Slashdot Mirror


Nokia, Intel Merge Maemo, Moblin Into MeeGo

AVee writes "Intel and Nokia just announced a new project called MeeGo. MeeGo is supposed to be the result of merging Maemo and Moblin, bringing together the best pieces of those (already quite similar platforms). Interestingly this means that Intel will be sponsoring a mobile Linux distro which will run on ARM."

162 comments

  1. Eh? by goose-incarnated · · Score: 4, Informative

    All Linux distros can potentially run on ARM ...

    --
    I'm a minority race. Save your vitriol for white people.
    1. Re:Eh? by dsavi · · Score: 1

      ...Whether they choose to focus on that area or not is a different story.

    2. Re:Eh? by goldaryn · · Score: 4, Funny

      All Linux distros can potentially run on ARM ...

      All Windows distros can potentially run

    3. Re:Eh? by goose-incarnated · · Score: 1

      ...Whether they choose to focus on that area or not is a different story.

      From the summary:

      Interestingly this means that Intel will be sponsoring a mobile Linux distro which will run on ARM."

      Is there a mobile distro that *doesn't* support ARM?

      --
      I'm a minority race. Save your vitriol for white people.
    4. Re:Eh? by zlogic · · Score: 1

      Yeah, but Intel sold its ARM division to Marvell because they thought Atom was a perfect CPU for phones, TVs and other appliances.

    5. Re:Eh? by diegocg · · Score: 1

      MeeGo will be ARM/x86, so it's not like Intel is not going to benefit from this.

    6. Re:Eh? by newdsfornerds · · Score: 1

      What is ARM/x86? Do you mean that MeeGo will be designed to run on both ARM and x86?

      --
      Damping absorbs vibrations. Dampening is caused by moisture.
    7. Re:Re:Eh? by aBaldrich · · Score: 1

      Linux has already been ported to ARM, Windows has not. And, for what we know about the leaked source code, Microsoft's standards are not optimal: the code is badly commented, etc. It's not like you click a different box in Visual Studio and voilà, ARM code. Who knows how many architecture-specific hacks they have used: all that code needs to be rewritten.
      And then you'd had to port Windows' killer apps (IE and Office). GLWT

      --
      In soviet russia the government regulates the companies.
    8. Re:Eh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe it was a joke based on the Loongson, which is a MIPS processor that can hardware-accelerate emulation of x86 instructions. Thus, MIPS/x86.

      Nah, GP just meant "ARM and x86."

    9. Re:Eh? by montibbalt · · Score: 1

      All Linux distros can potentially run on ARM ...

      All Windows distros can potentially run

      Well played

    10. Re:Re:Eh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No no no. Not "All Windows distros can potentially run [on arm]."

      All he said was "All Windows distros can potentially run". ie: On any given boot they _may_ run. Maybe not.

      By way of airplane analogy: Whoosh.

    11. Re:Eh? by Korin43 · · Score: 1

      I think the point is that Intel is making it. You know.. Intel, the company which primarily makes IA32 and AMD64 processors, is making an operating system that also supports ARM. Imagine if the line read "Interestingly this means that Microsoft will be sponsoring an office suite which will run on Linux".

    12. Re:Re:Eh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Uh, WinCE and Windows Mobile run on ARM chips you fool.

    13. Re:Re:Eh? by TemporalBeing · · Score: 2, Informative

      Linux has already been ported to ARM, Windows has not.

      Windows Mobile/WinCE/etc. have all been ported to ARM, which Microsoft provides support for.

      In fact, you even get the source code so that you can port it to the architecture of your choice; but then you have to support it yourself. That's the catch.

      Linux, OTOH, is supported on dozens of processor architectures from the ARM to the Itanium to the Cell, whether you want an 8-bit processor or 256-bit processor. Windows can't do that.

      --
      Truth is like the sun. You can shut it out for a time, but it ain't goin' away. - Elvis Presley (source: imdb.com)
    14. Re:Eh? by Hamoohead · · Score: 1

      Intel, the company which primarily makes IA32 and AMD64 processors

      (emphasis mine)

      Bet AMD is surprised. Intel should be ashamed of themselves.

      --
      "If your parents never had children, chances are you wonât either." -Dick Cavett
    15. Re:Eh? by Korin43 · · Score: 1

      AMD64 is an architecture. I guess Intel made minor changes and calls it "Intel 64", but I've never heard anyone actually call it that.

  2. Re:Quit similar? by dsavi · · Score: 2, Informative

    That is why you tag the story with "typoinsummary".

  3. Funny names by goldaryn · · Score: 5, Funny

    MeeGo is supposed to be the result of merging Maemo and Moblin

    Who named these platforms, a Lord of the Rings fan with a speech impediment?

    1. Re:Funny names by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And now it's a MeeGo--it's fun for a girl and a boy!

    2. Re:Funny names by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      MeeGo Potty!!!

    3. Re:Funny names by Rexdude · · Score: 4, Insightful

      More like a Mi-Go

      --
      "..One hosts to look them up, one DNS to find them, and in the darkness BIND them."
    4. Re:Funny names by EvilNTUser · · Score: 4, Funny

      A stupid name is a prerequisite for being a successful FOSS product. Nokia and Intel have clearly done their homework.

      Also indicating huge potential, MeeGo has already ignited a flamewar between RPM and DEB supporters. Welcome to the community!

      --
      My Sig: SEGV
    5. Re:Funny names by Moryath · · Score: 1

      Either that or a Cthulhu Fan...

    6. Re:Funny names by meringuoid · · Score: 2, Funny

      Well, I could tell you the story behind Moblin, but IT'S A SECRET TO EVERYBODY.

      --
      Real Daleks don't climb stairs - they level the building.
    7. Re:Funny names by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Maemo is a mythical figure/creature in Finnish folklore. The name has been made readable for most of western world by ditching the double a.

    8. Re:Funny names by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Please release me, let meeee gooo.

    9. Re:Funny names by Ephemeriis · · Score: 1

      More like a Mi-Go

      That was my first thought as well...

      --
      "Work is the curse of the drinking classes." -Oscar Wilde
    10. Re:Funny names by Nyrath+the+nearly+wi · · Score: 1

      Somebody should make a cutesy "Hello Kitty" version of a Mi-Go to be the logo and mascot for Meego.

    11. Re:Funny names by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      MeeGo is supposed to be the result of merging Maemo and Moblin

      Who named these platforms, a Lord of the Rings fan with a speech impediment?

      No. It was named by a Shenzhen CEO when he just wanted to end the meeting because he really needed to pee.

    12. Re:Funny names by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well played sir

    13. Re:Funny names by meringuoid · · Score: 1
      Please release me, let meeee gooo.

      BISMILLAH!

      --
      Real Daleks don't climb stairs - they level the building.
    14. Re:Funny names by Jazzbunny · · Score: 1

      MeeGo is supposed to be the result of merging Maemo and Moblin

      Who named these platforms, a Lord of the Rings fan with a speech impediment?

