Let's consider-- no matter what we're going to be in this mixed, quasi-open mode even with MeeGo (hopefully to a lesser extent)... so what we need is an "official community support" sort of description. Some way to clearly communicate to users that yes, the community is doing the heavy lifting but there's a strong support system involving corporate ventures.

Its just all become so tiring

I agree.. and if it's functional maybe it'll work.. so far though I see a mostly half-asked implementation of it here.

Sure; m.o and t.m.o are backed by Nokia - but where are they? How much involvement did Council really have in a lot of the things through the past? I know I've seen some council members complain several times on being "out of the loop".

Also, even if we call it "official community support" I'm still not sure it'd be 100% well-received among your typical end-user; they'll still want someone to blame/call for their problems with immediate results. We just can't provide that here.

We can help, but I don't think many of us like taking getting screamed at or demanded to help someone when - it's not our job.

So, yes I would support such a venture, I think that's the way that things going - but we're not there yet - however, I'm still not sure it'll fix the core problem of Nokia brushing off some of the responsibility of releasing an OS & and a device.

Great posts, GA and Texrat!

Personally, I would like to see Nokia take the reins. I actually would like to see someone in Nokia step-up and aim for quality and put an end to releasing half-baked apps. Someone needs to dictate the quality of their apps, open source or otherwise.

All the tablets that they have released -- 770 to the N900, quality wise were all great, and had so much potential. It's the software/OS that always fall short.

Something Quim said in the "Nokia complaint" thread about addressing the right channels really hardened this for me:

It is increasingly important for the community to have a deep, clear channel into Nokia. IMO that should be handled by the Community Council. But even though Quim and others have been great at facilitating where they can, it still feels ad hoc, as if Nokia executive management doesn't yet buy into Maemo/MeeGo and is still erecting firewalls that we the council can't breach.

I have lobbied for periodic Nokia/council get-togethers managed and funded by Nokia. I think such sessions are extremely important but so far no movement on such a thing. It's going to be even more important for MeeGo although more complicated due to the structure.

Regardless, it's past due time for Nokia to construct that channel. It's past due time for community outreach to ramp up in the company. I even positioned myself as a candidate to help in my region but I was told that such a thing would not happen until the need was determined. Sorry, that doesn't fly: you CULTIVATE the "need". If you build it they will come-- but they won't come if you don't build. And Nokia isn't building big and fast enough.

So maybe it's time for me to dust off that topic again and hit it hard...

That would be great, but in my opinion will not happen. Nokia is fighting hard enough to stonewall users, and there's like a million of us. If they had a direct channel for people to ask questions, they couldn't ignore us or release a two-sentence post where they sum it up as "no".

If they had a public board where they promised to give answers, how would they ignore questions like "what is taking so long with 1.2? I thought you said you had a team on it.", and "what's up with no Meego" (not that I really care, I want Fremantle patched up, thanks), or "do you really think we forgot you promised us that the device is beta when we bought it and that you will fix it and add functionality later".

Right now, silence is the best shield they have. No promises means they can nix whatever they find to be too hard to do at any time without people up in a bunch.

I have suggested something similar before, but I know too well that it's only going to be a wet dream. And even if it isn't, what would a coding team say? They would work for Nokia and if Nokia doesn't release info before etcetcetc then there is nothing TO say.

None of these dialogue suggestions will work until Nokia will make the move to open up and admit mistakes, limitations, lack of resources, whatever is keeping stuff back.

I'll admit openly that I know little about Linux. But I've been in the IT business one way or another for almost 20 years. I know how an OS works, I know how a driver works, I know what a hardware abstraction layer is and I am NOT buying any reason why future OSs don't run on older hardware.

If I can change my PC hardware 7 times under the same OS and change the OS 7 times on the same hardware, there's no reason to be unable to get ARM Linux running on an ARM.

And that's why Nokia is quieter than a fish in a church. Would you want to answer that? What would you say? It's hard and we already have your money?

I like that you're cautiously optimistic. Someone has to offset me. This isn't my first Nokia. I've said it before, I'll say it again. My N80 still has bugs. And not transdimentional bugs, that only happen every now and then when the moon is full. No, reproducible, across-several-devices, right-there-in-contacts bugs.

Now I've depressed myself :P

Closed components is Nokia added value and added value is a core of every business. No business could survive giving away their added value to competitors.

If you compare Nokia to Intel, Nokia is not a hardware vendor. Nokia is OEM in this context. They do not actually produce their hardware - only assemble hardware produced by others, putting an added value in.

Yes, I imagine Nokia would be filing for bankruptcy the following day of someone using their Memory and LED Patterns applets.

I bought Nokia because they designed the phone, selected and assembled components for me, tested them and maintain a centralized software reference. That's it with these new phones, they are modular, so basically you just compile a phone and cram it in. Add design and sell.

I did NOT buy Nokia hoping to use their Phone app and be unable to switch.

If the inability to patch, fix, enhance, replace or understand closed modules is added value, they added it the wrong way.

I see what you are trying to say, but really, consider this: Android uses Google Maps. Nokia uses Nokia Maps. Now, should Nokia open up and allow me to choose, wouldn't that push me MORE to buy a Nokia, since Android is now closed and limited by comparison?

Ok, it's a poor example. But I can't really see a case-in-point where making a closed app open would hurt Nokia. If anything, they don't want a Nokia Maps client ported to Android, so IT sells better based on THEIR maps. That, however, is hardly added value.

If closed software is added value, then their value means nothing to me. I like the phone, not the Phone app, and if I had a ready-to-go flash image with Windows CE with similar implementation, I'd switch. For you Linux fans out there, swap that for a different distribution.

Are any of you saying that if open source replacements for Nokia closed source would be available you wouldn't switch because Nokia's have better value?

If you would compare Nokia NIT and the cheap Chinese Maemo devices, the "only" differences are Nokia proprietary apps.
And these make the difference so huge, that most people do not consider these a competition.

And I do imagine Nokia NIT branch bankruptcy and closing once the market is flooded by spin-off devices with exactly the same functionality for half the price.
Especially in times so hard for Nokia, where they are inspecting every revenue stream very carefully and cutting expenses badly.