Re: Why maemo is not as popular as Android?
 

Actually, the Nexus S (made for Google by Samsung) is the second official Google handset (the original was the Nexus One, made for Google by HTC). Google's had their own phone for about a year now but I didn't really see a shift in their relationships with Google over that time.

Which is not to say that Maemo was bad--but you do make a good point: it's not particularly welcoming.

Re: Why maemo is not as popular as Android?
 

The producers of android phones and the iPhone give their customers the impression that their products have a future and are just the first step for a big future.

Nokia gives his users the impression that maemo is dying and that the products are the end of line.

Meego is no continuation but a new try that will also end this way.

No customer wants to buy dying products.


Nokia should offer new upgrades with surprising and revolutionary features if they want to show that there is still life.

Re: Why maemo is not as popular as Android?
 

I think you're possibly being melodramatic and hyperbolic, but I agree with your underlying point. If Nokia truly had intended Maemo to be groomed as the future OS for smartphones and other higher end devices, the least they could have done is supported it with frequent updates to applications (untie those applications from the flash OS images, for crying out loud!) and prompt bugfixes to make it seem like a current and supported product. Then, if they really wanted to make it feel more "alive" and current, they could have advertised it more to make people wonder what this thing is so that current owners have an opportunity to show it off. As it is, if I show off a Maemo product, it strikes people as a niche device--neat, but they wouldn't buy it for themselves or for family.

Re: Why maemo is not as popular as Android?
 

Here is another one point that nobody seems to be cover yet/
You all trying to simplify this to some point, so here is another one but very important.

It is perfect for youtube (except flash 10.1)

Somebody didn't realize that giving access to the Flash Dev community to play around is a smart business decision. Over 3 millions active community keep spreading the news about new area they can possibly enter. And here we go! Air apps, Flash 10.1 stuff, small steps but helping many people to make decision witch device I would like to buy and platform to support as Flash Dev. We are not talking about average Joe but geeks that playing with technology and n900 + Maemo + flash 10.1 would be perfect combination.

Base on this experience somebody realized the potential finally. New player with custom and fresh system on the market. Guess what they did. Prepared VM simulator of their OS and released it to Flash devs before its available on the market!

Yep..., http://us.blackberry.com/playbook-tablet/ They were trying to attract Flash guys and I have to say, they succeed already at some point.

Whatever you might thing about flash itself it's a huge factor in this game. Especially when comes to comparison iOS vs Android, don't overlooked that. It was the main reason for many people... ok IShine is cool because its shiny but flash.. hmm. I can show off that I have true and full web experience. Was it the one of the advert key point for Maemo and N900? Full experience? Really?

And here we go, so flash dev end up here, by mistake and trust that this OS will be future prove. I'm wondering how many more were so naive like me. Fact is, it's a shame since now I know how truly Maemo 5 unique is
and robust could be...

[Edit]

I can also add something in terms of OS classification these days.

Android, iOS - at some point i agree Android is a copy of iOS in terms of functionality and user experience. Mainly relaying on apps. Giving you wild race for get app for every single task you would like to make. Atomizing it to the level of uselessness.
Why I need so many apps to duplicate mainly web based stuff?

Chrome OS - as opposite to above, relaying on web based stuff only. Trying to convince you everybody is using one Application called web browser.

From one extremeness to another. Maybe there is even millions of customers that could find one of the ways useful but there is still huge amount of people that would like to have both. Even if the statement of Google is correct, we still need proper, local OS under our control. We don't need 2k apps if we have robust web experience, I agree. Maemo could perfectly fill the gap. But end up in nowhere in this case. No apps no Full web experience.

Re: Why maemo is not as popular as Android?
 

For however short it does it, since a slim device usually means a capacity-challenged battery.

Re: Why maemo is not as popular as Android?
 

For a fellow living in London, your English is somewhat hard to parse. If I understand you correctly, though, I would believe that you're arguing that Flash is what made Maemo. I disagree. I would like to point out to you that Maemo existed for many revisions and a few years before Flash had been available. I would further argue the point that iOS phones were popular despite the lack of Flash, and that Android was catching up quickly to iOS despite lacking Flash long before Flash was even announced coming to the platform. Most importantly, Maemo was never more popular than either of them at any point during their commercial availability to customers, even when Maemo was the only one of the three that DID have Flash for a time.

