Symbian Ideas allows anyone (device users, developers, naysayers, enthusiasts, … truly anyone) to determine the features that are and are not implemented on Symbian.
The ideas, votes and feedback determine which features are given attention, and Symbian then looks to have these features implemented by seeking contributions. Or, if an idea relates to the running of Symbian, we explore how to change our internal workings
In the days of Symbian Software Limited there was what seemed a tortuous process by which a product feature could be mandated and monitored.
It was the imaginatively titled “Product Requirement Process” (or P-req for managerial snappiness). As a member of the Marketing department I understood this process only insofar as “if you want to get Software Engineering to do anything, fill in these forms and attend these meetings”.
A stable, considered product requirement process is clearly a good thing when attempting to create a stable, bug-lite, well-architected, predictably-released software platform, however convoluted it might seem to a marketer. But, an internally driven product requirement process can become introspective… resulting in a low uptake of new product features. That is, it can result in the creation of features that no-one actually wants.
Symbian Software then introduced ‘Market Requirements’ (predictably abbreviated to M-reqs) to force the question: “Does anyone actually want this feature?”
Symbian Ideas answers this question by filtering the many voices within our community and providing a perspective on what is actually wanted.
But just as interesting are the features that nobody wants. The most direct parallel to those product features that Symbian Software released and that were never used in a mobile device, those for which there was no ‘M-req’, are those ideas towards which there has been pure indifference. We’re not talking rejection, such as with the idea to “Rename Symbian“, we’re talking….
- Why not have your contacts expire?
- Get your mobile to sound like it’s dialling a number to create ‘easy dial’ on speaker phones
- If you don’t trust your own judgment, get your phone to tell you whether someone you encounter is well dressed
Are they not even worthy of a ’scrap’?
This is how brain-storming works. A lot of ideas from anyone. Certainly not all of these ideas are worthy even a ’scrap’, but I’m pretty sure that mature and really creative ideas would manage to come out of the clouds of proposal at ideas.symbian.org
The truth is out there.
First of all, as Symbian goes open source, then lack of tools for open source platforms is just a pity – http://ideas.symbian.org/Idea/View?ideaid=921
Other example, http://ideas.symbian.org/Idea/View?ideaid=3381 – as to me, it’s quite simple but nice idea. And there plenty of others. Probably, the main challenge at the moment is the ideas filtering routine.
Hi Damavik,
I agree – some of the ideas that emerge will not excite any interest whatsoever, positive or negative. I see indifference and a complete lack of votes as more damning than a high number of scraps as it indicates that nobody cares about this particular feature or suggestion. Should an idea receive a large number of scraps, this is useful as it serves to demonstrate that the community feel that the counter to the ’scrapped’ idea is desirable.
Hence, the most damning state of all: “not even worthy of a scrap”.
– Freddie
I suggest the panel to review all interesting ideas and not basing from votes alone. Innovative ideas come from brilliant minds that ordinary thinkers can’t comprehend their importance unless they see them implemented already.
Jhorwin
Hi Jhorwin,
Boybwang made a very similar remark in response to this post: http://blog.symbian.org/2009/12/09/from-ideas-to-reality/#comments
A summary and extension of my comment there:
Most of the experts are looking at all of the ideas (and they receive a notification every time an idea within their field is raised).
The 30 vote threshold does act as a filter for market need, and so entails that others must see a need for that which is suggested. It is plausible to suggest that some ideas may be so brilliant that general users may not understand their significance. This is an issue, and always has been. Even when innovators create break-through technologies it doesn’t necessarily mean they’ll be adopted (my favourite example of this is Buckminster Fuller’s aerodynamic rival to the Ford motor car, that quietly disappeared).
I’m not sure if there’s any completely effective way to ensure that brilliant ideas are recognised as such, I can only suggest that it’s important that the originator of the idea phrases with clarity, succinctness and clearly outlines its purpose. Plus, I would ask anyone who recognises a break-through idea to publicise it: via Twitter, via blog comments such as your own, via inviting other Symbian Ideas users to be part of an idea.
– Freddie