Re: Unix vs Windows security (was Re: Nokia device usage)
ThinLinc from www.cendio.com is a perfect alternative to Citrix which also works perfectly on *nix software. It is built on open source product and offers a very cheap and more reliable solution compared to Citrix. BR Henrik On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 07:22:26AM -0400, James Knott wrote: George Farris wrote: On Thu, 2009-03-12 at 22:15 -0600, Mark Haury wrote: James Knott wrote: Windows doesn't need (never has, and never will) to have the capability for simultaneous users. What would be the point? As PCs continue to shrink in size as they increase in power, it makes a lot more sense for everybody to have their own separate computer and not share someone else's. Home networking is a no-brainer if they want or need to share anything. The point my friend, would be to separate the different processes such as apache, postfix, desktop apps etc into different user ids thus gaining a logical, built in, separation of security boundaries. The point I made about Citrix is that many companies have a need to run multiple users on a server. Citrix came up with a way to make that possible, as Windows by itself can't do that. While you can have multiple users on Windows, they can't be on at the same time. That sort of thing comes standard with Linux or Unix. -- Use OpenOffice.org http://www.openoffice.org ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users -- ___ Henrik Madsen Phone : (+45) 45 25 34 08 Informatics and Mathematical Modelling, Fax : (+45) 45 88 26 73 Technical University of Denmark,E-Mail : h...@imm.dtu.dk Building 321 DK-2800 Lyngby Denmark ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users
Re: Unix vs Windows security (was Re: Nokia device usage)
James Knott wrote: George Farris wrote: On Thu, 2009-03-12 at 22:15 -0600, Mark Haury wrote: James Knott wrote: Windows doesn't need (never has, and never will) to have the capability for simultaneous users. What would be the point? As PCs continue to shrink in size as they increase in power, it makes a lot more sense for everybody to have their own separate computer and not share someone else's. Home networking is a no-brainer if they want or need to share anything. The point my friend, would be to separate the different processes such as apache, postfix, desktop apps etc into different user ids thus gaining a logical, built in, separation of security boundaries. The point I made about Citrix is that many companies have a need to run multiple users on a server. Citrix came up with a way to make that possible, as Windows by itself can't do that. While you can have multiple users on Windows, they can't be on at the same time. That sort of thing comes standard with Linux or Unix. i could have sworn that microsoft have remote desktop now. hell, the story goes that microsoft killed of smart displays as it would be a cheap way to do multi-user on xp home. something that would undermine their more expensive multi-user licenses on win2k3 (where, iirc, you pay ones for the os, and ones for the number of users you want able to access the system at the same time). ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users
Re: Unix vs Windows security (was Re: Nokia device usage)
kenneth marken wrote: hell, the story goes that microsoft killed of smart displays as it would be a cheap way to do multi-user on xp home. something that would undermine their more expensive multi-user licenses on win2k3 (where, iirc, you pay ones for the os, and ones for the number of users you want able to access the system at the same time). I have used RDC and IIRC, you could log in as the user or, if you wanted to use a different account, i.e. admin, the user had to log out. It's been a while since I've used it, so my memory may need replacing. ;-) -- Use OpenOffice.org http://www.openoffice.org ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users
Re: Unix vs Windows security (was Re: Nokia device usage)
George Farris wrote: On Thu, 2009-03-12 at 22:15 -0600, Mark Haury wrote: James Knott wrote: Windows doesn't need (never has, and never will) to have the capability for simultaneous users. What would be the point? As PCs continue to shrink in size as they increase in power, it makes a lot more sense for everybody to have their own separate computer and not share someone else's. Home networking is a no-brainer if they want or need to share anything. The point my friend, would be to separate the different processes such as apache, postfix, desktop apps etc into different user ids thus gaining a logical, built in, separation of security boundaries. The point I made about Citrix is that many companies have a need to run multiple users on a server. Citrix came up with a way to make that possible, as Windows by itself can't do that. While you can have multiple users on Windows, they can't be on at the same time. That sort of thing comes standard with Linux or Unix. -- Use OpenOffice.org http://www.openoffice.org ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users
Re: Unix vs Windows security (was Re: Nokia device usage)
Henrik Madsen wrote: ThinLinc from www.cendio.com is a perfect alternative to Citrix which also works perfectly on *nix software. It is built on open source product and offers a very cheap and more reliable solution compared to Citrix. I'm not familiar with that, but it's still an add on to Windows to accomplish what's standard with Linux Unix. I have multiple Linux systems here. I can remotely access them, either with a full desktop or just an individual app, without worrying about someone else ( my dog or cat :-) using them. -- Use OpenOffice.org http://www.openoffice.org ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users
Re: Unix vs Windows security (was Re: Nokia device usage)
On Thu, Mar 12, 2009 at 11:16 PM, George Farris farr...@shaw.ca wrote: On Thu, 2009-03-12 at 22:15 -0600, Mark Haury wrote: James Knott wrote: Windows doesn't need (never has, and never will) to have the capability for simultaneous users. What would be the point? As PCs continue to shrink in size as they increase in power, it makes a lot more sense for everybody to have their own separate computer and not share someone else's. Home networking is a no-brainer if they want or need to share anything. The point my friend, would be to separate the different processes such as apache, postfix, desktop apps etc into different user ids thus gaining a logical, built in, separation of security boundaries. Windows does this... The fact remains that in spite of theories and claims, actual unaided attacks on Windows boxes that are successful are actually quite rare. The ones that are successful are usually because of the gaping security hole between the keyboard and the chair. The so-called holes are exploited in contrived circumstances which are much more difficult to find in the wild. As evident by the HUGH number of patches we see coming down the pipe for Windows. And yes, there are lots of patches for Linux but by far and wide most of those are for applications not the kernel. Circular reasoning... Again, Linux is *NOT* Unix. Regardless, since no one is putting serious effort into developing viruses and such for it (there's exactly zero payoff) No what would be the advantage to getting into such small sites as say oh Google, Youtube, Facebook, Wikipedia all of which run Linux, not Windows or Unix for a reason. Yeah, that reason being that it's free and they can do what they want with it... Face it Windows is like stacking up books one on top of the other and standing on the top, after adding about 5 or 6 services it gets pretty wobbly and fragile. ...and as I've said, Linux isn't anywhere nearly as stable as you want everybody to believe. I've already had to forcibly reboot my Eee PC three times because kubuntu crashed, and I only got the machine Tuesday night. There's a lot more in common than different. You can generally take source code and compile it to run on either. Way more common and Linux is pulling major market share from Unix. ...because it's *free* and Unix is more expensive than Windows... As time goes on, Linux becomes more like Windows than like Unix as far as the user experience. There are very compelling reasons for that. This is just plain not true. Such as running Linux with only a console, nothing like Windows. Look at Linux running on big iron and it's a different story. Yeah, the average user really runs Linux with only a console...NOT! ...and you make it sound so easy to compromise Windows, and so hard to compromise *Linux* (you keep saying Unix when what you really mean is Linux...). The reality is somewhat different, and the ease of security breach is directly related to the operator/owner's actions and settings rather than the OS. No the design of the systems are completely different, maybe have a go at reading Operating Systems, Design and Implementation by Andrew Tanenbaum, it laid out rather nicely in there. Who said the underlying architecture isn't completely different? What I said was that the user experience is becoming much more similar, which is the only way that Linux will ever make inroads into the average user's desktop, and that requires certain compromises that reduce security. I hate Micro$oft and Windows as much as anybody (as much because they've trained society to accept bugs as normal than anything else), but I hate even more the fact that I *still* have to waste a significant amount of space on my hard drives for dual-booting into Windows to do the things that Linux can't do. The fact remains that the reason Linux hasn't taken over the world is because it just doesn't meet the needs of most users, especially the less techie ones. Hmm, first, try running VirtualBox or something similar and forget dual booting, and second the rest of the computing world seems to be heading towards the, Virtualization is NOT the answer. It's a PITA to set up and has all kinds of issues that no one is talking about. Yes Linux is good and does meet the needs of most users as evident by the growing number of users. I guess your idea of most users is different than mine. Growing and most are very different concepts in my mind, and growing from 0.44% to 0.80% market share is hardly impressive. That's an 82% increase, which sounds good until you notice that the actual numbers are so tiny. http://blogs.zdnet.com/hardware/?p=2179 Then there's the fact that the netbooks, which are the #1 reason for the Linux market share increase in the last 18 months, are already going back to Windows. Try and find an Eee PC with Linux at this point, and your choices will be severely
Re: Unix vs Windows security (was Re: Nokia device usage)
Mark wrote: From: http://arstechnica.com/open-source/news/2009/03/french-police-saves-millions-of-euros-by-adopting-ubuntu.ars Games are not our priority I guess they're not into Cops and Robbers. ;-) -- Use OpenOffice.org http://www.openoffice.org ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users
Re: Nokia device usage
John Holmblad a écrit : Jean-Christian, interesting. And from the diagram I see your point. Of course the N95 is a full function mobile phone and based on that N95 diagram I would expect that the heavy lifting of the 3G voice and HSPA protocols for voice and non-voice (packet) data above the physical layer would be implemented/managed between the Baseband and the Application processor shown in that diagram as Texas Instruments devices. This in turn would suggest to me that that whether a device of this hardware design does or does not support 3G voice (not HSPA packetized voice) would be determined by whatever firmware/software is on the device and not by the hardware components in this design. I should also note that one of the mobile device component suppliers, ST Ericsson, for their AERO RF TRANSCEIVER RF component family does mention in their marketing brochure available as an Adobe Acrobat .pdf at the www page whose url is http://www.stericsson.com/sales_marketing_resources/RFBR_1.pdf that these components can be used for either Tri-band HSPA + quad-band GSM/GPRS/EDGE digital cellular handsets or Tri-band HSPA + quad-band GSM/GPRS/EDGE digital cellular data modems In other words, the components suppliers such as ST Ericsson realize that their customers (the mobile handset manufacturers) may be interested in non-voice data devices as well as full function handsets. But here again that differentiation ( data device only vs full handset) would be determined by baseband firmware/software. The handset or modem are only targeted applications. A transceiver is mostly a analog chip. At this stage of the 2G/3G chain, there is little if no difference between the voice and the data streams. And if it exists at all, the voice will probably be a simpler configuration of the circuit required to make HSPA. As you point out, the question is now focused on the baseband processor, and more probably his firmware. If this is the case, then the cost will be a bad excuse to not have voice and SMS support, especially for a high end device. Best Regards, -- Jean-Christian de Rivaz ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users
Re: Unix vs Windows security (was Re: Nokia device usage)
That is completely correct, there are major difference between *nix operating system and Windows. not even on the technical leve but on the quality of deisgn and approach Regards Samer Azmy On Thu, Mar 12, 2009 at 7:24 AM, Farrell J. McGovern farrell.mcgov...@gmail.com wrote: ScottW wrote: The Mac and *nix world needs to stop gloating about their clean record so far and keep an eye out for what is to come. Dues to the learning curve of the OS, the users were more enlightened than the common computer user, but now these are more wide spread and the common user will be using them. The conspiracy theory people say that Antivirus companies are the ones making most of the viruses so that they have a product to sell, well there is a market out there just waiting to be tapped. Norton AV for Mac is on the shelves even though there is only really 1 documented virus, and people buy it. The good ole saying: The devil's greatest accomplishment was to convince everyone he does not exist... well the Linux virus does not exist. You are, of course, making the classic mistake of not understanding security on computer operating systems. Popularity has little to do with how vulnerable a system is. Fact: Windows XP is about 12 years old, Vista/Windows 7 maybe 5. Unix is 40+ years old. Face: Unix was designed for a mult-user, multi-processing environment, Windows was designed for a single user, single application at a time environment, it has had mult-user and multi-processing added on to it. Thus, most everything that can affect Windows today was probably seen and corrected on the architectural level decades ago in Unix. Even the simplest thing of making the user work in a non-privileged workspace is one of the basic things that Unix has done for decades, while it is a relatively new idea in Windows. Thus, if you compromise the workspace, you don't compromise the system. Next, you have the fact that to make things really fast in Windows, you have graphics primitives in the kernel. This means that to compromise the entire system, all you need to do is compromise a graphics routine...and as almost everything is graphical in Windows...compromise the Browser, you can own the system...compromise the mail reader, you can own the system...compromise an editor you can own the system...compromise an ERROR MESSAGE, and you can own the system. With Unix, very few things can access the kernel. If you compromise the Browser, you may compromise the user's workspace, but the system remains compromised. Generally, in Windows it's a single set to compromise the entire system...on Unix, it takes usually two more more steps, first you must compromise the userspace, then you must compromise the kernel. Ultimately, it takes a lot more work to compromise a Unix system than a Windows system. And that makes Unix and systems derived from Unix inherently more secure than Windows. ttyl Farrell McGovern -- Computers make very fast, very accurate mistaeks. ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users -- __ http://geek2live.blogspot.com/ http://www.siteheed.com - You pick the level of your suffering yourself - Budha- - There is nothing noble in being superior to some other man. The true nobility is in being superior to your previous self.-- Hindu proverb - Nearly all men can stand adversity, but if you want to test a man's character, give him power.-Abraham Lincoln - Live Free or Die-Kernel The Canine- - Without music, life would be a mistake.- Nietzsche - He who reigns within himself and rules his passions, desires, and fears is more than a king.-- John Milton - The best portion of a good man's life is the little, nameless,unremembered acts of kindness and love.-- William Wordsworth (1770-1850) English poet -- - The higher type of man clings to virtue, the lower type of man clings to material comfort. The higher type of man cherishes justice, the lower type of man cherishes the hope of favors to be received.-- Confucius (551-479 BC) Chinese Philosopher ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users
Re: Unix vs Windows security (was Re: Nokia device usage)
On Mar 12, 2009, at 12:24 AM, Farrell J. McGovern wrote: ScottW wrote: The Mac and *nix world needs to stop gloating about their clean record so far and keep an eye out for what is to come. Dues to the learning curve of the OS, the users were more enlightened than the common computer user, but now these are more wide spread and the common user will be using them. The conspiracy theory people say that Antivirus companies are the ones making most of the viruses so that they have a product to sell, well there is a market out there just waiting to be tapped. Norton AV for Mac is on the shelves even though there is only really 1 documented virus, and people buy it. The good ole saying: The devil's greatest accomplishment was to convince everyone he does not exist... well the Linux virus does not exist. You are, of course, making the classic mistake of not understanding security on computer operating systems. Popularity has little to do with how vulnerable a system is. Fact: Windows XP is about 12 years old, Vista/Windows 7 maybe 5. Unix is 40+ years old. I disagree. I know all about it. Any time I want to do something on my mac, it asks for authorization. It is very secure. You are making the new mistake of believing that people know about security on their computer. That 40 year old system was being ran by people who know what they were doing and it was not in tens of thousands of homes. Having to rebuild a kernal or using sudo educates people to the security built into the OS. Yes I understand how secure it is. It is not secure because of some mystical higher power. There is a root login. There is a root password. Once those are entered, destruction is a few key clicks away. Everyone here is cringing because that has been said because we understand what root passwords do. When the I just want it to work computer user gets on there with their root password set to password and written on their case, they will be very inclined to type that in any time they are prompted for it whether they know why or not. These are people who will have no idea there is a CLI, will think a script is what a movie or play is written on, and think that if the computer is asking me for it, it must me safe. I do agree that the virus will have to take a different tact to get into the system and infect it, but the path is there. The users will self infect themselves and then the media will report that the Unix virus is wide spread. ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users
Re: Unix vs Windows security (was Re: Nokia device usage)
Greetings All, Please take this thread to a more appropriate list, it has very little to do with tablet usage at this point. It might be better suited to the SecurityFocus Security Basics list, for example. Subscription info below: http://www.securityfocus.com/archive/105/description#0.3.1 Thanks, Mike Lococo ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users
Re: Unix vs Windows security (was Re: Nokia device usage)
While I hate OS wars; it's like taking to your cat. This was a well thought out response and worth reading. Thanks, Denis -- sik vis paw kem, para bellum -- oderint dum metuant -- Our Country won't go on forever, if we stay soft as we are now. There won't be any AMERICA because some foreign soldiery will invade us and take our women and breed a hardier race! -LT. GEN. LEWIS CHESTY PULLER, USMC On Wed, Mar 11, 2009 at 11:24 PM, Farrell J. McGovern farrell.mcgov...@gmail.com wrote: ScottW wrote: The Mac and *nix world needs to stop gloating about their clean record so far and keep an eye out for what is to come. Dues to the learning curve of the OS, the users were more enlightened than the common computer user, but now these are more wide spread and the common user will be using them. The conspiracy theory people say that Antivirus companies are the ones making most of the viruses so that they have a product to sell, well there is a market out there just waiting to be tapped. Norton AV for Mac is on the shelves even though there is only really 1 documented virus, and people buy it. The good ole saying: The devil's greatest accomplishment was to convince everyone he does not exist... well the Linux virus does not exist. You are, of course, making the classic mistake of not understanding security on computer operating systems. Popularity has little to do with how vulnerable a system is. Fact: Windows XP is about 12 years old, Vista/Windows 7 maybe 5. Unix is 40+ years old. Face: Unix was designed for a mult-user, multi-processing environment, Windows was designed for a single user, single application at a time environment, it has had mult-user and multi-processing added on to it. Thus, most everything that can affect Windows today was probably seen and corrected on the architectural level decades ago in Unix. Even the simplest thing of making the user work in a non-privileged workspace is one of the basic things that Unix has done for decades, while it is a relatively new idea in Windows. Thus, if you compromise the workspace, you don't compromise the system. Next, you have the fact that to make things really fast in Windows, you have graphics primitives in the kernel. This means that to compromise the entire system, all you need to do is compromise a graphics routine...and as almost everything is graphical in Windows...compromise the Browser, you can own the system...compromise the mail reader, you can own the system...compromise an editor you can own the system...compromise an ERROR MESSAGE, and you can own the system. With Unix, very few things can access the kernel. If you compromise the Browser, you may compromise the user's workspace, but the system remains compromised. Generally, in Windows it's a single set to compromise the entire system...on Unix, it takes usually two more more steps, first you must compromise the userspace, then you must compromise the kernel. Ultimately, it takes a lot more work to compromise a Unix system than a Windows system. And that makes Unix and systems derived from Unix inherently more secure than Windows. ttyl Farrell McGovern -- Computers make very fast, very accurate mistaeks. ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users
