Mailing List Archive: Maemo: Community

Re: A 'red thread' through talks at maemo summit

Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded

texrat at ovi

Sep 23, 2009, 2:19 PM

Post #1 of 5 (410 views)
Permalink

Re: A 'red thread' through talks at maemo summit

...and you now poke the biggest, ugliest stick of all into the hornets'
nest: roadmaps.

There's no way to make this issue black and white so we have been arguing
on what shade of grey it should be. This is one of those confounding
dilemmas where extreme views on either side have equal merit.

The problem for Nokia is, somehow this stumbling bloick MUST be
eliminated or development will persist in some quasi state satisfactory
to neither the company nor the community.

But ultimately all we as a community can do is
beg/whine/argue/recommend/protest. SOMEone in Nokia must decide what
roadmaps should look like and when/how they are released. That also
brings in the lawyers.

Ay yi yi...

-Randy

----- Original message -----
From: "Alan Bruce" <alan [at] thebruces>
To: "Randall Arnold" <texrat [at] ovi>
Subject: Re: A 'red thread' through talks at maemo summit
Date: Wed, 23 Sep 2009 12:05:40 -0700

Whoah, I've just doubled the size of my text by adding all the good
questions and comments from the t.m.o thread.

Here's the part of my text that has changed:

Harmattan / The future

* What kind of changes do you plan to make in the future to better
work with the community?

* Would Nokia consider giving end-of-life versions of Maemo to the
community to maintain? Or does Nokia expect the community to
exclusively use parallel versions of Maemo, like Mer, if the
community wishes to take control after Nokia ends support?

* Now that Maemo Devices controls the software and the hardware,
will the hardware become more open-source? Will there be
processes for the community to contribute to hardware design?

High Level Open Source vs. Closed Source Discussion

(the same)

Questions from the community:

Jaffa:
Accepting that some things need to be kept behind closed doors for
commercial reasons, when are Nokia engineers going to be operating in
the community for everything else? We'd like to see API design
discussions in advance, on maemo-developers, as well as an open,
common bugzilla and code repository. For example, we discovered the
Fremantle "third party package policy" when people started having
problems. And that's in an open, community-involved package like
Application Manager.

Discussion between Jaffa/ragnar:

* Jaffa: [W]e've already seen what happens with Hildon when well
intentioned developers go away for 18 months and then come back
with a beta which has a practically fixed API, which lots of
developers immediately start finding inconsistencies, edge cases,
over-zealous specialisms vs. over generalisations.
The only valid answer I can see is the one we've heard before:
"exposing this information for external comment from the
community will reveal too much of our future plans".
This is a fine answer. But, of course, there's then no hint of
roadmaps, design principles (not in the UX sense) or architecture
plans on which the community can contribute. So, no contributions
means the cycle continues and products which could've had free
consultancy services from an empassioned expert community are
shipped in a sub-optimal state.

* ragnar: Generally UI's are not revealed in advance because of
competitive reasons. If we would have shown the Maemo 5 UI plans
at the time they were ready for the first time, any smart
competitor would have not commented anything on them, picked up
on the good ideas, disregarded others and probably even come out
with their own device before Nokia. Then end consumers - who
don't know and care about the process of how things get done -
would be just left confused. Showing our own cards is a very
basic problem, and I hope everybody realizes that. We will be the
first company out with the device with the Maemo 5 UI. If you
wouldn't believe your UI is an competitive advantage and
therefore don't care about that fact, then we can all go home
already.

So, either you hold your cards really close to your chest, or you
then do the complete opposite, and do like Mozilla, and open up
everything all the time, right from the start. If Nokia = Maemo and
nothing more, and if Nokia could crank devices out faster than any
competitor, then perhaps there would be more options. But since Nokia
> just Maemo, even Maemo does not work in a bubble. Revealing some
parts of Maemo UI would reveal ... elements of "Nokia UI" - see that
however you want.

Well, yes, external consultancy costs money. But it can also offer
consistency, with testing methodology, target user gathering,
non-biased testers, consistent reporting metrics etc. etc. So they're
not really comparative. You wouldn't replace one with the other.

Could you - or anybody - can come up with a good (as in realistic and
pragmatic instead of idealistic) proposal on how to 'do' community
input regarding the new UI?

...[I]f we would show the whole plans, and then get n comments on it,
... Would following the democratic majority of the developer
community lead to an optimal solution in terms of an UI solution?
Wouldn't that be the worst kind of "design by committee" that one
could imagine? Do a poll for "Feature X, do solution A or solution B"
and vote which solution gets more votes? No?

Milhouse:
In three years, I've seen little real progress, just lots of promises
to improve which never really materialise. I can count the number of
Nokia/Maemo developers actively involved in Bugzilla on one hand.
Intel puts Nokia to shame with the amount of involvement from Intel
engineers in the Moblin bugzilla. Why is Intel able to achieve a much
greater level of transparency than Nokia when discussing defects and
enhancements? Intel appear willing to publicly file, and more
importantly discuss, the bugs in their product whereas Nokia prefer
to keep their dirty laundry a secret and are doing a very good job of
ignoring those bugs raised by the community. There is little if any
direct input from Nokia developers against publicly filed bugs, many
of which are closed as WONTFIX when the respective OS version is
end-of-lined.

jaem:
One of the strengths of Maemo is its community, largely drawn by the
relative openness and hackability of the Maemo devices. In light of
announced plans for a more mass-market approach, and potentially
future Linux-based smartphone devices (e.g. oFono), how does Nokia
plan to balance maintaining openness with the opposing pressures
typically inherent in such plans?

lma:
What happened since "It is not a cell phone -- and it is good" to
change your mind? Are those reasons not valid any more, or are there
more compelling reasons (and if so, what) pushing in the opposite
direction? The compromises/sacrifices necessary to turn a tablet into
a phone (finger UI, screen size and so on) have been very
controversial here [on the forums]; does Nokia plan to still address
the market segment that prefers a tablet to a phone?

benny1967:

* how much community input could nokia handle concerning hardware?
could they envision that some day a future product is designed
via a bugzilla-system, with people voting for enhancement
requests about hardware? could there be something like a
community edition of existing mass market products that differs
in things like screen size or keyboard layout etc according to
the wishes of a reasonably large part of the community?

* How does the maemo community live up to Nokia's expectations? Are
there still things that must be done internally (or don't happen
at all) because the community fails to deliver?

* On the business side, is dealing with the community in general
more expensive/difficult than handling uncoordinated customer
feedback?

ARJWright:
Nokia seems to be going in two directions: the transition from a
device to a services company with Ovi; and the transition to the new
open source Symbian and Maemo. Is "mobile" really the best arena for
a company which is basing its value on services and the relationships
that it has maintained? Or, from Nokia's perspective, do these
transitions to open source and services-orientation point to a key
element of technology-as-culture that we miss because we don't have
the same view that a company such as Nokia has? If the latter, can
you elaborate on what Nokia sees, and why this viewpoint is
significant for a community like Maemo to understand.

