Talk:Task:Maemo brand
(Building a strong brand) |
(→Building a strong brand) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
== Building a strong brand == | == Building a strong brand == | ||
| - | Um, I hate to sound rude, but where does one get off telling 3rd party developers what to name their applications? I could understand if it were Nokia applications you were discussing that you had some sway over, but asking one of the most prominent 3rd party developers to rename their application for "branding reasons" just doesn't sit well with me. :\ —[[User:generalantilles|GeneralAntilles]] | + | Um, I hate to sound rude, but where does one get off telling 3rd party developers what to name their applications? I could understand if it were Nokia applications you were discussing that you had some sway over, but asking one of the most prominent 3rd party developers to rename their application for "branding reasons" just doesn't sit well with me. :\ —[[User:generalantilles|GeneralAntilles]] 10:13, 12 June 2008 (UTC) |
:The fact is that since the trademark policy was approved no new application has come up with the name "maemo something", and "something for maemo" is the recommended alternative. We declared amnesty to the projects created before the trademark policy for obvious reasons. We could talk about recommendation to swith to the trademark compliant formulas, but not enforcement. But they might be interested. If you notice "Mapper" is cooler name than "Maemo Mapper". Also think about the opssibility to have it ported it to i.e. S60 in a future. Why getting your app tied to the name of one platform if it ever becomes succesful and ported to other platforms?--[[User:qgil|qgil]] 12:42, 12 June 2008 (UTC) | :The fact is that since the trademark policy was approved no new application has come up with the name "maemo something", and "something for maemo" is the recommended alternative. We declared amnesty to the projects created before the trademark policy for obvious reasons. We could talk about recommendation to swith to the trademark compliant formulas, but not enforcement. But they might be interested. If you notice "Mapper" is cooler name than "Maemo Mapper". Also think about the opssibility to have it ported it to i.e. S60 in a future. Why getting your app tied to the name of one platform if it ever becomes succesful and ported to other platforms?--[[User:qgil|qgil]] 12:42, 12 June 2008 (UTC) | ||
| - | As for the distinction between maemo and Internet Tablet OS, I think this is a ''very'' important one. Internet Tablet OS is a fairly proprietary mobile operating system that ships with Nokia Internet Tablets, maemo is an open-source development platform for mobile Linux. They're two distinctly separate (if sometimes closely related) things. Moving forward, we should really be ''increasing'' this distinction, not blurring it further. | + | As for the distinction between maemo and Internet Tablet OS, I think this is a ''very'' important one. Internet Tablet OS is a fairly proprietary mobile operating system that ships with Nokia Internet Tablets, maemo is an open-source development platform for mobile Linux. They're two distinctly separate (if sometimes closely related) things. Moving forward, we should really be ''increasing'' this distinction, not blurring it further. —[[User:generalantilles|GeneralAntilles]] 10:13, 12 June 2008 (UTC) |
:Let's see. The "fairly proprietary" part in the OS2008 comes mainly from the application and Nokia design layer, since the rest of closed elements are also present in the low level and developer platform. The current diff between Maemo 4 and and OS2008 would be, according to these definition, these preinstalled applications and the Nokia design layer that is not available in the SDK (covered by the open Plankton theme). Is that right? If so, then a possibility would be that Maemo = Maemo platform = from kernel to SDK. Then the Nokia N810 would still ship Maemo 4 + a set of preinstalled applications and a Nokia design flavor. In a potential escenario, someone in the maemo community could also take Maemo 4, add a section of application and a default own theme.--[[User:qgil|qgil]] 12:42, 12 June 2008 (UTC) | :Let's see. The "fairly proprietary" part in the OS2008 comes mainly from the application and Nokia design layer, since the rest of closed elements are also present in the low level and developer platform. The current diff between Maemo 4 and and OS2008 would be, according to these definition, these preinstalled applications and the Nokia design layer that is not available in the SDK (covered by the open Plankton theme). Is that right? If so, then a possibility would be that Maemo = Maemo platform = from kernel to SDK. Then the Nokia N810 would still ship Maemo 4 + a set of preinstalled applications and a Nokia design flavor. In a potential escenario, someone in the maemo community could also take Maemo 4, add a section of application and a default own theme.--[[User:qgil|qgil]] 12:42, 12 June 2008 (UTC) | ||
