PCLinuxOS Minime 2009

For the last few months my Thinkpad has been, and still is, the host of several wonderful Linux distributions, all of them based on the new KDE 4 desktop environment. So, today, in mid summer 2009, is there still a reason to run a KDE 3 desktop? Well, if it wasn’t for PCLinuxOS I would have to say no. But this little distro can really hold its own against any of the large commercially supported distributions around. I am going to divide this review in three parts, “The Good”, “The Bad”, and “The Ugly”.

The Good

PCLinuxOS has some very unique features that make it a standout among Linux distributions. Perhaps the most important reason that keeps me coming back to PCLinuxOS is the fact that, once installed, you just have to keep applying updates and it stays current for years. For example, I installed PCLinuxOS on my home machine in early 2007 and down to today I have not had to reinstall it again. Today it has the latest and greatest software that is available on the recently released 2009 batch.

While we are on the subject of updates, I think it is important to mention that PClinuxOS now has a new “Update Notifier” that helps for remembering to stay up to date.

PCLinuxOS Updates Notifier

When one clicks on the Update Notifier icon on the tool bar, a small window appears with options for updating the system.

Update Notifier Options

I particularly like that, when updates are available, it offers the option of using aptget for installing them. When selecting this option, aptget opens in a terminal, prompts for the root password, and shows you all the available options for you to accept. This is very fast, and yet it shows all the details of what is being done. If you want to read a little more about why I like PCLinuxOS in general, take a look at my review of PCLinuxOS 2008.

But what about Minime 2009.1 specifically? Minime is a very streamed down variant of PCLinuxOS. It is meant for those that are familiar with Linux and want a bare bones installation of Linux to build up from. That is why the ISO image is only about 300 Megabytes. If what you prefer is to have all the basic applications already on the default installation don’t use the Minime. Download the 2009.2 ISO image instead. Having said that, bringing Minime up to snuff with all that you may need or like is really not that hard and you end up with a very slick, very slim system. That is why I chose to use it myself and so far everything, and I mean everything, has performed superbly on this laptop.

The bad

Some unsuspecting users may be horrified about just how bare bones Minime is. I mean, out of the box, not even wireless works. But, really, that is exactly the point of Minime. You add what you need to the working base. Let me tell you what I did to bring my installation to where I like it. First of all, to get wireless working you will need to install the proper firmware for your wireless card. That is right, you will need to have a wired connection to start with. In my case, it was simply a matter of plugging in the network cable, opening Synaptic, and installing the ipw3945-ucode package (since my laptop has the Intel PRO/Wireless 3945 card). After that wireless has worked perfectly.

From there it is just a matter of installing whatever applications you desire. I personally installed Firefox, The Gimp, Amarok, wine, Kuickshow, etc., without any trouble. On the desktop there is a folder called Utilities. In it there is a special script available for installing OpenOffice with your desired language pack, although you can install the English version from Synaptic if you prefer. For further recommendations see the “General and ThinkPad T61 Specific Recommendations” section of my 2008 review. I can’t think of anything else that would be a stumper, except for the fact that it doesn’t seem to have support for the ext4 file system. You see, it is not really that bad after all.

The Ugly

There had to be a negative. I guess it is a matter of taste, but I personally do not like the icon set that comes installed by default.

Default Icon Set

What I don’t like about it is that the default icon used for folders does not have any contrast and looks washed out. For example, look at the “Downloads” folder on the picture above. So, to fix that I went to Synaptic and installed the kde-icons-crystaldiamonds package. I also installed the Liberation fonts while I was at it. To apply them I went to the KDE Control Center -> Appearance -> Icons and chose the Crystal Diamonds theme. Under fonts I changed all the fonts for the Liberation Sans. And that was it.

CrystalDiamond Icon Set

Now I have a beautiful, very fast, very mature and stable Linux installation to enjoy and do my work. The result is so nice that I am debating on whether I will want to install the KDE 4 packages that are supposed to be arriving to the repository soon. I will have to think about that. In the mean time, PCLinuxOS Minime is working great and looking very nice on my machine, and it most likely can do the same on yours. Why not give it a try?

I wrote a blog entry recently in which I expressed my displeasure with the situation around the use of Mono for FOSS development. Since then an interesting and unexpected development has occurred. Microsoft has promised, irrevocably, to not sue anyone using or creating a fully compliant implementation of C# as defined through ECMA.

http://port25.technet.com/archive/2009/07/06/the-ecma-c-and-cli-standards.aspx

I am glad to see that some of the questions about Mono have been settled. What other questions remain? Well, it will be interesting to see what happens in the future, when newer versions of C# come out of Microsoft. How will those be licensed? Will they be standardized as well? Under what terms? Will it matter for Mono developers? Will Microsoft become litigant against the other, non ECMA derived, parts of Mono? And, more immediately, what is meant by “only if the implementation conforms fully to required portions of the specification”? Those are some of the questions that I still have.