      Be happy they didn't name it M&M.

    15. Re:Funny names by Pictish+Prince · · Score: 1

      MeeGo is supposed to be the result of merging Maemo and Moblin

      Who named these platforms, a Lord of the Rings fan with a speech impediment?

      Be happy they didn't name it M&M.

      Probably a Lovecraft fan

      --
      Only his tendency toward a dazed stupor prevented him from screaming aloud.
    16. Re:Funny names by JohnBailey · · Score: 1

      Somebody should make a cutesy "Hello Kitty" version of a Mi-Go to be the logo and mascot for Meego.

      Nah.. Just give Tux neko ears..

      --
      It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his job depends on not understanding it.
    17. Re:Funny names by lotho+brandybuck · · Score: 1
      Too bad. It'd look totally badass with the aa... Unpronounceable deity/mythical creature names are much more terrifying.

      Not that I'm a conspiricy theorist, but what if someone at Intel was thinking.. hmm.. maybe we'll sponsor the dominant distribution for ARM platforms but give it a name that non-geeks will think is sissy.

    18. Re:Funny names by Xtifr · · Score: 1

      There may already be one on the Hello Cthulhu site.

    19. Re:Funny names by Nothing2Chere · · Score: 1

      At the risking of being juvenile, I have to say that my brain keeps putting an extra "O" in the pronunciation.

      MeeGoo...

    20. Re:Funny names by Hamoohead · · Score: 1

      The MeeGo was named by Jar-Jar, I think.

      --
      "If your parents never had children, chances are you wonât either." -Dick Cavett
    21. Re:Funny names by Bay1 · · Score: 1

      A possible Apple knock off: MeeGo I

  4. Interesting... by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 1

    Intel must be extraordinarily bullish on their ability to bring x86 into ARM's low power turf.

    1. Re:Interesting... by maxume · · Score: 1

      Or they see no benefit (or perhaps negative effects) to (excessive) software fragmentation.

      They have generally shown themselves to be rather pragmatic (as a business should).

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    2. Re:Interesting... by segedunum · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I think it's more of a case of cutting down on maintenance and reducing fragmentation. You could potentially run Moblin or any piece of software that runs on Linux on Arm by recompiling anyway, so it makes very little difference.

    3. Re:Interesting... by beguyld · · Score: 1

      Intel Atom's are already getting quite down in power consumption, now that they have truly integrated everything in one chip. The additional chip took 3x the power of the processor before. The new N450 is quoted at 5 Watts at 1.6GHz, while a Cortext A8 based OMAP 3530 at 720 MHz at 2 Watts. Both with GPUs.

      Also, Intel can push the edge on process technology and thus drive the power down further. All the while, the ARM chips are reaching into the GHz range, and so are using more power. Not that they are equivalent processor architectures, but Intel can push the power down quite a bit yet with the same or better performance.

      Intel is late to the mobile market, and they are stuck with the x86/AMD64 instruction set, but there seems to be a niche for them to run Windows and off the shelf apps. Should be interesting...

  5. Next version of the n900? by dsavi · · Score: 2, Interesting

    This will make the next version of the Nokia internet tablet series very interesting indeed, I think. Will this be a new Android, running on both netbooks and higher-end smartphones? Anyway, I like the idea.

    1. Re:Next version of the n900? by r_jensen11 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Meego's website lists netbooks, pocketables, in-vehicle, connected TV and Media Phone, so it looks like they're looking at a much broader population than Android is

    2. Re:Next version of the n900? by thms · · Score: 1
      I hope that really soon now(tm) the mobile phone operating systems (the linux based ones at least), will become interchangeable.

      Some of the newer Android hardware is quite neat, yet an OS so tightly coupled with Google-Everything is not quite to my taste. I would love to put Maemo/MeeGo on these devices. Sorry, Nokia :/

    3. Re:Next version of the n900? by gmuslera · · Score: 2, Informative

      How so? Android is already running in most of those devices (check this wikipedia page on that topic, tablets, netbooks, ebook readers and more is listed there, and there is plenty of different devices announced for a maybe close future).

    4. Re:Next version of the n900? by Zaiff+Urgulbunger · · Score: 1

      But Google aren't targeting tablets with Android -- that's more where Chrome OS might exist. Although Google have said that Chrome OS and Android may converge in the future.

  6. Meekrob? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Dude, I'd rather eat a bucket of rotten shit than another plate of meekrob.

  7. Name? by Dartz-IRL · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Meego?

    The mobile OS from Yuggoth

    --
    So there I was, scribbling down some notes off the PC screen by hand, when I reached for the keyboard and Ctrl-S'd.
    1. Re:Name? by Hurricane78 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Still better than the other way around:

      Maggot.
      The mobile OS from Yugo. ^^

      --
      Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
    2. Re:Name? by NeoSkandranon · · Score: 1

      Intel IS involved, after all...

      --
      If you can't see the value in jet powered ants you should turn in your nerd card. - Dunbal (464142)
    3. Re:Name? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  8. Does it run Jar(Jar) files by Overzeetop · · Score: 1

    Just asking...

    --
    Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
    1. Re:Does it run Jar(Jar) files by goldaryn · · Score: 2, Funny

      For JarJar files you'll need the Meesa

    2. Re:Does it run Jar(Jar) files by johnny0099 · · Score: 1

      Thanks, still laughing.

      --
      Get your dogma outta my yard!
  9. Re:Quit similar? by Megaweapon · · Score: 1

    Slashdot would probably save on bandwidth if people would tag "notypoinsummary" on the rare occasion that a summary is typo free.

    --
    I'm sure "SlashdotMedia" will improve on all the wonders that Dice Holdings blessed us all with
  10. Re:Quit similar? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I was going to go with "gibberish" myself...

  11. Package management by quantumphaze · · Score: 1, Interesting

    The real important question: What package management system will it use?

    1. Re:Package management by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      well Maemo uses debs, not sure about the other one

    2. Re:Package management by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      Q Will MeeGo use .rpm or .deb as its packaging system?
      A: MeeGo will use the .rpm format

      http://meego.com/about/faq

      Also Quim Gil of Maemo stated that it will officially support both GTK+ and Qt (original plan for Maemo 6 was to officially support only Qt and deliver GTK+ via community supported packages)
      http://talk.maemo.org/showpost.php?p=527251&postcount=87

    3. Re:Package management by goldaryn · · Score: 2, Funny

      Also Quim Gil of Maemo stated that

      Quim Gil of Maemo? Even Tolkien would have rejected that name as too preposterous

    4. Re:Package management by EvilIdler · · Score: 4, Interesting

      RPM, says Intel. Can't find a link, but there is much gnashing of teeth over that at work here. I would prefer to keep the repository apt, at the very least. But apt+dpkg would be lovely.

    5. Re:Package management by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

      That's a mistake. GTK is crap aesthetically, codewise AND from a documentation point of view. They should have concentrated on Qt for the professionals, and left GTK to rot with the "community".

