On Sun, 19 Sep 2010 11:12:50 +0100
Graham Cobb <[email protected]> wrote:

> On Saturday 18 September 2010 19:48:04 Skarpness, Mark wrote:
>>...
>>  We can add this to a
> > future version of compliance if everyone says "wow, that's great -
> > I really want this on my next device"

IThis works against the very reason that an open software
approach is taken for efforts like MeeGo - the fast availability of a
wide variety of apps from a wide variety of providers.

Some (very important) device manufacturers and phone/media service
providers rely on a closed market approach and can't change
realistically in the short term even if they want to.

But you can't just force the same business model on everybody. 

Graham Cobb <[email protected]> wrote:

> Fine, but just delete the concept of "compliance" for apps altogether
> and replace it with what we really need -- a simple marketing concept
> which can be explained to both vendors and users but which does not
> imply that there is something bad about apps which don't meet the
> criteria.

That sounds very doable. There is precedence for this sort of thing in
marketing - take the DVD movie industry with Full Screen and Wide
Screen versions. There could be Meego Full Compliance and MeeGo Wide
Compliance. Marketing professionals can find better terms for those,
I'm sure. And marketing of the companies supporting either one could
explain to their customers why each one is better than the other.

Bernd
-- 
Bernd Stramm
[email protected]

_______________________________________________
MeeGo-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.meego.com/listinfo/meego-dev

Reply via email to