What about GPL compatibility? It seems that a lot of it has been settled. I don’t see a conflict any more. Of course, if a developer chooses to deviate from the ECMA specification he is free to do so, as per the Mono license, and he would have to fend for himself against Microsoft, or any other patent holder in the world. But, that is the same thing that could happen if I chose to write a program in C++ that infringed someone’s patent. It just so happens that any deviation from the standard immediately makes you liable. But at least a legally safe implementation is possible. And who knows, maybe the patent landscape will improve in the future allowing for non ECMA compliant implementations without the risk of a lawsuit.

Will this be enough to make me want to develop in Mono? No, not me, not yet. I prefer to use languages that have no questions surrounding them. I also still think that Mono should not be used for important infrastructure parts of FOSS projects like KDE or GNOME because of the long term questions that remain. But, I can see that some may want to avail themselves of Mono’s C# for writing some applications. I now feel that, as long as they are well informed of what the possible gotchas are, I can respect their choice. And I don’t mind if a Linux distribution chooses to include them as part of their default release. It is their free choice.

Congratulations Mono developers!

Linux users have been aware for some time that Microsoft does not share their love for their favorite operating system, Linux. Microsoft has spent a lot of time, energy, and resources trying to marginalize Linux and the slew of FOSS software than has sprung up around it. The European Committee for Interoperable Systems provided us with a good summary of this in a recent report.

In spite of all that, Linux has continued to grow and improve at an impressive rate. And that is precisely what seems to have Microsoft worried. As Steve Ballmer himself has acknowledged, “Linux is not about free software, it is about community… It’s not like Novell, it isn’t going to run out of money–it started off bankrupt, in a way.”

In contrast with Microsoft’s previous competitors which depended on the success of a product, FOSS is primarily a social movement, a movement which springs forth a variety of products. And those products end up having a negative effect on Microsoft’s returns.

It is clear that the more people are interested and able to improve and maintain the FOSS pool, the more Microsoft will find it hard to continue having success in the market. In other words, the only hope for Microsoft to contain Linux is to remove the desire for people to continue contributing to it. If you were Microsoft how would you attempt to accomplish that? Obviously, you would first have to identify the reasons why people contribute to FOSS. Then you would have to find ways to remove or dilute those incentives.

Of course, that is easier said than done. There are a lot of reasons why people like to contribute to Linux. So, I don’t think Microsoft can realistically hope to completely eradicate Linux or FOSS. But, maybe, just maybe, it could discourage the right type of contributors, the ones that contribute to its infrastructure and its foundation parts. Or. if that doesn’t work, maybe it could remove the incentive for a large enough number of top layer contributors, the ones that provide interfaces and user visible features. Microsoft would hope that this would slow down Linux enough for it to be able to outrun it in terms of features and quality.

So what is it that motivates the contributors to the foundation layers of Linux. Well, primarily these are the type of people that grew Linux from its “bankrupt” origins. These people are idealists or visionaries. They thrive in overcoming practical considerations. Their happiness comes from the realization of their ideals more than from any financial rewards. These are the hardest people to discourage. They tend to have a long range view of things and are willing to sacrifice present advantages in order to secure future success. They become more dangerous when attacked since this has the tendency of galvanizing them and increasing their focus and determination. Probably the best results in containing these type of people are achieved by disrupting their unity from within. So, it would not be surprising to see Microsoft attempting to introduce “moles” and bought out defectors into the Linux camp.

The other mayor group of FOSS contributors are the ones attracted by the practical advantages of Linux. Within this group are those interested in Linux because it gives them an advantage in the market. This group likes to create products or features that are very visible to the user and that produce returns either directly or indirectly. They are willing to risk long term success when the chances for short term success is high. These group of people can become impatient with the former group when their caution appears to put obstacles in their quest for immediate results. This is the group that started to congregate around Linux in the late nineties. It certainly accelerated the utility and uptake of Linux. These people tend to view themselves as pragmatic and practical. To undermine this group a couple of strategies can be used. One of them would be to divert their interest from FOSS technologies to others that promise greater “efficiency”. The second would be to negate or dilute the returns that could be achieved through the use of FOSS.

When both of these groups are able to work together unhindered the results are amazing and explosive. However, it is not uncommon to see conflicts between these camps. I think a very visible conflict that has created a lot of discussion lately is the mono controversy. A mono proponent expressed his view this way:

“It is the ‘best technology’ Linux camp that is a threat to Microsoft, and Microsoft is surely pleased when the two camps argue. If the ‘free software’ camp can hold back Mono, that is a loss for the ‘best technology’ camp, and a win for Microsoft.”

