This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Need Rephrasing

"The 32 GB is formated as 768 MB of swap, ~1 GB of ext3 mounted on /home (actually, application are in /opt which is a symbolic link to /home/opt), for extra applications, and ~25 GB of FAT32 mounted on /home/user/MyDocs, for movies, music and documents." --Mandor (talk) 02:15, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

The 32 GB eMMC is split into 3 partitions:

768MB as swap
1GB as ext3 mounted to /home
the remainder as VFAT mounted to /home/user/MyDocs with about 25GB of free space.

The 256 MB NAND is formatted as UBIFS and contains the bootloader, kernel and "/" with about 100MB of free space.

Small files like icons, configuration files, and desktop files should be stored in the root partition. Programs larger than 500KB including all application code, dependencies, images, translations, libraries and theme graphics should go in /opt (-> /home/opt). The VFAT partition should not be used for program files because it is not permanantly mounted.[1] Bgkwtnyqhzor (talk) 10:42, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

That is very good and detailed. Although I am still unsure about the "(-> /home/opt)" part. Would it not be better to write "symbolic link" or "symlink". Will you copy/paste it in the article ?--Mandor (talk) 11:06, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

fixed and pasted. Bgkwtnyqhzor (talk) 11:33, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Missing links

First, thanks for helping with this article guys.

I would like to know the reason why the two links ([2] and [3]) have been deleted ? The whole paragraph needs proper citations. --Mandor (talk) 04:03, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Nokia made another statement refuting the rumors [4].--Mandor (talk) 08:53, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Need Rephrasing

"There are many applications already written for Maemo based on the previous Internet Tablets. As a new feature to the Maemo operating system, Maemo 5 will support Qt. The Forum Nokia Wiki has quality-controlled articles which support Qt development. The Maemo operating system has a development group on the Forum Nokia Wiki at Forum Nokia Wiki Maemo. The programming languages Python and C++ will also be supported. Only C and GTK+ are actually officially supported for now."

--Mandor (talk) 02:15, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Clarification of "support Qt" from the Maemo article [5]: The release will also bring Qt library as a community-supported component alongside the officialy supported GTK+ backend. This is going to change with Harmattan release which will bring Qt library as default, GTK+ becoming community-supported.[6] Bgkwtnyqhzor (talk) 01:44, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

I have rewritten this section and added the clarification. I think it still need to say that only C and GTK+ is officially supported for now. --Mandor (talk) 05:40, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Merged with Maemo. --Mandor (talk) 02:26, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

Maemo is Linux

I have to admit I am still trying to understand that statement. In the interview you fond with Dr. Ari Jaaksi [7], at around 9:55 he said that most of the work will come out if a developer wants to adapt the "Linux application" to the Maemo 5 UI. Is that what : "Debian ARM packages can be used if they are modified with the maemo-optify tool for example" means ? I am far from being an expert with Linux so I was just wondering. --Mandor (talk) 04:44, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Linux is the kernel but typically also happen to refer to all the tools that compose a full system. The GUI API in Maemo is a bit different and adapted to a tablet screen. Thus, normal Xorg application might look ugly and not conform to certain rules used in the Maemo window manager which may cause them to be not very practical to use. --Alex

I believe he was referring to reprogramming graphical elements to fit in with the platform more fluidly. If you don't care about modifying the GUI the porting process is supposed to be trivial.

maemo-optify just moves all the files larger than 2KB into the /opt directory and puts symlinks where they were originally. This has to be done because of the uniqueness of the file structure of maemo 5 and the limited space available in /.

The complexity of application compatibility is quite large in embedded linux and I just feel it's misleading to claim that it is Linux and will run Linux applications when there are a lot of qualifiers. Perhaps someone with embedded coding experience can offer some insight into what is and is not possible in porting applications especially in regards to the GUI. Bgkwtnyqhzor (talk) 05:15, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

I am reversing my position, it would be better to leave detailed maemo stuff out of this article altogether; it should be handled on the maemo page. The software section is quite redundant to the maemo article also; the summary should be condensed dramatically and the content merged into the maemo article (fremantle section maybe) if it's not already there.