Re: Unix vs Windows security (was Re: Nokia device usage)
Hello root user is not the absolute power any more, please dont forget SELINUX and the MLS Multi Level Seurity you can read more on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Selinux On Thu, Mar 12, 2009 at 6:15 PM, Mark wolfm...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Mar 11, 2009 at 11:24 PM, Farrell J. McGovern farrell.mcgov...@gmail.com wrote: ScottW wrote: The Mac and *nix world needs to stop gloating about their clean record so far and keep an eye out for what is to come. Dues to the learning curve of the OS, the users were more enlightened than the common computer user, but now these are more wide spread and the common user will be using them. The conspiracy theory people say that Antivirus companies are the ones making most of the viruses so that they have a product to sell, well there is a market out there just waiting to be tapped. Norton AV for Mac is on the shelves even though there is only really 1 documented virus, and people buy it. The good ole saying: The devil's greatest accomplishment was to convince everyone he does not exist... well the Linux virus does not exist. You are, of course, making the classic mistake of not understanding security on computer operating systems. Popularity has little to do with how vulnerable a system is. Yeah, tell that to celebrities. I'm sure they just *love* the stalkers and paparazzi. When's the last time *you* were surrounded by dozens of photographers documenting the worst moments of your life? Anyway, it's not about popularity, it's about payoff. Any time there's something to gain (Windows boxes), people will keep trying. When there's nothing to gain (Linux boxes), there's no motivation. More attacks=more vulnerability. The law of averages says that the more attacks there are, the more likely that sooner or later one will be successful. Someone who has their home Windows machine set to autologin and no firewall or antivirus software but uses a gateway, never uses Outlook or IE and never opens messages (never mind attachments) from someone they don't know is much less vulnerable than someone who has every possible security aspect in place on their laptop (any OS) that is exposed to open networks and/or leaves their computer unattended for a few moments. Everything is relative. *You* are the one who clearly does not understand computer security. Fact: Windows XP is about 12 years old, Vista/Windows 7 maybe 5. Unix is 40+ years old. Fact: Windows is 30+ years old, and what you're calling Unix is every bit as much a progression/assortment of different OSs/kernels as Windows. Your assertion is totally invalid. Face: Unix was designed for a mult-user, multi-processing environment, Windows was designed for a single user, single application at a time environment, it has had multi-user and multi-processing added on to it. Once again, your assertions are totally incorrect. Unix started with single-user mainframes, long before the Internet or any kind of remote networking or simultaneous multi-user environment. Even once they went mult-user, local multi-user setups with tightly controlled physical access are a very different thing from the worldwide network of today (~1995 and on, only the last 15 years). As for multi-user and multi-processing, the former is only incidentally related to network security, and the latter not at all. Thus, most everything that can affect Windows today was probably seen and corrected on the architectural level decades ago in Unix. Totally untrue. The issues of concern are mostly related to network access, not multiple logins. See above. Even the simplest thing of making the user work in a non-privileged workspace is one of the basic things that Unix has done for decades, while it is a relatively new idea in Windows. Thus, if you compromise the workspace, you don't compromise the system. Unix was not designed for personal computers, it was designed for room- and building-filling mainframes and minicomputers for governments, universities and large security-minded businesses. You are comparing apples to oranges. While Linux is Unix-like, it is NOT Unix and has to be much more user-friendly, which Unix is very much not. The owner of a Linux box has to also be the administrator, while a Unix user seldom has to deal with the administration side of it. Any time you design an OS for the masses, there is no escaping the necessity of compromising security for usability and flexibility. Next, you have the fact that to make things really fast in Windows, you have graphics primitives in the kernel. This means that to compromise the entire system, all you need to do is compromise a graphics routine...and as almost everything is graphical in Windows...compromise the Browser, you can own the system...compromise the mail reader, you can own the system...compromise an editor you can own the system...compromise an ERROR MESSAGE, and you can
Re: Unix vs Windows security (was Re: Nokia device usage)
Scott wrote: On Mar 12, 2009, at 12:24 AM, Farrell J. McGovern wrote: ScottW wrote: The Mac and *nix world needs to stop gloating about their clean record so far and keep an eye out for what is to come. Dues to the learning curve of the OS, the users were more enlightened than the common computer user, but now these are more wide spread and the common user will be using them. The conspiracy theory people say that Antivirus companies are the ones making most of the viruses so that they have a product to sell, well there is a market out there just waiting to be tapped. Norton AV for Mac is on the shelves even though there is only really 1 documented virus, and people buy it. The good ole saying: The devil's greatest accomplishment was to convince everyone he does not exist... well the Linux virus does not exist. You are, of course, making the classic mistake of not understanding security on computer operating systems. Popularity has little to do with how vulnerable a system is. Fact: Windows XP is about 12 years old, Vista/Windows 7 maybe 5. Unix is 40+ years old. I disagree. I know all about it. Any time I want to do something on my mac, it asks for authorization. It is very secure. The Mac OS is built on BSD Unix. You are making the new mistake of believing that people know about security on their computer. That 40 year old system was being ran by people who know what they were doing and it was not in tens of thousands of homes. Having to rebuild a kernal or using sudo educates people to the security built into the OS. Yes I understand how secure it is. It is not secure because of some mystical higher power. There is a root login. There is a root password. Once those are entered, destruction is a few key clicks away. Everyone here is cringing because that has been said because we understand what root passwords do. When the I just want it to work computer user gets on there with their root password set to password and written on their case, they will be very inclined to type that in any time they are prompted for it whether they know why or not. These are people who will have no idea there is a CLI, will think a script is what a movie or play is written on, and think that if the computer is asking me for it, it must me safe. Many modern Linux distros try to discourage you from running as root. The default root KDE desktop on SUSE is red and displays several bombs. Even then, kernel space user space are clearly defined, which makes it more difficult for malware to work than on Windows, where the distinction is nowhere so clearly defined and many user applications require admin rights to function, so the user finds it necessary to run with admin rights. I do agree that the virus will have to take a different tact to get into the system and infect it, but the path is there. The users will self infect themselves and then the media will report that the Unix virus is wide spread. Funny thing, I've heard of attempts to write a Linux virus, but none have been successful. I wonder why that is? -- Use OpenOffice.org http://www.openoffice.org ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users
Re: Unix vs Windows security (was Re: Nokia device usage)
Mark wrote: On Wed, Mar 11, 2009 at 11:24 PM, Farrell J. McGovern farrell.mcgov...@gmail.com wrote: ScottW wrote: The Mac and *nix world needs to stop gloating about their clean record so far and keep an eye out for what is to come. Dues to the learning curve of the OS, the users were more enlightened than the common computer user, but now these are more wide spread and the common user will be using them. The conspiracy theory people say that Antivirus companies are the ones making most of the viruses so that they have a product to sell, well there is a market out there just waiting to be tapped. Norton AV for Mac is on the shelves even though there is only really 1 documented virus, and people buy it. The good ole saying: The devil's greatest accomplishment was to convince everyone he does not exist... well the Linux virus does not exist. You are, of course, making the classic mistake of not understanding security on computer operating systems. Popularity has little to do with how vulnerable a system is. Yeah, tell that to celebrities. I'm sure they just *love* the stalkers and paparazzi. When's the last time *you* were surrounded by dozens of photographers documenting the worst moments of your life? Anyway, it's not about popularity, it's about payoff. Any time there's something to gain (Windows boxes), people will keep trying. When there's nothing to gain (Linux boxes), there's no motivation. More attacks=more vulnerability. The law of averages says that the more attacks there are, the more likely that sooner or later one will be successful. Someone who has their home Windows machine set to autologin and no firewall or antivirus software but uses a gateway, never uses Outlook or IE and never opens messages (never mind attachments) from someone they don't know is much less vulnerable than someone who has every possible security aspect in place on their laptop (any OS) that is exposed to open networks and/or leaves their computer unattended for a few moments. Everything is relative. *You* are the one who clearly does not understand computer security. Fact: Windows XP is about 12 years old, Vista/Windows 7 maybe 5. Unix is 40+ years old. Fact: Windows is 30+ years old, and what you're calling Unix is every bit as much a progression/assortment of different OSs/kernels as Windows. Your assertion is totally invalid. Ummm... Given that DOS didn't appear until 1981, there's no way Windows could have been around 30+ years ago. That would have been the days of CP/M and Apple II. Face: Unix was designed for a mult-user, multi-processing environment, Windows was designed for a single user, single application at a time environment, it has had multi-user and multi-processing added on to it. Once again, your assertions are totally incorrect. Unix started with single-user mainframes, long before the Internet or any kind of remote networking or simultaneous multi-user environment. Even once they went mult-user, local multi-user setups with tightly controlled physical access are a very different thing from the worldwide network of today (~1995 and on, only the last 15 years). As for multi-user and multi-processing, the former is only incidentally related to network security, and the latter not at all. Back in the days when Unix was created, virtually all computers were multiuser, because they were too expensive for a single user. The whole idea of multiuser was to get the most use out of that very expensive hardware. It wasn't until personal computers, such as the Altair 8800, IMSAI 8080, Apple II etc. appeared, in the mid '70s that single user computers became affordable. Thus, most everything that can affect Windows today was probably seen and corrected on the architectural level decades ago in Unix. Totally untrue. The issues of concern are mostly related to network access, not multiple logins. See above. Take a look at the history of Windows, to when it was just a graphical shell on top of DOS. And how it then migrated to a better system, but still single user. Can you, even now, multi-task several users on a Windows box, without using something like Citrix? Then take a look at how Microsoft integrated IE into the OS, to make a point after the Netscape vs Microsoft trial. You'll find that one thing alone, which is in violation of good software engineering, ensured Windows would be a security sieve. Even the simplest thing of making the user work in a non-privileged workspace is one of the basic things that Unix has done for decades, while it is a relatively new idea in Windows. Thus, if you compromise the workspace, you don't compromise the system. Unix was not designed for personal computers, it was designed for room- and building-filling mainframes and minicomputers for governments, universities and large security-minded businesses. You are
Re: Nokia device usage
Jean-Christian, interesting. And from the diagram I see your point. Of course the N95 is a full function mobile phone and based on that N95 diagram I would expect that the heavy lifting of the 3G voice and HSPA protocols for voice and non-voice (packet) data above the physical layer would be implemented/managed between the Baseband and the Application processor shown in that diagram as Texas Instruments devices. This in turn would suggest to me that that whether a device of this hardware design does or does not support 3G voice (not HSPA packetized voice) would be determined by whatever firmware/software is on the device and not by the hardware components in this design. I should also note that one of the mobile device component suppliers, ST Ericsson, for their AERO RF TRANSCEIVER RF component family does mention in their marketing brochure available as an Adobe Acrobat .pdf at the www page whose url is http://www.stericsson.com/sales_marketing_resources/RFBR_1.pdf that these components can be used for either Tri-band HSPA + quad-band GSM/GPRS/EDGE digital cellular handsets or Tri-band HSPA + quad-band GSM/GPRS/EDGE digital cellular data modems In other words, the components suppliers such as ST Ericsson realize that their customers (the mobile handset manufacturers) may be interested in non-voice data devices as well as full function handsets. But here again that differentiation ( data device only vs full handset) would be determined by baseband firmware/software. With all this chop shopping/reverse engineering/teardown being performed by analysis companies like isupply and others it makes me wonder if the handset manufacturers actually cooperate with such outfits to make the teardown analysis a little bit easier. On the other hand, by taking the product off the shelf and out of the box, without help from the manufacturer, the teardown specialist is assured of starting with an on the street product vs one that may have been juiced by the manufacturer. I should add that the article on page 78-80 (Adobe Acrobat pp 82-84) in the issue of Electronic Products Magazine available at the www page whose url is: http://www.nxtbook.com/nxtbooks/hearst/ep0508/index.php?startid=80 provides an impressive amount of detail from the chop that isupply performed on the N95. It does reinforce my point that the mobile device designers are acutely aware of the components of product cost Further detail pm the N95 component workup is provided on the www page whose url is: http://www2.electronicproducts.com/Nokia_N95-whatsinside-61.aspx Best Regards, John Holmblad Acadia Secure Networks, LLC * * Jean-Christian de Rivaz wrote: John Holmblad a écrit : http://www.smta.org/files/CTEA_High_Density_Pkg_Trends-Carey-Portelligent.pdf You can see, from viewing the iphone PCB discussed on pp 13-17 of that presentation. that, in addition to having separate power amps for each of 3 frequency band groupings (it is a quad band device). the device also has a Multi-chip package (MCP) to handle both a GSM/EDGE chip as well as a WCDMA chip needed for 3g baseband processing. I could foresee that another designer, with an application that did not require 2G backward compatibility, might :design out: the 2G chip ( hold the 2g if you will) in order to save space and power in the design. This, however, would make the device un-useable in a network that was not 100% 3G/UMTS, UNLESS the device was being used ONLY for non-voice data access and not for traditional voice. John, Nokia will more likely use this kind of integration: http://www.phonewreck.com/wiki/index.php?title=Nokia_N95#Block_Diagram The Quad-band GSM/GPRS/EDGE + Dual-band UMTS/HSPDA chain use 1 chip for the baseband, 1 chip for the transceiver and 1 chip for the amplifier. Best Regards, ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users
Re: Unix vs Windows security (was Re: Nokia device usage)
James Knott wrote: Ummm... Given that DOS didn't appear until 1981, there's no way Windows could have been around 30+ years ago. That would have been the days of CP/M and Apple II. Sorry, that should have been 20+... 24 to be more precise. Momentary lapse in brain function. Back in the days when Unix was created, virtually all computers were multiuser, because they were too expensive for a single user. The whole idea of multiuser was to get the most use out of that very expensive hardware. It wasn't until personal computers, such as the Altair 8800, IMSAI 8080, Apple II etc. appeared, in the mid '70s that single user computers became affordable. If by multiuser you mean different people could use the same machine at different times, but *not* simultaneously. It wasn't until the '70s that Unix could support simultaneous users, and at first it was limited to two at any given time. It was *not* simultaneously multiuser from the very start. Thus, most everything that can affect Windows today was probably seen and corrected on the architectural level decades ago in Unix. Totally untrue. The issues of concern are mostly related to network access, not multiple logins. See above. Take a look at the history of Windows, to when it was just a graphical shell on top of DOS. And how it then migrated to a better system, but still single user. Can you, even now, multi-task several users on a Windows box, without using something like Citrix? Then take a look at how Microsoft integrated IE into the OS, to make a point after the Netscape vs Microsoft trial. You'll find that one thing alone, which is in violation of good software engineering, ensured Windows would be a security sieve. Windows doesn't need (never has, and never will) to have the capability for simultaneous users. What would be the point? As PCs continue to shrink in size as they increase in power, it makes a lot more sense for everybody to have their own separate computer and not share someone else's. Home networking is a no-brainer if they want or need to share anything. Even the simplest thing of making the user work in a non-privileged workspace is one of the basic things that Unix has done for decades, while it is a relatively new idea in Windows. Thus, if you compromise the workspace, you don't compromise the system. Unix was not designed for personal computers, it was designed for room- and building-filling mainframes and minicomputers for governments, universities and large security-minded businesses. You are comparing apples to oranges. While Linux is Unix-like, it is NOT Unix and has to be much more user-friendly, which Unix is very much not. The owner of a Linux box has to also be the administrator, while a Unix user seldom has to deal with the administration side of it. Any time you design an OS for the masses, there is no escaping the necessity of compromising security for usability and flexibility. Have you actually run either Linux or Unix? Very much of what applies to one applies to the other. While some of the details differ, they are fundamentally the same to use. I first learned Fortran programming in 1982 on a DEC PDP-10, and have worked on Unix systems much more recently than that. I've used Linux at home off and on for 10 years, and almost exclusively used kubuntu on my personal machines for the last 2 years. So yes, I know exactly what I'm talking about, and Unix is a *very* different experience from Linux. As time goes on, the gap widens. Next, you have the fact that to make things really fast in Windows, you have graphics primitives in the kernel. This means that to compromise the entire system, all you need to do is compromise a graphics routine...and as almost everything is graphical in Windows...compromise the Browser, you can own the system...compromise the mail reader, you can own the system...compromise an editor you can own the system...compromise an ERROR MESSAGE, and you can own the system. You're talking theory, and making it sound much easier than it actually is. In reality, such attacks seldom actually work, and they require far more preparation and work than you are willing to admit. Read about what I mentioned re IE and Netscape vs Microsoft. The fact remains that in spite of theories and claims, actual unaided attacks on Windows boxes that are successful are actually quite rare. The ones that are successful are usually because of the gaping security hole between the keyboard and the chair. The so-called holes are exploited in contrived circumstances which are much more difficult to find in the wild. With Unix, very few things can access the kernel. If you compromise the Browser, you may compromise the user's workspace, but the system remains compromised. Again, Linux is *NOT* Unix. Regardless, since no one is putting serious effort into developing viruses and such for it
Re: Unix vs Windows security (was Re: Nokia device usage)
