Yes, that is nice. It would be cool to be able to see some of that data integrated to the application manager and a way to access the application's Maemo website from there.

Of course they do. That's why Nokia has an app store. Applications are products. Most people who buy the N900 are buying a product to do certain jobs. If the jobs require additional applications they buy (or acquire, if they're free) those that they need. The end result is, ideally, a functioning product, regardless of how it was assembled.

If I need to sync with Outlook, I want a product that does that and does it reliably. I don't care if it's from Microsoft or Nokia or Joe the Developer. I don't care what it's written in. I don't care if it's open source, freeware, shareware, or commercial [with many unlimited plans running over $1000 per year, a few bucks for applications is minor]. I just want it to work.

Right now, today, if you want to make money off your product and Maemo and Symbian are your only choices you should ignore Maemo and focus on Symbian. If the N900 turns out to be a success you can try to port it later. If you are programming for yourself, buy a phone you like and program for it. If you like the N900 and are willing to wait, fine.

First off, these are a great set of questions. And ones that have been asked here in various capacities over the past few years. Its harder to answer, and for a ship the size of Nokia, its not merly a "go do it" as much as it is "what will be effected in core and non-core assets if/when we do move to doing it."

As a developer, if you cannot create demand for your application, then you are either (a) building to scratch a personal itch, or (b) have no sense of building an application to solve a problem - you are more on the side of coding for fun - which isn't a bad thing, but you end up being limited towards what you can address when you have this perspective.

Nokia tried changing this (largely western/developed countries) perception with the creation of N and E series brand lines. They then offered the hardware in mobile devices that could do this. However, there was not as much attention given to the marketing or developing on-device aspects that could have been paradigm transforming.

That being said, there's a thread here that's been talking about how one can develop applications on the N900 (using TV-Out and wireless keyboard). This would be essentially something that shouldn't just be marketed by developers, but forwarded by Nokia as one of those genre-bending approaches to mobility that the N900 and Maemo 5/6 platforms enable to be done.

After that, its all about making development tools usable and *easy* on the N900. You then end up with users, knowledgeable that they can develop on their device, pushing applications from an open platform to a nearly open store to people who just have openly held and acknowledged issues. AKA, you change mobile

This part actually requires people that think outside of the box to have people loudly shouting what it is that they do well - in good season and wisdom. When the tools become easier to use and maintain, communication with Nokia, Maemo, various other open source-supporting companies, and students becomes cleaner, then you see these changes from the bottom up.

Some of this you can see in some projects here now. For example, there are a slew of us working various angles towards getting a Bible application up and going for Maemo 5. There are some folks coding, others who will be testers, a UI/UX set of folks, and possibly more. This is allowing each of those persons to break the genre of "just another application" towards creating something that is platform defining.

EDIT: A week ago, I won an application from Nokia Conversations for asking why NFC wasn't included within the Maemo 5/N900 project and that it should be something added to the platform. This is the kind of out of the box thinking that opens up the appeal from other persons/orgs/areas. (end edit)

I can also say from personal experience that Maemo4 got a nice boost after WordPy was released. The UI/UX design, plus the attention of the developer and community allowed for Nokia to have a means to say what is possible when a community works together. But it all starts with communication. And that foundation/framework is here, just needs to be pushed/matured a bit.

By the way, HTC is quickly trying to change their model to be more like the Mer project - where the company develops something, sells it for a time, and then releases the code to the community to continue to enhance. This improves developer relations, and creates avenues for educational integrations that creates future HTC workers, marketers, etc. where these folks would have otherwise had little to no familiarity with that code or the persons there.

Is it possible to do this here? Yup.
Do you end up projecting the same image as HTC and Apple? Nope.

In time, all needed voices will rise to the top. Its a *body* though, and each part plays its role as needed - in silence until that moment.

If you are starting to develop today your application won't be ready today. Instead, program with portability in mind. This will provide long-term flexibility, and helps squashing bugs, too.

That is ONE business model. It is not the ONLY business model.

Now tell me, in this context, why would I care if that application came from an appstore ? Why would I care about what the developers business model is ?

You're not listening. By developing in Qt you get both. Actively making your application incompatible with other platforms is foolish at best.

I agree it is just one business model but I think you hit on a hugely important fact Why would I care about what the developers business model is ? I just want the application, or plug in, or extention or whatever - and i want it to work. Oh and I want it to be easy, to find, and install and set up. And if it looks cool too - Bonus!

Thank you for saying it so well

Remember: http://wiki.maemo.org/Objective:Best...nux_innovation

One year left or so.

Interesting discussion. It made me think that once maemo gains enough iUsers, who just buy whatever 5$ "apps" available at the ovi store, I just might re-package some freely available apps and sell them

(Please let us not get into a morals flame war. If you don't want people doing this, use a license that prohibits it. GPL is specifically designed to allow it as long as some rules are respected)

[QUOTE=matthewcc;356833]I agree it is just one business model but I think you hit on a hugely important fact Why would I care about what the developers business model is ? I just want the application, or plug in, or extention or whatever - and i want it to work. Oh and I want it to be easy, to find, and install and set up. And if it looks cool too - Bonus!/QUOTE]

For many apps I don't care. The reason I care for some apps is that I want some assurance that the app will exist and will be updated in a year or two. I have a better assurance of continuing support when the app is developed by a group rather than an individual and when the developers have a business model that will allow them to focus on the app rather than on exams or a new baby or whatever.

If you look at sourceforge.net there are numerous apps which are no longer being supported. Just looking at the desktop environment section, there are almost 100 projects that have released files but have not made any updates in this century. If I happen to have a solitaire game that's abandoned, it's no big deal. If apps I count on are abandoned, it is. So, yes, for some apps I want to know the developers have a business model.