Desktop Android?

The pieces of the puzzle are coming together. I predicted a while back that */Linux on ARM would invade the “personal computing” space including notebooks and desktops. The Chromebook has been produced in strength and millions will ship this year, but on x86. There are rumblings that Android/Linux will soon be multi-user and SJVN observes,

“Microsoft is fumbling its Windows 8 introduction, if ever there was a time for Google to introduce an Android desktop, this is the time.”

see Desktop Android? Multi-user Android support is on its way | ZDNet.

Probably in time for Christmas there will be Android/Linux systems shipping on every kind of PC, including ARMed ones. That should kill “8” in its crib. That should end retail lockout of GNU/Linux everywhere. That should bring us a competitive market instead of monopoly.

About Robert Pogson

I am a retired teacher in Canada. I taught in the subject areas where I have worked for almost forty years: maths, physics, chemistry and computers. I love hunting, fishing, picking berries and mushrooms, too.
This entry was posted in technology. Bookmark the permalink.

32 Responses to Desktop Android?

  1. ch says:

    “IMHO, inAD is a complete waste and a burden of complexity.”

    That’s because you never learned to use it. Blind man talking about color, again.

    “One can accomplish”

    Yes, and you can use a hammer to get a screw in. I prefer a screw-driver.

    “While some think inAD is intended to help users of M$’s stuff, it’s actually lock-in and a tool to sell licences for servers,”

    In fact, it helps to sell Windows server licenses because it helps users – more precisely: admins – do their stuff. BTW: Have you ever actually used openLDAP? Because that would have required you to learn it – just like you should have learned how to use AD when you sell your services as a Windows admin.

  2. ch says:

    “So, essentially, people pay $hundreds for stuff that’s not essential?”

    I don’t know about the world that you live in, but in the world I live in people pay $thousands every day for non-essential stuff.

    There is a lot of room between “essential” and “useless”. Stuff like a media player or a simple paint program are definitively not essential parts of an OS, but it’s very convenient to have them.

  3. ch wrote, “if someone wants to buy a really cheap netbook, it’s Win Starter (rock-bottom price, nothing that’s not essential included).

    For home users, it’s Win Home Premium: No support for AD (since very few people are likely to use AD at home) but almost everything else.

    For organisations, it’s Win Professional (surprise, surprise!) because of the AD support, if nothing else.”

    Thanks for the information I will likely never use except to discourage use of that other OS.

    So, essentially, people pay $hundreds for stuff that’s not essential? Does that make any sense in the real world? Nope. IMHO, inAD is a complete waste and a burden of complexity. One can accomplish anything really necessary even in very large organizations with openLDAP and GNU/Linux file-permissions. All the rest is M$’s baggage designed to lock in the world of IT. I have met people who have never used GNU/Linux and cannot believe IT is possible without the complexity who become believers in just a few minutes. While some think inAD is intended to help users of M$’s stuff, it’s actually lock-in and a tool to sell licences for servers, stuff people own not M$. I could buy a bull-dozer to build a really large swimming pool in my yard but do I really need that? Nope. Neither do I need a server licence nor inAD to administer huge numbers of PCs.

    Of course, through bundling, M$ and its partners make it difficult if not impossible to buy “Starter” for a desktop PC… M$ has layers of licensing and some apply to the poor OEMs who are forced to sell non-essential stuff to consumers.

  4. ch says:

    “That other OS from $50 (students) to $275 (ultimate pro whatever…).”

    OK, so here’s my for-free hands-on guide to Windows versions:

    The rough idea is that customers only pay what they want to pay (for) – or something as close as possible, at least.

    So if someone wants to buy a really cheap netbook, it’s Win Starter (rock-bottom price, nothing that’s not essential included).

    For home users, it’s Win Home Premium: No support for AD (since very few people are likely to use AD at home) but almost everything else.

    For organisations, it’s Win Professional (surprise, surprise!) because of the AD support, if nothing else.

    The Ultimate and Enterprise version (it’s technically the same, but with different licensing schemes: Enterprise for volume licenses, Ultimate for retail) include some more geeky stuff like Services For Unix. I bought Win7 Ultimate for ~ €130 because I could, not because I had to.

    Oh, and the $279 includes-a-shiny-box-and-a-blowjob Ultimate version? That’s so people with absolutely too much money can give some to poor MS 😉

    I hope this clears matters. If you want to learn more about pricing, read this article which explains a bit or two about airline prices, SW prices and rebate coupons:

    http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/CamelsandRubberDuckies.html

    Oh, and yes: I made up the bit about the blowjob being included.

