Linux Desktop Application Development Flounders

You know, I have been trying to remain objective on this topic and have debated whether or not it would be constructive to write a post for going on several months now. (Image credit: illustrationsource.com)

Each day I survey the news pan-handling for those 'nuggets' that would indicate someone out there is 'thinking' and actually innovating on the Linux Desktop.  When I sort through the chaff of daily trumpeting of the newest Distro cookie cutter 'me too!' clone, I come up with scant information on new software development for specifically the Linux Desktop market.

Okay, you are grumbling.  You see, being an Advocate doesn't mean I will feed you platitudes and say 'nice things' all the time.  Quite the opposite.  I take a critical eye to what is, or in case of this story, isn't going on with Linux.

I don't get as excited about Linux on the Desktop (LoD).  Where are the killer apps?

Close your eyes and what do you see?  Heh.  Yep.  Nothing.  This is saying something but I am not sure what it means.

Are Developers too busy doing other things in their lives?

Are the global economic conditions putting pressure on LoD software development in general?

Companies with a bankroll and capability to pay Developers to do their work allow them a decent livelihood.  So, consequently companies like Microsoft and Apple have traditionally done well.

Yet, even now, Microsoft just announced a major lay-off of 18,000 employees.

Along with the effects of a recession, which I prefer to call a depression, come the attendant 'side-effects':

Business contraction, job loss, increased unemployment are all symptoms of what is not just regional, but encompassing the global economy as it were.

Thus, if you are one of those committers who volunteers their service in writing Open Source code in your spare time, and you find yourself out of a day job, that will most undoubtedly put a crimp on your ability, willingness to volunteer services when you cannot put dinner on the table.

We see ongoing development continues with Apple, Microsoft, Red Hat Linux and their orbiting software vendors in the commercial arena, but on the community side of Linux, I see few interesting new software applications in the offing.

Does this fit with what you see?  What are your thoughts?  -- Dietrich

Related articles

• Cookie Cutter Distros Don't Cut It
• Emmabuntus: Yet More Recycled Bits?
• Where Will Your Linux Distro Be in Five Years?

Read More

Top 5 Linux Desktops: Where Do You Want to Go Today?

by Dietrich Schmitz

Overview

No one can disagree, the level of choice one can have for coupling a graphical user interface to Linux to achieve the Linux Desktop metaphor has grown and become quite extensive. (Image right: Fedora 20 Desktop Edition)

By comparison, Apple's OSX and Microsoft's Windows legacy x86 7/8 have little choice to offer, by default.

I've been thinking about whether or not having so much choice is a good thing or not.  Certainly everyone understands that 'choice' is a tenet or, if you will, a cornerstone of Open Source and Linux and breeds variety and stimulates creativity.

But to temper one's thoughts, should it come with a level of restraint lest we find ourselves ultimately floundering with 'too much choice'?  That is an important question and distinction.

If one considers the abstraction 'Linux Desktop', one may not necessarily and reflexively fix their mind on a singular idea of what that is.  No, there are quite a few good choices one can make insofar as which GUI to use.  Might there be a 'down side' to having so much choice?

Newcomers to Apple Macs know the GUI will always be what Apple provides -- one and only one GUI.

Newcomers to Microsoft Windows will have the same expectation.

And now, upcoming Google Chromebook provides uniformity of its own.

These three commercial products are designed not to encourage decoupling the gui from the kernel.  The technophile may try to do so, but by and large, consumers in the larger mass market accept without conscious thought the packaging and presentation as found and just use a given product, because 'it works' for them, by design.

That reduces common-denominators dramatically and allows to a large degree a level of standardization to be fostered.

With Linux, the story is different.  For example, the commercial Distros Red Hat and Ubuntu Linux offer one GUI.  That makes sense as far as the aforementioned is concerned, providing consistency across varying hardware platforms, along with meeting user expectation.  If assumptions can be made on how software behaves then cost of operation will also be lowered appreciably.

On the community side of Linux, we have a garden variety of multiple GUIs, package managers, File Hiearchical Standard variations, because with 'choice' comes the ability to depart from what was previously done.

Each Distro brings with it a variation or 'spin', if you will, on what constitutes a 'better mousetrap'.  The design goals can be modest to major departures from previous attempts.  In some cases, one might not be able to distinguish the difference between Distro A and Distro B.

