Okay, then further analysis is required: WHY didn't these developers tap into the system contacts provision? Is functionality missing? Does the API come up short? Is it an educational gap? Is it too hard? Are they too lazy?

As programmer myself I can readily assure tablet program folks that when presented with the choice of creating my own widget or tapping into available infrastructure, I'm going with door 2 every single time. No debate.

So-- why didn't they? That's Nokia's question to ask and solve.

They must have a reason for not using the system-wide contacts - there is no logic to having multiple contact lists, one for each application. Perhaps the use of a system-wide database should be "enforced" a little more strongly by Nokia or Maemo (not sure how, better guide lines/documentation? Peer pressure?) otherwise the end user experience ultimately suffers - it's immediately apparent that I'm entering the same data multiple times into the same device.

Agreed with Milhouse. If nothing else, Nokia needs to provide clear, definite leadership on an issue like this. Maybe not heavy-handed, but strong nonetheless.

Ragnar, I totally understand where you're coming from in this post (better than the previous ones, anyway :-).
Just three things :

- online vs offline : evidently that's the future... more so than the present. Today if I'm in a meeting and we're looking to program the next one, I don't have time to connect the tablet through BT then GPRS and launch the browser and pull down Google Cal or whatever. It has to be a local app with current data, as with the Psion or the Zaurus or good old 6021. Otherwise the tablet is a toy.
Likewise I could be proactive and mail myself the needed docs and spreadsheets for that meeting, so I can look them up in Google Mail's viewer. But it is still easier to have those reference files on my MMC and open them if needed with a local app, no ? Otherwise the tablet is a toy.

- long term vs short term : like any good technical team with a strong vision (almost since the Romans one might say :-), I suspect the maemo team has a tendency to think big, long-term and thus over engineer things. Than can be good, but only if short-term sales sustain the momentum until goals can be met. Not every company can or will push stuff at a loss for years until they wear off everyone else in the market and win by default, if you see what I mean. In 1995 the Psion guys set out to build the mother of all 32-bit embedded OSes, and they succeeded : EPOC32 was a jewel, and lives to this day in Symbian phones. Only Psion itself is not there anymore to ride that wave... So sometimes it is useful to do simpler, humble things, that satisfy user needs *now*. Even if they're somewhat at odds with the "great vision", they'll help getting there too...

- my PIM vs your PIM : if you ask only power users, you, me, your friends and posters here, evidently you'll get a bewildering and contradictory array of definitions for what "PIM" is. But it another post you say the goal is true mass market, something like phones rather than Palms ; and strangely, when you add my sister and my boss and your cousin and Bob's uncle to the mix, things actually get simpler, and now we know what PIM is : ability to open (preferably edit) *office documents ; a calendar that syncs with my other one ; and a way to use my existing contacts.

That's the same list I suggested to Qim yesterday : nothing fancy, nothing new, done for cheap ; certainly nothing appealing for a gung-ho team who set out to dazzle the world... But get those basics covered and you can turn back to the vision, and hopefully last long enough to get the great things done

Damn, fpp, I am now nominating you for council spokesman.

Sorry. It's Prez or nuthin. We're arrogant that way over here :-)

You have my vote.

Take this as speculation - I do not work for those companies in question - but:

If you look at Skype, for instance, they have a pretty similar UI and user experience in all of their Skype client applications in various devices. It's their choice and their freedom to think that the experience they provide by redesigning and reimplementing the contact handling again is better. The Skype experience is closely tied to their UI, as is with nearly any service.

In general, Company A wants to control the entire experience of using service A, promote the features of service A in exactly the manner they wish to promote them. With a unified UI there is always a compromise: they cannot have all the buttons in exactly the places where they want them to be, there needs to be some kind of balance between all the services. So there is a rather strong logic. Considering the overall user experience of the device it's perhaps an unfortunate logic, if you choose to see it that way.

However, If Nokia would say that "no, you must do it this way", then they do not do it at all. Then again, not all hope is lost: the whole UI of providing services and contact handling is still at a very early stage.

Ragnar - if you want to see how effective your products can be when you pay attention to UI design, UI consistency and maximising the end user experience, look no further than Apple.

On the other hand, If Nokia are willing to stand by while partner companies (with whom one would assume Nokia have some kind of influence) offer major, top billing, applications (such as Skype) on the Nokia platform that subvert and undermine the _overall_ user experience then fine with me - just don't expect Nokia to be in this business when other tablet companies do UI right and take away your customers.

Please hurry and convince the developers to use consistent contact handling because the clock is ticking and after two years, two devices, and 3 major releases of Maemo (a fourth is not far away ) for you to say that contact handling services is still at a very early stage does not fill me with much hope for the future.

I'm new here, I just got my N800 2 weeks ago but its already become indispensable. My original reason for buying it was to run Slimserver, which it does remarkably well. I really could care less about PIM features and editing word documents.

I have found the web surfing on the IT to be very addictive, I carry it with me all over the house, I can surf while eating breakfast, when commercials are playing on TV etc. I put it on the bedside table at night so I can surf in the middle of the night when I wake up without disturbing my wife. Its so much more convenient than the laptop that I wind up using it in many situations that I would not bother using the laptop.

One of the big draws to me was the fact that it runs linux, being able to go in and play with things, port programs etc was very important.

It seems to me that this opennes is part of the "problem" with the IT. On desktops people expect to buy programs that did not come with the computer in order to do most of their tasks. A fairly large number of people even modify their machines, adding new video cards etc. The mind set is that the hardware is a platform for external software and hardware.

Laptops are a bit more closed, very few people would ever consider upgrading the hardware on a laptop, but most people will still assume that they will be buying software for it. A certain number of people have a well defined function for their laptop and get it it with software to support it, but that is a fairly small percentage of users. One telling point is that almost nobody would ever even think of putting a new operating system on a laptop, while the concept is well known for desktops, even if most people balk at actually doing it.

For handheld computing devices its very different. The concept in most peoples mind is that a handheld is designed for a specific function and comes out of the box with everything you need to perform that function. The traditional functions being calculator, cell phone, PDA and MP3 player. This is the overwhelming mindset of most people when thinking about handheld electronic devices. If you want a new function, get a new device.

It takes a major mind shift to think of a hendheld as a platform like you do a desktop. To a large number of people its just inconceivable that they would have to get software and install it etc in order to get the functionality they want the device to perform. Its not their mindset.

The IT DOES come out of the box with the software for its intended purpose (browsing the internet) but that is so far removed from most peoples conception of a handheld device, that the fact its not optimized out of the box to perform traditional handheld functions can cause great distress and frustration because it does not fit their preconceptions of what a handheld is.

I think this is one of the big hurdles for the IT, to change peoples conception of what a handheld is, from a single use optimized for one purpose device into a platform that needs to have programs installed and configured, an incredibly flexible device, but one that you have to make into what you want it to be. A "handheld computing platform" rather than an appliance.

John S.