S60 Open to new features

Great news Jukka; FN finally listened to their customers ;-)

I don't fully understand the BC issue. When you have the time could you please explain this in a little detail?

Cheers, Boom

Boom, it's us (S60) listening :) FN is just the distribution channel for SDK stuff.

What parts would you like to clarify on the BC issues? There are obviously some things I cannot say in public, but I can try. MMF APIs are owned by Symbian and they are a bit loosely defined, leading to problems when different licensees can implement things a little differently.

Ok, good to know S60 is listening. For us developers you are all just one entity :-) but I'm really happy to see you have taken developer requests in to consideration. I'm guessing you personally had a big role to play in this decision?

I guess most of the explanation will not be releasable to the public. But what is the relationship between PlatSec and BC for MMF?

Boom

There is no relationship between PlatSec and BC, except that they were both introduced at the same time, in S60 3rd eddition. In the MMF case, these two are distinct reasons why these MMF APIs were removed from the SDK.

The "PlatSec reasons" needs a bit of explanation. As you may know, designing multimedia applications to use MMF is not extremely useful, because MMF is not very efficient and all in all, making MMF plugins is not trivial. One of the benefits of using MMF was that by creating MMF Controllers and recognizers, an application was able to register some MIMEs with the MMF framework. For example, OggPlay (the MMF version) creates an MMF Controller for playing ogg vorbis files. As side effect, the S60 Music Player can also play ogg vorbis files, because it discovers the MMF Controller for playing ogg vorbis files, and asks it to play any ogg vorbis file it encounters.

In S60 3rd eddition this benefit cannot be taken for granted, due to PlatSec. As you may know, PlatSec prevents an application that has some capabilities to load DLLs that have less capabilities. So the S60 Music Player, which has DRM and MultimediaDD capabilities (among others), will not load a 3rd party MMF Controller (a DLL, in fact) that does not have the DRM and MultimediaDD capabilities. These 2 are in fact some of the most difficult-to-get capabilities.

So with the main benefit more or less gone and with the BC uncertain in the future, S60 does not recommend creating MMF Controllers or other plugins as part of new applications, unless the developers really know what they are doing...

Hope this clarifies things a bit ....

I get it now Florin, good & clear explanation.

Boom

Argh, these guys from Nokia are really got increadible annoying.How far this stupidity will go?I'm do not want to buy device which creators treating me like some kind of criminal by default and instead of adding new featres adding some crap and causing my headache with their dumb app signing and DRM bullshit.What I have to admit here?

- DRM is utterly stupid thing.It can be always bypassed, no matter what you're invent.I can listen, I can re-capture.Fxxkoff, I will always be able to do it.It just some protection from idiots which affects user's rights.I'm doubt anyone want to be treated like criminal and pirate by default.Even courts are using "innocent unless proven guilty" principle.But DRM is not a case 8E

- Your signing causing a major headache.It looks like it is not for real platform security but to obtain some moneys from developers and similar crap.I'm own 6680 phone and I will be utter idiot if I'll change it to your S60 3rd edition crap.Do I need headache with apps signing?I do not need S60 3rd edition phone where there is almost no programs because this signing and security crap has stopping all cheap & free software developers and there is permanent brainf%ck like "you can not do something because...".Ok, in my 6680 I can!I can use my favorite ringtones in my favorite OGG format.I can install unsigned apps if I want to and developers can create apps with slightly fewer restrictions.I can use LOTS of apps as the result.Buy phone for over $500 and then buy expensive apps?!Nope, I will better buy PDA then.It is much more powerful and does not has moron restrictions.

- Hey, guys from Nokia, did you forget?It is we're end users who pays for phones after all.Of course cellular operators want smth different than users but if I do not want to buy phone due to lack of features, cheap and free apps and even there is DRM crap which is cutting off my rights, you can be pretty sure: no cellular operator will be able to force me to change my existing phone to something else.And I will not recommend S60 3rd edition phones to any of my friends.I hope there will be day when guys will get smart enough to recognize that DRM violates their lawful rights and then you'll have to sorry about it.Now this process partially starts because restrictions are too heavy and what's moron that this show goes on OUR moneys.You're going to restrict my rights for my moneys?You're utter idiots then.

t3st3r, you're talking about 2 different things: DRM and Symbian signing.

