Elops oh s**t moment for Meego - Page 20 - maemo.org

Active Topics

Camera phone competition March 2023 "Endless" (35)
to General by Maemish - 2 days, 12 hrs ago
TLS 1.2 for N9 is ready (28)
to MeeGo / Harmattan by smartblu9 - 2 days, 13 hrs ago
Maemo repository (3)
to Community by torsen - 3 days, 5 hrs ago
Error after installing Leste on sdcard (11)
to Maemo 7 / Leste by Maemish - 4 days, 2 hrs ago
Introducing ubiboot N9 (multiboot OS loader) (1,393)
to Alternatives by smatkovi - 5 days, 9 hrs ago
more...

Page 20 of 24

Thread Tools

	SubCore	2011-06-07 , 15:35
	Posts: 850 \| Thanked: 626 times \| Joined on Sep 2009 @ Vienna, Austria	#191

Originally Posted by geohsia

Will the SDK for Harmattan be different than for MeeGo?

i'd imagine nokia will combine them. but since the next device is going to be harmattan, and any later meego device by nokia is pure speculation at this point, no one can say for sure.
mind you, i'm talking about the official nokia sdk here, which targets their devices.

for meego proper (as in, the underlying generic platform) the sdk is already available.

__________________
"What we perceive is not nature itself, but nature exposed to our method of questioning."
-- Werner Karl Heisenberg

Quote & Reply |

geohsia	2011-06-07 , 15:41
Posts: 515 \| Thanked: 259 times \| Joined on Jan 2010	#192

Originally Posted by SubCore

i'd imagine nokia will combine them. but since the next device is going to be harmattan, and any later meego device by nokia is pure speculation at this point, no one can say for sure.
mind you, i'm talking about the official nokia sdk here, which targets their devices.

for meego proper (as in, the underlying generic platform) the sdk is already available.

I just wonder Harmattan will have the same problems that Maemo ran into that developers will feel like it's just worth the effort even though the app probably already works.

Quote & Reply |

	volt	2011-06-07 , 23:58
	Posts: 1,309 \| Thanked: 1,187 times \| Joined on Nov 2008	#193

Originally Posted by geohsia

Where is this mature / evolved / pervasive and all expansive ecosystem that has changed and revolutionized the industry. They haven't. I mean is there even an QT Store?

Dude, your world is warped into some strange Apple concepts. There's no such a thing as a HTML store either. HTML must be a failure, then.

From the wiki:
"Controversy erupted around 1998 when it became clear that KDE’s KDE Software Compilation was going to become one of the leading desktop environments for Linux. As it was based on Qt, many people in the free software movement worried that an essential piece of one of their major operating systems would be proprietary."

KDE, based on Qt. I'd say KDE is fairly matured, evolved, pervasive and expansive by now.

Originally Posted by geohsia

Wait, I thought this was around for years, since 1994. Oh, so they never used it. So what good is technology if it's never used. So you are basically saying though it existed it was never used so for all intents and purposes it was NEW to the industry because it was never really out there.

Dude, you are way off track here. Just because you don't know what Qt is, doesn't mean that it isn't used. Yes, it's been around for years, and it's been used, and the creators of it has been making money. So, exactly what part about not being bought by Nokia at the time did you not get, since you have a problem understanding why Nokia didn't base their strategy around it until recently?

Qt isn't new to the industry, it's new to YOU. It was successful enough that I knew about it as far back as 1996. But I guess that can't possibly count, eh? This is just so much about what you don't see so it can't possibly be a success.

Quote & Reply |

geohsia	2011-06-08 , 00:22
Posts: 515 \| Thanked: 259 times \| Joined on Jan 2010	#194

Originally Posted by volt

Dude, your world is warped into some strange Apple concepts. There's no such a thing as a HTML store either. HTML must be a failure, then.

Reread the post a central marketplace for Qt apps is just one example of the maturity of the ecosystem. You disagree, that's fine. My point still remains if Qt is that mature and works as advertised why doesn't the N900 have the same number of wonderful Qt apps as the N8 and etc. Such a shame, isn't it?

Dude, you are way off track here. Just because you don't know what Qt is, doesn't mean that it isn't used. Yes, it's been around for years, and it's been used, and the creators of it has been making money. So, exactly what part about not being bought by Nokia at the time did you not get, since you have a problem understanding why Nokia didn't base their strategy around it until recently?

Yes, it is being used but it's still moving too slowly to be competitive (reread myposts). Yes, Nokia based their strategy around it. They had their reasons and the problem with this strategy is that it was confusing. At some point a developer could develop for Symbian, Qt and then Maemo (now MeeGo). A waste of time for developers and for Nokia, having to spread their time to essentially support 3 dev environments. Sure Qt was the recommended platform but not everyone moved to it.