May I also add that I don't use Flash on my Android devices and yet they are able to browse and operate excellently on every website I've browsed with Dolphin or Firefox (I'm not a fan of the built-in Android browser, but then the argument here is about Flash making or breaking a platform). I sincerely doubt that Maemo succeeded as a fantastic platform because it had Flash to "help" show you a bunch of web ads.

As for Youtube, I sincerely prefer it without Flash. The YouTube app works GREAT on Android and I'm never left wanting a Flash based player. Not at all.

In my opinion, you give far too much credit and credence to Flash as if it would make or break an operating system. In my view, it's the annoying RealPlayer plugin-in of the 2000's: a plug-in that web site operators keep hinging on so much that they effectively make it feel like a plugin-in is a web standard requirement. Silly--especially in an operating system argument.

Re: Why maemo is not as popular as Android?
 

Nokia is one such flash-whore. At one stage (2-3 years ago) going to nokia.com you was presented with some friggin flash crap to select which localised version of their website to view, and they didn't provide any HTML navigation at all. So if like me you're running firefox with noscript you'll see an empty page.

Re: Why maemo is not as popular as Android?
 

Heh... I remember that. And THAT, my friend, is NOT a web page. You might as well compare sites that rely on Flash with old-school AOL service or Prodigy. You needed to use THEIR client to log in and see THEIR content on THEIR network. Flash is a little less exclusive than that, but it's not a far walk away from an Adobe owned "web" without the open and competitive standards. What kind of idiot communications hardware company creates their entire website in a non-standards based pure plug-in way? Nokia. They're all about the "open"... or some junk. :P

Re: Why maemo is not as popular as Android?
 

oh please...

Re: Why maemo is not as popular as Android?
 

From the PoV of user of device that doesn’t really attract official apps developers, ChromeOS argument sounds good enough. At least with browser that doesn’t have too much propietary function, those services will still be usable.

Websites made so many native apps for iOS and Android for something they could just make mobile website for.
Can’t bringing a function from desktop to mobile because the service limit themself to specific platform, it could outweight Maemo’s unrealizable potential :P

It's not just about get the device you wanted, not about black or white. I like those services, but don't like their “nationality”

Re: Why maemo is not as popular as Android?
 

because Maemo is basically a "fart" from Nokia.

Re: Why maemo is not as popular as Android?
 

Dissenting opinion? Please... go on. Explain to me how a "web page" composed entirely of Flash content is still a web page.

Re: Why maemo is not as popular as Android?
 

I thought so.

Re: Why maemo is not as popular as Android?
 

Advertising.

Re: Why maemo is not as popular as Android?
 

Devil's advocate here... it's a web page because I can use a web browser to get to it and it's embedded via SWFObject in a HTML or PHP page.

Sorry. I had to do it ;)

Re: Why maemo is not as popular as Android?
 

So how you call my flaemo project then. I am looking for good name so you could help me out :).

From your respond above yea... fact I am living in London doesn't mean my English is good, My apology for that, work in progress.

Anyway... it's clear for me that you didn't get it right. What I was saying is not Flash itself as a peace of technology. No mater plug-in or not, you like it or not. its a pure fact that is a massive computer geek market they are hungry to enter mobile world as well. Doesn't matter what is your personal opinion about flash. Or my own.

In short, 3 million people keep talking over the web every single day. Steve Jobs is a **** and Android is an option. Power of publicity. If people are talking about something you wont to know what is this hype about. This is what helped Android to grow in popularity. Even if by the end of the day nobody is even using flash.

Is it more clear now?

Re: Why maemo is not as popular as Android?
 

I was on my little Nokia N800 when reading the news that some company named Google was buying this little Os named Android way back in the day. Fast forward 4 years later this GIANT!! little Os wants to swallow my (neglected by Nokia) little Tablet :(:( Ohhh!! the Humanity poor me.

Re: Why maemo is not as popular as Android?
 

You answered your own question.

Carriers do not want open devices. It's hard to lock their customers with one.

Re: Why maemo is not as popular as Android?
 

... and they have a plan.

Battlestar Galactica
was the most suicidally depressing scifi every screened,
Nokia smartphone strategy seems like it was taken
straight from a cylon planbook.


Big noises with lots of shattered and abandoned product lines
drifting across the smoke-clogged skies of markets destroyed in treachery.
People trapped in hopeless places watching the inevitable
knowing that they were led into disaster by placing their
trust in those who had agendas very different than advertised.
Hauntingly scripted burials of still-viable equipment so like watching
living people being herded into airlocks to be artistically
flushed into the star-flecked beauty of a cruel vacuum.
Leaving behind at every turn someone cherished for their
competence or loyalty to face certain death as punishment for
a faith betrayed.
An impossible goal far beyond the boundaries of known space,
trying to find the lost myth of a product which needs no firmware support.

