- iPhone
- Windows Mobile
- Blackberry
- Symbian
- Linux
- Xandros (Eee)
- moblin 2.0
- LiMo
- maemo
- Andriod (beta, perpetually)
- Ubuntu Mobile
- etc. etc. etc.
One thing must happen for mobile Linux to thrive: The distribution sponsors must create a consistent application pool and installation experience. They must provide developers with ease and incentive to create applications for the platform. If this is not done, every mobile Linux device will be relegated to a small pool of hobbyists and dedicated fans.
Windows Mobile and Symbian provide the developers with incentive: There are just so many darn phones of theirs out there and the owners are known to pay for the application. Both platforms are lacking dedicated (and sponsored) application directories with easy on-device browsing and purchasing.
Apple came in with the solution to that: The iPhone application store is easy for users and provides the ability to browse, download, and purchase applications directly from the device. Apple now has enough phones in the marketplace to attract a purchasing audience for the software. However, they punish developers by telling then what can and cannot be sold there. They are also under strict non-disclosure clauses in participating in the iPhone application store.
Linux has the opportunity to learn from these competitors and blow them away. Since Linux systems are fewer and most are newer and more nimble than their competiors, they can rise above the shortcomings and dominate. The problem: It would delay launch of ALL the systems and stock holders would be mad. As a result, manufacturers and mobile Linux sponsors will cave to the stock holders' demands to release early and be the "first to market."
It's a shame. I will miss the excitement of mobile Linux systems. I hope some company is strong (or wealthy) enough to provide developers with the tools, distribution channels, and incentives to provide a rich application directory for their devices. Failing that, mobile Linux is doomed.
8 comments:
Android is defiantly not a flavor of linux. It's got it's own toolchain, vm, and package format that is neither source or binary compatible with anything else.
Don't get me wrong it's one of the problems that linux has always had. Without a strong, controlling, leadership it will always tend to fragment as the projects get larger and more complicated.
The funny thing is that almost every distribution has more in common than they have differences, but they all can't get off their high horse long enough to meet on common ground and combine efforts.
@Eric, to clarify: strictly speaking Android is Linux. But you can't get the source code. When you download the Android SDK, you get a Java dev system to develop Java apps that hook into the Linux OS which runs the hardware. Android may succeed because where other distributions fragment, because Google will keep the underlying system from one unified codebase.
And just like any other OS, mobile or otherwise, the newest upgrade will probably break compatibility with the older version. To succeed in this aspect, devs need consistent predictable upgrades, which a backing from Google should provide.
Looking at Symbian, it's arguably worse. Most Nokia users probably couldn't tell you if their phone is running S60, S60FP1 or S60FP2.
The Apple App Store has laid down a clear challenge. Who can met or better that?
I see a flaw, quite a fundamental one too. You write
"Linux has the opportunity to learn from these competitors and blow them away."
And yes, it does... but who is "Linux"? Arrange me a meeting with the CEO of "Linux" and its board of directors.
That can't be done, can it? There's no one person in control, no one single vision or direction keeping things consistent... There's just millions of individuals running around doing what they (or their own little communities) think is best.
You also say
"I hope some company is strong (or wealthy) enough to provide developers with the tools, distribution channels, and incentives to provide a rich application directory for their devices."
But then we've just got another distribution out there justifying its existance as being "the one". Every large Linux distro is the result of someone thinking these exact thoughts and saying "God this is a mess, I am going to sort it out and do things properly".
The OSS community has, for so long, been hell-bent on competing with Microsoft and getting itself noticed. We've done that part now - I can buy a multitude of Linux based devices. It's like winning a war and realising you've now got to create some law and order, without causing a riot.
Now the community needs to create some standards for what a "Linux" distribution really is.
Unfortunately none of this will happen since the instant you tell RedHat users that Debian's package system is good you've got a holy war. And if a large company suddenly pops up and tries to do it, they'll be knocked down instantly since the OSS community is riddled with people that hate any form of large business for no real concrete reason.
Then again, Linux was never designed with any particular goals, so it's hardly surprising things are chaotic.
-- Sorry if this comes out twice, Blogger went strange and ate my original reply --
I see a flaw, quite a fundamental one too. You write
"Linux has the opportunity to learn from these competitors and blow them away."
And yes, it does... but who is "Linux"? Arrange me a meeting with the CEO of "Linux" and its board of directors.
That can't be done, can it? There's no one person in control, no one single vision or direction keeping things consistent... There's just millions of individuals running around doing what they (or their own little communities) think is best.
You also say
"I hope some company is strong (or wealthy) enough to provide developers with the tools, distribution channels, and incentives to provide a rich application directory for their devices."
But then we've just got another distribution out there justifying its existance as being "the one". Every large Linux distro is the result of someone thinking these exact thoughts and saying "God this is a mess, I am going to sort it out and do things properly".
The OSS community has, for so long, been hell-bent on competing with Microsoft and getting itself noticed. We've done that part now - I can buy a multitude of Linux based devices. It's like winning a war and realising you've now got to create some law and order, without causing a riot.
Now the community needs to create some standards for what a "Linux" distribution really is.
Unfortunately none of this will happen since the instant you tell RedHat users that Debian's package system is good you've got a holy war. And if a large company suddenly pops up and tries to do it, they'll be knocked down instantly since the OSS community is riddled with people that hate any form of large business for no real concrete reason.
Then again, Linux was never designed with any particular goals, so it's hardly surprising things are chaotic.
I think "doomed" is strong, but I take your point. I just got an Eee PC to play with, and trying to see what other OSes I could put on there led straight down a deep rabbit hole.
Just like the desktop versions of Linux, they need a clean, crisp installation package or they will continue to struggle. But this area is still very young and the dust has yet to settle. You may be right, but I haven't given up yet.
Same reason I hate Linux for PCs
Linux on the EeePC and Asus One is actually quite well done. The fairly instant bootups are great and there's not really any need to install more software on them - it's a netbook, rather than an actual laptop.
XP on these things seems a bit wrong, with all the start buttons and stuff. The Eee interface is nice and clean, just what you want.
The idea of seeing Linux operating systems as one common pool, when selecting your operating system, is the thing that's flawed.
Instead of first selecting "Linux" and then selecting your flavour, you should simply have the flavours listed. Common users (who don't know the details about their operating system) are not likely to identify their devices as Linux devices.
On another note, the problems are being addressed and things are pretty much handled. Also the idea of having software installed over a network was AFAIK first seen in Linux based operating systems.
Post a Comment