On Thu, 2009-03-12 at 22:15 -0600, Mark Haury wrote: James Knott wrote: Windows doesn't need (never has, and never will) to have the capability for simultaneous users. What would be the point? As PCs continue to shrink in size as they increase in power, it makes a lot more sense for everybody to have their own separate computer and not share someone else's. Home networking is a no-brainer if they want or need to share anything. The point my friend, would be to separate the different processes such as apache, postfix, desktop apps etc into different user ids thus gaining a logical, built in, separation of security boundaries. The fact remains that in spite of theories and claims, actual unaided attacks on Windows boxes that are successful are actually quite rare. The ones that are successful are usually because of the gaping security hole between the keyboard and the chair. The so-called holes are exploited in contrived circumstances which are much more difficult to find in the wild. As evident by the HUGH number of patches we see coming down the pipe for Windows. And yes, there are lots of patches for Linux but by far and wide most of those are for applications not the kernel. Again, Linux is *NOT* Unix. Regardless, since no one is putting serious effort into developing viruses and such for it (there's exactly zero payoff) No what would be the advantage to getting into such small sites as say oh Google, Youtube, Facebook, Wikipedia all of which run Linux, not Windows or Unix for a reason. Face it Windows is like stacking up books one on top of the other and standing on the top, after adding about 5 or 6 services it gets pretty wobbly and fragile. There's a lot more in common than different. You can generally take source code and compile it to run on either. Way more common and Linux is pulling major market share from Unix. As time goes on, Linux becomes more like Windows than like Unix as far as the user experience. There are very compelling reasons for that. This is just plain not true. Such as running Linux with only a console, nothing like Windows. Look at Linux running on big iron and it's a different story. ...and you make it sound so easy to compromise Windows, and so hard to compromise *Linux* (you keep saying Unix when what you really mean is Linux...). The reality is somewhat different, and the ease of security breach is directly related to the operator/owner's actions and settings rather than the OS. No the design of the systems are completely different, maybe have a go at reading Operating Systems, Design and Implementation by Andrew Tanenbaum, it laid out rather nicely in there. I hate Micro$oft and Windows as much as anybody (as much because they've trained society to accept bugs as normal than anything else), but I hate even more the fact that I *still* have to waste a significant amount of space on my hard drives for dual-booting into Windows to do the things that Linux can't do. The fact remains that the reason Linux hasn't taken over the world is because it just doesn't meet the needs of most users, especially the less techie ones. Hmm, first, try running VirtualBox or something similar and forget dual booting, and second the rest of the computing world seems to be heading towards the, Yes Linux is good and does meet the needs of most users as evident by the growing number of users. 90,000 Ubuntu workstations for the French police force tell a different story, and this is just one of many. http://arstechnica.com/open-source/news/2009/03/french-police-saves-millions-of-euros-by-adopting-ubuntu.ars Cheers and great discussion ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users
Re: Nokia device usage
Mark wrote: You're putting words in my mouth. I never said that. I said that they were either Linux or Mac fanboys OR were simply targeting the most common OS. I don't personally disagree with Mark's statement, except for the wording. I would have put it as: But NOT impossible, and the fact remains that the overwhelming majority of malware writers are either gunning for the OS that is installed on the overwhelming majority of PCs worldwide, or to a lesser extent are Mac or Linux fanboys and aren't about to attack their own pet OS or they are simply . I would say that was a truer statement. IMO, there are just as many Unix weenies and Windows hackers that write Viruses. ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users
Re: Nokia device usage
Mark wrote: On Tue, Mar 10, 2009 at 7:02 PM, James Knott james.kn...@rogers.com wrote: Mark wrote: On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 7:14 PM, James Knott james.kn...@rogers.com wrote: Bottom line, there are a lot of technical and usage reasons that make it much harder for malware to attack Linux/Unix. But NOT impossible, and the fact remains that the overwhelming majority of malware writers are either Mac or Linux fanboys and aren't about to attack their own pet OS or they are simply gunning for the OS that is installed on the overwhelming majority of PCs worldwide. I never claimed it was impossible. However, how do you know the majority of malware writers run Linux or Mac You're putting words in my mouth. I never said that. I said that they were either Linux or Mac fanboys OR were simply targeting the most common OS. Mark Again, how do you know Linux or Mac fanboys are involved? What is there to indicate that? I'm not putting words in your mouth. They are in what I quoted. the overwhelming majority of malware writers are either Mac or Linux fanboys and aren't about to attack their own pet OS the or after this does not change the fact that you're implying a significant number of malware writers are Linux or Mac users. What's your source of this? -- Use OpenOffice.org http://www.openoffice.org ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users
Re: Nokia device usage
John Holmblad wrote: James, as you are well aware, a user of a Microsoft Desktop or Server OS is not required to use Outlook for email. Mozilla Thunderbird works quite well on Microsoft OS's and of course there is Evolution. I am well aware that you can use other mail applications. However, many corporate users allow nothing else and many people don't even know there are alternatives. As for IE, while you can use other browsers, you can't really get rid of it and it will often be used by some apps etc., even though it's not the default browser. Also, the problems are not caused by IE, but due to the fact it's so tightly tied to the OS that a problem with it becomes a problem for the OS. -- Use OpenOffice.org http://www.openoffice.org ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users
Re: Nokia device usage
John Holmblad a écrit : http://www.smta.org/files/CTEA_High_Density_Pkg_Trends-Carey-Portelligent.pdf You can see, from viewing the iphone PCB discussed on pp 13-17 of that presentation. that, in addition to having separate power amps for each of 3 frequency band groupings (it is a quad band device). the device also has a Multi-chip package (MCP) to handle both a GSM/EDGE chip as well as a WCDMA chip needed for 3g baseband processing. I could foresee that another designer, with an application that did not require 2G backward compatibility, might :design out: the 2G chip ( hold the 2g if you will) in order to save space and power in the design. This, however, would make the device un-useable in a network that was not 100% 3G/UMTS, UNLESS the device was being used ONLY for non-voice data access and not for traditional voice. John, Nokia will more likely use this kind of integration: http://www.phonewreck.com/wiki/index.php?title=Nokia_N95#Block_Diagram The Quad-band GSM/GPRS/EDGE + Dual-band UMTS/HSPDA chain use 1 chip for the baseband, 1 chip for the transceiver and 1 chip for the amplifier. Best Regards, -- Jean-Christian de Rivaz ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users
Re: Nokia device usage
Jean-Christian de Rivaz a écrit : Nokia will more likely use this kind of integration: http://www.phonewreck.com/wiki/index.php?title=Nokia_N95#Block_Diagram The Quad-band GSM/GPRS/EDGE + Dual-band UMTS/HSPDA chain use 1 chip for the baseband, 1 chip for the transceiver and 1 chip for the amplifier. Small mistake: 2 chips for the amplifiers. But UMTS only, without GSM compatibility, will make the device useless in too many area. The logical conclusion that a 3G HSPA tablet will certainly be able to make phone call, at least from a technically hardware point of view. Best Regards, -- Jean-Christian de Rivaz ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users
Unix vs Windows security (was Re: Nokia device usage)
ScottW wrote: The Mac and *nix world needs to stop gloating about their clean record so far and keep an eye out for what is to come. Dues to the learning curve of the OS, the users were more enlightened than the common computer user, but now these are more wide spread and the common user will be using them. The conspiracy theory people say that Antivirus companies are the ones making most of the viruses so that they have a product to sell, well there is a market out there just waiting to be tapped. Norton AV for Mac is on the shelves even though there is only really 1 documented virus, and people buy it. The good ole saying: The devil's greatest accomplishment was to convince everyone he does not exist... well the Linux virus does not exist. You are, of course, making the classic mistake of not understanding security on computer operating systems. Popularity has little to do with how vulnerable a system is. Fact: Windows XP is about 12 years old, Vista/Windows 7 maybe 5. Unix is 40+ years old. Face: Unix was designed for a mult-user, multi-processing environment, Windows was designed for a single user, single application at a time environment, it has had mult-user and multi-processing added on to it. Thus, most everything that can affect Windows today was probably seen and corrected on the architectural level decades ago in Unix. Even the simplest thing of making the user work in a non-privileged workspace is one of the basic things that Unix has done for decades, while it is a relatively new idea in Windows. Thus, if you compromise the workspace, you don't compromise the system. Next, you have the fact that to make things really fast in Windows, you have graphics primitives in the kernel. This means that to compromise the entire system, all you need to do is compromise a graphics routine...and as almost everything is graphical in Windows...compromise the Browser, you can own the system...compromise the mail reader, you can own the system...compromise an editor you can own the system...compromise an ERROR MESSAGE, and you can own the system. With Unix, very few things can access the kernel. If you compromise the Browser, you may compromise the user's workspace, but the system remains compromised. Generally, in Windows it's a single set to compromise the entire system...on Unix, it takes usually two more more steps, first you must compromise the userspace, then you must compromise the kernel. Ultimately, it takes a lot more work to compromise a Unix system than a Windows system. And that makes Unix and systems derived from Unix inherently more secure than Windows. ttyl Farrell McGovern -- Computers make very fast, very accurate mistaeks. ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users
Re: Nokia device usage
John Holmblad a écrit : Jean-Christian, the term 3g radio is a fairly broad term. The key is what software is going to be in the new G4 IT above the radio/physical layer. It would make sense, especially if Nokia decides that the G4 IT is going to go after the market served by the iphone, to give the G4 IT, full 2G/3G voice functionality in addition to HSDPA. The rub here with such a decision may be the impact on the product cost of having to use a presumably more expensive radio of the kind that are contained in 2G/3G dual mode handsets. I would think that for a product released in 2009 2G support would still be essential. [...] John, It seem that you think that there exists 3G chip that make only HSPA, without voice, and/or without 2G compatibility. You can be right, but I have a big doubt on that. Best Regards, -- Jean-Christian de Rivaz ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users
Re: Nokia device usage
On Mon, Mar 09, 2009 at 03:56:48PM -0600, Mark wrote: And the only reason that Linux and Macs are so relatively safe from viruses and worms is because they aren't targeted, not because they are fundamentally more secure. This would make sense if creating a virus required a significant effort... Berto ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users
Re: Nokia device usage
On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 7:14 PM, James Knott james.kn...@rogers.com wrote: Bottom line, there are a lot of technical and usage reasons that make it much harder for malware to attack Linux/Unix. But NOT impossible, and the fact remains that the overwhelming majority of malware writers are either Mac or Linux fanboys and aren't about to attack their own pet OS or they are simply gunning for the OS that is installed on the overwhelming majority of PCs worldwide. Mark ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users
Re: Nokia device usage
On Tue, Mar 10, 2009 at 9:21 AM, kenneth marken kemar...@broadpark.no wrote: basically, the only really safe option is to yank that plug, and use only home-coded apps... Provided you *never* make any mistakes or overlook any bugs... ;-) Mark ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users
Re: Nokia device usage
kenneth marken wrote: Bottom line, there are a lot of technical and usage reasons that make it much harder for malware to attack Linux/Unix. the big problem here is that the target for said malware have changed... its no longer about bringing down whole systems. these days its the users data they are after. credit card info, codes of all kinds, and just about anything else. was there not a sweep of ransom attacks where a worm would archive the whole content of the users document dir, and encrypt the archive? leaving a message to send x amount of money to some account for the password? under these situations, read access is more then enough access, most of the time. the only option i can see for the user then is to run every program he tries to make use of online, inside some kind of chroot can. but even thats not perfect. basically, the only really safe option is to yank that plug, and use only home-coded apps... Again, it's harder. In Outlook, for example, a virus attached to an email could run as soon as the message was read, without the user having to do anything. For a virus to run in Linux, the user would have to: 1) detach the file 2) make it executable 3) manually run it In short, it won't run without the user taking 3 deliberate steps to run it. -- Use OpenOffice.org http://www.openoffice.org ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users
Re: Nokia device usage
Mark wrote: On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 7:14 PM, James Knott james.kn...@rogers.com wrote: Bottom line, there are a lot of technical and usage reasons that make it much harder for malware to attack Linux/Unix. But NOT impossible, and the fact remains that the overwhelming majority of malware writers are either Mac or Linux fanboys and aren't about to attack their own pet OS or they are simply gunning for the OS that is installed on the overwhelming majority of PCs worldwide. I never claimed it was impossible. However, how do you know the majority of malware writers run Linux or Mac -- Use OpenOffice.org http://www.openoffice.org ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users
Re: Nokia device usage
James, as you are well aware, a user of a Microsoft Desktop or Server OS is not required to use Outlook for email. Mozilla Thunderbird works quite well on Microsoft OS's and of course there is Evolution. I should add that, just as Microsoft has mitigated/eliminated well known vulnerabilities in earlier versions of the Microsoft OS's through the release of improved versions of their OS's including Sever 2003/2008, XP SP1/2/3, and Vista and Vista SP1, Microsoft has also mitigated/eliminated many vulnerabilities in the components of earlier versions of Microsoft Office with the release of Microsoft Office 2007. Best Regards, John Holmblad Acadia Secure Networks, LLC James Knott wrote: kenneth marken wrote: Bottom line, there are a lot of technical and usage reasons that make it much harder for malware to attack Linux/Unix. the big problem here is that the target for said malware have changed... its no longer about bringing down whole systems. these days its the users data they are after. credit card info, codes of all kinds, and just about anything else. was there not a sweep of ransom attacks where a worm would archive the whole content of the users document dir, and encrypt the archive? leaving a message to send x amount of money to some account for the password? under these situations, read access is more then enough access, most of the time. the only option i can see for the user then is to run every program he tries to make use of online, inside some kind of chroot can. but even thats not perfect. basically, the only really safe option is to yank that plug, and use only home-coded apps... Again, it's harder. In Outlook, for example, a virus attached to an email could run as soon as the message was read, without the user having to do anything. For a virus to run in Linux, the user would have to: 1) detach the file 2) make it executable 3) manually run it In short, it won't run without the user taking 3 deliberate steps to run it. ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users
Re: Nokia device usage
John Holmblad a écrit : [...] On the other hand mobile service providers who are evolving from GSM to 3G/UMTS can, if they so choose, start to move their voice traffic over to their UMTS infrastructure (equipment and RF) and do so gradually by providing their customers with dual mode 2g/3g handsets. Although the UMTS standard, supports call handoff from GSM to UMTS, I have to wonder how much of that is actually going on right now since the user would have a dual mode (GSM + 3G) handset and the network would have to be engineered to implement such inter-technology (GSM=3G) handoff/roaming. John, In Switzerland, and from what I know in most on the west Europe, 2G/3G handsets are the standard. The GSM / 3G switching is completely transparent to the user, even on the active call. Best Regards, -- Jean-Christian de Rivaz ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users
Re: Nokia device usage
Hi, ext Alejandro López wrote: Eero Tamminen escribió: Skype video requires significantly more power than for example Gtalk video (which the device supports) and has quite strict latency requirements (the call drops if Skype doesn't get enough CPU). Great! Now I know the technical reasons, but I still don't know why this is not mentioned when it is said that Skype runs on the tablet. I don't know about the others (or the device marketing), but at least to me the Skype video use is very marginal even on Desktop at home. In the beginning the video call was a nice novelty, but nowadays we enable it only sometimes when discussing with our young nieces, for 99%[1] of the calls voice is enough. As this thread is Nokia device usage, what you would use the Skype video for? :-) - Eero [1] of the _time_ used for all the calls video part might be more, the calls with our nieces are usually quite long as they show what they've done in pre-school etc... ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users
Re: Nokia device usage
Eero Tamminen wrote: As this thread is Nokia device usage, what you would use the Skype video for? :-) Mainly to communicate with my family when on business travel, but also to put in touch my kids (2 and 4 year old) and their grand mother (11000 km away) without requiring them to stay in front of a desktop computer (which is quite difficult). I once tried with the laptop computer but you can imaging that moving around the house carrying a laptop is not the same as carrying the N810... :) ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users
Re: Nokia device usage
Alejandro López wrote: Eero Tamminen wrote: As this thread is Nokia device usage, what you would use the Skype video for? :-) Mainly to communicate with my family when on business travel, but also to put in touch my kids (2 and 4 year old) and their grand mother (11000 km away) without requiring them to stay in front of a desktop computer (which is quite difficult). I once tried with the laptop computer but you can imaging that moving around the house carrying a laptop is not the same as carrying the N810... :) i guess there is allways the option of skype-out, turning the call into some kind of local call to wireless or mobile phone... ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users
Re: Nokia device usage
kenneth marken wrote: Alejandro López wrote: Eero Tamminen wrote: As this thread is Nokia device usage, what you would use the Skype video for? :-) Mainly to communicate with my family when on business travel, but also to put in touch my kids (2 and 4 year old) and their grand mother (11000 km away) without requiring them to stay in front of a desktop computer (which is quite difficult). I once tried with the laptop computer but you can imaging that moving around the house carrying a laptop is not the same as carrying the N810... :) i guess there is allways the option of skype-out, turning the call into some kind of local call to wireless or mobile phone... I think in that case you don't get video, do you? ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users
Re: Nokia device usage
Fernando Cassia wrote: A couple points: 1. Apple makes proprietary, closed solutions. Try to reverse engineer Apple´s firmware for compatibility reasons and you´ll see Apple lawyers coming to get you. They've found there's a broad end-user market for stuff that meets a certain ease of use and reliability standards. Go figure. 2. Apple makes expensive, not cheap, hardware. See above. 3. Apple does not support Free Software in general (if you know any Apple software released under the GNU GPL Free Software license, let me know) that puts it at odds with the N8xx tablets Linux OS foundation. See above. Also, at least for the Ipod and Iphones, lots of applications are inexpensive, many less than $10 -- a couple Starbucks. The market appears to find low cost functional software beneficial. Lots of folks are willing to pay a little for software developers to fill their market with a wide variety of software. Go figure. 4. Apple continues pretending Linux doesn´t exist (Quicktime for Linux, anyone). And MS doesn't provide DirectX 10 for Linux either so more games and graphics apps would be Linux compatible. Big surprise there. It's as if the proprietary world has figured out the Linux world isn't organized enough to cooperate together to develop an open source version for these important niches. 5. Apple charges an arm and a leg for software upgrades See above. 6. Apple doesn´t like people tinkering with its OS. See above 7. Apple is just a Microsoft with a sense of style. There´s plenty of not invented here syndrome, like Microsoft does with WMV, Apple does with Quicktime. Why not embrace OpenOffice.org? Not invented at Apple, so it must suck, right?. See above. I wouldn´t buy any device from Apple corp. FC Good luck carrying that non-Apple albatross around your neck... It's not like there's nothing to learn from the successful. Always, Fred C ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users
Re: Nokia device usage