I'm sure Symbian (and Nokia) didn't want to f*** customers when they created signing procedures and platform security. That would be bad business. We'll see quite soon how it plays out, to me it seems 3rd Edition applications are coming out really fast now.

About DRM, I share your thinking it's just bad and should go away. But here S60 is doing what it needs ie. implement DRM and at the same time enable all possible DRM-free contents to be used. It's up to the customers if they choose to support services that use DRM.

>when they created signing procedures and platform security.
If platform security means constant headache with app signing, absence of fully-featured FREE, OpenSource or very cheap apps [I'm reasonable doubt that developers will cover costs of fully-featured certificates using their own moneys] and total incompatibility with previous platform, this is BAD thing for me as for customer.At first I have to pay near to $500 for device itself.And then I should buy some expensive apps to get it somehow useful?!Or I should buy device which costs near $500 just to be able to dial phone numbers and send email with built-in client?Hey, but non-smart phones for $150..200 provide same features!Why I need such smart phone if I can not use its smart features well?

Taking into account that this platform security idiocy caused apps to get incompatible, this makes me really angry.Even M$ Win XP still able to run [at least some] DOS and Win 3.1 apps, saving my old investments and relaxing headaches with software availability.

And well, now, I'm able to use my favorite OGG files everywhere in my 6681.But in Symbian 9 phone I will no longer able, right?Or I have to pay for it because Symbian Ogg Player dev's can not longer integrate their OGG codec into system for free?As for me, if this security consideration, codec integration should be allowed in such way:system should prompt me and explain this operation is potentially could be harmful if malicious code requests it(unevident code autorun feature, etc) and explaining that typically I only should allow it if installing codec or player.Restricting to non-free certificates is unfair (I'm treating this as light kind of racket - "pay for certificate or your app will not be fully functional") and as usually, extending Murphy laws to Nokia devices :) "any new restrictions and improvements will prevent you from using apps you're like\need.Crap you're do not need or use rarely will remain usable".So idea maybe not bad (list which features app intends to use, etc) but actual implementation sucks.

What about DRM:in short, it f***s my legal rights.I cannot send my favorite free\GPLed apps to friends even if their license WELCOMES distribution!I cannot send free or self-created midi files also.What a moron!Why I'm treated as criminal by default?Just because cellular operators and content providers are unhappy?Laws in my country claiming that "nobody is guilty unless this has been proven in court".And finally, it is I am, the customer who finally pays for all this.I was able to bypass major waste of restrictions in my Nokia 6681 proving once more that DRM is stupid idea but I'm still do not understand why I should find ways to bypass crap which is even not properly described on usual Nokia's site.Yes, you will not find words "hey dude, your phone will be unable to sed *.sis, *.mid *.jar regardless their licenses because we're thinking you're ugly pirate!".Nope, there is some mumbling about OMA DRM 1.0 "feature".This is CHEATING :E.Of course, there is description of DRM on developers site.But I could be just an user and not developer and still encuonter DRM restrictions, right?!So, Nokia cheating here.And I have to admit Nokia's firmware quality dropped very low in latest phones.Firmware shipped with my 6681 initailly had an increadible low quality and tons of bugs.Of course it is easier to implement stupid DRM crap and signing stuff than release well-tested stable firmware(yeah, I'm reasonable ironic here).

Well, why I'm writing all this?Because I see no good alternatives to Nokia but I also see no any reason to change my 6681 to something new.I do not need new restrictions and new headaches, I just want featured smart phone which just works and does not f***s my brain and rights for my moneys.So it begins to look for me that PDAs and communicators are maybe better choice for approximately same moneys.

