PL/SQL Guy writes "Search giant Google is set to offer its free Android mobile-phone operating system for computers, opening a new front in its rivalry with Microsoft by challenging the dominance of the company's Windows software. Acer Inc., the world's second-largest laptop maker, will release a low-cost notebook powered by Android next quarter, said Jim Wong, head of information-technology products at the Taipei-based company. Calvin Huang, an analyst at Daiwa Securities Group Inc, says that adoption of Android-based netbooks will likely eat into Windows' share of PC operating systems."
Meanwhile, notes reader Barence, Asus is continuing to distance itself from Android, saying it "isn't a priority."
That's odd considering the story we discussed yesterday [slashdot.org] in which Qualcomm showed an eee PC (an Asus product) running Android with an ARM processor. And in the Bloomberg article (which also mentions that), "Asustek said in February its engineers were trying to develop an Android-based netbook this year."
The comments of Jonathan Tsang, vice chairman of Asus, don't convince me. Actions speak louder than words. Hint: When you release an ARM Processor based chipset in a netbook, you're actually distancing yourself from Windows and x86 applications.
What he means to say is "everything's ready, just don't alarm our Redmond masters [slashdot.org] until we're sure the consumer likes Android."
If most users spent 80+% of their computer time running calc.exe and not much else, your trusty HP calculator would indeed be a threat to Windows marketshare.
I'm not all that sold on the idea of Android as a netbook OS, Moblin or ordinary Linux would be my preference; but it is nevertheless a potentially viable candidate.
Most PCs spend most of their lives doing something very close to the netbook use case, so sure, many could be replaced by netbooks. Hardly 100%, but many.
by Anonymous Coward
on Wednesday June 03 2009, @11:37AM (#28197399)
I agree. Women would never again buy Sybian [wikipedia.org] devices if they could be sexually serviced by a full-sized android a la the Kubrick/Spielberg film A.I..
Would be funny to see your comment join the ranks of famous quotes like "No wireless. Less space than a Nomad. Lame." and "640kb should be enough for everybody" a few years later, when/if Android beats both Symbian and Windows:-)
Here we have a very interesting inversion of the typical Open vs Closed debate. Although Windows itself may be a closed source OS, it is actually a very open system. And although Android is built on layers of open source components, it is fundamentally a closed system (like iPhone).
The target audience for Android PCs would be one which needs a dedicated internet browsing device. Anything more would mean that they would be looking at Windows.
This strategy has been tried several times before. And it has faile
"Anyone can take the Android platform and add code or download it to create a mobile device without restrictions," Google said in an e-mail. "We look forward to seeing what contributions are made and how an open platform spurs innovation."
I thought it was just a phone OS though? Is google pushing Android on netbooks or is someone else. From what (admittedly little) reading I've done on the API and stuff everything seems centered around cell phone usage - event classes, screen UIs that seem to fit a cell phone pretty well, etc.
I think the problem is that you can't produce the hardware cheap enough to make Windows compatibility a non-issue. If you could buy a typical sized netbook that could just do email and browse the internet (including supporting things like flash, like it or not) nobody would care which OS it used.
I'm just going to buy one, and think of it as a high-end Smartphone. It may also function as a PC, but I'm mostly buying it to have a versatile, low-power media hub I can take with me anywhere.
Flash is really slow, and I would really like for it to die before all the hardware catches up.
I think that's more because Americans wanted cheaper laptops, not portable internet devices. The original concept of a netbook has been replaced with scaled down (physically and price-wise) laptops.
Americans don't have a problem with the variety of unfamiliar phone OSes out there, because nobody expects them to be like their big desktop computers. If we had the same view of netbooks, Linux would continue to dominate there.
In what way is Android a closed system? Anyone can write Android apps. The API is fully open. Anyone can publish them to the Google ap store. Or you can just install them individually like any application for any OS.
I don't see how you can compare Android to the iPhone as both being closed. The iPhone is closed in every single way. Android in nearly none.
Although Windows itself may be a closed source OS, it is actually a very open system. And although Android is built on layers of open source components, it is fundamentally a closed system (like iPhone).
This doesn't make much sense. If we're comparing OSes themselves, then neither one restricts application development or distribution. If we're comparing devices, then, obviously, it's quite possible to lock down Windows just as much as any other OS if the device manufacturer decides to do that - it's just that it's something much more common in phone/handheld market. I doubt that Android-based netbooks, for example, would be similarly locked down - it would fall short of the expectations consumers have of those devices, based on existing models.