  5. Clarence Moon wrote, “You don’t actually know the mixture of what ships on new system or the actual count of those systems.”

    You wish. Courts force that stuff to be divulged from time to time and we are ready to read it.

    see, for example,
    “Supporting (mis?)information:
    – ~40MM units of Win95 in the marketplace (~3-4MM run rate per month);
    approximately 8MM retail, the rest OEM
    – ~2MM installations of Win NT (more new NT servers sold last quarter
    than Novell) ·”

    see US DOJ v M$ exhibit 1233.

  6. Clarence Moon says:

    We do know

    No you don’t know at all. You have some memory of guesses made about pricing, but no actual evidence. You don’t actually know the mixture of what ships on new system or the actual count of those systems. You have blogs and press releases and other unaudited information that tells conflicting stories which you select from to form your “proof”.

    The reality is in the financial results which are, at least, audited and watched over by various regulators world-wide. Increasing financial indicates a degree of success and continuing viability in general. Any unsubstantiated number to the contrary is likely to be wrong.

    Their base models are essentially cripple-ware.

    That is called beneficial pricing, Mr. Pogson. Think about it. If something is worth a lot to someone, then charge accordingly. You can buy a license for Windows that is inexpensive, but limits your use, or pay more for one that allows you more latitude of operations. It is like a video DVD that cost, say, $10 but only allows you to watch it at home by yourself or with friends. The same physical DVD, if you allowed to rent it to others, costs a lot more. Or if you are going to show it in a theater it costs more yet.

    Nothing wrong with that.

  7. ch wrote, “where do you see rising prices?”

    Thanks for the data. M$ used to compete on price/performance before they solidified the monopoly granted by IBM. Now their “partners” publish price lists that are an order of magnitude higher. e.g. That other OS from $50 (students) to $275 (ultimate pro whatever…). see NewEgg This is all essentially the same OS with a few features more or less yet M$ charges multiple times over for the more featureful version. Their base models are essentially cripple-ware. In the old days DOS came in a single flavour…

  8. ch says:

    “We do know that when the world was shipping a few million PCs per annum, M$ charged $20 or so. Now that they ship hundreds of millions they charge $100+.”

    To be precise, in the 80ies MS-DOS/PC-DOS sold for $40. (By comparison: CP/M sold for $240, later IBM tried to sell OS/2 for $340 and charged a whopping $3,000 just for the SDK.) With Windows added (and that was quite a substantial addition) the price went to $100, and that’s more or less what it still is – if you buy it separately at all.

    Over here in Germany, WinNT Workstation sold for the equivalent of €200 and a combination of DOS and Win3.x for €100. (By comparison: Then SCO Unix – the most viable PC Unix at the time – had prices starting beyond €500.) Today Win7 Home Premium is less than €100 and Win7 Ultimate less than €150 – and sometimes there are special discounts like this recent offer: Updates to Win7HP for three machines for just €120.

    So where do you see rising prices? In fact, MS won the OS wars partly because Windows was comparetively cheap. And of course the decline of prices was even more dramatic for Office applications – today’s MSO is virtually for free compared to the old prices for all applications in that range.

  9. Clarence Moon wrote, of knowledge of unit shipments, “You do not have any hard information on this”.

    We do know that when the world was shipping a few million PCs per annum, M$ charged $20 or so. Now that they ship hundreds of millions they charge $100+. Their revenue is declining and they have begun to cut prices so they must be shipping fewer units. Do the maths.

    Revenue for the desktop OS segment in 2012 10-K was $18 billion. In 2010 it was $19.5 billion. The retail price of OEM licences is in the range $120 to $150 and M$ gets less than half that. They are shipping only a couple of hundred client OS licences annually. The world is shipping 360 x86/amd64 PCs annually.

  10. Clarence Moon says:

    Even so, the number of new licences M$ sales each quarter is decreasing not increasing.

    You do not have any hard information on this, Mr. Pogson, all you ever have is inferences that you draw by comparing items that are not from the same frame of reference ever.

    I think you are just fooling yourself, but that really doesn’t matter much. What I think matters is the actual results that are being achieved quarterly and annually for a long period of time in terms of financial performance of Microsoft as a corporation. So far, their performance has been more than acceptable in recent times and historically, they are a phenomenally successful operation.

    Read as much doom and gloom into snapshots that you take of things and claim to be visions of the future, but until it happens, you are just whistling Dixie.

