Slashdot Mirror


Symbian Introduces Open Source Release Plan

volume4 brings news that David Wood of the Symbian Foundation has made a post detailing their plans for a release schedule, with new versions due out every six months. We discussed Nokia's acquisition of Symbian for the purpose of open sourcing the popular mobile OS last year. Quoting: "There's a lot of activity underway, throughout the software development teams for all the different packages that make up the Symbian Platform. These packages are finding their way into platform releases. The plan is that there will be two platform releases each year. ... Symbian^2, which is based on S60 5.1, reaches a functionally complete state at the middle of this year, and should be hardened by the end of the year. This means that the first devices based on Symbian^2 could be reaching the market any time around the end of this year — depending on the integration plans, the level of customisation, and the design choices made by manufacturers. Symbian^3 follows on six months later — reaching a functionally complete state at the end of this year, and should be hardened by the middle of 2010."

9 of 92 comments (clear)

  1. Big news for Symbian developers! by BadAnalogyGuy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    int CoolNews(HBufC aNews)
      {
    // TODO: Source code won't help you
    // learn how to use these freaking
    // Symbian buffer types...
      return static_cast<TBoolC>(1);
      }

    1. Re:Big news for Symbian developers! by dwater · · Score: 4, Informative

      > Not only that, but there are many different versions (V9, V9.1, S60 3rd Ed, S60 FP1, S60 FP2, 9.4, 9.5 and that's just the recent ones) and they are mostly binary and source incompatible.

      That's balony. I (helped) develop an S60 application, and the differences were significant between S60 2nd and 3rd editions (there was a big OS-break then - akin to OS9/OSX), but otherwise there were very few OS version specific changes needed to the source. The main things I remember were that the 2nd edition phones and the first few of the 3rd edition phones had a WAP browser; and the newer ones have the webkit ones (yes, before the iPhone). The other difference that came to mind was that S60 3rd edition came with an OpenGL driver, while for 2nd edition, we had to package one with our app.

      Actually, our code base was common for both S60 2nd edition and S60 3rd edition...the differences there were for SDK differences (like having to get things signed/etc/etc).

      In the end, we had just two versions for users to install - one for 2nd edition, and one for 3rd edition. From the user's point of view, it didn't matter which of the 2nd edition or 3rd edition phones they had...and a web/wap page could easily tell from the user-agent which one to provide for the user to install.

      Really, not rocket science at all.

      Calling them 'mostly binary and source incompatible' is just rubbish and plainly FUD.

      Also, what's wrong with having different versions? Even something like the iPhone OS has two (soon to be three) versions. It's mostly a symptom of having a successful platform and many different target phones. Perhaps when there are many different iPhones and Android phones, then they will have the same issues.

      Yes, the development platform is not so much fun to use, but that's a different thing to the target OSes being different. I even got the SDK working on Linux the other day and plan to do some applications in my spare time, in the hope that I can sell stuff on the soon-to-open Ovi Store. It seems like the SDKs will even work on OSX for all you Apple guys. Personally, I find it kind of refreshing to actually understand what's going on, instead of have a GUI 'protect' me from it all.

      I think the Ovi Store could well be very significant. The prospect of having access to such a large user base has to turn some heads, surely. It *is* huge, especially if they can enable it on existing phones too. I guess they could do that by using the Download! application somehow - the Download! application is what might be called the 'app store' that's been around for many years (yes, way before iPhone even was a twinkle in any Jobs' eye) on S60 phones - since it's already on probably well over a hundred million phones already.

      We'll see, I guess.

      --
      Max.
    2. Re:Big news for Symbian developers! by ElGuapoGolf · · Score: 5, Interesting

      The Download application has been around for years, and it's been redefining the word suck for years. If you enjoy waiting 10 minutes to see the same 10 applications displayed every day, the Download! application is for you. To even mention it in the same breath as Apple's App Store is delusional. And as a Symbian coder, I'll agree with the parents above... the platform sucks to code for. It's a totally non-standard (no exceptions, what?) platform that makes you account for design decisions/tradeoffs which were made over 10 years ago and should be a non-issue today. When they did the big binary break and added Symbian Signed they could have addressed a lot of this, but they chose not to. And don't get me started on Symbian Signed. Pay to have your app tested, pay to have it signed. Pay more to have your app tested if you start going deeper into the phone. Pay to have your app re-tested if you fail the test for somewhat arbitrary reasons (just check on Forum nokia to see some test rejection horror stories). Pay Nokia for the privilege of helping to grow their platform. Is it any wonder that while the total smartphone marketplace has been growing, Symbian marketshare has shrunk for 2 years running?

  2. Android by rufus+t+firefly · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Sounds like a response to Android, but a little late.

    Other than install base for phones, what advantage does an opensourced Symbian have over Android?

    There were rumors of Android and Symbian merging for a while, but it seems as though Symbian has taken to cheap heckling.

    --
    "He may look like an idiot, and talk like an idiot, but don't let that fool you. He really is an idiot." - Duck Soup
    1. Re:Android by Hurricane78 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Simple. We talked about, how people like what they are used to, in earlier news.

      Well, I must say, judging the user-interface alone, I liked Symbian. Here in Germany, Nokia phones (with Symbian on them) pretty much dominated the market for a decade. Only recently have the SonyEricsson models taken over.

      I know, that the programming interface of Symbian is a horrible horrible joke, that lets the Microsoft Internet Explorer pale in comparison.
      So open-sourcing might make it possible to re-implement the horrible part, while leaving the user-interface intact, and hopefully also allowing backwards-compatibility.

      We all wanted to program cool stuff for the Symbian platform... until we read about the API quirks. ;)
      So maybe now we can.