I think it is interesting that he thinks that it is the “best technology Linux camp” that is the camp that offers the greatest threat to Microsoft. I can understand why some may think that this is true since this camp is creating flashy and very useful products and features that increase the appeal of Linux. However, mono is not the only tool that the “‘best technology’ Linux camp” has at its disposal. Many view the use of the Qt toolkit as a better alternative, and one that does not have the risk associated with mono. Furthermore, I do not agree with the thought that “‘best technology’ Linux camp” is the one that Microsoft feels most threatened by. I think Microsoft is only threatened by the combination of both camps.

I view mono as a distraction for FOSS developers. Yes, there are some practical advantages in its use, but there are a lot of questions surrounding it. It has the potential of dividing the two mayor camps of Linux contributors. It will be interesting to see what comes out of this controversy.

Since the introduction of the Palm Pilot, in the mid 90’s, people have been enjoying the ability of having instant access to one’s data almost any where and at any time. Personal Digital Assistants (PDAs) have also saved many of us afflicted with bad memories from getting in trouble by reminding us of one important event or another. However, their use has not always been devoid of headaches. While PDA users are notorious for the love they have for their little devices, they have always wished for one improvement or another. Nevertheless, when I bought my Palm T|X I thought I was going to be all set. It seemed to have all I really needed and more. It had a very nice screen with great resolution. It was much faster than any of my previous devices and could handle music and video with no problem. It was compatible with my collection of Palm programs that I had accumulated over the years. It even had wi-fi connectivity to check Google Maps and browse the Internet at any hot spot for free. What more could I want? Well, how about durability?

My Palm T|X began showing problems after about 7 or 8 months of use. It seemed that some areas of the screen were becoming desensitized. I had not purchased an extended warranty since I am usually very careful with my things and it would have added a lot to the cost of the device. Unfortunately, the problem kept getting worse and worse, until it finally became completely unusable. The cost for repairing it (I can’t remember exactly what it was right now) seemed ridiculously high. It was obvious that they had set it so high to discourage people from availing themselves of it and to steer them instead towards simply buying a new replacement. To say that I was very disappointed at the quality of Palm’s craftsmanship is an understatement. At the time the iPhone had not yet been released, and my only alternative would have been to buy a device with Windows CE on it. I really was not interested in buying a smart phone that would require an expensive data plan. So, very reluctantly, I decided to give Palm one more chance and I bought my second Palm T|X, my last one. Unfortunately, after about 8 or 9 months, the screen began to give me trouble again. I purchased a program called PowerDiGi which alleviated some of the screen problems, temporarily. But, eventually the device also became unusable. What to do?

I guess that what I would love to have is a small portable device, that wouldn’t require waiting for it to boot, that gave me access to my data without requiring a cellular data plan, and that was able to give me audible reminders.

Well, for the moment, I went back to a paper based agenda. It has some advantages, such as an unbeatable resolution, even under bright direct sunlight. It doesn’t need to be recharged and never runs out of power. And, it is very reliable. However, some of its disadvantages are that it tends to get full rather quickly. There is no efficient way of transferring its data when upgrading to a newer model. And, it completely lacks one of the most important features of a PDA (at least for me), audible reminders.

So, I think I do want go back to some form of PDA. But what is there available to me? Paying $300+ a year to Palm, with plenty of aggravations, for the luxury of having a PDA seems a bit high to me. I do have a cell phone (through AT&T), but paying another $40 a month (on top of my current cell phone charges) to have a smart phone does not feel very smart in my case. Nevertheless, I am tempted. I am especially tempted by the Android OS. First of all, it runs Linux! Secondly, I am a heavy user of Google Apps. I migrated our office to Google Apps Premier Edition and have to offer support for it. So I am rather knowledgeable on its use and its features. Having access to my Google Apps any time any where is certainly luring. No more having to transfer my data from one device to another. The data all resides in one place, securely. But, that would mean changing carrier and, again, adding a data plan. Is the privilege of getting reminders and not having to transfer my data manually really worth the cost of the data plan? I am not sure yet.

I guess that what I would love to have is a small portable device, that wouldn’t require waiting for it to boot, that gave me access to my data without requiring a cellular data plan, and that was able to give me audible reminders. Does such a thing exist outside of Palm and Windows CE? Well, there are rumors of an interesting device from Nokia called N900, but I am not sure about its features yet. It does seem to be a Linux device, which for me is a big plus, and since it is made by Nokia, it is probably programmable with the Qt toolkit which I am familiar with from KDE. If the Trolltech guys are behind this device and are able to turn it into a fully open platform, I may be swayed into going with it instead of going with Android. I do enjoy coding in Qt more than in Java. Yes, it does seem to be described as an “Internet Tablet” which would likely mean that a data plan is required to take advantage of all its features, but would it be usable without a data plan? Would it be able to provide audible reminders for me? I need more details before deciding.

The iPhone store is not my thing. Yes, I am tight fisted with my money. Hey, we are in the middle of an economic recession, and not just any recession. They are calling this one, “The great recession”. The only thing I know for sure is that I will not be getting a Windows CE device (since I do not want to contribute to the monopoly that is trying to destroy my favorite OS), and that I will not be getting a Palm device. Even though the PalmPre is a Linux device, I am through with Palm and its shoddy craftsmanship.

