This page is not a forum for general discussion about Bada. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about Bada at the Reference desk. |
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
According to Samsung's press release, bada is "open". However, that's pretty meaningless. Microsoft also calls everything it does "open". Before adding the word "open" to the article, I think we should wait to see what kind of license is attached to bada.-- Lester 09:13, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
Bada is not actually an OS but just a software platform which can sit upon any OS and provide a single API to the applications. So the article should be rewritten with that in mind. Hypertonik ( talk) 13:42, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
The article quotes some bold statements of up to 50 million users this year. I don't think that relates to Samsung's official estimate well. The latest they've said is that
- they want to sell 24 million smartphones this year
- about half of their new smartphone models will come with Android, another third with Bada
Very roughly, one can deduce an estimate of 8 million Bada phones shipping this year, depending on which model is selling what amount. 50 million seems too unreasonable as to be mentioned here. Thoughts? -- Repetition ( talk) 11:53, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
I moved the article under a new name since the current name was false. Bada uses different operating systems to create a platform for smartphone application development, but it is not an operating system itself. -- Drieakko ( talk) 09:46, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
"Bada application framework only allows one Bada application at a time. Multitasking is possible between the base applications stored in ROM and one Bada application.". Multitasking works ok on my phone. I tested it on several downloaded samsung apps. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.25.181.195 ( talk) 08:15, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
guidelines at WP:MOSTM suggest that this article needs to be titled Bada rather than bada (see the part on Adidas, and the corresponding article). 118.90.97.210 ( talk) 10:49, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: page moved per request. Disambiguation page also moved, per comment below. - GTBacchus( talk) 16:27, 24 September 2011 (UTC)
Bada (operating system) →
Bada –
Primary topic. Page views:
54,530,
3,216,
110,
74.
Marcus
Qwertyus
00:55, 17 September 2011 (UTC)
HTML5 is not going to be finished for years, there is no way to have "Full" HTML5 Support 75.94.224.91 ( talk) 22:42, 14 September 2012 (UTC)
Please do not add unverified information about FreeBSD kernel without reliable sources confirming this exactly. For example this changes: [1], [2].
Mentioned source - Open Source License Agreement - says only that some unspecified code under BSD license from FreeBSD, OpenBSD and NetBSD was used. It does not specify that a kernel was taken from FreeBSD/OpenBSD/NetBSD. This license agreement says that some code was used. It could be a whole kernel, part of kernel, part of one driver, an user space program or user space library. Or even something written in shell! The source does not confirm that FreeBSD kernel is used.
Another issue with this source - why FreeBSD kernel but not OpenBSD or NetBSD? Source mentions 3 of these projects so why FreeBSD was chosen? Maybe it was OpenBSD? Summarizing - mentioned source does not mention any kernel (nor FreeBSD kernel) used, so it does not confirm that fact. Please do not add this fact unless new reliable source is found. -- KoziK ( talk) 13:54, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
I thought that it used its own RTOS/BSDs, why does the infobox say it is Linux? Ref 2 which supposedly says it is Linux doesn't even mention Linux, just saying "Kernel" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 180.194.248.68 ( talk) 05:57, 10 December 2012 (UTC)
This page is not a forum for general discussion about Bada. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about Bada at the Reference desk. |
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
According to Samsung's press release, bada is "open". However, that's pretty meaningless. Microsoft also calls everything it does "open". Before adding the word "open" to the article, I think we should wait to see what kind of license is attached to bada.-- Lester 09:13, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
Bada is not actually an OS but just a software platform which can sit upon any OS and provide a single API to the applications. So the article should be rewritten with that in mind. Hypertonik ( talk) 13:42, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
The article quotes some bold statements of up to 50 million users this year. I don't think that relates to Samsung's official estimate well. The latest they've said is that
- they want to sell 24 million smartphones this year
- about half of their new smartphone models will come with Android, another third with Bada
Very roughly, one can deduce an estimate of 8 million Bada phones shipping this year, depending on which model is selling what amount. 50 million seems too unreasonable as to be mentioned here. Thoughts? -- Repetition ( talk) 11:53, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
I moved the article under a new name since the current name was false. Bada uses different operating systems to create a platform for smartphone application development, but it is not an operating system itself. -- Drieakko ( talk) 09:46, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
"Bada application framework only allows one Bada application at a time. Multitasking is possible between the base applications stored in ROM and one Bada application.". Multitasking works ok on my phone. I tested it on several downloaded samsung apps. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.25.181.195 ( talk) 08:15, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
guidelines at WP:MOSTM suggest that this article needs to be titled Bada rather than bada (see the part on Adidas, and the corresponding article). 118.90.97.210 ( talk) 10:49, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: page moved per request. Disambiguation page also moved, per comment below. - GTBacchus( talk) 16:27, 24 September 2011 (UTC)
Bada (operating system) →
Bada –
Primary topic. Page views:
54,530,
3,216,
110,
74.
Marcus
Qwertyus
00:55, 17 September 2011 (UTC)
HTML5 is not going to be finished for years, there is no way to have "Full" HTML5 Support 75.94.224.91 ( talk) 22:42, 14 September 2012 (UTC)
Please do not add unverified information about FreeBSD kernel without reliable sources confirming this exactly. For example this changes: [1], [2].
Mentioned source - Open Source License Agreement - says only that some unspecified code under BSD license from FreeBSD, OpenBSD and NetBSD was used. It does not specify that a kernel was taken from FreeBSD/OpenBSD/NetBSD. This license agreement says that some code was used. It could be a whole kernel, part of kernel, part of one driver, an user space program or user space library. Or even something written in shell! The source does not confirm that FreeBSD kernel is used.
Another issue with this source - why FreeBSD kernel but not OpenBSD or NetBSD? Source mentions 3 of these projects so why FreeBSD was chosen? Maybe it was OpenBSD? Summarizing - mentioned source does not mention any kernel (nor FreeBSD kernel) used, so it does not confirm that fact. Please do not add this fact unless new reliable source is found. -- KoziK ( talk) 13:54, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
I thought that it used its own RTOS/BSDs, why does the infobox say it is Linux? Ref 2 which supposedly says it is Linux doesn't even mention Linux, just saying "Kernel" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 180.194.248.68 ( talk) 05:57, 10 December 2012 (UTC)