Re: Should MeeGo developers continue to publish info on this forum for maemo users (wrt Nokia device support)?
 

Yes, seriously, seriously. (Was there a reason to say that twice?) If that 5% is a key component, then it doesn't matter how open the rest of it is.

Take the Motorola series with the locked boot loader. If the entire source tree minus the loader were opened tomorrow, you still couldn't make a viable image to boot on those devices because you can't do that without that last little 0.1% of code. Sure, maybe you could find an exploit and hack in to start replacing bits. But then we wouldn't call that "open", would we? If we do, why would we not call the iPhone open, since we can do the same thing there?

I think you need to re-think why you, personally, are insulted by that.

For the rest, please don't put words in my mouth. I'm not saying that at all. I'm saying when comparing two systems that are almost identical in which parts are closed vs open (in this case Maemo and MeeGo CE for N900, which is the only part of MeeGo we've been talking about in this thread), it makes little difference if one is marginally more open.

In fact, I referenced several times that I personally would call them both "open", while groups like Fedora would not. (Fedora takes a hard line of 100% open, no exceptions.) My beef was with another member claiming that MeeGo was "more open" than Maemo, which I said was a moot point in this particular case. But then you didn't actually read the thread, or you'd have seen that.

MeeGo's also not a very functional system, last I saw, without closed components. When this discussion was happening, MeeGo didn't even have it's own GUI. It was "left to the implementer" that was picking up MeeGo as a "base". Does it at least have a desktop now? It can't be that speedy with a frame buffer driver. Can the "open" version make a call, or connect to wifi, or do anything useful? I know the binary blob version can, I'm talking about the fully open version you speak of here.

Sure you can; It's called Debian. :rolleyes: MeeGo CE is based on MeeGo, just like Maemo is based on Debian. If you boot "just the open parts", you'll get just about the same functionality... not much. But then nobody is going to boot just the open parts for more than development, or to say they did it. And nobody is going to be able to implement the completely closed GSM driver modules in either as open source any time soon without breaking an NDA.

If you want a device that has no wifi, no gsm, no sensors, no bluetooth, no battery control, no gps, and a basic frame buffer for graphics, please do boot "OpenMeeGo". All of those (and more) rely on blobs, and can be easily outmoded and rendered crippled, broken, or worse if/when MeeGo 2.0 changes those interfaces. Most people didn't pay for all that hardware just to have it sit idle. Most won't want to lose all of that for this wonderful "platform" that will see 0 future ARM based processors after the N9. (Where's the MeeGo ARM app store again?)

So, again in my view, it's a moot point to say one is "more open", when it relies on almost the exact same set of binary blobs to do anything at all functional.

Yeah.. because there's not a list of them in the paragraph above, or in several other posts I've made in this thread (that you clearly didn't read) or people working on those closed bits making lists. Nope, not a clue as to what's closed in MeeGo.

That's one difference between you and I; I don't look to control others. I say what I mean and that's that. If others like what I say, or don't, that's their prerogative. I never claimed to be the end-all source of information, nor would I want to be. I just say what I understand, and usually wind up explaining why I take the view that I do. If others find utility in that, good for them. If you disagree with that view, good for you.

But to claim I don't know what I'm talking about, when I've referenced where my information is coming from, and not referencing any sources yourself? (Where did that "40%" estimate come from for Maemo openness?) Or saying that I'm somehow insulting you by having a different point of view? Or to claim that someones view is unintelligent just because it doesn't agree with your particular view? All I can say to that is:

Re: Should MeeGo developers continue to publish info on this forum for maemo users (wrt Nokia device support)?
 

This is a schoolbook example of "The Internet Effect".

It all starts out pretty innocently with a poll about something that is totally unrelated to an old conflict/disagreement (since the poll was about giving information about development progress, not about the specifics of Maemo/MeeGo development) but quickly turns into a rehash match with the usual misunderstandings you can expect from "The Internet Effect".

To me, this can all be summed up by:

Devoted developer 1: We get picked on, why is that?
Community member: Because you don't manage information well.
Devoted developer 1: But, MeeGo is that good. To me at least, on my device, with my use-cases. Ordinary users just don't get it, and I'm not caring about them anyway. They pick on me.
Community member: ...