Distrowatch Top Five

Taking a look at the 'Top 5' Distros listed on Distrowatch today (Image left: taken 1/12/2014 by DTS) we see Mint, Debian, Ubuntu, Mageia and Fedora are in the pack.

These 'players' have moved around a bit but for the most part have been dominant insofar as a Distrowatch measurement gives.  It's not scientific by any means, but, over time one can get a feel for where the modalities are.

So, is it safe to assume these are the top 5 players in the Linux Desktop market?  There is room for debate and if you have played 'horseshoes' in your life, you know that 'close' counts.

We are seeing a 'clustering' around these data points happening for a long period of time.  I don't think we'd be out on a limb to say they represent the most popular Distros in terms of traffic detected.

Then making that assumption, what GUIs appear to be used with each of these?  Let's take each one at a time.

Linux Mint

Linux Mint Lead Developer Clem LeFebvre has much to be proud of.  He has shown that a better mousetrap can be built and the level of thought, fit and finish to his several 'spins' are worthy candidates for any newcomer to Linux.  In fact, I'd probably offer them first to a newcomer than Fedora my mainstay Desktop of choice.  Why?  They just work and nothing needs to be tweaked out of the box.  In its current incarnation, Linux Mint 16 "Petra", users have several GUIs from which to choose: KDE, Xfce, Cinnamon, and MATE.

At one revision, I believe 12, Mint offered an LXDE spin.  How I wish they'd bring that back.  But, Xfce works really well as lightweight GUIs go.

Interestingly, Mint doesn't offer a GNOME spin and no Enlightenment either.  Enlightenment just released version 18.  I feel, Enlightenment is not getting the 'respect' that it deserves and the spins which offer it are few and far between.   Bodhi Linux is a good choice if you'd like a good out of the box experience.

Debian

Debian is the staid, pragmatist-favored Distro for reasons of intentional slow development to promote a stable operating environment.  If you want cutting edge technology, it won't be there by default.  The kernel will be at least 12 months old and packages will be likely aged the same.  As for GUIs, and if you want to stay in the present, you'll likely feel like you are living in the past if you opt for Debian's choices.  The website design hasn't changed much for many years, appears spartan, and if I were a new user, I'd be intimidated by it.  It certainly doesn't coddle the user by providing what I call user-friendly 'good guidance'.

It wouldn't cost much to improve its friendliness and that's why I won't ever have a new user first try Debian.  When you are drilled down to picking the isos from a barren directory tree structure, you'll find they offer GNOME, KDE, LXDE and Xfce 'flavored' isos.  Most will fit on a CD with 'overburn' but one or two require a DVD if you opt not to use a larger USB pen drive.

Ubuntu

To be fair, Canonical Ltd. has succeeded in making Ubuntu Linux a true 'user-friendly' experience.  From the moment you arrive on their website to downloading, to installing, you will be coddled and that breeds confidence.  As it should be, Ubuntu is made for commercial use and for the general consumer.  It is designed to fit most users' needs with just one GUI, called Unity.

Unity is the bastard child in the Open Source community, promulgated by Canonical Ltd.  But it has resulted in somewhat of a 'wedge' in upstream development standards.  Namely, despite their vocal support for nurturing and being behind Wayland, the follow-on new Display server standard to replace the aging and 'problematic' X.org, they did a switch of direction by choosing to write Xmir, a variant containing some of Wayland but mostly rewritten by the Canonical developer team.  As such, much contention has arisen around its development and the long story short is that Unity isn't supported by any other Distro.  It's an island.  It's how Canonical does things.  They are in full control of it.  So be it.  The long-term prognosis for Unity is unclear as more and more Distros hop on board with Wayland-driven technologies.  I would personally offer another spin of Ubuntu such as Kubuntu or Xubuntu before I would recommend Ubuntu.  Both will support Wayland going forward.

Mageia

Mageia is a community-based fork of commercial Mandriva Linux.  I cannot give you a statistic for it, but I would tend to believe that Mageia in terms of country of origin dominates in Europe since Mandriva was historically developed by a French concern.

Mageia is in the pack for very good reason and one need only go to their website to see the level of professional work and finish is a 'cut above'.  It's the same level of polish as that of Ubuntu, only they offer a comprehensive list of GUIs that include:

• KDE4 SC 4.10.2,
• GNOME 3.6,
• XFCE 4.10,
• LXDE,
• Razor-Qt,
• E17.