Qt isn't new to the industry, it's new to YOU. It was successful enough that I knew about it as far back as 1996.

Haha. Back in the days of Windows 3.1 / 95 and having to use Winsock to log on to the internet via modem. If after 15 years it hasn't gotten momentum as a dev platform then maybe it's time to call it, don't you think?

Why don't you answer my question. Why isn't the N900 flooded with numerous quality Qt apps if it is as good and easy to use as it claims and they already exist for Symbian?

But I guess that can't possibly count, eh? This is just so much about what you don't see so it can't possibly be a success.

It's the other way around. The emperor has no clothes and you choose not to see it.

Last edited by geohsia; 2011-06-08 at 00:38.

Quote & Reply |

	volt	2011-06-08 , 00:57
	Posts: 1,309 \| Thanked: 1,187 times \| Joined on Nov 2008	#195

Originally Posted by geohsia

You disagree, that's fine. My point still remains if Qt is that mature and works as advertised why doesn't the N900 have the same number of wonderful Qt apps as the N8 and etc.

(...)

Why don't you answer my question. Why isn't the N900 flooded with numerous quality Qt apps if it is as good and easy to use as it claims and they already exist for Symbian?

Disagreeing is okay, I am sure we'll still disagree after I clear up your errors.

Why haven't the Qt synergy given the N900 as many Qt applications as the N8 had?

1) Because there is no Qt synergy effect between an OS based on Qt and an OS not based on Qt. Maemo 5 is GTK based.

2) Because there's no Qt synergy effect when the Qt synergy strategy doesn't exist yet. It wasn't until MeeGo was announced, that they had a Qt synergy strategy. The first device that would have a real Qt strategy effect is the N9, N950, or whatever it'll be called.

3) Even with a full blown, successful Qt synergy effect, a platform with a few hundred thousand users will never get as many Qt applications as the mother platform with tens or hundreds of millions of users. That would require every single Qt application made for the bigger platform to be ported.

4) Qt was being backported to the N900 because they needed a development platform compatible with MeeGo. Being backported meant there is problems with distribution, resource allocation, etc. Not to mention the delay. So the only Qt synergy effect possible were only possible for a handful months, to a single non-Symbian device, before Nokia announced they gave up on Qt as the common building brick. That means the window was very limited, and the target audience very small.

Originally Posted by geohsia

At some point a developer could develop for Symbian, Qt and then Maemo (now MeeGo). A waste of time for developers and for Nokia, having to spread their time to essentially support 3 dev environments.

(...)
It's the other way around. The king is naked and you choose not to see it.

Please.

You do realize that Microsoft support a far bigger number of environments/languages on Windows Phone 7 - a OS that is marginal compared to Symbian?

Really. You cover up your lack of knowledge and understanding with naked king anecdotes?

Last edited by volt; 2011-06-08 at 01:00.

Quote & Reply |

The Following User Says Thank You to volt For This Useful Post:
benny1967

geohsia	2011-06-08 , 01:09
Posts: 515 \| Thanked: 259 times \| Joined on Jan 2010	#196

Originally Posted by volt

2) Because there's no Qt synergy effect when the Qt synergy strategy doesn't exist yet. It wasn't until MeeGo was announced, that they had a Qt synergy strategy.

But wait I thought this was around since 1995? So they finally have the strategy now and it was just getting ready for 16 years? This is the the point of the OP that even after all this time the previous strategies weren't working and even the new strategy would take too much time to implement. As you said, the current strategy didn't exist until MeeGo and wouldn't be ready for a while since MeeGo itself won't be ready for a while.

This isn't a discussion about whether or not Qt exists or is a "good idea". Stick with the purpose of the thread.

3) Even with a full blown, successful Qt synergy effect, a platform with a few hundred thousand users will never get as many Qt applications as the mother platform with tens or hundreds of millions of users. That would require every single Qt application made for the bigger platform to be ported.

And things would be different for MeeGo? My point is that the portability of Qt may not be as good or effortless as some would make it out to be.

You do realize that Microsoft support a far bigger number of environments/languages on Windows Phone 7 - a OS that is marginal compared to Symbian?

They seem to be doing well doing that, much better than Nokia.

Really. You cover up your lack of knowledge and understanding with naked king anecdotes?

I call them like I see them.

Quote & Reply |

	volt	2011-06-08 , 01:33
	Posts: 1,309 \| Thanked: 1,187 times \| Joined on Nov 2008	#197

Originally Posted by geohsia

But wait I thought this was around since 1995? So they finally have the strategy now and it was just getting ready for 16 years?

