Google OS

Dear reader

I have shared with you my views on technology, operating systems and computing for awhile now. So here's my latest one.

I just read a column by Matt Hartley (a contributing writer to OS Weekly). The article discusses possible entrance by Google into OS space.

I wanted to respond on that opinion by my own. The issue of Google OS is being debated for as long as Google become an important part of internet culture. Many have predicted the appearance of Google's OS long time ago, but the thing never happened.

Why?

If Google OS is easy to create (just peak any Linux distro and create an additional "brand"), easy to maintain (the distro is already there and if you choose wisely, it is being frequently updated and bugfixed), easy to customize (it is Google after all using an open source application and it is a house full of open source developers), so why haven't this already happened?

Because Google doesn't need one. Just think about it. What Google's purpose is? World domination. What Google's business is? Selling ads. So how would OS integrate into this scheme?

Well, the thing is - it wouldn't. And the main reason for this is that an importance of any specific operating system is diminishing by the second as much of our computer life goes onto the net. In addition, diversity of mobile and small devices running uncommon local operating systems would render another desktop OS useless - and those devices are great for Google, as they allow users to view ads anywhere. And another reason - is the one I'm putting always as reason du jour for many Windows users stay in Windows - gamers would not use it because they won't have their favorite games there.

But besides any other reason, here's the million dollar question: why Google needs to have an operating system if it is not in operating system business?

And what's for sure, is that Ubuntu (Canonical) is very good by their own, without Google's money. And if you target only home users, I'm sure you will fail, as main OS business today is actually business users.

I prefer Google contributing money to a good cause instead.

-A.

Technorati : Google, Linux, technology

Google Linux

I just read a column in Inquirer about meetup in Googleplex. There are people from Linux Foundation and FSF, which meet up in goal to discuss the latest Microsoft ramblings about licensing problems in Linux:

Following Microsoft's inking of agreements with Linux hawkers, offering to shield them from lawsuits over the 235 patents it reckons versions of Linux infringe, a gathering of open sorcerers is assembling at Google HQ to debate what is to be done.

According to Reuters report, which helpfully details what a Linux geek is wearing these days (T-shirts and jeans), organizer of the "Collaboration Summit", Jim Zemlin of the Linux Foundation, told the amassed geeks: "Guys: Be seekers of truth, not finders of contradiction."

Maybe something will come of it, but typically, like the Left in politics, there may be too much squabbling over what society should look like after the revolution that the revolution will be eternally postponed.

I actually agree to this. Its much easier to discuss than get things done. But then, I like this comment:

Google Linux anyone?

Funny isn't it? Not that Google needs such a thing, but I think that while everyone is talking Ubuntu would do the trick and take it all.

-A

Technorati : Gentoo, Linux, Ubuntu

Choosing a platform for work.

After meeting a friend yesterday and talking a bit about technology with him, and after reading a review today, I had an idea.

I recently understood that most of my "computer"-related work is either already done or can be moved to be totally online. Such a thing would lead me to one of the following (or combination of them):

1. I'm totally online. I never loose my data because I have it online all the time. The only moment when its not there is that split of a second I loose my wireless connection and my data not uploaded yet. I can do my work (or entertainment) anywhere, anytime.
2. I'm totally "dead" without internet connection. My powerful computer has no use for me. I can't access anything. I can't do anything. I'm so addicted to being online, that I have problems figuring out what are computers for. Although my movies and music are local and with me, I have no wish to "consume" them - after all, I can't access my email (don't tell me its unrelated! It is. I am not addicted).
   

Then I've thought about it even more.

We have an internet connection nowadays everywhere. I walk around my neighborhood and I catch easily 10 open WiFi spots. Many can check their email with 3G mobile phones, or even use them to connect to the "real" Internet. Many of those phones are good enough for Internet by themselves. WiMax us promised to come in couple of years give or take. So we have connectivity problem solved. That, probably, also solves me the "problem" with an Internet addiction usage. This means, I can work virtually everywhere anytime.

Now, what bothers me at this point, is the computer itself. I mainly use browser and email. I use simple editor for documents/blog writing. I use simple photo management application. I use somewhat more advanced pictures editing application. I use multimedia players.

These all are hardly resource intensive tasks. But my computer starts to crawl when I open more than 2 apps at a time. Besides, when I'm thinking about installing applications and maintaining the computer, I wonder: why should I invest so much time in it?

So, I know what I want. I want a TV-like usability computer - something that just works. I want a "work" appliance. I want an appliance which is lite, small, convenient, has a long battery life, and fast and responsive. I want to know what it does and how it does it. I want to be able to customize it. I want my computing everywhere with me.

Just like an OLPC with a larger screen and battery life.

-A.

