There is no reason it cant work if you support your own products that you give away.

          And Canonical offers that, if fact IIRC it was the first commercial offering Canonical did. But they are not a 'professional services' company, they are a software company with more than a handful of (320+ according to wikipedia I just checked) employees which means they need to, just like every other company, try many avenues to make money to keep those people employed. And quite frankly as a linux admin myself I have (like many of us) a superiority complex that tells me I would never need to purchase su

        • by tepples (727027)

          Ever hear of support?

          How would you charge for support for, say, a video game that isn't massively multiplayer?

          • And how do you charge for support when it is a rather simple and small app (on the user side) that is written well enough to be essentially support free (with community support that answers any questions faster than you could pick up the phone and read in your credit card info for paid support)?
        • 1 - Ever hear of support? Product for free, support for $. Lots of companies solely thrive on this concept of support ( of others products ). They often call it 'professional services'. I suggest you look it up sometime. There is no reason it cant work if you support your own products that you give away.

          Congratulations, now a company has to create two enticing products instead of one.

        • Product for free, support for $. Lots of companies solely thrive on this concept of support ( of others products ).

          Why isn't this self-defeating? If you're supporting someone else's product, what's the incentive for them to make it? If you're supporting your own product, what's the incentive to improve it?

          The more you improve your product, the less support you can sell. Doesn't that make you want to have an enticing, yet difficult-to-use product?

          Unless all your support involves customer-specific modificatio

    • by spikeb (966663)
      RH still contributes MIGHTILY to the OSS community. we were not, and are not being used by them.
      • Re: (Score:1, Flamebait)

        by nurb432 (527695)

        we were not, and are not being used by them.

        Having been around the community since before they existed, I disagree.

        • by spikeb (966663)
          haha is about the only response for that kind of thing.
        • by maeka (518272)

          we were not, and are not being used by them.

          Having been around the community since before they existed, I disagree.

          I'm all ears.

    • I think you are mis-understanding "free" in "free software" (or OSS for that matter, which is strictly speaking less "free" than "free software"). Hint: it's not referring to money.

      The GPL even explicitly allows you to charge for the software (it's just that the source must then be available).

      Pretty much no-one objects to charging for a service.

    • by selven (1556643)

      Yes, this is the beginning of their move to being a strong, profitable business instead of just the charity arm of Mark Shuttleworth.

  • Then users could sync all their data (calendar, email push, tasks to phones that have that) as well as contacts.
  • I thought the GPLv3 was incompatible with App Store distribution.
    I haven't seen anything in the Affero addition that would clear the Tivoization, DRM, etc. clauses.

    http://itunes.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/viewEula?id=365281620 [apple.com]

  • Will the appeasing of the hipsters every cease http://www.latfh.com/ [latfh.com]

"It's like deja vu all over again." -- Yogi Berra

Working...