I agreed with your analysis otherwise, but this battle is just starting... We haven't seen usable preinstalled linux netbooks yet
Huh? The EEE, the Cloudbook, the Wind, and most of the others were preinstalled Linux from the start, only adding preinstalled Windows as an option months after they came out. Are you implying that these were not usable?
What does android has that linux doesn't?
Linux has more software than android and if we're talking about familiarity the linux desktop is closer to windows than android.
The android netbooks will be cheaper than the windows ones but, again, if that hasn't helped linux I don't see how it's going to help android.
I'd like to see the microsoft dominance in the os market broken as much as anyone but I don't have much hope this is going to do it.
Unity: as opposed to the fragmentation of Linux. Linux has ~1% of the desktop market and that is divided into a hundred fragments. I say this as someone who uses RH at work and Ubuntu at home (secondary boot to windows). I am not going to get into a back and forth over the benefit of the freedom to fork new things. Yep thats nice, but with the utter fragmentation reducing Linux to the ghetto forever, it has IMO relegated it to the backwaters forever.
The biggest challenge facing Windows is its size and hardware requirements - as phones get smarter and netbooks become more popular then people will become accustomed to having a 'proper' computer on them at all time- for many people with an iPhone this is already happening. Even Miyamoto (the Nintendo guy) was talking today about broadening the range of applications available for the DS so that gamers begin to take them everywhere and use them for everything. It doesn't really matter whether it's a Nintendo DS, an Apple iPhone, a Palm Pre, a Blackberry or a netbook running Android- the key is portability. Portability is The Next Big Thing and in this market Windows does not seem to have a very attractive offering - Windows Mobile only makes headlines when it's market share is overtaken by something else. So personally I don't see Android as a specific challenge to Windows, I see Windows being challenged by a fundamental shift in computing - from the desktop to personal - and Windows biggest challenge in this area is probably itself and it's own bloated history.
Asus is continuing to distance itself from Android, saying it "isn't a priority."
They're probably also thinking that those long-haired young guys calling themselves the "Beatles" aren't worth the investment in signing up with their company, either.
It seems to me that this is all part of the next wave of computing devices. The iPhone showed that portable computing device could be easy to use and fulfill a number of functions including cell phone, internet browser, applications platform and media player. It's not so much a smart phone as it is a computer. Google followed with Android. Nokia and RIM are now inspired to try to make their smartphone operating systems work the same way. They won't. They are going to have to adopt Android or develop new operating systems (Linux-based most likely) if they want to compete for the long term.
The next step (this new wave) is to use the operating system developed for iPhone type devices on larger form factors better suited for more general purpose computing. The rumored Apple tablet and what is being announced here are just that. The approach of trying to fit a full desktop operating system on crapped-down hardware that conforms to a common PC form factor yielded netbooks. If you are used to a full blown laptop netbooks are very unsatisfying. Yet the need for a less expensive, useful and durable device with excellent battery life remains. I think that is what these new devices are trying to address and it makes sense to me that they are more likely to be successful.
Microsoft, watch out. The growth in the computing market will be devices like these, not general purpose computers - desktops and laptops. These devices will be more reliant on browser based RIA apps (e.g. Javascript & HTML5) and web services than on native applications. General purpose PCs will still be around in large but stagnant numbers. If I'm making these more specialized devices, why would I pay for an operating system when I can get one for free? If the browser I put on my device meets all the requisite standards, you can no longer offer me the advantage of lot's of applications.
But Microsoft is not stupid. The new Zune HD shows me that at least they are thinking about this market and how to compete in it.
The Android based hand held device does not pose a direct threat to MSFT. But all it needs is just large enough market share to force MSFT to be standards compliant. MSFT cant keep changing internal file formats, APIs and other tricks to be eternally non standards compliant. If enough people use Android to check email, it will force MSExchange to be more open.
Remember Firefox? Once it reached a 10% market share most websites started abandoning MSFT's walled garden and adopt standards. Same way if enough people migrate to Google docs, Open Office, Android etc etc, it will nail MSFT's underhanded tactics. If 10% of the people are using OpenOffice, they will interact with some 20% of the MsOffice market, and start demanding smooth file transfers. If 10% of the people use Android net book to take a quick look at MsOffice powerpoint it will force MSFT to at least allow a standard compliant export or standard compliant view only mode.
