Active Topics
-
The N900 is now 15 years old! (9)
to Nokia N900 by Arno_11 - 20 hrs, 1 min ago -
Sailfish OS for the Motorola Moto G7 Power (XT1955-5) - (ocean) (4)
to SailfishOS by Maemish - 6 days, 8 hrs ago - more...
 |
c:drive |
2010-08-11
, 05:03
|
|
Posts: 62 |
Thanked: 20 times |
Joined on Jun 2010
@ SSD
|
#51
|
maybe exporting to space(for Predator or aliens perhaps)? our earth is too crowded for another NewOS.
__________________
Nokia do something
Nokia do something
 |
|
2010-08-11
, 05:18
|
|
Posts: 337 |
Thanked: 283 times |
Joined on Nov 2009
@ NYC
|
#52
|
Originally Posted by nseika
I understand perfectly well your premises. Well, if the need is professional, then the investment should be made by the company. Which explains the ubiquity of Windows. I only tolerate Windows for my work needs because it came practically for free with my new laptop, and 7 turned out pretty good. All software that I use comes form the Linux world, and I love it. The second I find anything annoying about Windows, it's gone...
Problem is, there’s also the now-and-here requirement.
Take example, I want to buy PC and want to use Photoshop, but I don’t want to use Windows. Yes, there’s Gimp and other alternative, but assume nobody write the software yet. Does that means I had to bear for years waiting for someone to think it worth the trouble writing that image editor. Imagine if the need is professional.
For now, the new platform need to have the value too. They can’t just play underdog, or give promise. Well, Google can, but they have big name and good record on delivering recently so they’re a better bet. If Nokia and Intel want to give MeeGo a better traction, they better get try to get more (vocal and influential) geek credit than stockholder credit.
PS: since one of the value is about applications, what if they conduct a survey to see which applications users needed from other platform, then aggresively help those software authors to port their code (rather than merely asking them, which they might not bother the unfeasible touble) and help maintaining it.
Yes, that will be enormous cost to gamble.
__________________
In anticipation of TMO's obsolescence, and hoping to meet you all again: elsewhere on the interwebs, I am Dr Doppio.
In anticipation of TMO's obsolescence, and hoping to meet you all again: elsewhere on the interwebs, I am Dr Doppio.
|
|
2010-08-11
, 05:19
|
|
Posts: 30 |
Thanked: 4 times |
Joined on Mar 2010
@ Jakarta, Indonesia
|
#53
|
My interest is actually, 1st party developers for web services I already used on desktop and want to bring to mobile. Those, I think, is the developers driven by “carrot objectives”.
But that’s just me.
There’s words back then when Linux is still used to be pitted against Windows as the underdog champion. Windows users wait for applications they need, Linux users write applications they need.
As great as it sounds, average peoples can’t and don’t want to write software, they want it ready.
Well… something to get credit besides the developer. Better company image (suggested this before the apps topic).
Combining the voices in the community council topic as well as topic about Froyo update to the Milestone in XDA Devs… they should open about everything.
What they’re doing, when it’s planned to be finished. If any suggestion is in review and a date when it will be answered (and quick). A straight to the point yes/no answer, not being ambiguous. Keep contact, make the audience know that their demand reached open ears in the higher ups and is answered with action (or rejected clearly without trying to be nice so we can go on) instead of marketing peoples trying to fix technical trouble with sweet words.
Will MeeGo have that ? And have it published more koudly in places where average consumer can see and understand what it means ?
Sopwith: hasn’t thought that deep yet
As long as they don’t acquire the software company instead.
Last edited by nseika; 2010-08-11 at 05:25.
But that’s just me.
There’s words back then when Linux is still used to be pitted against Windows as the underdog champion. Windows users wait for applications they need, Linux users write applications they need.
As great as it sounds, average peoples can’t and don’t want to write software, they want it ready.
Well… something to get credit besides the developer. Better company image (suggested this before the apps topic).
Combining the voices in the community council topic as well as topic about Froyo update to the Milestone in XDA Devs… they should open about everything.
What they’re doing, when it’s planned to be finished. If any suggestion is in review and a date when it will be answered (and quick). A straight to the point yes/no answer, not being ambiguous. Keep contact, make the audience know that their demand reached open ears in the higher ups and is answered with action (or rejected clearly without trying to be nice so we can go on) instead of marketing peoples trying to fix technical trouble with sweet words.
Will MeeGo have that ? And have it published more koudly in places where average consumer can see and understand what it means ?
Sopwith: hasn’t thought that deep yet
As long as they don’t acquire the software company instead.
Last edited by nseika; 2010-08-11 at 05:25.
|
|
2010-08-11
, 05:20
|
|
Posts: 117 |
Thanked: 16 times |
Joined on Jun 2010
@ San Diego
|
#54
|
Originally Posted by railroadmaster
Yes, I agree. But that's the thing... they need to change that.
Knowing Nokia's track record it will be worse than HTC, Motorola, or Samsung.
|
|
2010-08-11
, 06:22
|
|
Posts: 81 |
Thanked: 45 times |
Joined on Dec 2009
|
#55
|
[QUOTE=attila77;780916]People will not develop for MeeGo - they will develop for Qt. ...
I have seen this argument several times, but I still don't get it technically. If you write for Qt for the desktop, you may e.g. make clever use of the third mouse button. You may make interesting applications based on hovering. You may save and load your data in application specific places. You can popup lots of sub windows (e.g. like gimp does). You can make heavy use of read/write cycles to the hard disk. And I'm sure lots of other decisions that work just fine on the desktop, but don't scale to a mobile device with its different constraints. How does Qt take care of that? E.g. an Android application is supposed to automatically store its entire state on close. How does Qt/MeeGo do that, or doesn't it? Is it up to the application programmer to decide whether he wants to store the state, or popup a window asking whether to save the data?
