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

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

Gentoo week and other stuff

Man, it have been a boring week. Besides a Bugday which took place last Saturday (and still have to check out the results of that), there's almost nothing.

The only thing thing that I've noticed on forums is kinda twofold: one user considered moving from Gentoo to Ubuntu, and wanted convincing to stay, and other wanted to try Gentoo while he's using Ubuntu and wanted points to help him out.

This actually caused me thinking. The question here, of course, is more general, and I would say it like this:

• How does one picks the most appropriate distro for himself/herself and what can we do to make that Gentoo?

Now, this issue is not so simple. While I could understand ones' choice of Linux over Windows or MacOS (and don't start with me on GNU, its semantics for me). But how would one choose a distribution?

On one of the forum threads, someone said "when you choose a distribution, you are choosing the way of thinking, the philosophy and an approach". This is the most accurate characterization I heard about "what I get if I choose {your favorite distro here}?".

So, in a nutshell, one chooses a distro by a most suitable way of doing things on a computer, not according to applications list. I don't care for how long my computer boot, because I have uptime of months, and I reboot it once in a long while. So will it take 20 seconds or a minute, doesn't matter to me.

But if I create a Media Center, I would like it to turn on instantly, and I do turn it off all the time. See, the purpose is an important thing, but the way of doing it is much more important.

Does my mom care what OS her TV runs (or if at all)? Does my dad care for his cell phone OS? Of course not. They want a predefined set of tasks, but these tasks should perform flawlessly.

If I want distribution, with predefined set of tasks, I want them be performed flawlessly. In the end, in screenshots you'll see a standard X with standard window manager with custom theme and icons. How does this provide a mindset of a distro? How would I know whether we're good for each other?

I see many users complain that Gentoo is not Fedora, Ubuntu or Suse. I suppose that after a move to these distros they complain how Fedora, Ubuntu or Suse is not Gentoo. We like to complain.

My friend started his second grad year, started using Red Hat in uni, because thats what they have. According his main complains, its like he's complaining that Linux is not Windows (he doesn't say that directly, he says something like "why don't I have {...} in Linux as I did in Windows. It was so simple!!").

So, why would a person leave Gentoo for other distro or other distro for Gentoo? 2 reasons:

• He/she did something (or, although more rarely, something internal happened in distro structure) which broke his system and he/she either couldn't recover it or it took a lot of effort; and
  
• The perceived mindset of other distro (or Gentoo) seems to be more suitable to this users' mindset at the moment, so user believes that other distro is "better" because it would allow to do things the way he/she can't at the moment with the distro he/she uses.
  

So can we do anything withing Gentoo to help that? Meaning, keeping more existing users and luring more of a new ones?

I believe so. There are many things that can be done, but the main thing I believe would be creating an easy ways around Gentoo. These would include, some but not limited to:

• Easier processes for installing and maintaining. (we're close but it's not perfect)
• Better documentation (either more fun, interactive and comprehensive)
• Better change notification
• Better feedback and support.
• Better accessibility of developers to users and better interaction within community.

I can't say how exactly to do these, I'm trying to figure things each at a time. But as a part of user-user community relations, and part of users-developers relations, all ideas that are out there should be checked (and that's partially what userreps are there for), and in the end I believe we would have the best distro.

The best for out mindset that is.

Feel free to throw more ideas for making it better.