The Future of Symbian

S3D writes "On 18 May 2004, Symbian, owner of the OS for high-end smartphones announced the formal launch of the Symbian Signed initiative for digitally signing and certifying Symbian applications that meet a set of test criteria. Gartner believes that Symbian Signed, in its current form, is a weak certification program oriented largely toward the needs of application publishers and network operators and may be inconvinient for developers. "

Comments

Right!

[CaptainZapp]

The test criteria are minimal and oriented toward application installation, interaction with network features such as billing, and ensuring that the application does not disrupt major phone features such as call handling. No meaningful tests exist to ensure usability, quality, effective documentation, conformance with interface expectations, correct operation in the absence of expected network features or correct operation on all hardware variants of the complex and fragmented Symbian platform.

Well, we are talking of an OS for cell phones, right? Wouldn't it be the major goal of such a certification process indeed be about being compatible with the network and with phone features?

Symbian doesn't specifiy a user interface. Nokia developed Systems 60/90 as user interfaces. Sony Ericsson provides again something different. Other manufacturers sublicense the interface (Siemens)

Again and very slowly: Certifying a cell phone (platform) is precisely about the systems interaction with the network. Not about "usability" (whatever that is).

Not all certification is carried out independently.

Ah, you mean like some analysts don't seem to act independently, but sometimes leave the reader with the distinct fealing that they are whores in the pay of a uhhh! major software company trying frantically to get a foothold into the booming cellphone business?

Dudes, this is not about "Windows Certified". I suggest that you use more of your time cluing yourself in, instead of constantly wasting your time in rebooting your Microsoft Powered "Smart"-Phones.

Questions

[StripedCow]

Couple of questions. Do they have a (free) runtime environment which runs on Linux? Can I use gcc to compile cellphone applications? If so, I am going to have a look at this stuff.

Re:False safety

[Troed]

I believe this will create a lot of resentment towards Symbian in the long run. The testing basically only gives you a guarantee that it will not run up your phonebill and or delete your range of oh-so cool ringtones/ sounds/ wallpapers/ whatevers. ... and that's exactly what it SHOULD do, and nothing else. Don't you understand what this certification is for?

It's the CELL OPERATORS that demand it - they don't want EVIL software running rampant in their networks. They're scared shitless as it is today with anyone being able to write applications that can access (quite) low level stuff on cellphones.

Have a look at the requirements for signed MIDlets (that's J2ME) and compare it with Symbian ...

Yes I work in the cellphone industry, on handsets, with Symbian and J2ME.

Re:Seem Familiar?

[bit01]

There's no question in my mind that signed drivers lead to stable computers.

Depends on your point of view. If it doesn't run the piece of software/hardware you want at all (due to the signing not working because it is not in the M$ monopoly financial interest) that sounds 100% unstable to me.

The correct solution is for the M$ OS to popup a meaningful error message pointing the finger at the appropriate broken driver and manufacturer. Since most failures are access violations this would work a charm. It is the fault of M$ that they want to make other company's branding invisible and plaster their own brand everywhere. They want to claim responsibility for the good in other company products but not the bad. That is hypocritical.