Fragmentation in Linux hinders mass adoption

A few days back I ran a couple of posts titled Switch to Ubuntu Linux not Mac OS and Mac OS is better than Ubuntu: A myth. Both the articles generated significant interest amongst readers and there were quite a few comments. Most of the comments were in favor of the Mac OS and against Ubuntu. That led me to conclude that the Mac OS user community is extremely loyal towards it. Unfortunately the same cannot be said about the Linux users.

Of course there were a few Linux users who defended Linux against the onslaught of comments from the Mac users, but they were far outnumbered. I thought that the Linux users were a loyal and dedicated group of people who were passionate about the technology and had a unified voice against proprietary systems. Sad to say but that apparently is not the case.

Why is that so? Probably the answer lies in the fragmentation that exists in the Linux community. There are a whole lot of Linux distributions available in the market and each have their own base of loyal users. But these users will not come to the defense of a Linux distribution or flavor which is other than their own. So with Ubuntu/Kubuntu, SuSE, Fedora, Linux Mint, Mandriva, and a plethora of other distributions around this fragmentation in user loyalty is hurting Linux and open source as a whole.

What is needed is a set of standards that would abide all the Linux distribution vendors together. Most versions of Linux run either Gnome or KDE as their windowing system. Most use a kernel that comes from a single source. But the package management systems do vary from flavor to flavor. We can argue the merits and demerits of each of these but we have to reach a standard approach. Proprietary systems like Windows and Mac OS do not have this problem. Apple and Microsoft can dream of any “feature” and then incorporate that in their system. Loathe it or like it those “features” remain with you. In case of Linux the user is the driver. He/She decides what they want to keep or discard. Though this choice makes Linux a lot more attractive to many, it appears  intimidating to others. This is where we have to make things happen. This is where Linux needs to change.

There is not doubt that technically Linux is probably superior to both Windows and the Mac OS, but unfortunately user adoption rates are dismal. One of the major reasons is the lack of standards and the sooner the Linux community understands this the better for them.

The most common response to a proposal to use standards is “how are the vendors going to make money?”. Presence of standards does not tie vendors up. Rather it opens up newer opportunities for them. For instance if Linux comes up with a standard for package management, that would enforce a uniform binary distribution format for all Linux flavors. This is good because vendors do not have to release versions of their products for .deb, .rpm and other formats. Where Linux vendors can make their offerings more compelling is in defining good UI features, making file management easier, making program management better, etc. The opportunities are endless.

Standards are needed. Lets think of them as a common minimum program to which every Linux vendor subscribes. This would lead to greater interoperability between different distributions and also make it easier for people to choose. A common minimum program would guarantee certain features in all Linux systems. The rest is up to the Linux vendors

Apple Mac OS soon on the PC (x86)

Maybe if Psystar has its way. Psystar is the company that was selling the Open Computer which is basically an X86 hacked to run Apple’s Mac OS operating system. Regarded as one of the best in the market, Apple’s Mac OS license has prohibited running of the operating system on any non-Apple branded hardware. Though in the enthusiast community the concept of a Hackintosh or a PC running Apple Mac OS is not new, Psystar is the first company to have taken the concept public. In the process it has drawn the wrath of Apple.

In yet another David vs Goliath battle, Apple launched a copyright violation lawsuit against Psystar. Many thought it would be an open-and-shut case for Apple. But Psystar did not back down but retaliated with counter lawsuits calling Apple’s business a monopoly and allegeing it to be anti-competitive.

Till now the lawsuit proceedings did not spring any surprises. The twist came in a recent report that said that Apple and Psystar have decided to resolve the dispute outside the court. Interesting! Apparently Apple was sure its case was watertight and most “experts” said that Psystar will not stand a chance in court. But the facts do not seem to be so.

So what’s the deal? Is Apple going to open up Mac OS? Or is Psystar going to capitulate to Apple in return of Apple not suing the pants of it? 

