<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet href="http://blogs.forum.nokia.com/styles/rss.css" type="text/css"?>
<rdf:RDF
 xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
 xmlns="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/"
 xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
>
 <channel rdf:about="http://blogs.forum.nokia.com/rss.php?profile=rss10&amp;op=ArticleComments&amp;postId=">
  <title>Mark Wilcox's Forum Nokia Blog - Symbian Foundation Implications</title>
  <description>Forum Nokia Blogs</description>
  <link>http://blogs.forum.nokia.com/summary.php</link>
  <items>
    <rdf:Seq>
                          
      <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://blogs.forum.nokia.com/blog/mark-wilcoxs-forum-nokia-blog/2008/07/18/symbian-foundation-implications#comment23997" />
                          
      <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://blogs.forum.nokia.com/blog/mark-wilcoxs-forum-nokia-blog/2008/07/18/symbian-foundation-implications#comment23989" />
                          
      <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://blogs.forum.nokia.com/blog/mark-wilcoxs-forum-nokia-blog/2008/07/18/symbian-foundation-implications#comment23988" />
                          
      <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://blogs.forum.nokia.com/blog/mark-wilcoxs-forum-nokia-blog/2008/07/18/symbian-foundation-implications#comment23984" />
                          
      <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://blogs.forum.nokia.com/blog/mark-wilcoxs-forum-nokia-blog/2008/07/18/symbian-foundation-implications#comment23981" />
        </rdf:Seq>
  </items> 
 </channel>
                
  <item rdf:about="http://blogs.forum.nokia.com/blog/mark-wilcoxs-forum-nokia-blog/2008/07/18/symbian-foundation-implications#comment23997">
   <title>Seems Symbian will stay...</title>
   <dc:title>Seems Symbian will stay...</dc:title>
   <description>&lt;p&gt;Yes, it looks like Symbian is there to stay. It may change, change a lot, but I really feel it is there to stay.&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
   <link>http://blogs.forum.nokia.com/blog/mark-wilcoxs-forum-nokia-blog/2008/07/18/symbian-foundation-implications#comment23997</link>
      <dc:date>2008-07-22T16:30:31Z</dc:date>
   <dc:creator>amitkankani</dc:creator>
  </item>
                
  <item rdf:about="http://blogs.forum.nokia.com/blog/mark-wilcoxs-forum-nokia-blog/2008/07/18/symbian-foundation-implications#comment23989">
   <title>Then why buy Symbian?</title>
   <dc:title>Then why buy Symbian?</dc:title>
   <description>&lt;p&gt;There are already shiny Linux devices from Nokia - the internet tablets.  I very much doubt that we won&#039;t get any more Symbian devices in 1-2 years.  Why on earth would Nokia buy Symbian and hence several hundred more Symbian OS engineers if they were planning to ditch it.  Avkon may eventually be replaced by Qt but it&#039;ll probably still have an S60 badge and the underlying OS for a huge volume of devices is likely to be Symbian.&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
   <link>http://blogs.forum.nokia.com/blog/mark-wilcoxs-forum-nokia-blog/2008/07/18/symbian-foundation-implications#comment23989</link>
      <dc:date>2008-07-21T11:52:42Z</dc:date>
   <dc:creator>Sorcery-ltd</dc:creator>
  </item>
                
  <item rdf:about="http://blogs.forum.nokia.com/blog/mark-wilcoxs-forum-nokia-blog/2008/07/18/symbian-foundation-implications#comment23988">
   <title>S60 going away?</title>
   <dc:title>S60 going away?</dc:title>
   <description>&lt;p&gt;I think we&#039;ll see shiny linux devices from Nokia within 1-2 years tops. RIP s60.&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
   <link>http://blogs.forum.nokia.com/blog/mark-wilcoxs-forum-nokia-blog/2008/07/18/symbian-foundation-implications#comment23988</link>
      <dc:date>2008-07-21T11:44:41Z</dc:date>
   <dc:creator>iothal</dc:creator>
  </item>
                
  <item rdf:about="http://blogs.forum.nokia.com/blog/mark-wilcoxs-forum-nokia-blog/2008/07/18/symbian-foundation-implications#comment23984">
   <title>Exactly</title>
   <dc:title>Exactly</dc:title>
   <description>&lt;p&gt;Yes, Nokia has a herd of lawyers and they will have considered the choice of license very carefully.  That&#039;s why it&#039;s so interesting.  There are a lot of other good reasons for choosing the EPL, many of which have already been mentioned around the blogosphere, but it may just be that the EPL vs GPL incompatibility is desirable.  It will prevent LiMo (say) from borrowing the EKA2 nano-kernel to add real-time scheduling under Linux (not that it can&#039;t be done other ways of course).&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Mark&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
   <link>http://blogs.forum.nokia.com/blog/mark-wilcoxs-forum-nokia-blog/2008/07/18/symbian-foundation-implications#comment23984</link>
      <dc:date>2008-07-19T18:07:08Z</dc:date>
   <dc:creator>Sorcery-ltd</dc:creator>
  </item>
                
  <item rdf:about="http://blogs.forum.nokia.com/blog/mark-wilcoxs-forum-nokia-blog/2008/07/18/symbian-foundation-implications#comment23981">
   <title>EPL vs GPL</title>
   <dc:title>EPL vs GPL</dc:title>
   <description>&lt;p&gt;Nokia has a herd of lawyers, so they know what they are doing. Will be interesting to hear the official comments to this licensing glitch!&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Thanx,&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;--jouni&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
   <link>http://blogs.forum.nokia.com/blog/mark-wilcoxs-forum-nokia-blog/2008/07/18/symbian-foundation-implications#comment23981</link>
      <dc:date>2008-07-19T02:24:38Z</dc:date>
   <dc:creator>JOM</dc:creator>
  </item>
  </rdf:RDF>