This is probably a more clear/more neutral/less misleading statement although I am not sure the citations are sufficient: Due to the similarity of maemo to desktop linux, straight ports of many existing Linux programs are possible.[8] This is not possible on Android (since programs must run in the Dalvik virtual machine)[9] or webOS (since programs must be written using HTML5, Java or CSS)[10]. Bgkwtnyqhzor (talk) 07:45, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

I have been looking at the "Maemo is Linux" issue for an hour or so. My conclusion is : WebOS and Android have at their heart a modified Linux kernel (and that's about it); Maemo has a modified Linux kernel and components of a "typical Linux desktop OS" (say Debain and Ubuntu for example) such as X Window System, GNOME and .deb package. In other words, Maemo is based on a "Linux distribution" (Debian), webOS and Android are based on the Linux kernel. I will look at that further sometime.

I think you are right about the merge. The main Maemo article on Maemo 5 is only ~25 characters long. It would probably worth discuting what we keep here and what we send to the main Maemo article.

Below, I'll try to make a brief distinction of Maemo vs. Android and webOS, and the portability of existing apps.

Maemo vs. Android & webOS: Maemo is a stripped down Debian while Android and webOS use only some portion of the FLOSS ecosystem (like Linux, gcc, webkit, etc.) and have added their own technologies on top.

Maemo vs. Android & webOS app portability: GUI apps that run on any Linux distribution are not portable to Android and webOS (Android apps are written on Java and make use of the toolkit provided by Android|webOS apps are written on HTML/CSS/JavaScript). On the other hand, to port those apps to Maemo is just a matter of a recompilation for the ARM arch.

Maemo ported app: A simple recompilation will probably have accessibility problems (like OOo) on Maemo because of the different natures of desktop and internet tablet. Apps in general will need a UI facelift to make them more finger friendly and to deal with the shortcomings (small screen size, lack of mouse, lack of a full keyboard, etc.) of the internet tablet nature (Office Viewer, a derivation from KOffice to fit Maemo).

Thank you. kedadial 08:54, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Merged with Maemo. --Mandor (talk) 02:19, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

Application development support

The original text was a copy/paste from the Qt article[11]

"There are many applications already written for Maemo based on the previous Internet Tablets. The Nokia N900 also supports Qt. The Forum Nokia Wiki has quality-controlled articles which support Qt development. The Maemo operating system has a development group on the Forum Nokia Wiki at Forum Nokia Wiki Maemo. The programming language Python is supported along with c++. The Qt for Symbian development group has many quality-controlled articles available."

It may need some clean up and a link to the original article.--Mandor (talk) 03:12, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Merged with Maemo. --Mandor (talk) 02:18, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

Battery Size

It may be worth mentioning that previous tablets used larger batteries. The N810 used the 1500 mAh BP-4L Battery while the N800 and 770 used the 1500 mAh BP-5L Battery. Bgkwtnyqhzor (talk) 00:49, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

I agree with mentioning the smaller battery compared to previous Internet Tablet. If I remember there was a discussion on that matter on talk.maemo.org. People were asking how a smaller battery can provide more hours of real usage. If you agree I would like to rewrite the whole battery section so the numbers in the press release (2-4 days (TCP/IP connected) and Active online usage: Up to 1+ day) are included. We should make sure although to mention the device is still undergoing software improvements so those numbers are more likely to be what Nokia is aiming at for the release. Then make mention of the smaller battery compared to N810 to either 1) imply that those number are to be taken lightly (as it is always the case with pre-production device) or 2) there was major improvements on the power consumption compared to previous Internet Tablets. I lean toward number 2), although we need citation. --Mandor (talk) 04:55, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Some sources for the battery life of the Nokia N810, as we are comparing the two devices :

1) Nokia says the N810 has a battery life of 4 hours under "typical use," accessing the Web and watching video. I have to say this is way off; with my typical use I get much more than that, about 6 hours on a single charge.[12]

2) The Nokia N810's battery is rated for 4 hours of continuous use -- with display and Wi-Fi on -- and up to 14 days of standby time. It also claims 10 hours of music playback and up to 5 days of online time. We're still running battery tests and will update this section after we have results.[13] --Mandor (talk) 04:10, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Almost forgot Nokia.[14]--Mandor (talk) 04:16, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Power Management and Efficiency

According to TI, OMAP3 is 30% more power efficient than OMAP2.[15] That might be one of the many reasons why a smaller battery provides more usage time.--Mandor (talk) 05:18, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

"Battery lasts 12-13 hours normal usage that is: wlan on constantly, surfing, videos and somewhat gps. no need to load during day"[16]--Mandor (talk) 05:43, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

