Well, this was inevitable. After Samsung and Sony Ericsson abandoning Symbian for their line of smartphones, and after Symbian Foundation executive director Lee Williams leaving the company for “personal reasons”, there’s now a report that the Symbian Foundation is winding down its operations, in preparation for closing up shop entirely.
The news comes from a “source close to Symbian”, and basically states that Lee Williams’ successor as executive director, chief financial officer Tim Holbrow, has been appointed to wind down the Symbian Foundation’s operations. This seems in line with Holbrow’s background in finance, whereas Williams worked within Nokia on S60.
El Reg contacted the Symbian Foundation for a response, and they nor confirmed, nor denied the report from the source. “The future business strategy for the Symbian Foundation is still under review by the board,” they stated, “As no decisions have been made, we will not be offering further comment.”
At this point, only Nokia is really putting any kind of effort behind the Symbian platform. Nokia spent quite a lot of money buying Sony Ericsson, Ericsson, Panasonic, and Siemens out of Symbian in order to open up the code. The Foundation was set up to steer development of the platform, but if this report is true, Symbian’s future seems to be even more at stake than anticipated.
Symbian is the most widely used and most popular smart phone OS in the world!!!
[/sarcasm]
Symbian ha(s|d) it’s place but it just doesn’t cut it anymore. Apart from looking and functioning like a dog, it just doesn’t have the sparkle gluestick sheen needed by today’s zomg look at my shinny toy generation.
In TFA it states that it is potentially “facing closure”. Nothing is confirmed.
Hence the “report”, which indicates it does not have to be fact – it’s just a report.
Well, it seems to me that TFR did not actually report what you said it reported…
In what way?
There’s been personnel changes, there is a massive shortfall in funding and it is reported that emloyees have been offered redundancy packages. What more do you want?
Refocusing effort that was previously split between MeeGo and Symbian (and MeeGo Touch + Orbit, respectively) to Qt Quick that spans both platforms is considered a positive thing for both MeeGo *and* Symbian.
If you think of Symbian as a way to get the Qt Quick development platform on cheaper phones with massive installed base, you’ve got a good head start in understanding why Symbian isn’t quite as doomed as you may think.
Exactly. If Meego wants to compete with android, iOS, etc… it will only run properly on 600€+ hardware too.
Let’s face it : most people don’t want to invest that much in a phone, even if it also replaces their TV and their microwave oven. With the current distribution of money, only a few percents of the population of the Earth can afford that. Like it or not, only Symbian runs properly on mid-end phones as of today.
Moreover, meego is late, and still has to gain some interest somewhere else than in geekdom.
Symbian allows precisely that : getting good applications for Meego before it’s even out, to ease its adoption.
It’s not entirely clear why Nokia needs two platforms, apart from flogging the Symbian horse to keep it going.
Sorry, but this is seriously misguided.
There is no ‘installed base’ of Symbian phones. The way phone turnover works is that people throw phones away and buy new ones with no reference to any applications or anything else that they ran on their old phone. This is not Windows on desktops. There’s no way that Nokia is going to get an instant installed base for Qt Quick or anything else with people installing it on their existing Symbian phones. You make it sound as if that is something that will magically happen.
The problem for Nokia is that their ‘installed base’ really does count for nothing.
Edited 2010-10-27 13:46 UTC
It will happen through people downloading Qt programs from Ovi store. The trick is “smart installer”:
http://wiki.forum.nokia.com/index.php/Nokia_Smart_Installer_for_Sym…
It downloads Qt from Nokia servers if the application to install requires Qt. This is managed by embedding the smart installer in .sis packages, so that it works on existing device base. I don’t know the number of capable phones, but I know it’s huge.
For all the existing Symbian phones that don’t have ‘Ovi store’ support then it really is neither here nor there since you’re not going to get those phones upgraded. The Symbian installed base counts for zilch.