Technorati : Gentoo, Linux, OLPC, Ubuntu, apple, technology, windows

Responsive computing required!

Hey all. Thanks for spelling me out the obvious by commenting on my previous post - using swap out of memory is useless.

But I still want my computer to be faster and swap less. I know that today's userspace apps suck and use much unnecessary computer resources, but all I want for my computer is to be responsive!

I remember in DOS days, with much slower computers I didn't have to wait for it. Computers perform tasks much faster that people, so I want to use this tool and I want it to be usable. I don't want to wait for it to do something it "thinks" it needs to. I want it to respond in half of a second to any of my actions.

Is that too much to ask for?
Is it possible to be easily done? Without the suggestion to buy more hardware? If so, how?

-A.

Technorati : Linux, Ubuntu, technology, windows

Standard Linux - is it possible?

I've read a post by Dana Blankenhorn, who "has been a business journalist for nearly 25 years and has covered the online world professionally since 1985".

Here's a trackback to a story.

He's talking about running a "standard" Linux distribution. Not choosing one, but rather, using one.

I like his way of thinking actually. If mostly used distribution is Ubuntu, doesn't that makes it "standard"? Wouldn't it be easier for all to create and distribute products that would work with this vendor? Wouldn't it be great to optimize ourselves to work with/on it the best way possible?

Well, yes and no.

Yes because all Linux distributions (and Ubuntu in particular) are built alike. All of them include the kernel (it is a kernel what makes Linux after all), basic software, X server system (with great graphics support), management tools and software, which is generally the same on all of them. So, when an application or product is "ready" for Ubuntu, is will not be daunting or hard task to make it work with almost any other Linux distribution.

And no because it seems to me we already been in this scenario. Just imagine: a real alternative to Microsoft's and Apple's OSes, and a good one. It is so good, that many vendors start creating a products for it and based on it. Hardware vendors provide drivers and optimize their hardware. Accessories are made. Software is getting better. Ain't it great? The world, where at least one distribution becomes as good as commercial operating systems?

But that is exactly the world we're trying to change. We don't want the "lock-in" on a single vendor. I don't want to be forced to use something I don't choose by myself. We already have such vendor in our midst. Wanna guess who that is?

Isn't that the reason we do what we do with free software in the first place?

I'm all for innovation. I'm in favor of competition. I am in favor of trying to achieve high goals.

But I can't stand a choice forced on me. Even with best intentions in mind.

Technorati : Linux, Ubuntu, technology

Computer for gradma and world domination

This entry was inspired by latest entry in LinuxToday, but refers to such topic as "Computers for gramma" or "Linux on a desktop" in general.

These topics have history now, and they've been "refurbished" at least once per few weeks. The major points of those are twofold (althouth highly interconnected). Those points are being:

1. Whether my {favorite non-technical member of the family} can easily use computer?
   
2. Is Linux ready for desktop?
   

Please allow me to explain, why those 2 are interconnected.

Well, the first one is well understood. In last 15 or so years, computers transformed from geaky toy to a "in any home" appliance. We do many of day to day tasks with it: We send and read our mail. We read, see and listen to a news. We listen to a music/radio. We watch movies (and sometimes TV). We record music, speech and TV. We play. We talk.

So, if my grandma can operate a TV/VCR, why can't she operate a computer system? Of course she can. In the matter of simplicity, I'll ask anyone who is familiar with computers, to perform the following tasks:

• Check/Send an email
  
• Read/check news on favorite website
  
• Listen to a music
  
• Watch a movie/DVD (all legal, don't worry)
  
• Write a simple document (such as you shop list)
  

I'd believe that anyone who's been using a computer for at least a month, would be able to perform all these tasks.

Now consider the following: the "Alex computer system" that I asked to perform those tasks on has nothing but pretty picture on the desktop, with the following icons:

• Mail
  
• Internet
  
• Documents
  
• Music/Movies
  

Wouldn't you agree, that using only common sense performing the aforementioned tasks would not be too hard? Say, Mail would present some pretty interface to email (or Gmail, Yahoo or anything else - all our email interfaces are alike and pretty self explanatory), Internet would fire up Firefox (or any other browser; and all our browser interfaces are alike and self explanatory), Music/Movies would start something like "media center" application (like Windows Media Center/Tivo/MythTv/Telly, or any other similar application) which is pretty straight forward to use and self explanatory, and Documents will start simple document editor, either local or browser-based (they do have similar interfaces anyway, except MS Office 2007, of course).

Now, I still believe, that no age-related neither intellectual issues have been discussed here yet. It is all very intuitive and common sense.

Just like the TV.

So, at this point, considering all I discussed before, could you answer the following question, please, :

Do you know which operating system "Alex computer system" runs? And more important, does it matter?