As ASIC technology progresses to smaller technology nodes (63nm and and lower), leakage currents become increasingly important. This means that just stopping clocks isn't enough to save enough power to obtain the desired device use times. We need to shut off inactive parts of the ASIC depending on the actual usage. Eg. turn off the camera functionality or the GPU when not in use. We call this dynamic power switching (DPS). This talk will show how TI, Nokia and the community implemented DPS in the linux kernel. We will also discuss other power saving features of OMAP3 and how they are used in the linux kernel. [17] --Mandor (talk) 06:02, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Publicity Photos

It looks like at least two of the photos on this page are Wikipedia:Publicity_photos from the Nokia press kit, which are marked as "Media use only" on the Nokia press site. The first image on the page is a scaled down version of Nokia_N900_48.jpg. The portrait mode photo is a scaled down version of Nokia_N900_05.jpg. I am not sure that nDevilTV has the authority to re-release them under Creative Commons licenses but we should assume they do not and try to replace these when we can. They should probably be marked as fair-use for now unless I am completely wrong. Bgkwtnyqhzor (talk) 05:04, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

The current discussion on the topic of publicity photos is Wikipedia:Fair_use/Publicity_photos Bgkwtnyqhzor (talk) 05:07, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

It looks like a slightly different situation with the sim slot photo sourced from nDevilTV. It was originally posted [18] on 13 July 2009 as a leak of the RX-51 prototype but has since been removed from both that page and the photobucket album [19]. It would be wise to not use any images released by nDevilTV. Bgkwtnyqhzor (talk) 05:41, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

From my reading of Wikipedia:Fair_use/Publicity_photos, my opinion is we should try as much as possible not to use any publicity photos until the debate on this issue is over. One can argue that with a soon-to-be-released device it can be night impossible to obtain a free alternative/high quality picture to replace those used in the article (aka fair use). This being said, I am the one who uploaded the photos (most of them) and I think I have been a little too lax on checking the source of said photos. If we are using the press photos, we should at least give proper credit (to Nokia[20]) and make mention, as you suggested, of the fair-use policy.

This guy [21] seems to have a few good pictures of the device (we are already using one from him).

Ok here what I am going to do. I will upload the photos from the Nokia website and mention fair-use. Let's see what happen from now. If they get deleted then we will use Nechbi's photos[22]. The picture of the inside has to go, unfortunately. --Mandor (talk) 11:16, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

Apparently we have not right to use CC 2.0 pictures. The N900 camera has been deleted. I am a little confused ? --Mandor (talk) 04:20, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

Non-free Creative Commons

Well this license [23] is not approved to use on Wikipedia. So those pictures [24] are off limit. --Mandor (talk) 04:29, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

The relevant policies; these are the licenses that can be used:

Wikipedia:Image_copyright_tags/Free_licenses

These are the creative commons licenses that can NOT be used:

Wikipedia:Image_copyright_tags/Deprecated#Non-free_Creative_Commons_licenses

However, considering that there is very little free content available for this device right now, it should be okay to use:

Wikipedia:Image_copyright_tags/Non-free

as fair-use with proper justification:

Wikipedia:Non-free_use_rationale_guideline

Bgkwtnyqhzor (talk) 05:53, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

Using those creative commons released photos should be okay for now if there is definitely no alternative, just reupload them with the corresponding non-free or "Non-free fair use in" tag instead of the disallowed creative commons license.

The three photos remaining in the article look okay as of now though. Bgkwtnyqhzor (talk) 06:11, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

I re-uploaded the photo of the camera [25]. --Mandor (talk) 09:14, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

What to merge to the Maemo article

Keep : Maemo 5, also known as Fremantle, will be the default operating system on the Nokia N900.

Keep : The UI in Maemo is fully customizable (move widgets around, add/remove widgets, change the background, shortcut to application).

Keep (list but must be shorter) : The Maemo 5 operation system comes preloaded with a variety of applications such as :

Keep (list but must be shorter, if none at all) : Due to its free and open source nature, porting applications to Maemo 5 is a straightforward procedure. As an example, applications developed by the community and supported by Nokia as Fremantle Stars will also be part of Maemo 5.

Keep : Nokia has launched a contest at the onedotzero festival in London called PUSH N900 aimed at designers, artists, hackers and modders. The contest invites participants to "to connect the N900 to something you love."--Mandor (talk) 01:29, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Moved. I am going to work on that tomorrow morning. --Mandor (talk) 12:27, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

I have done some clean up of the Software section. Merged with the Maemo article. I think we can still shorten this section. --Mandor (talk) 00:33, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

The Software section has been merged with the Maemo article. --Mandor (talk) 02:17, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.