Active Topics
-
TLS 1.2 for N9 is ready (29)
to MeeGo / Harmattan by smatkovi - 6 hrs, 48 mins ago -
Error after installing Leste on sdcard (12)
to Maemo 7 / Leste by teroyk - 7 hrs, 36 mins ago -
Camera phone competition March 2023 "Endless" (35)
to General by Maemish - 3 days, 15 hrs ago -
Maemo repository (3)
to Community by torsen - 4 days, 8 hrs ago -
Introducing ubiboot N9 (multiboot OS loader) (1,393)
to Alternatives by smatkovi - 6 days, 12 hrs ago - more...
| The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to attila77 For This Useful Post: | ||
 |
|
2009-11-24
, 16:12
|
|
Posts: 11,700 |
Thanked: 10,045 times |
Joined on Jun 2006
@ North Texas, USA
|
#32
|
Originally Posted by attila77
There is a simple beauty in that.
1. Why is it taken as granted they have to search in two different places without considering any collaboration between Extras and Ovi ? Again, sounds a bit like a variant of Select. I would not mind Ovi (semi-)automatically listing Extras projects. Is that unacceptable to the Ovi team ?
And it gets to my point about liability.
Let's envision this scenario:
A developer creates some nifty app he's willing to share for free. He uploads to Extras but would sure like it to be listed in Ovi as well. So there could be a feature represented by a checkbox that asks, in effect, "do you want this to be mirrored in Ovi?". If the developer checks yes, then his app is published in one place but shows up in two.
Attila, are we thinking along similar lines?
Of course, we're still left with the thorny "what if individual developers want to make money" issue but I think it's best to break this all down into edible chunks...
Anyway, is virtual representation of an app any different than physical representation in this sense? In other words, if Ovi mirrors stuff that's in Extras, without the developer being asked for insurance or other such obligations, is this somehow legally different than having the app actually hosted on the Ovi server?
I ask this rhetorically, but I can see Quim rushing at me with the "take these questions to the wiki" broom...
__________________
Nokia Developer Champion
Different <> Wrong | Listen - Judgment = Progress | People + Trust = Success
My personal site: http://texrat.net
Nokia Developer Champion
Different <> Wrong | Listen - Judgment = Progress | People + Trust = Success
My personal site: http://texrat.net
|
|
2009-11-24
, 17:40
|
|
Posts: 3,319 |
Thanked: 5,610 times |
Joined on Aug 2008
@ Finland
|
#33
|
Originally Posted by Texrat
Yes. If Select cannot be made the 'one place to choose them all', pushing things from Extras to Ovi must be dead simple and not a privilege or special hoopjumping operation.
Attila, are we thinking along similar lines?
Anyway, is virtual representation of an app any different than physical representation in this sense? In other words, if Ovi mirrors stuff that's in Extras, without the developer being asked for insurance or other such obligations, is this somehow legally different than having the app actually hosted on the Ovi server?
I ask this rhetorically, but I can see Quim rushing at me with the "take these questions to the wiki" broom...
 |
|
2009-11-24
, 18:49
|
|
Posts: 3,790 |
Thanked: 5,718 times |
Joined on Mar 2006
@ Vienna, Austria
|
#34
|
While it looks tempting to "mirror" Extras and have applications show up in Ovi Store as well, I still have my doubts about where this would end.
Ovi = controlled by Nokia
Extras = controlled by us
Both have rules. I don't know the differences now, but it's irrelevant as they may cange any time. The point is that whatever will be searched and found in Ovi will have to follow their guidelines for content. - If all publishers do and you're the only one with an application that they don't want... What will you do? Be happy in Extras? Sure, except nobody will come there anymore once everything is in the Ovi store, too.
It's not only a matter of technical feasibility and "what's easiest for the end user". It's also a matter of who's in control and what does it mean for the whole Maemo ecosystem in the long run.
(The worst case could be that once 98% of the free software can be found in Ovi Store and in Extras, the next SSU will remove the application manager as we know it because "Ovi Store is all we need and users can always use apt-get, anyway".)
Ovi = controlled by Nokia
Extras = controlled by us
Both have rules. I don't know the differences now, but it's irrelevant as they may cange any time. The point is that whatever will be searched and found in Ovi will have to follow their guidelines for content. - If all publishers do and you're the only one with an application that they don't want... What will you do? Be happy in Extras? Sure, except nobody will come there anymore once everything is in the Ovi store, too.