    If Microsoft market share drops to 25%, they are not going to go out of business. They are just going to collect less revenue, but even at 25%, it is billions of dollars. And it is far greater than 25% and much more near to 100% where it has been for a long time.

    If Dell opens a store in China and sells Windows and Linux, so what? How much product is actually Linux and how much does that affect their bottom line?

  11. Clarence Moon wrote, “The installed base is being augmented annually by 240M or more newly minted, legitimate Windows PCs. That says nothing about the retirement rate for existing Windows PCs. The two combined determine whether the installed base count is increasing or decreasing.”

    Nonsense. Folks tend to use a PC for a period of time and then replace it. Occasionally they increase the number of PCs in the system. Folks used to keep PCs for only 3 or 4 years because they believed their PCs were slowing down. Now they keep them 8 years because they know they are not slowing down. Even so, the number of new licences M$ sales each quarter is decreasing not increasing. That reflects a shrinking installed base. The number of x86 PCs on Earth is rising less than 10% per annum but M$’s licences are decreasing in numbers shipped each year. The result is more “other PCs” out there. And then there is ARM where M$ has been doing nothing. Illegal copies of that other OS should be reflected in web stats but they are not there to prop up Clarence’s conjecture.

    NetApplications share for M$ in 1997 was 96%
    NetApplications share for M$ in 2011 was 88%

    We know that NetApplications is heavily biased to business use of PCs because of the way they highlight Google’s use of GNU/Linux so there in the most locked-in users there has been an 8% decline in installed base share over five years. These are the same people who make illegal copies the least because of the snitches line and the BSA. Those loyal fans are switching to GNU/Linux and MacOS.

    Even for desktops/notebooks alone NA has them declining from 96 to 93%.

    In the real world, Dell is selling GNU/Linux PCs in bricks and mortar stores.

  12. Clarence Moon says:

    Market share that used to be 95% of units shipped is now 66%, so the installed base is declining.

    Your premise is not true, but even so, it is not applicable to the conclusion. The installed base is being augmented annually by 240M or more newly minted, legitimate Windows PCs. That says nothing about the retirement rate for existing Windows PCs. The two combined determine whether the installed base count is increasing or decreasing.

    The really interesting question is what’s on those other units.

    Since the impact of the Linux PC continues to be on the order of 1%, it can only be that the machines that fail to acquire a legitimate Windows license or Macintosh OS licenses are being fitted with an unauthorized copy of Windows, Mr. Pogson. As much has been widely conceded.

    My own company ghosts on a copy of Windows 7 Enterprise edition and other standard applications on new machines, which are mostly ordered from Dell with no OS installed as allowed by our master agreement with Microsoft. As far as I can tell, there is no accounting whatsoever to Microsoft or Dell as to what was put on what and when.

    We are in the Fortune 500, but well down the list, and it seems fair to me to assume that most large corporations are in the same circumstances. Thus a lot of the “missing” licenses are likely coming from similar use of blanket licensing agreements such as ours.

    Pirated or legitimate, though, the “other” units are Windows, no doubt.

  13. kurkosdr wrote, “instead of “computer”, what you really meant is “replacement for the desktop OSes we now use, aka Windows and OSX”.”

    I know the difference between an OS and hardware. A computer is a combination of memory, logic/arithmetic/sequencing, and I/O subsystems. An OS is the software/firmware used to control that hardware and to manage its resources. A personal computer is a computer designed/sized/priced to be practical and useful for an individual. Personal computers include smart phones and other thingies based on ARM and x86/amd64 systems and a bunch of other kinds of hardware and software combinations. While some rich guy might see a mainframe or cluster as his personal computer, those things are not designed for a single user and are definitely not portable, a feature common in many PCs.

    I see people like my wife and my children using smart phones every day as PCs. The chief advantages of smart phones as PCs are price, size and portability although portability can be a disadvantage for losing/breaking devices. My wife adamantly refuses to pocket or fasten a smart phone to her person so she often walks away from hers… In any digital system there are usually one or more bottle-necks that can be identified to be the limit on performance. Smart phones have limits on screen-size and network speed that most often limit performance but the advantages of portability in many cases offsets those very well. My children, for instance, have really sharp eyes so the screen-size is of little importance as long as there are enough pixels. For me that is a killer. Still, I have often used my wife’s smart phone to transfer files, browse to sites and to take pictures. It’s definitely a PC and it runs Android/Linux on ARM.