Texrat:

The community really desires some sort of development/release roadmap
for Maemo hardware and software. We understand that Nokia cannot be
completely forthcoming due to competitive needs, but can't at least
some degree of rough guidance be provided?

On Wed, Sep 23, 2009 at 11:10 AM, Randall Arnold <texrat [at] ovi>
wrote:

Excellent point, and one I actually raised 3 years ago and have
harped on so much since that it did not occur to me to raise it
again. : D

----- Original message -----
From: "Alan Bruce" <alan [at] thebruces>
To: "Carsten Munk" <carsten.munk [at] gmail>
Subject: Re: A 'red thread' through talks at maemo summit
Date: Wed, 23 Sep 2009 10:34:21 -0700

Carsten, you're right. I just re-read my thread at t.m.o. and
jaffa asks the same question:

Jaffa: Accepting that some things need to be kept behind
closed doors for commercial reasons, when are Nokia engineers
going to be operating in the community for everything else?
(For example, we discovered the Fremantle "third party
package policy" when people started having problems. And
that's in an open, community-involved package like
Application Manager.)

On Wed, Sep 23, 2009 at 12:22 AM, Carsten Munk <carsten.munk [at] gmail>
wrote:

Loving the questions. Maybe a question on getting
internal developers out in the open - open source happens
by doing things in the open as well.

Regards,
Carsten

--------------------------------------------------------------
Ovi Store: Fresh apps and more
http://store.ovi.com/?cid=ovistore-fw-bac-na-acq-na-ovimail-g0-na-4

qole.tablet at gmail

Sep 23, 2009, 2:47 PM

Post #2 of 5 (380 views)
Permalink

Re: A 'red thread' through talks at maemo summit [In reply to]

If that seems like someone accidentally sent a private e-mail to a public
mailing-list right in the middle of a long discussion, with no context and
no indicators as to what all of that was about...

You'd be right.

On Wed, Sep 23, 2009 at 2:19 PM, Randall Arnold <texrat [at] ovi> wrote:

> ...and you now poke the biggest, ugliest stick of all into the hornets'
> nest: *roadmaps*.
>
> There's no way to make this issue black and white so we have been arguing
> on what shade of grey it should be. This is one of those confounding
> dilemmas where extreme views on either side have equal merit.
>
> The problem for Nokia is, somehow this stumbling bloick MUST be eliminated
> or development will persist in some quasi state satisfactory to neither the
> company nor the community.
>
> But ultimately all we as a community can do is
> beg/whine/argue/recommend/protest. SOMEone in Nokia must decide what
> roadmaps should look like and when/how they are released. That also brings
> in the lawyers.
>
> Ay yi yi...
>
> -Randy
>
>
> ----- Original message -----
> From: "Alan Bruce" <alan [at] thebruces>
> To: "Randall Arnold" <texrat [at] ovi>
> Subject: Re: A 'red thread' through talks at maemo summit
> Date: Wed, 23 Sep 2009 12:05:40 -0700
>
> Whoah, I've just doubled the size of my text by adding all the good
> questions and comments from the t.m.o thread.
>
> Here's the part of my text that has changed:
>
> Harmattan / The future
>
> - What kind of changes do you plan to make in the future to better work
> with the community?
> - Would Nokia consider giving end-of-life versions of Maemo to the
> community to maintain? Or does Nokia expect the community to exclusively use
> parallel versions of Maemo, like Mer, if the community wishes to take
> control after Nokia ends support?
> - Now that Maemo Devices controls the software and the hardware, will
> the hardware become more open-source? Will there be processes for the
> community to contribute to hardware design?
>
> *High Level Open Source vs. Closed Source Discussion*
> *(the same)
> **
> Questions from the community:*
>
> *Jaffa:*
> Accepting that some things need to be kept behind closed doors for
> commercial reasons, when are Nokia engineers going to be operating in the
> community for everything *else*? We'd like to see API design discussions
> in advance, on maemo-developers, as well as an open, common bugzilla and
> code repository. For example, we discovered the Fremantle "third party
> package policy" when people started having problems. And that's in an open,
> community-involved package like Application Manager.
>
> *Discussion between Jaffa/ragnar*:
>
> - *Jaffa:* [W]e've already seen what happens with Hildon when well
> intentioned developers go away for 18 months and then come back with a beta
> which has a practically fixed API, which lots of developers immediately
> start finding inconsistencies, edge cases, over-zealous specialisms vs. over
> generalisations.
> The only valid answer I can see is the one we've heard before:
> "exposing this information for external comment from the community will
> reveal too much of our future plans".
> This is a fine answer. But, of course, there's then no hint of
> roadmaps, design principles (not in the UX sense) or architecture plans on
> which the community can contribute. So, no contributions means the cycle
> continues and products which could've had free consultancy services from an
> empassioned expert community are shipped in a sub-optimal state.
>
>
> - *ragnar:* Generally UI's are not revealed in advance because of
> competitive reasons. If we would have shown the Maemo 5 UI plans at the time
> they were ready for the first time, any smart competitor would have not
> commented anything on them, picked up on the good ideas, disregarded others
> and probably even come out with their own device before Nokia. Then end
> consumers - who don't know and care about the process of how things get done
> - would be just left confused. Showing our own cards is a very basic
> problem, and I hope everybody realizes that. We will be the first company
> out with the device with the Maemo 5 UI. If you wouldn't believe your UI is
> an competitive advantage and therefore don't care about that fact, then we
> can all go home already.
>
>
> So, either you hold your cards really close to your chest, or you then do
> the complete opposite, and do like Mozilla, and open up everything all the
> time, right from the start. If Nokia = Maemo and nothing more, and if Nokia
> could crank devices out faster than any competitor, then perhaps there would