lakestevensdental wrote: Fernando Cassia wrote: A couple points: 1. Apple makes proprietary, closed solutions. Try to reverse engineer Apple´s firmware for compatibility reasons and you´ll see Apple lawyers coming to get you. They've found there's a broad end-user market for stuff that meets a certain ease of use and reliability standards. Go figure. 2. Apple makes expensive, not cheap, hardware. See above. 3. Apple does not support Free Software in general (if you know any Apple software released under the GNU GPL Free Software license, let me know) that puts it at odds with the N8xx tablets Linux OS foundation. See above. Also, at least for the Ipod and Iphones, lots of applications are inexpensive, many less than $10 -- a couple Starbucks. The market appears to find low cost functional software beneficial. Lots of folks are willing to pay a little for software developers to fill their market with a wide variety of software. Go figure. 4. Apple continues pretending Linux doesn´t exist (Quicktime for Linux, anyone). And MS doesn't provide DirectX 10 for Linux either so more games and graphics apps would be Linux compatible. Big surprise there. It's as if the proprietary world has figured out the Linux world isn't organized enough to cooperate together to develop an open source version for these important niches. 5. Apple charges an arm and a leg for software upgrades See above. 6. Apple doesn´t like people tinkering with its OS. See above 7. Apple is just a Microsoft with a sense of style. There´s plenty of not invented here syndrome, like Microsoft does with WMV, Apple does with Quicktime. Why not embrace OpenOffice.org? Not invented at Apple, so it must suck, right?. See above. I wouldn´t buy any device from Apple corp. FC Good luck carrying that non-Apple albatross around your neck... It's not like there's nothing to learn from the successful. heh, one thing one can learn for sure, is that playing on peoples vanity provides a whole lot of free publicity... ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users
Re: Nokia device usage
On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 12:29 PM, lakestevensdental lakestevensden...@verizon.net wrote: \ Good luck carrying that non-Apple albatross around your neck... It's not like there's nothing to learn from the successful. Always, Fred C ...or non-Micro$oft, or non-Linux, or... it all depends on whose fan-boy you're talking to. The sad fact is that they're *all* albatrosses in one way or another. And it all depends on how you measure success as to how you view Apple in general. If it weren't for the iPod, Apple would have died an ugly death a long time ago. They were in a very serious crisis when the iPod came out. They're still far from dominant in the computer market, and probably never will be. They don't even dominate the PC graphics/video editing market any more. I for one will never buy an Apple product. Where do you think Micro$oft learned their worst business tactics and product strategies? The Apple IIe was the last Apple product worth buying - it's been downhill ever since. Once they killed the Franklin Ace, there's been no looking back. At least PC architecture has always been and still is freely interchangeable and modifiable and open enough to allow competition. And I will never understand those who insist that Apple products are so easy to use. They aren't. They're counter-intuitive and illogical, and rely much more on style than on substance. I guess they make sense to people who don't... Mark ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users
Re: Nokia device usage
Mark wrote: On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 12:29 PM, lakestevensdental lakestevensden...@verizon.net wrote: \ Good luck carrying that non-Apple albatross around your neck... It's not like there's nothing to learn from the successful. Always, Fred C ...or non-Micro$oft, or non-Linux, or... it all depends on whose fan-boy you're talking to. The sad fact is that they're *all* albatrosses in one way or another. M$ is no albatross. It's the world's largest computer virus. Apple, hmmm IMHO, they've found a growing niche for folks who want to get over the M$ virus, who feel the need to buy something that works. If it weren't for the iPod, Apple would have died an ugly death a long time ago. They were in a very serious crisis when the iPod came out. They're still far from dominant in the computer market, and probably never will be. The Ipod phenon has been an interesting ride to watch. Say what you want about Apple's marketing style -- it's worked to dominate a rapidly growing market niche and will likely continue that way into the near future because of sheer marketing momentum of it and it's vertical markets. As for the PC world, Apple could probably dominate, or at least quickly become very big player, in the PC market if they decided to make and sell their OS for installation in Intel boxes for a modest price. Linux could probably make everyone pay serious attention if a common Direct X like app were available to grab the gamers out of the PC (and Game box) world. Without gamers, there's little need for all the additional speed and power in the PC market. Who knows, Linux may pick up a lot of attention if more governments would adopt the policy of open source OS and software were possible as someone has talked about in Europe recently (make Great Britian?). I suppose if someone could get Intuit to provide a Linux Quickbooks and TurboTax, movement to Linux could be a done deal for a fair number of small businesses that just need some accounting, inventory and Open Office Suite to do most of their business computing needs. Who needs to spend $150 on a bloated M$ O$, plus new devices and install hassles. Intuit could offer QB, TT, OO, and Ubuntu or PCBSD on a disk for the same price as M$ W7 alone, plus it would install and run. ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users
Re: Nokia device usage
On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 2:43 PM, lakestevensdental lakestevensden...@verizon.net wrote: Mark wrote: On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 12:29 PM, lakestevensdental lakestevensden...@verizon.net wrote: \ Good luck carrying that non-Apple albatross around your neck... It's not like there's nothing to learn from the successful. Always, Fred C ...or non-Micro$oft, or non-Linux, or... it all depends on whose fan-boy you're talking to. The sad fact is that they're *all* albatrosses in one way or another. M$ is no albatross. It's the world's largest computer virus. ...and Apple isn't? You're being very hypocritical. Apple, hmmm IMHO, they've found a growing niche for folks who want to get over the M$ virus, who feel the need to buy something that works. Give me a break. Whether you want to admit it or not, Windows *does* work well enough for it to be overwhelmingly dominant, and the only reason it breaks so often is because it's so much more open than MacOS or OS X - which is nothing but a crippled rip-off of Linux... For everything you can do on an Apple, you can do fifty things on a Windows box, and you have a multitude of choices of software to do each thing, most of which are far cheaper, just as stable and more featureful than the Apple alternative. Having used many flavors of DOS, all versions of Windows since 3.11, many Macs, and many different distros of Linux (not to mention UNIX and other mainframe OSes from the '70s and '80s) over the years, I can tell you that they're *all* full of crap. Linux crashes, Macs crash, and Windows doesn't crash as much as the Mac and Linux fanboys want to believe. And the only reason that Linux and Macs are so relatively safe from viruses and worms is because they aren't targeted, not because they are fundamentally more secure. (Don't get me wrong, I'm in the last stages of escaping the Micro$oft virus myself - my daily use is with kubuntu and my N800. However, I'm still forced to boot into WinXP occasionally to do things that just aren't yet possible in Linux.) If it weren't for the iPod, Apple would have died an ugly death a long time ago. They were in a very serious crisis when the iPod came out. They're still far from dominant in the computer market, and probably never will be. The Ipod phenon has been an interesting ride to watch. Say what you want about Apple's marketing style -- it's worked to dominate a rapidly growing market niche and will likely continue that way into the near future because of sheer marketing momentum of it and it's vertical markets. That momentum can't last forever. Sooner or later, Apple is going to be right back where they were just before the iPod came out. Maybe they'll come out with another Hail Mary device then, maybe they won't... Actually, what seems to be coming out of the Apple camp these days is the if you can't beat 'em, join 'em philosophy. Hence the Intel Macs, giving up on DRM, etc. That's pretty smart, because in the long run they won't be able to survive with the same tactics they've been using for the last 20 years. The world has changed. As for the PC world, Apple could probably dominate, or at least quickly become very big player, in the PC market if they decided to make and sell their OS for installation in Intel boxes for a modest price. Not likely. They would still need to be able to support the sheer numbers and variety of apps and hardware that Windows does. In other words, they would have to join 'em rather than beat 'em... Linux could probably make everyone pay serious attention if a common Direct X like app were available to grab the gamers out of the PC (and Game box) world. Without gamers, there's little need for all the additional speed and power in the PC market. Who knows, Linux may pick up a lot of attention if more governments would adopt the policy of open source OS and software were possible as someone has talked about in Europe recently (make Great Britian?). No, the one thing that keeps Linux from dominating is the mind-boggling fragmentation of effort. If Linux developers would work together instead of splintering off and starting a new app or distro every time they have the most miniscule difference of opinion, Linux would have take over the world long ago. As it is, new distros crop up every day, along with competing and equally unfinished apps. That isn't competition, it's stupidity. Ubuntu is by far the biggest threat to Apple and Microsoft, but even Canonical is making some mistakes. They've come light-years in even the last five years with making Linux installable and usable by the average consumer, but a set of updates a couple of weeks ago broke my box to the point where the average consumer would have thought it was completely dead and given up on it. (Fortunately I was able to resuscitate it, but some plasmoids still aren't working.) I can't get Wine to do anything but crash the whole system. (And no, virtualization is not and never will
Re: Nokia device usage
Mark, re your comment Managing repositories is far beyond the understanding of the average consumer. Installing apps from source code is even less user-friendly. Far too many important apps must be installed with apt-get from the command line and don't show up at all in Adept. That's barely scratching the surface. this repository management problem will eventually be resolved as services such as the Novell sponsored OpenSuse Build Service eventually make it possible for end users to customize their own OS + related software installs without concern for the packaging details. This kind of service will eventually make mass customization of LInux environments possible. With services like this it will be possible to have builds that are unique to each user or community of users. You may already be aware of this service since it has been around for awhile now. Here is the url to a www page with some commentary on this service: http://itmanagement.earthweb.com/osrc/article.php/3655986/Novell-Auto-Builds-Linux-For-All.htm Here is the url to the www page for the Opensuse build service portal: http://en.opensuse.org/Build_Service#Build_Service_Source_Code Although I learned about the RPath service a few years ago I did not pay much attention to the problem of Linux OS+App build since I have not been involved in that kind of activity except as an end user using either Redhat's or Novells install tools. However, recently the Opensuse build service showed up as a discussion to topic on the maemo-developers list which led me to take a closer look at it. Best Regards, John Holmblad Acadia Secure Networks, LLC * * mailto:jholmb...@verizon.net Mark wrote: On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 2:43 PM, lakestevensdental lakestevensden...@verizon.net wrote: Mark wrote: On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 12:29 PM, lakestevensdental lakestevensden...@verizon.net wrote: \ Good luck carrying that non-Apple albatross around your neck... It's not like there's nothing to learn from the successful. Always, Fred C ...or non-Micro$oft, or non-Linux, or... it all depends on whose fan-boy you're talking to. The sad fact is that they're *all* albatrosses in one way or another. M$ is no albatross. It's the world's largest computer virus. and Apple isn't? You're being very hypocritical. Apple, hmmm IMHO, they've found a growing niche for folks who want to get over the M$ virus, who feel the need to buy something that works. Give me a break. Whether you want to admit it or not, Windows *does* work well enough for it to be overwhelmingly dominant, and the only reason it breaks so often is because it's so much more open than MacOS or OS X - which is nothing but a crippled rip-off of Linux... For everything you can do on an Apple, you can do fifty things on a Windows box, and you have a multitude of choices of software to do each thing, most of which are far cheaper, just as stable and more featureful than the Apple alternative. Having used many flavors of DOS, all versions of Windows since 3.11, many Macs, and many different distros of Linux (not to mention UNIX and other mainframe OSes from the '70s and '80s) over the years, I can tell you that they're *all* full of crap. Linux crashes, Macs crash, and Windows doesn't crash as much as the Mac and Linux fanboys want to believe. And the only reason that Linux and Macs are so relatively safe from viruses and worms is because they aren't targeted, not because they are fundamentally more secure. (Don't get me wrong, I'm in the last stages of escaping the Micro$oft virus myself - my daily use is with kubuntu and my N800. However, I'm still forced to boot into WinXP occasionally to do things that just aren't yet possible in Linux.) If it weren't for the iPod, Apple would have died an ugly death a long time ago. They were in a very serious crisis when the iPod came out. They're still far from dominant in the computer market, and probably never will be. The Ipod phenon has been an interesting ride to watch. Say what you want about Apple's marketing style -- it's worked to dominate a rapidly growing market niche and will likely continue that way into the near future because of sheer marketing momentum of it and it's vertical markets. That momentum can't last forever. Sooner or later, Apple is going to be right back where they were just before the iPod came out. Maybe they'll come out with another Hail Mary device then, maybe they won't... Actually, what seems to be coming out of the Apple camp these days is the if you can't beat 'em, join 'em philosophy. Hence the Intel Macs, giving up on DRM, etc. That's pretty smart, because in the long run they won't be able to survive with the same tactics they've been using for the last 20 years. The world has changed. As for the PC world, Apple could
Re: Nokia device usage
Mark wrote: And the only reason that Linux and Macs are so relatively safe from viruses and worms is because they aren't targeted, not because they are fundamentally more secure. Well, considering that most web sites run Apache on Linux or Unix, I'm not so sure about that. And if you investigate the way Windows and Linux/Unix are designed, I'm certain you're wrong. You might want to read up on how IE became so tightly coupled with the OS. You can start with the Netscape vs Microsoft trial, where MS claimed IE could not be removed, because it was part of the OS. At that time it wasn't, but next version of Windows (W98 IIRC) it was and as a result, Windows has been wide open to attack via IE. Then you can look at how difficult it is for a virus to propagate in Linux/Unix because a user cannot write to files outside his authorized areas etc. And, of course, Unix was designed from the ground up to be multiuser and had appropriate protection mechansims built in. Windows was built on top of single user DOS and then tried to have all the holes fixed. Bottom line, there are a lot of technical and usage reasons that make it much harder for malware to attack Linux/Unix. -- Use OpenOffice.org http://www.openoffice.org ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users
Re: Nokia device usage
Jean-Christian, the term 3g radio is a fairly broad term. The key is what software is going to be in the new G4 IT above the radio/physical layer. It would make sense, especially if Nokia decides that the G4 IT is going to go after the market served by the iphone, to give the G4 IT, full 2G/3G voice functionality in addition to HSDPA. The rub here with such a decision may be the impact on the product cost of having to use a presumably more expensive radio of the kind that are contained in 2G/3G dual mode handsets. I would think that for a product released in 2009 2G support would still be essential. On the other hand, if Nokia is not planning to make the G4 IT into a full mobile smartphone (as we know such devices today) then my surmise that, in the case of the G4 IT, there will NOT be a 2G/3G radio nor will there be the software to support all the voice call handoff/roaming that is contained in a regular 2g/3g mobile phone. Rather the software will rely on SIP endpoint services such as are contained in the current G3 IT and will utilize the underlying (unreliable best effort) IP service capability layered on a HSUPA radio layer to agnostically (voice, data,who cares as long as it is in a packet) move the voice UDP packets end to end over the mobile service provider's network. One consequence of this approach, is that, for such voice traffic originating/terminating on a G4 IT, the 3G radio base stations inside of the mobile service provider's network would NOT have to be concerned about voice call handoff from base station to base station in the case of a user that is in motion. The base stations would only need to concern themselves with handing off an (unreliable by definition) IP interface from one BS to the next. Only the SIP endpoints would be aware of the voice connection. Related to this, today I learned that a consortium of mobile industry participants (mostly infrastructure equipment providers) just today announced yet another forum called the VOLGA forum (no relation to the Volga River) to .enable mobile operators to deliver mobile voice and messaging services over LTE access networks based on the existing 3GPP Generic Access Network (GAN) standard. VOLGA in this case stands for Voice Over Lte via Generic Access and a Generic Access Network^1 is a network that uses IP at its core (e.g. one based on IEEE 802.11 a/b/g wireless)for transport). Here is the url to the www page for the VOLGA www site: http://www.volga-forum.com/index.php Now I thought that the LTE standards framework as defined by the 3GPP had already solved the very basic question of how to convey mobile voice and messaging over LTE but clearly I was wrong. Obviously this VOLGA group has some new and/or different ideas of how to utilize LTE infrastructure using GAN principles to convey voice and SMS over a 4g network. different, that is, from the method that is already contained in the 3GPP LTE standards framework. Since there are no spec's yet published on this www site from this forum it is impossible to say for sure but, based on my reading of what GAN is all about, my gut tells me that VOLGA is a voice over packet solution similar to what I surmised above and that this solution is somehow different from whatever voice over packet solution is already contained in the 3gpp standards. I suspect that what is going on here is that, as the commercial reality and success of VOIP and SIP trunking service providers (aided and abetted by the fantastic success of the proprietary protocol based SKYPE service) seeps in to the minds of the world's mobile network planners, these planners from within the mobile service providers, handset providers, and infrastructure providers are all rethinking how to most cost effectively evolve the world's mobile networks to 4g. I do find it interesting that, with respect to the VOLGA forum, although the infrastructure providers Alcatel-Lucent, Nortel, Ericsson and ZTE are involved, there is no mention of Nokia-Siemens Networks as a member. 1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generic_Access_Network Best Regards, John Holmblad Acadia Secure Networks, LLC * * Jean-Christian de Rivaz wrote: Andrew Flegg a écrit : On Sat, Mar 7, 2009 at 8:59 PM, Jean-Christian de Rivaz j...@eclis.ch wrote: I don't understand why the next tablet will not be able to make regular phone call, since it will have 3G link. It's a non sense. You seem awfully sure about the features of a device which has yet to be announced, let alone released. Perhaps such certainty should be held in check until an announcement is actually made about what the RX-51 and RX-71 *are*? Of course I can be wrong. I just read news from Maemo site: http://maemo.org/news/internet_tablet_talk/dr-ari_jaaksi_on_maemo_5/ Dr. Ari Jaaksi has just finished his keynote speech over at OSiM, revealing a lot of juicy stuff on the
Re: Nokia device usage
Andrew Flegg a écrit : On Sat, Mar 7, 2009 at 8:59 PM, Jean-Christian de Rivaz j...@eclis.ch wrote: I don't understand why the next tablet will not be able to make regular phone call, since it will have 3G link. It's a non sense. You seem awfully sure about the features of a device which has yet to be announced, let alone released. Perhaps such certainty should be held in check until an announcement is actually made about what the RX-51 and RX-71 *are*? Of course I can be wrong. I just read news from Maemo site: http://maemo.org/news/internet_tablet_talk/dr-ari_jaaksi_on_maemo_5/ Dr. Ari Jaaksi has just finished his keynote speech over at OSiM, revealing a lot of juicy stuff on the future of Maemo. Check out the the upcoming Maemo 5 (5th generation) highlights: * online anywhere with cellular connectivity over HSPA for broadband anywhere * powerful computing with TI OMAP3 processor - for better performance and better graphics performance * photo sharing with hi-def camera - imaging and photo-sharing * Nokia is now Gold Sponsor of Linux Foundation, has contributed code today for 3G/HSPA cellular (data) connectivity for OMAP3 to Linux kernel * no news yet on backward compatibility for older devices From what I can find on the net, HSPA seem to be an extend of the 3G. So it seem logical to me that the next tablet will have 3G radio. Best regards, -- Jean-Christian de Rivaz ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users
