2 ms·
Yeah, it technically was there, but it had proprietary components and Nokia had a baggage of softbware project management being super inefficient because of the
by Permik 2mo ago
Yeah, it technically was there, but it had proprietary components and Nokia had a baggage of softbware project management being super inefficient because of their earlier roots of how they developed software in their past. Not that I have personal experience of it, but a colleague of mine had first hand experience of it.
Nokia had a "means to an end" type of perspective to software, it was all made to be basically disposable and they didn't have great "steward of the platform" type of effort.
Also, if we take a gander at the timelines, unfortunately QT and Maemo were happening in parallel, and of course Maemo was based on GTK. (But QT was still a Nokia proprietary tech back then.) Right hand not knowing what the left hand was doing etc.
Not that any of this means anything, just felt that this was all relevant.
- jauntywundrkind 2mo agoAnd in spite of Nokia being fundamentally in the dark, not really helping: it was a wildly successful scene. People were rabidly excited and doing incredible things with their devices, in cross-modal between phone/laptop/desktop ways. The core of technology had great interoperation points. It's weird because my whole point is that the freedesktop mentality means no one company ever is that important to the device. And your point is that Nokia was terrible at Maemo. Yes but? Yes but: it didn't really matter. The ecosystem was incredible, intense, vibrant. If you leave the door open, people will do amazing things with your platform. And even if the company burns the platform, burns the ships, a lot of people will still probably spent a decade being vociferously dedicated to the platform. https://maemo-freak.com/community/ https://maemo-freak.com/community/