Why do we think Meego will be better tham Maemo?
 

There seems to be a lot of talk about MeeGo lately and admittedly I haven't quite digested all there is to know about it, but what's so great about it?

Now, i've been using Maemo on my N900 since December last year and I've gotten used to its quirks and there are a few features that I initially missed from my N95 (picture messaging, detailed info in call log, decent maps, messaging that works properly etc). However, it offers so much more, so i've pretty much forgotten these things.

Can we get some kind of top level discussion about what sets MeeGo apart from Maemo? Why are people excited when there are barely any screenshots and not a great deal is known about it? Why do people automatically think it will be an improvement over Maemo?

Re: Why do we think Meego will be better tham Maemo?
 

It will be better simply due to much more funding from both Intel and Nokia. Also, they are really keen to make this the next big OS for little devices. The fact that they are investing quite a bit in it assures me that it will be better at the end. Maemo is great and I can only assume they are smart enough to not make meego worse than maemo. Especially considering it will have a open development process where we will also have some say in it.

Re: Why do we think Meego will be better tham Maemo?
 

I think one of the greatest things on peoples' minds with regard to MeeGo is the fear that Maemo5 will no longer be supported.

Maemo5 came out of the oven pretty raw and people would like to see their 500+ dollar device be perfected by Nokia in times to come.

Feature-wise I think MeeGo and Maemo are going to be very similar, with the exception that any new functions new technology will bring will more likely be updated to MeeGo but not Maemo5.

In short, people fear that MeeGo being the replacement of Maemo will mean that they're stuck with something that's old and dated less than a year from its launch. :)

Re: Why do we think Meego will be better tham Maemo?
 

I expect overall security to be better in Meego if it follows de facto RPM-distribution policy that all packages should be GPG-signed.
This current situation with Maemo and unsigned deb-package installations with wget+dpkg is intolerable, because also developers do it and one targeted MITM-attack can infect the whole community easily now without traces who did it.

I do not know if Meego and OpenSUSE has good SELinux support, but I hope Meego will get it. Fedora nowadays, after couple of years trial and error, has good SELinux-support and it is expected that all Fedora compatible RPM-packages are SELinux-aware.

Re: Why do we think Meego will be better tham Maemo?
 

I'm not sure if I expect MeeGo to be better than Maemo in terms of what itcan do for me etc.

I do expect it to be a more flexible and future-proof platform, though, because it doesn't depend on Nokia like Maemo does and isn't tied to its products. - I expect to have more choices with MeeGo.

Re: Why do we think Meego will be better tham Maemo?
 

The only disappointing part of MeeGo for me is that Nokia's image includes binary-only software (e.g. phone app & battery management).

I was hoping they would open-source the above systems. It means we would be stuck with Nokia's phone application - judging by what Nokia released on the n900.

There is an open-source image but there is a "big fat warning" stating you may damage the battery if you install the image on the n900.
(This image is ideal for installing on a "development" PC)

Re: Why do we think Meego will be better tham Maemo?
 

I agree with benny1967. I am longing for a MeeGo tablet for instance with a 5" screen, wifi, gps, bt and forward facing camera. And of course, without any cellular capability. I really do not care if it comes from Nokia (unlikely), LG, Samsung, or SmartQ. MeeGo will bring choice to this 'platform' that could never be possible under Maemo.

Re: Why do we think Meego will be better tham Maemo?
 

Because i think Harmattan/MeeGo will still probally carry heavy resembles to Maemo 5 UI(that i like very much) and the application framework is Qt.
Anybody who have tested Qt4.6 widget gallery knows how smooth this device could be with Qt and we have already seen it with the today released moblin/MeeGo videos. Plus more future proof and better support for portrait.

Can't wait.

Re: Why do we think Meego will be better tham Maemo?
 

Is the MeeGo Nokia GUI being developed "behind closed doors?".

If that is the case then so far it's not very open.

I'm extremely grateful for the non-gui release they did a couple of weeks ago.

Its like someone cooking you the perfect steak and then saying "You can smell it, you can touch it but you cannot eat it until I tell you!".

Re: Why do we think Meego will be better tham Maemo?
 

what you've seen in the videos is moblin rebranded as MeeGo 1. which was already built behind closed doors.
you will see harmattan/maemo 6 released soon rebranded Meego 1 too.
then all the confusion starts b/c we'll have 2 MeeGo's with same release number while a 3rd is in open development
neither are real MeeGo that wont truly come until 1.1

Re: Why do we think Meego will be better tham Maemo?
 

But see here you're talking about features that MeeGo has nothing to do with. This is your wishlist of things you want to create an ideal device. You are saying nothing in the vein of what the OP is asking and is about.

In addition to this, you're putting words in Benny's mouth he never said!

Please separate your dreams and wishes from actual facts!