That is all it takes to start shaking the monopoly. Once MSFT market share in Office and OS starts to dip below 80% it will get into a avalanche mode and drop to 40% in just 4 or 5 years.
If it looks like a portable computer (laptop/netbook), people will expect to see Windows on it, and the vast majority of them will run away if it doesn't have it.
Alternative OSs have a chance on things that have the same compute power as a portable computer, but don't look like them.
Android/Linux/OS X on smartphones or similar things will sell.
I predict that whatever Apple does with all those 10" screens it it rumored to be buying, it won't look like a netbook.
Who didn't see this coming? But I think the smarter route is to start it as purely a mobile (smartphone/netbook) OS, work out the kinks and extend it THEN break it out as a full fledged OS. You'd hit the ground running, people already familiar with it, apps developed for it, etc. Then crush Microsoft's grapes.
I just realised a few days ago that there was something wrong with the desktop OS market: you have a declining giant which held until now pretty much 98% of its market (non-Mac PC market), a strong but much smaller giant which is much more limited in how it can eat the big declining giant because he requires buying a whole new machine (and doesn't even cover all the ranges of machines, i.e. hardly any low end machines), and the rest, which is the tiny Linux and BSD guys who can't do much because well, none of them are anywhere near being giants.
So I thought something is missing, cause if the big giant is declining fast, then another giant has to help him lose its market share. Apple can only do it in a very limited manner, and even if desktop Linux was ready as a product it just isn't pushed into the desktop OS market by a giant.
And there comes Google and its Android platform. If they are actually going for the desktop market, and if they do things right, then I believe that within a few years they'll manage to relieve Microsoft from a portion of their desktop OS share that we'd consider quite significant by our current standards (understand 5-10% in 5 years), and in the long term they may turn out to be the ones who break the Windows' image of being the big OS you can't do without.
That's a huge challenge, but the thing about Google is, they're fucking huge now, but their biggest thing is still by far their web searching, and they're as big as one can be there, so I think they need something else that is huge to get into. Taking a shot at replacing Windows on desktops/laptops/netbooks seems like a logical choice.
Lost perhaps in the fervor over "eating into Windows' share of PC operating systems" is the fact that Microsoft doesn't seem to -- or doesn't want to appear to seem to -- care.
Although it may be a case of CYA, or a byproduct of some Wintel partnership fine print, Microsoft has said it has no plans to port a PC version of Windows over to the ARM core, in a sense leaving the whole "smartbooks" market Linux and Android [infoworld.com].
And though it may be true that an Intel deal, a desire not to eat into its own Windows netbook/notebook revenue, or the difficulty of porting a worthwhile version of Windows to ARM is at the heart of this deference to Android, you have to wonder whether there is some grain of truth to the fact that it is 'hard to create new categories' of technology, as Microsoft is claiming in relation to its stated disinterest in "smartbooks."
There is such a misunderstanding of what is going on with netbooks. There are two markets developing, and they could not be more different. The most important difference is who the customer really is:
Consumers (meaning you and me) are buying cheap, small, wimpy laptops. This is the market that is going crazy right now as people are buying $279 netbooks instead of $500 laptops. (Windows is a plus here as it protects the buyer's investment in legacy software). For most netbook buyers, it's either a compliment to their desktop or it is the primary machine for a non power user. Linux is important in this market because MS was forced to allow XP to be sold as Vista was too heavy, and will continue to be too heavy. In fact, MS had end of lifed XP before allowing netbook manufacturers to distribute with their computers.
- and -
Cell phone carriers are buying connected netbooks. Cell carriers want to sell these inexpensive netbooks locked on to their network. It's a way to sell another connection to you for $50/month using their traditional loss leader strategy (have a $250 phone for free, just pay us $50/month for two years). Windows is a liability here as it takes a lot more end user support than a purpose built environment like Android. Windows also just can't be locked down like Android either (this is considered good. Android is not itself a consumer product, but Android applications are). Most software is going to be either small applications that are installed on the netbook or bigger ones that are provided via browser (Google Apps). Android is built to deliver internet based applications and distribute applications in a way that limits the need for technical support. In other words: it's amazingly easy to use for end users and doesn't break in ways that reqire support calls. It also can be locked down to the carrier's needs (doing so may limit what Google software may be shipped with the device).
If people want Windows, they can have Windows. However, I'll be more than happy to stick with the rarely-used Windows installation I already have.