The only thing missing is a Bear McReary ringtone.

Whoever dreamed up this transition strategy from
Maemo to Meego should have their line Boxed.

Re: Why maemo is not as popular as Android?
 

Not popular for consumers or for device manufacturers?

Not popular for consumers because of:
Brand Association:
Maemo = Nokia, Linux (what's that?)
Android = HTC, Motorola, LG, Samsung, Google, Toshiba laptop!...

Not popular for device manufacturers because of:
Niche consumer market:
Maemo = Nokia, Linux (what's that?)
Android = HTC, Motorola, LG, Samsung, Google, Toshiba laptop!...

So, the next question should be; which influenced which? :cool:

Re: Why maemo is not as popular as Android?
 

Android is more comparable to DangerOS than any Linux distro. I don't think Maemo influenced it at all.

Re: Why maemo is not as popular as Android?
 

So what exactly WAS the point of Maemo 5?

To piss off quite a few of those who bought N900 for its great potential, only to be slapped back to reality by Nokia? To make sure Maemos (and Nokias)reputation to most people would be ruined to a point where they wouldn't even think about getting the Maemo 6 phone? To show everyone there is absolutely no commercial support or even support from Nokia?

Re: Why maemo is not as popular as Android?
 

Can someone define the difference between popularity of Mercedes Benz (Maemo) and Toyota (Android)?

Re: Why maemo is not as popular as Android?
 

Internally (?), Nokia had this '5 step program' in which they're trying to build and repackage an opensource platform (maemo) into something as pliable and usable as their Symbian platform for the masses. maemo5 was supposed to be the 4th iteration before this maemo worm transform into a fully grown butterfly that's supposed to be consumer friendly and media-darling worthy.

Why they let loose this unfinished (they said it themselves) product upon the masses outside of its intended niche (potential developers, *nix users and non-smartphone users in general) and how they keep spreading it on our eastern brethren (hongkong, india, viet/cambodia, etc) with this same strategy is beyond me.

No one can. That's failed logic from the get go.

Re: Why maemo is not as popular as Android?
 

The more I think about it... the more I have to think that Maemo was basically an internal project that was beta tested upon all that consumed their internet tablets - 770 through N900. Look at how the phone bits were "tacked on". Look at how easy it was to stop, restart, resume and repeat between each and every version of Maemo.

But the constant statement that "Maemo was never meant for mainstream" is very annoying. Typically, most well founded companies do not release pet projects. Apparently, Nokia did just that.

That's my take on it. And this comes from a person that's owned a 770, N810 and N900. Guess I played along with 3 out of 4 of their pet project steps.

Re: Why maemo is not as popular as Android?
 

Don't feel so bad, I'm sure Nokia didn't meant for the 770, N810, N900 as pet projects. Rather I believe it's a niche market strategy. And the payoff is the market exposure or awareness or whatever you want to call it. At least it give Linux/Maemo/Meego fans some awareness of Nokia brand - however, they should show more support otherwise the strategy backfires.

Re: Why maemo is not as popular as Android?
 

because google wants our money. therefore, they provide service to their customers, as oppsed to nokia. -.-

Re: Why maemo is not as popular as Android?
 

Nokia's phones are abandoned too quickly.

You buy cheap android phone with OS 1.6 and upgrade it to 2.2
You buy rather expensive N900 (N8, E61, whatever) and junk it looking at new shiny Nokia phones with newer OS version full of really good features.

Anyone want to exchange Android phone in good condition for my N900 in Russia, Moscow?

edit: I like linux. I use linux in my everyday life and feel bad with stock kernel. Gentoo > Ubuntu, and all that stuff. I like Maemo. Maemo's problem is Nokia. I don't like Nokia. The only thing Nokia is good at is cheaphones.

Hope Intel will create loads of Meego-based x86 mobile devices. ARM will fail with Nokia.

Re: Why maemo is not as popular as Android?
 

Um, no. :) You can use a web browser to get RealPlayer video and to get a page full of nothing but plugins running--that doesn't make the plugin content web pages. The plugin content is sitting ON a web page, but the plugin media aren't the web page. Flash content isn't a web site and it's only as portable as Flash is. Considering how utterly abandoned the Maemo platform has been, you're increasingly unlikely to see web pages that host Flash content with the exception of your aforementioned (and utterly unwelcomed, in most cases--completely unnecessary, in all cases) Flash based advertisements.