I sincerely hope it would be the former. With Mac OS open it is very likely that the majority of PC vendors would offer computers with Mac OS running. This would offer consumers a lot more choice and would surely end Microsoft’s hegemony. For Apple its an all win situation. Acceptance of the Mac OS will see an exponential rise potentially posing the most serious threat to the Microsoft empire ever.

Before all the Apple fans start abusing me, let me state that I am not on drugs. If Apple wanted to destroy Psystar it could have done so in court. In fact such an event would have deterred any and all potential Mac clone makers. But instead it opted for an out of court settlement. Is Apple’s case not ironclad? Does Apple want to become the next Microsoft (with Vista’s failure its potent timing) ? Does Apple want to have another shot at licensing its platform to third-parties?

Its getting more and more tantalizing.

Android can beat Apple and the iPhone

The latest entrant in the sphere of mobile operating systems in Google’s Android. The OS has been received well by the mobile content development community and has been gaining steady momentum. T-Mobile’s G1 has also received very good reviews and some(including myself) have called it better than Apple’s iPhone. 

There are quite a few reasons that are in favour of Google Android. Here are a few:

• Android is open source and free to use and customize. This also makes it more attractive for adoption by a large number of mobile phone vendors.
• There are certain features in-built like cut-n-paste that are still to make their way into the iPhone. 
• Android apps are developed using Java that run on a specialized virtual machine. This aspect makes it attractive to a larger pool of developers than the iPhone.
• The Android Market has set policies that would let developers keep a majority share of the revenues earned through it. This is in contrast to Apple’s App Store policies.
• Google has promised to have very little control over the Android Market.
• Coming from Google, Android has the backing of a behemoth and top-notch quality is ensured.
• Being open source, community based development can introduce newer features to this operating system much faster than any other.

In fact Android adoption has seen a steady rise. From developers to mobile phone vendors everybody seems to be jumping on to the Android bandwagon. Here’s a list of few news item that come up on CNET.com when you search for Android in the news section:

• Kyocera joins Android phone bandwagon
• Google Android and Symbian to merge?
• Report: Motorola expanding Android team
• Coders get 70 percent of Android Market revenue
• MySpace’s Android application goes live
• Maverick puts Google Talk on Android G1
• Motorola preps its own Android phone
• Capitalism still alive: EA on Android games
• Google adds Android app for Flickr photos

It’s pretty clear that interest amongst developers and vendors is increasing with respect to Google’s Android. Amongst mobile phone vendors Kyocera, HTC, and Motorola are already on to it. It’s only a matter of time before a lot more follow this trend. If this continues, Android’s appeal would surely surpass that of the iPhone’s. 

So is Android the beginning of the end of Apple iPhone’s dominance in the smart phone segment?

New Apple MacBook, MacBook Pro laptops suck

Today was the big day. Apple fanboys the world over had been waiting for the latest from the stables of the Cupertino based company. And today they got to see it – the dream laptops from the company that is often considered to be the final word in innovation. Sadly enough Apple’s laptops disappointed. 

There was hardly anything revolutionary about them. Some different price points, loads of aluminum, a more powerful graphics subsystem, solid state hard drives and some gimmickry in the name of touch gestures and glass trackpads. These kinds of features and specs were being offered in laptops from other manufacturers for quite some time now. I not quite sure how much does the glass trackpad and enhanced gestures add to the value of the laptops. So what is there in these laptops that would make them a compelling proposition for a new buyer? The short and sweet answer is nothing.

In their presentation Apple admitted that the recent growth in sales of their laptops had been fuelled by the disgraceful failure of Microsoft’s Windows Vista operating system. Accepted that Apple’s operating system is probably one of the best in the business but still how does one justify the cost of these machines? The hardware that is being used in them is the same as the ones in other laptops. So why the premium? Just for the OS? Is it justified?