Re: Nokia device usage
On Sun, Mar 8, 2009 at 8:45 AM, Jean-Christian de Rivaz j...@eclis.ch wrote: From what I can find on the net, HSPA seem to be an extend of the 3G. So it seem logical to me that the next tablet will have 3G radio. Yup, that's practically assured. However, you were also talking about how it definitely won't have voice; there's been no definitive statement on that, and the evidence either way is not yet persuasive. Cheers, Andrew -- Andrew Flegg -- mailto:and...@bleb.org | http://www.bleb.org/ Maemo Community Council member ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users
Re: Nokia device usage
Andrew Flegg wrote: On Sat, Mar 7, 2009 at 8:59 PM, Jean-Christian de Rivaz j...@eclis.ch wrote: I don't understand why the next tablet will not be able to make regular phone call, since it will have 3G link. It's a non sense. You seem awfully sure about the features of a device which has yet to be announced, let alone released. Perhaps such certainty should be held in check until an announcement is actually made about what the RX-51 and RX-71 *are*? there are two of them now?! ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users
Re: Nokia device usage
John Holmblad wrote: Andrew, yes, I am being overly presumptuous as to what kind of radio technology will and will not be in the next turn of the IT hardware. I must have read it somewhere that it was going to be HSDPA only. HSDPA do not result in data only, as HSDPA only builds on UMTS. and UMTS carry voice just fine... ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users
Re: Nokia device usage
kenneth, I have not read the HSDPA spec myself but my assumption is that it is all packet, all the time As the P implies in HSDPA UMTS, as a superset of HSDPA incorporates various QOS and other features (roaming, voice connection awareness, etc) that are needed in order to properly handle voice traffic as a part of the total packet stream on a UMTS network. As I understand it, the key difference between voice traffic on a 3g network vs voice traffic on a 4 g network such as one based on, LTE, or WIMAX is that on a 4 g network the network core is packetized and runs IP (or at least an connectionless packetized core with a network protocol that looks like IP) with QOS enhancements for the voice packets. On the other hand, on a 3 g network with HSUPA or HSDPA, the voice traffic, although it may be statistically multiplexed, is not competing for the same bandwidth as the HSUPA/HSDPA packets. Perhaps a 3G expert on this list could clarify this somewhat subtle point. if not I will dig into the spec myself to figure this out. I have always (professionally speaking) considered voice as a particular case of data (bits if you will) with specific characteristics, i.e. connection oriented, duplex content flow, streaming, delay sensitive, and relatively narrow bandwidth (i.e. frequency limited) per conversation/connection. My assumption is that most GSM mobile network service providers who are evolving to 3G are building HSDPA overlay networks to first (and primarily) convey non-voice data (by my definition, above, not an oxymoron) just as the CDMA based mobile network service providers have built EVDO overlays to do the same thing. In other words those GSM service providers are not attempting to move their voice traffic to UMTS right away. A key difference between HSDPA/UMTS on the one hand and EVDO/CDMA on the other (in terms of application of the underlying technology) is that, in the U.S. at least the CDMA/EVDO providers (the largest being Verizon and Sprint) are not themselves using EVDO to convey voice although the end user of EVDO service could certainly do so (e.g. SKYPE or arrangement with a SIP trunking provider). They are using EVDO service to meet new and growing demand for broadband wireless Internet access. On the other hand mobile service providers who are evolving from GSM to 3G/UMTS can, if they so choose, start to move their voice traffic over to their UMTS infrastructure (equipment and RF) and do so gradually by providing their customers with dual mode 2g/3g handsets. Although the UMTS standard, supports call handoff from GSM to UMTS, I have to wonder how much of that is actually going on right now since the user would have a dual mode (GSM + 3G) handset and the network would have to be engineered to implement such inter-technology (GSM=3G) handoff/roaming. Best Regards, John Holmblad Acadia Secure Networks, LLC * * kenneth marken wrote: John Holmblad wrote: Andrew, yes, I am being overly presumptuous as to what kind of radio technology will and will not be in the next turn of the IT hardware. I must have read it somewhere that it was going to be HSDPA only. HSDPA do not result in data only, as HSDPA only builds on UMTS. and UMTS carry voice just fine... ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users
Re: Nokia device usage
John Holmblad a écrit : Jean-Chirstian, you have put into words a good operational definition of the mass market for the context of this discussion, that is: ...people that don't have some technical orientation Like many companies, Nokia seems to have been fooled into thinking that the mass market as one that DOES have a technical orientation. Apple, a very experienced marketing as well as technology company does not make this mistake. I for one would like to see Apple acquire Nokia. That would be a great combination. Unfortunately, and in direct contrast to Cisco, Apple does not do acquisitions and they have never been good at it. I was not talking about Apple. Nokia make a hug number of phone that are buy by people without technical orientation. Theres phones are easy to use and the interface is not frustrating as is the current interface of too many applications of the tablet. Nokia, as a company, can do a super tablet product, but this need strategic decision from the top of the company to put the most skilled QA and interface engineering resources there have to work with the current team. I think this is the good time to do so. Now the hardware and the infrastructure of the tablet is mature enough. The market too. Best Regards. -- Jean-Christian de Rivaz ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users
Re: Nokia device usage
See online reply. Sent from my iPhone On 7 Mar 2009, at 02:08, Fernando Cassia fcas...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Mar 6, 2009 at 7:37 PM, John Holmblad jholmb...@acadiasecurenets.com wrote: I for one would like to see Apple acquire Nokia. That would be a great combination. A couple points: 1. Apple makes proprietary, closed solutions. Try to reverse engineer Apple´s firmware for compatibility reasons and you´ll see Apple lawyers coming to get you. You don't need to. This is the point. There are only two types of people that need to do tho : 1) people who don't want Apple hardware but want Apple Software, 2) iPhone users Who cant live in the sade world Apple created. 2. Apple makes expensive, not cheap, hardware. This is a misconception Apple makes expensive hardware that is well specified. Apple does not cater to PC builder types. 3. Apple does not support Free Software in general (if you know any Apple software released under the GNU GPL Free Software license, let me know) that puts it at odds with the N8xx tablets Linux OS foundation. Free software does not require GPL. 4. Apple continues pretending Linux doesn´t exist (Quicktime for Lin ux, anyone). Lots of companies ignore Linux. It's not an Apple exclusive. 5. Apple charges an arm and a leg for software upgrades No, no it doesn't. Apple charges for major releases. But point releases (eg. Ubuntu 8.04 to 8.10) are free. 10.4 to 10.5 was a major release. Microsoft charges way more for the same type of upgrade. 6. Apple doesn´t like people tinkering with its OS. There's not a lot you need to tinker with. It just works. 7. Apple is just a Microsoft with a sense of style. There´s plenty of not invented here syndrome, like Microsoft does with WMV, Apple does with Quicktime. Why not embrace OpenOffice.org? Not invented at Apple, so it must suck, right?. Because Apple have iWork, which is pretty much better that OpenOffice for most users. So please don´t. I wouldn´t buy any device from Apple corp. Apple Corp is the Beatles record label, isn't it? Each to their own. FC not do acquisitions and they have never been good at it. Best Regards, ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users
Re: Nokia device usage
On Sat, Mar 07, 2009 at 01:06:58PM +, Matt Emson wrote: 3. Apple does not support Free Software in general (if you know any Apple software released under the GNU GPL Free Software license, let me know) that puts it at odds with the N8xx tablets Linux OS foundation. Free software does not require GPL. squeak is a smalltalk inmplementation. It was apparently put together in an Apple research facility, and appears to be free, but not GPL'd ... ... ... So please don´t. I wouldn´t buy any device from Apple corp. Apple Corp is the Beatles record label, isn't it? Yes. Apple licenced the name to build their computers. There was legal dispute about the scope of the licence when Apple started with itunes. -- hendrik ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users
Re: Nokia device usage
Mark, You can substitute Motorola cell phones for Nokia tablets and your arguments will remain valid. Hardware is easier than software. julius On Fri, 6 Mar 2009, Mark wrote: On Fri, Mar 6, 2009 at 3:52 PM, Andrew Flegg and...@bleb.org wrote: John, you wrote: [snip] I have to agree with Mark that, implicitly, Nokia misleads the public to the extent that it markets the IT's along side of its other mass market mobile phone devices if, in fact, the IT's are a work in progress (I agree, they are, unfortunately)? that will take 5 generations? and a few more years to get the product ready for the mass market. I don't think they're yet ready for the mainstream, but I don't think they're an albatross around the neck of anyone who buys them, as your Amazon figures show: N800 ? ? 4 stars out of 5 with a sample size of 172 N810 ? ? 4 stars out of 5 with a sample size of 93 Anyway, let's remember the not ready for mainstream point... ? ? Over a period of three years, I can count on one finger the number ? ? of individuals besides myself that I have actually seen ? ? carrying/using an IT As you say, the mainstream aren't buying them yet. If they're not ready for the mainstream, that's a good thing, no? Not really, because as long as they can keep selling them in relatively small numbers to fanboys they don't have to worry about supporting them or ever polishing them to the point that they are living up to their full potential. Do you really think the successors will be any better? They'll keep updating the hardware, and keep spending far too little time finishing the software. No generation will ever be better than the current ones in that respect. What good is fantastic hardware without software that can make full use of it? The N800 has been discontinued for a while already, and at this point there's zero chance that I'll ever be able to use the hardware to its full potential. Nokia has already moved on, and once the next generation comes out most of the kind and generous developers who are supplying us with apps for the current crop will move most of their attention to the new device. They've already said that there will be zero backwards compatibility with the OS and software because the hardware is going to be fundamentally different. Do you not understand that as long as they keep coming out with new devices and dropping the old ones there will NEVER be one that is ready for consumers? In order for a device to be ready for consumers they have to stand by it long enough to finish the software. Mark ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users
Re: Nokia device usage
Matt Emson wrote: See online reply. Sent from my iPhone On 7 Mar 2009, at 02:08, Fernando Cassia fcas...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Mar 6, 2009 at 7:37 PM, John Holmblad jholmb...@acadiasecurenets.com wrote: I for one would like to see Apple acquire Nokia. That would be a great combination. A couple points: 1. Apple makes proprietary, closed solutions. Try to reverse engineer Apple´s firmware for compatibility reasons and you´ll see Apple lawyers coming to get you. You don't need to. This is the point. There are only two types of people that need to do tho : 1) people who don't want Apple hardware but want Apple Software, 2) iPhone users Who cant live in the sade world Apple created. 2. Apple makes expensive, not cheap, hardware. This is a misconception Apple makes expensive hardware that is well specified. Apple does not cater to PC builder types. 3. Apple does not support Free Software in general (if you know any Apple software released under the GNU GPL Free Software license, let me know) that puts it at odds with the N8xx tablets Linux OS foundation. Free software does not require GPL. 4. Apple continues pretending Linux doesn´t exist (Quicktime for Lin ux, anyone). Lots of companies ignore Linux. It's not an Apple exclusive. 5. Apple charges an arm and a leg for software upgrades No, no it doesn't. Apple charges for major releases. But point releases (eg. Ubuntu 8.04 to 8.10) are free. 10.4 to 10.5 was a major release. Microsoft charges way more for the same type of upgrade. 6. Apple doesn´t like people tinkering with its OS. There's not a lot you need to tinker with. It just works. 7. Apple is just a Microsoft with a sense of style. There´s plenty of not invented here syndrome, like Microsoft does with WMV, Apple does with Quicktime. Why not embrace OpenOffice.org? Not invented at Apple, so it must suck, right?. Because Apple have iWork, which is pretty much better that OpenOffice for most users. So please don´t. I wouldn´t buy any device from Apple corp. Apple Corp is the Beatles record label, isn't it? Each to their own. FC not do acquisitions and they have never been good at it. i would simply say, if you want a iphone, buy a iphone, if you want a tablet, buy a tablet. but do not buy a tablet, expecting to get a iphone! ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users
Re: Nokia device usage
hend...@topoi.pooq.com wrote: On Sat, Mar 07, 2009 at 01:06:58PM +, Matt Emson wrote: 3. Apple does not support Free Software in general (if you know any Apple software released under the GNU GPL Free Software license, let me know) that puts it at odds with the N8xx tablets Linux OS foundation. Free software does not require GPL. squeak is a smalltalk inmplementation. It was apparently put together in an Apple research facility, and appears to be free, but not GPL'd ... ... ... So please don´t. I wouldn´t buy any device from Apple corp. Apple Corp is the Beatles record label, isn't it? Yes. Apple licenced the name to build their computers. There was legal dispute about the scope of the licence when Apple started with itunes. iirc, apple computers got sued by apple records when they first got the media spotlight with the appleII (oh how the mighty have fallen, that thing was basically as open as one could get when it came to tinkering), but settled with the agreement that apple computers would not go into the music biz. so not surprising that there was a whole lot of noise and lawyers when itms opened up... ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users
Re: Nokia device usage
Sent from my iPhone On 7 Mar 2009, at 16:05, Julius Szelagiewicz jul...@turtle.com wrote: Mark, You can substitute Motorola cell phones for Nokia tablets and your arguments will remain valid. Hardware is easier than software. julius Now, that's just plain mean!! No company makes phones as bad as Motorola ;-) On Fri, 6 Mar 2009, Mark wrote: On Fri, Mar 6, 2009 at 3:52 PM, Andrew Flegg and...@bleb.org wrote: John, you wrote: [snip] I have to agree with Mark that, implicitly, Nokia misleads the public to the extent that it markets the IT's along side of its other mass market mobile phone devices if, in fact, the IT's are a work in progress (I agree, they are, unfortunately) that will take 5 generations and a few more years to get the product ready for the mass market. I don't think they're yet ready for the mainstream, but I don't think they're an albatross around the neck of anyone who buys them, as your Amazon figures show: N800 4 stars out of 5 with a sample size of 172 N810 4 stars out of 5 with a sample size of 93 Anyway, let's remember the not ready for mainstream point... Over a period of three years, I can count on one finger the number of individuals besides myself that I have actually seen carrying/using an IT As you say, the mainstream aren't buying them yet. If they're not ready for the mainstream, that's a good thing, no? Not really, because as long as they can keep selling them in relatively small numbers to fanboys they don't have to worry about supporting them or ever polishing them to the point that they are living up to their full potential. Do you really think the successors will be any better? They'll keep updating the hardware, and keep spending far too little time finishing the software. No generation will ever be better than the current ones in that respect. What good is fantastic hardware without software that can make full use of it? The N800 has been discontinued for a while already, and at this point there's zero chance that I'll ever be able to use the hardware to its full potential. Nokia has already moved on, and once the next generation comes out most of the kind and generous developers who are supplying us with apps for the current crop will move most of their attention to the new device. They've already said that there will be zero backwards compatibility with the OS and software because the hardware is going to be fundamentally different. Do you not understand that as long as they keep coming out with new devices and dropping the old ones there will NEVER be one that is ready for consumers? In order for a device to be ready for consumers they have to stand by it long enough to finish the software. Mark ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users
Re: Nokia device usage
Jean-Christian, you are, of course, correct in that Nokia has had tremendous success with mass market mobile phones but not PDA's or IT's. Nokia might do well run the following experiment (in situ if you will) to get a better (and sooner than 2 more generations from now) grasp of what the mass market really expects/demands from an IT like product.. * Select a diversified (from janitor to exec level) sample of say 100 NON-Technical employees of Nokia from around the world who do not already own/use an IT and provide them with a N810 + a mobile phone with data service but with all other apps besides voice on the mobile phone itself disabled. Disabling those apps obviously will force the user to get to know the N810. * Provide no training, only the documentation in the product box. * Let them use the combo for 90 days * Run a focus group (or a few) at the end to record experiences, attitudes, perspectives on their use of the n810 My own theory, so far unproven is that a truly successful IT product should be able to take away market share from the smartphone market, allowing the user to replace their smartphone with a less powerful handset that supports voice + data (as a modem) + bluetooth + a very strong battery and which for the most part, stays in the user's pocket. Perhaps the forthcoming G4 of the IT, with its HSDPA support, if and when it is released, will eliminate the need for the handset altogether for those intrepid enough to replace their GSM voice provider with a provider of SIP trunking services. Those of us, in the U.S. for example, who use CDMA/EVDO networks for our mobile service will either have to switch to a mobile service provider that supports HSDPA or, utilize the bluetooth interface on the G4 IT to our CDMA/EVDO mobile phone, and live with the vestigial (for this particular use case) HSDPA radio. Best Regards, John Holmblad Acadia Secure Networks, LLC * * *Serving the SmartDigital^TM home, entrepreneurial enterprise, and emerging network service provider markets* * * *GSEC Gold, GCWN Gold, GAWN, GGSC-0100, NSA-IAM, NSA-IEM*** *Cisco Select Certified Partner and SMB Specialist | **Microsoft Small Business Specialist | Speakeasy Certified VOIP Partner | Linksys Authorized LVS Partner | Qualys Certified Qualysguard Specialist* * * (M) 703 407 2278 (F) 703 620 5388 (W) www.acadiasecure.com primary email address: jholmb...@acadiasecure.com mailto:jholmb...@acadiasecure.com backup email address: jholmb...@verizon.net mailto:jholmb...@verizon.net Jean-Christian de Rivaz wrote: John Holmblad a écrit : Jean-Chirstian, you have put into words a good operational definition of the mass market for the context of this discussion, that is: ...people that don't have some technical orientation Like many companies, Nokia seems to have been fooled into thinking that the mass market as one that DOES have a technical orientation. Apple, a very experienced marketing as well as technology company does not make this mistake. I for one would like to see Apple acquire Nokia. That would be a great combination. Unfortunately, and in direct contrast to Cisco, Apple does not do acquisitions and they have never been good at it. I was not talking about Apple. Nokia make a hug number of phone that are buy by people without technical orientation. Theres phones are easy to use and the interface is not frustrating as is the current interface of too many applications of the tablet. Nokia, as a company, can do a super tablet product, but this need strategic decision from the top of the company to put the most skilled QA and interface engineering resources there have to work with the current team. I think this is the good time to do so. Now the hardware and the infrastructure of the tablet is mature enough. The market too. Best Regards. ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users
Re: Nokia device usage
John Holmblad a écrit : Jean-Christian, Perhaps the forthcoming G4 of the IT, with its HSDPA support, if and when it is released, will eliminate the need for the handset altogether for those intrepid enough to replace their GSM voice provider with a provider of SIP trunking services. Those of us, in the U.S. for example, who use CDMA/EVDO networks for our mobile service will either have to switch to a mobile service provider that supports HSDPA or, utilize the bluetooth interface on the G4 IT to our CDMA/EVDO mobile phone, and live with the vestigial (for this particular use case) HSDPA radio. John, I don't understand why the next tablet will not be able to make regular phone call, since it will have 3G link. It's a non sense. Of course it's possible to use SIP over HSDPA, but it's not a service that provides well know operators (at lest in Switzerland) where the vast majority of people already have there usual number (maybe this will change in the future). I hope the HSDPA is not the only protocol of the next tablet as there is still vast area where only the GSM signal will be available. And from my experience, I doubt that even the 3G IP link have acceptable quality of service to pass a SIP call if your are not is near ideal condition compared to a regular call. Best regards, -- Jean-Christian de Rivaz ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users