Re: Why maemo is not as popular as Android?
 

If anything... this is overwhelmingly less lucent that your previous explanation. Can you elaborate in a more cogent fashion and try not to make silly analogies? :)

Re: Why maemo is not as popular as Android?
 

OK, I'll try .You pushing my English skills to the limit, but I will take it as a challenge :).

whisper marketing

Involved 3 millions of people potentially on the direct target from the marketing point of view. Android did it and it worked out. Now Black Berry is going to do the same. Ask every single flash dev about is he aware about mobile platforms he can deliver some stuff?. I can't find any better reason or more convincing way. I know, for most of anti flash guys, flash is nothing but adds, however it's only showing me ignorance. Same ignorance as Nokia showed me off. But they might have commercial reasons behind this strategy.

You have no any other but ranting against plug-ins used as commonly as web browsers. As open source lover I understand your point of view trying to defend purity of the web standards to keep the web open. But trying to stay in balance with commercial reality of the current internet world, is not a point to keep trying to convince you that you, by using flash plug-in you still can stay open source and use open source solutions to deliver some projects on the market for free. If you don't know that, you are just not up-to-date.

If you would like to know my opinion about plug-ins and opening the source of the flash player I can refer you to this topic

Going back to the subject. Understanding the question even if is not being written in your native tongue is crucial.

Question:
My personal opinion as the answer:
whisper marketing

Now let's find the supportive audience (flash community) and something to give customer over the opponent (which is iOS in this case) that don't have.


[EDIT]

Result?

Day to day conversation on the street with random dude:

MAC funboy:
I've got new shiny iPhone 4.. look how cool is the screen res and smooth transitions!

ANDROID funboy: blehh, but you still don't have proper multitasking!

MAC funboy: you kidding me.. look I can play audio on one app video on the second and play a game in this same time!

ANDROID funboy (quickly navigate using his back button to hide the weakness of having true multitasking OS): Ok, but it's not proper multitasking it just audio and video playback exception. Here It's a real one.

MAC funboy: sorry dude but who really is using 3 apps in this same time! Especially if this is killing your battery life!

ANDROID funboy: hmm... you know we can replace the battery. You can't :P

MAC funboy: ;/

ANDROID funboy:ok, cool. But what about Flash?

MAC funboy: Ok man I have to go so... btw, I prefer html5 :P (this is what Steve gave him as a weapon just for situations like that)

Maemo with its grate potential is not even taking a part in this game. As long as it could give you the options. Even if this is the bloody plug-in you personally hate. I miss the plug-in for conversation to be able to stay in touch with my friends abroad for example. Is no longer working in PR 1.3.

How rude would be life without extensions to make your software more personalized. Is not actually the genesis of where the app idea come from? Somebody realized if something is for everything it's over bloated peace of crap. Web browser using HTML5 itself will not give you what 3th party plug-ins can offer. But you have this freedom of choice. No like Android OS or Google desktop trying to force you to use ONLY one solution.. Chrome web browser. Seriously there is more danger and flash plug-in is on the very last place.

Re: Why maemo is not as popular as Android?
 

You may be right, I think the language barrier might be an issue for me here--but if I'm understanding you right, you're making the case that Maemo somehow has an advantage over both Android and iOS because it has.. Flash? I would like to point out that the Flash on Maemo is outdated, insecure and not utilized to any reasonable extent by anybody except advertisers to spam your attention.

To whit, I must also bring to your attention that HTML purity has little to do with the idea that web pages composed of nothing but Flash content isn't really a web page. It had FAR more to do with the idea that a web browser has little or no involvement in rendering the display and any architecture lacking Flash, or falling too far behind in Flash, will fail to see anything while even an improperly constructed (barely HTML) web page can still render for decades on pretty much any web enabled browser. Flash is pure closed-source fail on many levels--but Maemo has very little to brag about even if it weren't fail. Hence, Maemo isn't as popular as Android.

Re: Why maemo is not as popular as Android?
 

hmm... is anybody here able to understand my point (in broken English) and explain to danramos? :)

All I am saying is the answer to the main question.

Why maemo is not as popular as Android?

My personal opinion as the answer:
whisper marketing

And after, I gave you generic example how Android lovers are happy with flash and Air as the MAIN advantage over the iOS.

But again, conclusion is that Maemo missed out that opportunity because outdated flash player. Of course is not the only factor. But still important because 3mln of people were waiting to follow some platform.

