Like many of you (lol ok most) I am loving the look of the new N900. But being one who likes to make an informed choice and after reading some negative comments about Android on this forum, I would like to ask whats wrong with the Android platform? I have had the Iphone 3g sold it got bored, now running a WinMo with no hard keyboard and even though I love the multitasking it drives me made trying to type on the damm thing! lol. I have looked at the Palm Pre but dont think the hardware will last . Android is the only platform I have not looked into,And i t has version two coming soon

it's from google, and google is the evil...

Coming from a G1 to N900, here's what I dislike on the G1 (not necessarily Android):

- battery life is too short
- capacitive touch screen responsiveness varies with the weather
- takes forever to boot (OK, you don't reboot a phone often unless it runs WinMo)
- sluggish UI
- poor multitasking experience due to apps getting restarted after switching to them due to not enough memory
- approx. 70 MB for installing apps, this space gets filled in no time

You need to program the apps in Java.

Yes, like you said, these complaints are related to one phone, not the operating system. Not to claim that these aren't real issues, but still, there's newer Android phones (Hero, for one) that don't suffer from, well, any of these, and the Droid device and other upcoming ones are comparable to the N900 in hardware. Android 1.6 is out now, and a major upgrade in the form of Android 2.0 is coming quite soon (maybe not as soon as N900 but certainly way before the next Maemo). So G1 vs. N900 is hardly a valid comparison. Still, in certain aspects (Market), The G1 would still come out on top.

I'm baffled by this hostility toward Android too, and I find it really annoying, frankly, as I'm a "fan" and "root for" both of these OS's. My phone is Android, but I'm still quite fond of the N810, and I'm hoping Maemo will be used in a decent phone or perhaps a nice tablet eventually. I'm just not interested in paying 700 euros to Beta test Nokia's first Maemo phone that will be abandoned by Christmas when they start working on their next one, but let's not get into that (oh noes, afraid I just did...), still, I'm hoping there will be a good Maemo phone eventually next year or whenever Maemo 6 is out, it's just a race between the "best Android device" and the "best Maemo device" for me. I frankly like the competition a lot, I think it's great for the consumer and I'm very sick of the anti-Anrdoid fanbois here on the forums too.

The "it's from Google and Google is evil" stuff is so ridiculous that I won't even touch it. Nokia isn't exactly a boyscout when it comes to many, many things about the company. Ask the people working for it or read up on what sort of laws they ask the government to pass here, for starters. I for one trust Google way more than my dear countrymen. (And besides, Google doesn't completely control Android anymore blahblahblah...). Regarding open source, I don't see a difference between Google's and Nokia's approach to open-source, really, both bundle their own software with the system and let you build your own stuff for it, that's it, it's all good.

Actually it's not a Google product, Google is just the company that decided to pay for it's development and the developers are technically Google employees. The people behind it are actually the Open Handset Alliance. The entire Android OS is completely Open Source through the Android Open Source Project or AOSP, though there is controversy because Google also has their own closed source components and all the device drivers are proprietary software. Though you can get a complete Google free build based on AOSP so I dunno whats up with the Google hate.

There's also something else, though most end users won't care about it as it doesn't directly affect user experience:

The licensing of the whole platform is fundamentally different. Both Maemo and Android have open and closed parts. With Maemo, open components need to remain open. It's illegal (for Nokia or other companies) to change/enhance them and distribute their changes/enhancements as binaries only. Android permits just that: While vendors are allowed to re-distribute Android with the full sources, the license doesn't force them to do it.

The difference for the end user? If a free component on a Maemo system has a bug, you can download the sources, change and re-compile them, install them on your device... done. (This is more or less what I did when I found I didn't like the layout of the OS2008 feed reader applet, so it's not only a theoretical thing.)
On Android, it could well be that the sources you download from the Android website are not what was used to create the binaries on your device. Bugs you experience may not be visible in the sources because the vendor applied changes. Even worse, your own variation of a (supposedly open) component may not run on your device because it depends on other packages that also have been changed by the vendor - and are incompatible now.

Compared to really closed systems, of course, Android is still relatively open... But Maemo is even better.