A wild flurry of "open", "not open" and "governance" erupts where examples from history are presented to add to a sidenote-type discussion of the actual definition of "governance" and how it relates to MeeGo development.

Devoted developer 2: You know nothing, man. You weren't there, man. I've seen things you wouldn't believe. Man.
Community member: I wrote the code in the machines that made your birth possible. Boy.

Yet another wild flurry erupts but this time revolving around percentages (real or imagined) and reiterations of previous points together with ad hominem attacks, passive aggressiveness and general "What if"s that add pretty much nothing.

All the while, the admins circle this shirk-fest as vultures, swooping in to manage the ebb and flow of meta discussions about who can say what about certain elements.

I won't even vote. I did read every post in the thread, though. And I enjoyed some of them very much.

Re: Should MeeGo developers continue to publish info on this forum for maemo users (wrt Nokia device support)?
 

All true. And even being aware of it isn't a fix, as it's so easy to get caught up in it...

http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/duty_calls.png

Re: Should MeeGo developers continue to publish info on this forum for maemo users (wrt Nokia device support)?
 

If the entire Motorola series source tree were to be opened tomorrow it would be a miracle, and if only the bootloader was left closed it would be RE'd in a weekend. And the codebase would quickly be used in other phones as well.

But still, you'd be there to say that it does not matter. It's no better good as 100% closed platform because there's still a single component that is closed, a bootloader.

Well, sorry. I still think it's stupid to see it your way.

No. I at least would call it "more open".

Oh, I thought I used the world "insulting". Sorry you confused it with "offensive". You know, there's a reason lawyers tend to use the quote "hateful, offensive, and insulting" -- and it's exactly because of nitpickers like the above webcomic author.

You have literally said:
and I have said:
And that quote of yours is the only reason I came to this thread.

Oh no, oh no, that's an even worse thing to say. _Marginally?_ Sigh

Do I really need to start? Do you even know what the closed components are in Meego for the N900? And in Maemo?

I have always called Maemo closed. I would never call Meego closed. I could argue whether Meego for the N900 is closed or not. You can make a bootable Meego for the N900 that charges and even makes phone calls. Note however that it might be illegal in many countries because AIUI without the closed PA blobs it lacks several features that are required in every GSM handset.

Fedora also does not take a hard line of 100% open, no exceptions. It allows closed source firmware. On Meego, this is considered a "closed" package and marked as such -- and the N900 requires a few such firmware packages. By gNewSense logic Fedora is a closed source distro. By my logic, as seen above, I could argue whether it is.

The particular case doesn't exist. The point is thus not moot. That's my main point.

Since you're now talking about Meego as a "base", I guess you're not talking about the N900 CE any more. For your information, Meego has always had several UIs to choose from release 1 and virtually since day 1. Meego CE for the N900, on the other side, hasn't.
I hope you will understand that has nothing to do with openness and closeness and is just because of concepts like software testing.

A "frame buffer driver" makes no sense. Virtually all devices use a "frame buffer driver", not to mention all mobile ones. I will guess you meant "without 3D acceleration".

It can boot. To a UI. Not the handset UX as that would be quite slow with a software 3D rasterizer, but you can if you want. I would personally call that "something useful". It can also connect to Wi-Fi. It can also browse the Web.

I failed to understand your point here. You're now trying to tell me that different GNU/Linux distributions all tend to share all of the opened enhancements and functionality and thus they all end alike? I'd say that's a good thing!

You've not really looked at the Meego mailing lists a lot lately, have you?

Either way, I'm here to publicly rebate your point that Meego being more open than Maemo is moot, not talking about Meego being useless. I wholeheartedly agree that Meego is less useful than Maemo on the N900 -- even with the closed blobs. But I fail to see how that means that it being more open is a "moot point" for its future-proof-ness.

*Sigh*. As said, you do not even know what components are closed.