How often do you use a full-blown OS while you're waiting at the fast food line? Not very often, I'll bet. Why not simply leave the bloat at home or in the office? Most of us would be happy with relatively simple things like a good web browser, email reader, and a cheap old rich text editor, and if you're going to blur the lines between phone and netbook, why not add phone functions to that list? All of those things are things that will come to Android, and it basically takes care of the "necessities" on the go.
As far as the luxuries on the go, you might be able to squeeze a DVD drive into that sub-netbook. Wireless connectivity can be used to connect to the heavier iron, making things that people use at work and home accessible (take for example: MS Office or programming tasks).
VNC is not out of the question; the most you may have to do is bring your little charger around with you. The bigger question than VNC is how to make it accessible to the masses? I'd think that's easy. Google has the connectedness to be able to tell one computer where to find another computer, all you'd need is the connecting software. Granted, it's not quite like having a laptop right in front of you, but it allows the casual person to be able to take care of things at home, including checking on the shopping list.
Let's face it; we're not limited to the world of x86 netbooks. smartbooks (or sub-netbooks) can be the tool of choice; capable of things that you wouldn't even be able to do casually with your favorite phone or Windows-based laptop variant. I know that I'd ditch my laptop for a smartbook that can do the works, even if I have to do some things remotely.
It's not that the thing's 'ready to go', the problem still remains that the majority people currently using windows are use to windows and don't want to spend another 5 years learning a new operating system with new software. We really need to target the younger audiences and schools if we want to make progress. It's something that windows did early on, and something that worked very well.
This is something that is currently being exploited by Apple. Walking around the college campuses lately I have been noticing that Macs are about 50% of the "I brought it to class to take notes" crowd.
You've obviously never done customer support or you'd realize how important consistency and expected functionality is.
Just because YOU don't have a problem with different OSes and all their quirks doesn't mean that the rest of the world wants to learn how to use something new just to satisfy some moral conviction you have to OSS. Most of us have better things to do than extol the virtues of OSS without having a clue as to what making a pleasant user experience is.
With Ubuntu now in a "just works" state on most hardware
Not really true, unfortunately. I know this is just anecdotal but I've a few friends who were just getting into linux and they had nothing but trouble with installing on recent laptops. They're pretty smart folks and somewhat tech-savvy, so I can't imagine someone's mom or grandmother trying to do the same.
Why is everyone obsessed with the idea that Mother/Grandmother needs to be able to install Ubuntu? Seriously, my mother-in-law can't manage to navigate to a web page without help, I've had to put a link on the desktop to Google Mail. The one, only, big problem with Linux-based operating systems is commercial application and driver support. People want to be able to walk into a shop and buy something. They want to put the CD that came with their new digital camera into the drive and install the stuff that came with it because they think they got something free (even if it's rubbish). The early adopters of OS X had this problem, but now almost any device comes with OS X support and most of the important packages have OS X ports. Linux just isn't there yet in that department. One commercially-supported platform for developers to target, supported by a number of the bigger hardware companies, might just achieve that.
People want to be able to walk into a shop and buy something.
This is completely different than 'commercial application and driver support.' There is no value to be had in aggressively promoting Linux compatibility at the average retailer. There simply aren't enough customers/money to be made yet.
commercial application and driver support I am dog tired of hearing this bit of disinformation. Many distros provide excellent support. And I don't mean forums. I mean talking to a warm body on the phone that
With Ubuntu now in a "just works" state on some hardware
There. Fixed that for you. Unfortunately, my own stats (and I have installed Ubuntu on lots of different hardware configurations) indicate that in only about 30% cases it just works with all the hardware that an average user will immediately notice to fail. Wireless, sound cards, video cards (missing 3d support and more), ACPI quirks... I think that the year of Linux on Desktop will never come, until we realize that we must not go the Microsoft Way - we must go the Apple Way, no matter how absurd as it may sound at first! And maybe Google is trying to do just that - make sure there are several distinct hardware configurations 100% supported by Android, instead of writing software to support everything invented by the mankind.
Then we *have* defined the game we're going to play ourselves. It just doesn't involve total desktop dominance. The problem is that nobody will really admit this. Linux is about choice and freedom first, and development will proceed in that fashion for the forseeable future because that has value to the people who actually develop Linux.
