Once again on LInux. This article is full of “nostalgia” for people who followed all of this development.
At the same time the article leaves a sense of a “missed opportunity”. To clarify I reproduce here the complete text of my online comment:
In the meantime, people at Apple, using the same unix-like baseline, developed something everybody likes and everybody would like to have.
This slideshow unfortunately represents the reality of a fight between 3 chickens in the same hen house. Instead of coalescing to produce something every user would like to have, they fought each other and, at best, "followed" what was popular elsewhere.
Just my personal interpretation of course!
It is not the first time I comment on this topic. And I will continue because I really cannot understand how someone could think that Unity (from Canonical) or Gnome could be something a normal user would like to have on her own desktop (if not because it does not cost anything)
Today I took the time to open a couple of articles related to Linux and to LibreOffice. I knew I shouldn’t have done it, because this makes me feeling engaged in a battle that I have lost the wish it will ever been won.
The first article, In Search of Linux’s Greatest Moment, looks to me the typical product of someone who is very proud of what he/she likes. I do not think there is any doubt about the revolution that Linux made possible in the IT world of today. This is true at enterprise level but, also, at consumer level. Anytime (or most of the times) in which there is an intelligent device, Linux is powering it. This is imho one of the Linux’s greatest moment.
The second one, as it appears in the article, is around Android.
But the author seems to look to where Linux did great on the desktop. And it is here that, imho, we do not have any great moment. The great moment will be when people will choose a Linux desktop instead of a Mac or instead of Windows. Not speaking about geeks or not speaking about people who do not like MS or not speaking about people who want to save money. I am speaking about my children for instance. They would love to have a Mac. They love to have an Android or an iOS. But they would never ever go and use Ubuntu or RedHat unless they would be forced to.
The strange thing is that the Mac UI (and the iOS UI also) are built on the top of a Unix derivative…. But in the Linux world there is too much separation between the Gnome and the KDE camps that this prevents forces to join and to create a seducing interface. Seducing for non-IT people.
And now to the second article, LibreOffice 4 review. Getting better but… , I understand that Sun before and, especially, Oracle after made things difficult with OpenOffice. But now the time is over. Oracle decided that they will not be able to make money out of OpenOffice and left it to its destiny. And the destiny is not that unknown… it is the Apache foundation. There are companies that put money and means in the Apache Foundation…. So, please, tell me what the need is to have LibreOffice if not the one of reproducing the battle bewteen KDE and Gnome that prevented innovation to spur on the Linux desktop…..
Apparently, instead than focussing on the real objective (make an free OS alternative to commercial OSes and make a free Office alternative to MS Office), people prefer to split the efforts, concentrate on one camp’s best idea instead than on what users will like….. Romans 2000 years ago said “Divide et Impera”. Perhaps 2000 years later we still need to prove that this sentence holds true.
Last week, the ebizQ site posted a forum discussion on the subject “Why Hasn’t BPM Taken Off Like ERP or CRM?”. Hre is the reply I posted in the forum.
When we work we actually execute one (or more) of the "business processes" of our company. I think that "business processes" are, actually, part of the plumbing of each enterprise. At a point that, sometimes, it is "hard" to describe it because we sort of "live it".
So, in that matter, BPM should be the obvious fit.
The fact that it is has been "hard" to introduce it in the enterprises makes me thinking to the following:
- A business process which is not documented gives the possibility to be "adapted" more rapidly. Actually, a pre-requisite for adopting BPM will be to document what needs to be automated and managed
So, the perception may be that the company would be “more agile” if something could be changed without running into a big Change Management process.
One could, also, think that something that is “not documented” may not be accountable also…. but this may certainly be the “bad guy” who speaks in my head…
- A significant business process often spans several domains.
Formally describing it may introduce negotiation issues across departments and may imply some organizational changes.
- Once a process is described and ready to be deployed, an owner will likely be required.
The owner may not be clearly identified yet and this may require some further negotiation. And may imply,once again, some organizational changes…
- As Nicholas Carr was saying in his book “The Big Switch”, it is easier today for companies to adapt themselves to the business processes embedded in the CRM and ERP tools they buy instead of investing time to describe and negotiate company specific business processes….
This said, I think that the maturity of the market and the maturity of the products are now helping a lot in the adoption.
I read the Google announcement around the new Google Chrome OS.
I immediately went back to my article Enter the “Reign of RIA 3rd”. In that article I expressed my enthusiasm for the new Google browser as I saw, in the way it was announced, the principle for something new, a platform where applications delivered over the web can be executed fast, securely and offline…Chrome becomes a container for applications delivered over the web!
I rememberI concluded that long post saying:
Chrome, which could be the last browser but, perhaps, the first element of a different kind
I think that I missed something that, now, seems so obvious. I thought to Chrome as, mainly, a new RIA platform. Something beyond the traditional browser but still in the domain of a container.
What this announcement tells us is that Google went far beyond. Chrome becomes the OS, not just a container.
And not “just a new kind of OS”, but as the official announcement says, “the web is the platform”.
Ehi, this is exactly the first principle in Tim O’Reilly famous definition of what is Web2.0 !
The border between an OS and the “web as a platform” is blurring. Not only on the Internet infrastructure. It is blurring deep right onto the desktop. The Browser becoming the Operating System and the Operating System becoming an extension of the web platform itself. So, Chrome OS may be much more revolutionary than it appears. It is not simply Google attacking Microsoft on the OS battlefield. It is extending the cloud to the border.
The new Chrome OS may become the real incarnation of that principle. The operating system for the Cloud Generation. Where Web2.0, SOA and Cloud Computing meet and could shape something, this time, very different!