tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-178947916580376471.post3516299587147926437..comments2023-09-24T22:26:00.289-07:00Comments on EE Daily News: Android vs. MeeGo: two approaches to competitively leveraging "open source"EE Daily Newshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01609630249488100984noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-178947916580376471.post-5717456421614757822010-11-19T09:01:33.326-08:002010-11-19T09:01:33.326-08:00Abhay said: "There is one important point whi...Abhay said: <i>"There is one important point which is overlooked.<br /><br />Because of DVM android is a fork of linux while Maemo, Meego are still part of the Linux foundation which means that all applications from linux can work on meego <b>with changes to UI</b> while it is not the same case with Android."</i><br /><br />Abhay, I think that distinction is an excellent argument in favor of Android. The Android OS was optimized for the smartphone form factor. Opening it up to <i>"all applications from linux"</i> would be a disaster. As you pointed out, it would take at least some <i>"changes to UI"</i>. Also, the MeeGo platform will not allow just any Linux app to claim MeeGo compliance.EE Daily Newshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01609630249488100984noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-178947916580376471.post-62244110821573016722010-11-18T23:56:29.610-08:002010-11-18T23:56:29.610-08:00There is one important point which is overlooked.
...There is one important point which is overlooked.<br /><br />Because of DVM android is a fork of linux while Maemo, Meego are still part of the Linux foundation which means that all applications from linux can work on meego with changes to UI while it is not the same case with Android.Abhayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10523517522618062046noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-178947916580376471.post-72571587355423708922010-06-29T07:14:34.745-07:002010-06-29T07:14:34.745-07:00Nokia's page states:
Qt GNU LGPL v. 2.1 Vers...Nokia's page states:<br /><br /><i><br />Qt GNU LGPL v. 2.1 Version<br /><br />This version is available for development of proprietary and commercial applications in accordance with the terms and conditions of the GNU Lesser General Public License version 2.1. <br /><br />Support services are available separately for purchase.<br /></i><br /><br />I'd take that as 'you can release commercial applications, providing you don't mess around with the Qt library itself..Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08426039661931820886noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-178947916580376471.post-50678836345595060522010-06-27T20:10:41.172-07:002010-06-27T20:10:41.172-07:00Thanks for adding the comment "BZH". Dr....Thanks for adding the comment "BZH". Dr. West had noted the LGPL provision earlier, but also pointed out that it is restricted to use on non-commercial products. So I'd say that it's not "completely wrong", and the link I provided is still currently valid on the Qt website.<br /><br />As regards ARM and MeeGo, I see that work continues in the developer community on an N900 port - but without ARM's participation. The same kind of thing had happened for Android on Atom processors, until Intel recently agreed to support it officially (e.g. Google-TV).<br /><br />Could you elaborate on how you see Linaro connecting with MeeGo?EE Daily Newshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01609630249488100984noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-178947916580376471.post-50760516492096585362010-06-27T18:26:31.332-07:002010-06-27T18:26:31.332-07:00Nice article, but a few comments:
-"Whereas ...Nice article, but a few comments:<br /><br />-"Whereas Android development will primarily be done in the open source Eclipse IDE, it's important to note that Qt requires a commercial developer's license for any application where you don't want to give away the source code."<br /><br />This part is completely wrong. It used to be like that a few years ago. But then Nokia released Qt under LGPL. It means that you can keep your code closed source with only those restriction :<br />1/ Every modification to the Qt library itself must be released under LGPL (No big deal since most apps devs won't modify the library - eventually they will propose a patch ).<br />2/ No static link compilation between your program and the library (no big deal, especially for phones where the library is already installed)<br /><br />-"So, at this point it's not clear exactly where that ARM support [for MeeGo] is going to come from."<br /><br />The new Linaro foundation will do that...bzhbokhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12425817811520774950noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-178947916580376471.post-52402212746607412022010-05-18T14:53:31.017-07:002010-05-18T14:53:31.017-07:00Hi Joel,
Thanks for your comment.
Since writing ...Hi Joel,<br /><br />Thanks for your comment.<br /><br />Since writing this I've been following the (very active) discussions in the MeeGo community. I may have to do a followup.<br /><br />I wasn't plugged into Android pre- 1st release, but I can't help wondering if it was as chaotic as what I see in Maemo. There is a flurry of activity concerning the development of the MeeGo port to the N900, which is a TI OMAP (ARM) based device. <br /><br />In response to some of my questions, Nokia let me know that they have a "long standing relationship with ARM". However, it appears that the N900 development work is being led by engineers from Intel.<br /><br />Interesting.. eh?<br /><br />-MikeEE Daily Newshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01609630249488100984noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-178947916580376471.post-87284539806218910302010-05-18T13:53:26.739-07:002010-05-18T13:53:26.739-07:00I’ve been waiting for this comparison for a long t...I’ve been waiting for this comparison for a long time: it's great you bring out the differences.<br /><br />However, under the link you provide, I believe most developers can use the LGPL and not distribute their own source code -- they only have to provide fixes to Qt.<br /><br />One clause seems surreal:<br /><i>You must purchase a Qt Commercial Developer License from us or from one of our authorized resellers before you start developing commercial software. The Qt Commercial Developer License does not allow the incorporation of code developed with the Qt GNU LGPL v. 2.1 or GNU GPL v. 3.0 license versions into a commercial product.</i><br /><br />So what if a student hacker writes something with the GPL license and then brings that code with them to their new job? Do you have to throw it out? Use a clean room approach?Joel Westhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03837038327488766775noreply@blogger.com