Active Topics
-
Sailfish OS for the Motorola Moto G7 Power (XT1955-5) - (ocean) (3)
to SailfishOS by edp17 - 2 hrs, 11 mins ago -
The N900 is now 15 years old! (6)
to Nokia N900 by Macros - 1 day, 6 hrs ago -
F(x)tec Pro1x (QWERTY) for sale (0)
to Buy & Sell by aln00000 - 1 day, 18 hrs ago -
n770 youtube video (0)
to General by nmdv - 5 days, 18 hrs ago - more...
|
2015-10-29
, 21:39
|
|
Posts: 2,076 |
Thanked: 3,268 times |
Joined on Feb 2011
|
#22
|
Originally Posted by zeebra
Do not mistake contractual obligations for the 'will of a company'. Neither Nokia, nor MS wants to keep us around, MS just has to. On the other hand they are trying to be more like Google from the old days, open source happy and community building happy (until they can F that all and concentrate on closed source gapps once everybody believed they are kewl). Which doesn't exactly stop anyone from taking advantage of their open source PR happiness. Hey company X, you state you are for FOSS and even throw a party for debian, why not give us sources. Get a journalist or two on that and maybe we can see results (but apathy and disbelief trumps everything anyway, nevermind)
Ok, most resources anyways.. and not only for Nokia N900.
I am just basing it on all te dead links about Nokia N900 in search engines and so which leads to horrible Lumia pages and the fact that all firmware and such was removed, followed by making maps unusable (Nokia) which was a devestating blow at the time.
Luckily we are blessed to have a community area like this where most resources are available
Was it Nokia or Microsoft who closed the community to force the now indepeence of this place?
| The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to szopin For This Useful Post: | ||
|
|
2015-10-30
, 09:12
|
|
Posts: 1,808 |
Thanked: 4,272 times |
Joined on Feb 2011
@ Germany
|
#23
|
Originally Posted by szopin
The problem is that one common reason for keeping software closed is because you don't even own the copyright. Obvious example is the flashplayer for Maemo. Nokia was allowed to distribute it, but could not single-handedly decide to open source it.
Do not mistake contractual obligations for the 'will of a company'. Neither Nokia, nor MS wants to keep us around, MS just has to. On the other hand they are trying to be more like Google from the old days, open source happy and community building happy (until they can F that all and concentrate on closed source gapps once everybody believed they are kewl). Which doesn't exactly stop anyone from taking advantage of their open source PR happiness. Hey company X, you state you are for FOSS and even throw a party for debian, why not give us sources. Get a journalist or two on that and maybe we can see results (but apathy and disbelief trumps everything anyway, nevermind)
If Microsoft were to release the source code of whatever closed bits Maemo has, they would need to ask every single one of the copyright holders for permission (and this is assuming the source code is even available, either to Microsoft or to the original developers).
In short: it ain't gonna happen. Full stop.
For all I care the future, even for the N[eo]900, is either Mer/Nemo or some debian adaptation. We're lucky that the N900 sort-of-works with upstream kernel (though still a lot needs to be done). This puts us in a very very special situation compared to basically every other handset being sold.
| The Following 10 Users Say Thank You to reinob For This Useful Post: | ||
|
|
2015-10-30
, 14:47
|
|
Guest |
Posts: n/a |
Thanked: 0 times |
Joined on
|
#24
|
Originally Posted by reinob
In the aforesaid example, Adobe Flash isn't really a necessary/essential part of the OS and since it's no longer in production for any mobile device it just doesn't hit with a priority.
The problem is that one common reason for keeping software closed is because you don't even own the copyright. Obvious example is the flashplayer for Maemo. Nokia was allowed to distribute it, but could not single-handedly decide to open source it.
Why not use the Nokia N900 BME as an example instead? Nokia, thus Microsoft owns the code, it was never released; just reversed-engineered.
I think that's piss poor for a so-called "open" phone that was touted to be more open than Android. And it wasn't released because of supposedly being written so badly.... if it were open, then it could have been "righted". If Microsoft releases it, they might inherit a potential time waster for something that they'd rather just hopefully disappear.
Or they could release it, as-is, without condition or guarantee and I think that would perhaps be best.
But as it stands, and do not get me wrong... I'm a Maemo fan; this has dented my faith in whatever comes out as "open" in the near future due to lack of support once it gets out of the spotlight. I do not consider reverse-engineering a great option whenever this kind of situation arises.
So with that said... I agree. Microsoft... release the damn files. We don't even want a guarantee. Just access.
Realistically, we know it will not happen.
| The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to For This Useful Post: | ||
 |
|
2015-10-30
, 16:09
|
|
Posts: 634 |
Thanked: 3,266 times |
Joined on May 2010
@ Colombia
|
#25
|
I don't think Maemo was ever touted to be more free/open source than Android, at least not by Nokia. Sure, there are plenty of fan boys on this forum that have said that. For me comparing the openness of the two is apples and oranges.
Right now, Android is ahead in this area, thanks in no small part to the Replicant project. Replicant can however only run on a small number of devices. Android has always had AOSP but it's not possible to build the complete Android environment from that.
With Maemo, we're still waiting on the excellent work from the Fremantle Porting Task Force. Progress is slow but I think they will get there eventually, probably without all of the features and services that Maemo 5 originally shipped with.
Maemo for me, has never been completely about being open source, otherwise I'd probably be using a Replicant device. The draw towards Maemo is more about interoperability with existing Linux OSs: glibc, X11, the ease of porting existing software, etc. In this sense of the word, it's way more open than Android.
