In part 2 of our huge review of the Motorola RIZR Z8, Rafe Blandford looks in detail at its PIM applications, email and web functions and the host of other utilities and applets. Look out for part 3 in a few days time, looking at the Z8's multimedia performance.
Read on in the full article.
In functionality, UIQ doesn't actually seem that different to S60, and with the touchscreen element removed, it's even more similar. It's the same screen resolution, very similar layout, very similar method of selecting items, profiles have been added etc. It's not the same, but it's far more similar than it used to be.
If Motorola makes UIQ their main smartphone platform (the way Nokia has done with S60), the non-touchscreen version may begin to dominate the world of UIQ. If that happens, it makes you wonder why Symbian needs two major versions.
Perhaps it would be better for all concerned to merge S60 and UIQ, if there's now little practical difference between their operation. It would allow more research resources to be devoted to a single platform, reduce manufacturing costs, and make life much easier for Symbian developers too.
That's a very interesting proposition. Both UIQ and S60 have their strengths and weaknesses. (for example, Agenda is better than Callendar)
S60 would gain from UIQs proven touchscreen support, while UIQ could gain from some of S60s rationalle. (i.e. it's generally more intuitive than UIQ to new users)
Unfortunately, with SonyEricsson owning UIQ and Nokia owning S60, I think a merger is almost as likely as Brown resigning and putting Bliar back in as prime minister.
It would be really nice...but yes, its utopical
I don't think it's likely to happen either. 😊
But... if a rival smartphone OS started getting close to Symbian in market share, it might make Nokia and Sony Ericsson reconsider their options. A single Symbian platform supported by both of them (and Motorola etc) would make it much easier for Symbian to compete with any threats from rival OSes.
A parallel for this is Microsoft's unification of Windows Pocket PC and Windows Smartphone into one platform, Windows Mobile.
Even Nokia has unified platforms in a way by abandoning Series 80 and Series 90 in favour of a more flexible S60 3rd Edition which supports a much wider range of screen shapes and sizes. S60 3rd Edition apparently already has support for touchscreens, but no manufacturer has used it yet, so perhaps the potential is there for a merger with UIQ if Nokia and SE want it to happen.
Actually, it's not like the different UI systems were ever needed. Having two different code branches for somethings as simple as supporting different types of input and different screen sizes/orientations makes no sense. Unfortunately the Symbian UI teams back in the days when this split originally happened seemed to have very little knowledge on how to design a decent UI, and that's why we have an OS without an actual GUI and several different UI systems built on top of it.
"Actually, it's not like the different UI systems were ever needed. Having two different code branches for somethings as simple as supporting different types of input and different screen sizes/orientations makes no sense."
If you look at it in terms of company politics, perhaps that was the real reason for splitting into different platforms?
"The Symbian OS Sourcebook" claims that the reasons were technical. I recommend the first part of the book to anyone who's interested in why parts of the architecture of Symbian OS is as screwed up as it is. The book isn't as technical as the title suggests.
Of course, there might have been political reasons that they don't want to talk about, but it doesn't seem like that's the case.