Fedora

Fedora is my Distro of choice.  By default, Fedora 20 Desktop Linux Edition installs GNOME 3.10.x.  In their 'family' of spins one will find GUIs of KDE, Xfce, LXDE, and MATE.



 

Conclusion

It would appear that Fedora is the only Distro that offers their default Desktop with Gnome.  I would add that this is the first experience I have had with Gnome in a long time where I feel that it has reached a plateau of usability in version 3.10.  It's not perfect and there are issues for the more technically inclined who quickly hit limitations, but for a newcomer and 'Joe Six-pack', I feel that Fedora 20 Desktop Edition is more than 'adequate' to get the job done in Gnome 3.10.

Looking at Mint 16 Petra's other 4 Distros, Mint seems to premier KDE and Cinnamon and MATE provide good Gnome alternatives, while Xfce offers Gtk2/3 support going forward and no Gnome dependencies.

Canonical Ltd. continues to chart their own course doing many things that simply depart from common sense.  Unity being what it is, will still give new users ease of use and the work done to keep to a standard and polished commercial product stands out, nonetheless.

I expect to see continuing big things from Mageia.  While they tend to lumber along, they are dealing with a lot of moving parts so necessarily must be pragmatic and plan their changes carefully executing them in good time.  They are worth waiting for whatever they bring to the next major revision level.

Debian are probably not going to change a lot in terms of their software policy management and so while work continues on the next Debian 8, it will be slow coming.  The Distro spins and website could use a major face lift.  Get out of that '90s Yahoo look.  Is Debian a 'speed bump'?  Yep.

Mint stays firmly entrenched in the top 5 slot numero uno and for good reason.  The reputation and expectation is that one can quickly, easily install any flavor of Mint and hit the ground running.  Just use.  Mint doesn't include Gnome but makes up for it with a set of jewel-like Distros, shiney and ready to go to work for you.

That's it for now.  Let me know what you think.  -- Dietrich

Related articles

• What Happened In Desktop Linux In 2013? Not Much
• Linux Mint 16 Improves Cinnamon Desktop
• Choosing the Right Linux Distro for Your Enterprise Servers

Read More

Google's Chrome Packaged Apps (Local) Development Strategy

by Dietrich Schmitz

I've been watching Google's progress for some time.

We've seen most recently related technology improvements made to the Linux Kernel that specifically relate to support for software drivers and hardware on the Google Chromebook.

A few months ago, we saw the newest Pixel Chromebook arrive on the scene with superior display and other performance characteristics -- arguably as good as Apple's Retina MacBook line.

Now another adjustment to Chrome was announced in May for the official development of Google Chrome Packaged Apps.  This page explains packaged apps in further detail and includes a video.

If you watch the video which tries to explain what Packaged Apps are, Google talk euphemistically in terms which won't say we're writing local Apps, but if you read between the lines, that's really what they are doing.  Pay close attention Folks, these won't be half-baked Javscript Apps.  No, they'll be running with Native Client (NaCl) C/C++ compiled executables which are the fastest compiled code one can have driving any application.  Here's a brief text explaining what to expect when running a packaged app:

How they behave 

Packaged app pages always load locally. This allows apps to be less dependent on the network. Once a user installs an app, they have full control over the app's lifecycle. Apps open and close quickly, and the system can shut apps down at any time to improve performance. Users can fully uninstall apps. 

Without any effort on your part, your apps will launch offline. But you will need to put some effort into making sure user data is stored locally while offline and then synced back up to your data server once online (see Offline First).

You see, the Apps will be free-standing and so will run outside of the browser, but still use their fork of WebKit, called Blink, which is at the heart of Chrome.   Blink won't be recognizable after they've finished refactoring and tearing out the parts they don't want--it has been reported they already have removed over 8.8 millions lines of code.

And that's another thing they did which is beginning to make more sense.  They now can modify the WebKit code to their heart's content to satisfy both browser and packaged apps as they see fit without upstream hassles.

So, that leaves us where?

It leaves us with the proposition that Google know there is still a need for good local Desktop software, a la the days of Microsoft Windows past, only they aren't saying it.  Microsoft still have a market for Windows-based legacy x86 software which have always had the performance characteristics and the gold standard applications which so many still rely upon today and Google know they can't capture this traditional buyer's market without local Apps.  Local Apps still rule.

Initially, it seems they released a photography-driven app which comes pre-installed on the Pixel Chromebook.

