View Single Post
Posts: 1,746 | Thanked: 2,100 times | Joined on Sep 2009
#142
Originally Posted by kanishou View Post
There is a problem with that though: What is the ecosystem?
Ecosystems, aka exclusive platforms intended for lock in, are the responsibility of whatever vendor uses MeeGo.

It is easy to say that MeeGo apps should run on any MeeGo OS, no matter what the UI layer is. But in practice, that just won't work. If the UI layer is too different, apps have to be tweaked towards the specific product, and can't just be released for "MeeGo".
Be specific. Vagaries like "UI layer" don't contribute to the discussion.

It is still not clear to me at all how this problem is going to be solved. You want to be able to say "this is a FOO phone and you can run FOO apps on it" (and expect a consistent, competitive user experience). MeeGo, the way it is structured and presented now, does not really provide this kind of ecosystem.
MeeGo is intended to make it possible to move software between devices with a minimum of difficulty, and supply a consistent API and allow the developer to expect certain capabilities of compliant devices.

The next "MeeGo" device is going to be an awesome product. But I am just not sure what exactly the value and purpose of "MeeGo" is in the process.
MeeGo's purpose is one step above Linaro. Linaro standardizes compilers and architectures, MeeGo standardizes APIs and interfaces.

At least with Maemo, we had a clear identity. Everything since then is almost a blur to me, and I think it's exactly this lack of clarity which was causing Nokia a lot of harm, and which Elop has been set out to eliminate.
Maemo was never clear. It was always muddled in internal Nokia politics, unusable except by Nokia due to all the chunks for which no source was available. Elop, well, I have my suspicions. Suffice it to say, Symbian and the internal bureaucracy were a far greater source of harm than MeeGo ever was.
 

The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to wmarone For This Useful Post: