maemo.org - Talk - What we do realistically see in the RX-51

maemo.org - Talk (https://talk.maemo.org/index.php)

- General (https://talk.maemo.org/forumdisplay.php?f=7)

- - What we do realistically see in the RX-51 (https://talk.maemo.org/showthread.php?t=25478)

Re: What we do realistically see in the RX-51

In a related note about as could be the new tablet, Stskeeps and myself were looking to the mce header files for Fremantle, and we found this new interesting code about orientations:

Code:

/** Device rotation name for portrait orientation */

#define MCE_ORIENTATION_PORTRAIT                "portrait"

/** Device rotation name for landscape orientation */

#define MCE_ORIENTATION_LANDSCAPE                "landscape"

/** Device rotation name for on stand */

#define MCE_ORIENTATION_ON_STAND                "on_stand"

/** Device rotation name for off stand */

#define MCE_ORIENTATION_OFF_STAND                "off_stand"

/** Device rotation name for facing up */

#define MCE_ORIENTATION_FACE_UP                        "face_up"

/** Device rotation name for facing down */

#define MCE_ORIENTATION_FACE_DOWN                "face_down"

/** Device rotation name for unknown */

#define MCE_ORIENTATION_UNKNOWN                        "unknown"

#endif /* _MCE_MODE_NAMES_H_ */

Also this could be interesting but not related to orientations:

Code:

/** Cellular call */

#define MCE_CALL_STATE_CELLULAR                        "cellular"

Mce should be replaced with OHM in Fremantle though.

Re: What we do realistically see in the RX-51

Quote:

Originally Posted by yerga (Post 249635)

In a related note about as could be the new tablet, Stskeeps and myself were looking to the mce header files for Fremantle, and we found this new interesting code about orientations:

Code:

/** Device rotation name for portrait orientation */

#define MCE_ORIENTATION_PORTRAIT                "portrait"

/** Device rotation name for landscape orientation */

#define MCE_ORIENTATION_LANDSCAPE                "landscape"

/** Device rotation name for on stand */

#define MCE_ORIENTATION_ON_STAND                "on_stand"

/** Device rotation name for off stand */

#define MCE_ORIENTATION_OFF_STAND                "off_stand"

/** Device rotation name for facing up */

#define MCE_ORIENTATION_FACE_UP                        "face_up"

/** Device rotation name for facing down */

#define MCE_ORIENTATION_FACE_DOWN                "face_down"

/** Device rotation name for unknown */

#define MCE_ORIENTATION_UNKNOWN                        "unknown"

#endif /* _MCE_MODE_NAMES_H_ */

Seems reasonable. Some Nokia phones do not ring while put face down on a table.

Quote:

Originally Posted by yerga (Post 249635)

Also this could be interesting but not related to orientations:

Code:

/** Cellular call */

#define MCE_CALL_STATE_CELLULAR                        "cellular"

While the other call states are as follows, the case should be fairly obvious for everybody:

Code:

/** VoIP call */

#define MCE_CALL_STATE_VOIP                        "voip"

/** Video call */

#define MCE_CALL_STATE_VIDEO                        "video"

Re: What we do realistically see in the RX-51

I see Maemo as a Nokia research project. Symbian is open sourced because of Nokia's experience with Linux and open source; IOW Maemo. Trolltech is also related to that.

Nokia E90 is landscape yes, but totally different resoltion. Nokia E90 keyboard has nothing to do with this. It is ancient stemming from older Nokia 9000 series. Its just a Nokia Communicator rebranded as E-series. It is a clamshell; the Pandora will be a bit like this because its also a clamshell. But with touch. Like Sharp Zaurus c7x0/c1000/c3x00... but a lot faster.

The N97 keyboard slides out, and if its slided out it makes the device stand in the same way the N8x0 series does.

Applets are very useful for user customized, default information gathering. On Maemo they've experimented with this as well, and will build upon this further in both devices. The 770 and N8x0 are Nokia's first commercial devices with touch screen capabilities. It'd be unwise to not learn from these experience, while at the same time learn from competitors who also use touch screen capabilities (so you will see things inspired by e.g. iPhone as well).

Quote:

The desire for memory has been around from long before. Hardly learned from the N8x0.

But not on-board a lot + microSD, or on-board not much but with SD. So that is what can be learned from N800 -> N810.

Quote:

The N900 is undoubtedly taken from the n8x0. So saying that the N900 and N97 are developed in parallel, just seems inconsistent with saying the N97 learned from the N8x0.

Their target release date are 2009Q1 and 2009Q2. N900 learns from N8x0 but also aspects you've never seen in Nokia Internet Tablets but with which Nokia has a lot of experience in their smartphone lines. Now, if you take into account the N97 similarities. Would you argue the N97 looks more like N96, or more like N8x0? To me, it seems like its definetely gotten aspects from both.

The name 'NIT' is abandoned. Qt will be a bridge between Symbian and Maemo. Symbian is open sourced. I believe there is a lot of reflection back and forth internally, and it won't become less. We'll see with Harmattan brining the official Qt bridge. The question is rather: how much is it now.