Oh, for crying out loud. How many times does it have to be repeated? It didn't exist for Nokia until 2008/2009, and after that they had to adapt it to their platforms. There was a time, before Android, when Trolltech's Qt based concept Greenphone were giving developers bright eyes, and that was probably what caught the eye of Nokia as well.

Originally Posted by geohsia

Originally Posted by volt
3) Even with a full blown, successful Qt synergy effect (...)

And things would be different for MeeGo? My point is that the portability of Qt may not be as good or effortless as some would make it out to be.

No, part 3) in my explanation it wouldn't be different for a starter platform like MeeGo. You asked why there were not as many Qt applications for the N900 as there were for the N8. I answered in four parts. One of those parts says that a lesser (in percent market share) OS like MeeGo will always get a limited number of applications ported. That only shows that your goal of having as many Qt applications on such platform is completely unrealistic in any circumstance. The other three parts show that the very question is pointless since there has been no demand, no time and, I can't stress how important this is considering your question, no Qt based platform to port to.

So, basically, your argumentation is so fundamentally flawed that I don't know where to start. And NOTHING in this has to do with how good or bad the portability is, so I can't even find how the arguments connect.

Android and iOS doesn't have any such effect at ALL. Any effect at all would be a great help for MeeGo, because it would mean that there would be a lot of software that could be ported easily. It might even have a little positive effect for Symbian, because the MeeGo platform has a high percentage of developers. In addition to this, the Qt platform is easy to develop on, compared to what the Symbian developers are used to.

Point after point after point that says the Qt strategy was a good strategy. I understand that you want to negate that, but the want does not make up for being wrong.

Originally Posted by geohsia

I call them like I see them.

You call 'them' kings. I don't even know who your 'them' is. This is just frustrating. I am sorry, but that you don't understand what Qt is or how it could have been of benefit Nokia, that you seem to mean the lack of success can't possibly have anything to do with it not BEING DISTRIBUTED YET, it makes me look like a fool indeed, for feeding you.

Last edited by volt; 2011-06-08 at 01:42.

Quote & Reply |

The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to volt For This Useful Post:
benny1967, lohner

9000	2011-06-08 , 02:11
Posts: 1,425 \| Thanked: 983 times \| Joined on May 2010 @ Hong Kong	#198

Originally Posted by volt

You do realize that Microsoft support a far bigger number of environments/languages on Windows Phone 7 - a OS that is marginal compared to Symbian?

Windows Phone 7 is a new platform that is mostly incompatible with its (far far) distant relative Windows Mobile platform.

Without the backing of a well-established ecosystem of WM, WP7 is not remotely comparable to Symbian...yet.

Just for your information. Sorry to interrupt. You guys may now go on.

__________________

[HOWTO] N900 Bluetooth-PAN Tethering (N900 supplies Internet Access for PC)

[HOWTO] N900 WiFi Hotspot (shell script version)

N900: Useful Tips (a summary)

Quote & Reply |

geohsia	2011-06-08 , 03:27
Posts: 515 \| Thanked: 259 times \| Joined on Jan 2010	#199

Originally Posted by volt

Oh, for crying out loud. How many times does it have to be repeated?

"Qt isn't new to the industry, it's new to YOU. It was successful enough that I knew about it as far back as 1996"

Haha. Your quote, not mine. Your Qt quote is like saying Andorid has been around since 1992 because Android came from Java that came from Oak.

It didn't exist for Nokia until 2008/2009, and after that they had to adapt it to their platforms.

Great. Then stop saying it's been around since the mid 90's. The current iteration (which is all that's relevant) started around 2008 and given that the platforms themselves won't be ready until 2012 (MeeGo), there is no reason to think that any adaption to that platform would be ready until after that.

The other three parts show that the very question is pointless since there has been no demand, no time and, I can't stress how important this is considering your question, no Qt based platform to port to.

So, basically, your argumentation is so fundamentally flawed that I don't know where to start. And NOTHING in this has to do with how good or bad the portability is, so I can't even find how the arguments connect.

Um... that's what I've been saying, feel free to re-read my posts at your leisure. Technical merits aside, the problem that Elop faced was that given the lack of demand and readiness of the various platforms the direction they were heading toward, getting everything on QT was not a wise choice. It would have been a lot of work building up to nothing. So he decided to cut it because too many pieces are missing and would remain missing for a while.

Android and iOS doesn't have any such effect at ALL. Any effect at all would be a great help for MeeGo, because it would mean that there would be a lot of software that could be ported easily.

And here's the fundamental flaw with the Qt paradigm. I don't see developers moving to platforms because they're easy to develop for. They move to it because they can make money.

I"m sure Qt is great but there are already tons of Symbian / linux (GTK) developers. Did there really need to be another easy to program for system? I think the reason Nokia decided to use Qt because they knew that Symbian was limited and so they needed a transitional / migration platform that allowed them to support other platforms that would take them into the future.