Have you seen latest Adobe MAX sneak-peak. There was no conference without using words Flash, Mobile, devices, future

This is not discussion what is flash, is it good or not. What supposed to be used instead, what is the plug-in etc. I really trying stick to the subject.

My impression is you are reading to many topics on this forum around Flash and continuously trying to find something against this technology.

If you want to discus about this I am sure there is more suitable thread to do so.

Re: Why maemo is not as popular as Android?
 

Obviously you did not understand the question.

It was about the popularity of the OS, not the device.

The answer was that the N900 was likely less appealing than the plethora of Android options (I'd throw in tablets with the phones nowadays).

So your comment was completely inadequate.

Re: Why maemo is not as popular as Android?
 

Do you mean word-of-mouth advertising? You DO understand that it CAN work--but only when you have a compelling device that people can convince others with. Nokia hasn't done ANYTHING right with regard to that--they pretty much communicate terribly, offer the worst warranties and customer support that local laws will allow, and do nothing as far as I can tell to provide something better than their competition--in fact providing far worse experiences than competing devices on the market. The only thing they seem to have going is that they sell far more cheaper devices around the world. Well, at least they do SOMETHING right. Certainly nothing worthy word-of-mouth advertising, if that's what you meant.

Re: Why maemo is not as popular as Android?
 

Hey! Word of Mouth Marketing is working here! I once read a post where some guy got free beer for just having a N900. Tell me if Android gets you that??? :D

Re: Why maemo is not as popular as Android?
 

Heh.. actually, my Androids have easily gotten me plenty of free. On that level, I HAVE gotten free drinks because I showed people neat stuff on my Droid. On another level, I got a FREE excellent mapping program, FREE email hosting service that doesn't suck, etc. :) On yet another level, I've gotten PAID for doing work with my Droid (not yet with my Tab.. but we'll see). Tell me if your N900 got you all of that?

Re: Why maemo is not as popular as Android?
 

Sorry but I found out about N900 off a flyer I got in a phone store while on vacation to the mountains. They put some money in marketing, maybe not enough but they got my attention not from gsmarena or other online resource, but from a printed ad.

I believe Maemo is not as popular because N900 is the single device and is quite expensive, as many said before me.

But yet again, there is the developer that a platform / phone OS needs to attract in order for it to become interesting for the end user. Exactly what Apple does for iPhone if you are about to argue that iPhone is also the single device running iOS.

Maemo benefits from hundreds of cool free applications that unfortunately are built on a tight budget: the free time of passionate developers.
And in most cases this translates into both lack of user interface and experience and in support/updates too.

As an N900 owner I was truly disappointed to read that nokia discontinues Maemo. It built distrust, even if later I found out that MeeGo might support N900. It also sounded as an awfully wrong strategy that Nokia had.

Re: Why maemo is not as popular as Android?
 

Google is yesterday's idea growing big now. Meego is today's idea growing big tomorrow. Maemo was a little fart, but a nice one. That is all you need to know.

Oh yes, Symbian will be the most popular also in 2011

Jolicloud is superb. Incredible. Just upgraded to 1.1 it took ages, but that OS really got something going. The best OS for netbooks by far, and I have tried them all.

Re: Why maemo is not as popular as Android?
 

You actually pulled out RealPlayer? Props for the nerve to do that.

But both RealPlayer (is that still around!? I've not installed it since G2 way back in my early, pre-SP1 Win2k days) and Flash are web based technologies (initially) and since I can setValue() via SWFAddress, I can alter the browser's URL as well - but I cannot do that unless I am embedded in a HTML/PHP page.

Thus, the Flash content, a web browser plugin based content is a web page. Your argument, while incredibly valid... you'd be saying that YouTube isn't a webpage either because it has embedded media that's normally played only via a browser plugin.

Flash is more than just ads. Video, navigation, pulling out data into datagrids via queries directly to the database (Flex), Adobe AIR (integrated runtime), Flash is more than just web too.

And once Adobe integrates Flash to HTML5... then Flash will output web pages too.

And be careful. By your description of "sitting on" the webpage, the pages are indeed the buckets that we fill with our content. Some require plugins, some require special DOM interpreters (javascript for instance) and then are those considered on the page or in? That's a very slippery slope.

I just go with the whole "Can I get to it via http://somedamnaddress.com?" and if it's yes, then the content is all the web page to me.

Overly simplistic? Hell yeah. But it keeps me from overthinking things.