> be more options. But since Nokia > just Maemo, even Maemo does not work in a
> bubble. Revealing some parts of Maemo UI would reveal ... elements of "Nokia
> UI" - see that however you want.
>
> Well, yes, external consultancy costs money. But it can also offer
> consistency, with testing methodology, target user gathering, non-biased
> testers, consistent reporting metrics etc. etc. So they're not really
> comparative. You wouldn't replace one with the other.
>
> Could you - or anybody - can come up with a good (as in realistic and
> pragmatic instead of idealistic) proposal on how to 'do' community input
> regarding the new UI?
>
> ...[I]f we would show the whole plans, and then get n comments on it, ...
> Would following the democratic majority of the developer community lead to
> an optimal solution in terms of an UI solution? Wouldn't that be the worst
> kind of "design by committee" that one could imagine? Do a poll for "Feature
> X, do solution A or solution B" and vote which solution gets more votes? No?
>
>
> *Milhouse:*
> In three years, I've seen little real progress, just lots of promises to
> improve which never really materialise. I can count the number of
> Nokia/Maemo developers actively involved in Bugzilla on one hand. Intel puts
> Nokia to shame with the amount of involvement from Intel engineers in the
> Moblin bugzilla. Why is Intel able to achieve a much greater level of
> transparency than Nokia when discussing defects and enhancements? Intel
> appear willing to publicly file, and more importantly discuss, the bugs in
> their product whereas Nokia prefer to keep their dirty laundry a secret and
> are doing a very good job of ignoring those bugs raised by the community.
> There is little if any direct input from Nokia developers against publicly
> filed bugs, many of which are closed as WONTFIX when the respective OS
> version is end-of-lined.
>
>
> *jaem:*
> One of the strengths of Maemo is its community, largely drawn by the
> relative openness and hackability of the Maemo devices. In light of
> announced plans for a more mass-market approach, and potentially future
> Linux-based smartphone devices (e.g. oFono), how does Nokia plan to balance
> maintaining openness with the opposing pressures typically inherent in such
> plans?
>
>
> *lma:*
> What happened since "It is not a cell phone -- and it is good<http://jaaksi.blogspot.com/2005/11/it-is-not-cell-phone-and-it-is-good.html>"
> to change your mind? Are those reasons not valid any more, or are there more
> compelling reasons (and if so, what) pushing in the opposite direction? The
> compromises/sacrifices necessary to turn a tablet into a phone (finger UI,
> screen size and so on) have been very controversial here [on the forums];
> does Nokia plan to still address the market segment that prefers a tablet to
> a phone?
>
>
> *benny1967*:
>
> - how much community input could nokia handle concerning *hardware*?
> could they envision that some day a future product is designed via a
> bugzilla-system, with people voting for enhancement requests about hardware?
> could there be something like a community edition of existing mass market
> products that differs in things like screen size or keyboard layout etc
> according to the wishes of a reasonably large part of the community?
> - How does the maemo community live up to Nokia's expectations? Are
> there still things that must be done internally (or don't happen at all)
> because the community fails to deliver?
> - On the business side, is dealing with the community in general more
> expensive/difficult than handling uncoordinated customer feedback?
>
> *ARJWright:*
> Nokia seems to be going in two directions: the transition from a device to
> a services company with Ovi; and the transition to the new open source
> Symbian and Maemo. Is "mobile" really the best arena for a company which is
> basing its value on services and the relationships that it has maintained?
> Or, from Nokia's perspective, do these transitions to open source and
> services-orientation point to a key element of technology-as-culture that we
> miss because we don't have the same view that a company such as Nokia has?
> If the latter, can you elaborate on what Nokia sees, and why this viewpoint
> is significant for a community like Maemo to understand.
>
>
> *Texrat:*
>
> The community really desires *some* sort of development/release roadmap
> for Maemo hardware and software. We understand that Nokia cannot be *
> completely* forthcoming due to competitive needs, but can't at least *some
> * degree of rough guidance be provided?
>
>
>
> On Wed, Sep 23, 2009 at 11:10 AM, Randall Arnold <texrat [at] ovi> wrote:
>
>> Excellent point, and one I actually raised 3 years ago and have harped on
>> so much since that it did not occur to me to raise it again. : D
>>
>>
>>
>> ----- Original message -----
>> From: "Alan Bruce" <alan [at] thebruces>
>> To: "Carsten Munk" <carsten.munk [at] gmail>
>> Subject: Re: A 'red thread' through talks at maemo summit
>>
>> Date: Wed, 23 Sep 2009 10:34:21 -0700
>>
>> Carsten, you're right. I just re-read my thread at t.m.o. and jaffa asks
>> the same question:
>>
>> Jaffa: Accepting that some things need to be kept behind closed doors for
>> commercial reasons, when are Nokia engineers going to be operating in the
>> community for everything *else*? (For example, we discovered the
>> Fremantle "third party package policy" when people started having problems.
>> And that's in an open, community-involved package like Application Manager.)
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 23, 2009 at 12:22 AM, Carsten Munk <carsten.munk [at] gmail>wrote:
>>
>>> Loving the questions. Maybe a question on getting internal developers out
>>> in the open - open source happens by doing things in the open as well.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Carsten
>>>
>>>
>>>
>
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> Ovi Store: New apps daily
> http://store.ovi.com/?cid=ovistore-fw-bac-na-acq-na-ovimail-g0-na-3
>
> _______________________________________________
> maemo-community mailing list
> maemo-community [at] maemo
> https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-community
>
>