Oh, FUD! Let's surprise you:
- Wi-Fi and BT only require closed firmware.
- The GSM stack is fully open.
- What is sensors? If you mean the accelerometer, no, it doesn't require anything closed.
- Battery control is mostly RE'd and alternatives to bme exist. No one has been truly interested in merging them in Meego yet.
- GPS is also mostly RE'd. Except for AGPS.
- 3D acceleration is not open and will never be opened. However, there's one provider that is keen on providing updated versions of these drivers PLUS the fact that we could potentially reuse Android drivers if the need ever came.

See how having LESS closed components is better? People CAN find alternatives or reimplement if you're talking about less than a dozen. They CANNOT if you're talking about hundreds.

Some unrelated yaddayadda I don't even disagree with. Btw the Meego on the N9 is not even Meego. But I do not see what this has to do with the point that MORE OPEN is not a moot point.

Yes, the exact same set. Go figure. As said, insulting.

Your list in the paragraph above was wrong. There's not a list in that URL you linked.
Please do a bit of googling and search for the actual list of packages. You can even download those and look inside. I am not even going to do it for you. When you do, will you please correct your posts?

You are here arguing, and you have for the past 15 threads too. So we are not that different.

You do not know what you're talking about. The 40% estimate is completely bogus. If you want a more realistic one, grab Stskeeps', which says that 57% of Fremantle is closed. But I guess you didn't know that.

Re: Should MeeGo developers continue to publish info on this forum for maemo users (wrt Nokia device support)?
 

In a hypothetical situation, where you have a full access to motorola source, you would still not be able to install your custom build firmware.

The reason is simple, boot loader makes sure it can run only firmware packaged by motorola. So there is no chance of forcing in (RE'd).

See the philosophical view on it (it was labeled as paranoid at the time it was created):
Trusted computing.

http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/can-you-trust.html

Aside from this, here is the question to demonstrate openness of meego (or maemo):

Can you influence the meego design decisions and how?

Re: Should MeeGo developers continue to publish info on this forum for maemo users (wrt Nokia device support)?
 

I am fully aware of that (the N950 has this Aegis thing).

But, would you thus conclude that it doesn't matter at all? That you couldn't care less than Motorola went to the heights of opensourcing the rest of their platform? That the fact they did wouldn't be more useful to you?

Re: Should MeeGo developers continue to publish info on this forum for maemo users (wrt Nokia device support)?
 

@javispedro

So, to sum this up, when you say "open", you mean reverse engineered or source released by, in this case, Nokia?

And when you talk about openness of a system/OS/whatnot not being "a moot point", your main argument is how much easier it might make reverse engineering which might result in "open" components?

Finally, I assume the "openness" of MeeGo by itself, without any device, seen as a framework or something like that, is "pure open" with code that has either been developed from scratch or released without reverse engineering anything.

But as soon as MeeGo ends up on a device like the N900, this changes and depends on how many components have been reverse engineered (or where other vendors have stepped in with better/more open alternatives).

Clear distinctions of what is discussed would, hopefully, make it less likely to end up in discussions about something else. The "openness" of Fedora is irrelevant. The same goes for Ubuntu.

The "openness" of a platform like the N900 does matter when it comes to the effort needed to reverse engineer components (if your testament to this fact is to be taken at face value). This, then, has nothing to do with the "openness" of MeeGo, or Maemo for that matter. This is all about the effort needed to reverse engineer any component on any platform. I'm sure woody14619 can agree on this and you then have no reason to feel insulted since that's not what he's disagreeing with you about.

When it comes to the effort put into this (if you and your fellow developers have managed to, for example, pry open and reverse engineer the full GSM driver layer) I'm also sure that woody14619 agrees on a "Well done!" since that is the kind of effort he can appreciate, taking his experience into account.

So, less muddling of the water and w00t cookies for all!

Re: Should MeeGo developers continue to publish info on this forum for maemo users (wrt Nokia device support)?
 

I think you should explore what Richard Stallman says on this subject. There is more to openness than the plain old source code.

There are many more places where corporation can screw both developers and users. See the Big Picture.

