Being convincing has a lot to do with the path of least resistance.

A single community input based on the feedback and contributions of several members does carry more weight. As opposed to threads of discussions, a wiki page requires a certain level of discussion and consensus before considering it a community proposal. For the ones needing to be convinced (whoever they are, Nokia employees or your own users), reading a single and well structured and contextualized argument in a page is far more efficient than going to any long and heat discussion happening somewhere.

So we should call +1-888-665-4228 and start asking how we can play divx videos and 3d games on the device as well as flash? What about the forever promised ogg?

To be quite honest, Nokia and your position on the whole situation is unacceptable. Paying customers don't like to be locked out of features they technically have access and the right to use because they paid for the product, but the developers, willingly or unwillingly disabled them?

I suggest you check out the case versus Verizon on them knowingly restricting the use of Bluetooth features on their phones. This same argument could potentially be used to justify a case against Nokia in knowingly not developing/enabling certain features because they don't want customers to have access to them for whatever reason. A strong argument is your comment in the bug report about exactly WHY these drivers/features aren't enabled straight out of the box.

Verizon learned one lesson; don't short-change your customers. They don't like restrictions.

I suggest you persuade your superiors that if they don't want legal trouble, they start explaining and they better damn well have a good explanation of why these hardware features aren't enabled. Nokia's name is all over the kernel drivers for the framebuffer, so we know you have the IDE, who why no 3D? Your excuse that the resolution doesn't work is invalid, as has been pointed out that the Epson LCD chip can take care of the upscaling with little noticeable visual quality loss. In fact, it can actually be more efficient than the built-in LCD driver because it doesn't have to render resolutions as large as normal screens.

So. Explain. Explain exactly why the DSP hasn't been developed for when promised; explain why the PowerVR driver hasn't been developed for when you obviously pay the license for in the Symbian implementation of the drivers, and explain a few more shortcomings.

I'm sick of having to kiss *** around here. I want answers. Real ones. No speculation, no fake ones we can disprove in about 5 minutes, and no manpower excuses, as your OSS platform developemnt program is HUGE as it develops for at leat four completely different platforms. I find it hard to believe they dont't collaborate to develop software, as that just wouldn't make sense.

I'm sure generalantilles will have something to say in defense, as he always does, but I want to hear it from "the horse's mouth," not some outsider who blindly defends all decisions the Maemo dev team makes.

I'm hell-bent on getting you guys to open up and if it takes daily calls to +1-888-665-4228 to ask why this stuff hasn't been developed for; so be it. I do it to HTC and they caved. Nokia has even less excuse as they already have software developed for other software platforms for this stuff and we are all wondering what the hell is going on.

Well, you're obviously not particularly interested in reason or facts here, just emotion and false assumptions, so I'll just ask you two questions:

Where, by Nokia, were you promised these things?
and
Where are these "excuses", from Nokia, that you've found?

They included the hardware in the device, did they not? That implies that they planned on using them, otherwise they would have gone with a cheaper solution.

Excuses? Check the bugtracker.

It's like putting eight cylinders in a car, but only using six. They sell you all eight, but don't enable two because...well....they can't tell you.

I want my eight cylinders.

Enought of an excuse for "false" pretenses?

But my point was that the 770 users were promised native ogg support and yet, three years later, there no official support to be found. The hardware is there, they have purchased the use of the IP, so.....what's the hold-up? this is prosecutable in court in the US under the term "False Advertising" and this is clearly a case where Nokia would lose.

Do your research, the OMAP2420 is an SoC, you can't get it without the PowerVR.

Why did they choose the OMAP 2420? Why no something cheaper without an integrated GPU? Hmm?

No. If you read the quote you have put in your own post, I'm suggesting that troublemakers like you could better try to contribute to wiki pages like this one.

As for the rest, if you think you have a better knowledge than Nokia on business dynamics and legal rules, then I don't think I have any answer to your questions.

Have you ever heard the phrase "The squeaky wheel gets the oil?"

That's What I'm suggesting. Enough genuine and documented demand for something will eventually make its way to the people responsible for decision making.

I hate to bring up Sprint up again, but I doubt they want to have to go through another debacle like they did with the HTC touch and the lack of directdraw and d3d drivers. I have a relative who does QA for devices before theyhit the market and I have already made him aware of the issue. Not to be an ******* about it, but Nokia is really the ones being unforthcoming about the whole thing. The hardware is there. The IP is licensed. You guys practically developed the FB kernel driver for the OMAP 2420, yet didn't include OGL anything. I've made this person aware of the issues.

It's not that I want to make trouble for Nokia, it's that I want all features and potential of the device realized. It can be a brilliant and revolutionary device, yet, for whatever reason, Nokia chooses to hinder it. I don't appreciate that attitude or approach and quite frankly, I think it is irresponsible and unethical of a corporation to consciously make a decision to remove or just plain not implement features into a product to potentially force users into an upgrade once a new device is released.

I don't care what the limitations are. The LEAST Nokia could do is to release binary blobs. That way they don't violate whatever, if any IP NDA they have and appease the community to at least have the ability to tinker with features instead of withholding all information and code and leaving us out in the cold.

I'm pretty adamant about the whole issue, as I think it is plainly the completely wrong approach to it on Nokia's side, so I'll keep nagging for cooperation.

http://wiki.maemo.org/Talk:Drivers_j...iolation_issue