And rest assured, there will be others to follow.  Applications fuel sales.  It's that simple.

With the recent disclosure of the NSA PRISM surveillance program, that leaves a major stigma attached to doing anything in the Cloud, which can potentially hinder sales of their Cloud-based Chromebook.  How long that stigma stays around remains to be seen, but, Google isn't placing all of their eggs in one basket.

Realistically, Google can go in any direction after whatever market they choose--and they usually do.  They have the know-how, cash, and have shown themselves to be quite capable at software development--innovative in fact, much to Microsoft's disliking and worry.

Can Google pull off writing a decent Office clone packaged App?  If they did, that might really send sales through the roof.  All they have to do is make up their minds to do it and it will happen, which should be one of the major concerns at One Microsoft Way.

So, watch the video above and see if you agree with my thinking.

-- Dietrich

Related articles

• Living with Chromebook: Giving Google's OS a second chance
• The Puzzling Case of Google Chromebook Packaged Apps
• Chromebooks: Best PC for Your Bucks or Overpriced Browser Shells?
• How Google plans to rule the computing world through Chrome

Read More

COLA: No Not a Drink. A Veritable Cage Fight.

by Dietrich Schmitz

On rare occasion, I find going to one of the Google Groups comp.os.linux.advocacy actually informative.  This is about one of those times. (Image credit: mmaweekly.com)

That doesn't happen often.  Most of the time, I simply stay away, but my colleague +Chris Ahlstrom and Linux Advocate mentioned that one of my stories is being talked up there and so I thought I might pay the Google Groups site a visit to see what he meant.

I always prepare myself for the worst when I go there.  You really have to expect that.  Most of the time, the thread begins with an opening exchange, followed by Jack Nicholson-style "you can't handle the truth", then followed directly by Freddie Krueger-style dark hate-filled comments which go around and around and around with no satisfactory conclusion.  Just hate heaped up on hate.

So I thought I would share some of the feedback which has come out on my story Linux Desktop: Little Innovation, Lots of Mediocrity.

An opening thread by Snit, a much-reviled regular COLA visitor, provides his own endorsement for some of the content in my story.  Snit proceeds to make reference to a linked-to Apple video and draws parallels:

"I think this is much of what Apple is getting to with their new commercial here: <http://youtu.be/JsBrI_ftKXw>.     -----     If everyone is busy making everything...how can anyone perfect     anything? We start to confuse convenience with joy, abundance with     choice. Design requires something: focus. The first thing we ask is     what do we want people to feel.     Delight...surprise...love...connection. Then we begin to craft     around that intention. It takes time. There are a thousand no's for     every yes. We perfect. We start over, until everything we touch     enhances every life it touches. Only then do we sign our work:     Designed by Apple in California.     ----- 
I think Apple got the wording a bit wrong to focus so much on just the *feeling*, but that is what many in the tech world miss. You *can* get work done on other systems, of course, but Apple gets that when you focus on productivity, efficiency, and error reduction things feel right. 

Too many in the open source community do confuse abundance with choice... and there is a difference. All too often the Linux distros fail to understand that what you exclude is just as important as what you include. Maybe more. Google gets this with their home page and ChromeOS. Canonical might get this, too... but they are so tied to the open source ecosystem it is hard for them to do this well." 

Not surprisingly, Snit favors Apple, and quite often segues to dropping 'b-o-m-b-s' filled with Apple propaganda as if throwing a grenade into the room and quickly runs off, terrorist-style.

But he appears to be quite the glutton for punishment and often succeeds in having the last word even if his message is completely lost on the other COLA participants.

Another regular with anti-Linux leanings flatfish doesn't hesitate to let his ideas be known and is among the regulars who wind up in a cage fight-style exchange, replies: 

"Until the Linux community rallies behind a single desktop distribution and pools it's resources, it will be forever doomed to niche status. 

Choosing between 500+ versions where 490 of them are crap isn't really choice at all.  

And finally, until the Linux/FOSS community realizes that it's all about applications and not geek speak, tinkering with operating systems and the underlying bits and bytes, the average public is not going to be interested in Linux."

I am kind of beginning to see that there are some kernels of truth found on COLA when you sort through the chaf betwixt and between which are somewhat consistent with what I have put in my story.  Flatfish has zeroed in with one sentence (above in bold) which sums up my sentiment regarding making Linux become ultimately wildly successful--I mean ramping up to mass market scale on both commercial and consumer levels.