Re: Nokia device usage
On Sat, Mar 7, 2009 at 10:24 AM, John Holmblad jholmb...@acadiasecurenets.com wrote: Jean-Christian, you are, of course, correct in that Nokia has had tremendous success with mass market mobile phones but not PDA's or IT's. Nokia might do well run the following experiment (in situ if you will) to get a better (and sooner than 2 more generations from now) grasp of what the mass market really expects/demands from an IT like product.. * Select a diversified (from janitor to exec level) sample of say 100 NON-Technical employees of Nokia from around the world who do not already own/use an IT and provide them with a N810 + a mobile phone with data service but with all other apps besides voice on the mobile phone itself disabled. Disabling those apps obviously will force the user to get to know the N810. * Provide no training, only the documentation in the product box. * Let them use the combo for 90 days * Run a focus group (or a few) at the end to record experiences, attitudes, perspectives on their use of the n810 My own theory, so far unproven is that a truly successful IT product should be able to take away market share from the smartphone market, allowing the user to replace their smartphone with a less powerful handset that supports voice + data (as a modem) + bluetooth + a very strong battery and which for the most part, stays in the user's pocket. If Nokia had ever finished the software for the tablets, they would *already* have taken market share from the smartphone market. It makes a lot more sense to tether to a dumb phone (that is usually much smaller and lighter and is easily and cheaply replaced by a newer one) for Internet connectivity and have a device that is more or less open and very software upgradeable than an expensive smartphone that will be quickly outdated and basically not upgradeable. Sure, you may be able to get lots of apps, but you're pretty much stuck with the form factor and shipped OS. I'm really beginning to wonder if the tablets are strictly a teaching/testing exercise for Nokia's new hires to see if they can produce something that works at all before turning them loose on real products. They certainly don't seem to be at all serious about selling them. Mark ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users
Re: Nokia device usage
On Sat, Mar 7, 2009 at 8:59 PM, Jean-Christian de Rivaz j...@eclis.ch wrote: I don't understand why the next tablet will not be able to make regular phone call, since it will have 3G link. It's a non sense. You seem awfully sure about the features of a device which has yet to be announced, let alone released. Perhaps such certainty should be held in check until an announcement is actually made about what the RX-51 and RX-71 *are*? Cheers, Andrew -- Andrew Flegg -- mailto:and...@bleb.org | http://www.bleb.org/ Maemo Community Council member ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users
Re: Nokia device usage
Andrew, yes, I am being overly presumptuous as to what kind of radio technology will and will not be in the next turn of the IT hardware. I must have read it somewhere that it was going to be HSDPA only. . Best Regards, John Holmblad Acadia Secure Networks, LLC Andrew Flegg wrote: On Sat, Mar 7, 2009 at 8:59 PM, Jean-Christian de Rivaz j...@eclis.ch wrote: I don't understand why the next tablet will not be able to make regular phone call, since it will have 3G link. It's a non sense. You seem awfully sure about the features of a device which has yet to be announced, let alone released. Perhaps such certainty should be held in check until an announcement is actually made about what the RX-51 and RX-71 *are*? Cheers, Andrew ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users
Re: Nokia device usage
On Sat, Mar 07, 2009 at 02:41:04PM -0700, Mark wrote: On Sat, Mar 7, 2009 at 10:24 AM, John Holmblad jholmb...@acadiasecurenets.com wrote: Jean-Christian, you are, of course, correct in that Nokia has had tremendous success with mass market mobile phones but not PDA's or IT's. Nokia might do well run the following experiment (in situ if you will) to get a better (and sooner than 2 more generations from now) grasp of what the mass market really expects/demands from an IT like product.. * Select a diversified (from janitor to exec level) sample of say 100 NON-Technical employees of Nokia from around the world who do not already own/use an IT and provide them with a N810 + a mobile phone with data service but with all other apps besides voice on the mobile phone itself disabled. Disabling those apps obviously will force the user to get to know the N810. * Provide no training, only the documentation in the product box. * Let them use the combo for 90 days * Run a focus group (or a few) at the end to record experiences, attitudes, perspectives on their use of the n810 My own theory, so far unproven is that a truly successful IT product should be able to take away market share from the smartphone market, allowing the user to replace their smartphone with a less powerful handset that supports voice + data (as a modem) + bluetooth + a very strong battery and which for the most part, stays in the user's pocket. If Nokia had ever finished the software for the tablets, they would *already* have taken market share from the smartphone market. It makes a lot more sense to tether to a dumb phone (that is usually much smaller and lighter and is easily and cheaply replaced by a newer one) for Internet connectivity and have a device that is more or less open and very software upgradeable than an expensive smartphone that will be quickly outdated and basically not upgradeable. Sure, you may be able to get lots of apps, but you're pretty much stuck with the form factor and shipped OS. Apple is certainly doing well with their ipods -- even though they're not phones. -- hendrik ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users
Re: Nokia device usage
On Thu, Mar 05, 2009 at 11:48:26AM -0700, Mark wrote: On Thu, Mar 5, 2009 at 11:40 AM, Ryan Abel rabe...@gmail.com wrote: On Mar 5, 2009, at 1:38 PM, Mark wrote: On Thu, Mar 5, 2009 at 11:24 AM, Marius Gedminas mar...@pov.lt wrote: Overall, the current generations of NITs are far from perfect, but they are the best hacker's devices of their size I've ever seen. And *that* is the summary of the state of the tablets: they're *great* for hackers, but as consumer end-user devices, not so much. And? This is exactly how Nokia's positioned them, so it sounds like the plan is working really well. That is as Benjamin Disraeli would say it, a damned lie. Your unrealistic protests notwithstanding, these things have been and still are being sold as consumer devices, and nowhere are they referred to as being aimed at hackers. On several occasions people from Nokia with official-sounding titles (such as Vice President) explicitly say that they expect it will take around five generations for the Internet Tablets to be consumer-ready. The N810 is 3rd generation. I'd provide references if I weren't a lazy bum. Marius Gedminas -- As far as the laws of mathematics refer to reality, they are not certain, and as far as they are certain, they do not refer to reality. -- Albert Einstein signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users
Re: Nokia device usage
Hi, ext OgnenD wrote: It is too slow when browsing the net (compared to, for example, my Asus EEE or my laptop). Oh great, you are comparing an ultra low-power 320MHZ ARM CPU (RISC) vs a 1Ghz x86 CISC. It is not about computational power comparison, it is about functionality. If I can spend the same amount of money and get something that does the same job WAY better and is close in size and weight, why buy the underpowered thing? From the technical point of view, the size difference is huge. More powerful CPU + integrated GPU and much larger amount of RAM will consume a lot more power. The larger form of Netbook can accommodate a much larger battery and dissipate the heat generated by the HW and battery. You cannot fit such a battery to a smaller device and such power usage would fry the smaller device. - Eero PS. Some historical perspective... To some extent, the early contributions Nokia did to open source helped OLPC to get started (at least they affected the OLPC technology selections). Whereas OLPC kicked the netbook marked into existence. This then forced Microsoft to re-consider its licensing so you got Windows option for Netbooks too. ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users
Re: Nokia device usage
Eero Tamminen wrote: Hi, ext OgnenD wrote: It is too slow when browsing the net (compared to, for example, my Asus EEE or my laptop). Oh great, you are comparing an ultra low-power 320MHZ ARM CPU (RISC) vs a 1Ghz x86 CISC. It is not about computational power comparison, it is about functionality. If I can spend the same amount of money and get something that does the same job WAY better and is close in size and weight, why buy the underpowered thing? From the technical point of view, the size difference is huge. More powerful CPU + integrated GPU and much larger amount of RAM will consume a lot more power. The larger form of Netbook can accommodate a much larger battery and dissipate the heat generated by the HW and battery. You cannot fit such a battery to a smaller device and such power usage would fry the smaller device. - Eero PS. Some historical perspective... To some extent, the early contributions Nokia did to open source helped OLPC to get started (at least they affected the OLPC technology selections). Whereas OLPC kicked the netbook marked into existence. This then forced Microsoft to re-consider its licensing so you got Windows option for Netbooks too. Eero, Point taken. I was talking in terms of cost effectiveness. If you only have $250 to spend on a single device and you are looking for small, portable, decent battery life and do as many things well as possible without forcing me to carry pounds of weight around - my choice would currently be an Eee. I have the Linux version on which I put Ubuntu and it works great, not to mention that it actually has the power to allow me proper web browsing, proper movie watching etc. It is also small enough to let me walk it around the house or take on vacation, has USB, ethernet jack etc. Someone made the comment that it would take five generations to make the tablet come to its full utility (apparently N810 is gen 3). Well maybe so but what about all the people who bought gen 1 and 2 (and even gen 3)? Someone else said that a buyer should do their homework prior to purchase. I agree with that but some things are impossible to judge from tech specs until the thing is in front of you to test. Either way, I am glad I asked the question in this group. It seems like most people found some use for their tablet and that most are happy with the way it works for their specific purpose. At the same time most also seemed to think that there is lots of space for improvement and that certain things did not work as advertised. Ognen ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users
Re: Nokia device usage
Marius Gedminas wrote: On Thu, Mar 05, 2009 at 11:48:26AM -0700, Mark wrote: On Thu, Mar 5, 2009 at 11:40 AM, Ryan Abel rabe...@gmail.com wrote: On Mar 5, 2009, at 1:38 PM, Mark wrote: On Thu, Mar 5, 2009 at 11:24 AM, Marius Gedminas mar...@pov.lt wrote: Overall, the current generations of NITs are far from perfect, but they are the best hacker's devices of their size I've ever seen. And *that* is the summary of the state of the tablets: they're *great* for hackers, but as consumer end-user devices, not so much. And? This is exactly how Nokia's positioned them, so it sounds like the plan is working really well. That is as Benjamin Disraeli would say it, a damned lie. Your unrealistic protests notwithstanding, these things have been and still are being sold as consumer devices, and nowhere are they referred to as being aimed at hackers. On several occasions people from Nokia with official-sounding titles (such as Vice President) explicitly say that they expect it will take around five generations for the Internet Tablets to be consumer-ready. The N810 is 3rd generation. I'd provide references if I weren't a lazy bum. Marius Gedminas ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users Here is one: If you look at the Internet tablet segment, it’s not dying at all, on the contrary -- it's our future. I remember saying at some launch even that it would take five generations of the Internet Tablet devices to really make them mass consumer products -- so far, we have launched only three generations and the fourth is in the making at this very moment, based on the Maemo software that is written for touch-based products, so it's a very important asset for us. Taken from http://www.brighthand.com/default.asp?newsID=14786 - it is apparently a statement made by a Nokia VP. I guess I should have had the foresight to google five generations consumer ready nokia before buying my N800 ;) Thanks, Ognen ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users
Re: Nokia device usage
On Fri, Mar 6, 2009 at 1:45 AM, Marius Gedminas mar...@pov.lt wrote: On Thu, Mar 05, 2009 at 11:48:26AM -0700, Mark wrote: On Thu, Mar 5, 2009 at 11:40 AM, Ryan Abel rabe...@gmail.com wrote: On Mar 5, 2009, at 1:38 PM, Mark wrote: On Thu, Mar 5, 2009 at 11:24 AM, Marius Gedminas mar...@pov.lt wrote: Overall, the current generations of NITs are far from perfect, but they are the best hacker's devices of their size I've ever seen. And *that* is the summary of the state of the tablets: they're *great* for hackers, but as consumer end-user devices, not so much. And? This is exactly how Nokia's positioned them, so it sounds like the plan is working really well. That is as Benjamin Disraeli would say it, a damned lie. Your unrealistic protests notwithstanding, these things have been and still are being sold as consumer devices, and nowhere are they referred to as being aimed at hackers. On several occasions people from Nokia with official-sounding titles (such as Vice President) explicitly say that they expect it will take around five generations for the Internet Tablets to be consumer-ready. The N810 is 3rd generation. I'd provide references if I weren't a lazy bum. Marius Gedminas -- Sure, they say it, after you've already bought the thing and are on a mailing list and a discussion such as this comes up, but NOWHERE in the sales literature or at any sales point that I've seen does it say that. That little morsel is *not* freely disseminated. Mark ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users
Re: Nokia device usage
On Mar 6, 2009, at 10:03 AM, Mark wrote: On Fri, Mar 6, 2009 at 1:45 AM, Marius Gedminas mar...@pov.lt wrote: On Thu, Mar 05, 2009 at 11:48:26AM -0700, Mark wrote: On Thu, Mar 5, 2009 at 11:40 AM, Ryan Abel rabe...@gmail.com wrote: On Mar 5, 2009, at 1:38 PM, Mark wrote: On Thu, Mar 5, 2009 at 11:24 AM, Marius Gedminas mar...@pov.lt wrote: Overall, the current generations of NITs are far from perfect, but they are the best hacker's devices of their size I've ever seen. And *that* is the summary of the state of the tablets: they're *great* for hackers, but as consumer end-user devices, not so much. And? This is exactly how Nokia's positioned them, so it sounds like the plan is working really well. That is as Benjamin Disraeli would say it, a damned lie. Your unrealistic protests notwithstanding, these things have been and still are being sold as consumer devices, and nowhere are they referred to as being aimed at hackers. On several occasions people from Nokia with official-sounding titles (such as Vice President) explicitly say that they expect it will take around five generations for the Internet Tablets to be consumer- ready. The N810 is 3rd generation. I'd provide references if I weren't a lazy bum. Sure, they say it, after you've already bought the thing and are on a mailing list and a discussion such as this comes up, but NOWHERE in the sales literature or at any sales point that I've seen does it say that. That little morsel is *not* freely disseminated. Yeah, and it also works exactly as advertised in the sales literature. You're grasping for a point, but not making much progress. -- Ryan Abel Maemo Community Council chair ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users
Re: Nokia device usage
Mark wrote: Sure, they say it, after you've already bought the thing and are on a mailing list and a discussion such as this comes up, but NOWHERE in the sales literature or at any sales point that I've seen does it say that. That little morsel is *not* freely disseminated. I'm trying to stay out of this discussion, because it is a circular argument - no one will win because there is no simple correct stance. However, I got my N800 in a PC World store in the UK. PC World is a large retail chain aimed primarily at consumers. They sell Microsoft products to Ma and Pa types. They also sell some more specialized parts - at highly inflated prices, and just because an Apple dealer. Having acknowledged that point, on the whole, you go to PC World to buy consumer electronics, not bleeding edged hacker tools. Make of that what you want, but also notice that not all territories that sell Nokia products treat them in the same way - this is the reason the argument is circular. The N800 was never sold as anything *but* a consumer product in PC World - which may well speak volumes for PC World's stupidity, but also supports what Mark is saying. M ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users
Re: Nokia device usage
On Fri, Mar 6, 2009 at 3:59 PM, Matt Emson mem...@interalpha.co.uk wrote: I'm trying to stay out of this discussion, because it is a circular argument - no one will win because there is no simple correct stance. And now we've both failed at that :-) The N800 was never sold as anything *but* a consumer product in PC World - which may well speak volumes for PC World's stupidity, but also supports what Mark is saying. Agreed, and fully understandable. Can we draw up a list of what - exactly - the N8x0 fails to do out-of-the-box which it is advertised it *can* do; and requires hacker-like skills to enable? Cheers, Andrew -- Andrew Flegg -- mailto:and...@bleb.org | http://www.bleb.org/ Maemo Community Council member ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users
Re: Nokia device usage
2009/3/6 Matt Emson mem...@interalpha.co.uk: Mark wrote: Sure, they say it, after you've already bought the thing and are on a mailing list and a discussion such as this comes up, but NOWHERE in the sales literature or at any sales point that I've seen does it say that. That little morsel is *not* freely disseminated. I'm trying to stay out of this discussion, because it is a circular argument - no one will win because there is no simple correct stance. However, I got my N800 in a PC World store in the UK. PC World is a large retail chain aimed primarily at consumers. They sell Microsoft products to Ma and Pa types. They also sell some more specialized parts - at highly inflated prices, and just because an Apple dealer. Having acknowledged that point, on the whole, you go to PC World to buy consumer electronics, not bleeding edged hacker tools. Make of that what you want, but also notice that not all territories that sell Nokia products treat them in the same way - this is the reason the argument is circular. The N800 was never sold as anything *but* a consumer product in PC World - which may well speak volumes for PC World's stupidity, but also supports what Mark is saying. So what are you guys saying ? The ADs are not true for this particular device? But is there any ADs that is true for device ? Is Windows fulfilling what's said in its ADs? Was Mac OS X 10.0 doing the same? Was it buggy and slow as hell? I don't get it. And, as I said earlier, I think you guys are pretending too much out of it. It does what it is supposed to do (browsing, im, email). It may not do it perfectly, but it does it and I think that's also what is in its ADs. -- anidel ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users
Re: Nokia device usage
Aniello Del Sorbo wrote: 2009/3/6 Matt Emson mem...@interalpha.co.uk: Mark wrote: Sure, they say it, after you've already bought the thing and are on a mailing list and a discussion such as this comes up, but NOWHERE in the sales literature or at any sales point that I've seen does it say that. That little morsel is *not* freely disseminated. I'm trying to stay out of this discussion, because it is a circular argument - no one will win because there is no simple correct stance. However, I got my N800 in a PC World store in the UK. PC World is a large retail chain aimed primarily at consumers. They sell Microsoft products to Ma and Pa types. They also sell some more specialized parts - at highly inflated prices, and just because an Apple dealer. Having acknowledged that point, on the whole, you go to PC World to buy consumer electronics, not bleeding edged hacker tools. Make of that what you want, but also notice that not all territories that sell Nokia products treat them in the same way - this is the reason the argument is circular. The N800 was never sold as anything *but* a consumer product in PC World - which may well speak volumes for PC World's stupidity, but also supports what Mark is saying. So what are you guys saying ? The ADs are not true for this particular device? But is there any ADs that is true for device ? Is Windows fulfilling what's said in its ADs? Was Mac OS X 10.0 doing the same? Was it buggy and slow as hell? I don't get it. And, as I said earlier, I think you guys are pretending too much out of it. It does what it is supposed to do (browsing, im, email). It may not do it perfectly, but it does it and I think that's also what is in its ADs. Aniello, :) I guess I am now going to invoke someone's bicycle analogy: the bicycle you just bought can go in a straight line (maybe turn if you have 20 years of cycling experience under your belt and tons of time to spend practicing) except that it is only at speeds of 1km/h. When you sit on the bicycle it will take some time to actually start moving even though you have been working the pedals for a few minutes. Now, when you buy a mirror for your bike (or a horn), it might or might not work, depending on how good you are with mirrors or horns and how much time you have to spend playing with them. Finally, the GPS that you can attach to the bike comes with a poorly written map software that sometimes works and sometimes doesn't. Would you buy this bike? Ognen ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users