      But do we still want? ...With Android and others out there? We will only know, when we see it happen.

      --
      Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
    2. Re:Android by TheRaven64 · · Score: 4, Funny

      Totally! Any platform that barely has 70% of the market clearly has no future. Any changes makes are just reactionary measures to deal with a competitor that has almost scraped a massive 1% of the market.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
  3. Can I install it on my phone? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I have a Symbian-based phone made by Nokia. What apparently happens with these is that eventually a new version of Symbian comes out, new phones ship with it, but the people with older phones are stuck with the old Symbian version. New applications will only be written for the latest Symbian version, and thus the older phones become pretty much useless over time - no matter how much potential they have hardware-wise. From what I've understood this is pretty much what happened for example with the move from S60 2nd edition to S60 3rd edition.

    My phone is S60 3rd FP1 (Symbian 9.2), and there already exists S60 3rd FP2 (Symbian 9.3) and S60 5th edition (Symbian 9.4). So I guess my phone will become useless soon.

    Will this Open Sourcing in any way help me with getting a longer lifetime for my phone? Or do I need to keep buying new phones just to get the latest Symbian version?

  4. Symbian development by david.given · · Score: 5, Interesting

    If anyone here's interested in coding for an embedded operating system, I'd strongly recommend running the hell away from Symbian. It's awful.

    Let us gloss over the lousy documentation (in which it's impossible to find anything, and where there are no links between chapters --- so, e.g., you can't follow a superclass chain up through the S60 chapter into the Symbian core chapter). Let us also gloss over the lousy build system (a horrible maze of crappy perl scripts, which, apart from being so hideously slow that our project takes the best part of ten minutes to build even if no source files have changed, doesn't allow you to have two source files in the same project with the same name. Even if they're in different directories). Let us also pass quickly over the debugger, trying not to make eye contact, that's unreliable, will only let you debug one task at a time, and which tends to crash if you do the wrong thing.

    No, let's talk about the language.

    You program for Symbian in C++. Good, you might think. No. This is C++ with all the good bits taken out and replaced by badly designed bits.

    Let's take exceptions. There are no C++ exceptions. What there are instead are Leave codes; a macro-and-longjmp framework that replaces exceptions which allows you to throw an integer value and then catch it further up the call stack. Unfortunately because this is implemented without compiler assistance it doesn't unwind the stack frame, so destructors of locals aren't called! All is not lost, though: there's a complicated and easy-to-get-wrong manual cleanup stack on which you can push stuff that you want the system to free for you in such situations. God help you if you forget to push something, or pop something at the wrong point...

    Let's take strings. There's no standard string class, of course. What there are are an even dozen different classes for storing strings in different ways: on the heap, on the stack, constant strings owned by someone else, etc. There are some superclasses that will allow you to pass references to these things around without having to worry about the implementation.

    Except... it doesn't actually work. The various different string superclasses are incompatible. You can cast a TDes (mutable abstract string) to a TDesC (immutable abstract string). You can't cast a TPtr (mutable pointer to mutable string data) to a TPtrC (mutable pointer to immutable string data). Some of their system functions require you to pass in a reference to a concrete string type, so god help you if want to use a different implementation. You can't use certain implementations in certain contexts. The result is that for some operations you have to allocate a fixed-size buffer on the stack, call a system function to populate it, then copy the buffer into another buffer on the heap, because the buffer-on-heap object is immutable! Despite being resizeable and assignable!

    Things get even worse when you want to store multiple strings. There's a labyrinthine maze of string array classes: arrays of fixed sized strings, arrays of descriptors, arrays of pointers to strings, arrays of pointer strings (which are different)... add this to Symbian's bizarre convention where a data storage class allocates memory in its constructor but does not free it in its destructor (which means the user must manually Close() method on all member variables) and simply figuring out who's responsible for freeing a particular object becomes non-trivial. I once spent three days trying to find out how to store an array of strings without leaking them. I kid you not.

    (To be fair, they have been trying to fix this with OpenC++, a new programming environment based on, like, standards. It doesn't actually work. The interface to Symbian C++ code is patchy and poorly specced which means it's only really useful for running chunks of third-party code in a sandbox --- you still need to write your actual application in Symbian C++.)

    Now lets move on to the OS proper. Like the languag

    1. Re:Symbian development by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      The good old symbian myths:

      - No c++ exceptions, below the rebuttal:
      http://developer.symbian.com/main/downloads/papers/Exception_Handling_in_Symbian_OS-v1.02.pdf

      - Descriptors: yes, they are weird, but they do make sense:
      http://descriptors.blogspot.com/

      - Standards: Open C, pips (posix compliancy), S60Python. Is hard to build an OS on a language which was not standard when it was being designed.

      - there are more runtimes than symbian c++ (if that is too hard for you):
      http://blogs.forum.nokia.com/blog/hartti-suomelas-forum-nokia-blog/2007/05/17/slides-for-the-s60-runtimes-presentation-on-svsig

      plus: QT for s60 is around the corner and will remove some of the pain for developers.

      http://www.qtsoftware.com/developer/technical-preview-qt-for-s60

      about the debugger: I still don't see the problem with carbide.c++ 2.0 and trk to debug symbian phones. You can also go fancy an use lauterbach or any other ICE that you like. Also you can use the emulator for 90% of app developement, so unless you are making something tied to the HW your target debugging should be a breeze (if you know what you are doing).

      and about android: Please go on an read the code, run a grep for "fixme", then another for "??" and another for "hack". I specially like the TI AT command workarounds in the their telephony RIL reference implementation. This guys have put it together with gum and tape, product quality my ass.

      Yes, they have good ideas, they are not reinventing the wheel and is easier to use (sometimes), but feature wise, production quality wise, android is not just there...yet.