You make alot of valid arguements, and seem to be doing the necessary research to make an informed decision. I and a couple other bloggers are planning to write about this very subject this morning. You've ignored one major differentiator in comparing the two software platforms, and I'll give you a little bit of insight before I write my article, which I'll PM a link to when I'm finished.

I understand what you mean, but you are mistaking the intimate knowledge these guys here have of both platforms. Most of the guys here make software for both OSes, along with many others, so they are more aware of the architectural advantages of Maemo over the other mobile OSes out there. As I've discovered, your question is what they'd consider a "silly" question, and once you learn the facts you'll see why.

The intellectual level of the majority of the members here are not so simplistic as to label them fanboys. They mostly develop software for a living, and know more than regular end users like you and I. Their education level has blessed them with the ability to judge the way the OS is designed and choose based on that, without even paying attention to the hardware. They don't always do a good job explaining why Maemo is better, but that's why they're programmers and I'm a writer. They're not always good communicators, but they're knowledge is top notch, if you know how to get it out of them. I'll give you the skinny on this whole issue, and you can decide for yourself what is best for you.

Google isn't very friendly to the free open source software movement, and more similar to the early days of Microsoft, which is the antithesis of Linux and FOSS. FOSS is the foundation of Maemo, and a deep part of the philosophy of most of the developers here. Nokia is the only mobile company promoting only open source OSes, and their recent transparency has made mobile development easier, unlike the rest of the competition. You'd have to understand the benefits of FOSS first, so I suggest learning the effect companies like Google and Microsoft have had on FOSS, and get a closer understanding of this forum's sentiment towards Google and similar companies.

Google touts its Linux underpinnings and openness, but in actuality, Android has little similarity to Linux or FOSS. Since Maemo is a touch friendly Linux distro, and not just "based on Linux", it has all of the advantages of Linux, which has so many advantages, more and more major companies are using it for their enterprise networks. Nokia allows developers to use open and available tools to make its applications, whereas Android doesn't as much. It used FOSS to make Android, but when it comes to software development, most of that heritage is thrown out of the window. Android apps are merely high quality Java apps run in a virtual machine on top of Linux, so it will never run .debs like Maemo can, whereas Maemo apps are more versatile apps designed with various industry standard tools, and many devs don't even use the SDK very much, since its mainly Linux, which has been around for decades.

The easiest way to see the advantage of Maemo vs. Android is comparing both to desktop OSes. I'll use Linux as the base desktop OS, since its open source, more than relevant to this comparison, and much more powerful than a smartphone or mobile OS.Now with Linux, you know its closest contemporary is Windows Mobile and Mac OSX. Ask anyone that makes software how easy it is to make programs for Linux vs. mobile OSes Android, WinMo, iPhone, Blackberry, or Symbian. I'm not just talking ease of making apps, but the ability and quality of those apps. The tools available for Linux allow for anything from simple Twitter clients and media players to heads up displays on fighter jets and firmware for robotics and manufacturing factories.

Now you'd usually never compare any of the aforementioned mobile OSes to any of the desktop OSes. But let's compare Maemo this time. First, Maemo IS Linux. The only difference is it includes a few pieces of proprietary software, but the basic architecture of Maemo is no different than Linux Mint or Ubuntu. The biggest difference is it has a custom user interface optimized for a touchscreen and small, relatively low resolution (in desktop terms) display. It is just as capable of running many of the apps designed for the desktop, only sometimes you'll need a stylus, since the desktop app UIs aren't always optimal when used on a small form factor device. So Maemo is desktop software, and we all know desktop class software is always more powerful than any of the stuff on most mobiles.