Are you a Palm T|X user? What are your plans for a replacement?

The vast majority of Windows users in the world have never experienced the advantages that a multiple desktop computer environment provides.  That is because most people use Microsoft Windows and that operating system only comes with a single desktop environment*.  Users of the Linux operating system have been enjoying multiple desktop capabilities for many years already, and they are about to experience the next step of the multiple desktop paradigm evolution.  So why are multiple desktops useful and how much do they really help?

Single desktop deficiencies

First of all, lets discuss the problems that having only one desktop creates.  Most people I know of like to place items on the desktop.  They do that because they hope to be able to find them quickly next time they need them.  The idea is to have them readily available rather than having to dig down searching for them.  Ironically that is what they end up having to do, in a way.  That is because just about every user likes to have two or more applications open at a time. And, more likely than not, those applications will be in the way when trying to reach for those “handy” desktop items.

Usability experts are well aware of that problem and that is why you hear them discouraging the use of desktop items.  Microsoft has been trying for years to wean off its users from placing things on the desktop, but no matter how much they try, users continue to fall for the temptation of placing things on the desktop.  Whose fault is it?

But, the difficulty of accessing items on the desktop is just part of the problem that comes with a single desktop interface.  Since modern computers excel at multitasking most users enjoy being able to do more than one thing at a time.  Unfortunately, the Windows interface does not scale well for multitasking.  For example, lets say that one has just returned from a vacation and now finds some time to do some photo processing.  This task will usually involve a file manager, and one or two image management applications.  So far so good.  We can manage to work with that in just one desktop.  However, if you like taking pictures as much as I do, and if you are as much of a perfectionist as I am about the final quality of your photos, that task is likely to be a several hours long task.

Lets think about that for a moment.  Can anyone really hold their undivided attention to a single task for several hours on a Saturday afternoon?  Should any one even try to?  In practice, I find it very hard to work on a single task for a long period of time.  I get bored, uninterested, and unproductive.  Switching between tasks allows me to keep my interest and intensity up.  And I am quite sure that I am not alone in this.  There have been many studies that find that one cannot efficiently maintain attention spans longer than 10 or 15 minutes.  That is why it is recommend that teachers switch to a different teaching method every so often to keep the minds of their students engaged. I find the same applies to my type of work most of the time.

So getting back to our photo processing task, what other tasks are we likely to want to do in parallel with it?  I don’t know about you, but I am rarely at the computer without running Firefox.  I am also very likely to have a Word processor and an email client open, at least!  That means that to switch between tasks in Microsoft Windows I am going to have to minimize and maximize applications often.  And if I try to reach out for something on the desktop, restoring the sometimes multiple windows that belong to each task can start to get quite laborious.  But why does it have to be that way?  Having multiple desktops solves all of these problems.

Desktop shortcuts are a great way to start populating a desktop with the applications needed for the task it is going to be handling.

Multiple desktops advantages

I have to admit that, in spite of the fact that I had used Linux for many years, I was still mostly a one desktop user.  What finally made me realize that I could work more efficiently by using multiple desktops was Compiz. With it, it was easy to see visually what was going on in each of the desktops and made me realize that I could separate my tasks between them.  With KDE 4 one does not need to use Compiz to get the same 3D functionality.  See this for example.

While those effects are fun and were instrumental in helping me understand the multiple desktop potential, I find that I don’t need 3D effects any more.  I have developed a “standard” methodology for my work.  I like to use between 4 and 6 desktops at a time, depending on if I am at work or at home.  This allows me to have all the windows related to each task on their own desktop.  Usually, the first desktop is reserved for Google Apps running on Firefox.  Desktop 2 is file management.  Desktop 3 is general web browsing.  Desktop 4 is word processing, etc.  These guidelines are not very rigid, but I tend to stick to them.  It took me a while to unlearn the minimize and restore habits, but now I find that my workspace is much better organized and clean, and this makes it easier for me to work.  There may be a bit of a learning curve, but it is not steep and it is very worth wile.  Once you get used to the multiple desktops you will never want to go back.

Just last night, I was copying some very large files to an external hard drive on one desktop, backing up a DVD on another, browsing on another, and working on some spreadsheets and schedules on another. Of course, one can minimize and restore windows to do this too, but it is so much easier to switch desktops with a single click to see how the task is doing on another desktop (with multiple windows open), and then switch right back with another single click to the one that I am presently trying to give most of my attention.  And, when I want to reach for an item on the desktop all I have to do is switch to a new desktop and click on it.  No need to waste all that precious and handy space.  Desktop shortcuts are a great way to start populating a desktop with the applications needed for the task it is going to be handling.

