I was recently reading an article from LXer, entitled ‘Linux alternatives for the iPad – and the future of netbooks, tablets and smartbooks’. The author hypes up Linux on tablet devices, concluding that 2010 is the year of Linux on the tablet, most of which will be Android flavored. He attempts to put down the iPad and the would-be iPad users, saying that ‘Probably most Apple users don’t care [about System-on-Chip design] just as they don’t care about the hardware of their iPhones. The iPad is a closed device that’s supposed to just work and cater to fashion minded people, not to ‘tweakers’ and hackers.’ (In the eyes of a computer geek, this statement is designed as an insult.) The author also refers to the iPad as an iTab, again intended to provoke, rather than inform.
The article makes a number of interesting observations, particularly about hardware manufacturers and suppliers. It also makes mention of a number of upcoming hardware designs and the features they will bring. I’d recommend reading the piece, even if just for the factual knowledge it contains.
I’m afraid however, that I have to disagree with the author. In my opinion, I don’t believe that 2010 is the year of the Linux tablet. As a matter of fact, I don’t think that any Linux device will ever out-iPad the iPad. Linux aficionados have been proclaiming the ‘year of Linux’ on desktops for as far back as I can remember. Every year, every distribution, Linux fans rejoice and proclaim that the end is nigh for Microsoft and Apple domination, and that Linux is going to take over the world. Why? Because they believe that ‘free’ will triumph over commercial.
The author summarizes my perspective exactly (though completely unintended) in a later paragraph, where he says ‘In my opinion, Linux won’t offer this kind of magic. To bring magic like Apple does, Linux and the companies bringing Linux have to act like Apple. That means secrecy, a closed development model, a one-size-fits-all solution and one and only one manufacturer / organization which oversees hardware, software, marketing and the developer community. Not going to happen for free software and Linux!’ If we break down this statement meaningfully, we see that that in order to bring an almost perfect user experience, one needs to have a closed development model, and a single manufacturer designing both the hardware AND software. He continually pushes Android, an flavor of Linux being driven by a company (Google) with a lot of money behind it, and a development structure (management) that is not available in a community driven environment.
The author highlights another perspective I share (again, unintentionally I’m sure), when he states that ‘Android is much more popular, and the magic comes from Google, Google marketing Android at big device manufacturers and the platform being ‘pretty open’. Also, in contrary to my limited view, Google understood the issue about marketing and education. That’s why, in advent of the ballot screen, they ran huge adds outside on busstops, along highways and buildings at least in NL and UK and they even bought their own front page add on free newspapers read by millions of Dutch readers.’ It’s funny how advertising is so important even for something free. He realizes that the idealistic nature of Linux (free) is not merely enough to make people want it. Money (and lots of it) must be spent in order for something to be adopted. Nothing in life is free, and unfortunately, the majority of the Linux community seem to miss that fact.
The author concludes with a short(sighted) paragraph, stating that ‘Android on the tablet will be what Windows was on the desktop. But it will be easier for other Linux to co-exist with Android than with Windows, so for those who like to tinker the feature is pretty bright.’ But I thought that Linux by its very nature was supposed to be open, so that it can coexist easily with everything? Therefore, it shouldn’t be easier to code for Linux rather than Windows. Unfortunately, developers tend to code more for the platforms that make them money (but hey, everything in life should be free right? 
), and the majority of developers will tend to code for the Windows desktop OS. Also, I think it is very short-sighted to conclude that Microsoft will not be targeting the tablet market as well.
This post may come across a little bit harsh toward Linux. However, the fact remains that without proper guidance/direction in the development of a Linux tablet OS, and proper marketing, Linux will never succeed. For this ‘free’ operating system to succeed, money, and lots of it, must be spent. The only problem is that it is not the general Linux community who will pay for it. Rather, it will be (is) big corporations (see Google) who fork out tons of money. It just seems that the Linux community does not get this fact, or, if they do, do not care about freeloading the money to support their dream of a ‘free’ OS.
0 Responses
Stay in touch with the conversation, subscribe to the RSS feed for comments on this post.