Re: Can someone tell me why N900 and not Android?
 

I'm not sure how it's possible to say that when you've got the counterexample of Debian, currently available on twelve architectures, all in native code. It's entirely possible to write code to an API that's available across architectures and then have it build on all of them instead of insisting on a cross architecture ABI.

You just don't need portable binaries in order to be portable.

Re: Can someone tell me why N900 and not Android?
 

Debian wasn't the first to do this.

Nextstep/Openstep (now "Cocoa"/OS X) did it, with transparency (fat binaries that were automatically built unless you told the compiler not to). But even the best, most carefully designed, and anally debugged environment for it, still had the problem that you still had to individually debug each platform. If you didn't, you'd get subtle variations in user experience, even subtle bugs. It was a great idea, but even the staunchest Nextstep advocates admitted that it had issues.

Even the anal retentive, overbearing, demanding taskmaster mentality that Steve Jobs brings to everything he oversees, couldn't make it 100% transparent to the developer. It's no coincidence that when Sun licensed Openstep, in the hope of the same goal ... it had to instead evolve in to Java.

What Debian does is a few steps less integrated than Nextstep/Openstep ... which means a few more steps of effort are required.

Interpreted environments (including bytecode type virtual machines) work that out in the interpreter. So the provider of the interpreter does that effort, not the application developer.

Re: Can someone tell me why N900 and not Android?
 

There's no conspiracy theory. Apple does have a multi-touch gestures patent in America. Though they haven't tried enforcing it (Palm Pre has it for example). Not to mention there's a debate of whether

a) it can really be patentable
b) prior work (there's a company in Asia that had been doing it for a while.. last I heard they were suing Apple about it).

But Google has pretty much determined that it would not support multi-touch gestures officially in America at least.

Re: Can someone tell me why N900 and not Android?
 

Yeah, I thought about it some more, but I don't know if I buy it. Apple is on really shaky ground with its patents. More so than you point out.

When Apple started making waves about the Pre having multi-touch, I read some pretty in-depth analyses that said Apple's patents are really very specific and don't pertain to much of what you see on the Pre. And, as you mention, Apple themselves is getting sued by Elan Microelectronics from Taiwan, for supposedly infringing Elan's own prior multi-touch patents. Apple is also infringing all kinds of patents that Palm holds (like syncing data from a cradle). Nokia is suing Apple now for infringing patents that have to do with just basic cell phone technology. So if Apple really wants to make waves in the cell phone industry over patents, they could get creamed (apparently businesses tend to use patents as weapons against each other, in a sort of mutually assured destruction logic).

And again, as you touch on, if Apple really went to court over these patents there's a not small possibility that Apple could get its patents revoked. Closer examination would probably show that Apple's patents actually violate other people's intellectual property, as well as being bogus based on prior art (publically known information from before the patents, making the ideas not patentable). In fact, this article is really interesting: http://www.rcrwireless.com/article/2...pabilities-is# It explains that now that multi-touch is taking off in the commercial sector and there's a lot of money in it, sooner or later the universities that really own the intellectual property on multi-touch are probably going to sue Apple. Basically the patent office is not very thorough and Apple probably shouldn't have gottent these patents to begin with.

So I think with Apple it's just a bunch of bluster. They don't want to go the legal route because it's bad news for them.

Also the stories about Apple nixing multi-touch in Android are hightly rumor based. Really there was one unnamed source back in February (http://digital.venturebeat.com/2009/...ogle-complied/) and then that one story got repeated a bazillion times online until it became the truth.

If it does have something to do with Apple, it really seems to be more becasue Google wants to play nice with Apple and continue to have Google services and applications work well on the iPhone/iPod Touch, in Safari, and other Apple products. But that said, the idea of Apple being able to nix multi-touch in Android doesn't make much sense to me. Google is in direct competition with Apple, pitting Android against the iPhone. If Google wanted to be nice to Apple, why would Google give in on just one feature? Especially since Google has shown lately that if it wants to go head to head with Apple, it's happy to sick the FCC on them for blocking Google Voice on the iPhone. And unlike Palm, Google has definitely got the money to go to court with Apple, over patents that Google has got to know are probably going to be a losing battle for Apple. It just seems like Google holds the cards, why bend to Apple's will?

