This is a post I wrote a long time ago, when this blog was first conceived. I decided to hold off on posting it, because I thought it'd be better to do some technical posts before waxing philosophically. I think it is still appropriate, so as we work on reverse engineering the NAND FTL, here's some food for thought.
Porting Linux to the iPhone is an arduous project. We will be trying to develop an entire suite of device drivers for undocumented hardware and then attempt to run a full-fledged operating system on it. This thread speculates "10 days" or "3 hours" as the amount of time it'd take to get Linux up and running on the iPhone. Perhaps this figure would be accurate on a x86 platform, or other platforms with hardware for which device drivers are already written or for which at least documentation is available, but we have no such luck on the iPhone.
This comment on a O'Reilly Radar article about NerveGas's iPhone Open Application Development book says, with perhaps a little too much vitriol for my taste, that developers should not waste time on the iPhone, a closed platform, and spend time more productively on OpenMoko or Android: truly open platforms. Apple should thus be punished for not making the iPhone open. His point is well-taken though. Reverse engineering Apple's code is inefficient and ought to be unnecessary. Why do I bother when I can just develop on an open platform instead with no such wasted effort?
Finally, I have faced skepticism even from my fellow Dev Team members when I first talked about this project. The iPhone already has a perfectly serviceable operating system that we can develop on. Why does it need another one? Sure, Linux might be cool, but what practical use would it have? How does it justify the tremendous amount of effort that would need to be put in?
So. Why do I bother? Why should we bother?
Part of the answer is that I don't choose which platform I hack on based on how hackable it is. I choose it based on how much I like it. I don't own an OpenMoko device; it simply doesn't look as polished as the iPhone, and support is lacking for it. It wouldn't make sense to buy it to use it, only to buy it to hack on it. While this may work for other people, it's simply not the way a (relatively) starving college student does things. As for the Android, I'm not too convinced about how amazing it will be from the videos I've seen and besides: It doesn't even exist yet! In general, the more people use a device, the more hackers use it, and thus the more it is hacked on. Usability frankly trumps hackability.
The other part of the answer is that iPhone Linux will actually be of tremendous value. There will be no more need to port applications over: The applications already run on the iPhone! Also, with a familiar kernel, we can do all kinds of things I've wanted to do: doing security related work with the wi-fi for example. Plus, knowledge that we are gaining/will have gained about the iPhone hardware will be of incredible practical value to the homebrew iPhone community. We've always wanted to be able to plug in the iPhone as a simple USB mass storage device. With USB and NAND FTL drivers, we can actually implement this ourselves.
Perhaps my most important point is how iPhone Linux will affect the various open platforms in development. The iPhone has revolutionized the way the market thinks about mobile computing and now several mobile platforms are in development: OpenMoko, Google's Android, and Mobile Ubuntu (thought the last is not targeted for phones). All of these projects are based on Linux, and "based on Linux" means that, by definition, they "use the Linux kernel" and the Linux kernel is exactly what we're porting. As long as the kernel works, the rest of the operating system will barely need to be touched at all! (fine print: provided that the working configuration of the kernel can support all the features the userland requires).
Imagine OpenMoko on the iPhone. Android on the iPhone. Ubuntu Mobile on the iPhone. Consumers will have choice, and not some Linux-hippie idealistic choice-for-the-sake-of-choice choice: All of these platforms have major momentum behind them and it is very possible they will end up being better than the iPhone's platform (have better UI, more application support, etc.). Also, imagine what it will mean for the developers of these platforms: A ready userbase of millions of users. If many people can already install and try out one of these platforms, it'll be far easier to attract users to buy the hardware, and developers to develop for the platform. Thus, I do not believe we are harming the open platforms by developing on the iPhone. In fact, if all goes well, we will be allowing them to conquer the Apple iPhone.
Of course, I know the reply to all of this. "That sounds good, now show me the code." It's important not to overpromise and underdeliver, so I will be very cautious. What I have just said is the hope, the best possible outcome. But just having that as a possibility is tantalizing enough to justify working on this project. However, to be honest, my original justification (as stated to the dev team) for working on iPhone Linux was "for Skillz.app", our facetious term for working on something merely to hone one's skill or to satisfy one's curiosity. But honestly, what did you expect from a "hacker"? :)
We have already made more progress with openiboot than many people have anticipated would ever happen. Reverse engineering drivers is a laborious process, but one that doesn't require the luck of finding a security vulnerability: It just happens slowly and steadily, rather than unpredictably. Presumably after the drivers are in place, the Linux kernel will "just work" without too many other changes, since it is designed to be relatively portable, so we ought not to have many problems. After the kernel works, I hope enough developers will become interested and a nice userland can be developed without too much trouble. The userland work is much less risky from a time-investment point of view.