Re: Why do we think Meego will be better tham Maemo?
 

IMO Maemo is a good OS designed by people who understand tablets, but who do not so well understand mobile phones. Hence no mms, no portrait mode, yadda yadda.. Meego offers the hope of getting away from that mentality, and offering a genuine OS for mobile phones which is fully baked with all the features we'd expect in a modern handset.

Re: Why do we think Meego will be better tham Maemo?
 

Debian supports GPG signed packages as well, at least in Lenny+. Unfortunately most of Maemo 5 is built off of Debian Etch, so no GPG signing to be seen. This could easily be added though, so I don't know why it isn't.

Re: Why do we think Meego will be better tham Maemo?
 

meego will be better than Maemo5 if they stay on the idea of recreate all the ui with C++/Qt which is far better than C/Python GTK+ : this way, UI beauty, animations, fluidity, speed and energry consumption will all be improved.
And the idea of being using QtCreator with real-time usb emulation on my N900 is great IMHO !
the only dark spot on meego for me is using RPM/YUM instead of DEB/APT-DPKG ....
I can't wait to see harmattan (Nokia's Meego 1.0) UI which will be in Qt4, because what i've seen from moblin 2.1 handset (Intel Meego 1.0) is far from perfect and isn't Qt ! However, even with Intel's Ui, i could have some fun because there are some good ideas....

Re: Why do we think Meego will be better tham Maemo?
 

....and what happens with my 59 euro Sygic maps I bought?Would Sygic port their GPS software for free for those of us that paid for the software.....

So many questions are lingering into the air.....only time will tell.

Re: Why do we think Meego will be better tham Maemo?
 

The OP was asking what sets MeeGo apart from Maemo. benny1967 said "I expect to have more choices with MeeGo.".

I was agreeing with his statement and providing an example of why MeeGo would be better than Maemo in terms of hardware. Sorry if you felt it was off-topic with respect to the OP question. I think a big advantage of MeeGo is that it will bring alot more hardware choices to us. Not everything about MeeGo is about the OS/UI, IMO.

Re: Why do we think Meego will be better tham Maemo?
 

Ok, regarding the n900.

There is:

MeeGo open edition - no gui - Downloadable image - no phone or battery software

MeeGo Nokia edition - no gui - Downloadable image - phone and battery software included (closed source)

MeeGo gui - Nokia developed - not publically available yet - developed privately

MeeGo gui - x86 only? - publically available including source code

Is that right?

What concerns me is that the Nokia binary-only software is closed. This means as MeeG0 changes over time we rely on Nokia to keep binary-only software maintained.

What happens if incompatible changes are made in MeeGo and Nokia stops maintaining the binary-only software. Any updates to n900 are then royally screwed and you are stuck with last working version of MeeGo?

This is a concern to me.
I know it sounds paranoid but AMD/ATI did this with their closed-source drivers for older cards(> 2years old!) and I have to rely on open-source 3d support (unfortunately nowhere near as optimised as the proprietory drivers).

Re: Why do we think Meego will be better tham Maemo?
 

My thoughts exactly. Just adding the more future proof and better support for portrait.

Re: Why do we think Meego will be better tham Maemo?
 

MeeGo has a lot to do with them as it will allow vendors to build exactly the hardware that EIPI is waiting for.... and that Nokia doesn't seem to be interested in...

In fact, I feel EIPI understood better what I said than you did. :D

Re: Why do we think Meego will be better tham Maemo?
 

Package signing goes back much further than that--it was present in Potato and probably before that. Many (most?) "nonofficial" official repositories use gpg signing also, like Debian Multimedia, but this doesn't prevent anyone from downloading unsigned .debs and installing packages that way.

The n900 comes with a trusted keys keyring although I'm not sure what it's used for. Regardless, it's a matter of Nokia using security tools already available in .deb and .rpm package management, and not a package format problem.

Re: Why do we think Meego will be better tham Maemo?
 

I'm hoping that we'll at least get a more mature phone application, including MMS, contact groups etc, while not losing any or much of the freedom we have on Maemo.

Re: Why do we think Meego will be better tham Maemo?
 

Do not forget Qt/Python and remember, in programs where is lots of dynamic memory handling (like www-browser), Java and Python can have faster and more energy efficient programs than C++. C++ has its benefits in low level programming, but it is a previous generation programming language and has the crosses to bear.

RPM is an improvement. De facto security policy with DEB-packages is not to have embedded GPG-signatures, but RPM packages distributed are generally all GPG-signed.

rpm-program also natively support GPG- authenticity and -integrity checking of installed files (rpm -V), just because it is assumed every RPM-package has the GPG-signature embedded. DEB-packages and dpkg does not have this important security feature, but is added as a "plugin" and most of the Debian based systems do not use it. Also the old detached GPG-signature of some package is not found from the system after repositories have upgraded their packages, so to check after intrusion what was tampered is very difficult in DEB-systems.
So security-wise RPM brings lots of needed improvement.