In addition, the Ovi store is still very much in its infancy and at the moment is still a knee-jerk reaction to the iPhone and Android stores. Qt development for these phones is still a massive, tacked on work-in-progress and a long way from where the competition currently sits. Case in point:
It’s only now that Android is catching up with the iPhone store application base. Goodness knows how a third store will fair with a work-in-progress development environment.
Really? It’s going to be a very, very small proportion of the current Symbian installed base. Only all but the very recent phones will be capable out-of-the-box, we’ve established that few existing phones will be upgraded in a throwaway market and remember that larger and larger chunks of that recent sales share are being taken by the iPhone and Android phones. Look at it that way and Ovi store support is already shrinking.
The point is that you’ve tried to argue that the Symbian installed base counts for something, but it really doesn’t. We’ve also veered off-topic somewhat.
Edited 2010-10-27 20:23 UTC
Note that Symbian Foundation != Symbian.
Exactly, by this reports, Symbian might actually become “Nokia OS” so to speak.
It effectively already is. Because everyone else has backed out of Symbian.
Well, that’s a bit thin since the two are inextricably linked. It raises a lot of serious questions about the future of the platform and whether Nokia is really contemplating going it alone.
Samsung did not stop supporting the Symbian foundation. Both articles you linked to are wrong (yours and the register)
BTW it was already pointed to you that your article about Samsung was wrong. You amended it a little but it is still wrong.
Maybe not, what do I know, but:
http://innovator.samsungmobile.com/bbs/tech/view.do?boardName=techn…
Linux is the best option for any new phone. It doesn’t make sense for any company, including Nokia, to invest in anything else, since it takes gazillion dollars to develop such software.
Tell that to Google ;-).
You mean Apple 😉
Google’s Android is still Linux – it’s just not GNU/Linux.
Edited 2010-10-26 12:46 UTC
Apple is successful not because of the iOS kernel – but because of the overall presentation of the phone, including the hardware. Android vendors failed to present a UI experience that matches or surpasses that of Apple. If Apple knows one thing is how to make UIs for the masses.
Now you’re contradicting your original point!
Make your mind up – either smartphones need Linux or they don’t.
Oh, and I’m fully versed in why the iPhone was a success. It’s not exactly rocket science now is it.
Edited 2010-10-27 09:09 UTC
You are confused because you make the classic mistake of including the UI in the definition of ‘Linux’. Linux is the O/S, i.e. the kernel and the drivers; it does not include the UI. There is no economic point in investing in another kernel/drivers combo.
The UI, though, that is offered with Linux O/Ses has to do a lot to catch up with the iOS devices or the UIs of desktop systems.
No, you are the one who is confused because you’re arguing against points I have never made.
In fact, I’m not entirely sure you’re not intentionally trolling me. However – giving you the benefit of the doubt for now – I can assure you that I am fully aware of what Linux is thank you very much. I even stated in the very post you originally replied to: “Google’s Android is still Linux – it’s just not GNU/Linux.”, thus demonstrating a working knowledge of the difference between Linux (the kernel) and Android / GNU (the userspace)
Furthermore, you’re still missing the point / deliberately changing the subject away (depending on the intention of your tangent) from your original claim that manufacturers shouldn’t bother with non-Linux platforms.
That’s entirely a matter of opinion.
For example, I personally favour KDE4 over Aero and Aqua (or whatever OS Xs DE is called). But I know a number of people on here would see KDE as an inferior product to GNOME.
At the end of the day, it’s just a matter of what works best for that user. As everyone is different, it stands to reason that different UIs are going to be better for different users. So stating that you’re preferred UI is superior to mine smacks of little more than unproductive elitism.
Back on topic though (and as stated above) this is a tangent that has little to do with the point I raised against your absurd claim.
Edited 2010-10-27 12:13 UTC
Holy attack, Batman!
My original claim is that manufacturers should not bother with non-Linux operating systems (i.e. kernel + drivers), not platforms.
I personally don’t like Aqua or KDE4, but as you say, that’s subjective.