Desktop activities

And that takes us to what is clearly the next step in the evolution of the multiple desktop paradigm, the ability of being able to preconfigure multiple “activities”.  The idea is that, instead of having a desktop populated with everything you could possibly need for any ‘activity’, one can have several types of desktops, each one populated with what one would need for a particular activity.  For example, one could have a desktop populated for general work, one for graphics work, another for research, another for development, another for gaming, one with nothing but your beautiful desktop, etc.  That way, if you are working on something and decide to start working on something else, all you have to do is start a new desktop and switch the activity.  With two click of the mouse you are ready to go.  Let me show you how it works.

Conclusion

So, are you convinced yet?  If you are not, it is probably my fault.  Do give working with multiple desktops a chance.  Avoid the minimize button like the plague.  Maybe then you will come to agree with me in thinking that single desktop interfaces are so last century it is not even funny.

*I am aware of several third party utilities that attempt to provide
multiple desktop functionality to Windows.  Unfortunately, neither of
those utilities provides a smooth experience.  They all fail due to
various bugs and/or heavy resource utilization.  What is needed is for
Windows to provide native multiple desktops.

According to some estimates, about 70% of those using the Internet are doing so with Internet Explorer.  Those of us that work with computers a lot know that there are better alternatives, but it seems that a lot of people just use what comes with their computer and rarely stray to far from it.  There is currently a very bad security problem in Internet Explorer that is actively being exploited by the bad guys and that threatens to make the Internet even more infested with compromised machines that the bad guys can then use for their nefarious purposes.  See here for example:

http://www.informationweek.com/news/internet/security/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=212400523

7/8/2009 update:
Here is a more recent vulnerability:
http://secunia.com/advisories/35683/

With that in mind, I thought that this may be a good opportunity to help our friends and family members that are Internet Explorer users try out some of the alternatives.  For example, what do you think about sending an email like the following to all (or most) of those in your email’s contacts list:

I don’t normally send mail to a distribution list, but this time I am making an exception.  Since I work with computers so much, I keep abreast of what goes on in the computer field.  From time to time I become aware of security problems that affect most people.  When this happens I just say to myself that people using the internet should be smart enough to keep their computers up to date and to have virus scanner software installed.  This time it is different however.  I have become aware of a security vulnerability in Internet Explorer (the web browser that comes with Windows) that is, for the moment and for the most part, impossible for people to defend against.  Microsoft recommends taking some steps to protect oneself, but those steps are hard to implement for most people and in the end they leave Internet Explorer mostly unusable any way.  The only practical protection is to use a different web browser.

http://news.cnet.com/8301-1009_3-10122203-83.html

http://www.informationweek.com/news/internet/security/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=212400523

Personally, I have been using the Firefox web browser for years and I am very pleased with it.  Other options are the Opera browser and Safari.  Firefox is my favorite due to the fact that it is an “Open Source” browser. That means that it is a product made in the open, mostly by volunteers, that has nothing to hide, including bugs.  This type of software has proven to be much more secure than older style software since thousands of people are able to look for bugs or security problems and quickly offer patches to fix them.

You can download any one of those browsers for free from the following links:

http://www.mozilla.com/firefox/

http://www.opera.com/download/

http://www.apple.com/safari/download/

http://www.google.com/chrome/

Take care.

So, what do you think?  Are you game?

My Fedora KDE Desktop

My experience with Fedora has not been bad at all. I think a big reason for that is that my Thinkpad T61 laptop has practically no need for proprietary drivers. The Intel graphics card open source driver has gotten quite good and provides painless and efficient compositing out of the box. In fact, every piece of hardware, including sound, works out of the box. So, that leaves me free to compare distros by their features and ease of use. So what have I found in using Fedora 10 KDE version?

The good:

• Beautiful KDE 4.1 and artwork.
• Fast boot up – With auto-sign on enabled, it takes less than a minute from boot start until the last tray icon loads! (For comparison, on the same machine, PCLOS takes 1 minute 15 seconds.Yes it loads a few more things, like the compiz icon and the OOo icon, but still, the desktop is not even shown after 1 minute wile Fedora shows me the desktop after just 45 seconds.)
• Up to date repository – Firefox 3.0.4, OOo 3.0, Django 1.0-1., Gimp 2.6.2, etc. (I only wish it came with Python 2.6 )
• Adequate package manager. KPackagekit has had no trouble resolving dependencies so far and it is quite fast.
• Because packages are presented in a more granular way, instead of as single large packages, some nifty extra packages are discoverable, such as the Ufraw plugin for Cinepaint and the one that provides extra PDF functionality for OOo.
• Good wireless networking – connects very reliably and fast.
• Good Print Configuration tool (it really is quite intuitive, but it took me for spin at first because I didn’t think that connecting to a printer on a remote CUPS server would involve creating a new printer object on the local machine).
• I love the new KDE4 Gwenview image viewer.
• Comes with a slick translucent Folder view widget ready to be populated by dragging and dropping from the application launcher or any way you like.
• I was able to create an icon to launch konqueror as root (other applications launch as root from there if needed) [/usr/libexec/kde4/kdesu konqueror].
• So far no crashes or hangups.