Young people tend to call Richard different names with attributes such as "paranoid", but that does not eliminate the fact that he is sooner or later correct on all predictions (if that can be called a prediction).

BTW: What about AEGIS thingy? I've missed that.

Re: Should MeeGo developers continue to publish info on this forum for maemo users (wrt Nokia device support)?
 

You have to consider that:

- Maemo has many closed packages. This includes a lot of hardware drivers, hardware middleware, OS middleware (state management, power saving, etc.), virtually all user visible applications, the entire telephony stack, ...
If you use packages as your metric, you will find out that around 60% of Maemo is closed. My own completely made up estimation says this is about 40% of the system.

- Upstream Meego is 100% open; that means, everything is under a permissive, weak or strong, copyleft license.

- Meego for the N900 has a few closed packages. Around 25, and all of them are N900 hardware related. Meego has around 2000 packages total. Thus, using packages as metric, Meego for the N900 is 2% closed. Compare.

When asked which one is more "futureproof", the answer should be clear. If you ask me other questions, like, which one is most useful today, or which one has a more kickass logo, I might answer Maemo. But on Maemo, you're not going to add features to the Calendar application. The Meego Handset Calendar application might be so useless it might as well be non-existant, but, at least, if you want to add features to it, you can.

Even from the hardware point of view, which woody14619 seems to have a fixation with despite the fact that is not exactly one of the hardest parts to reimplement IMHO, things look more bright with Meego. Several reasons:
- Meego has less Nokia-specific interfaces and generally uses open, well-documented middleware. Examples: sensorfw, contextkit,ofono,connman instead of icd2,csd,etc. Therefore writing drivers for Meego is easier.
- Meego has had Nokia support for a little more. They have been listening to suggestions about how to make the closed components more future-proof. Also, updated, less buggy versions are used in Meego. Those will never work in Maemo because changing the smallest blob breaks the entire system. Meego is more open, more understood, more resilient.
If we ever find ourselves with the need to use Android GFX drivers for any reason, Meego will be the second OS to support them (the first one shall be obvious ;) ).
- Meego has some third-party support. There has even been a special nvidia build of tegra drivers for Meego.
- Some of the few binary blobs that remain have had open source implementations made/RE'd. Note that one of the reasons the open versions are not used is that they're still not up to par with the closed implementations. Despite what you seem to believe, MeegoCE folks do care about daily usage. They use their phones, you know. So if a blob from Nokia whose mission and interface are well-known does the job, well, the MeegoCE team uses it.

Now, some people including woody14619 have said in this thread that Meego efforts are wasted and one of the reasons he has put through is that "it is more open" is a moot point. I'm not here to argue whether the efforts are useful or not. I'm here the argue that "it is more open" is not a moot point. It makes Meego more customizable. It makes Meego more futureproof. Quite a lot of people seemingly want this.

Note that I do not use MeegoCE for the N900. But that's because I'm happy with that I have and I don't need upgrades -- I don't use the CSSU either.

Re: Should MeeGo developers continue to publish info on this forum for maemo users (wrt Nokia device support)?
 

Why won't Nokia and the community members just come straight out and say the one thing that's not been said so far... the future here is capped, the source will never be released, enjoy what you have for as long as it works... have a good day.

Simple. Clear. Seems to precisely what needs to be said.

Re: Should MeeGo developers continue to publish info on this forum for maemo users (wrt Nokia device support)?
 

AHA where did that come from i wonder :rolleyes: but yes unless something changes ......

Re: Should MeeGo developers continue to publish info on this forum for maemo users (wrt Nokia device support)?
 

I typed it. That's where it came from.

Now, if only we can get confirmation - but I promise I will not doggedly go after it and say the same thing in many threads upsetting people even further.

Take the hint.

Re: Should MeeGo developers continue to publish info on this forum for maemo users (wrt Nokia device support)?
 

I did laugh when i read the title of this thread and thought to myself.... MeeGo development ??? for the N900 ????? what???? where when how??????.

Re: Should MeeGo developers continue to publish info on this forum for maemo users (wrt Nokia device support)?
 