--
enthusiast, n. "One whose mind is wholly possessed and heated by what
engages it; one who is influenced by a peculiar fervor of mind; an ardent
and imaginative person."

crashanddie at gmail

Sep 24, 2009, 1:09 AM

Post #3 of 5 (375 views)
Permalink

Re: A 'red thread' through talks at maemo summit [In reply to]

Good to see some posts are harvested to fuel whatever. (Summit
questions? Blog post?)

Also, Randall, your email requesting deletion is sadly not going to
happen -- the mailing lists are archived publicly.

-S.

On 23/09/2009, Qole <qole.tablet [at] gmail> wrote:
> If that seems like someone accidentally sent a private e-mail to a public
> mailing-list right in the middle of a long discussion, with no context and
> no indicators as to what all of that was about...
>
> You'd be right.
>
>
> On Wed, Sep 23, 2009 at 2:19 PM, Randall Arnold <texrat [at] ovi> wrote:
>
>> ...and you now poke the biggest, ugliest stick of all into the hornets'
>> nest: *roadmaps*.
>>
>> There's no way to make this issue black and white so we have been arguing
>> on what shade of grey it should be. This is one of those confounding
>> dilemmas where extreme views on either side have equal merit.
>>
>> The problem for Nokia is, somehow this stumbling bloick MUST be eliminated
>> or development will persist in some quasi state satisfactory to neither
>> the
>> company nor the community.
>>
>> But ultimately all we as a community can do is
>> beg/whine/argue/recommend/protest. SOMEone in Nokia must decide what
>> roadmaps should look like and when/how they are released. That also
>> brings
>> in the lawyers.
>>
>> Ay yi yi...
>>
>> -Randy
>>
>>
>> ----- Original message -----
>> From: "Alan Bruce" <alan [at] thebruces>
>> To: "Randall Arnold" <texrat [at] ovi>
>> Subject: Re: A 'red thread' through talks at maemo summit
>> Date: Wed, 23 Sep 2009 12:05:40 -0700
>>
>> Whoah, I've just doubled the size of my text by adding all the good
>> questions and comments from the t.m.o thread.
>>
>> Here's the part of my text that has changed:
>>
>> Harmattan / The future
>>
>> - What kind of changes do you plan to make in the future to better work
>> with the community?
>> - Would Nokia consider giving end-of-life versions of Maemo to the
>> community to maintain? Or does Nokia expect the community to
>> exclusively use
>> parallel versions of Maemo, like Mer, if the community wishes to take
>> control after Nokia ends support?
>> - Now that Maemo Devices controls the software and the hardware, will
>> the hardware become more open-source? Will there be processes for the
>> community to contribute to hardware design?
>>
>> *High Level Open Source vs. Closed Source Discussion*
>> *(the same)
>> **
>> Questions from the community:*
>>
>> *Jaffa:*
>> Accepting that some things need to be kept behind closed doors for
>> commercial reasons, when are Nokia engineers going to be operating in the
>> community for everything *else*? We'd like to see API design discussions
>> in advance, on maemo-developers, as well as an open, common bugzilla and
>> code repository. For example, we discovered the Fremantle "third party
>> package policy" when people started having problems. And that's in an
>> open,
>> community-involved package like Application Manager.
>>
>> *Discussion between Jaffa/ragnar*:
>>
>> - *Jaffa:* [W]e've already seen what happens with Hildon when well
>> intentioned developers go away for 18 months and then come back with a
>> beta
>> which has a practically fixed API, which lots of developers immediately
>> start finding inconsistencies, edge cases, over-zealous specialisms vs.
>> over
>> generalisations.
>> The only valid answer I can see is the one we've heard before:
>> "exposing this information for external comment from the community will
>> reveal too much of our future plans".
>> This is a fine answer. But, of course, there's then no hint of
>> roadmaps, design principles (not in the UX sense) or architecture plans
>> on
>> which the community can contribute. So, no contributions means the
>> cycle
>> continues and products which could've had free consultancy services
>> from an
>> empassioned expert community are shipped in a sub-optimal state.
>>
>>
>> - *ragnar:* Generally UI's are not revealed in advance because of
>> competitive reasons. If we would have shown the Maemo 5 UI plans at the
>> time
>> they were ready for the first time, any smart competitor would have not
>> commented anything on them, picked up on the good ideas, disregarded
>> others
>> and probably even come out with their own device before Nokia. Then end
>> consumers - who don't know and care about the process of how things get
>> done
>> - would be just left confused. Showing our own cards is a very basic
>> problem, and I hope everybody realizes that. We will be the first
>> company
>> out with the device with the Maemo 5 UI. If you wouldn't believe your
>> UI is
>> an competitive advantage and therefore don't care about that fact, then
>> we
>> can all go home already.
>>
>>
>> So, either you hold your cards really close to your chest, or you then do
>> the complete opposite, and do like Mozilla, and open up everything all the
>> time, right from the start. If Nokia = Maemo and nothing more, and if
>> Nokia
>> could crank devices out faster than any competitor, then perhaps there
>> would
>> be more options. But since Nokia > just Maemo, even Maemo does not work in
>> a
>> bubble. Revealing some parts of Maemo UI would reveal ... elements of
>> "Nokia
>> UI" - see that however you want.
>>
>> Well, yes, external consultancy costs money. But it can also offer
>> consistency, with testing methodology, target user gathering, non-biased
>> testers, consistent reporting metrics etc. etc. So they're not really
>> comparative. You wouldn't replace one with the other.
>>
>> Could you - or anybody - can come up with a good (as in realistic and
>> pragmatic instead of idealistic) proposal on how to 'do' community input
>> regarding the new UI?
>>
>> ...[I]f we would show the whole plans, and then get n comments on it, ...
>> Would following the democratic majority of the developer community lead to
>> an optimal solution in terms of an UI solution? Wouldn't that be the worst
>> kind of "design by committee" that one could imagine? Do a poll for
>> "Feature
>> X, do solution A or solution B" and vote which solution gets more votes?
>> No?
>>
>>
>> *Milhouse:*
>> In three years, I've seen little real progress, just lots of promises to
>> improve which never really materialise. I can count the number of
>> Nokia/Maemo developers actively involved in Bugzilla on one hand. Intel
>> puts
>> Nokia to shame with the amount of involvement from Intel engineers in the
>> Moblin bugzilla. Why is Intel able to achieve a much greater level of
>> transparency than Nokia when discussing defects and enhancements? Intel
>> appear willing to publicly file, and more importantly discuss, the bugs in
>> their product whereas Nokia prefer to keep their dirty laundry a secret
>> and
>> are doing a very good job of ignoring those bugs raised by the community.
>> There is little if any direct input from Nokia developers against publicly
>> filed bugs, many of which are closed as WONTFIX when the respective OS
>> version is end-of-lined.
>>
>>
>> *jaem:*
>> One of the strengths of Maemo is its community, largely drawn by the
>> relative openness and hackability of the Maemo devices. In light of
>> announced plans for a more mass-market approach, and potentially future
>> Linux-based smartphone devices (e.g. oFono), how does Nokia plan to
>> balance
>> maintaining openness with the opposing pressures typically inherent in
>> such
>> plans?
>>
>>
>> *lma:*
>> What happened since "It is not a cell phone -- and it is
>> good<http://jaaksi.blogspot.com/2005/11/it-is-not-cell-phone-and-it-is-good.html>"
>> to change your mind? Are those reasons not valid any more, or are there
>> more
>> compelling reasons (and if so, what) pushing in the opposite direction?
>> The
>> compromises/sacrifices necessary to turn a tablet into a phone (finger UI,
>> screen size and so on) have been very controversial here [on the forums];
>> does Nokia plan to still address the market segment that prefers a tablet
>> to
>> a phone?
>>
>>
>> *benny1967*:
>>
>> - how much community input could nokia handle concerning *hardware*?
>> could they envision that some day a future product is designed via a
>> bugzilla-system, with people voting for enhancement requests about
>> hardware?
>> could there be something like a community edition of existing mass
>> market
>> products that differs in things like screen size or keyboard layout etc
>> according to the wishes of a reasonably large part of the community?
>> - How does the maemo community live up to Nokia's expectations? Are
>> there still things that must be done internally (or don't happen at
>> all)
>> because the community fails to deliver?
>> - On the business side, is dealing with the community in general more
>> expensive/difficult than handling uncoordinated customer feedback?
>>
>> *ARJWright:*
>> Nokia seems to be going in two directions: the transition from a device to
>> a services company with Ovi; and the transition to the new open source
>> Symbian and Maemo. Is "mobile" really the best arena for a company which
>> is
>> basing its value on services and the relationships that it has maintained?
>> Or, from Nokia's perspective, do these transitions to open source and
>> services-orientation point to a key element of technology-as-culture that
>> we
>> miss because we don't have the same view that a company such as Nokia has?
>> If the latter, can you elaborate on what Nokia sees, and why this
>> viewpoint
>> is significant for a community like Maemo to understand.
>>
>>
>> *Texrat:*
>>
>> The community really desires *some* sort of development/release roadmap
>> for Maemo hardware and software. We understand that Nokia cannot be *
>> completely* forthcoming due to competitive needs, but can't at least *some
>> * degree of rough guidance be provided?
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 23, 2009 at 11:10 AM, Randall Arnold <texrat [at] ovi> wrote:
>>
>>> Excellent point, and one I actually raised 3 years ago and have harped on
>>> so much since that it did not occur to me to raise it again. : D
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ----- Original message -----
>>> From: "Alan Bruce" <alan [at] thebruces>
>>> To: "Carsten Munk" <carsten.munk [at] gmail>
>>> Subject: Re: A 'red thread' through talks at maemo summit
>>>
>>> Date: Wed, 23 Sep 2009 10:34:21 -0700
>>>
>>> Carsten, you're right. I just re-read my thread at t.m.o. and jaffa asks
>>> the same question:
>>>
>>> Jaffa: Accepting that some things need to be kept behind closed doors for
>>> commercial reasons, when are Nokia engineers going to be operating in the
>>> community for everything *else*? (For example, we discovered the
>>> Fremantle "third party package policy" when people started having
>>> problems.
>>> And that's in an open, community-involved package like Application
>>> Manager.)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Sep 23, 2009 at 12:22 AM, Carsten Munk
>>> <carsten.munk [at] gmail>wrote:
>>>
>>>> Loving the questions. Maybe a question on getting internal developers
>>>> out
>>>> in the open - open source happens by doing things in the open as well.
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Carsten
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --------------------------------------------------------------
>> Ovi Store: New apps daily
>> http://store.ovi.com/?cid=ovistore-fw-bac-na-acq-na-ovimail-g0-na-3
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> maemo-community mailing list
>> maemo-community [at] maemo
>> https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-community
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> enthusiast, n. "One whose mind is wholly possessed and heated by what
> engages it; one who is influenced by a peculiar fervor of mind; an ardent
> and imaginative person."
>