Canonical can choose to play a different game with Ubuntu (which I love, btw, and my entire team has it installed on our development computers). But Linux is not Canonic
Seriously. With Ubuntu now in a "just works" state on most hardware, and Android tested by commercial entities to work out-of-the-box fro specific hardware, there is real choice. The lower cost of slick Linux devices and PCs compared to OS X premium hardware from Apple will start to take hold this year.
Contradictory Statements! (Score:5, Insightful)
Meanwhile, notes reader Barence, Asus is continuing to distance itself from Android, saying it "isn't a priority."
I think the article you wanted to link there was Asus distances itself from Android netbook [pcpro.co.uk].
That's odd considering the story we discussed yesterday [slashdot.org] in which Qualcomm showed an eee PC (an Asus product) running Android with an ARM processor. And in the Bloomberg article (which also mentions that), "Asustek said in February its engineers were trying to develop an Android-based netbook this year."
The comments of Jonathan Tsang, vice chairman of Asus, don't convince me. Actions speak louder than words. Hint: When you release an ARM Processor based chipset in a netbook, you're actually distancing yourself from Windows and x86 applications.
What he means to say is "everything's ready, just don't alarm our Redmond masters [slashdot.org] until we're sure the consumer likes Android."
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I think you actually need a s/Acer/Asus/g; in there, read what you quoted.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I'm not all that sold on the idea of Android as a netbook OS, Moblin or ordinary Linux would be my preference; but it is nevertheless a potentially viable candidate.
Most PCs spend most of their lives doing something very close to the netbook use case, so sure, many could be replaced by netbooks. Hardly 100%, but many.
Re:Contradictory Statements! (Score:4, Funny)
That's Video Graphics Array to you, TeknoHog. IAEATMTWPOA, eh? Sheesh. ;-)
Parent
Symbian? (Score:3, Informative)
Right now, Android is more a rival for symbian than for Windows.
Re:Symbian? (Score:5, Funny)
I agree. Women would never again buy Sybian [wikipedia.org] devices if they could be sexually serviced by a full-sized android a la the Kubrick/Spielberg film A.I..
Oh, wait, you said Symbian. Oops.
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
you forgot to include the oft repeated "it's the year of the Linux desktop" in your list of utter fail.......
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
my guess is that he meant windows mobile.
Open vs Closed (Score:2, Insightful)
Here we have a very interesting inversion of the typical Open vs Closed debate. Although Windows itself may be a closed source OS, it is actually a very open system. And although Android is built on layers of open source components, it is fundamentally a closed system (like iPhone).
The target audience for Android PCs would be one which needs a dedicated internet browsing device. Anything more would mean that they would be looking at Windows.
This strategy has been tried several times before. And it has faile
Re:Open vs Closed (Score:5, Informative)
"Anyone can take the Android platform and add code or download it to create a mobile device without restrictions," Google said in an e-mail. "We look forward to seeing what contributions are made and how an open platform spurs innovation."
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Why is it Google's fault that your expectations of them are unrealistic?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I thought it was just a phone OS though? Is google pushing Android on netbooks or is someone else. From what (admittedly little) reading I've done on the API and stuff everything seems centered around cell phone usage - event classes, screen UIs that seem to fit a cell phone pretty well, etc.
Re:Open vs Closed (Score:4, Insightful)
I think the problem is that you can't produce the hardware cheap enough to make Windows compatibility a non-issue. If you could buy a typical sized netbook that could just do email and browse the internet (including supporting things like flash, like it or not) nobody would care which OS it used.
Parent
Oops - forgot to mention the price point (Score:4, Insightful)
I forgot the most important part "for $99.95".
Parent
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
I'm just going to buy one, and think of it as a high-end Smartphone. It may also function as a PC, but I'm mostly buying it to have a versatile, low-power media hub I can take with me anywhere.
Flash is really slow, and I would really like for it to die before all the hardware catches up.
Re:Open vs Closed (Score:5, Insightful)
I think that's more because Americans wanted cheaper laptops, not portable internet devices. The original concept of a netbook has been replaced with scaled down (physically and price-wise) laptops.
Americans don't have a problem with the variety of unfamiliar phone OSes out there, because nobody expects them to be like their big desktop computers. If we had the same view of netbooks, Linux would continue to dominate there.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
You're slipping badly there.
Er... what? (Score:5, Insightful)
In what way is Android a closed system? Anyone can write Android apps. The API is fully open. Anyone can publish them to the Google ap store. Or you can just install them individually like any application for any OS.
I don't see how you can compare Android to the iPhone as both being closed. The iPhone is closed in every single way. Android in nearly none.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Well, his name is "BadAnalogyGuy"...
