Active Topics
-
[HOWTO] Comprehensive Firmware Flashing Guide for N9 (1,580)
to Nokia N9 / N950 by aspergerguy - 7 hrs, 8 mins ago -
Nokia N9-00 Prototype Build S1.12 (RM-680 codename "Dali") (250)
to Nokia N9 / N950 by en0s - 3 days, 3 hrs ago -
[Announce] Maebble - Pebble support for Maemo (118)
to Applications by glo-worm - 3 days, 15 hrs ago -
Possible to flash Leste to eMMC? (6)
to Maemo 7 / Leste by Eri - 4 days, 6 hrs ago - more...
 |
|
2010-01-11
, 12:33
|
|
Posts: 190 |
Thanked: 101 times |
Joined on Oct 2009
|
#22
|
I sometimes think people spend more time debating about when their phone will get an update as to actually using their phone.
|
|
2010-01-11
, 12:37
|
|
Posts: 94 |
Thanked: 10 times |
Joined on Jan 2010
|
#23
|
Originally Posted by jjx
Good post
It is not possible to set dates for bug fixes until the cause of the bug has been found and a solution devised. With nastier bugs no timescale at all can be set at first, because nobody knows why it happens or even if a fix is possible.
When a fix is found, it must be confirmed by testing, review, etc. otherwise it is not known to be a fix.
When all that's done, only then, can a release timescale be set.
In general, there are two options, both with pros and cons:
1. Set goals, and be unable to say (reliably) how long it will take, only give estimates and ranges. This seems to be Nokia's way so far with the N900. (It is also my way when working)
2. Set times for releases, and be unable to say what will be included, only give estimates and have unreliable intentions. This is called timeboxing. It can encourage regular output, but the downside is people getting expectations about what will be included and being disappointed.
Yes, I agree that you can't set dates until a cause of a bug has been identified and how much coding will be needed to resolve it. What you can do is the following though:
1. Scope what fixes the customer needs the most
2. Identify the causes
3. Talk to somebody with enough knowledge of the relevant code to identify what changes will be needed to resolve the problem
4. Tot up all of your times, resources etc. and create a plan with a deadline and contingency, giving you a dev release time.
5. Use risk analysis to scope the amount of testing needed, and time to do so
6. Use this to set a release date / estimate for a beta release
etc. etc.
I can say for certain that other companies manage this. For example with an MS patch Tuesday, they know the scope of each release far in advance.
Maybe the processes are different for Nokia, but IMO it is clear that there's alot of confusion here with regard to when a release can be expected, and I would say some frustration, fuelled by the lack of communication about this.
Even if it is not possible to set exact dates, it is possible to strongly control communication and let everyone know what's going on... Unless I am missing something it seems Nokia is being pretty quiet.
Cheers
Last edited by meep; 2010-01-11 at 12:47.
|
|
2010-01-11
, 13:00
|
|
Posts: 162 |
Thanked: 79 times |
Joined on Jan 2010
@ Finland
|
#24
|
Originally Posted by meep
I have to disagree. If you're a(n incompetent) project manager you can easily set dates.
Yes, I agree that you can't set dates until a cause of a bug has been identified and how much coding will be needed to resolve it.
|
|
2010-01-11
, 13:00
|
|
Posts: 474 |
Thanked: 283 times |
Joined on Oct 2009
@ Oxford, UK
|
#25
|
Originally Posted by horus
No, we use our phones to post to this site. Don't start thinking it's serious. All the debates are just us testing that the phone browser is working
I sometimes think people spend more time debating about when their phone will get an update as to actually using their phone.
| The Following User Says Thank You to jjx For This Useful Post: | ||
 |
|
2010-01-11
, 13:15
|
|
Posts: 1,217 |
Thanked: 446 times |
Joined on Oct 2009
@ Bedfordshire, UK
|
#26
|
Originally Posted by meep
Do you have any idea on the difference in size between the two different set of people here? Ubuntu has a massive team and the Maemo team in Nokia is tiny!
I'm not complaining so much as trying to understand the processes involved.