--
Sent from my mobile device

question = ( to ) ? be : ! be;
-- Wm. Shakespeare
_______________________________________________
maemo-community mailing list
maemo-community [at] maemo
https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-community

anidel at gmail

Sep 24, 2009, 2:04 AM

Post #4 of 5 (374 views)
Permalink

Re: A 'red thread' through talks at maemo summit [In reply to]

It would have been even better if that was made in the public.

Aniello

2009/9/24 Sebastian 'CrashandDie' Lauwers <crashanddie [at] gmail>:
> Good to see some posts are harvested to fuel whatever. (Summit
> questions? Blog post?)
>
> Also, Randall, your email requesting deletion is sadly not going to
> happen -- the mailing lists are archived publicly.
>
> -S.
>
>
> On 23/09/2009, Qole <qole.tablet [at] gmail> wrote:
>> If that seems like someone accidentally sent a private e-mail to a public
>> mailing-list right in the middle of a long discussion, with no context and
>> no indicators as to what all of that was about...
>>
>> You'd be right.
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 23, 2009 at 2:19 PM, Randall Arnold <texrat [at] ovi> wrote:
>>
>>> ...and you now poke the biggest, ugliest stick of all into the hornets'
>>> nest: *roadmaps*.
>>>
>>> There's no way to make this issue black and white so we have been arguing
>>> on what shade of grey it should be. This is one of those confounding
>>> dilemmas where extreme views on either side have equal merit.
>>>
>>> The problem for Nokia is, somehow this stumbling bloick MUST be eliminated
>>> or development will persist in some quasi state satisfactory to neither
>>> the
>>> company nor the community.
>>>
>>> But ultimately all we as a community can do is
>>> beg/whine/argue/recommend/protest. SOMEone in Nokia must decide what
>>> roadmaps should look like and when/how they are released. That also
>>> brings
>>> in the lawyers.
>>>
>>> Ay yi yi...
>>>
>>> -Randy
>>>
>>>
>>> ----- Original message -----
>>> From: "Alan Bruce" <alan [at] thebruces>
>>> To: "Randall Arnold" <texrat [at] ovi>
>>> Subject: Re: A 'red thread' through talks at maemo summit
>>> Date: Wed, 23 Sep 2009 12:05:40 -0700
>>>
>>> Whoah, I've just doubled the size of my text by adding all the good
>>> questions and comments from the t.m.o thread.
>>>
>>> Here's the part of my text that has changed:
>>>
>>> Harmattan / The future
>>>
>>> - What kind of changes do you plan to make in the future to better work
>>> with the community?
>>> - Would Nokia consider giving end-of-life versions of Maemo to the
>>> community to maintain? Or does Nokia expect the community to
>>> exclusively use
>>> parallel versions of Maemo, like Mer, if the community wishes to take
>>> control after Nokia ends support?
>>> - Now that Maemo Devices controls the software and the hardware, will
>>> the hardware become more open-source? Will there be processes for the
>>> community to contribute to hardware design?
>>>
>>> *High Level Open Source vs. Closed Source Discussion*
>>> *(the same)
>>> **
>>> Questions from the community:*
>>>
>>> *Jaffa:*
>>> Accepting that some things need to be kept behind closed doors for
>>> commercial reasons, when are Nokia engineers going to be operating in the
>>> community for everything *else*? We'd like to see API design discussions
>>> in advance, on maemo-developers, as well as an open, common bugzilla and
>>> code repository. For example, we discovered the Fremantle "third party
>>> package policy" when people started having problems. And that's in an
>>> open,
>>> community-involved package like Application Manager.
>>>
>>> *Discussion between Jaffa/ragnar*:
>>>
>>> - *Jaffa:* [W]e've already seen what happens with Hildon when well
>>> intentioned developers go away for 18 months and then come back with a
>>> beta
>>> which has a practically fixed API, which lots of developers immediately
>>> start finding inconsistencies, edge cases, over-zealous specialisms vs.
>>> over
>>> generalisations.
>>> The only valid answer I can see is the one we've heard before:
>>> "exposing this information for external comment from the community will
>>> reveal too much of our future plans".
>>> This is a fine answer. But, of course, there's then no hint of
>>> roadmaps, design principles (not in the UX sense) or architecture plans
>>> on
>>> which the community can contribute. So, no contributions means the
>>> cycle
>>> continues and products which could've had free consultancy services
>>> from an
>>> empassioned expert community are shipped in a sub-optimal state.
>>>
>>>
>>> - *ragnar:* Generally UI's are not revealed in advance because of
>>> competitive reasons. If we would have shown the Maemo 5 UI plans at the
>>> time
>>> they were ready for the first time, any smart competitor would have not
>>> commented anything on them, picked up on the good ideas, disregarded
>>> others
>>> and probably even come out with their own device before Nokia. Then end
>>> consumers - who don't know and care about the process of how things get
>>> done
>>> - would be just left confused. Showing our own cards is a very basic
>>> problem, and I hope everybody realizes that. We will be the first
>>> company
>>> out with the device with the Maemo 5 UI. If you wouldn't believe your
>>> UI is
>>> an competitive advantage and therefore don't care about that fact, then
>>> we
>>> can all go home already.
>>>
>>>
>>> So, either you hold your cards really close to your chest, or you then do
>>> the complete opposite, and do like Mozilla, and open up everything all the
>>> time, right from the start. If Nokia = Maemo and nothing more, and if
>>> Nokia
>>> could crank devices out faster than any competitor, then perhaps there
>>> would
>>> be more options. But since Nokia > just Maemo, even Maemo does not work in
>>> a
>>> bubble. Revealing some parts of Maemo UI would reveal ... elements of
>>> "Nokia
>>> UI" - see that however you want.
>>>
>>> Well, yes, external consultancy costs money. But it can also offer
>>> consistency, with testing methodology, target user gathering, non-biased
>>> testers, consistent reporting metrics etc. etc. So they're not really
>>> comparative. You wouldn't replace one with the other.
>>>
>>> Could you - or anybody - can come up with a good (as in realistic and
>>> pragmatic instead of idealistic) proposal on how to 'do' community input
>>> regarding the new UI?
>>>
>>> ...[I]f we would show the whole plans, and then get n comments on it, ...
>>> Would following the democratic majority of the developer community lead to
>>> an optimal solution in terms of an UI solution? Wouldn't that be the worst
>>> kind of "design by committee" that one could imagine? Do a poll for
>>> "Feature
>>> X, do solution A or solution B" and vote which solution gets more votes?