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
You dirty old man.
Re:Open vs Closed (Score:4, Insightful)
Although Windows itself may be a closed source OS, it is actually a very open system. And although Android is built on layers of open source components, it is fundamentally a closed system (like iPhone).
This doesn't make much sense. If we're comparing OSes themselves, then neither one restricts application development or distribution. If we're comparing devices, then, obviously, it's quite possible to lock down Windows just as much as any other OS if the device manufacturer decides to do that - it's just that it's something much more common in phone/handheld market. I doubt that Android-based netbooks, for example, would be similarly locked down - it would fall short of the expectations consumers have of those devices, based on existing models.
Parent
Re:Open vs Closed (Score:5, Insightful)
Huh? The EEE, the Cloudbook, the Wind, and most of the others were preinstalled Linux from the start, only adding preinstalled Windows as an option months after they came out. Are you implying that these were not usable?
Parent
How exactly? (Score:3, Insightful)
Linux has more software than android and if we're talking about familiarity the linux desktop is closer to windows than android.
The android netbooks will be cheaper than the windows ones but, again, if that hasn't helped linux I don't see how it's going to help android.
I'd like to see the microsoft dominance in the os market broken as much as anyone but I don't have much hope this is going to do it.
Re:How exactly? (Score:5, Insightful)
What does android has that linux doesn't?
Google
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Unity, name recognition, money. (Score:3, Insightful)
"What does android has that linux doesn't?"
Unity: as opposed to the fragmentation of Linux. Linux has ~1% of the desktop market and that is divided into a hundred fragments. I say this as someone who uses RH at work and Ubuntu at home (secondary boot to windows). I am not going to get into a back and forth over the benefit of the freedom to fork new things. Yep thats nice, but with the utter fragmentation reducing Linux to the ghetto forever, it has IMO relegated it to the backwaters forever.
Name recognitio
Windows' biggest challenge is its size (Score:5, Insightful)
So personally I don't see Android as a specific challenge to Windows, I see Windows being challenged by a fundamental shift in computing - from the desktop to personal - and Windows biggest challenge in this area is probably itself and it's own bloated history.
Famous Last Words (Score:3, Funny)
Asus is continuing to distance itself from Android, saying it "isn't a priority."
They're probably also thinking that those long-haired young guys calling themselves the "Beatles" aren't worth the investment in signing up with their company, either.
Pointless Link (Score:4, Informative)
"Asus is continuing to distance itself from Android, saying it "isn't a priority.""
If you follow the link from that quote in the summary, the word "Asus" isn't anywhere on the page.
Re:Pointless Link (Score:5, Funny)
Well, you can't get much more distant than that.
Parent
Next Wave (Score:4, Insightful)
It seems to me that this is all part of the next wave of computing devices. The iPhone showed that portable computing device could be easy to use and fulfill a number of functions including cell phone, internet browser, applications platform and media player. It's not so much a smart phone as it is a computer. Google followed with Android. Nokia and RIM are now inspired to try to make their smartphone operating systems work the same way. They won't. They are going to have to adopt Android or develop new operating systems (Linux-based most likely) if they want to compete for the long term.
The next step (this new wave) is to use the operating system developed for iPhone type devices on larger form factors better suited for more general purpose computing. The rumored Apple tablet and what is being announced here are just that. The approach of trying to fit a full desktop operating system on crapped-down hardware that conforms to a common PC form factor yielded netbooks. If you are used to a full blown laptop netbooks are very unsatisfying. Yet the need for a less expensive, useful and durable device with excellent battery life remains. I think that is what these new devices are trying to address and it makes sense to me that they are more likely to be successful.
Microsoft, watch out. The growth in the computing market will be devices like these, not general purpose computers - desktops and laptops. These devices will be more reliant on browser based RIA apps (e.g. Javascript & HTML5) and web services than on native applications. General purpose PCs will still be around in large but stagnant numbers. If I'm making these more specialized devices, why would I pay for an operating system when I can get one for free? If the browser I put on my device meets all the requisite standards, you can no longer offer me the advantage of lot's of applications.
But Microsoft is not stupid. The new Zune HD shows me that at least they are thinking about this market and how to compete in it.
