On Sun, 19 Sep 2010 15:30:18 -0700
"Skarpness, Mark" <[email protected]> wrote:


> That misses the point of compliance - the simple marketing concept is
> "MeeGo compliant apps run on all MeeGo compliant devices".  There's
> nothing bad about apps that don't meet the criteria - they just don't
> come with that promise.

Several people have pointed this out before, and I will point it out
again: 

A compliant app will not be guaranteed to work on all compliant
devices. It cannot be guaranteed to do anything useful, and from the
cosumer point of view a correctly installed app that doesn't do
anything is not "working".

This of course happens because perfectly good devices can be so
different that the support hardware for the app isn't there in some
cases.

This can't be fixed in the user interface, whether it is called a UI or
a UX or something else. An app that uses GPS or accelerometers for its
main purpose won't work on a device without GPS or accelerometers. If a
store sells such a meego compliant app to a customer, the store will
have to deal with an unsatisfied customer. A stupid unsatisfied
customer, certainly. But unsatisfied nonetheless.

A second point is that "compliance" and "non-compliance" are quality
labels, no matter how many times we say the aren't. 

For you and me and the well-informed insiders this may not be the case,
for the general public it is.

Bernd

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



-- 
Bernd Stramm
[email protected]

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

Reply via email to