Also RPM is the LSB-way to make Linux-systems more compatible with each others.

Yum, I think, is not used in Meego; but zypper, which supports differential-packages and therefore are better for users doing updates OTA in cellular networks.

Re: Why do we think Meego will be better tham Maemo?
 

AFAIK the applications themselves are not developed in the open, but the framework on which they are based is in http://qt.gitorious.org/maemo-6-ui-framework. You can already try it on your N900 by installing the widgetsgallery application or compiling it on your desktop. Should be noted though that this is MeeGo/Harmattan from Nokia we're talking about and may not have much to do with MeeGo proper from Linux Foundation(the code drop without a UI)

Re: Why do we think Meego will be better tham Maemo?
 

So if we wanted a truly open-source version of MeeGo (on the n900) an alternative gui would have to be developed?

Re: Why do we think Meego will be better tham Maemo?
 

Depends on which MeeGo you're talking about. MeeGo reference, Harmattan or pure MeeGo from Nokia?

But I guess if we're talking about zero closed source components you should start by replacing the boot loader and once you get something to boot you call PowerVR and ask nicely if they'd like to open source the graphics drivers. When that's done we can think about the trivial UI stuff. (and watch hell freezing over :))

Re: Why do we think Meego will be better tham Maemo?
 

MeeGo is sounding alot more like WinCE now. Just hope there is a common UI across all MeeGo Handheld devices. I want MeeGo to be the Windows of the next 20 yrs.

Re: Why do we think Meego will be better tham Maemo?
 

MeeGo supports the same app frameworks, so the app should run well on either. there may be some code repackaging, but I don't see much issue.

Re: Why do we think Meego will be better tham Maemo?
 

re rpm/yum versus apt/deb...

RPM and yum rock once you get used to them.

I find yum to be particularly great. I don't think I've had to do a single manual rpm intervention since it matured a few years ago.

And from a development point of view, it looks pretty easy to wrap a GUI around yum and give the user whatever update experience you would like them to have.

I am very happy that Meego is going to use rpms and yum.

Re: Why do we think Meego will be better tham Maemo?
 

Why I am excited about MeeGo:

• Base is open source with multiple contributing vendors. This means less dependence on only Nokia for support & enhancements.
• UX layer is vendor-specific, but Nokia seems to be gradually increasing the openness of their code. So, again, you're less dependent on Nokia for support & enhancements.
• Possibility of other hardware configurations. I want a MeeGo version of the iPad! ;)
• I am hoping that the focus on Qt 4.6 means development & deployment tools will continue to mature. This makes me hope that if I choose to spend my limited free time in development, I'll be less likely to lose hours slogging through arcane problems.
• Qt 4.6 is cross-platform. This makes it more worth it for me to spend my time learning it. I think it will be the same for a lot of Windows users who bought the N900 and got completely bewildered when they tried to start developing.
• I hope that Qt 4.6's cross-platform nature translates to more apps. As has been eloquently stated on t.m.o. before, if every time you release a new version of the OS (e.g. Maemo 4, Maemo 5, etc.) you reset your app count to zero, it's pretty hard to catch up with Apple & Android. But with Qt 4.6, I hope that there is a better chance that an app someone develops for a Harmattan machine will work on my MeeGo tablet (or vice versa). I'm hoping that will help, although there may still be hardware considerations.

BTW, that last point argues that Nokia should be trying to get Qt 4.6 on as many platforms as possible. If someone could write an open source Qt 4.6 app for Android (for example), when maybe that app could fairly easily run on the N900 as well (for example).

Re: Why do we think Meego will be better tham Maemo?
 

Not sure about the whole GUI. But the Mer project, if I understand correctly, has frequently dealt with closed-source components from Nokia by writing their own open-source replacement.

Re: Why do we think Meego will be better tham Maemo?
 

Even if I hadn't seen any screenshoot or known any details about Meego, I think the odds are that a new O.S. will consolidate (or in some cases, copying) the best lessons learned among the competitors. By lessons learned I mean things like ease UI, fast development of applications, a functional app store, interoperability with own vendor services&tools since day-1 (come on Nokia, don't forget to allocate Ovi Maps/Suite/Services development team BEFORE launching the first Meego device, as happened with Maemo...), etc... It is just common sense for new projects, and a Project Manager is obligated to know and avoid repeating the same mistake from previous projects!!

I am also considering that Nokia and Intel are companies with more than extensive experience and skills to innovate in this market, so it would be a disappointment if they came out with something not that great.

But having two large companies support and applying the best practices is not a warranty that Meego will be better than any other O.S.. Creating an innovative product ultimately depends on inspired employees behind the curtains, with bosses who actually listen and incentive their ideas.

