I'm sure all you Slashtards have seen it by now.
Nokia tells the OSS world to grow the fuck up.
We want to educate open-source developers. There are certain business rules [developers] need to obey, such as DRM, IPR [intellectual property rights], SIM locks and subsidised business models.
Translation: thanks for the code guys! but your "freedom" thing makes it hard for us to actually make money. We're gonna learn you some economics ok?
The primary thing they learned after all their involvement in the Linux community?
Don't make your own version. The original mistake we made was to take the code to our labs, change it and then release it at the last minute. The community had already gone in a different direction than [us], and no-one was pushing it other than [us]. Everybody wants to make their own version and keep it too close to their chest but that leads to fragmentation.
Shiiiiet. You don't say. Open source people take code and make incompatible versions of the same thing? I would have never guessed. Can you give me some examples of that? Because I can't believe your claims without actual examples.
Good luck trying to herd these ego-driven cats, Nokia. I strongly recommend you purchase the biggest shit-shield you can find.
edit: Apparently you guys can't read. Nokia said that EVERYBODY forks the code. I don't give a shit if it's some proprietary company or some open source buffoons. The point is that _everybody_ does it because they don't know better, and _that_ sucks as a development model. Nokia is sane (and stupid?) enough to tell everyone that it doesn't work. But somehow it's ok when Ubuntu forks Debian? just cuz it's some OSS project? Please.
I guess you guys really need my help to read between the lines. Proprietary companies always come at this the same way. They look at the code. They say, "wow, there's some useful code in there, but over the past 10 releases these guys have broken something every time. We can't depend on this bullshit, so we're gonna fork it."
Eventually they come around and realize that it doesn't really work, but what other option did they have? They want the code, but they can't depend on the project managers to get their shit together. I mean why should they? Volunteer contributors to the project have no incentive to listen and or cooperate.
The final conclusion usually is that open source projects are a fucking huge pain in the ass to work with if you're trying to get anything real done as a company and you have assloads of customers who don't give a fuck how your product is built. The projects who adapt and figure out ways support and incorporate paid developers (from real businesses) are the ones that usually succeed.
edit again: I hate myself for biting. I hate you for wasting for my time. Serves me well for giving any credibility to what you Anon commenters write. Hurray for the internet. You guys are helpless. Go write code for a living and use Linux for 10 years and then come back. I might listen to you then.
Anyways, I didn't say that all forks were bad did I? But you know what? The bad forks grossly outnumber the good ones. Worse yet, each bad fork has collateral damage. It confuses the landscape needlessly, confuses users, and reduces cooperation and coordination among the already scarce developer resources. As it is, I've watched osstards fork things for so many stupid reasons that I don't trust them any more. And worse, I've seen osstards fight among each other for years and years over two or more forks of a program that all look the same to any normal user. Y'all are free to do what you want, but I'm also free to make fun of you for it.