Last edited by wicket; 2015-10-30 at 21:37.
Right now, Android is ahead in this area, thanks in no small part to the Replicant project. Replicant can however only run on a small number of devices. Android has always had AOSP but it's not possible to build the complete Android environment from that.
With Maemo, we're still waiting on the excellent work from the Fremantle Porting Task Force. Progress is slow but I think they will get there eventually, probably without all of the features and services that Maemo 5 originally shipped with.
Maemo for me, has never been completely about being open source, otherwise I'd probably be using a Replicant device. The draw towards Maemo is more about interoperability with existing Linux OSs: glibc, X11, the ease of porting existing software, etc. In this sense of the word, it's way more open than Android.
__________________
DebiaN900 - Native Debian on the N900. Deprecated in favour of Maemo Leste.
Maemo Leste for N950 and N9 (currently broken).
Devuan for N950 and N9.
Mobile devices with mainline Linux support - Help needed with documentation.
"Those who do not understand Unix are condemned to reinvent it, poorly." - Henry Spencer
Maemo Leste for N950 and N9 (currently broken).
Devuan for N950 and N9.
Mobile devices with mainline Linux support - Help needed with documentation.
"Those who do not understand Unix are condemned to reinvent it, poorly." - Henry Spencer
Last edited by wicket; 2015-10-30 at 21:37.
|
|
2015-10-30
, 21:38
|
|
Guest |
Posts: n/a |
Thanked: 0 times |
Joined on
|
#26
|
Originally Posted by wicket
Search back... it was touted here as being more open than Android or some other ********.
I don't think Maemo was ever touted to be more free/open source than Android, at least not by Nokia.
Sure, there are plenty of fan boys on this forum that have said that. For me comparing the openness of the two is apples and oranges.
Microsoft, via Stephen Elop, ended that quickly. But I'd rather state that the Nokia board, the folks that hired Elop, that allowed each and every Maemo device to inherit only one iteration of the Maemo OS for the most part (I know that's not 100% true including Hacker Editions and the N800/N810, but **** semantics for the moment) and in the end I just don't think the claims were justified then nor are they echoed as much now.
Simply put, it was ******** then, it's ******** now.
With Maemo, we're still waiting on the excellent work from the Fremantle Porting Task Force. Progress is slow but I think they will get there eventually, probably without all of the features and services that Maemo 5 originally shipped with.
Maemo for me, has never been completely about being open source...
The draw towards Maemo is more about interoperability with existing Linux OSs: glibc, X11, the ease porting software, etc. In this sense of the word, it's way more open than Android.
Thanks for posting and giving me an alternate take. It's appreciated.
| The Following 13 Users Say Thank You to For This Useful Post: | ||
 |
|
2015-11-29
, 17:29
|
|
Posts: 290 |
Thanked: 738 times |
Joined on Mar 2008
@ .pl
|
#27
|
@gerbick: as for 'completely unsupported phone' development (cssu and apps) and users (forums) are quite active. as for 'release the files': citing doc/joerg: it's better to stay under m$ radar
__________________
oscp - media player with network remote and almost no dependencies (pc/lin/win/maemo(n8x0/n900), x86/x64/armel/armhf) - http://talk.maemo.org/showthread.php?t=94590 - if you like it, tell others.
contact with me: #osc or #maemo on freenode/ircnet or /query KotCzarny
oscp - media player with network remote and almost no dependencies (pc/lin/win/maemo(n8x0/n900), x86/x64/armel/armhf) - http://talk.maemo.org/showthread.php?t=94590 - if you like it, tell others.
contact with me: #osc or #maemo on freenode/ircnet or /query KotCzarny
| The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to KotCzarny For This Useful Post: | ||
|
|
2016-08-15
, 16:29
|
|
Posts: 1 |
Thanked: 4 times |
Joined on Aug 2016
|
#28
|
Originally Posted by szopin
Does maemo program runs in windows 10 now? Seems have issues
MS now craves good publicity, they organize things like Debian 8 release celebration (this cost them at least 50k), release first program that works straight away on linux ('code' for visual studio), sharp was open sourced, what a great time for maemo, because MS bought maemo from nokia. Open sourcing it costs them 0, and we can bring tons of good publicity just by cheering. Slashdot, reddit, you name it, will write about MS doing what nokia never could, so much more open they would be. Next announcement maemo programs run natively on windows 10
 |
|
2016-08-15
, 18:19
|
|
Posts: 6,447 |
Thanked: 20,981 times |
Joined on Sep 2012
@ UK
|
#29
|
Who does not have issues with Windows 10?
__________________
Русский военный корабль, иди нахуй!
Русский военный корабль, иди нахуй!
| The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to pichlo For This Useful Post: | ||
|
|
2016-08-15
, 18:35
|
|
Community Council |
Posts: 4,920 |
Thanked: 12,867 times |
Joined on May 2012
@ Southerrn Finland
|
#30
|
Originally Posted by pichlo
I have no issues with any windoze version whatsoever..
Who does not have issues with Windows 10?
I am just basing it on all te dead links about Nokia N900 in search engines and so which leads to horrible Lumia pages and the fact that all firmware and such was removed, followed by making maps unusable (Nokia) which was a devestating blow at the time.
Luckily we are blessed to have a community area like this where most resources are available
Was it Nokia or Microsoft who closed the community to force the now indepeence of this place?