The not so good:

• It is not obvious how to get some things working, like flash, DVD playback, etc. One has to know what to look for and be proficient at Googling.
• There does not seem to be a way to make “File Management” the default profile when launching konqueror.
• It does not have OOo or Firefox installed by default.
• Dolphin will not load as root using the above method.
• KPackagekit sometimes sits there for a little while with no feedback for the user to know that it is doing something.
• Installing applications like OOo involve selecting several packages instead of just one (while the granular approach has advantages, there should still be the option of just selecting one all encompassing package with sane defaults).
• Amarok does not yet have a graphic equalizer.

• It asks for the keyring password before connecting to wifi every time you boot.

Of course, both of those lists will probably grow as I use the distro more. But, using it exclusively for about 4 days now that is what I have found. Overall, I am finding it a pleasure to work with.

Just about everyone in the technology field is aware of the release of the first Android phone by T-Mobile.  Naturally, there have been many mixed reactions to that release.  The device is by no means perfect.  For example, I personally hope that the next Android phone to be released has a standard headphone jack.  Nevertheless, there is a feature about Android that is very exciting to techies and reminds me of the early days of the Palm Pilot, it is open and enthusiast developer friendly.

In those early Palm days, developers took to the Palm Pilot with tremendous excitement.  There were new applications coming out at a relentless pace.  And, since a lot of the developers were simply having fun or trying to get a handle on the platform, most of those apps were free. Even I jumped on the fray and made a little application to help some of my Palm needs from back then.  Those of you that had Palm Pilots in those days probably remember meeting complete strangers with similar Palm devices and sharing applications withe each other through the infrared port.  Not only was it fun, it was also practical.

I personally have so many balls in the air that I find it very hard to function without a PDA to help me keep things straight and to help me remember things.  (Warning, if you can function without a PDA you are better off not getting one because your memory will only get worst once you have one.) The reason I got a PDA in the first place was that I was having a hard time keeping up and was starting to drop some balls.  The Palm Pilot was just what I needed, and down to today, a few minutes ago in fact, the Palm continues to keep me out of trouble.

However, I recognize that in today’s world the Palm does not produce the same level of excitement in developers that it used to.  One of the most important reasons for this is that the Palm OS itself has too many limitations, and, frankly, Windows Mobile is not exciting.  Palm, the company, has been aware of this fact for years and has been promising a new Linux based OS for just as long.  However, the mythical Linux based Palm has never come.  Another problem with the Palm platform is that there is only one company making devices for it.  Competition tends to encourage better quality and more innovation.  This has been absent from Palm.  (My last two devices started to malfunction not long after the warranty expired.)

This has had me thinking about jumping ship for a while, but I hadn’t seen an alternative that was compelling enough.  Sure, I could probably do everything I need to do with a Windows based PDA, or a Black Berry, or an IPhone, but I would miss a lot of the free and open source applications that are so readily available in the Palm.  Besides, none of those devices play well with my favorite desktop OS, Linux.

But, now there is Android.  The official definition of Android is this: “Android is a software stack for mobile devices that includes an operating system, middleware and key applications.”  And, very interestingly, “Android relies on Linux version 2.6 for core system services such as security, memory management, process management, network stack, and driver model. The kernel also acts as an abstraction layer between the hardware and the rest of the software stack.”  That is right, Android is a Linux platform.  What this tells me is that Android is going to be irresistible to PDA open source developers.  And, if that is where they are going, that is where I want to be.

The lack of integration with Exchange is no problem at all to me.  I am becoming quite a fan of Google applications.  In fact, I am just about finished testing Google Applications Premier Edition for a client and it looks like it is a go.  They are migrating all their mail and collaboration tools to Google.  From what I have seen, the integration of Google Apps in Android is excellent!  That is all I’m going to need as far as corporate mail goes from now on.

My current Palm TX is still working, but I can’t access the icons at the bottom of the screen. (This is aparently a widely ocurring problem from what I see here and here and here.  I’ll have to give the solutions offered in the links a try). Fortunately, I have been able to limp along by having the screen rotated.  But one thing is for sure, this is my last Palm device.  Lets see what other Android devices appear before my current Palm completely dies.  In the mean time, I may just download the Android SDK and start playing around with it.  Hopefully a Jython port shows up soon.  I can already see that Android is going to bring back some long missing excitement to my PDA use.  How about you?

P.S.: Here is a good example of what I am talking about: 8 Killer Apps for Android and Best Free Google android Apps

The standard components of a PC are in constant evolution. Features that used to be integral to the PC are almost impossible to buy these days. (How many of you remember 5.25″ floppies?) However, for the most part, nobody misses those old features since they have been gradually replaced by alternatives that do a better job. And that is as it should be. As time goes by, thanks to technological advances, the computers available in the market should be more powerful and/or offer more functionality. Unfortunately, there seem to be other factors at play that break down this idea of continuous progress.