That's an insult to all the people working on MeeGo ARM and Nokia N900 hardware adaptation. Please educate yourself and go look at what work actually has been done instead of this crap.

Re: Should MeeGo developers continue to publish info on this forum for maemo users (wrt Nokia device support)?
 

At least in N900 hardware adaptation for MeeGo, for those binaries that are currently closed, I find it unlikely their source will ever be released.

What does matter is if there's work to somehow make the binaries sustainable. Ie, things that are closed, but redistributable, maintained or otherwise technically made to automatically recompile against newest targets.

I maintain it's better we have working functionality of some hardware parts through some few closed binaries than nothing at all. OpenGL ES Software rendering is such a drag.

Re: Should MeeGo developers continue to publish info on this forum for maemo users (wrt Nokia device support)?
 

Yeah right so we have this WONDERFUL MeeGo UI for the N900????? stop talking crap will you and look at reality for gods sake !.

Re: Should MeeGo developers continue to publish info on this forum for maemo users (wrt Nokia device support)?
 

This proves once again your going round and round and round in circles talking about dreams nothing more..... get to the facts and look LOOK at what has ACTUALLY been achieved to date as a MeeGo adaption for the N900, because it is no more than a very very basic ui that can not even hold it's own weight as an independant MeeGo OS for the N900.

Re: Should MeeGo developers continue to publish info on this forum for maemo users (wrt Nokia device support)?
 

I am looking at reality and you claim there's no development going on, which is not true and totally baseless. There is a ton of work done to support the base system and hardware adaptations, leading to people being able to put -any- UI on top, be it Handset UI, Plasma Active, Cordia or even XBMC or a fancy video of a pink pony dancing to the sounds of the 80's. The UI is just candy on top.

And I'm asking you to simply go and educate yourself as you're looking like a fool. Check out mailing list archives, http://lists.meego.com/pipermail/mee...gust/date.html (follow meeting minutes and the logs referred in those), IRC logs: http://trac.tspre.org/merbot/freenode/%23meego-arm/ , http://lists.meego.com/pipermail/mee...gust/date.html for commits (MeeGo core)

And there is your answer to your original question.

Any mobile operating system project is like a sausage. It looks really disgusting while you make it, but in the end it tastes good. In commercial systems you don't see the 'making' part.

I'd like to say that this community is utterly screwed if it wasn't for those teams doing hard work to drag out and rebase closed source and N900 specific functionality on top of a open stack, letting you loose of the death grip of a closed stack. Kernel developers updating your kernels, contributing N900 kernel patches to upstream, etc.

And I honestly think you should be thankful that this work is being done, just to help this community. They deserve some respect.

abill_uk, I've asked you to go educate yourself now. I don't have time to educate you and please, for the love of god, go read deepily about what you are posting about.

You're destroying good work, good motivations, good value and people wanting to do things and you might do a lot better if you knew more about what you were talking about.

Re: Should MeeGo developers continue to publish info on this forum for maemo users (wrt Nokia device support)?
 

OK, definitions:

Core: linux distribution, mostly consisting of boring UNIX style utilities and other middleware to boot a system

Hardware adaptation: kernel, drivers, plugins for a certain device

UI: what runs on top of a Core. UI can be for example the "Handset UX", "Plasma Active", "Cordia", "xterm"

Combine these three and you have a image for a device. UI doesn't say much about hardware adaptation or core, it just says something about UI.

If something is broken in UI on one device but not the other, then the hardware adaptation is at fault.

Now, go read my original post again with those definitions in mind.

Re: Should MeeGo developers continue to publish info on this forum for maemo users (wrt Nokia device support)?
 

I am talking about the MeeGo adaption for the N900 NOT for every other device and you very well know that so why tell me about what is going on in other area's?.

I am posting on Maemo.org not on Meego.com so yes i can give my opinion on here regarding the N900.

I have seen what has been done on the Meego front and it has now moved on to other devices and left the N900 behind.

WHEN you can point me to a completed OS that can be programmed into the N900 as a permament working fully OS then i will know for sure work has been furthered but untill then i will still have the same opinions sorry.

