Active Topics
-
Longtime users: What device(s) are you using today? (53)
to General by sicelo - 2 hrs, 54 mins ago -
Registering (1)
to General by Halftux - 2 days, 4 hrs ago -
Applications Wishlist (55)
to Maemo 7 / Leste by sixwheeledbeast - 3 days, 7 hrs ago -
Error after installing Leste on sdcard (2)
to Maemo 7 / Leste by insanelysexy - 5 days, 7 hrs ago -
Using LM2596 DC-DC for N900 (7)
to General by insanelysexy - 6 days, 23 hrs ago - more...
| The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to danramos For This Useful Post: | ||
|
2009-06-25
, 00:07
|
|
Posts: 3,319 |
Thanked: 5,610 times |
Joined on Aug 2008
@ Finland
|
#23
|
But even the ARM feels a bit out-of-place. I mean, while it IS a close relative, AFAIK Snapdragon isn't exactly a twin brother of the OMAP3s. I wouldn't mint a Maemo Snapdragon sofabook, but still...
|
|
2009-06-25
, 09:45
|
|
Posts: 341 |
Thanked: 64 times |
Joined on May 2009
|
#24
|
Originally Posted by REMFwhoopitydo
just to clarify; i wasn't worried that maemo would die, just that its future would be x86 which would result in the Maemo5/Omap3 generation hardware being unattractive to develop for due to its limited product life.
arguably the maemo community has benefited from a (mostly) common platform over three generations of hardware which has kept developers interested and consumers happy with new software.
now we have maemo 5 along with the Omap3 platform, promising a huge increase in performance and an OS that can take advantage of it......................... so we get to the release of the n900 sometime later this year.
how many developers are going to be really interested in long-term development for this platform if they know that by the end of 2010 nokia and intel will be planning the release of x86 based internet devices.
on this schedule there will be no follow on Omap3/4 based device running Harmattan. Harmattan will be running on x86 which makes it unlikely that n900/n910 owners will get the OS upgrade they might expect going on past practice.
maybe this explains why the n900 is going to be a smart-phone rather than an internet-tablet, because the target audience wants a device not a platform, i.e mobile phone users.
Last edited by REMFwhoopitydo; 2009-06-25 at 10:52.
 |
|
2009-06-25
, 10:18
|
|
Posts: 3,105 |
Thanked: 11,088 times |
Joined on Jul 2007
@ Mountain View (CA, USA)
|
#25
|
Why these ARM/x86 worries? Did you worry about Debian or Ubuntu supporting x86 when they opened their ARM architectures? Technically speaking you have a hardware adaptation layer and all the rest above can stay the same.
 |
|
2009-06-25
, 10:28
|
|
Posts: 3,790 |
Thanked: 5,718 times |
Joined on Mar 2006
@ Vienna, Austria
|
#26
|
Originally Posted by REMFwhoopitydo
Would it? A change from Maemo 5 on OMAP3 to a future version of Maemo on an Intel-based hardware needn't necessarily require more changes than, say, the transition from Diablo to Fremantle. Still we see developers happily adapting their applications.
just to clarify; i wasn't worried that maemo would die, just that its future would be x86 which would result in the Maemo5/Omap3 generation hardware unattractive to develop for due to its limited product life.
Depending on how the transition is done, it could even be easier than in the current Diablo/Fremantle situation. (Which is difficult because Fremantle introduces quite a few new concepts.)
Imagine Nokia puts together a version of Maemo that runs on Intel hardware. They would change the kernel, adapt hardware-specific bits and pieces, but leave everything on top of that unchanged (user interface, higher level APIs). Chances are that a lot of applications wouldn't need to be changed at all and will run on "old" OMAP3 and new Intel hardware.
What's makes developers' lives difficult is API changes. They will come anyway with new Maemo versions, regardless of the hardware architecture. Anybody developing for Maemo5 now or in the future has to know that their code will become incompatible with future devices sooner or later.
|
|
2009-06-25
, 10:53
|
|
Posts: 341 |
Thanked: 64 times |
Joined on May 2009
|
#27
|
fair enough, thanks for the info.
|
|
2009-06-25
, 11:13
|
|
Posts: 3,319 |
Thanked: 5,610 times |
Joined on Aug 2008
@ Finland
|
#28
|
Originally Posted by qgil
At a first glance, maybe, but not so sure on a second thought. The technical difference between ARM/x86 from a (linux) developer standpoint is minor. However, the difference in a *conceptual* sense (think use-case) is very-very different. You will not need the same interaction, performance, boot, power saving considerations for *applications* for the more desktop-ish x86 as you would for an ARM processor.
Why these ARM/x86 worries? Did you worry about Debian or Ubuntu supporting x86 when they opened their ARM architectures? Technically speaking you have a hardware adaptation layer and all the rest above can stay the same.
Furthermore, it's not the same if you add ARM to an existing x86 as a *desktop* platform (=the issue is whether it has enough processing power) or if you add x86 to an existing ARM *mobile* platform (=the issue is what do you do with application that require a low power always-on always-connected functionality). Debian and Ubuntu are thus the wrong examples (with the mini-exception of Ubuntu remix) as they are in the first group. Maemo, if it ever adopted x86 (as non development) would fall into the second group.
My fear of such a trasition is, that, at this point (considering the outside view of the advancement pace of Fremantle) Nokia would be spread ever thinner supporting a wider range of hardware and platform use-cases and that could mean even more complexity (=bugs) and delays.
|
|
2009-06-25
, 11:47
|
|
Posts: 3,790 |
Thanked: 5,718 times |
Joined on Mar 2006
@ Vienna, Austria
|
#29
|
Originally Posted by attila77
As I read it, we're not talking about any current x86 platform. The plan is to use (in whatever product) a future design by Intel that doesn't even exist yet (except in presentations). It's almost impossible therefore to make statements about performance, power saving etc.... and I'd not call it "desktopish".
However, the difference in a *conceptual* sense (think use-case) is very-very different. You will not need the same interaction, performance, boot, power saving considerations for *applications* for the more desktop-ish x86 as you would for an ARM processor.
|
|
2009-06-25
, 12:29
|
|
Posts: 3,319 |
Thanked: 5,610 times |
Joined on Aug 2008
@ Finland
|
#30
|
Originally Posted by benny1967
Ahh, the smell of fresh speculation in the morning. Always fun, these 'announcing a possible future announcement' things
As I read it, we're not talking about any current x86 platform. The plan is to use (in whatever product) a future design by Intel that doesn't even exist yet (except in presentations). It's almost impossible therefore to make statements about performance, power saving etc.... and I'd not call it "desktopish".
 |
| Tags |
| intel, maemo, nokia, partnership, strategic |
«
Previous Thread
|
Next Thread
»
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 20:33.
I, for one, would certainly look forward to an honest-to-goodness open-source OS optimized to run on x86 hardware that I can fit in my pocket.