You dont need big market share to win here (Score:5, Insightful)
Remember Firefox? Once it reached a 10% market share most websites started abandoning MSFT's walled garden and adopt standards. Same way if enough people migrate to Google docs, Open Office, Android etc etc, it will nail MSFT's underhanded tactics. If 10% of the people are using OpenOffice, they will interact with some 20% of the MsOffice market, and start demanding smooth file transfers. If 10% of the people use Android net book to take a quick look at MsOffice powerpoint it will force MSFT to at least allow a standard compliant export or standard compliant view only mode.
That is all it takes to start shaking the monopoly. Once MSFT market share in Office and OS starts to dip below 80% it will get into a avalanche mode and drop to 40% in just 4 or 5 years.
This won't work on netbooks, but... (Score:4, Insightful)
If it looks like a portable computer (laptop/netbook), people will expect to see Windows on it, and the vast majority of them will run away if it doesn't have it.
Alternative OSs have a chance on things that have the same compute power as a portable computer, but don't look like them.
Android/Linux/OS X on smartphones or similar things will sell.
I predict that whatever Apple does with all those 10" screens it it rumored to be buying, it won't look like a netbook.
No Way, Really? (Score:3, Insightful)
Who didn't see this coming? But I think the smarter route is to start it as purely a mobile (smartphone/netbook) OS, work out the kinks and extend it THEN break it out as a full fledged OS. You'd hit the ground running, people already familiar with it, apps developed for it, etc. Then crush Microsoft's grapes.
At last! (Score:3, Insightful)
I just realised a few days ago that there was something wrong with the desktop OS market: you have a declining giant which held until now pretty much 98% of its market (non-Mac PC market), a strong but much smaller giant which is much more limited in how it can eat the big declining giant because he requires buying a whole new machine (and doesn't even cover all the ranges of machines, i.e. hardly any low end machines), and the rest, which is the tiny Linux and BSD guys who can't do much because well, none of them are anywhere near being giants.
So I thought something is missing, cause if the big giant is declining fast, then another giant has to help him lose its market share. Apple can only do it in a very limited manner, and even if desktop Linux was ready as a product it just isn't pushed into the desktop OS market by a giant.
And there comes Google and its Android platform. If they are actually going for the desktop market, and if they do things right, then I believe that within a few years they'll manage to relieve Microsoft from a portion of their desktop OS share that we'd consider quite significant by our current standards (understand 5-10% in 5 years), and in the long term they may turn out to be the ones who break the Windows' image of being the big OS you can't do without.
That's a huge challenge, but the thing about Google is, they're fucking huge now, but their biggest thing is still by far their web searching, and they're as big as one can be there, so I think they need something else that is huge to get into. Taking a shot at replacing Windows on desktops/laptops/netbooks seems like a logical choice.
'Microsoft to leave smartbooks to Google' (Score:3, Interesting)
Although it may be a case of CYA, or a byproduct of some Wintel partnership fine print, Microsoft has said it has no plans to port a PC version of Windows over to the ARM core, in a sense leaving the whole "smartbooks" market Linux and Android [infoworld.com].
And though it may be true that an Intel deal, a desire not to eat into its own Windows netbook/notebook revenue, or the difficulty of porting a worthwhile version of Windows to ARM is at the heart of this deference to Android, you have to wonder whether there is some grain of truth to the fact that it is 'hard to create new categories' of technology, as Microsoft is claiming in relation to its stated disinterest in "smartbooks."
Missing the Point (Score:4, Insightful)
There is such a misunderstanding of what is going on with netbooks. There are two markets developing, and they could not be more different. The most important difference is who the customer really is:
Consumers (meaning you and me) are buying cheap, small, wimpy laptops. This is the market that is going crazy right now as people are buying $279 netbooks instead of $500 laptops. (Windows is a plus here as it protects the buyer's investment in legacy software). For most netbook buyers, it's either a compliment to their desktop or it is the primary machine for a non power user. Linux is important in this market because MS was forced to allow XP to be sold as Vista was too heavy, and will continue to be too heavy. In fact, MS had end of lifed XP before allowing netbook manufacturers to distribute with their computers.
- and -
Cell phone carriers are buying connected netbooks. Cell carriers want to sell these inexpensive netbooks locked on to their network. It's a way to sell another connection to you for $50/month using their traditional loss leader strategy (have a $250 phone for free, just pay us $50/month for two years). Windows is a liability here as it takes a lot more end user support than a purpose built environment like Android. Windows also just can't be locked down like Android either (this is considered good. Android is not itself a consumer product, but Android applications are). Most software is going to be either small applications that are installed on the netbook or bigger ones that are provided via browser (Google Apps). Android is built to deliver internet based applications and distribute applications in a way that limits the need for technical support. In other words: it's amazingly easy to use for end users and doesn't break in ways that reqire support calls. It also can be locked down to the carrier's needs (doing so may limit what Google software may be shipped with the device).
