Harmattan?

[codeMonkey]

@sachin
Or maybe their timezone isn't awake yet

[benny1967]

Originally Posted by YoDude

Is this what we are all doing here?

I truly hope someone from Maemo addresses this allegation.

While I don't like the idea of anything on my Maemo device (phone or not) making it irreversably dependent on an "always on"-connection, I don't really have a problem with the idea of ads.

See, right now, to get a cheap phone, I have to pay the carrier; renew my new contract for another year or two, sign up to a data plan, whatever. It's money. I can refuse the deal and pay the full price.
If I get an option for the same cheap phone by simply having part of my home screen reserved for an ad - why not? As long as there's still the possibility to get the ads-free version at full price.


The other thing that sounds bad is that the ad isn't removable, which somehow feels wrong in the context of a "free" operating system. You expect to be able to hack your device, don't you, and even more you expect to have full control over the home screen.
I don't know how they'd implement it code-wise, but I remember Nokia saying that free code may end at the level of the user interface. That's not news to us. We knew they'd probably build a proprietary UI on top of the free components... and an ad module being hardwired into this proprietary UI doesn't taint the free components or make them less hackable.

So if these rumours are true, as long as it's an option you can choose to keep the price down I'm happy with it.

And in general... I'm too busy getting my old brain to love Fremantle, I'm not inclined to worry about unconfirmed rumours that may or may not affect a device that may or may not be released 2010/2011.

[sachin007]

Originally Posted by codeMonkey

@sachin
Or maybe their timezone isn't awake yet

Actually i saw them online on the forum for quite sometime, haven't seen qgil yet.

[lma]

Originally Posted by sachin007

Silence from both peter@maemomarketing and Ragnar, proves that this in fact is remotely true..... or is it not?

Oh come on, do you really expect them to go around confirming or denying every little rumour that gets posted on some blog?

Personal opinion: I don't buy it, and even if it was an actual idea at some point the advertising bubble is bursting as we speak and 2010-11 would be a very bad time for an ad-subsidised revenue model. Not to mention the legal minefield of data protection and privacy legislation, just look at all the (very legitimate IMHO) hassle Google is getting from the EU for a lot less.

Also, the "screenshot" does look vaguely Fremantle-ish but contains nothing to support the allegation either and looks suspect in other ways (630 pixels is a very odd screen width, and seriously, "Lastest"?!).

[lardman]

Well the last Thursday the 22nd was in January (2009), and the one before that was in May 2008. Unless they're from the future, in which case October 2009 it is

I was just wondering about when the software was being worked on/leaked.

[fms]

Originally Posted by lardman

Well the last Thursday the 22nd was in January (2009), and the one before that was in May 2008. Unless they're from the future, in which case October 2009 it is I was just wondering about when the software was being worked on/leaked.

It is most likely a mockup. Nevertheless, as mockups go, it looks pretty realistic. Most UI elements shown in this image can be found in previous Nokia UIs. The title bar follows the style of S60e5 menu overlays and the icons are familiar too. The vertically scrolled display can be found in the Sports Tracker. Similar widgets have been shown in the upcoming N97 UI snapshots. So, yes, that may well be a Harmattan or even Freemantle app, from the look of it.

[ColdFusion]

Originally Posted by sachin007

Silence from both peter@maemomarketing and Ragnar, proves that this in fact is remotely true..... or is it not?

And if they come and deny it, it'll be clearly that they want to hide something!
They are trapped! We have them now!

[YoDude]

Originally Posted by krisse

...if you took it to an extreme by assuming an always-on connection, you could even have the interface made up entirely of web pages. :-)

I don't think that's the case here, obviously, but web-based content is starting to creep into mobile apps here and there already.

If pages are stored locally, the only need for a connection would be to update data.

>> EXAMPLES <<

XUL code may even reach out to the device its own dang self. (see attachment).

The problem that I have with the quote I posted in this thread is Carrier Subsidized...
Many of us in the US and Canada have looked at Nokia as the last great hope to free us from the constraints that this business model has imposed over the years. We have seen how technology has been harbored and innovation has been stifled.

Also... something about using community developed FOSS to sell soap back to the very same community rubs me the wrong way.

It is not like you are buying all your kids "Band Candy" in order to support extra curricular activities at his/her school. Rather, it would be like being told that if you don't buy product "X", your kids school may not get the new roof it needs.

[krisse]

Originally Posted by YoDude

The problem that I have with the quote I posted in this thread is Carrier Subsidized...
Many of us in the US and Canada have looked at Nokia as the last great hope to free us from the constraints that this business model has imposed over the years. We have seen how technology has been harbored and innovation has been stifled.

Quite frankly, the grip network operators have over American phone hardware is the fault of Americans themselves. Americans who are worried about network operators crippling hardware should put their money where their mouth is instead of playing the helpless victim.

Innovation has been stifled in America more than elsewhere because Americans have this weird idea that phones MUST be bought from network operators, that phones MUST be "activated". Neither of those things is even remotely true. Americans have got into the habit of always going to their network operator to buy a phone, and they are willing to buy phones that cannot be moved to other networks. Aren't there alarm bells ringing at that point? Would you buy a computer that only works with one ISP?

If you don't want to have any network operator involvement, don't buy your phones from network operators. You don't buy PCs from ISPs, you don't buy cars from fuel stations, so why the heck are you buying phones from network operators?

I have never ever bought anything from a network operator. All of my phones have been purchased from electrical retailers, just like computers or televisions or cameras. No activation, no network-locking, just pure hardware which can work on any network (or even without a network if I choose to use it entirely through wi-fi).

Nokia offers practically all its devices in unlocked form in every region, including North America, so it's up to the customer to buy unlocked devices if they want to avoid getting operator-crippled hardware.

Vote with your wallet, it's the only way to stop network operators crippling hardware.

To those who say unlocked phones are expensive: they're not. If you buy a phone from a network operator you're buying it in installments on credit, which is financially the same thing as buying an unlocked phone on a credit card. Quite often the unlocked phone turns out cheaper than the locked one once you add up all the payments, especially as unlocked phones are a lot easier to sell on ebay etc when you upgrade to a new model.

[YoDude]

Originally Posted by krisse

Innovation has been stifled in America more than elsewhere because Americans have this weird idea that phones MUST be bought from network operators, that phones MUST be "activated". Neither of those things is true.

...perhaps your notion that "Carrier Subsidized" is just a weird idea of North American consumers could be argued best in another thread.