Originally Posted by Texrat

What I mean to say is I would personally like the council to have more direct channels into Nokia available. Not to solve every problem for every customer, but to address high-level, far-reaching issues. Like the usb detachment failure. I just wanted to get the ear of the executive manager who was responsible for it, or at least the engineering team. I believe the council should have such access. Just my opinion though.

Originally Posted by Jaffa

Isn't the problem a subset/parent of the infamous #630? Certainly the problems trying to bring this about would be similar - and the community council works because we could pitch it as solving Nokia's problems as well as our own. What's the business case for a "consumer council"? Is it more than "don't piss off your early adopters, and product evangelists"?

Originally Posted by danramos

I don't know of too many phones that can't be rooted and most are able to have their ROM flashed.

You want a flash rooted Droid X, despite the chip signature crap? BOOM! Done.
http://slashdot.org/submission/1305286/

Even XBOX touted their UNCRACKABLE protection scheme and had it cracked before it even hit store shelves.

At any rate, the value here is that people are able to get what they want out of their Android devices despite the hardware manufacturer. Nokia seems to be doing a lot of the same. So, I don't see much difference. If I had to put money into it, I'd rather go with the one with the more satisfying experience overall (apps, cusstomer service, parts, replacement, walk-in presence, etc.)

Originally Posted by Jaffa

What's the business case for a "consumer council"? Is it more than "don't piss off your early adopters, and product evangelists"?

Originally Posted by Jaffa

Most consumers (and, as has been pointed out, there's a number of users on maemo.org) don't transition into that community. I've got an account on scirocconet, but despite posting a few times I don't think of myself as part of the community. There is a shift at some point, but no-one has been able to define when it is. But then again, it's not actually that important when it does: it's not entirely black & white.

Originally Posted by cfh11

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i28UEoLXVFQ
Sorry couldn't resist

Originally Posted by attila77

(though I think I have not really seen any previous council members actively taking part in this discussion).

Originally Posted by Texrat

Right.

We're to blame for Nokia's inaction.

I'm astounded at the comments of some (not silvermountain's-- I've come to expect his baseless, pointless bashing).

You folks can slam us all you like for failures. It's just rather inane at this point.

The current five ran knowing well we were entering into a likely lame duck situation. None of us were naive. We saw the Maemo sunset like anyone else. We just wanted to do our damndest, to at least TRY-- rather than simply squatting at a keyboard typing out epithets, gripes and invalid assessments of anyone's efforts.

You can slam us for failure. Go ahead. But the evidence of council action are right here, right under the Community banner. Right in the emails and blogs and websites devoted to this community.

Absence of success is not absence of effort. It just indicates that we've been pushing rope. But that's not by design-- it's a consequence. Of corporate inertia.

I expect people to understand the difference. Asking too much?

It's easy to slam the volunteers at this point. We answer. Nokia doesn't.

So sure, lash out, Rant away. Whatever makes you feel better, silvermountain and company.

knowing well we were entering into a likely lame duck situation. None of us were naive.