Quote:

Before the N97, there had already been a mid-ranged Symbian S60 model with the compass called the 6210 Navigator. Sorry; its a commody feature that, like TV-Out and 5mpx cameras, will be diffused throughout Nokia's lineup to enable connectivity to services that would best take advantage of such hardware.

Yes, that is stated in the article, but that is also their primary navigation device. So that aspect is learned from that (it is worth the price). But it is new all these devices will contain TV-Out.

Re: What we do realistically see in the RX-51

Quote:

Nokia E90 is landscape yes, but totally different resoltion. Nokia E90 keyboard has nothing to do with this. It is ancient stemming from older Nokia 9000 series. Its just a Nokia Communicator rebranded as E-series. It is a clamshell; the Pandora will be a bit like this because its also a clamshell. But with touch. Like Sharp Zaurus c7x0/c1000/c3x00... but a lot faster.

Huh? The N97 display shape and resolution is more similar to E90 than to the N8x0. So what that the e90 keyboard stems from the communicator series? The N97 keyboard is more similar in configuration to the e90 (and the communicators) than to the N8x0.

Quote:

The N97 keyboard slides out, and if its slided out it makes the device stand in the same way the N8x0 series does.

I haven't seen that. I saw a hinge that tilts the display relative to the keyboard; not a keyboard that slides out and stays in the same plane as the display. Can you link to a video or something that shows this?

Quote:

Applets are very useful for user customized, default information gathering. On Maemo they've experimented with this as well, and will build upon this further in both devices.

Applets are not unique to Maemo, and you didn't answer how Maemo and N97 "deal" with applets in the same way.

Quote:

The 770 and N8x0 are Nokia's first commercial devices with touch screen capabilities.

Well, this is wrong. The 7710 was Nokia's first commercial device with touch screen capabilities. (And the Tube was developed one generation before the N97.) But I'm glad you said that because (sorry to be blunt) I am beginning to surmise that you don't follow the themes of technology development rather than I am missing something. I appreciate your comments. A socratic method is a good way to test a hypothesis.

If interested in learning more, you may want to read Steve Hamm's new book on the history of portable computing.

Re: What we do realistically see in the RX-51

Answering eiffel:

> (3) Tell us as something substantial about the form factor.

We don't especulate about future devices. This is what device announcements are made for.

Also, why developers or community members need to worry about anything before a beta SDK is out? Of course I see reasons for interest, but not for the pre-panic seen in some threads lately. Note that no Nokia representative has said a single thing about future hardware, so any fears or conclusions are made on top of pure forum speculation.

> Something like this would be enough: "There will be a device with a
> keyboard. There might also be a tablet, and might also be a device
> with a form factor not seen before. They will all be pocketable,
> although larger than a cellphone." And dammit, if there's not going
> to be a D-pad, just tell us will you, and let us get on with coping with
> it. Obviously all this stuff has already been decided. Can't you just let
> a junior staffer leak the concept video? It seemed to work well for the
> 5800.

Ditto. And in addition to that let me remind once more that Maemo is a platform being developed to support several devices. The architecture it is already quite flexible and this flexibility is what allows any device program to think in different form factors, hardware keys and etc.

Re: What we do realistically see in the RX-51

In this tread it is suggested that the Maemo 5 will be a purely touch UI. I don't think it's far fetched that the screen will be multitouch.

The advantage of current resistive screen is that it is accurate and can be used with a stylus. That doesn't really matter if the UI is designed for use with fingers, so it would be logical to switch to capasitive screens that supply multitouch.

Re: What we do realistically see in the RX-51

Quote:

Originally Posted by Naranek (Post 257155)

I don't think it's far fetched that the screen will be multitouch.

~~It's not and it wont be.~~ That was unclear, what I mean to say is: the touchscreen is resistive. :)

Re: What we do realistically see in the RX-51

Resistive is not capacitive and that means it's not multi-touch.

Re: What we do realistically see in the RX-51

Quim, first I apologise to you personally for having treated you as the "public face of Maemo Software". Jaffa pointed this out and he's right. Nevertheless it's inevitable, just as we hold the waiter responsible for our food even though it's the chef who cooks it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by qgil (Post 257149)

We don't especulate about future devices. This is what device announcements are made for.

Sure, we're not asking you to speculate. We're asking Nokia to announce some information.

Quote:

Originally Posted by qgil (Post 257149)

Also, why developers or community members need to worry about anything before a beta SDK is out?

Developers worry because we need to know that we won't be wasting our time developing. I got burned once, spending over a thousand hours on an open source project written in the Eiffel programming language (that's where my username comes from) before the compiler vendor effectively ruined the niche.

Developers worry because there are hints of radical change in directions that might possibly make the N900 un-useful to us. There are also some wonderful things that could happen, but until we see them we can't develop for them.

If Nokia wants a successful open source product, they need to be much more open. No two ways about it. As that's not happening, I'm going to use my N800 until it breaks, but develop for Android for the future because it will provide a good choice of devices.

It's a sad but necessary decision for me. Back in July several people said "Just wait for the Maemo summit, something awesome is going to happen" but it didn't. There's still nothing more than "Trust us". No way. Trust has to be earned, not blindly demanded.

Regards,
Roger