Still, all that said, the lack of multi-touch only on the U.S. version of the Droid is curious, but I'm skeptical that Apple really forced it down Google's throat somehow.

Re: Can someone tell me why N900 and not Android?
 

Look up Droid's camera.. it might be 5mpxl, but it's image quality sucks. Thats my deal breaker. Since n900 has a great GPS in it, i'm just waiting for the navigation software to catch up. (only a matter of time)

Re: Can someone tell me why N900 and not Android?
 

FYI:

From: http://lwn.net/Articles/360343/

[1] http://laforge.gnumonks.org/weblog/2...id_mythbusters
[2] http://tree.celinuxforum.org/CelfPub...rs_Android.pdf

Re: Can someone tell me why N900 and not Android?
 

I think it's more Google just doesn't want to bother with a lawsuit and rather let someone else smack Apple upside the head. I don't think it's a google service issue because it's Apple that loses out if iphone users can't use gmail or gmaps with an application.

But true about the patent office, they also have quotas to meet a month and rejecting a patent doesn't count, only accepting.

Re: Can someone tell me why N900 and not Android?
 

Don't forget, Google just programs the OS, and they program it for general applicability. I don't know the mechanics of multi-touch but I have to think it is not something that could be implemented strictly in the software. Google may have decided that its programming efforts would only have benefited a few Android phones and that their development hours would be better spent elsewhere.

Re: Can someone tell me why N900 and not Android?
 

Yes, but recall that what prompted this dicussion is that on the exact same device (Droid/Milestone) multi-touch works in Europe and not in the U.S. So whatever technical explanations could be offered for not having multi-touch can't really make sense in this circumstance. In your example, if it's not worth the development hours, then it wouldn't be on the European version of the Droid either.

I guess part of my point in my post was that Apple's patent is so tenuous and everyone in the industry knows this, that the threat of a lawsuit isn't credible. So I just can't imagine Google getting pushed around by Apple. I mean, Apple wasn't even able to push around Palm, despite it being cash strapped and struggling to continue to exist. And Google can see that Apple actually hasn't sued Palm, after it's initial sabber rattling. So I don't see why Google should even bat an eye at any threat from Apple over multi-touch patents.

And multi-touch seems like a feature the average conusmer really wants. It has become sort of a hallmark of quality in a touch device. So it's worth Google bothering. Leaving it out of Android device, especially the U.S. Droid seems like something that could have a substantive effect on sales. (Although I have seen a few reviewers question whether multi-touch is actually that useful or is more of just a gee-whiz feature--but that's neither here nor there as far as public perceptions and sales go.)

Google and Apple of course have been very cozy. So maybe they did just come to some sort of agreement. I don't know. I don't really find any of the explanations so far very compelling. Some of them seem sensible, superficially, but I don't think they hold up to further consideration. It's just odd to me, to see it in the European Droid, but not the U.S. one. And it's not a hidden feature on the Milestone. It's a feature that Motorola is making a big point about.

Re: Can someone tell me why N900 and not Android?
 

Here's an nice more in-depth review of the multi-touch situation with the Droid and Apple's tenuous and not entirely existent patents:

http://www.engadget.com/2009/11/04/s...nd-multitouch/

Engadget points out, as they did with the Pre, that Apple does not actually appear to have a patent on the pinch-to-zoom multi-touch capability. So it's pretty unlikely it has anything to do with why this feature is available in the European Droid and not the U.S. one. They also point out that Windows 7 and the HD Zune have pinch-to-zoom enabled. And Apple has not said a word, further suggesting that there's nothing Apple can do about it (because if they could why would they let arch enemy Microsoft "steal" the feature?). They also point out that if Apple had a patent claim, Google would already be in violation since multi-touch support is built into Android 2.0 (even if it's not implemented). So they just don't buy that Google is worried at all about Apple and multi-touch.

Engadget says there are some claims that the pinch-to-zoom feature on the European Droid was implemented by Motorola. And Google implied it was Verizon's decision to leave it out on the U.S. Droid. And Engadget thinks what's most likely is that Google just hasn't finished developing multi-touch yet, but that it will be on future devices. Still they conclude, as I do, that the whole situation is just weird and doesn't really have a good explanation, given what's known.