Spec wise the new laptops spring no surprises. The standard Intel Core 2 Duo processors feature in all in speeds ranging from 2.0GHz to 2.8GHz. There is even an odd speed of 2.53GHz. Also the 2.8GHz speed processors come only in the 15″ MacBook Pro models and not the 17″ ones. Very odd indeed. The max RAM is limited to 4GB. Apple still does not offer a 64-bit version of the Mac OS on the laptops though both Microsoft and the various Linux distros do so. The MacBook and the MacBook Air also featured similar changes.

So what’s so different about these laptops? Practically nothing. In fact the new ones look bad. The serious coolness that used to be the USP of Apple’s laptops is missing in total in the new ones. A two-tone laptop from Apple? Come on. Was the design team on drugs when they approved this design?

In fact during the presentation Apple seemed to be more excited about the manufacturing process of the laptops rather than the laptops themselves. This, my friends, is really a huge disappointment. 

Apple has failed to live up to its own high standards of design with these new laptops. The specs have improved from the previous lineup but not to the extent to really turn heads. Sorry to say the new laptops from Apple suck.

An Olympian Windows crash

The opening ceremony of the 2008 summer Olympics at China was a brilliant spectacle. Arguably it is supposed to be the best Olympics opening ceremony ever. The festivities climaxed with one of China’s sporting greats, Li Ning, lighting the Olympic torch while hanging from a wire high above the crowd. This marvelous act not only thrilled the audience but also threw a surprise for the software community. The reason was a projection of the famous Blue Screen of Death that greets a user when Microsoft Windows crashes. Take a look for yourself:

What a shame for Microsoft! However they are pretty much used to it. Through the years they have gone through quite a few faux pas. But this one should prove to be an “Olympian” embarrassment for Microsoft. Linux or Mac anyone?

More problems for Apple iPhone users

In spite of Apple selling around 3 million iPhone 3G cellphones worldwide and a huge lot of applications, the iPhone seems to be pretty far from being a technological success. Initially there were problems with connecting to Apple’s servers, then MobileMe failed to light a spark and then there were reports that the new plastic casing was not the best. But now the iPhone is facing an accusation that can potentially drag it down from its high pedestal.

Many iPhone users have complained about dropped calls even in areas that are under AT&T’s coverage map. Apple’s message boards have been flooded with complaints about this and as a result the main thread has been locked up. The reason cited by Apple is browser timeouts being faced by many users. On top of it Apple has not acknowledged the problem.

This call drop problem is not specific to the US. T-Mobile Netherlands has in fact issues a statement in which it has acknowledged the problem and also put the blame on their partner Apple.

Personally I like the iPhone but not for the value that it delivers. Its a cool gadget to have that showcases cutting edge technology. But definitely its not a replacement for business phones like the Palm Treo or RIM’s Blackberry. The coolness of the iPhone still lies in the cosmetics. If functionality and performance are the important, probably RIM, Palm and even Nokia have more convincing products.

Hopefully Apple would do something very soon to iron out this problem which according to many is the cardinal sin of cellphones.

VoIP for Apple iPhone? Naah….

A San Francisco based software maker has announced that they are working on a software development kit that will enable developers to deliver VoIP applications to Apple’s iPhone over 3G networks. VoIP allows users to make phone calls over the internet. Having such an application would essentially allow users to save up on their calling minutes from AT&T.

The question is, will this be allowed or would it be crushed through legal means?

The recent admission of Steve Jobs to the existence of the kill switch in iPhones and the black listing of certain applications do not bode well for VoIP application on the iPhone. Even if a developer creates a VoIP application, will Apple permit the selling of the application through App Store? Will AT&T be happy with this? Seems very unlikely.

Suddenly it becomes very clear why Apple wants to have such a lot of control over what applications a user may or may not have on his iPhone. This policing is really becoming more and more unpalatable. Don’t such practices qualify for anti-trust cases?

Mozilla Labs Aurora: What web browsers are going to be

Mozilla labs is where Mozilla experiments with new technologies and applications. One of those experiments is the next generation web browser. Aurora is a concept video created by Adaptive Path in partnership with Mozilla Labs. So what is shown in the video below is more of a concept rather than an actual application that is in incubation. Nevertheless, its worth a watch.