
Let’s kick off with a positive ‘stick it on the poster’ sound bite from Conversation regular Antony Pranata
Fellow Conversation visitor, Gomcoite, was similarly upbeat but does question the complete freedom afforded to developers. Is this really a good thing?
Once he had recovered from the groundbreaking news, Antony Pranata was back, remaining positive but his still concerned over a conflict of interests for Nokia.
“Personally, I think this movement was great news. The OS will be open and there will be only one UI platforms (instead of 3). I have written my opinion on my personal blog as well.
The only concern that I have is “conflict of interests”. Nokia is the hardware manufacturer as well as the company behind the platform. Google and Microsoft are not device manufacturer; so there is less of “conflict of interests” there.
Over at The Register, the Symbian open source scenario wasn’t attracting such favourable comments. Adam T was pretty scathing, citing the move to open source as having no impact on the mobile industry and how he’s always seen the Symbian OS as shackling mobile development.
Similarly, fellow Register follower, Edward Rose, ignites the argument of fragmentation in the mobile OS market. Is five OS platforms too many? Edward doesn’t believe so, seeing open source Symbian preventing a healthy dose of competition.
Signing off this comment round-up, oldsm1320 from USA Today keeps it short and sweet but Microsoft mobile fans might want too turn away now.
Ouch. But what’s your take on thus public reaction? Let us know.
Photo by Striatic