Finally, we have Mark Bilk who takes a dim view on my story--that means he is pro-Linux, which is good.  He's another regular in the cage and often comes out with cuts, bruises, contusions, and sometimes rendered unconscious on a stretcher.  Not one for taking any of this lightly, Mark steps into the cage swinging and kicking straight off:

"Schmitz uses "commercial success" as his criterion of success, even though he admits that Linux is given away free, and so is often not counted commercially.  Not to mention the fact that it's only used by people who are aware enough to install a whole new OS on the computer they bought with Windows pre-installed.  So his criterion of relative "success" compared to other OSen is absolute nonsense."

To further demonstrate his kick-boxing prowess, Mark furthers and goes in for the knock-out combination with:

"Linux includes many, many alternative distros and apps, some of which are "ugly and unseemly".  This is one of the most common attacks made upon Linux.  It's like writing an article saying that the world of shoes has some "quite ugly and unseemly" ones, so therefore shoes are no good. 

The obvious answer is: THEN CHOOSE THE GOOD ONES, FOOL!  

If you choose a good Linux distro -- well designed and maintained, with good online assistance, and a good desktop environment, and you choose good apps, of which there are plenty for every type of commonly used function, and lots of uncommon ones, too, then you will have an excellent experience using it!  I recommend OpenSuse Linux with KDE3, but there are plenty of others.  Every Linux app will run on every common Linux distro, occasionally requiring compilation from source, which is extremely easy to do -- you get complete instructions, and if you don't understand them, you can ask in the distro or app IRC channel. 

Anti-Linux propagandists say, "What about the person who never heard of IRC, or doesn't know how to use it?"  And that has a very simple answer, too: THEN ASK SOMEBODY!"

Alright, as you can see, I do bring out the best in everybody and it should be abundantly clear that on COLA, respondents are on it faster than flies on cowchips.  I've carefully selected some of the more sedate comments so as to keep this story PG.

So, what are your thoughts?  Let me know.

-- Dietrich

Related articles

• Linux Desktop: Little Innovation, Lots of Mediocrity
• The Myth of FOSS Community
• Designed by Apple in California
• Apple's New Ad Initiative Introduces "Designed By Apple In California" Campaign

Read More

Google I/O 2013: Voice Search on the Desktop Using Google

by Dietrich Schmitz

Alright, Apple may have a head-start with their iPhone Siri voice search system, but one of the neat things shown at the Google I/O 2013 conference last week is the new Conversational Search, which is now available in Chrome version 27 which was updated today.

If you've got that version of Google Chrome, you'll notice in the Google.com search field to right-most extent a 'Microphone' symbol.  Clicking that symbol will activate voice search.  I tried it by saying: "Open the pod bay doors HAL", hoping desperately to hear HAL come back with "I'm sorry Dave, I am afraid I can't do that".

But no....it dutifully complied by performing a Google search using that exact string of text and found the movie 2001 Space Odyssey at imdb.com.  I am disappointed. (kidding):

Me, using Google trying to ask HAL to open the frickin' pod bay door.

Clearly, it's not a perfect science, and given HAL recognized voice quite a few years ago, I would suspect that there is some serious intellectual property infringed patents at issue here.  Time to get the PAEs (cough trolls) on the horn, perhaps?  Put me through to Dewey Cheatum and Howe right now.

Anyhow, if you really want to see how voice recognition works correctly, here's a short Youtube video from the 2001 Space Odyssey showing Dave's mastery of voice activated search:

Alright so I kid.  But I couldn't help but think about this movie as I uttered my search in Google wondering if we are getting closer to doing what the fantasy of movie making did in spurring the imagination with wild and fanciful story telling mixed with surreal technology non-existent at the time of making this classic (1968).  Pretty wild stuff then and I would add still pretty wild that I sit here, one with something called a Netbook, using something called wireless, magically connecting me to something called a router and cable modem and something even more bizarre called the Internet.  Is this a dream?  I hope not.  It's a movie and it's getting better and better with each technology du jour announcement.

Okay enough of my carrying on, here's a video from the Google I/O conference demonstrating the use of this new Chrome technology for your viewing pleasure:

So, that's it, the hotkey ("Okay Google") didn't work for me.  I suspect that will be worked out in due course.  As is demonstrated, this technology appears to be on par with Siri.  As I mentioned above, Voice Search is available as of today in Chrome 27 for Windows, Linux and Macs and is also available in all Chromebooks.  Have fun.