>>> No?
>>>
>>>
>>> *Milhouse:*
>>> In three years, I've seen little real progress, just lots of promises to
>>> improve which never really materialise. I can count the number of
>>> Nokia/Maemo developers actively involved in Bugzilla on one hand. Intel
>>> puts
>>> Nokia to shame with the amount of involvement from Intel engineers in the
>>> Moblin bugzilla. Why is Intel able to achieve a much greater level of
>>> transparency than Nokia when discussing defects and enhancements? Intel
>>> appear willing to publicly file, and more importantly discuss, the bugs in
>>> their product whereas Nokia prefer to keep their dirty laundry a secret
>>> and
>>> are doing a very good job of ignoring those bugs raised by the community.
>>> There is little if any direct input from Nokia developers against publicly
>>> filed bugs, many of which are closed as WONTFIX when the respective OS
>>> version is end-of-lined.
>>>
>>>
>>> *jaem:*
>>> One of the strengths of Maemo is its community, largely drawn by the
>>> relative openness and hackability of the Maemo devices. In light of
>>> announced plans for a more mass-market approach, and potentially future
>>> Linux-based smartphone devices (e.g. oFono), how does Nokia plan to
>>> balance
>>> maintaining openness with the opposing pressures typically inherent in
>>> such
>>> plans?
>>>
>>>
>>> *lma:*
>>> What happened since "It is not a cell phone -- and it is
>>> good<http://jaaksi.blogspot.com/2005/11/it-is-not-cell-phone-and-it-is-good.html>"
>>> to change your mind? Are those reasons not valid any more, or are there
>>> more
>>> compelling reasons (and if so, what) pushing in the opposite direction?
>>> The
>>> compromises/sacrifices necessary to turn a tablet into a phone (finger UI,
>>> screen size and so on) have been very controversial here [on the forums];
>>> does Nokia plan to still address the market segment that prefers a tablet
>>> to
>>> a phone?
>>>
>>>
>>> *benny1967*:
>>>
>>> - how much community input could nokia handle concerning *hardware*?
>>> could they envision that some day a future product is designed via a
>>> bugzilla-system, with people voting for enhancement requests about
>>> hardware?
>>> could there be something like a community edition of existing mass
>>> market
>>> products that differs in things like screen size or keyboard layout etc
>>> according to the wishes of a reasonably large part of the community?
>>> - How does the maemo community live up to Nokia's expectations? Are
>>> there still things that must be done internally (or don't happen at
>>> all)
>>> because the community fails to deliver?
>>> - On the business side, is dealing with the community in general more
>>> expensive/difficult than handling uncoordinated customer feedback?
>>>
>>> *ARJWright:*
>>> Nokia seems to be going in two directions: the transition from a device to
>>> a services company with Ovi; and the transition to the new open source
>>> Symbian and Maemo. Is "mobile" really the best arena for a company which
>>> is
>>> basing its value on services and the relationships that it has maintained?
>>> Or, from Nokia's perspective, do these transitions to open source and
>>> services-orientation point to a key element of technology-as-culture that
>>> we
>>> miss because we don't have the same view that a company such as Nokia has?
>>> If the latter, can you elaborate on what Nokia sees, and why this
>>> viewpoint
>>> is significant for a community like Maemo to understand.
>>>
>>>
>>> *Texrat:*
>>>
>>> The community really desires *some* sort of development/release roadmap
>>> for Maemo hardware and software. We understand that Nokia cannot be *
>>> completely* forthcoming due to competitive needs, but can't at least *some
>>> * degree of rough guidance be provided?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Sep 23, 2009 at 11:10 AM, Randall Arnold <texrat [at] ovi> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Excellent point, and one I actually raised 3 years ago and have harped on
>>>> so much since that it did not occur to me to raise it again. : D
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ----- Original message -----
>>>> From: "Alan Bruce" <alan [at] thebruces>
>>>> To: "Carsten Munk" <carsten.munk [at] gmail>
>>>> Subject: Re: A 'red thread' through talks at maemo summit
>>>>
>>>> Date: Wed, 23 Sep 2009 10:34:21 -0700
>>>>
>>>> Carsten, you're right. I just re-read my thread at t.m.o. and jaffa asks
>>>> the same question:
>>>>
>>>> Jaffa: Accepting that some things need to be kept behind closed doors for
>>>> commercial reasons, when are Nokia engineers going to be operating in the
>>>> community for everything *else*? (For example, we discovered the
>>>> Fremantle "third party package policy" when people started having
>>>> problems.
>>>> And that's in an open, community-involved package like Application
>>>> Manager.)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Sep 23, 2009 at 12:22 AM, Carsten Munk
>>>> <carsten.munk [at] gmail>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Loving the questions. Maybe a question on getting internal developers
>>>>> out
>>>>> in the open - open source happens by doing things in the open as well.
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>> Carsten
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --------------------------------------------------------------
>>> Ovi Store: New apps daily
>>> http://store.ovi.com/?cid=ovistore-fw-bac-na-acq-na-ovimail-g0-na-3
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> maemo-community mailing list
>>> maemo-community [at] maemo
>>> https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-community
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> enthusiast, n. "One whose mind is wholly possessed and heated by what
>> engages it; one who is influenced by a peculiar fervor of mind; an ardent
>> and imaginative person."
>>
>
> --
> Sent from my mobile device
>
> question = ( to ) ? be : ! be;
> -- Wm. Shakespeare
> _______________________________________________
> maemo-community mailing list
> maemo-community [at] maemo
> https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-community
>

--

--
anidel
_______________________________________________
maemo-community mailing list
maemo-community [at] maemo
https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-community

qole.tablet at gmail

Sep 24, 2009, 4:49 PM

Post #5 of 5 (375 views)
Permalink

Re: A 'red thread' through talks at maemo summit [In reply to]

On Thu, Sep 24, 2009 at 2:04 AM, Aniello Del Sorbo <anidel [at] gmail> wrote:

> It would have been even better if that was made in the public.
>
> Aniello
>

Aniello,

It was made in the public. And there's still time for you to contribute!

