Re: Maemo is CSS contaminated (not entirely open)
 

Maybe you're right Ta-t3, I'm not native English so maybe my wordings are a bit to strong or so, just wanted to state that I don't see anything wrong (even from deontological point) with what Nokia is doing for the tablets.
But of course, that's only my opinion :)
It's not my intention to "blame" jgombos (not sure what the correct term is) or so.

I *do* however agree with your (and others in this thread) point about "closedness of important parts of the UI and the provided software.". I hope this will be addressed in the future by Nokia as it hinders indeed the community on a rather practical level.

Re: Maemo is CSS contaminated (not entirely open)
 

I won't tackle your other points because they've already been addressed well.

Inclusion of Flash was deemed necessary to improve the out-of-box experience. And even if it wasn't included inherently, users expect Flash to be available for web access. You should have been here for the outcry when tablet owners had to deal with an older version-- the protest was loud and long. Flash is abused but it isn't solely used for bells and whistles, either. There are many "legitimate" implemntations as well, such as jaiku post applets. Could such components have been created via an alternate technology. Of course! But the reality is that Flash has become an ubiquitous, expected aspect of the Web experience and it had to be supported-- especially for YouTube. I'd rather SVG on steriods replace Flash entirely but that isn't going to happen.

If I understand correctly, for Nokia to even provide the possibility of Flash running (ie, as a separately-installable plug-in) there are still royalty issues to face (someone please correct me if I am wrong). Thus NDAs, proprietary interfaces, etc.

Finally, Flash was only used as an example, so no need to hyperfocus on it. If you've been reading the numerous, cogent rebuttals to your complaints, by now you should realize there were sound business reasons for certain closed aspects of the tablet and once again the important thing to note is the continual replacement of such elements where practical and possible. The tablets are evolving.

You seem to be approaching this commercial, for-profit enterprise with a purist's perfectionism, expecting Nokia to make the product 100% open a la OpenMoko. But Nokia isn't OpenMoko, so certain comparisons are flawed in sentiment. If you want purity, then by all means avoid the Nokia tablets and go with something that suits your ideals. The tablets wil get as close as they realistically can, but never 100% I'm afraid.

Re: Maemo is CSS contaminated (not entirely open)
 

There was a post or blog by Quim Gil (or was it it in the interview?) about this. They are working on this but they won't open source everything just because they can since it costs additional money to release the sources. Also it helps a lot when there is good (business) reason for having the source open. One example was the Hildon input framework which was closed but was opened recently because there were good reasons, see http://maemo.org/news/announcements/...189194936.html

Re: Maemo is CSS contaminated (not entirely open)
 

IIRC, FIC is a commercial, for-profit enterprise.

Re: Maemo is CSS contaminated (not entirely open)
 

Certainly not. Construing my needs as an expectation on Nokia isn't really productive. I expect Nokia to do what they deem prudent in pursuit of making money for the shareholders.

At the same time, I personally must choose the products that are right for me, and if I'm going to make development contributions, the future of those contributions must not be at the mercy or control of a commercial entity -- that is my personal requirement. I don't expect Nokia to give a rats 4$$ about it, but that doesn't mean I don't. Either the NIT is fit for my purpose, or it's not. Hence, the purpose of the discussion.

I've heard of GNU projects going commercial, and suddenly the work of (rightfully pissed off) GNU developers became the commercial property of someone. And here we have a GNU project that's starting off with significant commercial ownership and control.

Now considering that (according to you) Flash is a critical component to the success of the NIT, that's indeed cause for concern. It means the future of the GNU products for it are not only dependent on Nokia, but also Adobe. Although I don't accept it. It makes little sense to me that the Mamona project can't succeed. As it stands, I'm tempted to trust that Flash is separable from the OS, along with other components that will be replaced under Mamona.

Re: Maemo is CSS contaminated (not entirely open)
 

That's not what I derive from your comments. I see complaints that the tablet isn't completely open. But maybe there's an interpretation problem here. Anyway, I've said my bit.

Re: Maemo is CSS contaminated (not entirely open)
 

Care to give some details? AFAIK there is only one way to this and that is to use GNU (GPL) code and don't tell anyone and sell it as "close source" - which is violating the GNU (GPL) license and then you get into troubles with the FSF. Even on dynamic linking there is debate if this is allowed or not.
I do not see how any GPL code can go commercial - and by "commercial" I mean closed source, the GPL license allows you to charge *any* price for GPL'd software as long as you provide the derived code under GPL - and in that case someone else can then simply provide the same program for free (as in free beer).

edit: unless the *same* code also is licensable under a non-GPL license - which can only be granted/released by the authors/developers themselves, so that sitation is not applicable to my question.

edit2: just checked the GPLv3 , there is (maybe) one (slight) loophole: If i offer the derived program on a physical medium only ("including a physical distribution medium" -> CDROM/DVD) for let's say 20000 usd then under point 6b) I'm only obliged to provide the source to persons who actually have the object code (=order the cdrom), so someone has to shelf out the $$ one time and then can make free (as in beer) available.

Re: Maemo is CSS contaminated (not entirely open)
 

I don't recall the specifics; I will have to search for it. I'll post here if I find it. From what I recall, a commercial entity simply swallowed a project, took ownership, and the developers who contributed were powerless. It would be interesting to see how that happened. It may have been the ddwrt forums where I read that. It's heresay. Maybe it was under some strange non-GPL free license.

Complaining Loud and Long
 

Yeah, we here in the IT community like to complain loud and long about missing stuff that we consider to be "ubiquitous, expected aspect[s] of the Web experience"... By the way, are we getting Java any time soon? ;) :p :D