Symbian Signed is designed to keep troublemakers out. Both intentional troublemakers such as virus writers and unintentional troublemakers such as software with critical bugs. The idea is to have an outside third party company doing the testing in order to have the same rules and tests for everyone. To me, this sounds too good to be true. Unrealistic.

In my opinion the reality is that Symbian Signed keeps many developers out!  Less software for Symbian phones, less choice...

There are many problems with the process. In my experience the main problem is that the process is so heavy and expensive, that many applications do not make sense anymore. Only blockbuster best sellers can make it.

In the old days (before S60 3rd edition) we could create one application and then make different variants. For example, if we sold the application through www.Handango.com they have a requirement that a trial version should only refer to Handango.com as the place to purchase the software. Fair enough. I suppose Nokia Softwaremarket has a similar requirement. If you want to sell the software on your own site as well, then you may have different requirements (different messages, different unlock code mechanism, whatever). Already here we have three different versions of one application. With the current Symbian Signed rules this has to be signed three times - and each time the process has to be started from scratch! No mercy for having just had it tested.

Each version needs to be signed separately. This means that the cost of signing is suddenly much higher than it first sounded when it was presented as a nice idea on a Powerpoint presentation.

When I talk about the cost of signing, I don't mean the several hundred euros that each round costs. I mean the total costs. It takes surprisingly long to manage the Symbian Signed process. At this stage the Symbian Signed website is in my opinion still full of teething problems. It is designed to be so 'secure' that any minor deviation of the lenghty requirements in the submission process and your submission is bluntly rejected. You are welcome to start all over again from the beginning. Type all details again into those numerous little boxes on the seven or eight different entry screens. That is costly, if you calculate any value to your own time.

Symbian Signed is supposed to make sure that your application does not do unexpected things. However, some of the restrictions are illogical. For example, if your application needs to see your phone's IMEI number (commonly used for copy protection) then it has to be Symbian Signed. What harm could the software application possibly do with the IMEI? On the other hand, your application can send a text message without the need for the application to be Symbian Signed. That is not logical at all! A text message sent by the application could be harmful. Granted, it does not send it silently unless it has been Symbian Signed. A non-signed application can send a text message but before it is sent the operating system comes up with a dialog box asking you to confirm sending the message. It does not show you what the message is or to what number it is sent. It just looks like one of those numerous unnecessary Yes/No message boxes that S60 is coming up with all the time. Most people don't pay any attention to them any more and just click OK. Again the purpose of Symbian Signed is not achieved.

My suggestion is that Symbian Signed rules should be changed.

Symbian Signing could be given to a company rather than to an application. After all, a serious company would not want to do itself harm by distributing bad or malicious software. Symbian Signing would identify the source of the software. Who would want to do bad or malicious software when the source can be unequivocally identified? In my opinion this ought to be enough.

Making Symbian Signing a company audit rather than application audit would make the process infinitely faster, cheaper and less frustrating. And it would mean more Symbian applications, more choice.

The recent developments of Nokia PC Suite have not generated much reviews or discussion. That is why I would like to draw some attention to this. I think the new generation of Nokia PC Suite is one of the most important developments recently. The reason I think it is important is that it finally creates a very simple and reliable link between your mobile phone and your PC. Before this time, making a connection was not as straightforward as it should have been, especially if you changed phones. Many early adopters were disappointed. Remember how it was with the 9210 and the serial cable? Those days are gone!

With the new Nokia PC Suite you can plug and play with your smartphone (S60, S80 and even S40). Connect the phone to your PC using a USB cable or Bluetooth, and immediately you will be able to copy files in both directions (except for the hidden directories - but nobody is perfect) and install software very easily. The connection is reasonably fast.  You can also use the same Nokia PC Suite to connect your laptop to the internet via your phone and guess what? It works.

Has anybody else been positively suprised by this?

On this blog you will find comments about new developments in the mobile device space. My background is in software development through the company I started, Lumisoft.net. I am specially interested in making smartphones easy to use. Ease of use leads to... well, to actually using the devices and taking advantage of their huge capabilities. Simplicity is good for you.

P.S.  Have you read 'The Inmates are Running the Asylum' by Alan Cooper?  This is one of the best books about software development. Thought provoking, written by the person who invented Visual Basic.