View Single Post
Posts: 171 | Thanked: 114 times | Joined on Feb 2010
#79
Originally Posted by volt View Post
If the firmware needs an update, it's not good enough. If there's too much software in the firmware, I believe they should extract it, create as small a kernel as possible, and keep software updates as separate from OS updates as possible. If Nokia had done that with the N900, we would not have had to wait all these extra weeks for PR1.2 debugging, but could have had microfixes and individual software updates. I think it's bad service that you should have to flash the OS to upgrade a mozilla-based web browser. I think it's bad service that we have to wait extra months to fix a ton of bugs because changes in non-essential functionality doesn't pass quality testing. And the idea of paying extra for this bad service, doesn't taste good to me.
Even though I do agree with the sentiment, you do realise that this is oneNAND flash that we are dealing with here and thus have finite number of write cycles? So while this approach might have worked for a regular PC, this is not the best approach for a mobile device. Besides, testing the various configurations in an incremental update model would be much more difficult. So I can see why Nokia takes the approach it does.

Last edited by arbitrabbit; 2010-06-02 at 14:01.