All your talking about is Meego development going on in other area's and your trying to make out this fantastic development that has been done for the N900 ... yes the N900 i am talking about here ok.

Re: Should MeeGo developers continue to publish info on this forum for maemo users (wrt Nokia device support)?
 

I don't know where you got the understanding that "it has now moved on to other devices", could you elaborate a bit on that?

I'm only talking about N900 in my posts, for what it's worth.

Re: Should MeeGo developers continue to publish info on this forum for maemo users (wrt Nokia device support)?
 

When you look at the ui it is very basic and incomplete, slow and does not have the ability and functionality even as Maemo does.

Development has been going on for how long now?.

I do not see anthing in a complete state yet as it is only still in dvelopment and a specific development "os" if you can even call it that as it is incomplete in many ways.

How many people are currently working on this Meego adaption for the N900 now?.

Re: Should MeeGo developers continue to publish info on this forum for maemo users (wrt Nokia device support)?
 

OK, since I presented the layering (Core, hardware adaptation, UI) to you in a earlier post, I'll just tell the exact story of how things have been working so you can put that in perspective. I won't excuse the UI quality, but I just want to make sure you're understanding this clearly to understand where we are coming from and where we are.

Almost since the start of the MeeGo project, there has been a team that has worked specifically towards the N900, called the MeeGo ARM team. This has been a paid team to do so, paid by Nokia

That team has been doing two things:
* Making MeeGo work on ARM processors and maintaining the ARM port (boring stuff like fixing compile errors, compilers, etc)
* Making a hardware adaptation for N900
- this means in practice, making modern kernels for the N900, get new graphics drivers, implement phonecalls on top of a open stack, implement GPS support and so on. This team has not touched UI at all.

There has been another team, that made a reference Handset UI for all MeeGo devices (UI is independent) based on the technologies from what you now see as Harmattan, MeeGo Touch Framework (previously known as libdui, or Developing under the Influence). This team has been paid by Intel. When I say reference, this UI is of course very limited and not commercial grade, more like a "can show at tradeshows and someone can possibly make a product out of". N900 team used this reference UI on top of the N900 hardware adaptation and the ARM port to test out hardware adaptation features, which is what many of you have seen.

Now, sometime in December or earlier, Intel stopped this work, leaving it in the crap state it was and didn't bother to tell anyone they stopped working on it. This was because they moved all their resources to the Tablet UI work, which was secret at the time.

Now, February 11 happened and well, that changed circumstances. The MeeGo efforts from Nokia's side expanded (both in team size and focus) into providing the Community Edition. The hardware adaptation team continued it's work as usual. The work was decided to be based on the Handset UI work as this was closest to the Harmattan software stack.

Teams were put together with a goal of providing basic functionality in the UI and polishing the UI, listed in http://wiki.meego.com/ARM/N900#Key_features key features.

Over those months since there has been several releases, immensely improving experience and performance, as many will tell you.

The N900 hardware adaptation itself is pretty much complete, hence they're now working on making it sustainable for the future.

There are some problems still occuring, which impacts people's first impression, such as the media indexer, Tracker, runs on first boot, rendering the device immensely slow until it has settled. Similar things happen on N900/Maemo.

There are problems with application launch times, though they are much more improved than originally. On Maemo you see smoke and mirrors because many applications are already started in the background and hence 'launch quicker', or a splash screen. CE don't have such magic tricks at the moment.

This is a list of people who has contributed to the community edition.

http://wiki.meego.com/ARM/N900/Contributors

This is an important point that everyone needs to understand: Think of the paid team people as community members working day in and day out to improve the product. Then think about how much difficulty other UX, hardware adaptation teams will have if we have been so many, working like open source projects do, completely in the open and still only got this far?

Look up the names of some of those people on google - they aren't all amateurs and many have been working with making Maemo/N900 as you see it today in various areas. Or the N950/N9.

What is happening right now is that the CE project is looking to put together a steering group for the future, as we are directly offering this as a direction for the Maemo and MeeGo communities to work on and actively making it sustainable. Steering group would contain contributors and community representants, ie, something to actually govern for the community.