A standard feature of mainstream multimedia PCs and laptops has been the ability of being able to record digital sound. This ability was clearly defined in section 5.5 of the AC ‘97 Specification, a paper intended to serve as a standard “for implementing audio and modem I/O functionality in mainstream PC systems”:

AC ‘97 Analog Mixer
The AC ‘97 analog mixer is designed to manage playback and record of all digital and analog audio sources likely to
be present in a mainstream PC. These include:
• System audio: digital PCM input and output for business, games, and multimedia
• CD/DVD: analog CD/DVD-ROM Redbook audio with internal connections to Codec mixer
• Mic: choice of desktop or headset microphone, with programmable boost and gain
• Speakerphone: use of system microphone & speakers for telephony, DSVD, and video conferencing
• Line in: external analog line level source from consumer audio, video camera, etc
• Video: TV tuner or video capture card with internal connections to Codec mixer
• AUX: internal analog line level source

Sounds good right? Well, it would if every manufacturer chose to implement it. The sad thing is that many “mainstream” devices are choosing not implement these features to some degree or another. In particular, there has been a recent crop of laptops being shipped without the ability to record from anything other than the built-in microphone. (To see if your computer has this feature, check the Recording section of your Sound Volume properties in the Control Panel as see if you have something called “Wave Out Mix”, “Stereo Mix”, or “What U Hear”.) Some have speculated that the absence of this feature is the result of pressure placed by the RIAA on OEMs. But, so far, no substantial evidence has surfaced to validate this claim. What is certain is that a substantial number of consumers are being disappointed when finding that this long standing feature of multimedia computers is missing from their shiny new laptops.

After a flood of complaints (just do a Google search for “stereo mix what you hear”, without the quotes), some laptop manufacturers like Dell and Asus are issuing updated drivers for their sound cards which correct the issue by enabling that feature. See here for example:

http://www.dellideastorm.com/article/show/66120?page=last

(The above link is now dead.  See the following link for some useful info.)

http://audacityteam.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=27&t=2548

Unfortunately, other manufacturers apparently do not plan to offer any fixes for this problem. Lenovo in particular has said that their laptops are crippled “at the hardware level”. This is their official response so far:

The ‘61 series systems do not have any way to provide the same loopback function or “Stereo Mix” that previous systems have provided. This is by design of the hardware. There cannot be any driver update to enable this function as the hardware layer does not support it.

It is too bad that the specs they publish for their systems do not show whether this functionality is present or not. I find it an outrage that people are buying crippled laptops without notice from the manufacturer. I guess it is up to the user community to sound the alert. I don’t know what else to do other than write this blog entry and hope that it gets as much publicity as possible.

The question of whether the “Sound Mix” feature has a legitimate place in a standard multimedia PC shouldn’t even have to be asked. There are educational packages that use this feature, such as Sony Virtuoso, a language learning application.  People have written comment after comment explaining how this feature is useful to them. One user provided the following list:

1. I have a radio program I produce. The “stereo mix” is what allowed me to do voice-overs and such the way a real radio program does. I now have to use another old system I dug out of the closet to do this.

2. I have a device I connect to the USB port to copy VCR tapes to DVD for some of my customers. Things like family videos and such. That device uses, you guessed it, “stereo mix” for the audio portion of the tape. Back to the old boat anchor system.

3. A radio station in the area contracts with me to make some of their commercials for them. Again, those require voice-over work. Without the “stereo mix” it’s right back to the old system again.

4. I am part of a Bluegrass Gospel group. I used to use my laptop to make “master” recordings to use to make CDs for the group. That was handy because I could set up wherever we wanted to work. My old system is a desktop, so now we will have to move all the stuff for a desktop the next time we want to do that.

5. The company I work for does meetings via the web. I used to be the one that recorded the meetings to be played back later. There’s a slight problem with that now since I can only record the video portion of the meetings and not the audio.

6. I used to be a member of a web site that does Karoke and allows you to record what you sing. This one is the thing I like to do, and it also uses “stereo mix” to mix the music with the voice from the mic. They are RIAA members and pay royalties for the music you use, BTW.

So, if you think that this feature is important to you or someone you know, don’t just assume that your next PC or laptop will have it.  Otherwise you may join the ranks of those that have been disappointed by their purchases.

The FOSS (Free/Open Source Software) Community knows, thanks to leaked Microsoft internal documents, that since about 1998 Microsoft has been in a sort of war against them. Because of this, it is not surprising that the FOSS community has looked at Microsoft with suspicion and has vilified it to no end. But, is Microsoft really evil?

The reality is that Microsoft is just a company. It is a company that was at the right place at the right time (when the PC was created) and this brought a lot of success. Of course, there was a lot of hard work and good talent involved. In some respects, Microsoft may have even been a positive force in the world, since it was instrumental in bringing down the price of computing at a time in which this was very expensive. However, with that success came a lot of power.