Please see this talk.maemo.org thread:

Summit 09: Call for Input for Ari Jaaksi dialog
http://talk.maemo.org/showthread.php?t=30120

The e-mail that was accidentally "leaked" was just asking for some final
input from other Summit contributors who will be also discussing similar
things in their talks.

Also, I want my final talk to be a little bit of a surprise, even though you
get a very good overall idea from that thread.

It would be somewhat ironic if I was secretly doing something about open
source.

Alan "qole" Bruce

> 2009/9/24 Sebastian 'CrashandDie' Lauwers <crashanddie [at] gmail>:
> > Good to see some posts are harvested to fuel whatever. (Summit
> > questions? Blog post?)
> >
> > Also, Randall, your email requesting deletion is sadly not going to
> > happen -- the mailing lists are archived publicly.
> >
> > -S.
> >
> >
> > On 23/09/2009, Qole <qole.tablet [at] gmail> wrote:
> >> If that seems like someone accidentally sent a private e-mail to a
> public
> >> mailing-list right in the middle of a long discussion, with no context
> and
> >> no indicators as to what all of that was about...
> >>
> >> You'd be right.
> >>
> >>
> >> On Wed, Sep 23, 2009 at 2:19 PM, Randall Arnold <texrat [at] ovi> wrote:
> >>
> >>> ...and you now poke the biggest, ugliest stick of all into the hornets'
> >>> nest: *roadmaps*.
> >>>
> >>> There's no way to make this issue black and white so we have been
> arguing
> >>> on what shade of grey it should be. This is one of those confounding
> >>> dilemmas where extreme views on either side have equal merit.
> >>>
> >>> The problem for Nokia is, somehow this stumbling bloick MUST be
> eliminated
> >>> or development will persist in some quasi state satisfactory to neither
> >>> the
> >>> company nor the community.
> >>>
> >>> But ultimately all we as a community can do is
> >>> beg/whine/argue/recommend/protest. SOMEone in Nokia must decide what
> >>> roadmaps should look like and when/how they are released. That also
> >>> brings
> >>> in the lawyers.
> >>>
> >>> Ay yi yi...
> >>>
> >>> -Randy
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> ----- Original message -----
> >>> From: "Alan Bruce" <alan [at] thebruces>
> >>> To: "Randall Arnold" <texrat [at] ovi>
> >>> Subject: Re: A 'red thread' through talks at maemo summit
> >>> Date: Wed, 23 Sep 2009 12:05:40 -0700
> >>>
> >>> Whoah, I've just doubled the size of my text by adding all the good
> >>> questions and comments from the t.m.o thread.
> >>>
> >>> Here's the part of my text that has changed:
> >>>
> >>> Harmattan / The future
> >>>
> >>> - What kind of changes do you plan to make in the future to better
> work
> >>> with the community?
> >>> - Would Nokia consider giving end-of-life versions of Maemo to the
> >>> community to maintain? Or does Nokia expect the community to
> >>> exclusively use
> >>> parallel versions of Maemo, like Mer, if the community wishes to
> take
> >>> control after Nokia ends support?
> >>> - Now that Maemo Devices controls the software and the hardware,
> will
> >>> the hardware become more open-source? Will there be processes for
> the
> >>> community to contribute to hardware design?
> >>>
> >>> *High Level Open Source vs. Closed Source Discussion*
> >>> *(the same)
> >>> **
> >>> Questions from the community:*
> >>>
> >>> *Jaffa:*
> >>> Accepting that some things need to be kept behind closed doors for
> >>> commercial reasons, when are Nokia engineers going to be operating in
> the
> >>> community for everything *else*? We'd like to see API design
> discussions
> >>> in advance, on maemo-developers, as well as an open, common bugzilla
> and
> >>> code repository. For example, we discovered the Fremantle "third party
> >>> package policy" when people started having problems. And that's in an
> >>> open,
> >>> community-involved package like Application Manager.
> >>>
> >>> *Discussion between Jaffa/ragnar*:
> >>>
> >>> - *Jaffa:* [W]e've already seen what happens with Hildon when well
> >>> intentioned developers go away for 18 months and then come back with
> a
> >>> beta
> >>> which has a practically fixed API, which lots of developers
> immediately
> >>> start finding inconsistencies, edge cases, over-zealous specialisms
> vs.
> >>> over
> >>> generalisations.
> >>> The only valid answer I can see is the one we've heard before:
> >>> "exposing this information for external comment from the community
> will
> >>> reveal too much of our future plans".
> >>> This is a fine answer. But, of course, there's then no hint of
> >>> roadmaps, design principles (not in the UX sense) or architecture
> plans
> >>> on
> >>> which the community can contribute. So, no contributions means the
> >>> cycle
> >>> continues and products which could've had free consultancy services
> >>> from an
> >>> empassioned expert community are shipped in a sub-optimal state.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> - *ragnar:* Generally UI's are not revealed in advance because of
> >>> competitive reasons. If we would have shown the Maemo 5 UI plans at
> the
> >>> time
> >>> they were ready for the first time, any smart competitor would have
> not
> >>> commented anything on them, picked up on the good ideas, disregarded
> >>> others
> >>> and probably even come out with their own device before Nokia. Then
> end
> >>> consumers - who don't know and care about the process of how things
> get
> >>> done
> >>> - would be just left confused. Showing our own cards is a very basic
> >>> problem, and I hope everybody realizes that. We will be the first
> >>> company
> >>> out with the device with the Maemo 5 UI. If you wouldn't believe
> your
> >>> UI is
> >>> an competitive advantage and therefore don't care about that fact,
> then
> >>> we
> >>> can all go home already.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> So, either you hold your cards really close to your chest, or you then
> do
> >>> the complete opposite, and do like Mozilla, and open up everything all
> the
> >>> time, right from the start. If Nokia = Maemo and nothing more, and if
> >>> Nokia
> >>> could crank devices out faster than any competitor, then perhaps there
> >>> would
> >>> be more options. But since Nokia > just Maemo, even Maemo does not work
> in
> >>> a
> >>> bubble. Revealing some parts of Maemo UI would reveal ... elements of
> >>> "Nokia
> >>> UI" - see that however you want.
> >>>
> >>> Well, yes, external consultancy costs money. But it can also offer
> >>> consistency, with testing methodology, target user gathering,
> non-biased
> >>> testers, consistent reporting metrics etc. etc. So they're not really
> >>> comparative. You wouldn't replace one with the other.
> >>>
> >>> Could you - or anybody - can come up with a good (as in realistic and
> >>> pragmatic instead of idealistic) proposal on how to 'do' community
> input
> >>> regarding the new UI?
> >>>
> >>> ...[I]f we would show the whole plans, and then get n comments on it,
> ...
> >>> Would following the democratic majority of the developer community lead
> to
> >>> an optimal solution in terms of an UI solution? Wouldn't that be the
> worst
> >>> kind of "design by committee" that one could imagine? Do a poll for
> >>> "Feature