And yes, we've only got so far, but with a little polish and perhaps your contribution we can get even better and get to a place where you can accept the quality. We've gotten quite far - better than I've seen other UI projects on other devices. But yes, not nearly there just yet. I personally hope that the rebase upon MeeGo 1.3 and Qt 4.8 will make things a lot faster.

http://blip.tv/carsten-munk/qt-compo...-based-5508447 shows nice promise in that regard.

There is also interesting developments ongoing (like Smoku told about in Cordia thread) about a new openly governed/openly developed fork of MeeGo, which CE work would probably fit in nicely too.

I hope this helps understanding where and how.

Re: Should MeeGo developers continue to publish info on this forum for maemo users (wrt Nokia device support)?
 

@tekki - thanks for the detailed explanation. Now I can see the bright n900 future ahead leaded by the best of the best developers from all over the world united. With Meego CE as primary OS.

But please, can some of you guys throw a little light on what is your exact problem with continuing Maemo development (from not so great developers, just ordinary monkeys like me) until that future happens. Almost every time someone related to Meego CE(team?) opens his mouth, the mantra "you are wasting your time, you stupid" is thrown. Apocalyptic threads like "n900 is dead, Maemo is dead" are opened every now and then from people who moved from Maemo to who knows where(Meego?). Why is that?

Something stinks here, really. I didn't see anyone from HW adaptation team (the guys that are paid by Nokia) to contribute a line of code in the last few months for kernel-power or CSSU for example even though I suspect all of them are still using Maemo as their primary OS(or I am missing something?). And they have lots of closed Maemo bits revealed. Why?

BTW don't talk about NDA's please, I am not sayng that anyone should break NDA, there are ways to make things happens despite of NDA's if someone has a will.

Thanks.

Re: Should MeeGo developers continue to publish info on this forum for maemo users (wrt Nokia device support)?
 

AM sorry to say but it is just not happening, whatever is said about Meego it is just not going anywhere and enough people have been at it now for over 8 months or so and for it to be in the state it is in now is why people are losing interest.

That list of dev's is a "was" situation and not a "now" situation that i asked you about.

Meego is nothing at the moment worth even talking about and that is basically that and all i have to say on the matter.

Re: Should MeeGo developers continue to publish info on this forum for maemo users (wrt Nokia device support)?
 

My (personal) opinion is that it's a waste of time to do any big effort as everyone will be heading towards some time where they'd have to redistribute full images/firmwares or will hit a wall related to the 57% closed source bits in Maemo.

Instead of trying to fix that past, how about getting ahead in the game instead of constantly being behind? My own reasoning is that I've seen a lot of these kind of projects to fix a company's firmware and they've all ended similar ways. And now we have a good chance to finally be ahead in the game in a open source way and have something of our own.

I'm not saying that CSSU is a bad idea, for good measure. CSSU has purposes, but will hit the closed binaries wall eventually as most fixes people want are in, well, the closed software.

Never said N900 is dead :) In fact, it might be one of the best supported by open software that I've seen.

I can't speak to other people's motivation, but sometimes, when people go home from work they don't work on the same thing they do while working. Or they would rather spend it on the project they're working on because they find it exciting.

We did contribute kexec patches ages ago. uboot stems from the adaptation work. Noone stops anyone from contributing with knowledge.

If you want an exact reason why you're not seeing any activity into Maemo, it's simple, it's because those activities aren't financed by Nokia. This usually means Nokia doesn't see reason to.

They however see good reason in furthering open systems with Qt and not beating a dead horse, it seems like...

However, just to reach out: If there's any technical questions, people are more than welcome to come to #meego-arm IRC channel on irc.freenode.net and ask questions. For many things we can advise.

Re: Should MeeGo developers continue to publish info on this forum for maemo users (wrt Nokia device support)?
 

tekki, if you want to keep your sanity, use the ignore list on that pure excuse for a human being(abill_uk).

Re: Should MeeGo developers continue to publish info on this forum for maemo users (wrt Nokia device support)?
 

Please keep that out of this thread. He brought up a common sentiment and it was worth answering.