    6. Re:Package management by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      RPM, says the FAQ

    7. Re:Package management by diegocg · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It's really a problem? I mean, package wars are so 1999. I recently switched to a RPM based distro after 9 years using and loving APT. And while there're differences (some advantages, some disadvantages), these days they're pretty much the same thing. I'm using KDE 4.4 from Fedora rawhide in my Fedora 13 base system, just as I would have done in Ubuntu. There're things far more important in this merge than using RPM instead of DEB. Like, for example, focusing on QT instead of Clutter.

    8. Re:Package management by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Many of Tolkien's names can be found extant around the world.

    9. Re:Package management by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Q: Will MeeGo use .rpm or .deb as its packaging system?
      A: MeeGo will use the .rpm format

      http://meego.com/about/faq

    10. Re:Package management by Hognoxious · · Score: 2, Funny

      What's the odds there'll be a fork within the next month or so?

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    11. Re:Package management by hyartep · · Score: 1

      maemo is based on debian so apt+dpkg for meego is possible. (otoh: moblin is based on fedora - it means rpm).

    12. Re:Package management by hyartep · · Score: 1

      according to official faq [http://meego.com/about/faq] package management will be rpm.

    13. Re:Package management by ChienAndalu · · Score: 1

      RPM, says Intel. Can't find a link, but there is much gnashing of teeth over that at work here. I would prefer to keep the repository apt, at the very least. But apt+dpkg would be lovely.

      I don't get why people say this. I use Debian and Archlinux but I find Archlinux's pacman much more comfortable than the apt(-get -cache -search itute) + dpkg* mess

    14. Re:Package management by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I use Debian and Archlinux but I find Archlinux's pacman much more comfortable than the apt(-get -cache -search itute) + dpkg* mess

      You might "use" dpkg but you obviously know nothing about it.

    15. Re:Package management by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Absolutely, it's a problem. I currently run multiple systems, some using yum and some apt. Apt dominates. It's that simple. I feel confident about this, having dealt with both for years now. Yum just isn't as good.

      With luck, PackageKit will abstract away much of this long term though...

    16. Re:Package management by spirit+of+reason · · Score: 1

      One question... why? I bet your prejudices are based on very outdated information.

      I've used yum, zypper, apt, and pacman based systems before, and I don't see any significant differences in the packaging format's power. Repositories are often set up a bit differently, but that's a policy issue. What is this major feature DEB has that RPM doesn't? Or even that apt has that yum doesn't?

    17. Re:Package management by MoralHazard · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I'll bet you haven't used RPM in-depth since before YUM became the preferred front-end. If you had, you would have already known that rpm:dpkg what yum:apt, and there really isn't much of a difference between the two stacks, at this point.

      It's funny how little some people can be bothered to know about the Linux world outside their own little preferred ecosystems. Last week, I suggested that a co-worker might want use RPMs instead of tarballs to distribute a patched custom LAMP stack to a server farm. Rather than admit that he didn't know anything about writing spec files and couldn't be bothered to learn, he started lecturing me on the evils of "RPM dependency hell".

      In 2050, I'm sure some people who use some kind of Linux on a daily basis will still be spouting these old saws, feebly unaware that everybody is just too polite to whack an old geezer with the clue bat.

    18. Re:Package management by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      With luck, PackageKit will abstract away much of this long term though...

      Good luck getting Portage to work with that. It's a concern because Android uses Portage.

    19. Re:Package management by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, you claimed (spanish link) that Yum used more resources and APT was better organized. In devices with lower resources, APT+DPKG seems better. Also, newer DPKG versions include some nice improvements that help a lot the developer (specially those that have to add patches to a third party package), and that improve size and decompression times by using LZMA.

      The fact that RPM was chosen seems more a political one (LSB and Linux Foundation) than a technical one. Despite that, I don't think it will be a problem. RPM is not bad and can easily be improved.

    20. Re:Package management by diegocg · · Score: 1

      RPM 4.8 (included in Fedora 13) is insanely faster.

    21. Re:Package management by quantumphaze · · Score: 1

      I use Arch too but there are some things that stack against it for consumer devices this will run on.

      Pacman lacks a stable/polished gui and has no built in downgrade support (you have to manually install an old package from /var/cache which you hopefully didn't clean out). Apt also has other features like the gpg keys that though you and I may not miss, but I'm sure others may.

    22. Re:Package management by ChienAndalu · · Score: 1

      I use Arch too but there are some things that stack against it for consumer devices this will run on.

      Pacman lacks a stable/polished gui and has no built in downgrade support (you have to manually install an old package from /var/cache which you hopefully didn't clean out). Apt also has other features like the gpg keys that though you and I may not miss, but I'm sure others may.

      Agreed. But I am sure you can create a nice polished GUI easily and also somehow allow downgrading without a dpkg-apt mess. There has to be another way.

    23. Re:Package management by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Seriously, why would anyone name their child Quim?

    24. Re:Package management by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The real important question: What package management system will it use?

      No, the real important question: Will it blend?

  12. Doh! You beat me to it. by Giant+Electronic+Bra · · Score: 1

    Always seemed to me like these were redundant projects though. 12 flavors of mobile Linux kinda defeats the whole point?

    --
    "Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem." -- Jefferson
    1. Re:Doh! You beat me to it. by Rexdude · · Score: 1

      But unlike say, OpenMoko, you have hardware vendors backing this, not to mention a proper device already on the market (Nokia N900) I think Intel already contributes to Linux, so this isn't new for them.

      --
      "..One hosts to look them up, one DNS to find them, and in the darkness BIND them."
  13. Holy 90s Batman. by srothroc · · Score: 1

    The instant I saw this name, Bronson Pinchot jumped into my memory. MeeGo was a weird show.

  14. Intel + ARM = EEE by Hurricane78 · · Score: 0

    Interestingly this means that Intel will be sponsoring a mobile Linux distro which will run on ARM.

    Embrace: Check.
    Extend: Active.
    Extinguish: Pending.

    --
    Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
    1. Re:Intel + ARM = EEE by NeoStrider_BZK · · Score: 0

      They cant do that. Maemo is big enough to survive. There are already chinese manufacturers shipping Maemo devices and there is, of course, a full open source stack, Mer.

    2. Re:Intel + ARM = EEE by aBaldrich · · Score: 1

      But they are using Linux... They can't become a monopoly, unless they find a very clever way to close Meego's source. Anyone could fork the proyect.

      --
      In soviet russia the government regulates the companies.
    3. Re:Intel + ARM = EEE by Hurricane78 · · Score: 1

      You forgot the “extend” step.

      Just add something to it, that does not directly link into GPL code (and therefore can be closed-source), but that everybody will use and expect from then on. Then everyone who does not offer that function, will be left out in the cold, and called “incompatible” (Which of course is the wrong way around and totally unfair.)

      --
      Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
    4. Re:Intel + ARM = EEE by badkarmadayaccount · · Score: 1

      Yeah, Nokia is totally gonna let that happen...

