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

No, EDGE definitely is a 3G protocol -- it's specified in IMT-2000. Like 1xRTT, it's generally regarded as "2.75G" because it's so much slower than most of the 3G protocols, but AT&T would be just as justified on technicalities (and just as misleading in fact) to claim their entire coverage area was 3G (assuming they have EDGE everywhere; I'm sure they do by now) as Verizon would with 1xRTT.

EDIT: not that I'm sure what Verizon is representing in their map-for-that -- I've heard claims that they have their entire network upgraded to EV-DO everywhere, but I really don't know what they're representing.

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

I personally have decided to go Android for now but not for a cell phone, just an Internet Tablet. My wife bought me the 16G Archos Android Internet Tablet for my birthday and it is pretty cool. I decided not to go down the n900 route since I have At&T and Sprint for cell phone providers and I'm not switching to Tmobile. Also, I really have enjoyed my n800 first and then my n810 and can't imagine going to a smaller screen size for use as an internet tablet. I mostly use for browsing, google reader, twitter and IM. Now, don't get me wrong, I love Maemo and will go back if Nokia decides to come out with a true tablet. But for now I'm liking the A5 Android device.

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

At least in Europe it certainly isn't considered 3G. It's 2.5G, or was as far as the ETSI committees were concerned back in the late nineties when I was involved for work.

In the US it was being touted as a 2.5G technology around the same time. I don't know if it got "rebranded" post '99 as I moved into VoIP and never kept up with the US mobile scene much.

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

I concur - EDGE was called 2.5G when it was introduced. It was meant as a stopgap until 3G came along (which would be UMTS in Europe).

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

I don't want to sound to bold or dismissive here guys, but the story of the Openess is going to change once this OS goes really mass market.

Nokia started Maemo as an experiment, and being those devices for "nerds" (that's what we are, and don't yell at me please :) ), they didn't have to bother about security or UX much. People like us get excited because "you can run OpenGL on this thing" or because "you can run actual linux code"... and stuff like that.

Android has being designed from the ground up for Mass Market: that's why you have the most solid Architecture ever (Applications running sandboxed into a damn-fast-VM-named-Dalvik), and you actually have DRM and PlatSec.

Indeed, Maemo Summit 2009 was more a "teaching course" and a "preparation course" then a summit: Nokia now has to turn this amazing experiment (Maemo) into an actual Mass Market OS... or iPhone, and Android of course, will get too big. And they started to bring "us" the concept.

Symbian? Symbian is drop dead: don't listen to the Symbian Foundation. Nokia will support Symbian until H2 2010 (Symbian^4) then, either they reach a level of independence, or S60 will leave as closed source OS that Nokia will use for low and mid end devices.
After all the "actual Symbian code" into Nokia S60 devices reaches only in specific cases a max of 30/40%. The rest is all Nokia closed source goodness (luckily, otherwise you will not even able to have an actual WiFi G support on your phone).

I love the openness of Maemo: it feels just great the level of freedom that an actual Linux Distro in the palm of your hands can bring. But it's with Maemo 6 that we will see if this OS has a long life in front of it or not.

Better Nokia does a good clean work with PlatSec, otherwise I can already see some great people in this community get upset ;)

My 2 cents.

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

DRM is not a feature. At least not for -you-. If you think it is then you've bought into the snake oil and the lies of those pushing it. PlatSec has a nasty habit of being used against the device owner as well.

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

Agreed. So, how can I run Maemo 5 on my Motorola Droid?

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

Man, I was thinking of receiving a comment like that to that sentence. :)

Honestly, I technologically agree with you. They are not features (and indeed, I didn't call them so).
But I'm in this business for enough time now to say that there is no Mass Market without those "funtionalities". And, yes, they are there more to make the interest of the Companies then to make the interest of the Consumers.

BUT, to have a massive success, a large base of installation, something "of the iPhone size", you need to have a secure, solid platform. And for now PlatSec, in all it's different forms, has been the only way to deliver it.

My favourite? The Android one. Is still open enough that you can install anything from anyone if you want, but it's at least creating the filtering and giving the user the informations "to make him/her aware of what he/she is doing". Symbian PlatSec, on the other hand, is the example to avoid.

DRM is going to be required until all Media-producer will make their mind and stop bothering us. Once we see that happening (and you have iTunes of example of where this ALREADY HAPPENED), it will be a better world ;)

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

Considering how similar they are, it'd probably a fairly trivial port to get it running. The main issue would be the bootloader.

This doesn't take into account if Moto is doing any TPM/selinux stuff to lock down the bootloader/kernel, like they did with the MotoMAGX platform (which was giving the OpenEZX guys a hard time.)

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

I would love to try this...
It would also counter the argument that Maemo isn't really free because it only runs on one device.