Tricked out Android + VNC? (Score:3, Interesting)
If people want Windows, they can have Windows. However, I'll be more than happy to stick with the rarely-used Windows installation I already have.
How often do you use a full-blown OS while you're waiting at the fast food line? Not very often, I'll bet. Why not simply leave the bloat at home or in the office? Most of us would be happy with relatively simple things like a good web browser, email reader, and a cheap old rich text editor, and if you're going to blur the lines between phone and netbook, why not add phone functions to that list? All of those things are things that will come to Android, and it basically takes care of the "necessities" on the go.
As far as the luxuries on the go, you might be able to squeeze a DVD drive into that sub-netbook. Wireless connectivity can be used to connect to the heavier iron, making things that people use at work and home accessible (take for example: MS Office or programming tasks).
VNC is not out of the question; the most you may have to do is bring your little charger around with you. The bigger question than VNC is how to make it accessible to the masses? I'd think that's easy. Google has the connectedness to be able to tell one computer where to find another computer, all you'd need is the connecting software. Granted, it's not quite like having a laptop right in front of you, but it allows the casual person to be able to take care of things at home, including checking on the shopping list.
Let's face it; we're not limited to the world of x86 netbooks. smartbooks (or sub-netbooks) can be the tool of choice; capable of things that you wouldn't even be able to do casually with your favorite phone or Windows-based laptop variant. I know that I'd ditch my laptop for a smartbook that can do the works, even if I have to do some things remotely.
Re:2010... (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
You've obviously never done customer support or you'd realize how important consistency and expected functionality is.
Just because YOU don't have a problem with different OSes and all their quirks doesn't mean that the rest of the world wants to learn how to use something new just to satisfy some moral conviction you have to OSS. Most of us have better things to do than extol the virtues of OSS without having a clue as to what making a pleasant user experience is.
Just because you weren't around when they c
Re:2010... (Score:5, Interesting)
Not really true, unfortunately. I know this is just anecdotal but I've a few friends who were just getting into linux and they had nothing but trouble with installing on recent laptops.
They're pretty smart folks and somewhat tech-savvy, so I can't imagine someone's mom or grandmother trying to do the same.
Parent
Re:2010... (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
People want to be able to walk into a shop and buy something.
This is completely different than 'commercial application and driver support.' There is no value to be had in aggressively promoting Linux compatibility at the average retailer. There simply aren't enough customers/money to be made yet.
commercial application and driver support
I am dog tired of hearing this bit of disinformation. Many distros provide excellent support. And I don't mean forums. I mean talking to a warm body on the phone that
Re: (Score:2)
I'm just leaving a note here so I can Google (or Bing) this next year and get an even bigger laugh out of it than just now.
rofl_yolotd
Re:2010... (Score:5, Insightful)
With Ubuntu now in a "just works" state on some hardware
There. Fixed that for you. Unfortunately, my own stats (and I have installed Ubuntu on lots of different hardware configurations) indicate that in only about 30% cases it just works with all the hardware that an average user will immediately notice to fail. Wireless, sound cards, video cards (missing 3d support and more), ACPI quirks... I think that the year of Linux on Desktop will never come, until we realize that we must not go the Microsoft Way - we must go the Apple Way, no matter how absurd as it may sound at first! And maybe Google is trying to do just that - make sure there are several distinct hardware configurations 100% supported by Android, instead of writing software to support everything invented by the mankind.
Parent
If that's how you define the Apple way (Score:3, Insightful)
Then we *have* defined the game we're going to play ourselves. It just doesn't involve total desktop dominance. The problem is that nobody will really admit this. Linux is about choice and freedom first, and development will proceed in that fashion for the forseeable future because that has value to the people who actually develop Linux.
Canonical can choose to play a different game with Ubuntu (which I love, btw, and my entire team has it installed on our development computers). But Linux is not Canonic
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Ubuntu 9.04 had a serious regression on Intel integrated graphics [workswithu.com], as did Fedora 10. The sad part is this used to "just work" - Intel's drivers are fully open source.
Intel holds nearly 50% of the PC graphics [edn.com]