> >>> X, do solution A or solution B" and vote which solution gets more
> votes?
> >>> No?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> *Milhouse:*
> >>> In three years, I've seen little real progress, just lots of promises
> to
> >>> improve which never really materialise. I can count the number of
> >>> Nokia/Maemo developers actively involved in Bugzilla on one hand. Intel
> >>> puts
> >>> Nokia to shame with the amount of involvement from Intel engineers in
> the
> >>> Moblin bugzilla. Why is Intel able to achieve a much greater level of
> >>> transparency than Nokia when discussing defects and enhancements? Intel
> >>> appear willing to publicly file, and more importantly discuss, the bugs
> in
> >>> their product whereas Nokia prefer to keep their dirty laundry a secret
> >>> and
> >>> are doing a very good job of ignoring those bugs raised by the
> community.
> >>> There is little if any direct input from Nokia developers against
> publicly
> >>> filed bugs, many of which are closed as WONTFIX when the respective OS
> >>> version is end-of-lined.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> *jaem:*
> >>> One of the strengths of Maemo is its community, largely drawn by the
> >>> relative openness and hackability of the Maemo devices. In light of
> >>> announced plans for a more mass-market approach, and potentially future
> >>> Linux-based smartphone devices (e.g. oFono), how does Nokia plan to
> >>> balance
> >>> maintaining openness with the opposing pressures typically inherent in
> >>> such
> >>> plans?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> *lma:*
> >>> What happened since "It is not a cell phone -- and it is
> >>> good<
> http://jaaksi.blogspot.com/2005/11/it-is-not-cell-phone-and-it-is-good.html
> >"
> >>> to change your mind? Are those reasons not valid any more, or are there
> >>> more
> >>> compelling reasons (and if so, what) pushing in the opposite direction?
> >>> The
> >>> compromises/sacrifices necessary to turn a tablet into a phone (finger
> UI,
> >>> screen size and so on) have been very controversial here [on the
> forums];
> >>> does Nokia plan to still address the market segment that prefers a
> tablet
> >>> to
> >>> a phone?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> *benny1967*:
> >>>
> >>> - how much community input could nokia handle concerning *hardware*?
> >>> could they envision that some day a future product is designed via a
> >>> bugzilla-system, with people voting for enhancement requests about
> >>> hardware?
> >>> could there be something like a community edition of existing mass
> >>> market
> >>> products that differs in things like screen size or keyboard layout
> etc
> >>> according to the wishes of a reasonably large part of the community?
> >>> - How does the maemo community live up to Nokia's expectations? Are
> >>> there still things that must be done internally (or don't happen at
> >>> all)
> >>> because the community fails to deliver?
> >>> - On the business side, is dealing with the community in general
> more
> >>> expensive/difficult than handling uncoordinated customer feedback?
> >>>
> >>> *ARJWright:*
> >>> Nokia seems to be going in two directions: the transition from a device
> to
> >>> a services company with Ovi; and the transition to the new open source
> >>> Symbian and Maemo. Is "mobile" really the best arena for a company
> which
> >>> is
> >>> basing its value on services and the relationships that it has
> maintained?
> >>> Or, from Nokia's perspective, do these transitions to open source and
> >>> services-orientation point to a key element of technology-as-culture
> that
> >>> we
> >>> miss because we don't have the same view that a company such as Nokia
> has?
> >>> If the latter, can you elaborate on what Nokia sees, and why this
> >>> viewpoint
> >>> is significant for a community like Maemo to understand.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> *Texrat:*
> >>>
> >>> The community really desires *some* sort of development/release roadmap
> >>> for Maemo hardware and software. We understand that Nokia cannot be *
> >>> completely* forthcoming due to competitive needs, but can't at least
> *some
> >>> * degree of rough guidance be provided?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Wed, Sep 23, 2009 at 11:10 AM, Randall Arnold <texrat [at] ovi>
> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Excellent point, and one I actually raised 3 years ago and have harped
> on
> >>>> so much since that it did not occur to me to raise it again. : D
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> ----- Original message -----
> >>>> From: "Alan Bruce" <alan [at] thebruces>
> >>>> To: "Carsten Munk" <carsten.munk [at] gmail>
> >>>> Subject: Re: A 'red thread' through talks at maemo summit
> >>>>
> >>>> Date: Wed, 23 Sep 2009 10:34:21 -0700
> >>>>
> >>>> Carsten, you're right. I just re-read my thread at t.m.o. and jaffa
> asks
> >>>> the same question:
> >>>>
> >>>> Jaffa: Accepting that some things need to be kept behind closed doors
> for
> >>>> commercial reasons, when are Nokia engineers going to be operating in
> the
> >>>> community for everything *else*? (For example, we discovered the
> >>>> Fremantle "third party package policy" when people started having
> >>>> problems.
> >>>> And that's in an open, community-involved package like Application
> >>>> Manager.)
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On Wed, Sep 23, 2009 at 12:22 AM, Carsten Munk
> >>>> <carsten.munk [at] gmail>wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> Loving the questions. Maybe a question on getting internal developers
> >>>>> out
> >>>>> in the open - open source happens by doing things in the open as
> well.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Regards,
> >>>>> Carsten
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> --------------------------------------------------------------
> >>> Ovi Store: New apps daily
> >>> http://store.ovi.com/?cid=ovistore-fw-bac-na-acq-na-ovimail-g0-na-3
> >>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> maemo-community mailing list
> >>> maemo-community [at] maemo
> >>> https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-community
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> enthusiast, n. "One whose mind is wholly possessed and heated by what
> >> engages it; one who is influenced by a peculiar fervor of mind; an
> ardent
> >> and imaginative person."
> >>
> >
> > --
> > Sent from my mobile device
> >
> > question = ( to ) ? be : ! be;
> > -- Wm. Shakespeare
> > _______________________________________________
> > maemo-community mailing list
> > maemo-community [at] maemo
> > https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-community
> >
>
>
>
> --
>
> --
> anidel
> _______________________________________________
> maemo-community mailing list
> maemo-community [at] maemo
> https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-community
>

--
enthusiast, n. "One whose mind is wholly possessed and heated by what
engages it; one who is influenced by a peculiar fervor of mind; an ardent
and imaginative person."

Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded

Interested in having your list archived? Contact Gossamer Threads