  14. Clarence Moon wrote, of M$’s OS licences, “60M”.

    Well, we may not agree on the number but at least we both agree that 60M is way less than 90M, the number of PCs that shipped. Market share that used to be 95% of units shipped is now 66%, so the installed base is declining. The really interesting question is what’s on those other units. It’s not MacOS because Apple publishes its numbers. It’s a mix of MacOS and GNU/Linux most likely. Apple’s share is fairly static so GNU/Linux alone is growing.

  15. Clarence Moon says:

    Where’s the growth?

    Where’s any proof that your figures are valid, Mr. Pogson? Windows 7 sales, for example, were 60M per quarter over a year ago.

  16. oldman says:

    “High end super computers are your true Mainframe computers”

    Nope. Whether you like it or not the designation “Mainframe” still refers to the large batch processing systems that are now almost the sole provenance of IBM. Their system Z is a mainframe. Your average “supercomputer” is not even in the same class.

    Sorry but you dont get to change terminology to suit your needs.

  17. kurkosdr says:

    “smartphone is a computer”

    So what? Even the Motorola RAZR (the original one, with the 10MBs of storage, no expansion, no video and 20MHz CPU, which fortunatetly never had the misfortune to own), was a “computer”. The antique Nokia 3410 I keep in the attic for sentimental reasons, is a “computer”
    (black-&-white Java, yay!)

    Saying that an electronic device is a “computer” is as broad as saying a lifeform is a multicellular organism. It can be everything from a fly to a horse. And you don’t want to use a fly to do a horse’s job, right?

    So, instead of “computer”, what you really meant is “replacement for the desktop OSes we now use, aka Windows and OSX”.

    A nice Android tablet (not a smartphone) like the Asus Transformer Prime COULD fill that role, since it has the form factor and software to fill most of the use cases of a traditional desktop OS (Windows, OS X), but version fragmentation is preventing it. I own an Android (LG Optimus 2X) and I have personally experienced the pain of not having upgrades myself. How many of you dumpster-divers own an Android? Oh yeah right, get a Nexus. The Nexus smartphones are pretty pathetic when it comes to value for money, and the Nexus 7 has a really small screen to really replace the desktop. Nexuses account for a tiny percentage of Android sales anyway.

    The only Android smartphones that really are competitive are the ones running mutilated versions of Android (like Motoblur, TouchWiz etc) running on SoCs that are diffetent from the ones the original Nexus-Android run and which never receive upgrades in time. In plain english, if you want a good Android smartphone, you ll have to buy a non-Nexus one that never gets upgrades properly. As for tablets, the only ones that can really replace the desktop are those running mutilated versions on a non standard SoCs too, which also means upgrade pains (see the Transformer Prime upgrade pains).

    Long story short, Android is competitive a) because of all those mutilated versions OEMs are crapping out and never get upgraded properly and b) because WP7 was such a turd (no support for dual core, no support for 720p screens, and generally obsolete from the get go). Once WP8 (with full support for modern hardware) with it’s guaranteed upgrades for 2 years arrives, it’s game over for UpgradePainAndroid.

    Which is sad IMO, because I am an Android fan. But I can’t stand the upgrade fail train, and most users i talk to also can’t. Letting carriers and OEMs mess with Android and still keep Market and trademark access was a mistake by Google. It helped Android grow rapidly but it will backfire badly.

  18. Clarence wrote, “Windows continues to grow both in terms of licenses sold annually and aggregation of the world-wide installed base.”

    That’s not in evidence. M$ raises prices to offset lost share. Sales of licences were flat at 50M per quarter. Where’s the growth?

  19. oiaohm says:

    Clarence Moon
    “To me, it is equally plain that Microsoft and Windows with it are also here to stay.”
    Far too soon to say this. History does not support that anything is large enough to resist a tide of change.

    Clarence Moon
    “Conventional Linux “distributions” are curiosities that have failed to gain very much traction in the PC arena.”

    Lets be logical here for a second. Conventional Linux Distributions in the Server room will remain around for quite some time to come. Linux distributions for small business are improving in function. The foot hold servers based off converted PC’s. Microsoft is also stopping the small business server this next cycle.

    Clarence Moon
    “Windows continues to grow both in terms of licenses sold annually”
    Recent numbers are suggesting that growth is stalling. http://betanews.com/2012/01/19/microsoft-q2-2012-by-the-numbers-windows-revenue-falls-6/

    2012 MS shipped less windows licenses than 2011 Clarence Moon this a on the record fact. Either MS will recover in 2013 with Windows 8 release or they will not. This particular fact is why its too soon to call Clarence Moon. If it was still 2011 you could be claiming what you are claiming.