I have seen this argument several times, but I still don't get it technically. If you write for Qt for the desktop, you may e.g. make clever use of the third mouse button. You may make interesting applications based on hovering. You may save and load your data in application specific places. You can popup lots of sub windows (e.g. like gimp does). You can make heavy use of read/write cycles to the hard disk. And I'm sure lots of other decisions that work just fine on the desktop, but don't scale to a mobile device with its different constraints. How does Qt take care of that? E.g. an Android application is supposed to automatically store its entire state on close. How does Qt/MeeGo do that, or doesn't it? Is it up to the application programmer to decide whether he wants to store the state, or popup a window asking whether to save the data?
|
|
2010-08-11
, 06:58
|
|
Posts: 352 |
Thanked: 231 times |
Joined on Jul 2008
@ Vancouver
|
#56
|
don't forget the basics in making a successful mobile OS, a good PIM is with search capability, 2 fundamentals the n900 has missed.
__________________
the bugs below are important to the overall success of the n900 so please vote.
https://bugs.maemo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=6892
https://bugs.maemo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8343
the bugs below are important to the overall success of the n900 so please vote.
https://bugs.maemo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=6892
https://bugs.maemo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8343
|
|
2010-08-11
, 14:31
|
|
Posts: 3,428 |
Thanked: 2,856 times |
Joined on Jul 2008
|
#57
|
Originally Posted by dov
Yes, it's up to the developer to decide how their app works.. I don't see a problem with that?
I have seen this argument several times, but I still don't get it technically. If you write for Qt for the desktop, you may e.g. make clever use of the third mouse button. You may make interesting applications based on hovering. You may save and load your data in application specific places. You can popup lots of sub windows (e.g. like gimp does). You can make heavy use of read/write cycles to the hard disk. And I'm sure lots of other decisions that work just fine on the desktop, but don't scale to a mobile device with its different constraints. How does Qt take care of that? E.g. an Android application is supposed to automatically store its entire state on close. How does Qt/MeeGo do that, or doesn't it? Is it up to the application programmer to decide whether he wants to store the state, or popup a window asking whether to save the data?
If a Developer designs something with Desktop, AND Mobile devices as their target.. then as they are designing it they will avoid such things as the third mouse button. If the developer designs it for Desktops only then they might add things that would be non-optimal for mobile devices.
This is not a bad thing.. Developers decide for themselves how their app works. Besides, it's not like most desktop UI's are very efficient on small touchscreens. So when a Developer designs their application they take all this into account.
As far as saving state, all MeeGo is, is Linux. There is no "saving state" like in android, Maemo doesn't have it, so what's the question? If a Dev wants their app to save state, they make it, otherwise they make it work like every other application for Linux and Windows. Android is a separate beast because it thinks for you. It decides which apps you want running when and it decides which apps gets backgrounded/sleeped/or saved out. So therefore the applications on Android have to maintain a state or people will soon realize how annoying it is to go to an app you were just using only to find out it restarted itself.
On Maemo/MeeGo, you have to manually close the application, if you don't it'll sit there running constantly until you do - therefore no need for "save states".
Again, the power here resides with the Developer to decide their target audience, design their application accordingly, and code it.
| The Following User Says Thank You to fatalsaint For This Useful Post: | ||
|
|
2010-08-12
, 01:22
|
|
Posts: 1,082 |
Thanked: 1,235 times |
Joined on Apr 2010
|
#58
|
Ouch MeeGo doesn't seem to have a lot going for it.
- Failed to name why MeeGo is more than just another Linux based mobile platform and why developers should create applications for MeeGo. No qt doesn't change the fact that MeeGo is immature.
- Failed to name a killer feature for people who aren't Linux nerds.
- Failed to name why OEMS should adopt such an immature platform. Neither Nokia or Intel is neutral.
|
|
2010-08-12
, 03:57
|
|
Posts: 1,082 |
Thanked: 1,235 times |
Joined on Apr 2010
|
#59
|
Originally Posted by Russianhaxor
They probably won't change that.
Yes, I agree. But that's the thing... they need to change that.
|
|
2010-08-12
, 09:23
|
|
Posts: 81 |
Thanked: 45 times |
Joined on Dec 2009
|
#60
|
Originally Posted by fatalsaint
Ok, thanks for explaining. This dismisses the notion that you can take any Qt program and just recompile it and run it under MeeGo. I.e. there has to be an active concern for the developer to make sure it is cross platform.
Yes, it's up to the developer to decide how their app works.. I don't see a problem with that?
:
I can see the advantages and disadvantages with this approach. What's nice about it is all the freedom it leaves the developer. On the other hand applications will have less infrastructure in common, which means that they may behave differently, as well as each application needs to reinvent the wheel.
It is interesting to note the difference in a draconian approach that Apple takes for the ipad/iphone vs the "on our Windows 7 tablet you can run any of 3 million windows application" approach of Microsoft. I think that users prefer the Apple approach, as it will ensure that the user interface has been tested and works for the tablet platform.
But perhaps the same advantage can be achieved for MeeGo by some kind of voluntary assertion. E.g. an icon indicating that "this application has been tested to adher to the MeeGo style guide version 3.5.2".
| The Following User Says Thank You to dov For This Useful Post: | ||