5 ms·

The N95 was hugely popular. But yes, programming for Symbian was quite a steep learning curve. 'Train wreck' might be a bit extreme though, there was method be

The N95 was hugely popular. But yes, programming for Symbian was quite a steep learning curve. 'Train wreck' might be a bit extreme though, there was method behind the madness.

fidotron 3y ago
The N95 is the go to example of why Nokia went wrong. The chip in it could have supported an iOS type operating system, or even “just” a superficial take on the user interface, but they didn’t even want to do anti aliased font rendering, let alone leverage the 3D acceleration it had properly. Some games on it ran pretty well though. Basically a total failure of vision regarding how to make the most of the hardware for the benefit of the user.
- rstuart4133 3y ago
  I'm with the other poster. The N95 was a wonderful phone, with the emphasis being on the word "phone". It also could so ssh, and was a web browser of sorts and other things, but it was a phone first with excellent battery life. Even so it was better at most things that early Android, and possibly the very early iPhones. But that was never going to last. Once CPU's developed sufficient horsepower and there was enough RAM, the fully fledged OS's underneath Android and iPhone meant they could easily transition to what are now. I doubt Symbian ever could have done that.
- pavlov 3y ago
  The N95 had a traditional phone keypad and no touchscreen. There’s not really very much you can do with a 3D accelerated GUI under those constraints. For example, they had a WebKit browser years before Apple, but the navigation was stuck with arrow keys because of Nokia hardware. I don’t disagree with you, but the problem here wasn’t just the software not taking full advantage of the hardware. It was a more fundamental disconnect between hardware and software design. At Nokia, there was practically no innovation where these two were advanced together. Everything was incremental on one side or the other.

The N95 was hugely popular. But yes, programming for Symbian was quite a steep learning curve. 'Train wreck' might be a bit extreme though, there was method behind the madness.

fidotron 3y ago

The N95 is the go to example of why Nokia went wrong. The chip in it could have supported an iOS type operating system, or even “just” a superficial take on the user interface, but they didn’t even want to do anti aliased font rendering, let alone leverage the 3D acceleration it had properly. Some games on it ran pretty well though. Basically a total failure of vision regarding how to make the most of the hardware for the benefit of the user.

rstuart4133 3y ago
I'm with the other poster. The N95 was a wonderful phone, with the emphasis being on the word "phone". It also could so ssh, and was a web browser of sorts and other things, but it was a phone first with excellent battery life. Even so it was better at most things that early Android, and possibly the very early iPhones. But that was never going to last. Once CPU's developed sufficient horsepower and there was enough RAM, the fully fledged OS's underneath Android and iPhone meant they could easily transition to what are now. I doubt Symbian ever could have done that.
pavlov 3y ago
The N95 had a traditional phone keypad and no touchscreen. There’s not really very much you can do with a 3D accelerated GUI under those constraints. For example, they had a WebKit browser years before Apple, but the navigation was stuck with arrow keys because of Nokia hardware. I don’t disagree with you, but the problem here wasn’t just the software not taking full advantage of the hardware. It was a more fundamental disconnect between hardware and software design. At Nokia, there was practically no innovation where these two were advanced together. Everything was incremental on one side or the other.