Re: Nokia device usage
Andrew Flegg wrote: On Fri, Mar 6, 2009 at 3:59 PM, Matt Emson mem...@interalpha.co.uk wrote: I'm trying to stay out of this discussion, because it is a circular argument - no one will win because there is no simple correct stance. And now we've both failed at that :-) The N800 was never sold as anything *but* a consumer product in PC World - which may well speak volumes for PC World's stupidity, but also supports what Mark is saying. Agreed, and fully understandable. Can we draw up a list of what - exactly - the N8x0 fails to do out-of-the-box which it is advertised it *can* do; and requires hacker-like skills to enable? Cheers, Andrew I volunteer to do this as it actually might be a useful exercise, not because I want to hold Nokia accountable (which I cannot anyways) but because I might have some time to put towards making the darn thing better. Ognen ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users
Re: Nokia device usage
the bike comes with a subscription to a community repair shop and new elements are being created for it every day. it includes out of the box an expansive toolkit able to mend and repair anything on your bike. A new water bottle was designed for the bike which actually allows you to continuously ride for weeks at a time and have plenty of clean fluids available using an innovative recycling system. On Fri, Mar 6, 2009 at 4:13 PM, Ognen Duzlevski og...@naniteworld.comwrote: Aniello Del Sorbo wrote: 2009/3/6 Matt Emson mem...@interalpha.co.uk: Mark wrote: Sure, they say it, after you've already bought the thing and are on a mailing list and a discussion such as this comes up, but NOWHERE in the sales literature or at any sales point that I've seen does it say that. That little morsel is *not* freely disseminated. I'm trying to stay out of this discussion, because it is a circular argument - no one will win because there is no simple correct stance. However, I got my N800 in a PC World store in the UK. PC World is a large retail chain aimed primarily at consumers. They sell Microsoft products to Ma and Pa types. They also sell some more specialized parts - at highly inflated prices, and just because an Apple dealer. Having acknowledged that point, on the whole, you go to PC World to buy consumer electronics, not bleeding edged hacker tools. Make of that what you want, but also notice that not all territories that sell Nokia products treat them in the same way - this is the reason the argument is circular. The N800 was never sold as anything *but* a consumer product in PC World - which may well speak volumes for PC World's stupidity, but also supports what Mark is saying. So what are you guys saying ? The ADs are not true for this particular device? But is there any ADs that is true for device ? Is Windows fulfilling what's said in its ADs? Was Mac OS X 10.0 doing the same? Was it buggy and slow as hell? I don't get it. And, as I said earlier, I think you guys are pretending too much out of it. It does what it is supposed to do (browsing, im, email). It may not do it perfectly, but it does it and I think that's also what is in its ADs. Aniello, :) I guess I am now going to invoke someone's bicycle analogy: the bicycle you just bought can go in a straight line (maybe turn if you have 20 years of cycling experience under your belt and tons of time to spend practicing) except that it is only at speeds of 1km/h. When you sit on the bicycle it will take some time to actually start moving even though you have been working the pedals for a few minutes. Now, when you buy a mirror for your bike (or a horn), it might or might not work, depending on how good you are with mirrors or horns and how much time you have to spend playing with them. Finally, the GPS that you can attach to the bike comes with a poorly written map software that sometimes works and sometimes doesn't. Would you buy this bike? Ognen ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users
Re: Nokia device usage
2009/3/6 Ognen Duzlevski og...@naniteworld.com: Aniello Del Sorbo wrote: 2009/3/6 Matt Emson mem...@interalpha.co.uk: Mark wrote: Sure, they say it, after you've already bought the thing and are on a mailing list and a discussion such as this comes up, but NOWHERE in the sales literature or at any sales point that I've seen does it say that. That little morsel is *not* freely disseminated. I'm trying to stay out of this discussion, because it is a circular argument - no one will win because there is no simple correct stance. However, I got my N800 in a PC World store in the UK. PC World is a large retail chain aimed primarily at consumers. They sell Microsoft products to Ma and Pa types. They also sell some more specialized parts - at highly inflated prices, and just because an Apple dealer. Having acknowledged that point, on the whole, you go to PC World to buy consumer electronics, not bleeding edged hacker tools. Make of that what you want, but also notice that not all territories that sell Nokia products treat them in the same way - this is the reason the argument is circular. The N800 was never sold as anything *but* a consumer product in PC World - which may well speak volumes for PC World's stupidity, but also supports what Mark is saying. So what are you guys saying ? The ADs are not true for this particular device? But is there any ADs that is true for device ? Is Windows fulfilling what's said in its ADs? Was Mac OS X 10.0 doing the same? Was it buggy and slow as hell? I don't get it. And, as I said earlier, I think you guys are pretending too much out of it. It does what it is supposed to do (browsing, im, email). It may not do it perfectly, but it does it and I think that's also what is in its ADs. Aniello, :) I guess I am now going to invoke someone's bicycle analogy: the bicycle you just bought can go in a straight line (maybe turn if you have 20 years of cycling experience under your belt and tons of time to spend practicing) except that it is only at speeds of 1km/h. When you sit on the bicycle it will take some time to actually start moving even though you have been working the pedals for a few minutes. Now, when you buy a mirror for your bike (or a horn), it might or might not work, depending on how good you are with mirrors or horns and how much time you have to spend playing with them. Finally, the GPS that you can attach to the bike comes with a poorly written map software that sometimes works and sometimes doesn't. Would you buy this bike? Ognen I don't need it :) So I won't buy it. If it would be cheap and do what I need, I might buy it. I perfectly understand what you are saying, but I don't think it's entirely the n8x0's fault. It may not have been your device. -- anidel ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users
Re: Nokia device usage
2009/3/6 gary liquid liq...@gmail.com: the bike comes with a subscription to a community repair shop and new elements are being created for it every day. it includes out of the box an expansive toolkit able to mend and repair anything on your bike. A new water bottle was designed for the bike which actually allows you to continuously ride for weeks at a time and have plenty of clean fluids available using an innovative recycling system. This is more attractive to me, but this maybe because I am already working in the bike department :) On the other hand, I am sure I will never see an AD for a device that even think to mention about the shortcomings of the device they are about to advertise. -- anidel ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users
Re: Nokia device usage
On Fri, Mar 6, 2009 at 9:16 AM, gary liquid liq...@gmail.com wrote: the bike comes with a subscription to a community repair shop and new elements are being created for it every day. Provided you *want* all kinds of addons you will never need... it includes out of the box an expansive toolkit able to mend and repair anything on your bike. As long as you're mechanically inclined and/or an actual mechanic... A new water bottle was designed for the bike which actually allows you to continuously ride for weeks at a time and have plenty of clean fluids available using an innovative recycling system. What is that supposed to analogize? My battery doesn't last anywhere near the advertised time. I'm lucky to get 3 or 4 hours out of it, and lately not even that. Mark ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users
Re: Nokia device usage
2009/3/6 Ognen Duzlevski og...@naniteworld.com: Andrew Flegg wrote: On Fri, Mar 6, 2009 at 3:59 PM, Matt Emson mem...@interalpha.co.uk wrote: I'm trying to stay out of this discussion, because it is a circular argument - no one will win because there is no simple correct stance. And now we've both failed at that :-) The N800 was never sold as anything *but* a consumer product in PC World - which may well speak volumes for PC World's stupidity, but also supports what Mark is saying. Agreed, and fully understandable. Can we draw up a list of what - exactly - the N8x0 fails to do out-of-the-box which it is advertised it *can* do; and requires hacker-like skills to enable? Cheers, Andrew I volunteer to do this as it actually might be a useful exercise, not because I want to hold Nokia accountable (which I cannot anyways) but because I might have some time to put towards making the darn thing better. This would be indeed useful. Please do. Thanks. -- anidel ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users
Re: Nokia device usage
gary liquid wrote: the bike comes with a subscription to a community repair shop and new elements are being created for it every day. it includes out of the box an expansive toolkit able to mend and repair anything on your bike. A new water bottle was designed for the bike which actually allows you to continuously ride for weeks at a time and have plenty of clean fluids available using an innovative recycling system. The subscription to the community shop requires a level of expertise and countless hours of playing with the bike. At which point making the bike actually work becomes your primary preoccupation. You exist to make the bike work instead of the bike existing to be your mode of transportation. Ognen ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users
Re: Nokia device usage
2009/3/6 Mark wolfm...@gmail.com: On Fri, Mar 6, 2009 at 9:16 AM, gary liquid liq...@gmail.com wrote: the bike comes with a subscription to a community repair shop and new elements are being created for it every day. Provided you *want* all kinds of addons you will never need... Provided you *need* that bike in the first place. it includes out of the box an expansive toolkit able to mend and repair anything on your bike. As long as you're mechanically inclined and/or an actual mechanic... Correct. That free toolkit is appealing only for mechanics. But it may also appeal consumers who may be willing to try those geeky add-ons on their bike. A new water bottle was designed for the bike which actually allows you to continuously ride for weeks at a time and have plenty of clean fluids available using an innovative recycling system. What is that supposed to analogize? My battery doesn't last anywhere near the advertised time. I'm lucky to get 3 or 4 hours out of it, and lately not even that. Mine is standing next to me connected to my BT cellphone since this morning. And it's 16:23 now. -- anidel ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users
Re: Nokia device usage
Hi, ext Mark wrote: On Fri, Mar 6, 2009 at 9:16 AM, gary liquid liq...@gmail.com wrote: the bike comes with a subscription to a community repair shop and new elements are being created for it every day. Provided you *want* all kinds of addons you will never need... it includes out of the box an expansive toolkit able to mend and repair anything on your bike. As long as you're mechanically inclined and/or an actual mechanic... A new water bottle was designed for the bike which actually allows you to continuously ride for weeks at a time and have plenty of clean fluids available using an innovative recycling system. What is that supposed to analogize? My battery doesn't last anywhere near the advertised time. I'm lucky to get 3 or 4 hours out of it, and lately not even that. Do you have some (e.g. 3rd party app) running in the background taking CPU? Or something that frequently polls network (Do you switch it to offline mode when you don't use it)? Or doesn't allow the display to blank when you don't use the device? - Eero ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users
Re: Nokia device usage
Andrew Flegg wrote: Agreed, and fully understandable. Can we draw up a list of what - exactly - the N8x0 fails to do out-of-the-box which it is advertised it *can* do; and requires hacker-like skills to enable? One thing that deceived me is that Skype was announced as and important application. Although it is true that Skype works, it's a rather old version (1.7) that doesn't support video conference. As the device includes a webcam, I was expecting Skype to be able to use it. In my particular case, videoconf is the only usage I have for Skype. Cheers, Alejandro. ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users
Re: Nokia device usage
I won't quote the whole thread, there was too much of a tail already. Mark seems to have many, many issues, some of them even connected to the tablet. Since he completly dismissed the corporate usage by misquoting the original post, I'll address that first. People using Nokia N8x0 tablets for business are actually individuals and their concerns matter (think telephone). The very fact that the device is robust and stable enough for rigors of daily (ab)use speaks very highly of the hardware and software. The fact that it runs Linux is a great asset for USERS, as developers tend to develop for other people. No, it is not true that when you roll your own application, you have a full control of the software. The idea is to get the work done, not to redo the whole software stack. I get paid to deliver results which means that I use as much of existing software as possible, hence Linux as the preferred OS. Usability out of the box compared with ads. I haven't even seen any ads. I'm not crazy about out of the box experience and it annoys me to see on N8x0 the same counter productive underhanded tactics used my MS - the teaser apps you have to pay for later. On the other hand anybody remembers what it takes to view .doc file on a brand new Windows machine? I'd remove teaser apps and put Evince, Mplayer and MyTube on to dramatically increase out of the box usability. The biggest beef seems to be that the Nokia tablets are not aimed at the idiots. As a business decision, it may be misguided, since idiots constitute a vast majority of the buying public. Personally I like to be treated as an adult. I have been using N800 first and then N810 for over a year before I decided to push them into work environment - obviously my experiences were encouraging. For me the most limiting factor is also the most liberating factor - the screen size. I have an EEE PC that I use when I travel. I like it a lot, but it just doesn't fit in any of my pockets. The N810 isn't perfect, actually 2 changes from N800 make it less usable: the camera is now usless for taking photos and movies and removal of external full SD slot rendered my SD form RFID scanners usless. Overall I really like my N810 most on the sleepless nights when I get to watch comedy on YouTube or listen to the music (sound is great) and play Mahjong. my $0.02. julius ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users
Re: Nokia device usage
Hi, ext Alejandro López wrote: Agreed, and fully understandable. Can we draw up a list of what - exactly - the N8x0 fails to do out-of-the-box which it is advertised it *can* do; and requires hacker-like skills to enable? One thing that deceived me is that Skype was announced as and important application. Although it is true that Skype works, it's a rather old version (1.7) that doesn't support video conference. As the device includes a webcam, I was expecting Skype to be able to use it. In my particular case, videoconf is the only usage I have for Skype. To assess whether this was a realistic expectation, were there other mobile devices[1] which provided Skype *video*calls when you bought the device? [1] mobile = ones that are same size or smaller, see my earlier mail about power consumption heat dissipation. - Eero ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users
Re: Nokia device usage
On Fri, Mar 6, 2009 at 9:24 AM, Eero Tamminen eero.tammi...@nokia.com wrote: Hi, ext Mark wrote: On Fri, Mar 6, 2009 at 9:16 AM, gary liquid liq...@gmail.com wrote: the bike comes with a subscription to a community repair shop and new elements are being created for it every day. Provided you *want* all kinds of addons you will never need... it includes out of the box an expansive toolkit able to mend and repair anything on your bike. As long as you're mechanically inclined and/or an actual mechanic... A new water bottle was designed for the bike which actually allows you to continuously ride for weeks at a time and have plenty of clean fluids available using an innovative recycling system. What is that supposed to analogize? My battery doesn't last anywhere near the advertised time. I'm lucky to get 3 or 4 hours out of it, and lately not even that. Do you have some (e.g. 3rd party app) running in the background taking CPU? Or something that frequently polls network (Do you switch it to offline mode when you don't use it)? Or doesn't allow the display to blank when you don't use the device? - Eero I can't speak to the 3rd party app issue; I have so many apps installed that that is entirely possible, although according to LoadApplet there's nothing going on. I rarely switch to offline mode because much of the stuff I do with it requires network access, and even when I'm not doing anything constantly online there's stuff like OMWeather that needs to update every now and then. I *never* turn off bluetooth because it's too much of a pain digging through all those menus to get it back on again. I do have the display set to blank at 2 minutes, and only stay on when charging. I also have the auto-lock enabled. Mark ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users
Re: Nokia device usage
Andrew Flegg wrote: Agreed, and fully understandable. Can we draw up a list of what - exactly - the N8x0 fails to do out-of-the-box which it is advertised it *can* do; and requires hacker-like skills to enable? If I'd never owned another device (Palm, Handspring, Apple Newton, Sharp Zaurus sl5500 etc) or used anything comparable (Windows Mobile 5, Windows CE, Android, iPhone), I might be happy with the N800. But it just seems to do a lot of things in a half baked fashion. The Web browser is the biggest issue. It just is too slow. Mail, well it sort of works. Most of the time. Of the other apps, well I guess some work well. Others, not so much. Had I never owned an iPhone I might be a lot more forgiving, but I have apps, free apps, on my iPhone that do everything I used my N800 for regularly. It does everything more pleasingly and it doesn't struggle (most) of the time. Given that I have it on 24x7, the battery life is also way, way superior. I could list more reasons and be quite cruel about the way the N800 works, but it's now a legacy product, so what is the point? Each to their own. The N800 was a good device 2 years ago, just not now. Things move on. M ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users
Re: Nokia device usage
Julius Szelagiewicz wrote: The biggest beef seems to be that the Nokia tablets are not aimed at the idiots. As a business decision, it may be misguided, since idiots constitute a vast majority of the buying public. Personally I like to be treated as an adult. Julius, My intended application for the N800 is controlling Lego Mindstorms NXT bricks. For that purpose the N800 is actually a very cool device (runs Linux, has bluetooth and USB, can run python etc.). I have another N800 that I bought as a portable lazy-man's gadget - that portion has not played out so well. The idea was to take it on trips for movies, browsing the web and use it as a GPS. None of these have worked out well (for me, YMMV). I have since bought an Eee and that puppy is miles ahead of the N8x0 for my intended uses, mind you, it costs approximately the same and runs Linux or you can put Ubuntu on it yourself, which is what I did. My main beef with N800 is the difference between advertised functionality and what you actually get. Maemo community is great BUT there seems to be an enormous amount of confusion out there on what the device can actually do and how to get it done between the various versions of maemo. I am used to hacking stuff all day but maybe sometimes, just sometimes, I don't want to serve the gadget and I want the gadget to serve me. I kind of resent the wording in your email - that the beef with the device is that it is not meant for idiots. I have a CS degree, have even published a paper or two, co-wrote a chapter in a scientific textbook and have been a programmer for most of my life (on Linux). I don't consider myself to be an idiot by any means. Thanks, Ognen ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users
Re: Nokia device usage
On Fri, Mar 6, 2009 at 9:33 AM, Eero Tamminen eero.tammi...@nokia.com wrote: Hi, ext Alejandro López wrote: Agreed, and fully understandable. Can we draw up a list of what - exactly - the N8x0 fails to do out-of-the-box which it is advertised it *can* do; and requires hacker-like skills to enable? One thing that deceived me is that Skype was announced as and important application. Although it is true that Skype works, it's a rather old version (1.7) that doesn't support video conference. As the device includes a webcam, I was expecting Skype to be able to use it. In my particular case, videoconf is the only usage I have for Skype. To assess whether this was a realistic expectation, were there other mobile devices[1] which provided Skype *video*calls when you bought the device? [1] mobile = ones that are same size or smaller, see my earlier mail about power consumption heat dissipation. - Eero Bull hockey! The expectation is that 1) Skype is touted, 2) the device has a webcam, and 3) Skype even has an empty blank rectangle where the video would go if it were enabled. And every time you pop out the camera (on an N800) the Internet Call client opens WITH A FUNCTIONING VIDEO WINDOW running, no matter how many times you uncheck the Start when camera launched setting, so clearly it's possible. Mark ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users
