Interesting piece from Mobile News.

This sounds like a real dumb part on Nokia and also now makes the chance of getting a subsidised T-Mobile N900 a very slim option. Way to go Nokia get our hopes up in the US and the crush it at the same time.

I find it curious that Nokia is claiming that the menu's "can't" be customized...when the whole point of Maemo is its near-infinite extensibility and malleability. Sounds like a case of "don't want to water down our flagship with your network-specific crapware" than "can't be done" to me.

maybe "customizing" in this context means:

putting items there that the user cannot remove.

... or deleting items that corporation do not like: voip, bluetooth obex maybe.

Nope, just our money.

Does this mean the Gen 5 will be carrier crippled? If so, then I'm more then happy to get Gen 4 (N900).

It's interesting how they have to broadcast this fact now. I guess all carrier negotiations have ceased already and they're hoping to rally the interwebs to do some word of mouth marketing with "open platform vs carrier cartels" mantra of some sort.

At least in this respect Nokia has come out to be honest on this. Its not even so much that they cannot do it, but its pretty much against their model of use for Linux/Maemo to have the kinds of breakages that carriers usually encourage.

That being said, it would sound as if the context of the conversation was in respect to the N900 being added directly to a carrier deck (where about 80% of mobiles tend to be seen and sold to users). That would be a reason to address this, and a reason still that Nokia continues to make Symbian devices look more attractive to carriers (which they are doing).
--

The other side of this issue has to put some kind of onus on governments, carriers, and wireless associations. If carrier technology is so dependent on specialized IP that firmware needs to always be modified, what kind of real compeition can take place on the side of technology and processes?

Not saying that its not a competitive advantage to have a better codec or radio-language than someone else running a similar network. But it would seem quite counterproductive to the entire industry to prevent the kinds of innovation that would endear people to more willingly spend money on top of and through their networks.

EDIT: What more does it say for carriers who are reporting profits, but don't have in place the open source think/do-tanks that are able to take devices like the N900 and actively support them. That again speaks to some kind of inepitude that really should be talked about a bit more.

To me, something really wrong with that kind of level of politics.
---

The interesting part will be if there is anything in the way of active blocking or throttling of the N900 on some networks once users go to carriers to purchase data plans only, and then utilize VoIP services heavily. Some nations will certainly have networks who are up and arms about this, and then bend laws or terms of services accordingly. But then, you will have a few networks/carriers who will welcome this - as an excuse to beef things up, or move to wider-service technologies.

The N900 in this wise can be a very disruptive device.

EDIT: Does anyone here have the ability to play a part in that disruptive role?

or gen 2/3. remember why people said they wanted a tablet, not a phone?