IMO, the bug identified => identified fix => release process is not as quick as the equivalent process on debian / ubuntu. Arguably the fact that the phone has only been out 2 months means that this update process should be quicker than at a later stage in the product's lifespan, to capitalise on initial interest in the n900 / not give everyone a bad initial impression of things to come.
I would agree with the idea of allowing for a beta repo; whilst I can understand that Nokia may want to protect users from shafting their handset, this process works well for all other Linux distros without too much of this problem, as well as MS with Win 7 betas etc. If they can do it, why can't Nokia?
|
|
2010-01-11
, 13:20
|
|
Posts: 3,319 |
Thanked: 5,610 times |
Joined on Aug 2008
@ Finland
|
#27
|
Originally Posted by NvyUs
There IS a likely march/april update, but it's PR 1.2, not the one people are so eagerly waiting here. The major component of that update (and that's why we know it exists) is Qt 4.6.
that march date was just speculation started by a blogger which is definitely not true.
nokia would not give the update out for testing if it was still 3 months from a stable release.
__________________
Blogging about mobile linux - The Penguin Moves!
Maintainer of PyQt (see introduction and docs), AppWatch, QuickBrownFox, etc
Blogging about mobile linux - The Penguin Moves!
Maintainer of PyQt (see introduction and docs), AppWatch, QuickBrownFox, etc
|
|
2010-01-11
, 13:24
|
|
Posts: 1,217 |
Thanked: 446 times |
Joined on Oct 2009
@ Bedfordshire, UK
|
#28
|
Originally Posted by slender
So you bought this product instead of the rival for what reason? You do of course realise that this is not intended as a mass market device as well but intended for early adopters?
Entering to the market with buggy and incomplete functions that have been around on rivaliers product for quite long I would say that people are pretty patience right now.
...
Originally Posted by slender
So if you need something that has a few hiccups, don't get one for 'early adopters'. If you want a Nokia business focused device go for the E series not the N series as that is their purpose in life!
...
I would have gone really mad if i had bought this device for 550€ or maybe I would have given it about 1 week to get updates and after that changed it to other device. People do not have time to "get this" maemo/community idea they are too busy at doing their work and making money for their company and shareholders.
...
Originally Posted by slender
I don't seem to be able to fidn a complete product anywhere else in the IT industry eiher to be honest. Maybe it would be something to do with the fact that time to release is run by marketing people and not the engineers? Oh and the business focused devices are the E series not the N series.
...
I think that it's really twisted that there is people who forgive incomplitness on many areas because of e.g. multi-tasking and potential. I think that these kind of people have no slightes idea how you should make business todays fast paced markets and they live in dream world. A bit harsh to say, but that's just what i feel. :|
...
Originally Posted by slender
You might want to try that one with Microsoft and few other big companies. Late to market? I wasn't aware that they are late to market with the N900 - care to enlight the rest of us on how this was arrived at?
...
Fact is that when you come to market a bit late you do not anymore have time to make things better. Customers want functionality and working end product NOW! That's in my opinion really healthy progerss todays market.
|
|
2010-01-11
, 13:38
|
|
Posts: 291 |
Thanked: 134 times |
Joined on Dec 2009
@ North-west, UK
|
#29
|
Originally Posted by meep
Not true, as there is a non-zero cost in managing more users, and only finate resources available for Nokia to split between all the tasks.
more testers = more robust integration / quicker testing turnaround.
|
|
2010-01-11
, 13:43
|
|
Posts: 1,217 |
Thanked: 446 times |
Joined on Oct 2009
@ Bedfordshire, UK
|
#30
|
Originally Posted by tomchiverton
The other problem is that you can only spit things down so far. After a certain point the overhead in managing a situation costs more than the saving.
Not true, as there is a non-zero cost in managing more users, and only finate resources available for Nokia to split between all the tasks.
nokia would not give the update out for testing if it was still 3 months from a stable release.
its obvious nokia are happy with the beta build and opened it to outside testers to help them fine tuning which will benefit us all