Re: Why do we think Meego will be better tham Maemo?
 

I agree.
On that thought, I really wonder why Nokia stopped QTJambi development; QT for Java.
Maybe even next generation of Swing could be developed over QT; if it is really multiplatform capable.

They should read this in Nokia and rethink the decision:
http://trs-new.jpl.nasa.gov/dspace/handle/2014/18351
Java can be faster and require less battery energy, than same program done in C++ (in family of programs which use relatively much dynamic memory and are run "long" time, like www-browser)

Re: Why do we think Meego will be better tham Maemo?
 

Because it never caught on in the Java world. GUI was never as important there (plus most people already knew swing), and the rest of the framework was mostly just duplicating functionality.

I see you like this link and post it over and over, but I feel obliged to tell you this is fairly old stuff - the article talks about what later became known as JIT, which did improve Java performance a lot (and later influenced modern JavaScript engines), but never quite rose to the super-fast levels promised and hoped.

Re: Why do we think Meego will be better tham Maemo?
 

Nope, this is not about JIT. I wonder if you read the study at all.

There is many optimization techniques in modern compiler science which are impossible on C/C++ because they use pointers. The whole basic structure of C/C++ should be changed to overcome the obstacles.

Heap memory fragmentation is always a problem with C++ when program uses lots of dynamic memory and is run "long" time. I suspect Firefox will never get rid of memory leaks, as long as it uses C++. There is tricks to try to avoid memory fragmentation in C, but they are much more inefficient techniques what Java JVM can do with less effort.

I think you also know the importance of L2 cache, and what are cache misses. In Java-bytecode, (live) objects can be reordered during the run-time according to usage pattern, so making L2 cache misses more rare. For C++, this is not possible, unless C++ factually is changed to be bytecode based also. JIT, and re-JITing when there is benefits in run-time, is the key in Java.
The mordern compiler technology optimizations are not yet all implemented in JVMs. Running java with "--server" settings does take some of those optimizations to use, over normal --client mode.

edit: One good book to read about subject is Modern Compiler Implementation in Java, where in the sections which talk about optimizations it introduces many techniques which are impossible to fully compiled code, but are possible when the final phase of the compiling steps are done in run-time.

I know, it seems like against common sense that interpreted code could be faster than fully compiled assembly code, but the trick is just this: "there is information which can be gathered during the run-time, which is not available in compile-time". C++ cannot use that information, Java can.

Re: Why do we think Meego will be better tham Maemo?
 

I have low expectations, to be honest. Very low.

Re: Why do we think Meego will be better tham Maemo?
 

The moment EA announced that they will be developing games for MeeGo, that made it officially better than Maemo for me. I mean seriously, EA making games for Linux should be big news! MeeGo means more developers = many more fancy shiny application to attract the mainstream to Linux.

Re: Why do we think Meego will be better tham Maemo?
 

If EA is there, that means DRM is there. Which to me... is not a problem. But the whole "MeeGo is freedom for the rest of us" types will moan and groan something fierce perhaps.

EA needs to make more money. Google how the current EA CEO is being questioned.

Re: Why do we think Meego will be better tham Maemo?
 

If it is going to be anything similar like the work the Foundation is doing with Symbian, what´s gonna happen is that a base "MeeGo" UI will be developed, which is going to be fully open source.

Vendors would have the chance to replace such UI by their own, like "Nokia's MeeGo UI" in order to introduce differentiation and added value (though better features I guess). And is probably going to be developed in secret because an UI, which nowadays can make people flock to a product and ensure its success, can be considered a critical asset.

Pure speculation, mind you.

Re: Why do we think Meego will be better tham Maemo?
 

That was an early development release of MeeGo, not a final commercial release.

Re: Why do we think Meego will be better tham Maemo?
 

This paper shows that it is possible Java to have better general performance than C++, and that it is likely that this will actually occur. Java performance can exceed that of C++ because dynamic compilation gives the Java compiler access to runtime information not available to a C++ compiler.

Java bytecode + dynamic compilation *WAS* the idea JIT was based on. The article is apparently old enough not to take into account concepts that came in later with HotSpot, etc. Seriously, those we all dreams. Big dreams that looked great on paper, but never came through, and likely never will considering the fate of Sun. And before I get a you-dont-get-it, I must say I was actually a Java guy in my younger days (even wrote my Master thesis in Java). As for interpreted language speed considerations, I’m very much aware of those and the conclusion I came to in the end is that no JVM magic wand can help as much as the additional brainpower I can throw at the problem, and that’s why I prefer Python nowadays, with C(++) for the heavy artillery (the ability to use Qt from both makes this very sweet). Long story short, you don’t have to convince me, been there, done that, said goodbye to Java :)