Now you may say,"There's no way Maemo is the same as Linux." Well, think again, because its EXACTLY the same, just a custom distro made for mobiles, the first of its kind. Nokia has innovated its butt off with Maemo, and once the N900 is released, it will be more evident. Take a look at Linux Mint, a favorite Linux distro of mine I've recently fallen in love with. When comparing the two, the genetics are more evident. For instance:

1. Both have multiple scrollable desktops. Android does as well, but the similarities basically end there.

2. Both feature the Advanced Packaging Tool, which is the software distribution and management system used to automate the retrieval, configuration and installation of applications and software upgrades. This is Linux's biggest advantage over Windows and other OSes. Imagine if the Apple App Store were all free, included every app that could run on it, approved or not, and pushed upgrades to all installed apps automatically. Imagine going to a site, seeing you need a particular plugin, and the APT handles finding and pushing it to you. Linux has Synaptic, and Maemo has the Application Manager, but they're really just front ends for APT.

3. Its Linux, so its desktop software. Notice the apps running on Maemo. Mozilla browser? Not on any other mobile platform. And its the same Mozilla on your desktop, just optimized for touch. Users are already loading the Add-ons from Firefox into the N900 browser to prove that point home.

4. Its open source. This means the OS is open to changes. I don't mean the simple Cyanogen mods, but platform level changes. The N900 isn't even out yet, and already, developers have managed to sync the contacts list with Facebook profile photos. This agility is the beauty of FOSS, and being Linux, its easy for devs to deal with across the world. Which developer community do you think is larger, Linux or Android?

5. Most of the apps will be free. Linux is ground zero for free open source software, so Maemo will surely lead the market in this space. And this forum is available to allow the community to share ideas and implement features at the user's request, and in far quicker time than if the OS were organized like Android. Instead of waiting for the OS designers to release fixes and upgrades, multiple fixes can be released by the community, and freely distributed via APT, for users to install and try as they wish, without waiting on Nokia to release an update. So Nokia can focus on the most pressing issues, for instance portrait mode, and the simple stuff can be handled by us right here, with full support from Nokia.

I have to take time to get back to my research and morning writing, so I'll cut it short here. I hope this information was eye opening to you. Android is a good OS, but just not in the class of Maemo/Linux. The closest competitior to the N900 is the OQO Model 2, which I'd not choose over the N900. It is Windows, lacks the broad catalog of free apps, and isn't optimized for touch. But other than the various Windows tablets, nothing comes close to Maemo. We know this, and are shocked when people don't. Don't be offended when you get the responses you do, and consider yourself now informed.

So now, when someone asks you about comparing Android to Maemo, feel free to respond with smirks and flat comments, but also know you're armed with the truth, and hopefully you can share this knowledge with them.

wow, very impressed, Chris!

I suspect there are as many reasons as people voicing them. As for me, i started out as a big Android fan last year when the G1 was being released. It had a few too many limitations to make me bite.

Then, i watched the hardware for it fail to improve for an entire year. An entire year, in the smartphone world! "Not Android's fault", many will say. Well, that's not entirely true. Only the most recent release will support something besides the truly anemic resolution of the G1. For all i know there are other underlying software barriers, too.

But more recently two things have really changed my opinion about Android. First is the fact that for all the talk about Android being the open alternative, and the Linux phone, it's really not open in the way that your average Linux distribution is. Android is basically an application layer on top of Linux, and to really add to it in a meaningful way, you have to work within the constraints of that layer.

That extra layer of abstraction has the extra nastiness (again from my own perspective) of being modeled on a Java virtual machine. I hate Java. I've never seen a good app written with Java, but i've seen several bad ones. My experience programming in Java was also mostly miserable. It was years ago; i'm sure times and Swing have changed, but there was some component of the GUI that wouldn't work on every platform. On Irix (or linux, can't recall), it was the progress bar. On Mac, it was something else, and on Windows, yet a third element. What a mess. So much for "write once, run anywhere". If you remove that supposed capability of Java and throw in the silly moves Sun has made to keep control of its baby, it really has nothing to recommend it in my book.

Finally the real cold shower is the realisation that Android is nothing without Google, and Google is keeping its cards close. They were within their rights in sending the C&D letter to the Cyanogen mastermind--but that the need to do so arose in the first place is a symptom of the problem.

I don't want to keep all my data in the cloud (Google's or anyone else's). Sync capability is top priority, but if a mobile computer can't stand on its own, it's worthless to me. That doesn't fit within Google's (and hence Android's) paradigm.