Re: Nokia device usage
On Fri, Mar 6, 2009 at 4:40 PM, Matt Emson mem...@interalpha.co.uk wrote: Andrew Flegg wrote: Agreed, and fully understandable. Can we draw up a list of what - exactly - the N8x0 fails to do out-of-the-box which it is advertised it *can* do; and requires hacker-like skills to enable? [snip complaints, and other device comparisons] The N800 was a good device 2 years ago, just not now. Things move on. Right, so although your complaints may be valid (I'm not saying they're not - honestly, I'd love my tablet to be faster, which is why I'm looking forward to an RX-51/71), they're not relevant to any discussion about Nokia mis-selling the tablets or promising they can do more than they can. *That*'s what I was trying to pin down. For all their flaws, I'm not aware of Nokia saying you could do something which you actually couldn't - unless you were willing to open X Terminal, fiddle with configuration files and so on. Cheers, Andrew -- Andrew Flegg -- mailto:and...@bleb.org | http://www.bleb.org/ Maemo Community Council member ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users
Re: Nokia device usage
On Mar 6, 2009, at 11:28 AM, Julius Szelagiewicz wrote: I'm not crazy about out of the box experience and it annoys me to see on N8x0 the same counter productive underhanded tactics used my MS - the teaser apps you have to pay for later. Do you mind me asking which teaser apps? There's one, I think, and that's Map. Maybe you could make a case for Rhapsody, but everything else works just fine without additional effort. -- Ryan Abel Maemo Community Council chair ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users
Re: Nokia device usage
On Fri, Mar 6, 2009 at 9:46 AM, Andrew Flegg and...@bleb.org wrote: For all their flaws, I'm not aware of Nokia saying you could do something which you actually couldn't The fundamental problem is that you are *deliberately* unaware because you refuse to accept reality. Like G.W. Bush and a slew of others, no amount of obvious fact will deter you from believing what you want to believe. Mark ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users
Re: Nokia device usage
On Fri, Mar 6, 2009 at 4:50 PM, Mark wolfm...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Mar 6, 2009 at 9:46 AM, Andrew Flegg and...@bleb.org wrote: For all their flaws, I'm not aware of Nokia saying you could do something which you actually couldn't The fundamental problem is that you are *deliberately* unaware because you refuse to accept reality. Like G.W. Bush and a slew of others, no amount of obvious fact will deter you from believing what you want to believe. I'm trying to turn a flaming trollfest into something more constructive. Instead of calling me names, can you actually respond to my question: what has Nokia advertised that you can do on the device, that you can only do by opening X Terminal, fiddling with configuration files etc? The device may be well suited to hackers, but - as far as I can tell - it meets its stated goals adequately without having to resort to such things. A number of times in this thread, people have said you have to be a hacker to do anything with it and Nokia don't advertise that. What did Nokia advertise that you've got to be a hacker to do? Cheers, Andrew -- Andrew Flegg -- mailto:and...@bleb.org | http://www.bleb.org/ Maemo Community Council member ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users
Re: Nokia device usage
My complaints notwithstanding, I use my N800 constantly. * I'm only halfway through my gpe contacts list correcting the import errors, but I'm already relying heavily on it for that. * I finally shoved my reservations aside and have started using Google Calendar to do my time planning. That has worked out very well, so I've also started using the gpe Calendar for offline access to the same information. It works pretty well, but the color scheme is pretty ghastly and hard to read when using a dark Hildon theme such as NCARS. Erminig makes syncing remarkably quick and painless (at least for me). * I constantly use my bluetooth GPSr and Roadmap, Maps, and Maemo Mapper (in that order) for finding my way in addition to some other GPS tools such as GPXView and geopoi to do geocaching, for which the correctness of street data is pretty much irrelevant. I used my ancient Garmin GPS III+ to map my neighborhood on OSM long before the tablets came out, so don't have a lot to do with OSM any more, but I have used my N800 to map a hiking trail in Rocky Mountain National Park. * Media Player - I use the built-in Media Player for audio, and MPlayer for video. I've ripped a couple of DVDs and the entire Firefly series with satisfactory but not perfect results. * Games - I'm addicted to AisleRiot Solitaire, but have sudoku, chess, Pingus, Xword and a number of other games that help to pass the time on the buss or plane. * Alarm Clock while travelling - it's reliable and useful for this, and means one less bit of gear to carry around in my kit. Dali Clock and mClock can be useful for those times when I need to be very mindful of the time and there's no wall clock handy. (I completely stopped wearing a wristwatch about 18 months ago because my cell phone keeps just as good time and doesn't have to be reset for time zone changes.) * Leafpad is great for creating/editing plain text files that I want to be portable to Windows or any other machine with any OS. * Gnumeric Spreadsheet. * PDF reader for ebooks and all manner of pdf files. I have FBReader installed, but have never used it. * I'm experimenting with Pyrecipe and Gourmet Recipe Manager. I have word processing documents scattered about several different storage devices and it would be nice to have them all together in a searchable and handy place. Not being able to print is a considerable shortcoming, though. * OMWeather is very handing for planning my mode of commute to work and recreation, etc. It also gives me quick access to what's going on in other places. * I don't find the Web browsing to be nearly as slow or problematic as some others have mentioned. I never use an offline email app with the tablet - I just access gmail through the browser (and google's calendar as well) and am very happy with that aspect of my tablet. I do wish that the browser supported Firefox extensions, though. This is the one area where I think the tablet really shines. I do have to use the zoom buttons frequently, but they are so accessible and effective that it's not an issue. * OpenSSH for root access as well as the occasional access to pine for checking my work email on the go. I'm far from being a true hacker, since I can't do any of the programming, but I am definitely a power user and do pretty much everything *but* programming. My primary OS at home is kubuntu, with the occasional boot into WinXP for things that I haven't got to work in Linux yet, such as scanning photos and documents or cleaning my printer's heads. I have an Eee PC 1000HE on order (I pre-ordered, but they ran out before they got to me, darn it!), which I will immediately convert to dual-boot with most of the HDD space going to kubuntu, and hopefully it will complement my N800, do all the things that I wish the N800 did, and make my tablet a more positive experience, since the netbook will alleviate the pressure on the tablet to do the things that I expected of it. Mark ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users
Re: Nokia device usage
Andrew Flegg wrote: Right, so although your complaints may be valid (I'm not saying they're not - honestly, I'd love my tablet to be faster, which is why I'm looking forward to an RX-51/71), they're not relevant to any discussion about Nokia mis-selling the tablets or promising they can do more than they can. Well, with ITOS 2008 Diablo * Never picks up samba/smb/cifs shares any more - ever. No clear reason why that I could see. * Video is jumpy and it barely plays anything back smoothly. Even when encoded in a codec that the device supports out of the box. * Flash - just does not work at any speed vaguely acceptable. Flash video is a complete joke, and if it does play it will drop frames like mad and the audio often stutters - *even* if you allow the entire video to download before playback. * The browser is almost unusable on certain sites. This is probably CSS related, but it renders Facebook useless, for example. * The update mechanism is intrusive and can make the device unusable for the first 2+ minutes after a reboot. *That*'s what I was trying to pin down. For all their flaws, I'm not aware of Nokia saying you could do something which you actually couldn't - unless you were willing to open X Terminal, fiddle with configuration files and so on. Well, Nokia kind of implied it was an Internet Tablet and, if we're honest, it only just barely meets this function these days. It is painfully slow most of the time. But, I'm not being drawn in to this argument any more. It's circular. For every negative point I could come up with, someone will have a counter point from their perspective or make accusations of misconfiguring the device or misunderstanding something. It was a good little machine for its time, but it is not useful to me any more. M ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users
Re: Nokia device usage
I am a very savy computer user. Started in Dos 3.3, wrote programs in Basic on and apple 2, worked my way thru windows and now have a job supporting Mac laptops for a school... so a fair amount of bike experience. My geek desk has various desktops ranging from Windows 2000 - Vista, a desktop with an idle version of Linux, Mac laptops with OS X (unix based OS) that run VM Ware with Linux or Windows, an ipod touch, and of course, the n810. I make web sites and am trying to learn php and mysql, tried working with perl a bit but never caught on. Comparing the Nokia n8*0 to a computer is more like comparing a unicycle to a bike... or a walmart special to Lance Armstrong's bike. The Nokia bike does have a wheel, does have pedals, and can be ridden straight out of the box. In the hands of a pro, the bike can be easily fixed and worked on, but in the hands of joe average, there is nothing straight forward. Joe average thinks they need a wrench to fix the problem, well the wrench is not in numeric sizes, you have wrench size $ or size ( or size @ and also size %, and they all look the same size yet do different things. To break up the real problems here, its Windows vs Linux all over again. Nokia is a linux box. Anyone who knows about linux is fine with that and makes the device sing. Anyone from a Windows world, where you just click on an icon and things go, have problems. Sure there are prebundled apps that do this, and there is a wonderful selection of more apps available, but too many things want the CLI and that is where you lose any non-Linus person and the frustrations begin. I would love the mapping software to do more, and if I can CLI a script, then it will but I do not know the 1st thing about scripting and neither does the average computer user. We are in the point and click era of computers. What separates the normal users from power users or super users is the CLI. I got the device as a novelty more than a tool. I picked it for the GPS ability and thought that it would be able to do palm type operations. I knew it was not a phone from the get go and actually make fun of the marketing people that try to promote skype as a communications alternative to it not being a phone... compare it to the 2 tin cans and a string. I was also disappointed in the camera but have a nokia phone and it is as crappy on the phone as it is on the n810, but I did not buy it to be a camera so anything it does there is fine. I did sit down and get skype to talk to my desktop, was very not impressed, and that app has not been opened since. I have my n810 working fine but it sits on the desk and gets used maybe once a week or so. The GPS is on for trips and I keep notes in it for trips to the store, but really there is nothing on it that I depend on. Email is setup to check 5 accounts, not that many book marks, I will browse the web to test my websites, maybe I need the calendar to know what day it is. I continue to turn it on and hope that I will find that one thing that will make it stand out over the other devices, the GPS is that feature but I take a trip once every few months where I can use it (assuming I stay on the plan and download the right maps; I have driven off into the black zone a few times). -- Scott ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users
Re: Nokia device usage
On Fri, Mar 6, 2009 at 9:56 AM, Andrew Flegg and...@bleb.org wrote: I'm trying to turn a flaming trollfest into something more constructive. Instead of calling me names, can you actually respond to my question: what has Nokia advertised that you can do on the device, that you can only do by opening X Terminal, fiddling with configuration files etc? The device may be well suited to hackers, but - as far as I can tell - it meets its stated goals adequately without having to resort to such things. A number of times in this thread, people have said you have to be a hacker to do anything with it and Nokia don't advertise that. What did Nokia advertise that you've got to be a hacker to do? Cheers, Andrew 1) It can't navigate out of the box. You have to pay a seriously prohibitive fee for a limited-time subscription to get that functionality, but even then the maps are ancient and the functionality is primitive compared to dedicated GPS receivers (many of which can also do lots of non-GPS functions better than the tablets...) and pretty much any commercial map/navigation software. Delorme's TopoUSA is only $99, has all the navigation features, much more up-to-date street data (plus - admittedly limited - free updates and specialty map downloads), loads of other features, and no time limitation. If you don't need/want topo, you can get just the street version for $50, which includes a free version for mobile devices. Other street navigation apps sell for $35-$50 as well. None of the installable apps do native routing, and all have some significant limitations. Even the command line won't help you here. 2) It *does email, but in a very limited fashion that doesn't work for me. I do all my email online or in SSH, which has nothing to do with the device's advertised capability. The command line won't help you here, either. 3) The webcam is a selling point, but is practically useless out of the box. You have to install apps in order to take still photos or videos (and those weren't even available until the middle of 2008), and videoconferencing is out of the question unless the other party also has a tablet. No help in the command line. 4) The contacts applet as shipped is useless for anything but phone numbers and email addresses. There's no way to add street addresses or other important information. Not even the command line can help you with this one. Even the installable apps have serious import/export issues. Command line tools might help here, but I don't have the expertise necessary. 5) Media support - an advertised point - is very limited out of the box. Even if you install an app that supports the necessary codecs, converting video with good results requires lots of trial and error. 6) Other Internet usage requires a great deal of command-line expertise and additional installs. After all, they are Internet Tablets, right? That implies they are good - out of the box - with all kinds of Internet applications, not just the Web. Otherwise, they should be named Web Tablets. Shall I go on? Mark ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users
Re: Nokia device usage
Ognen Duzlevski a écrit : Hello, I am curious to find out what people use their Nokias for. If anyone could share their usage patterns, it would be appreciated. Hello, I own a N770. a N800 and a N810. I use a Nokia 6600 Slide for call, SMS, photo, agenda and modem. I hope that the next internet Tablet will make the use of the phone obsolete. I alway carry the N810 with me. My usage is for: - Browsing the Internet, even if the amount of ads in more and more sites make it barely usable. I found hard to open a link in a new tab (I like to do so). Script execution should be stoppable easily from the interface because some site abuse of it and it's painful to wait the dialog that propose to stop the script. On reasonable sites, it work very well and make it a far more useful tool than the browsers of the phone. - Playing music. One of the task that work the best. - Taking notes using Maemopad+. I found the concept useful but need more work. Saving more than a dozen of nodes are too slow. I like the way it can save the result into HTML page. - Connecting to other computers with SSH to make remote work. For me this is the most productive feature of the N810. Having a xterm by default is sweet. - Reading PDF document. Very good result. I suggest to keep the last horizontal position of the page when passing one page to an other in zoom mode, because many documents have small font and large space on the left of the text. - I use MaemoMapper with the internet GPS when I don't have a bluetooth GPS with me. The result with the internal GPS is very frustrating comparing to the result with the external one in the same condition. Switching from the external to the internal GPS is absolutely a nightmare (sometime it work only after a full reboot). Using real map is an excellent feature of MaemoMapper with his ability to store them for reuse. I never success using point of interest. The auto-center mode is too easily to disable compared to to operation the enable it (require the menu or the keyboard). The GPS fix should be indicated into the GPS info box instead of a system message, because it can stay for long time (especially with the internal GPS). The AGPS should work out of the box. - Programming some python script. Sadly, i found no small code editor that is comfortable in text mode (vi is ok, but I am not a big fan of it). Too many of them use the CTRL key that it so painful to use, even with the toolbar in the xterm. I tested pygtkeditor but found it too slow as file get bigger. I hope that one day it would be possible to have a native GCC on the tablet, so I could program in C. - Transfer files from my phone using bluetooth. This work great and is very useful. - Transfer file with my computer using bluetooth work, but file browsing is not available. This require to use rsync or the SD card. I have tested to use the N810 as a USB storage, but I ended too often with a corrupted file system, so I don't use this feature any more. - Showing photos to others. This work and the images are superb thank to the quality of the screen. The default application is half finished. I prefer to use Quiver. - Making Skype call. I found it usable only using a Wifi link, with very good result. - Playing video. it work, but the experience is not comfortable. There is too many stall while using the interface. The time adjustment is very too small to be useful when the video is long as is a normal movie. - Playing some games. The comfort is very different from one game to an other. The games that follow the GUI concept of the tablet are great. The others are less. Some to the point that there are not very usable. - Installing and updating application is too easily broken. Nokia should provide a real central repository like every distribution does and should find a way to get ride of the stupid legal box that pop up for every package that is not from Nokia. The refresh of the application list take too long and don't remember the position after an operation. I use Debian on my computers and I found it far more easy to update and install applications. I hope that the tablet will have a so good application as is synaptic. - I have tryed to use the default mail client, but it is too buggy to be usable. I tested claws-mail with some success, but the interface require too much learning to be safe with. It is not appropriate for taking last messages of very large IMAP folders. Overall, I found the N810 investment a good decision for my use. One of my soon like to use the N800 now that I have the N810. he use it to play music, movie, game and viewing photos since it have 2 year old. I can say that small child have no problem using an tablet. The N770 have no use anymore as it can only run old early applications that are too frustrating to use. I will certainly but the next tablet, as it seem to have an integrated 3G link, a high resolution camera and a even more
Re: Nokia device usage
On Thu, Mar 5, 2009 at 3:54 PM, OgnenD og...@naniteworld.com wrote: Not even going to comment. I think you need to re-read your email and reflect on your communication skills. Pretty uncivilized, in my opinion. Thanks, Ognen Ognen, OK I apologize. I didn´t know you had a CS degree and knew the difference between RISC and CISC CPUs, by reading your original comment, it seemed you had little clue about the technical differences between a Netbook and a N8xx internet tablet. Perhaps I get emotional after the messages like I will never buy a Nokia product again from people who act with outrage as if someone sold them a faulty item that breaks in a millon pieces in the first week of use. The device is a 300+ Mhz ARM PDA-like device with Wi-Fi and with an open software stack, which runs a Mozilla derivative browser and can run plenty of Linux software. It also comes with a decent selection of proprietary software like Skype... Then people come here and complain like stabbeds pigs saying their Asus EEE running WinXP provides more functionality and that hence, Internet Tablets suck and are doomed. That smells like trolling to me. It's the non-Windows products that always get that kind of spontaneous criticism. FC ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users
Re: Nokia device usage
On Fri, Mar 6, 2009 at 10:49 AM, Jean-Christian de Rivaz j...@eclis.ch wrote: The concept is good, the hardware too. I think that the most opportunity to progress is in the usability of the applications. Too much small bugs or frustrating interface prevent to make the current tablet enjoyable for people that don't have some technical orientation justifiable giving the price point and the growing concurrence of similar devices in that market. That's exactly the source of the frustration: the hardware is there, the concept is good, but the reality of the software is far less than ideal. Mark ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users
Re: Nokia device usage
Eero Tamminen escribió: Skype video requires significantly more power than for example Gtalk video (which the device supports) and has quite strict latency requirements (the call drops if Skype doesn't get enough CPU). Great! Now I know the technical reasons, but I still don't know why this is not mentioned when it is said that Skype runs on the tablet. ___ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users
