Re: Theory 1: only 30% of the cost of the N900 is "real" cost
 

geneven, you may find my comments dumb or whatever, but that guy came in here on various threads talking trash, spewing lies and misinformation, and got doused. I finally got him to shut up, and others to realize he knew little about what he was saying. He can run his game elsewhere, but I'm gonna check your game when I run up on cats like that. That goes for all of the disruptive haters and trolls around here. Come armed, because I'm waiting to put all soundbite chanters and iFools in their place. This ain't GigaOm or BGR, we're Maemo.org. I deprogram zombies. So watch what you say, and be ready to get your card pulled.

I'm Chris, and I, too, love arguing on the internet. Gotta go see who else is wrong... LOL

Re: Theory 1: only 30% of the cost of the N900 is "real" cost
 

he just disregarded the technology used in mobile gadgets. thinking that it has no economic value. resistors this small, processors that efficient but this powerful yet small, etc. those technologies were not used in laptops this time. that's why laptops are cheap. by the time mobile gadgets get another upgrade in technology, those technology will do for laptops.

If total compatibility does happens, I believe it'll be the holy grail. I just doubted how many people will get converted to Qt. hahah. It's brilliant, the idea of creating the program engine only once for all device, and then create the cosmetics for any device you like.

just googled and saw qt compatibility on winmo.

Re: Theory 1: only 30% of the cost of the N900 is "real" cost
 

"but that guy came in here on various threads talking trash, spewing lies and misinformation, and got doused. I finally got him to shut up, and others to realize he knew little about what he was saying. He can run his game elsewhere, but I'm gonna check your game when I run up on cats like that."

Whoever talks like this is a NOBODY and a very LOW LOW LOW person, regardless of how intelligent he may be. Because of people like you threads always become personal attacks. Shame on you big boy.

And no, you didn't "shut me up" I am just unwilling to have a conversation with you. I remember you from n95users.com forum. You have always been arrogant, rude and malicious. Hope that you're the pillar of your community and your friends and family respect you. Something I never will do.

I hope that other users of this forum will see you for what you really are.

Re: Theory 1: only 30% of the cost of the N900 is "real" cost
 

"It's brilliant, the idea of creating the program engine only once for all device, and then create the cosmetics for any device you like"

Java has had technology this for 10 years. Should Nokia and others have embraced it more there'd been no need for each manufacturer to roll out their own OS.

Re: Theory 1: only 30% of the cost of the N900 is "real" cost
 

Java on client side is still quite clumsy, and I don't see much future for Java on mobile devices.

Re: Theory 1: only 30% of the cost of the N900 is "real" cost
 

I thought he was generally pretty enthusiastic and interested in all this, even though I don't agree with him in this particular case. But "talking thrash, spewing lies and misinformation" is quite an overstatement.

Anyway, this is a bulletin board, not a goddamn warzone and I think that the "us vs. them" attitude leads nowhere.

Re: Theory 1: only 30% of the cost of the N900 is "real" cost
 

OrangeBox, nobody replayed your argument (which i think is crucial here). So I'll say it again: Nokia DON'T WANNA SELL TOO MUCH N900 yet.
They don't feel they are there yet. They started a project 4 years ago, a 5 generations project. And they still have to finish it's last step so they jump into the market.
If Apple or any other player enters into a new the market with something new but chumsky it doesn't matter. Everybody understand that is the very first version. But when the big company replies 3 or 4 years latter, it must be something excellent. Nokia is not interested right now in selling more devices that the necessary to fullfill two objectives:

a) Enough developers/firms/advanced users/evangelists are aware of the next tecnology and can get savy on it.
b) They can show up on marketting they have something to fight against apple-rim-sony-winmo (even if nobody buys it because right now it is too expensive).

Re: Theory 1: only 30% of the cost of the N900 is "real" cost
 

By the while: Apple has iPhone, iPhone 3G and iPhone 3GS. Ho is 3GS a better name than N900?

Re: Theory 1: only 30% of the cost of the N900 is "real" cost
 

It is a public bulletin board, so talking foolishly in public exposes you to public rebuttal. Calling me a fanboy and trolling in various other threads invites my enthusiastic responses. He came to the official Maemo forum sponsored by Nokia, and all he does is run his mouth disparaging the direction and production of their and our work. He doesn't have to like it, but he should expect others to feel slighted. Plus, he's straight up inciting and baiting. You can catch a bear, but that's only half the work. I have something to say, too.

You may remember me from N95users, though I don't recall ever doing more than browsing there. I have seen some Indian users with my screen name, so maybe there is another. I'm a fake broke web celebrity, evidently.

He has been very propagandic with his speech. I'm just providing the opposite view. Tell me, have I made any misleading, false, or opinionated (but presented as fact) information in all this? Not at all. But he called me a fanboy, so I responded like one, but one armed with the truth. I don't mind arguing, and enjoy conflict, for some twisted reason. We could've discussed like gentlemen, but you can't talk as a fool (Nokia's share can only fall... Misinformation and a lie.) and expect clemency. Sorry. I'm a jerk sometimes, but not a dummy.

Re: Theory 1: only 30% of the cost of the N900 is "real" cost
 

I thanked you for this comment. It proves my point about you. You have to update your knowledge. I'll tone down my rhetoric, and ask you to never call me a fanboy again. Its just rude regardless how you put it. I'm a fan of technology and business philosophy, not a brand or company (except BMW. I DO love them...) I really want you to know the facts, that's all.

Java is an outdated technology fragmented by all the various virtual machines out there. It is resource hungry and latent as all get out. Do you really think Nokia, who has sold more mobile phones that support Java than any other company on earth, didn't embrace it? Hasn't Nokia been a longtime supporter of Java? Or maybe its limitations have been exposed?

We're entering a new age. Consumers want their phones to be mini computers. This means more processing power and PC functionality. The OS is moot, since it is the supported frameworks that decide if Java works or not. There is a push to have Java support on the N900, so obviously the intent to create a new OS wasn't to leave Java behind.

Qt is alot like Java, but connects to the native code and APIs much better. It is the foundation of the KDE environment for Linux, VLC Media Player, and even Google Earth. This type of development would be impossible with Java on today's computers. The power and quality of applications made with Qt are far better than anything made with Java.

Mobiles have limited resources, so Nokia was wise enough to buy Trolltech and take Qt mobile and provide a more nimble successor to Java capable of powering apps for mobiles as well as desktops. This will lower software development costs, allow lower priced, seemingly underpowered hardware to remain relevant longer, and allow richer content and applications to be developed for more OSes at once.

Look at Mozilla's VP. He'd love to create a port of Firefox for Android, but as he stated, Android's third party application framework is the Dalvik VM, a customized Java virtual machine. It simply lacks the efficiency and power to run something as powerful as Firefox like the N900. If they allowed apps to be written in another language, like Qt, he'd be all over it. Blackberry users decry the quality of their apps and graphics, but RIM's OS, too, uses Java as an application framework. Too much latency for high level software production. See the trend here?

I think you'll see some cooperation with Blackberry and Nokia to upgrade its OS by porting Qt. Android could as well. They know the limitations of Java, and won't rest on their laurels. Developers are smart, and always eventually follow the economics of scale. It makes sense to write in a language that is supported by the most platforms. OS developers are as well, and try to be as attractive as possible to developers.

Apple has excellent application frameworks, but if WinMo, Symbian, Maemo, possibly Blackberry and Android, plus Windows, Linux, and Unix all support Qt, Apple will be the odd man out, and be forced to accept marginalization or get the port as well. Sadly, they'll probably accept the former and remain as controlling as ever. If they do, They'll probably fizzle as fast as they boomed.