I do agree that consistent usage of terminology has been lacking in maemo-related stuff from Nokia (MicroB versus Mozilla-based Browser for maemo is a fun one, though I understand the reasoning behind it), but I don't think eliminating important distinctions is the way to go about improving this situation. —[[User:generalantilles|GeneralAntilles]] 10:13, 12 June 2008 (UTC) | I do agree that consistent usage of terminology has been lacking in maemo-related stuff from Nokia (MicroB versus Mozilla-based Browser for maemo is a fun one, though I understand the reasoning behind it), but I don't think eliminating important distinctions is the way to go about improving this situation. —[[User:generalantilles|GeneralAntilles]] 10:13, 12 June 2008 (UTC) | ||
:It is though a priority reducing the brand soup and simplifying things that people anyway were doing '"wrong" but consistengly (i.e. Maemo instead of maemo)--[[User:qgil|qgil]] 12:42, 12 June 2008 (UTC) | :It is though a priority reducing the brand soup and simplifying things that people anyway were doing '"wrong" but consistengly (i.e. Maemo instead of maemo)--[[User:qgil|qgil]] 12:42, 12 June 2008 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 07:26, 13 June 2008
Building a strong brand
Um, I hate to sound rude, but where does one get off telling 3rd party developers what to name their applications? I could understand if it were Nokia applications you were discussing that you had some sway over, but asking one of the most prominent 3rd party developers to rename their application for "branding reasons" just doesn't sit well with me. :\ —GeneralAntilles 10:13, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
- The fact is that since the trademark policy was approved no new application has come up with the name "maemo something", and "something for maemo" is the recommended alternative. We declared amnesty to the projects created before the trademark policy for obvious reasons. We could talk about recommendation to swith to the trademark compliant formulas, but not enforcement. But they might be interested. If you notice "Mapper" is cooler name than "Maemo Mapper". Also think about the opssibility to have it ported it to i.e. S60 in a future. Why getting your app tied to the name of one platform if it ever becomes succesful and ported to other platforms?--qgil 12:42, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
As for the distinction between maemo and Internet Tablet OS, I think this is a very important one. Internet Tablet OS is a fairly proprietary mobile operating system that ships with Nokia Internet Tablets, maemo is an open-source development platform for mobile Linux. They're two distinctly separate (if sometimes closely related) things. Moving forward, we should really be increasing this distinction, not blurring it further. —GeneralAntilles 10:13, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
- Let's see. The "fairly proprietary" part in the OS2008 comes mainly from the application and Nokia design layer, since the rest of closed elements are also present in the low level and developer platform. The current diff between Maemo 4 and and OS2008 would be, according to these definition, these preinstalled applications and the Nokia design layer that is not available in the SDK (covered by the open Plankton theme). Is that right? If so, then a possibility would be that Maemo = Maemo platform = from kernel to SDK. Then the Nokia N810 would still ship Maemo 4 + a set of preinstalled applications and a Nokia design flavor. In a potential escenario, someone in the maemo community could also take Maemo 4, add a section of application and a default own theme.--qgil 12:42, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
I do agree that consistent usage of terminology has been lacking in maemo-related stuff from Nokia (MicroB versus Mozilla-based Browser for maemo is a fun one, though I understand the reasoning behind it), but I don't think eliminating important distinctions is the way to go about improving this situation. —GeneralAntilles 10:13, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
- It is though a priority reducing the brand soup and simplifying things that people anyway were doing '"wrong" but consistengly (i.e. Maemo instead of maemo)--qgil 12:42, 12 June 2008 (UTC)