It's not only a matter of technical feasibility and "what's easiest for the end user". It's also a matter of who's in control and what does it mean for the whole Maemo ecosystem in the long run.
(The worst case could be that once 98% of the free software can be found in Ovi Store and in Extras, the next SSU will remove the application manager as we know it because "Ovi Store is all we need and users can always use apt-get, anyway".)
 |
|
2009-11-24
, 19:49
|
|
Posts: 3,105 |
Thanked: 11,088 times |
Joined on Jul 2007
@ Mountain View (CA, USA)
|
#35
|
As long as the Application Manager has the UI it has in Maemo 5, I understand perfectly users preferring to discover new software by browsing pages with screenshots, user ratings and comments instead of one liners with a "Details" dialog.
Having Extras as a proxy to publish in Ovi would bypass the current requirements to become an Ovi publisher. Ovi currently won't approve as publisher one registered individual, so they are consistent not willing to give direct publishing rights to a community of individual developers going through a different filter.
I'll say it again: maemo.org Downloads are enabled by default in our next Maemo 5 release and they are present in our roadmap. Let us complete this Maemo 5 release and sales start and we will go further sharing the Harmattan plans.
Having Extras as a proxy to publish in Ovi would bypass the current requirements to become an Ovi publisher. Ovi currently won't approve as publisher one registered individual, so they are consistent not willing to give direct publishing rights to a community of individual developers going through a different filter.
I'll say it again: maemo.org Downloads are enabled by default in our next Maemo 5 release and they are present in our roadmap. Let us complete this Maemo 5 release and sales start and we will go further sharing the Harmattan plans.
|
|
2009-11-24
, 20:07
|
|
Posts: 3,319 |
Thanked: 5,610 times |
Joined on Aug 2008
@ Finland
|
#36
|
Originally Posted by qgil
We understand that Ovi today isn't quite ready for individual (especially non-profit) developers. The question is/was if it WANTS to cater to that crowd in the future or not. If not, I don't see what the point of this topic is at all
Having Extras as a proxy to publish in Ovi would bypass the current requirements to become an Ovi publisher. Ovi currently won't approve as publisher one registered individual, so they are consistent not willing to give direct publishing rights to a community of individual developers going through a different filter.
(PS and yes, that question is already in the wiki as of earlier today
)
__________________
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
| The Following User Says Thank You to attila77 For This Useful Post: | ||
|
|
2009-11-24
, 21:14
|
|
Posts: 11,700 |
Thanked: 10,045 times |
Joined on Jun 2006
@ North Texas, USA
|
#37
|
Originally Posted by qgil
But Quim-- don't you see how this doesn't really resolve the main sticking point, ie, the legal constraints?
Having Extras as a proxy to publish in Ovi would bypass the current requirements to become an Ovi publisher. Ovi currently won't approve as publisher one registered individual, so they are consistent not willing to give direct publishing rights to a community of individual developers going through a different filter.
- developers cannot use maemo.org as a collective for publishing direct to Ovi, ergo they must form some sort of legal operating entity conforming to VAT, et al, requirements;
- developers CAN use maemo.org as an indirect way to publish to Ovi
How is it that maemo.org can absorb liability for the latter but not the former? Is it solely the potenial of profit that is the difference? If so then I don't get that...
__________________
Nokia Developer Champion
Different <> Wrong | Listen - Judgment = Progress | People + Trust = Success
My personal site: http://texrat.net
Nokia Developer Champion
Different <> Wrong | Listen - Judgment = Progress | People + Trust = Success
My personal site: http://texrat.net
Last edited by Texrat; 2009-11-27 at 20:49.
|
|
2009-11-25
, 10:32
|
|
Posts: 3,105 |
Thanked: 11,088 times |
Joined on Jul 2007
@ Mountain View (CA, USA)
|
#38
|
This is not an aswer about Ovi, but a general concept to help understanding the problem. I'm also not a lawyer and I'm just trying to understand what I understood from reading/listening about this topic:
"Liability" is a tricky concept that has 3 axis:
- Sole individuals vs big corporations with the levels in between. If you are a sole individual then you probably are not very interesting target for a legal demand, while a big corp always is. If maemo.org is (from a legal perspective) nothing more than an aggregation of sole individuals then you see clearly what is the difference between maemo.org Downloads and Ovi by Nokia.
- Gratis vs paid. If you made milions out of something that is actually not even yours then you face different risks than someone that offers the same for free, even if it's also allegedly illegal. Since open source software is mostly gratis, this factor also helps getting it out of the usual areas of trouble.