This is what I've been trying to explain. I sustain, that there's sincerely and absolutely no importance in which operating system powers the all-powerful "Alex computer system". This, as great result, leads me to the following:

For any such general-purpose computing, Linux-based OS (all you zealots, I know the difference between GNU/Linux and Linux, but I don't want to go into politics for a moment) is completely ready for massive desktop usage, as long as it can be installed and maintained in a way that makes sense to a general public.

Please, note the "common sense" part. I don't think that working with "Start" (or "applications" or whatever) menu is very intuitive (although I have to agree that "Applications" is much better than "Start"). To watch TV, one has to press an "on" and that's it. To play a movie on a VCR one presses "play". That's common sense. That's intuitive.

So here's my initial suggestion to all those aspiring to "prove" to everyone that Linux is ready. Create an application with the following features:

1. Create a very beautiful GUI with pre-defined tasks, such as those mentioned above.
   
2. Make sure it works as stable and as predictable as TV.
   
3. Make sure that interface is consistent thorough the applications.
   
4. Try it on your not so technical {member of your family} to see whether it is intuitive enough.
   

Until now, we've been preparing to world domination. Now the final part:

When they are asleep, swap the OS to Linux. Enjoy the fruits of your labour.

Heh, that would be fun and easy. Wouldn't it?

Technorati : technology

My week with Gentoo and other stuff

Well, it's kinda a day for my weekly stuff.

In fact, I haven't see much of going on with Gentoo, this week was pretty calm. So few things then:

Non gentoo:

1. I'm twice an uncle now. My sis gave birth to another baby boy last friday, exactly one year after a previous one. So its kinda funny thing in a family now, we still laughing. But it is weird though.
2. Yet another "Is Linux ready for the desktop" type of article. I don't think we'll ever get rid of those. To the date, I think linux is just another OS, which gives you the choice. Because of the kind of a user I am, I do think Linux is better than anything else, because almost everything I do with computers, is either multiplatform (Java-Mono-.Net-Flash, and please don't flame on this - they all the same to me), webbased (gmail) or Linux/Unix oriented (shells, cli's of sorts, etc). Linux is great platform for that.
Don't get me wrong here, I'm not saying that Windows is bad, but for the god's sake, why would maximizing Outlook from system tray to a full or opening a "new mail" window takes 15-20 seconds on pretty idle system?

3. I've read an article about OLPC project efforts, and man, I want to work for something like that.
Isn't it great project? I'd quit my current job in an instant if job like that would come up. It's not the money thing, its pure interest and excitement drive - I like challenges and, more important, seeing the result almost immediately of what you did. I already have ideas for what can be done with this kind of laptops, and it doesn't even exist yet!! That alone should show how bored I am at my current job.

Gentoo-related:

1. Userreps are little slow lately because they are busy, but don't let it stop you. If you have anything interesting or important to say, suggest or ask, do it on User Representatives Subforum or drop by #gentoo-userreps channel on FreeNode irc network.
2. Last council meeting logs were published. One thing I noticed, is that Bryan (kloeri) will review Devrel etiquette guide, because the current one has some ambiguities. I did suggest few things for that and it would make me really happy if some of my suggestions would find a way in final document. That would be great.
3. XMMS voes (part 4) - "it ain't over until I say its over"? This subject seem to affect so many people, that many cannot leave it in peace. So, in an effort to help all of those, User Representative kopp (and developers nattfodd, amne, metalgod, nixnut, and if I forgot someone - correct me) has prepared an explanatory article about an issue. Use it to solve your problems and I hope it will be the end of it.
4. "Automatic Tools" department (if I'm starting to resemble John. C. Dvorak here - sorry) - this time its about automatic deletion of an old packages (or rather, their distfiles).
   My stake on this, is that yes, there are unneeded files on you system that take considerable amount of space, and I understand that some people never heard of eclean. But this cannot be the reason to create automatic tools to do so either. As some haven't heard of eclean, what makes one think that people will know about settings in /etc/make.conf for distcleaning? Isn't this the same concept? Besides, you obviously can't delete the files automatically, so you'd default to option in /etc/make.conf, which will not even be set in that file, but in some else, probably in profile/ somewhere. How is that different from eclean? It just means integrating eclean into Portage, not as stand alone package.And if eclean is not good enough, maybe it should be enhanced.

I just don't understand why every time the existing tool doesn't do exactly what one needs, the suggestion for "automatic tools" appear. IMHO, its not always the best way.

Well, thats it for this week. Feedbacks are appreciated (I am usually having them for lunch) and if I missed something (or forgot to mention someone I should've) just let me know and this unfortunate mistake will (supposedly) be corrected.