As far as I see it, the "rules" he is referring to are about the locked parts and requirements from the mobile industry. Ultimately the goal is create a platform and devices that ... that outside parties want to sell. Some of these features unfortunately cannot be open in terms of open source, at least currently.
I'm personally quite surprised over some of the comments to Ari's words. It's not an anti-open source statement, but it's more of a statement that there is learning required from both parties to make the open and non-open parts live together happily.
I'm personally quite surprised over some of the comments to Ari's words. It's not an anti-open source statement, but it's more of a statement that there is learning required from both parties to make the open and non-open parts live together happily.
It's not surprising, given the context the original article used the quotes in; Businessweek mentioned the QT purchase soon after that, and the quote takes on a much darker context when set that close to a major GPL GUI toolkit...
Actually, his later quote seemed pretty positive to me:
Originally Posted by businessweek
In his speech, Jaaksi detailed some of the lessons Nokia had learned in its work with the Maemo developer community, primarily the need to avoid 'forking' code. He said: "Don't make your own version. The original mistake we made was to take the code to our labs, change it and then release it at the last minute. The community had already gone in a different direction than [us], and no-one was pushing it other than [us]. Everybody wants to make their own version and keep it too close to their chest but that leads to fragmentation."
I also agree with Bruce that sim locks have nothing to do with the opensource model. It's merely part of the business model of the operators. And it needs some support from the devices. Same with DRM, just replace operator with publisher.
Aris blogpost really underlines the fact that companies need to participate actively in the development, not by dropping legally mandatory code bombs two days prior to launch.
Read the link Reggie just posted. Again: some of you are leaping too quickly, too far.
Perhaps. But I don't think my opinion was too harsh, and it wasn't formed based on just one of two articles or blog entries.
Naturally Dr Jaaksi must play for both audiences. There's nothing new or even particularly controversial about that.
My key interests are, however, that neither my data nor my hardware can be held captive (by corporate interests).
I know Maemo (Nokia) is trying to improve on certain points and I will continue buying Nokia phones as long as they provide good value in that field, but I personally and conscientiously evaluate companies (i.e. their products) according to their track record wrt. those key interests.
I'm not saying Nokia are evil, but others may well find their niche in providing more "freedom" and flexibility in the same market.