      --
      I know tobacco is bad for you, so I smoke weed with crack.
  15. Intel's not going anywhere. by FlyingBishop · · Score: 1

    It's become pretty clear that Intel's place in the market is assured. They can't stop people from using ARM in low-power devices, x86 just has too much overhead.

    What they can do is make sure that people don't have to worry about their architecture when they're using software. And that benefits everyone, because it keeps the chips we're using at top capacity.

    1. Re:Intel's not going anywhere. by AVee · · Score: 1

      And in the long term, it might just create a market for something which is neither ARM nor x86. And that something may well be build by Intel as well. The only reason we stick to x86 is binary compatibility, with more open-source that becomes less important.

  16. No by Carewolf · · Score: 4, Funny

    The real important question: What package management system will it use?

    No that's not it.

    1. Re:No by thorsen · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Please mod that guy up or the parent down. Package management is a completely irrelevant problem.

      These are actually important questions:

      How long will it take them to cut GTK support?

      What does this mean for Nokias Qt support? Many people in the Qt community have been worried that they would cut back on the desktop support in favour of the mobile parts.

      Intel controlling a Linux distro? How does this fit into the larger picture? How does this affect the possibility of it getting into the phones from, say, Motorola?

      Package management is irrelevant because it is not a general purpose system. So packages of software built for this won't be installed on Debian anyway - why worry about it?

      Bo Thorsen.

    2. Re:No by Randle_Revar · · Score: 1

      It isn't important to average users, maybe, but it is to the nerds on /.
      This is the only mobile Linux distro that takes openness and interop with desktop Linux seriously, so I'll still support it, but I really liked the fact that Maemo was Debian-based

    3. Re:No by Late+Adopter · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Maybe to the average nerd on /., but not to anyone who understands Maemo at all.

      Maemo was Debian-based in the same way that Microsoft is standards-based: buried at some pointless level and entirely irrelevant to users and developers alike. The API and SDK are of far greater consequence.

    4. Re:No by glasserc · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Speaking as a nerd on /., I have to say that whether Maemo itself is Debian-based is not as important as it seems. The Maemo repo isn't really compatible with the "true" Debian repos; if you want to apt-get install your pretty little heart out, what you do is install the package "easy-deb-chroot". In other words: getting access to the Debian software catalogue is orthogonal to the packaging system Maemo apps use. I hope that MeeGo still offers an easy-deb-chroot package, but it's fine if it's packaged as an RPM :)

      Ethan

    5. Re:No by EvilNTUser · · Score: 1

      That's misrepresenting it completely. Even though the recommended API is Qt and most people will stick to poking, Maemo's Debian base makes everything be where expected when users are in the terminal. For developers, being based on a real Linux distro means that any programming language works, and screw the SDK. A better analogy would be like the engine in your car, but certainly not like Microsoft and standards. Most people don't know how it works, but it's there, and it's important.

      --
      My Sig: SEGV
    6. Re:No by npsimons · · Score: 1

      This is the only mobile Linux distro that takes openness and interop with desktop Linux seriously, so I'll still support it, but I really liked the fact that Maemo was Debian-based

      Being a big fan of Debian (see my sig), I have to agree. Some claim that Maemo/Meego "is not a desktop OS, compatibility isn't important", but I'd just like to point out that Debian is the *only* distro I can run as a server *and* desktop OS, on multiple architectures, and not have it give me headaches. Why can't we extend the Debian model to smartphones/palmtops? Even Ubuntu, while derived from Debian, has enough differences to irritate me (the binary drivers in particular are nice until they crash the kernel). Just as a quick example of what Debian has that I would like on the N900: most of my friends have iPhones. I can easily develop software using the GNUstep packages for Debian and have the same software just work on the iPhone. Unfortunately, Maemo (another Debian derivative) doesn't even have the Objective-C *compiler*, which is shocking when you realize that Debian covers something like eleven architectures, and ARM (what's in the N900) is one of them. Furthermore, the packages (including dev tools) *work on all architectures*. I can compile ObjC on my NSLU2, but will I even be able to run those on the N900?

      I haven't used RPM based distros in a while (I happily switched away around the turn of the century), but I'm hoping that it really won't make much of a difference.

  17. Gtk RIP? by perrin · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Both Maemo and Moblin started off Gtk-based, using the Clutter toolkit on top of Gtk. Now both have switched over to Qt. Are there any other serious users of Clutter left?

    I hear lots of projects starting with or switching to Qt these days, and none that switch to or start with Gtk. Having programmed in both Gtk and Qt, I have to say I understand why. Qt is hands down the better and more elegant toolkit, despite my preference for C over C++. Qt also makes it easier than Gtk to port between Linux, Mac and Windows. Gtk on the other hand is stuck with a horrible dependency hell that prevents using it for anything serious on non-Linux platforms.

    I think the way forward for Linux on the desktop is to standardize on one GUI toolkit, and there is no doubt that this toolkit would have to be Qt. It is a bit sad, because I always like Gnome better than KDE, and I see no easy way for Gnome to convert over to Qt.

    1. Re:Gtk RIP? by ThoughtMonster · · Score: 1

      One of the main issues with GTK has been the lack of any serious corporate sponsorship. Really, money goes a long way, not only in helping people contribute more time to the project, but also in setting goals.

      That said, Clutter is still an Intel project, and probably will remain so for the time being. Intel has stated that MeeGo will remain forward-compatible to Moblin, but for how long, that remains in question.

      As far as I know, Clutter will eventually be integrated into GTK+ 3.x, just like Cairo and Pango, so maintainership will probably be passed from Intel to the GTK maintainers, if Intel decides to drop support.

    2. Re:Gtk RIP? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't worry about it. GNOME will have better support for now on, gtk will be developed mostly for desktop consume, and not needed useless things for embedded devices. Maemo's contribution to gtk was nothing for desktop (ie. GNOME). And Intel will keep developing in GTK since they won't have main developers of QT. Such a company won't rely on Nokia for it's main platform for devices. On the other hand I don't know who will back KDE after all, since neither Nokia, nor Intel is interested in PC market.

    3. Re:Gtk RIP? by SpinyNorman · · Score: 2, Interesting

      It seems that functionally Clutter has been superceded by advances in Qt.. Qt supports OpenGL/ES/VG backends and has a new "declarative UI" for designing animated and custom UIs. In fact since the Nokia aquisition Qt seems to have all but forgotten about the desktop and most new features are squarely aimed at implementing fluid custom iPhone-like interfaces on smartphone/netbook targets.

    4. Re:Gtk RIP? by Seth+Kriticos · · Score: 1, Flamebait

      I agree, it's weird.

      I was playing out with Qt and Qt Creator recently and the framework is very accessible and cross-platform, while GTK+ is somewhat more of a hassle to port. It's also nicer to develop with (much easier to get started and the Qt library has some very nice features, esp. since the 4.6 release).

