View Single Post
Posts: 177 | Thanked: 43 times | Joined on Apr 2008 @ Gainesville, FL
#37
Originally Posted by fatalsaint View Post
Right... and Windows 3.1 == Windows 7.

As has been said.. Maemo 3 <> Maemo 4 <> Maemo 5. Completely different operating systems. Granted... they are quite a bit more similar than Windows 3.1 and Windows 7 - but it just goes to show that just because something shares a similar name does *not* make it the same thing.

Nokia has been working on several different OS's, not just Maemo. Google has Android and Chrome.. and Apple Mobile has.. well.. whatever the hell they call that thing.. and windows has WinMo.

Since Apple, google, and windows only have the *one* mobile OS they are able to dedicate all their mobile resources to the one platform.

Nokia has at least 1 mobile phone OS and 1 mobile tablet OS if not more. So it's a bit more fractured than the rest. (not including old versions)

Gripes that I do understand: A date should be released for the firmware update everyone wants. An actual date.. not "when it's done". While us geeks don't mind that.. users do not like the answer "You'll get it when you get it."

Also, a detailed list of whats actually going to be there should be done.. as far as timeline though - doesn't matter. Just as long as there *is* one.

However.. constantly comparing a device thats already out to devices that are yet to be released is just sad. The N900 compares just fine to all the multitude of Android 1.5 or 1.6 phones that are out right now. And, well, pretty much anything beats the iPhone (hides).
LOL. I'll concur with you on that last bit.

How does it compare (in your estimation) to devices running 2.01, which have been out as long as the n900.

And, again, it sounds like what's being said is that Nokia hasn't devoted comparable resources to development of the n900. Oh sure, the "reason" being given is the competitors only have one platform, and it's true, but I don't think that's going to cut it.