This article is about open source vs proprietary closed systems, or about Maemo vs "iPad-ish OS". Here are some fragments, let me know what you think of the entire article:

" A computer has to be built by a smarter person than me, on technical and scientific basis that are way above average knowledge and common understanding, so that telling a computer to run a BASIC routine to be considered by the machine a game in a “sandbox” and nothing else at all.

I need to know that I use a computer as a tool that really is far above my comprehension, meaning it’s made in years of research and it’s made by teams of hundreds of smarter people than me, in order to rely on it.
....
This at least is one strong motive for Apple keeping a closed environment: protecting their own money, therefore protecting their programmers revenue. Don’t get me wrong: I’m blogging now from my N900, running a closest Maemo OS to open source in mobile tech. But open source should only be the seed, not the final product."

"Nokia has made almost no money from the apps, but only from device huge numbers, which are now threatened by Apple and Google. So they put a seed in the ground – Maemo – because they have no clue how to make money from apps and services."


The entire article here

Maemo community should be the exact opposite of the Apple fanboys, so ... hit hard!

Another American Blogger who fails to see beyound his US borders.
I have no time for US techbloggers who are blinderd by the shiny Apple logo.

All I read was somebody doing their best to convince themselves to buy and iPad.

After doing Psychology for 5 years before going into programming I can honestly say that Apple are the best technology company in understanding the psychology of human behavior and how to influence this behavior. This blog post seems to be a good anecdotal example.

Though I don't agree 100% with the article, I think he has made some good analogies.

I also think that many people (read:zealots) commits the common fallacy of clumping a few variables that are not always related into a single side/entity.

@Techtertainment
Wrong guess: not an US, not a blogger, not an Apple fanboy, not about Apple's shiny logo and I'd dare to say not a psychology graduate. Read and come with real arguments, cause this is a forum, not an obituary.

Oh, he's so right! I will immediately stop doing all the things I like, and start doing things he likes instead.
I will just looove to pay hundreds of euros to be able to do things he likes! How exciting! Why didn't I realize this earlier? I just stupidly spent my money on things I like myself
Silly me.

Well, the only thing that is unbelivable, for this article is that it is supposed that only people who are paid is smart. that would mean that the most linux OS has been done by non smart people, and that of course is not at all true.

Definively I do not like at all the way apple marketing.

onutz: Disregard the haters. Some of us will get it, the rest will seeth in the corner.

The article makes a similar premise to one that I read some days ago about old vs new world computing. I'll say my response to this piece like I've said to others here before:

There are more users than developers. There always has been.

The writer of the article while correctly assessing the approach that Apple is doing, has missed the approach that Nokia is doing. I'd belabor the point, but it pretty much amounts to making things system (organically and better able to respond to environmental and market forces, versus the previous siloed approach)-driven rather than company-vision driven (organic, but more profitable to the state of the market to be if it can be predicted). This is why it helps Nokia to have an ecosystem where anyone can have their hands into the car. This doesn't help Apple because while its true that most don't want control over the "magic" they don't understand, they do want control over the outcome of that magic.

Not trying to hold Nokia up on some moral soapbox, but to think like Maemo brings accountability; to think like iTunes offloads it. There will be room for both to be significant platforms for users.

The person's final point about likening Maemo/Nokia to going to MIT says a lot. While its true that a lot of folks don't go/get into MIT, they sure do invest a whole lot into what those persons learn - with and without the buggyness of getting under the hood

Well, let me boot into Fedora on my N900 and read this article through Lynx.

Anyway, Apple doesn't have customers. Apple doesn't like customers. Apple wants fanatics who will buy everything they serve them.-

The article likens maemo & open source to a pre 1990 Romanian D.I.Y car and iPhone/ Ipad to a 2010 Mercedes Benz = FAIL.

If I may extend his analogy: Just use a car to get you to work & see your folks.
Well what if the car (ipad) can only perform the very basic function of getting you to a place provided it is a well paved well lit urban area (basic text messaging).
What if one day I want to go see my country cousins who live off a dirt road (facebook IM intergration)?
On the closed car (ipad) I cannot tinker to equip it with off road tires (pidgin protocols for conversations)? Then I cannot visit my cousins I have to wait for the next car (iphone 4) to get to go see my country cousins.

Why limit myself?