As we all know, power can be a good thing, when used wisely and benevolently, or can be a bad thing, when used shortsightedly an selfishly. Unfortunately, corporations are, by their very nature, selfish and shortsighted. I am not saying that all people inside of Microsoft are bad people. I am sure that, for the most part, most people at Microsoft are just your average, mostly honest, hardworking people. But, it is not in the best interest of “the company” to be generous and meek. So, management has sometimes seen fit to use their power in ways that benefit “the company” at the expense of every one else.

For example, lets take the case of the Linux operating system. With the advent of the Internet, creating a powerful high quality operating system through collaboration is now possible. People from all over the world can now cooperate to create a software pool that everyone in the world can benefit from. Because it is freely available to all at no cost, poor people can more easily afford to own an up to date computer for their computing needs. Since the code is open to all and there are no hidden APIs, companies can build programs that run on that operating system knowing that they are competing on a level playing field. Knowledge is available to all and passed on to new generations rather than locked-in within a single increasingly more powerful corporation. Doesn’t this sound like a good thing for mankind?

But, the above is not in Microsoft’s best interest as a company. Therefore, Microsoft has been fighting tooth and nail the growth and adoption of Linux. Is Microsoft evil because of this? Well, lets just say that, while Microsoft’s success was due in large part for being at the right place at the right time, it now finds itself in the way of progress and the betterment of mankind. Worst yet for Microsoft is that, as time goes on, the inadequacy of its proprietary model, for a world in which technology has become so intertwined with our lives, becomes more and more evident. Computers and the internet are the railroad and freeways of today, except that what is being moved are ideas. Everyone needs computers (increasingly so) and therefore everyone has a stake. Too much control by one company is not in everyone’s best interest.

This realization seems to be very widespread now. The European Union competition commissioner, Neelie Kroes, is pushing hard for Europe to get out of the proprietary treadmill. I remember when, in 2002, the FOSS world rejoiced at seeing a congressman from Peru very clearly articulate, masterfully really, the advantages of “free software” over proprietary software in a response to a letter sent by the General Manager of Microsoft in Peru. That letter must have sent chills up the spine of Microsoft’s management. I can only imagine what they must now be thinking about Mrs. Kroes position expressed publicly at a recent a conference in Brussels. If this trend continues, and there is no indication that it won’t, it seems that Microsoft is due for being replaced outright as the primary provider for the world’s operating systems and basic business applications. Is there anything Microsoft can do to avoid this?

There are several strategies Microsoft has been implementing to stem the growth and adoption of FOSS (For example, see here, or here). All of them, however, have proved to be only temporary stop-gaps, with very limited success. Even the threat of patent warfare seems to be a strategy that is not expected by Microsoft to be overly successful, otherwise we would be hearing a lot more about it. So, what can we expect Microsoft’s next big move to be?

Microsoft is going to become an OSS company, not a FOSS company. (See what the “F” stands for here.) We are already seeing the early signs of this. They have created a couple of open source licenses and have submitted them for approval successfully with the Open Source Initiative. Microsoft has pledged to become a more open company. Although the said pledge has been received with a lot of skepticism, I think they really mean it. They have to. Microsoft is now hard at work trying to convince the world that they really have changed. Is all this going to be enough? I don’t think so. They have to still go a little further. Lets see why.

What are the advantages that FOSS is offering to the world?

1. A level playing field for software vendors. No hidden APIs. Everyone gets the updates and information about new features at the same time. Everyone has the same documentation and the same access to the OS developers.
2. The possibility of accessing the code by the user. This is especially important when the user is a government, sometimes for security reasons. However, it can also be important in the context of education. This also allows the user to choose who to receive support from.
3. An expanded potential for innovation and software improvement. This is because, since everyone has access to the code, innovations, fixes, and improvements, can come from anyone in the world, sometimes from the least expected places.

So, can Microsoft match that? Well, what if Microsoft offered Windows, or a version of Windows, as an open source product? They already have open source licenses that they feel comfortable with (albeit not definable as free software). They would of course retain the copyright and trademark. “But, but, then other people can compile the Windows source code and bypass purchasing it from us”, I hear Mr. Ballmer say. Yes, but Microsoft could still sell proprietary add-ons and applications since only the base OS needs to be open. They would retain the advantage of being the company most familiar with the code and of being the maintainers of the standard implementation, which would make them the premier company to offer support for it. They could offer money to those that contribute code to the Windows base. In one fell swoop Microsoft would eradicate some of the most important advantages Linux has over Windows as far as governments, third party software developers, and the general public goes. What does Microsoft lose in doing this? They lose some advantages over third party vendors that used to give them an edge. They would have to rework their way of making money from Windows around support. But, at least they are able to stay in business and are not tossed out altogether. I think it is only a matter of time before this happens. What do you think?