What is not subjective though is the extremely successful Apple computing platform, and the UI takes a big role in that success.
What absurd claim? I stated the obvious: manufacturers should stick with Linux, the operating system (kernel and drivers) but write their own UI that rivals in quality the iOS UI.
If that is an absurd claim for you, then you clearly have no idea of what makes Apple a success.
Same difference. ‘Platform’ just a generic term for a hardware or software vector – be it CPU architecture (x86/PowerPC/ARM), kernel (BSD/Linux) or developers framework (.NET/Qt/etc).
I never disputed that so you’re reiteration was not required.
Right, you didn’t state that until now. You only stated that they should stick with Linux. Perhaps if you’d expanded on your point, we could have saved ourselves a lot of time.
Anyway, I don’t think it matters too much what the kernel is – BSD, for example, would work just as well. I’ve also heard (though not personally used it) QNX would be well suited too.
So what really matters is that the time is spent on the user space (UI, developers toolkits, etc). A point you stated when you elaborated on your original comment but not the same as your original comment (as you original post explicitly targeted a single kernel)
Edited 2010-10-27 13:04 UTC
Perhaps if you asked, I would have expanded on it.
Agreed. My point is “please do not spend your resources on custom kernels like Symbian – concentrate in userspace”.
It’s not my fault that you did not understand my comment, sorry.
The symbian kernel is already built though so – to follow your point – it doesn’t matter whether you develop for Symbian’s userspace or Linux’s.
I thought you were saying there’s no point writing your own kernel from scratch (which there isn’t). But Symbian is already built so your example is flawed.
It’s generally good practice to explain your point before lecturing people who are mislead by an incomplete post.
Not exactly my point. Symbian is not a kernel that is maintained by the community and it’s not in large scale use(*).
My point is that there is no point in investing in kernels that are either custom or limited in usage, as Symbian is.
How am I supposed to know that some people wouldn’t understand the obvious?
(*)and since I know that you will reply by pointing out that Symbian is used in millions of devices, I’d like to clear that out as well: when I say “not large-scale use”, I don’t mean users, I mean manufacturers.
Sorry, but that *was* your point.
Being open source doesn’t make something better.
Neither iOS nor Windows Mobile / Phone’s kernel are community maintained, yet they do the job fine (yeah, I know WM6 is garbage, but that’s a use interface issue).
It is on phones and that’s exactly what we’re talking about.
It’s variety of handsets that matter, not manufacturers. Manufactures will use similar (even the same in many cases) hardware as their competitors. for example Snapdragon has featured in a few competing products.
So it doesn’t matter if only 3 or so manufacturers shipped Symbian – it was still on a massive array of handsets.
“Custom”? that doesn’t even make sense. Android uses a customized Linux kernel. Pretty much every kernel for an embedded OS will be a custom kernel. In fact, I’m really not sure theres such thing as a “non-custom” embedded kernel.
Quit the trolling will you. You clearly posted half an opinion and now frantically trying to justify the illogic you originally presented.
In fact – and I’m going to be blunt here as this will be my last reply to you – you’ve been talking out of your anus since the opening post. Yes, Symbian as an OS sucks arse. But to lay that down to the kernel is simply idiotic.
These days people put too much emphasis on the kernel. The fact is, 99% of the time, OSs fall apart because the user space tools are garbage. So ditching a Symbian kernel for a Linux kernel wouldn’t make any difference what-so-ever if you have the same crappy developers writing the same crappy user space tools.
Anyway, good luck trying to convince the others on here. Many of which (myself included, albeit less so) have developed or patched kernels in their time so are well versed on the subject.
Tell that to the user base of iOS. The kernel is used by exactly one manufacturer, and it seems to work just fine.
Moreover, when I think of it, it’s strange that you treat Symbian as some sort of novelty which Nokia wastes time on. It’s much older than Darwin and Linux, if we take its Epoc32 roots into account, I think.
