User: Password:
|
|
Subscribe / Log in / New account

The MeeGo Progress Report: A+ or D-? (Vision Mobile)

Dave Neary has posted a MeeGo progress report on the Vision Mobile site. "Long-awaited MeeGo compliance specifications have resulted in drawn out and sometimes acrimonious debate. Trademark guidelines have been a sticking point for community ports of the MeeGo netbook UX to Linux when these ports do not include required core components. Related to the technical governance of the project, there is some uncertainty around the release process, and the means and criteria which will be used when considering the inclusion of new components. And there are some signs that the 'all open, all the time' message at the project launch has been tempered by the reality of building a commercial device."
(Log in to post comments)

The MeeGo Progress Report: A+ or D-? (Vision Mobile)

Posted Nov 8, 2010 14:36 UTC (Mon) by rsalveti (subscriber, #42934) [Link]

They are even distributing closed software at their repository at the moment. For example http://repo.meego.com/MeeGo/builds/trunk/daily/non-oss/re...

The MeeGo Progress Report: A+ or D-? (Vision Mobile)

Posted Nov 8, 2010 15:06 UTC (Mon) by kragil (guest, #34373) [Link]

The bigger problem I see is that all the talk about openness is just a smokescreen. The current Qt handset UX is done by Intel guys, while the one Nokia is going to ship on actual devices is done behind closed doors.

The MeeGo Progress Report: A+ or D-? (Vision Mobile)

Posted Nov 9, 2010 9:03 UTC (Tue) by nhippi (subscriber, #34640) [Link]

That is pure unsubstantiated FUD. The Handset UX is done by Nokia and collaborators out in the open - as can be seen at:

http://meego.gitorious.org/meegotouch
http://meego.gitorious.org/meego-handset-ux

It would of course be a major surprise if the actual phones would come up looking _exactly_ like the current UX out there. More likely they have a different theme + non-free applications + custom plugins, that while basing on the above code, make the whole setup look different.

The closed PowerVR drivers certainly look like a major pain point. At least, unlike for the Intel GMA500, these drivers seem to be easily downloadable. Even for the MeeGo netbook UX intel doesn't distribute drivers for their own graphics chip..

The MeeGo Progress Report: A+ or D-? (Vision Mobile)

Posted Nov 16, 2010 0:17 UTC (Tue) by kragil (guest, #34373) [Link]

The MeeGo Progress Report: A+ or D-? (Vision Mobile)

Posted Nov 8, 2010 15:21 UTC (Mon) by johnflux (guest, #58833) [Link]

The SGX drivers come from Imagination Technology who positively hate open source. That accounts for half of those packages.

The MeeGo Progress Report: B+...

Posted Nov 9, 2010 6:37 UTC (Tue) by tajyrink (subscriber, #2750) [Link]

Can you elaborate on what do you mean by "even"? There is no other big name mobile distro that actually has a separation free and non-free, or allows to use only free packages so that there is some functionality.

This is IMHO a case that MeeGo, in this example, is by far the best and possibly currently only relevant freeish (future) mobile distribution there is at the moment, but since it is so close to our actual traditional distributions, some start to bash it that it's not as pure as Fedora or Debian (main). If the alternative is the closed development and "throw all FOSS history away" model of Android, or anything else nowhere near MeeGo in its openness, what's the point except polluting discussion forums with non-relevancy? The majority of FLOSS users even understand that there is Debian non-free or even the Ubuntu model of shipping a small handful of restricted software by default (unless told otherwise).

Regarding the UX stuff: I've no interest either if manufacturers are doing closed UX:s or not - of course they are doing, and they should be doing that. The fact that there is still going to be also free UX:s is a huge contribution to FLOSS world where we do not have enough touch friendly software yet. I'm going to be an extremely happy Debian packager of MeeGo software if I just have the free time of it. I see MeeGo's contribution currently as the best possible contribution to free software phone users - and how many of (you) potential complainers are actually using purely free software on their phone _now_? I've been using FreeRunner as my only phone since 2008 Autumn.

So please, there is so much more important stuff to discuss than these details. The freedom question is more relevant in the niche area (mass-market wise) of running only free software on some specific _device_ (not what there is available in the distribution repositories), and there I'm quite positive MeeGo's N900 adaptation team is making quite great progress as well so that also I'm going to have a potential successor to Neo FreeRunner one day. There is again no other current phone device than Nokia N900 that you can do calls with free software - supported and developed by the manufacturer.

So I'm giving them B+, mostly to say that they are doing better than anyone else by far (hence so high grade), even though there is much to improve (and ship).

The MeeGo Progress Report: B+...

Posted Nov 9, 2010 17:26 UTC (Tue) by sumC (guest, #1262) [Link]

Thank you, at least one sane person still here. I donĀ“t know why Nokia bashing has become so popular even here on LWN, of course I have my ideas...


Copyright © 2010, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds