diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'open-source-101-pms.txt')
| -rw-r--r-- | open-source-101-pms.txt | 64 |
1 files changed, 64 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/open-source-101-pms.txt b/open-source-101-pms.txt new file mode 100644 index 0000000..64da5c2 --- /dev/null +++ b/open-source-101-pms.txt @@ -0,0 +1,64 @@ +1. FOSS quality + +1a. Security Myths: + +Anyone can see open source code, so it's easier to create security exploits. + +CVE data shows Microsoft products have more critical venerabilities than Linux +products: + +http://www.cvedetails.com/cvss-score-charts.php?fromform=1&vendor_id=33&product_id=&startdate=2011-04-04&enddate=2016-04-04 +http://www.cvedetails.com/cvss-score-charts.php?fromform=1&vendor_id=26&product_id=&startdate=2011-04-04&enddate=2016-04-04 + +Hiding code does not make a product safer. + + +1a. Maintainability + +Car manufacturers get most of their software stack from third-party vendors who +put all the security liability on the manufacturers. There is no incentive to +update or keep their software secure. Since, car manufacturers have such a long +ramp-up time for safety approval and they have to maintain the car software +stack for 7-10 years, they are turning to open source. + +http://embedded-computing.com/articles/the-car-its-about-integration/ + +"What's not so obvious is that as complexity grows, the ability to innovate +shrinks. Why? Because if more and more of your development time and resources +are spent managing development options, associated requirements, and integration +testing, less time, money, expertise, and creative energy are available for +invention." + +"Open source maintainership is for life." + + + +5. Cost of technical debt +Talk dollars + +Android devices vs kernel versions and dates (as of March 31, 2016) + +Android Version |API Level |Linux Kernel in AOSP |% of Android devices |Kernel release date |Latest stable version |# of patches to port +-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- +1.5 Cupcake |3 |2.6.27 | | | | +1.6 Donut |4 |2.6.29 | | | | +2.0/1 Eclair |5-7 |2.6.29 | | | | +2.2.x Froyo |8 |2.6.32 | | | | +2.3.x Gingerbread |9, 10 |2.6.35 | | | | +3.x.x Honeycomb |11-13 |2.6.36 | | | | +4.0.x Ice Cream San|14, 15 |3.0.1 | | | | +4.1.x Jelly Bean |16 |3.0.31 | 8.1% |2012 | | +4.2.x Jelly Bean |17 |3.4.0 | 11.0% |2012 | | +4.3 Jelly Bean |18 |3.4.39 | 3.2% |2013 | | +4.4 Kit Kat |19, 20 |3.10 | 34.3% |2013 | | +5.x Lollipop |21, 22 |3.16.1 | 36.1% |2014 | | +6.0 Marshmallow |23 |3.18.10 | 2.3% |2015 | | + +sources: +http://android.stackexchange.com/questions/51651/which-android-runs-which-linux-kernel +http://developer.android.com/about/dashboards/index.html + +QUESTION: Do phone manufacturers choose to use an older version of AOSP so they +can run on cheaper hardware? Or is the above chart just showing the aging of +older phones? + |