      That said, I perceive KDE as a very ugly desktop environment. I stopped using it a long time ago. Still checking it out once or twice a year, but I don't like it compared to GNOME. I want a desktop that works on installation, not one where I have to tweak around for two weeks to get it do something. Also the options that pop up everywhere, the atrocious control panel and several other things are just horrible.

      Also when tweaked right (with some compiz magic) I can improve my application interaction productivity very much (application switching mapping to mouse, multiple desktop control with mouse, etc.) that are just not there in an evident way in KDE.

      Never mind the fact that it still looks ugly and very clumsy.

      I seriously don't know where this is going. Maybe the GTK+ team will do something unexpected and GTK+ 3 will completely smash Qt (though I'd be surprised), or maybe KDE will get some good looks and usability (which would also surprise me), or GNOME will be ported to Qt (haha), or maybe something else will let them both in the shadow while they don't get anywhere (though I have no clue what).

      I don't complain though. Qt integration in GNOME is not bad, so I can happily write Qt apps and don't care about the desktop (though I'm more into web and platform development, not much of a UI person).

      What ever comes around, it should be interesting.

    5. Re:Gtk RIP? by hyartep · · Score: 1

      maemo switching to qt was on the roadmap, so nothing too surprising.

      i expect they will use qt with clutter (or something based on clutter).

    6. Re:Gtk RIP? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      I don't complain though.

      That's odd, since people usually don't use words like "ugly", "horrible", "clumsy" unless they ARE complaining.

    7. Re:Gtk RIP? by ubersoldat2k7 · · Score: 1

      I hear lots of projects starting with or switching to Qt these days, and none that switch to or start with Gtk.

      I started my project on November on GTK. It's on Freshmeat, so I don't know how you missed it. I really like PyGTK and Glade, and are very easy to use and extend. Qt is very nice, too nice for me. I mean, I don't really feel its' L&F. Not that it doesn't work, it's just that I don't quite like it but I find that other people do, so it's good to have them both.

    8. Re:Gtk RIP? by segedunum · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I was playing out with Qt and Qt Creator recently and the framework is very accessible and cross-platform, while GTK+ is somewhat more of a hassle to port.

      Unfortunately, GTK is a huge panopoly of multiple dependencies that simply haven't got easier to package up over the years, and in many ways have got worse. It's cross-platform support is also pretty terrible as a result, especially when it comes to Windows and Mac but for embedded devices I would imagine the pain and maintenance would be worse. Sad, but true unfortunately.

      I want a desktop that works on installation, not one where I have to tweak around for two weeks to get it do something. Also the options that pop up everywhere, the atrocious control panel and several other things are just horrible.

      I just wonder why people post third, fourth or fifth hand 'information' from people who know very little as fact. That's like saying you can't do anything with Windows for two weeks because you have to install Office, a DVD player and a dozen other things............and you don't have to do those things with your average Linux distribution these days, apart from the DVD stuff, but there are ways and means. No one has any trouble sitting down to a KDE desktop and starting work. Perhaps you can enlighten us all?

      Also when tweaked right (with some compiz magic) I can improve my application interaction productivity very much (application switching mapping to mouse, multiple desktop control with mouse, etc.) that are just not there in an evident way in KDE.

      Well, Kwin provides a lot of options for stuff like that, but..........what I find amusing is that you're having a go at KDE because you think it takes you two weeks to configure things and you're then switching the whole thing around in the very next paragraph because KDE doesn't provide the configuration you want? Uh huh.

      Never mind the fact that it still looks ugly and very clumsy.

      Uh, huh. Alas, repeating something does not make it true I'm afraid. If you put KDE nest to Gnome, and next to the serious proprietary competitors like Vista, 7 and OS X, then you can only see one open source desktop competitor on the ugliness front. You might find things ugly as do others, but the aesthetics of desktop environments are moving on regardless.

    9. Re:Gtk RIP? by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      One of the main issues with GTK has been the lack of any serious corporate sponsorship.

      There used to be Sun. Used...

    10. Re:Gtk RIP? by ChienAndalu · · Score: 1

      Chrome?

    11. Re:Gtk RIP? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But with Qt you can code Gtk+!

      Just code your UI with Qt and you get wrappers to it work as it would be Gtk+!

      GTk+ is not n-e-e-d-e-d.

    12. Re:Gtk RIP? by MoralHazard · · Score: 1

      That's funny--I've never had to spend more than 10 minutes tweaking a new KDE desktop. And most of that is usually just adding the plasmoids I like, and setting up a quicklaunch with the apps I want.

      It takes a hot 5 seconds to open up the right menu and check the box to turn on Compiz. And all those wonderful productivity effects work basically identically on KDE and Gnome.

      There, see how I completely negated every point you thought you just made. Let this be a lesson as to why you shouldn't try to argue points based on anecdotes.

    13. Re:Gtk RIP? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Qt is an amazing brilliant toolkit. But KDE is horrible. KDE users defend it by saying "well you just aren't configuring it right." Since there is no consensus on what is the best configuration we need an objective test of this supposed flexibility. So I challenge any KDE user to configure KDE to give exactly the same user experience as Gnome. If KDE is as configurable as you all claim it should be easy for you. I doubt you will manage it in two weeks though. I don't believe it is even remotely possible.

      On the topic of KDE being ugly: If you show Gnome, KDE, Windows, Mac OS to any graphic designer, they will immediately pick out KDE as the ugly one. Why? There is no consistent color scheme, every app uses multiple different font sizes, and there is much too much stuff crammed into every window and toolbar. Even simple things like button labels are not properly centered on the buttons. None of this can be fixed with configuration. Gnome may not have the flashy eye candy, but at least what it does have has been done properly.

    14. Re:Gtk RIP? by jmorris42 · · Score: 2, Informative

      > Both Maemo and Moblin started off Gtk-based, using the Clutter toolkit on top of Gtk.

      You would have a point had it been done for technical reasons. And had you known what you were going on about. Maemo was never based on clutter, it predated clutter by several years and the hardware it ships on lacks 3d acceleration. This is corporate politics at work. Maemo is pretty much dead if you ask me, managed into oblivion. Moblin was already a dead horse, being tied too closely to both the x86 anchor and being a research toy OS watching Android come storming onto the scene sucking all the PR buzz up.

      As for Maemo, look how many flag days there have already been and how many more are planned. The current shipping product is GTK based and everyone had already been warned of a rip and replace of most of the guts to go to Qt for the next version. Why? Because Nokia went out and bought Trolltech thats why, and ya gotta eat the house brand of dogfood. Now before they can even ship a beta more corporate politics happen and the developers are going to get a much more crap they didn't ask for dumped into their laps and told to integrate it.

      So now there are two possibilities, either delay shipping the QT rewrite to merge all of the Intel tech and piss off everyone who, in anticipation of this switch was readying new code of their own, or worse ship the Qt port they had planned and announce yet again that it is a one release OS that is going to have most of it's innards ripped and replaced yet again for the next one. Who in their right mind is going to continue sinking resources into following this train wreck over the cliff? Perhaps Nokia can afford the developer resources to keep rewriting their OS for every release, but most 3rd party developers just want to release an app and get onto the next one or adding cool new features for a new version, not just keep rewriting and debugging the same one for an ever changing OS.