-- Dietrich

Related articles

• Google's cool new conversational search quietly hits Chrome
• Google Adds Conversational Search to Chrome
• Google's latest voice search features now available in Chrome

Read More

Fighting the Patents Industry Which Focuses on Software

by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Shield of transparency

Patents are the Nemesis of Free (as in freedom) software. But who is it that's really behind patents? There is the systemic component (institutional) and the corporate component. The latter, which relies on the former, is also the one which lobbies the former. One might say that, in the United States in particular, large corporations such as IBM and Microsoft reinforce the patent system for the sake of protectionism^*. Rackspace, a smaller company, says the patent system is "legally sanctioned extortion", so we know that the USPTO is serving neither small nor medium-sized companies. One can identify the system as benefiting lawyers, patent trolls, and large corporation which can afford to use the other two groups (trolls are sometimes used as a litigation proxy by larger entities to whom this investment and risk are worthwhile).

I advocate aiming for change in the system, not those who exploit the system. The problem is, those who write the law which makes the system (through lobbyists) are the same entities which exploit it. It is a problem of political entryism -- one that we find in the copyright world as well. Monsanto too made it infamous. The bottom line is, based on my experience battling software patents for nearly a decade, you should always fight at both levels. If you assume that the patent office is controlled by corporations -- which is correct -- then battle that office while also battling its enablers and those whose extortion it enables.

What makes me worried is that patent lawyers have taken over much of the public debate while developers remain apathetic or passive. There is a sense of defeatism. The ills of a system which facilitates government-granted monopolies on abstract ideas which are reducible to mathematics are not to be underestimated. Customers -- not just developers (irrespective of how they develop software) -- should be up in arms over it, but they are not. Well, to be fair, some of them became active after Apple had won the billion-dollar case against Samsung -- a case which has been rotting since then, due to jury/foreman misconduct and crucial patents that get invalidated upon re-examination, proving incompetence at the USPTO.

Unless we fight against software patents, the many patent lawyers who are vocal about it will have the stage dominated by their views. It's not too late to beat software patents in the US, preventing them from spreading further.

___
^* IBM and Microsoft also lobby at the EPO (EU) and IPONZ (New Zealand) as multinationals whose interests they believe supersede those of the locals. The EPO and IPONZ enjoy profit from glorification of patents, as seen today right here.

-- Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Related articles

• On Deaf Ears
• Software Patents: Incompatible With and Antithetical to GNU/Linux
• Those Who Push for Patent Reform and Those Who Protect Protectionism
• USPTO Worse Than Before With First-to-File System, Microsoft's Patent List Meaningless
• The Patent Protection Racket

Read More

War is Peace, Diversity is Fragmentation, Versatile is Difficult

by Dr. Roy Schestowitz



Companies that are crazy about control wish to own everything from software down to hardware. Apple could not tolerate BSD code without closing it and Microsoft just couldn't stand the idea of companies creating their own Windows shells -- a subject of antitrust litigation almost two decades ago.

Linux, as a kernel with a lot of development activity, has become the Swiss army knife for many who wish to rapidly create operating systems. Android is probably the most ubiquitous among those, depending on the assessed criteria. GNU is the Swiss army knife further up in the software stack and Apache is extremely popular in page-serving devices. All of those are Free/Open Source software (FOSS).

The flexibility of this software is hard to compete with. Corporations and/or large communities surround those projects. Due to the old tricks of newspeak, propaganda, spin and FUD we have become accustomed to hearing words like 'fragmentation' wherever FOSS goes. Recently, a lot of this has been said about Android. The other day a notable Linux advocate, SJVN, addressed the Android "fragmentation" FUD by writing a tongue-in-cheek report about Windows:

The transition from XP to Vista, to Windows 7 and most recently, both iterations of the newest version of Windows, 8 and RT, as well as all patch iterations and dot versions in between, has left a scattered landscape of PCs in various states of OS upgrade version malaise. (Cough) This has created problems for Windows developers when coding applications, and when they test against different versions of the OS and different target devices. (Oh my!) The introduction of multiple versions of PCs, as well as Windows virtual machines and emulators running in Mac OS X and Linux, has further complicated this situation by creating additional "forks" of Windows, which have their own unique application issues that developers need to address. (The horror! The horror!)