Re: Should MeeGo developers continue to publish info on this forum for maemo users (wrt Nokia device support)?
 

One based on FUD, ignorance and wilfull determination to completely ignore the MANY posts by people more knoweldgeable, better informed and closer to the project.

Whilst I admire your sentiment tekki, you're wasting time and oxygen in this case. the ignore button is a much better tool to address the issue.

virtually every thread relating to Meego on this forum is littered with the same comments by Abill_uk and the same ignorant and uninformed rubbish.

when pushed into a corner, he/she/it pulls out the "I'm hardware, not software" routine and then wanders off to what ever thread/post/forum where he/she/it can stir up ire and angst with yet another post full of rubbish and uninformed, unsubstantiated opinion.

Whilst I, and many more actually read your posts with a great respect and regard for your knowledge and the FACTS you bring to the conversation (along with informed and rational views), it's been said before and you really are trying to sow seeds in barren soil with this particular individual.....

edit: thank f#*k the Meego handset forum hasn't been sullied with the same rubbish

Re: Should MeeGo developers continue to publish info on this forum for maemo users (wrt Nokia device support)?
 

I would answer with anyone, just people aren't asking that many questions these days. Would rather spend time on someone else's questions :)

Re: Should MeeGo developers continue to publish info on this forum for maemo users (wrt Nokia device support)?
 

There needs to be some real progress on Meego for this community to recognise it is going somewhere.

While i sympathise with you on your work the real answers are in the progress being made and as Maemo is much further developed than Meego apparently is, and we do get people on here trying there best with the Meego installs, it is just not making the grade above very basic functionality.

Whilst there are many who dream and want there are people like me who only go by realsim and by looking at all the reports and disscussions about Meego, it is no more than a very basic ui with basic functions.

It does not address all the hardware of the N900 and that is VERY clear to see when you actually start to use the build.

I am a realist not a pessimist please try to remember that ok.

Re: Should MeeGo developers continue to publish info on this forum for maemo users (wrt Nokia device support)?
 

IGNORANCE is a real virtue especially in your case !!!.;)

Re: Should MeeGo developers continue to publish info on this forum for maemo users (wrt Nokia device support)?
 

Lol, all this irony must be due to your magnetic personality* dude!

*check the polarity

Re: Should MeeGo developers continue to publish info on this forum for maemo users (wrt Nokia device support)?
 

I dont like arrogant people no way, he can go to hell because no way i will give in with my views !!!.

What i see is what is, nothing more nothing less ... simple as that.

Re: Should MeeGo developers continue to publish info on this forum for maemo users (wrt Nokia device support)?
 

Fixed for you ;)

Re: Should MeeGo developers continue to publish info on this forum for maemo users (wrt Nokia device support)?
 

Na mate your obviously blind as well, i suggest you go try this meego build then come back and post on this thread !. ;)

Re: Should MeeGo developers continue to publish info on this forum for maemo users (wrt Nokia device support)?
 

I want everyone on this thread who is obviously BLIND and cannot see where meego is at to go download the latest build and use the dammm thing THEN come on here and tell me it is even close to Maemo !!.

I really wish people would get real and stop talking rubbish.

AM sick of the snidish comments from people who just do not use meego for themselves to know better.

Just because a developer comes on here and preaches how good this is going and that is going does not mean the end result is fantastic, go download and use is the only way to find out I DID ok.

Re: Should MeeGo developers continue to publish info on this forum for maemo users (wrt Nokia device support)?
 

Re: Should MeeGo developers continue to publish info on this forum for maemo users (wrt Nokia device support)?
 

I boot some meego builds from time to time so I can see
a) state
b) progress
so I'm pretty aware of were these two are, thanks.

Re: Should MeeGo developers continue to publish info on this forum for maemo users (wrt Nokia device support)?
 

really...... well throw this open to everyone and let everyone give there opinion of meego ok.

Stop directing your madness at me and wait untill people comment about the meego build and how good or bad it is... OK.

I boot some meego builds from time to time so I can see
a) state
b) progress
so I'm pretty aware of were these two are, thanks.


AND ???????.