      --
      Democrat delenda est
    15. Re:Gtk RIP? by Mike+McTernan · · Score: 1

      Doesn't Chromium use GTK?

      --
      -- Mike
    16. Re:Gtk RIP? by Narishma · · Score: 1

      (Un)fortunately, ordinary users aren't graphics designers and don't care about any of that. Else nobody would be using Windows where it seems each application is using it's own toolkit.

      --
      Mada mada dane.
    17. Re:Gtk RIP? by Narishma · · Score: 1

      The reason Chrome uses GTK is because the people at Google responsible for the Linux port were more familiar with GTK than Qt. Nothing to do with the merits of toolkits.

      --
      Mada mada dane.
    18. Re:Gtk RIP? by xenocide2 · · Score: 1

      You would have a point had it been done for technical reasons. And had you known what you were going on about. Maemo was never based on clutter, it predated clutter by several years and the hardware it ships on lacks 3d acceleration.

      Sadly, it seems you're also out of date. Maemo5 features 3d effects, to great use. I'm not sure whether clutter was in the final design, though.

      --
      I Browse at +4 Flamebait

      Open Source Sysadmin

    19. Re:Gtk RIP? by segedunum · · Score: 1

      KDE users defend it by saying "well you just aren't configuring it right."

      Uh huh. I don't know anyone who has said that anywhere in response to any of the quite meaningless crap that gets thrown.

      Since there is no consensus on what is the best configuration we need an objective test of this supposed flexibility.

      So provide one as opposed to a bunch of rather crappy third, fourth or fifth hand comments. Gnome just doesn't have the aesthetics or functionality anywhere close to Windows or OS X, which have a great deal more configuration to them possible incidentally, and that's what KDE has to compete against - not Gnome.

      So I challenge any KDE user to configure KDE to give exactly the same user experience as Gnome.

      Well, that will be hard since Gnome doesn't have the functionality of OS X, Windows or KDE, and users of those desktop environment simply don't care about having a minimalist environment that hides a multitude of sins.

      If you show Gnome, KDE, Windows, Mac OS to any graphic designer, they will immediately pick out KDE as the ugly one. Why? There is no consistent color scheme, every app uses multiple different font sizes, and there is much too much stuff crammed into every window and toolbar.

      ROTFL. Errrrrrrrr, no. Technologically, KDE applications get their theme, colour scheme and layout from a central point and a central set of settings - as do real desktops like Windows and OS X. Examples would be nice, but yet again, no one can provide them. Fake desktops pretend by trying to enforce that in a HIG or something for all applications, and all applications diverge in one way or another no matter how hard people try. I've lost count of the number of dialogues and applications that diverge completely from the instant-apply 'standard' config to OK/Cancel buttons. Even some Gnome control panel applets have done this.

      Taking that into account though, when you have applications and this thing called functionality, divergences happen. It's why OS X strikingly different styles to many applications, why applications like Office are unlike anything else in Windows and there are at least three distinct looks in there for many applications. However, users pick application functionality and the ability of their desktop and applications to do something over an Anonymous Coward's definition of ugliness every time.

    20. Re:Gtk RIP? by Funnnny · · Score: 1

      Wow, it's like your switch from Windows to Linux and say: What, I want Internet Explorer, where is it ? Such a crappy OS, I have to tweak 1 week just to get IE.

      Another wow, I wanna find Control Panel, what, Linux doesn't have it ?

    21. Re:Gtk RIP? by EvilNTUser · · Score: 1

      The whole point of switching to Qt is that porting is often as easy as recompiling, and both are very similar Linux distributions. I don't think what you fear is that likely, especially since you can already write Qt apps even for Maemo 5.

      --
      My Sig: SEGV
    22. Re:Gtk RIP? by KugelKurt · · Score: 1

      Why should they use Qt with Clutter? Qt already has similar technology built in.

    23. Re:Gtk RIP? by segedunum · · Score: 1

      You would have a point had it been done for technical reasons. And had you known what you were going on about. Maemo was never based on clutter, it predated clutter by several years and the hardware it ships on lacks 3d acceleration.

      He does know what he's talking about. He specifically said Maemo and Moblin, and Moblin does use Clutter.

      The current shipping product is GTK based and everyone had already been warned of a rip and replace of most of the guts to go to Qt for the next version. Why? Because Nokia went out and bought Trolltech thats why, and ya gotta eat the house brand of dogfood. Now before they can even ship a beta more corporate politics...

      You'd probably like think it was corporate politcs, but:

      Maemo is pretty much dead if you ask me, managed into oblivion. Moblin was already a dead horse, being tied too closely to both the x86 anchor and being a research toy OS watching Android come storming onto the scene sucking all the PR buzz up.

      Because Maemo is so far behind the technological curve when compared with Android and the iPhone it isn't funny. Technologically, from a maintenance and future development point of view, Maemo as it was, based on GTK, as a total dead-end that would have taken years to get into shape - if ever. Maemo was never something Nokia could ship on awider basis, and Moblin went down the same road.

      ...but most 3rd party developers just want to release an app and get onto the next one or adding cool new features for a new version, not just keep rewriting and debugging the same one for an ever changing OS.

      The sooner this change is done the sooner people can get on with writing applications - which never materialised with Maemo as it was.

  18. There can only be one! by micron · · Score: 1

    How about the handset manufacturers get behind one distro, and make it awesome? All multuple distros, with multiple app stores, and all sorts of crazy interfaces will do is fragment the market. In the end, none of them will succeed!

    1. Re:There can only be one! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah! Because no competition WORKS!

    2. Re:There can only be one! by alexandre · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Well, iPhone is doomed to stay as proprietary garbage, as is WinMo 7.
      Now what's left: Android, Meego, Palm, ...

      Those 3 could probably work together... Maybe Android is too full of itself and Samsung should join Meego and drop Bada too.

      The question for all these is who control the app store, and i think meego allows all of them to control their own while still staying compatible.
      This also means open access to an open market of different store for consumers if the platform is to stay open and thus attract people.

      Are we seeing the computer software industry transform into a "Label" that distributes apps?
      I can't understand this model in a world where everyone can setup their own distribution channel for 20$.
      It's only a winning move if you can sell hardware and the only way to compete against the über monopolistic Apple model is this.

      So the cycle of proprietary / FOSS reaction goes on ...

    3. Re:There can only be one! by MichaelSmith · · Score: 1

      Well, iPhone is doomed to stay as proprietary garbage, as is WinMo 7.
      Now what's left: Android, Meego, Palm, ...

      Those 3 could probably work together... Maybe Android is too full of itself and Samsung should join Meego and drop Bada too.

      There is SHR and QtMoko. Enlightenment is the desktop environment for SHR and the enlightenment team are working for Samsung now.

