On May 3, 2011, at 2:13 PM, ext Robin Burchell wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 03/05/11 08:53, Andrew Flegg wrote:
>> Well, Intel wrote their own set behind closed doors and threw it over
>> the wall. These then got adopted as the "MeeGo UX" without any public
>> discussion; whereas Nokia were developing their own set in the open,
>> and then closed the doors so as not to leak the "precious" Harmattan
>> UI.
>>
>> So, without the public discussion - and with Nokia's being closed now
>> - it's a case of (more) politics and whoever threw theirs over the
>> wall first.
>
> I think you're oversimplifying this a bit.
>
> On the one hand, we have meego-ux-components:
> - initially developed closed
> + now developed in the open
> + fairly feature-complete
> + open, decent looking, usable theming (unlike the handset codedrop)
> + open reference applications and UI stack
>
> On the other hand, we have Harmattan's components:
> + initially developed open
> - now developed closed
+ Will be developed open soon
> - unknown state of completion
+ Current completion status is good
> - unknown roadmap for completion
+ This should change soon
> - presumably theming will be closed unless an open one is created (in
> which case, pray it's not as ugly as the handset codedrop)
+ You can run them either with MTF mthemedaemon and then most of
graphics assets come from MTF. I have got them running with fairly
good results with current open source MTF graphics. Some amount hacking
was needed with some graphics elements names . I don't know
what is OSS status of harmattan graphics assets.
> - presumably closed applications
+ There is no reason why Harmattan component applications would be cosed.
You can use same application code with just loading different Qml file
with Harmatta, Desktop or Intel MeeGo components
+ Harmattan components offer best handset user experience, if you would
like your application have great user experience in handset, Harmattan
components is
best choice. You can use Intel MeeGo components but result does not integrate
as seemlesly and user experience is not as good.
>
> To me, at least, the reasoning for the 'choice' seems pretty clear: there was
> a need for components (ASAP, if not last *year*), and thanks to Nokia's
> decision to take development closed, nothing open existed to contribute to.
>
It is unfortunate that closed development phase took longer than expected but
there is not yet MeeGo handsets out either.
We wanted polish excellent UX and you have Harmattan components for handsets.
Once again, it's every developers
choice optimize UX for certain class of devices or chose just use one "one size
fits all" set of components.
Kate
> (BTW, provided API compatibility is a goal... this isn't even a problem.
> Applications written for MeeGo will happily run on Harmattan, and vice versa,
> and Symbian. Except for the occasional bit that uses components limited to a
> specific platform.)
>
> --
> Robin Burchell
> http://rburchell.com
> _______________________________________________
> MeeGo-dev mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.meego.com/listinfo/meego-dev
> http://wiki.meego.com/Mailing_list_guidelines
_______________________________________________
MeeGo-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.meego.com/listinfo/meego-dev
http://wiki.meego.com/Mailing_list_guidelines