I think symbian as a kernel is very capable. As others said, it’s the userspace that should be fixed… And shoehorning it on top of a linux kernel won’t make things better. In fact, use of a complex desktop kernel is more likely to introduce poorer performance, vulnerabilities, and bugs.
Edited 2010-10-27 19:19 UTC
What if kernel features, e.g. in the security area, have an influence on user experience ? Say, if I look at the number of vulnerabilities discovered on iOS and Android since their appearance and contrast with the vulnerabilities discovered in Symbian since they switched to their new security model, knowing that Symbian has been there longer…
What is not subjective though is the extremely successful Apple computing platform, and the UI takes a big role in that success.
I’d argue that the fact that it’s from Apple is a larger part of that success than the actual UI. I can’t help but think that if Apple had released Android and Google iOS, everyone would be fawning over how great Android is and iOS is a poor copy.
I know that I have trouble using iOS whereas Android makes sense to me. MacOS similarly makes no sense to me, but Linux (GNOME, mostly) and Windows do. It’s all what you get used it.
No, it’s the quality of Apple products. Apple had made bad products in the past that were total failures.
Me too, but I can’t have my eyes closed to the success of Apple.
Yeah, and it worked great on PCs!
20.. whatever, is the year of Linux on the desktop!
Anyway, Nokia is already heavily invested in Linux on phones. And Symbian.
Since Fujitsu (and AFAIR another phone OEM – Sharp?) is building its next platform on top of Symbian, I wonder if Nokia could really take back Symbian development in-house. At least they’d have to keep the development in the open, and unless they just changed their company culture from open to closed overnight, I don’t see them changing much to the way it’s been developed till now.
They might want to get rid of the foundation though, since that entity has been nothing but slow and stuck in the old age.
Just for example, there’s a bug open about providing a decent multi-language font for a start, so Symbian users can read SMS and emails using different character set than the phone’s, and their answer was basically that it’s the phone maker right to decide that, so they can lock users to a stupid last century mobile feature phone, when competing smartphone platforms make a point to let you use your phone for what you need it to do. Don’t even talk about allowing the user to install different input dictionary or IM… if you need German, Chinese and Japanese you need to buy 3 smartphones, because it would be so bad if you could do that with only one. Same if you need Italian, Spanish and French.
I wish whoever ends up taking the shots understands what a modern mobile OS should be, instead of keeping them in that “middleware for feature phones” mentality.
It makes no sense for Nokia to do anything else but use symbian only for feature phones. Meego is the future on the high end, taking over the lower ends as time goes on.
Thom, I am disappoint ©
Since when osnews started using yellow journalism websites as news source? As expected, the linked story is false: http://www.engadget.com/2010/10/26/nokias-savander-the-symbian-foun…
Edited 2010-10-26 22:32 UTC
It has failed to bring in a lot of new blood.
Also the Linux kernel has progressed a long way since when Symbian was released. The upcoming 2.6.27 yes I know 3 months off. The first that will build successfully without the Linux Big Kernel lock. Does not seam like a big change for phones until you work out one of the biggest blockers to Linux suspending has been that lock and not knowing if its locking a critical section that has to be waited for or not.
Removal of the Big Kernel lock is not the end of the Linux internal design clean ups.
Here is the point. Symbian has the advantage embed because it was highly clean internally. But now its getting highly dated. Linux is catching up.
Other major change for Linux is wayland. More and more tool kits are support it. Again this is Linux progressing more to being like the rest of the graphical.
Screen sync data now travel threw the Linux kernel API’s. So code can be set only to draw to screen after a sync. Something other OS’s have been able todo for ages.
Distance Linux has closed from a technical12 point of view in 12 months is massive. Then you compare it to how far Symbian has moved in 12 months. Biggest Symbian move was QT being its universal toolkit between Linux and Symbian. I am sorry that is not something to write as a living OS. Its more a move of OS that suspects it going to be dead.
good bloody riddance. took those nincompoops long enough.