I sincerly hope that Symbian 9.x will die horrible death. Horrible enough to make an example for all other OS/devices manufacturers. With all this crap of developer certificates and signing, and obscure documentation about wich capability require which level of signing not many developers of freeware or cheap applications would make an attempt for 9.x. Self-signing and freeware signing are not well explained and probaly not enough anyway. Also question of developer certificate not clear. All this make Win Mobile a lot more attractive. Those expenisve Symbian 9.x toy will be nothing more then Java-phones.

@strd: I'm sorry you feel that way. As Jukka mentioned in an earlier comment, Symbian and S60 didn't introduce PlatSec in order to screw developers and users. I agree that it's a pain, but it has a purpose. I have heard many times that mobile phone owners conider their phones to be very personal objects, and have higher expectations for security and stability from their phones than from their PC's. That tells me that we need to err on the side of security sometimes, even if it adds more complexity to the developer's job.

As Jukka noted, we're starting to see a good number of 3rd Edition applications, including many free and cheap ones, which tells me that developers are figuring out how to manage the added complexity. As a previous post explained, there are no-cost options for developers of freeware or cheap applications: self-signing or following the freeware path through Symbian Signed.

t3st3r and strd; you guys sound like disgruntled hard-core crackers who have still not found a way to crack PlatSec.

What's the point of all these rude abusive posts here? SS is here to stay for the forseeable future and the way you have adopted to get Nokia/Symbian to abandon it is not going to bear much fruit.

With PlatSec I do not like the extra headache and costs too but at least I can feel assured that something I spend so much money on developing is not going to be freely available on the net within a day or two of release. I'm not saying PlatSec is good or bad, this is one of the pro SS points I'm listing. Right now I am on the fence!

But I do hope the process becomes cheaper and the freeware process grows in size.

Boom

> t3st3r and strd; you guys sound like disgruntled
> hard-core crackers who have still not found
> a way to crack PlatSec.

No, actually.Cracking such thing requires a decent amount of efforts.Can you name any reason it will be worth of these efforts?

And I only know very few lame viruses for S60 2nd which should be installed by user itself, like email attachement worms, this requires a dozen of confirmations, so only absolutely stupid and clueless users can be affected.If user is an idiot, he can be affected even by java!Now, there is java trojan horses who send expensive SMSes to short number.User is charged in favor of short number's owner usually up to several US $ per SMS.This requires confirmation but users are stupid enough to confirm it.So there is no any way to stop users from being stupid but to *educate* them!Let's explain they should not use cracked apps got from doubtful sites and only should allow things they surely need and requested.Othervice they're "phished" by words like "new cool game cracked" and then installing trojan horse instead.Then, good-bye, moneys.Trojan's SMSes are expensive.Is this thing called "security"?

I also considered some options to write something for Symbian phones when S60 2nd ed appeared and learned it a bit.But soon 3rd ed appeared and no, I do not want to play such games, let's Nokia go on it's own with it's crap - I'm do not want to help Nokia to develop platforms crafted against user's legal rights.I'm really preferring OpenSource and non-evil companies, sorry :)

> But I do hope the process becomes cheaper and the freeware process grows in size.
I'm preferring protection to protect ME for my moneys, simple.Not Nokia's DRM or cell operators locks crap.Simple, huh?Now, for example, I can be kicked into teeth by some criminal ass, my phone grabbed and ... what?!Guys can read my phone security code using box which exists in almost any service company?!What a sucking security, user's phone code is NOT EVEN ENCRYPTED! But hey, DRM crap and cellular operator locks are protected a way better!Hey, I'm actually care my phone code to protect ME and DO NOT care what will happen with DRM or operator's locks.Really.PlatSec not looks like thing intended to protect ME.It looks like thing to protect Nokia's DRM, or whatever else.Talking about platform security and privacy... er... is phone's filesystem encrypted?I'm doubt it.If my phonecode stored as plain text, built in filesystem probably not encrypted, too.So any ass can grab a dozen of my private data just by kicking me into teeth and grabbing my phone.Then, for example, desolder flash IC and read file system.Voila, my valuable private data leaked.Wonderful protection, yep!Which definitely fails to protect ME though but causes me to have extra headaches and slightly fewer apps available.Thanks, no need to have such protection in my pocket.