    4. Re:There can only be one! by ChunderDownunder · · Score: 1

      Now what's left: Android, Meego, Palm, ...

      Linux based? meh.

      In case you missed it, Symbian went open source this month.

  19. Moorestown by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Nokia will probably use Moorestown

  20. Nokia and maybe GNOME wins... by camcorder · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Nokia bought Trolltech in order to get control of QT. And Intel bought OpenedHand in order to improve Clutter and Moblin. Now they merge their platforms, which is based on the Nokia's QT. Money wasted for OpenedHand buy out? It looks like Intel had plenty of money to dump for unstrategic move.

    Now it's obvious that QT will evolve for Mobile devices. And GTK will evolve to be a solid Desktop toolkit for Linux. When maemo project started GTK had lost lots of blood because Nokia contribution had no visible benefit to desktop users. That affected GNOME very much. Now I think KDE will suffer this mobile-movement of QT. I hope they won't, but history is evident for it to happen.

    1. Re:Nokia and maybe GNOME wins... by segedunum · · Score: 1

      Now it's obvious that QT will evolve for Mobile devices. And GTK will evolve to be a solid Desktop toolkit for Linux.

      Well, Qt (it's Qt by the way) has been available for mobile devices for years and it already is a solid desktop toolkit for Linux. The added development, interest and perhaps new applications and functionality from the mobile direction will be most welcome. I know a lot of people like to crow about the 'Linux desktop', but there has been nothing whatsoever happening on that front for Gnome or KDE for years, despite the hype, so perhaps it can be nudged forwards from another direction?

      When maemo project started GTK had lost lots of blood because Nokia contribution had no visible benefit to desktop users.

      I don't know why some people have that perception. Nokia contributed sparingly to GTK, and only in areas that they thought would benefit Maemo. They didn't exactly suck the life out of GTK because GTK has suffered from well known manpower shortages for years. Gnome 3 will almost certainly happen with GTK 3 being barely a glimmer on the horizon, or GTK 3 will be released with minimal changes on the 2.x line. Certainly, Nokia thought that GTK needed an overhaul for Maemo that they weren't willing to fund themselves, hence their change of tac for Maemo.

      That affected GNOME very much. Now I think KDE will suffer this mobile-movement of QT.

      Really? I don't see how. Qt has been available on mobile platforms for years and it certainly doesn't seem to have affected KDE in anything other than a positive way (they've got a major new version of their desktop out with it) or the manpower and resources Nokia have been able to put into Qt. Gnome Mobile and Maemo has had very, very little affect (certainly not negative) on the rest of Gnome - apart from the fact that Gnome Mobile has been an utter failure both technologically (where is it?) and PR-wise and rather an embarrassment.

    2. Re:Nokia and maybe GNOME wins... by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      I don't see why Qt would lose. Its development tools (Qt Creator, KDevelop) are still much better and more polished than anything Gtk has to offer, and much more like what you have in Windows land. Heck, Qt Creator is probably the first real C++ RAD environment for Linux that I've seen, and the second one overall (the first one was C++ Builder).

      Also, Qt is preferable if you want better L&F integration - if you write a Gtk application, it will look alien in KDE, but if you write a Qt4 appication, it will pick up the current Gtk theme when running under Gnome.

    3. Re:Nokia and maybe GNOME wins... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who said Qt will lose. It's a good thing for Qt, but only in its mobile related parts. I'm talking about KDE. Nokia and Intel used Gtk for years and there had been no single improvement for GTK about desktop usage of it. Why now Qt will get better for Desktop usage?

    4. Re:Nokia and maybe GNOME wins... by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      Qt doesn't need to get any better for desktop usage - it's already better than anything else in Linux land (and, for C++, anything on any platform).

  21. Intel and ARM by barbazoo · · Score: 1

    Actually, Intel and ARM are not exactly competitors in the mobile world. Heck, Intel even manufactures ARM based chips, so I can't really see why it's such a big deal that they back a ARM based linux distro for deviced where the ARM architecture is de facto standard.

    1. Re:Intel and ARM by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      From the Wikipedia link you posted it seems pretty evident that Intel don't manufacture ARM based chips anymore and haven't done since 2006.

    2. Re:Intel and ARM by Randle_Revar · · Score: 2, Informative

      Intel sold XScale a long time ago. June 2006, in fact, as you would know if you had looked at the link you posted.

  22. OpenMoko by Giant+Electronic+Bra · · Score: 1

    Really I don't quite get why OpenMoko exists as an independent project either except that nobody seemed able to agree to all get together. Fragmentation in server and desktop space isn't a big deal and the choices made available to users are valuable, but in the mobile marketplace those considerations really don't apply so much. All that is really left as a justification for various mobile Linux projects has always been no more than technical disagreements about how to implement certain things and a desire for various vendors like Intel to focus on elements specific to their hardware architecture.

    I think its been inevitable that at some point all these various mobile Linux projects would collapse together into one uber project. Some may instead simply fade away of course, but I suspect eventually even Android will be sucked in. OpenMoko too is unlikely to continue to exist as a completely distinct project for too much longer.

    --
    "Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem." -- Jefferson
    1. Re:OpenMoko by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, and then, like Ubuntu on the desktop, it will explode and fragment into niche-special distros, which will evolve, then be recollected into another uber-project.

      It's kinda like that hack in 3.5 where you turned yourself into a black pudding, split yourself a billion times, went out adventuring in each form, and then use xp-reallocation techniques to merge yourself back together and gain a billion levels.

    2. Re:OpenMoko by MichaelSmith · · Score: 1

      The openmoko software projects are entirely community driven. The hardware development is only done by educational institutions now I believe. Parts of the software stack will most likely survive beyond the openmoko project. The Enlightenment team are working for Samsung on smart phones for example. For now, I have a great phone which I like using and which I can develop for, so I am happy.

    3. Re:OpenMoko by mehemiah · · Score: 1

      Thats what Naruto does!

  23. It might be something new and good:) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    According to the two companies, MeeGo will support multiple hardware architectures across a broad range of device segments, including pocketable mobile computers, netbooks, tablets, mediaphones, connected TVs and in-vehicle infotainment systems.

    http://www.eweekeurope.co.uk/news/mwc--nokia-and-intel-team-up-for-new-linux-mobile-os-3367

  24. Do not say dependency hell... by ElusiveJoe · · Score: 2, Interesting

    ...when it's simple negligence. While package maintainers take care of Gtk for linux, Gtk for windows is in ruins.

    There's no installer on official gtk page. C'mon guys, it's 2010, and you still package it in zip archives?

    Ok, there is an installer on SF, but wait, there's no Glade support in there!

    Oh, here is Glade, but oh, it's shipping with its own Gtk bundle, which is outdated and incompatible with the first one.

    Ok, let's install the major Gtk app, GIMP... Wait, I already have two gtk bundles installed, I don't need another one! What do you mean, "no choice"?