This puts in perspective one aspect of the FUD's shortcomings. Because Windows also supports nearly as much hardware as Linux does, the 'fragmentation' may relate to hardware too. Let's face it. A power which is diversity -- something that Apple actively discourages -- should not be portrayed as a weakness. Linux and GNU are very compatible with UNIX owing to POSIX. GTK applications are quite compatible with applications that use Qt, and vice versa (narrowed down to two options just for the sake of concision). This took a while to achieve, but we are there now. Diversity is secured in the compatibility/standards sense, owing in part to compartmentalisation. People who chastise GNU/Linux over 'fragmentation' are either dishonest or have not kept up with GNU/Linux for nearly a decade. To say that GNU/Linux is 'hard' because it facilitates advanced features is also to overlook the progress made in the past half a decade in KDE and GNOME. But that's a subject for another day...

- Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Related articles

• Why Advocacy of Linux Must Not Tolerate Censorship
• GNU and Linux: It's Not Just About Attribution But Also Philosophy
• Linux in the Real World - A View from the Trenches
• Software Patents: Incompatible With and Antithetical to GNU/Linux

Read More

The PC is Here to Stay

by Dietrich Schmitz

Oh the proclamations continue to amplify and the pontificators pontificate taking information repeating it, sometimes distorting it along the way and it takes on a life all its own.

Lets examine the Post-PC era.  Would that suggest that at some point there will cease to exist a demand for Desktop PCs?  Will the PC go the way of the VHS Video Player, LP records and Cassette Players for example? If so, I refuse to believe it.  And I don't care if Steve Jobs (rest in peace) predicted it.

The fact is, nothing is constant.  Everything is in a state of eternal change.  You see, every business has its ups and downs.  Every economy too undergoes fluctuations and new events and technologies lead to growth spurts resulting in stronger demand for production.  The key here is that it is cyclical in nature.

Reading in an October 30, 2012 report for example from readwrite.com:

If this is the dawn of the “post-PC era,” then the economy never got the memo. While the tablet segment is finally growing (thank you, Apple), the five-times-larger PC segment is actually growing faster in terms of units, and will continue to do so for the foreseeable future....

...Industry analysis firm IDC predicts worldwide growth in tablet shipments from 2013 to 2016 to be about 32 million units per year. In the same period, the rate of PC shipment growth will be about 38 million units per year.

As if in a display of multiple-personality disorder, IDC recants its previous position according to this InformationWeek report on March 5, 2013:

The global PC market will shrink for the second consecutive year, IDC said on Monday. The research firm had previously predicted that PCs would achieve modest growth in 2013, but reversed its forecast due to slowing momentum in emerging markets, limited growth potential in mature segments and consumer indifference to new and expensive hardware.

Yet, reading just a paragraph further in the very same story reveals:

In the meantime, the firm's analysts expect PC shipments to decline by 1.3% over the rest of this year, dropping from 2012's 350.4 million, which itself was a 3.7% setback, to 345.8 million. IDC anticipates that desktops will suffer the biggest slowdown with not only a 4.2% downtick this year but also continued, albeit slower, declines through at least 2017. The outlook is somewhat rosier for portable PCs; IDC projects shipments for these products will increase almost 1% in 2013, and that emerging markets will push this segment to 241 million units by 2017, a 19.3% increase from 2012.

So, you see, this business of sales forecasting, predicting the future if you will, is rather tricky and, often, analysts just get it wrong, correct themselves, and then go further by hedging in the opposite direction.  This IDC analyst predicts PC sales will remain strong in 2013 (a bit negative year over year), but, years going forward through 2017, portable PC sales will see positive growth by as much as 19%

What can be believed?  As for myself, I don't see tablets replacing Desktop systems in the Enterprise or SMBs.  They simply can't perform production tasks as well and IT Managers aren't going to risk a wholesale shift to tablets regardless of how much the media might say the PC is dead.

You can be sure that Lenovo, HP, Dell will continue to build PCs for a long long time.

Make peace with that.  The PC is here to stay.

Oh.  By the way, I just checked my Driver's License and, can confirm, I wasn't born yesterday. ;)


-- Dietrich

Related articles

• 'Post-PC era' is misleading, expert says
• Desktops still fit in post-PC era
• Consequences of the Post-PC Era
• If Steve Jobs was right and this is a post-PC era, why did Google release the Chromebook?

Read More