For a company that has never been good at software, trying to develop Symbian, QT, Harmattan and MeeGo at the same time was just too much.

Point after point after point that says the Qt strategy was a good strategy. I understand that you want to negate that, but the want does not make up for being wrong.

Yes, what was I thinking. Qt is perfect and the solution to all of Nokia's problems.

... you don't understand what Qt is or how it could have been of benefit Nokia, that you seem to mean the lack of success can't possibly have anything to do with it not BEING DISTRIBUTED YET, it makes me look like a fool indeed, for feeding you.

So you're saying that Qt is finished for all platforms and is just waiting on some developer's hard drive but Elop decided not to distribute it? Nice.

Quote & Reply |

The Following User Says Thank You to geohsia For This Useful Post:
debernardis

	nwerneck	2011-06-08 , 03:38
	Posts: 304 \| Thanked: 233 times \| Joined on Jul 2009 @ São Paulo, SP, Brasil	#200

Originally Posted by geohsia

I'm not expert on QT but yes it's been around for a long time. Where is this mature / evolved / pervasive and all expansive ecosystem that has changed and revolutionized the industry. They haven't.

Qt is here and there, getting adopted by more and more people, and evolving a lot on the way. It's not some "pervasive" invention like the transistor, the compiler or whatever.

Originally Posted by geohsia

I mean is there even an QT Store?

That doesn't make any sense! "Qt store"??!!...

The most we could have perhaps was some kind of CPAN for Qt... Nah, forget it, that is just plain crazy, trying to compare Qt with something like a full "ecosystem" like iOS or whatever.

Hey maybe apt... Debian's repos. There is a "store", a very old and successful one that has a few Qt apps, will that do it for you?

Originally Posted by geohsia

From what I can see they're still trying to get it to work on MeeGo, Symbian and etc. Sure components exist but while Apple is moving on to iOS 5 and daily adding to the app store, where's QT?

Qt is working full steam on Symbian^3, Maemo 5 and even older Symbian phones. (not sure what version, but it includes 5800 and others). I don't know how many developers have already released Qt apps, but it's all there, ready to work. I wish I had one of these devices to give you more information, but unfortunately I only have a N800. This one is indeed only got Qt hacked into it.

Originally Posted by geohsia

I don't doubt much work and technical problems were solved with QT, but the unfortunate fact is after all these years it's a non-factor and without a QT store / ecosystem (more than just being around years ago) they are for all intents and purposes brand new.

This is the problem with Nokia the past few years. They dabbled in QT, but never really committed. They dabbled in Maemo / MeeGo but never really committed. Now they finally committed to WP7.
(...)

Maemo started in late 2005, with the 770. It was always based on GTK. Nokia only bought Trolltech in early 2008, after N810 was already on the streets. Maemo 5 supports Qt, but it will only now become a central component, used in the system "core".

And more than that, while Qt was cool back in "all those many years" as you say, it changed a lot lately. The SDK was not so much cool and straight forward like it is today. And there was also important innovations like QML, etc. This is all new, and if it wasn't created specifically to offer competition to the other "ecosystems", this is the role it plays now.

So, for all effects in this debate, Qt is actually "new". The often mentioned tradition and adoption is more of a rhetoric thing. Qt development for mass mobile apps only really exists and is being tested right now, because of Nokia's relatively recent push.

Originally Posted by geohsia

Wait, I thought this was around for years, since 1994. Oh, so they never used it. So what good is technology if it's never used.

...Is good technology waiting to be used.

Originally Posted by geohsia

So you are basically saying though it existed it was never used so for all intents and purposes it was NEW to the industry because it was never really out there.

Nokia's purchase and adoption of Qt is recent, and so are many current Qt features. So, yes, to all effects it's new. (Starting to repeat myself, sorry)

Originally Posted by geohsia

I subscribe to the KISS principle. QT, the one dev. platform to rule them all just was too complicated.

So KISS my Qt!!! Qt is beautiful, Qt is life, Qt is love! Simple and powerful.

Multi-platform development is always complicated, that is the truth. If there were no problems, it would be the same platform. Qt does offer a great means to archieve that, but it's not just about that. And also, have in mind that we are talking multi-platform across mobile/desktop etc. But maybe it could turn out Qt only really grows for handelds, who knows! :P

You can use Qt and just Qt to make lots of cool apps, and target a single device if you want. Very simple, stupid. You are talking like Nokia was forcing you to always take care of numerous different platforms, that doens't make any sense. If you wish, there will be facilities, but you can really just enter Qt Creator, make your simples stuff there, load it in a few handsets, or just on Maemo5 for example, and be done with it.