NewLC - Why does symbian bank on commercial compilers for the emulators? - Comments

Re: Why does symbian bank on commercial compilers for the emulat

NetMackan — Thu, 08 May 2008 09:18:05 +0200

Ok, sorry I finally found a place where it says that it is approved for commercial development: http://www.forum.nokia.com/info/sw.nokia.com/id/dbb8841d-832c-43a6-be13-f78119a2b4cb.html .

The Wikipedia page and other sources are clearly wrong at this point.

I'm not sure if it is free, don't even think the winsw compiler is open sourced I have to look more at that but anyway it is available at no cost so that might be enough for now.

Re: Why does symbian bank on commercial compilers for

Symbian_Neil — Wed, 07 May 2008 18:06:31 +0200

Well Carbide.c++ Express IS free. Developer, professional and OEM version cost. The SDK's are free (Referring to Symbian environment). The winscw and gcce compilers are free...Enough to start 'developing' I guess. Well, distributing it might involve costs in signing etc if you are using 3rd edition. But if you are using API's which can do with self-signed certificate, then if you can do with that..then have a party

Re: Why does symbian bank on commercial compilers for the emulat

NetMackan — Wed, 07 May 2008 17:10:34 +0200

Regarding the compilers, you can have a free compiler for the emulator as well. Take a look at Carbide.c++ Express edition and you'll have a 100% free and working development environment.

What do you mean by "100% free"?

The need for a license to develop commercial application is far from "free" in my opinion.

Perhaps I missed something.

Re: Why does symbian bank on commercial compilers for the emulat

N_A — Fri, 23 Jun 2006 17:07:30 +0200

Quote from: serg3d

Actually that is not very relevant question, because open source for symbian dying anyway with intorduction v9.1

Why? There are open source apps for Symbian 9.1. All apps on Symbian 9 do not need to be signed. Secondly, there is a way to get freeware signed, too.

More here: https://www.symbiansigned.com/app/page/freeware

Example of signed, free app (the author has not decided to release the sources, though, so it is not open source): http://www.antonypranata.com/screenshot/index.html

So, you can write free and open source software for Symbian 9 just fine, if you wish.

Re: Why does symbian bank on commercial compilers for the emulat

serg3d — Fri, 23 Jun 2006 09:22:39 +0200

Actually that is not very relevant question, because open source for symbian dying anyway with intorduction v9.1 Main stumbling block is the developer certificate, whitout wich you can't self-sign application and can't test application on the real phone, even for most basic capabilities, like camera access. I mayself switching to win mobile as soon as I finish current project.

Re: Why does symbian bank on commercial compilers for the emulat

eric — Fri, 23 Jun 2006 08:18:46 +0200

Having discussed with them about this particular topic, it looks like:
- there is not that much demand for a Linux based development environment (which does not mean there is none!)
- porting the emulator to another OS looks like a complex task.

Regarding the compilers, you can have a free compiler for the emulator as well. Take a look at Carbide.c++ Express edition and you'll have a 100% free and working development environment.

Re: Why does symbian bank on commercial compilers for the emulat

N_A — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 12:38:51 +0200

Here's one FN discussion thread related to the topic:
http://discussion.forum.nokia.com/forum/showthread.php?t=70898

Re: Why does symbian bank on commercial compilers for the emulat

N_A — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 09:29:57 +0200

I doubt that you get any official Nokia or Symbian replies on an independent developer forum.

Try asking in the C++ section on Forum Nokia discussion boards (http://discussion.forum.nokia.com), or Symbian newsgroups (news://publicnews.symbiandevnet.com).

You might also first search for existing discussion threads about Linux support in Symbian tools (or lack thereof).

Why does symbian bank on commercial compilers for the emulators?

thinrhino — Thu, 22 Jun 2006 06:47:45 +0200