    Hmmm, let's try this Deluge app... At last, I can skip Gtk installation and use one of the previously installed. Hey, why did it crash?

    F**k it, even .NET is better.

    1. Re:Do not say dependency hell... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      1. Glade is obsolete, use GtkBuilder.
      2. http://www.gtk.org/download-windows.html

    2. Re:Do not say dependency hell... by bmcage · · Score: 1
      glade is deprecated, you are supposed to use gkbuilder.

      You only need the glade package on windows if you want to use the glade interface editor to create xml files gtkbuilder can read

    3. Re:Do not say dependency hell... by ElusiveJoe · · Score: 1

      Unfortunately, some programs still use Glade. I don't remember now, but I think it was Deluge which wanted libglade.

      Anyway, this doesn't answer why there are no references to Glade on gtk.org? Or why Glade is shipping with its own Gtk?

      When I open QT website I get a full development suite, including SDK, IDE and GUI designer. What do I get on gtk.org? A bunch of assorted zipped sources and libraries, like it's 1995. It's a pity, because I like Gtk more than Qt.

  25. Good move by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I was recently worried they'd both wither on the vine trying to compete against Android and filling almost exactly the same space. Thus I was thinking I'd have to base a project on ChromeOS, which seemed strategically foolish (at least Nokia and Intel will have divergent interests to keep development focused on solving problems well in the abstract, rather than quick-n-dirty tangents a single vendor can accept).

    Especially if they stay with the mainline kernel, which Google isn't interested in doing, together Intel and Nokia are going to be much more successful than competing poorly against each other and Google.

    So, here's one developer's intent to go this way rather than Android (for a non-phone project). Congrats to the adults in both camps.

    --
    My God, it's Full of Source!
    OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
  26. Return of the Meego by ToreTS · · Score: 1

    Seriously, "Moblin", "Maemo" and "Meego" sound like characters in some cheesy science fiction or fantasy film.

    1. Re:Return of the Meego by ChipMonk · · Score: 1

      Or George Lucas' dialog for Jar-Jar.

  27. Re:Quit similar? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My spell check says "quit" is spelled correctly. It may be the wrong word, but it's spelled properly.

  28. Well defined and stable API by blackgod · · Score: 1

    What about API for app developers? In my understanding, MeeGo is not going to have a unique app stack like Android does have. MeeGo's compatibility with desktop will bring existing great apps to Mobile device. That is good one. But there is no well defined API (like iPhone and Android) to make it happen. How about my understanding?

    --
    bits and bytes of life should serve the needy - My bits and bytes
    1. Re:Well defined and stable API by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is not like you describe: There will be a set of standarised APIs: Qt for windowing system, D-Bus for intercomunication (as it is in maemo, now). Gtk is being supported mostly for backwards compatibility with current Maemo devices.
      Moreover, Qt-based apps will only require recompiling for symbian^3

  29. URGH - Qt is awful. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why all this talk about 'community'- while doing some corporate alliance between Intel & Nokia.
    Why abandon, the open and widely deployed GNOME / gtk+ base for this corporately controlled Qt crud ?
    This seems like a retarded move. Why are Intel and Nokia once again trying to do their own thing, after their (apparent) failure on Moblin and Maemo to actually build a real community around the stacks ?
    Why are they wasting time on dumb stuff like ConnMan ? who makes up this stuff ? how is it going to end up improving Desktop Linux (if at all) ?

    1. Re:URGH - Qt is awful. by segedunum · · Score: 1

      Why abandon, the open and widely deployed GNOME / gtk+ base for this corporately controlled Qt crud ?

      Because GTK+/Gnome proved to be shite, very few applications were written for Maemo as a result and it couldn't do all the cool stuff they wanted to compete with Android and the iPhone.

    2. Re:URGH - Qt is awful. by TheCycoONE · · Score: 1

      FUD? GNOME/gtk+ is managed by the GNOME foundation, an NPO, and Qt is managed by Nokia a for profit company but that's where the differences end. Both are available through public git repositories, and both are licensed through the LGPL (with Qt also available through the GPL 3 and Proprietary licenses).

      Qt is fairly widely deployed as well, even in the 'community' or would you like us to forget about KDE?

  30. WELL DUH !!! by mehemiah · · Score: 1

    also from the "there can only be one" department, all those stupid android phones should standardize on one UI implimentation, the linux Tablet makers should stick to one UI implementation per spec (internet tablet, productivity tablet) so we dont confuse the poor users on the systems. all this duplication of effort was stupid anyway. There's evolution and then there's Me-Too, which one was this? The reason why apple beats windows is because they make both hardware and software. Nokia could have put their linux on the netbook they made and it could have competed with the MacBook air, but no, they put windows on it where they have no control. The only thing wrong with apple laptops is their broken stupid bios, (some have virtualization disabled.) otherwise you can load whatever. Now someone can make a tablet just as beautifull and by virtue of choice more powerfull by loading it with MeeGo for shipping and allowing anyone to put anything else on it at void of warrente.

  31. Exactly... by Qubit · · Score: 1

    I was recently worried they'd both wither on the vine trying to compete against Android and filling almost exactly the same space.

    I've been especially excited about the fact that the n900 runs what roughly amounts to Debian inside. Google's neutering of key parts of the Linux kernel and subsystems really put a damper on people hacking on those internals of Android or porting existing software to the mobile OS.

    Especially if they stay with the mainline kernel, which Google isn't interested in doing

    It was quite disheartening for Google to make that choice. Google's decision was probably based on some kind of cheapest-bang-for-the-buck calculation, but the funny thing is that Google often goes the extra mile, such as their Data Liberation Front team that helps people migrate data out of Google services. By segregating the Android OS from mainline kernel development Google has shot themselves in the foot. Maybe hardware vendors will see this as well and choose another OS, such as MeeGo, for their future phones.

    This bit is very encouraging:

    MeeGo also means compatibility and full compliance with leading open source projects. We will not fork projects if we can possibly avoid it. We will work with leading open source projects using the open source best practices.

    As a final parting shot, I have the most experience with Debian and Ubuntu system, so I would have preferred that they choose apt and .debs over yum and .rpms, but certainly more important than the package manager is the hope that they'll continue to maintain a free and open system.

    --

    coding is life /* the rest is */
    1. Re:Exactly... by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

      As a final parting shot, I have the most experience with Debian and Ubuntu system, so I would have preferred that they choose apt and .debs over yum and .rpms, but certainly more important than the package manager is the hope that they'll continue to maintain a free and open system.

      Agreed. I have more experience on the RPM side, but I owned an n810 for about a year and found apt to be fine, it didn't really matter. The bad old days of dpkg bitching about circular dependencies didn't revisit during my time on maemo.

      I suspect what won them over is that Fedora pushes on the new technology front much harder than debian, and something like MeeGo can't be a couple years behind. They could have rebased on Ubuntu, but then they'd both be in new territory.

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
  32. One more Linux "platform"? by Argon · · Score: 1

    OMiGo might've been a better name :-).