- Software vs content. The Ovi store is not only a place to distribute apps, but also content. Digital content is in itself easier to copy, redistribute and consume. Nowadays there is a much bigger demand and business than in software itself. Again, open source software usually stays away from "blockbusters content" and frameworks like CreativeCommons are very good at defining who is the author and what can you do with the content.
Look at the combinations and you will see 2 extremes in terms of liability:
- Saucy company gets huge revenue publishing digital content for a price.
- Open source developer publishes software in his free time and all he gets is a Big Thank You.
I am willing to fight for the latter case if open source developers are indeed interested in publishing at Ovi. What I'm not doing is trying to convince you to do so. Either you are interested or not. There seems to be different opinions in the Brainstorm according to the votes, even if the discussion here seems to go more in one direction:
http://maemo.org/community/brainstor...store-ovi-com/
"Liability" is a tricky concept that has 3 axis:
- Sole individuals vs big corporations with the levels in between. If you are a sole individual then you probably are not very interesting target for a legal demand, while a big corp always is. If maemo.org is (from a legal perspective) nothing more than an aggregation of sole individuals then you see clearly what is the difference between maemo.org Downloads and Ovi by Nokia.
- Gratis vs paid. If you made milions out of something that is actually not even yours then you face different risks than someone that offers the same for free, even if it's also allegedly illegal. Since open source software is mostly gratis, this factor also helps getting it out of the usual areas of trouble.
- Software vs content. The Ovi store is not only a place to distribute apps, but also content. Digital content is in itself easier to copy, redistribute and consume. Nowadays there is a much bigger demand and business than in software itself. Again, open source software usually stays away from "blockbusters content" and frameworks like CreativeCommons are very good at defining who is the author and what can you do with the content.
Look at the combinations and you will see 2 extremes in terms of liability:
- Saucy company gets huge revenue publishing digital content for a price.
- Open source developer publishes software in his free time and all he gets is a Big Thank You.
I am willing to fight for the latter case if open source developers are indeed interested in publishing at Ovi. What I'm not doing is trying to convince you to do so. Either you are interested or not. There seems to be different opinions in the Brainstorm according to the votes, even if the discussion here seems to go more in one direction:
http://maemo.org/community/brainstor...store-ovi-com/
| The Following User Says Thank You to qgil For This Useful Post: | ||
 |
|
2009-11-27
, 04:19
|
|
Posts: 297 |
Thanked: 54 times |
Joined on Sep 2009
@ new jersey, usa
|
#39
|
Originally Posted by qgil
just look at symbian users. you've got to give the average users more credit.
One assumption would be that by default users are lazy and if they find one place giving them everything relevant to them then they will prefer that over to having to search in two different places.
This is not an issue in the Application Manager but what about those preferring to browse normal web catalogs (a majority?)
It would be good to kknow the opinion of the developers of the most downloaded apps: http://maemo.org/downloads/downloads/Maemo5/25/
Would be OMWeather interested in showing up at http://store.ovi.com/search?q=weather
AlmostTI at http://store.ovi.com/search?q=calculator
FM Radio at http://store.ovi.com/search?q=radio
eCoach at http://store.ovi.com/search?q=outdoors
Countdown widget at http://store.ovi.com/search?q=countdown
etc
Maemo Select is useful to manage dozens of recommendation but what about the day when you have hundreds of OSS apps in maemo.org Downloads and hundreds in Ovi Store?
|
|
2009-11-27
, 06:29
|
|
Posts: 3,105 |
Thanked: 11,088 times |
Joined on Jul 2007
@ Mountain View (CA, USA)
|
#40
|
Originally Posted by kryptoniankid17
Can you be more specific? There are millions of Symbian users out there and you can find all kins of behaviors in them.
just look at symbian users. you've got to give the average users more credit.
 |
| Tags |
| extras, opensource, oss, ovi |
«
Previous Thread
|
Next Thread
»
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 02:23.
1. Why is it taken as granted they have to search in two different places without considering any collaboration between Extras and Ovi ? Again, sounds a bit like a variant of Select. I would not mind Ovi (semi-)automatically listing Extras projects. Is that unacceptable to the Ovi team ?
2. Why is it important then to have a strong and united Extras then ? A lot of effort has been put to making a Extras a better place for end users, and now it is suggested it makes no difference as most people will not go (or, rather, be directed) there anyway.
EDIT: When I say semi-automatically, I mean something as 'promote to Ovi' alongside of 'promote to Extras'.
Last edited by attila77; 2009-11-24 at 12:46.