    This might be a simple displacement problem that will level out still with MS making less because of the numbers of people with tablets who don’t need to acquire a PC subtracted from MS sales numbers.

    There is also a problem Android is progressing down the path to a true multi-user interface. This is not your normal phone class any more. Next question how long until central server support for logins for office usage. Basically where is Android really going.

    Clarence Moon
    “For some people, they do everything that the person has occasion to do so they are, at least, replacements for PCs.”

    The question is as Android matures what percentage of the market will need nothing else. I don’t have the means to answer this yet either.

    Lot of where Android is going I cannot answer yet.

    Idea as a personal device platform as Android limit does not explain why its adding multi user support.

    Clarence Moon
    “But surveys seem to indicate that the vast majority of people perceive a PC and a phone and a tablet as distinct objects and assign roles to each.”

    Ok where does items like http://techland.time.com/2012/05/18/pc-in-your-pocket-74-android-stick-goes-on-sale/ this fit in.

    This is the problem. There are devices entering the market that don’t fit any of that listed on a survey. Market disruptions are here to stay.

    Brillo
    “Take a look inside your PC. See that thing sitting on that large socket there with a lot of holes/pins on it? That thing is microprocessor. Your computer is, thus, a microcomputer.”
    In fact normally idiots comment. Microprocessor and Micro computer are in fact not linked terms.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mini_computer
    Mini Computers also contain microprocessor chips. The clear historic divide is sockets and changeable parts. Problem is people have kept on calling a PC a Micro computer even after its motherboard evolved out of that define into the define of a mini computer.

    C64 and so on they are true Micro Computers.

    “personal computer”!=Micro Computer in most cases today.

    The term change to “Personal computer” also lines up to when to hardware define home computers started becoming mini computers. They did not want to call them mini computers because that would have cut into the price IBM and others was getting for mini computers. So new term coined the Personal Computer that covered both micro and mini computer configurations.

    Brillo
    “Excuse me? Supercomputers these days are mostly built from repeated units of commodity hardware for the sole purpose of parallel computing. The fastest supercomputer in the world, the PowerPC A2-based “Sequoria”, is a massively parallel cluster:”

    Mainframe in fact does still include clusters. Do they have Frames holding Processing units that could be classed as the Main frame or frames of the system. With other frames holding storage. Commodity hardware in fact shows up in some early valve based mainframes where the mainframe was modular construction. Some of there early designs are cluster some are unified.

    So the term Mainframe can cover either.

    Brillo
    “Mainframe, on the other hand, is a completely breed of cat. A mainframe is designed to handle complex transactions, which you simply cannot do efficiently on a cluster.”
    Sales man talk. Term Mainframe has nothing todo with how a server/cluster processes. Mainframe is a physical construction feature. To be really simple a frame is like rack cabinet(and in fact can be). Yes you can have a mainframe computer with no hardware in it. Because you have its frames. It only becomes a operational mainframe computer when its frames are filled with hardware.

    Not all clusters are mainframes. Why because some clusters don’t have frames mostly full of processing and other frames full of storage.

    Yes a cluster can be a mainframe also can turn out not to be based on configuration.

    Brillo also the bad define you just gave is why some people call a tower case computer a mainframe at times. Its wrong of course because there is no main frame in that construction.

    Brillo please go away and truly learn you terms.

  20. Clarence Moon says:

    I don’t recall anyone likening it to a desktop PC…

    Depends on the dweeb coefficient of your surroundings, I imagine. In any case, it is a tempest in a tea pot. The conventional wisdom is that the PC “market” is being eroded to some degree by cellphones and certainly tablets that do many of the things that PC do. For some people, they do everything that the person has occasion to do so they are, at least, replacements for PCs.

    That is the crux of a more important question as to the future of the PC and, by inference, Microsoft Windows. Windows continues to grow both in terms of licenses sold annually and aggregation of the world-wide installed base. Mr. Pogson’s voodoo statistics to the contrary, Windows remains a virtual gold mine for Microsoft.

    Absent the cellphones and tablets, Windows would likely be even larger than it is today since people who didn’t have computers previously would not have any recourse but to acquire a “conventional” PC. But surveys seem to indicate that the vast majority of people perceive a PC and a phone and a tablet as distinct objects and assign roles to each.

    It would be reasonable, say, to claim that people will assign a higher priority to obtaining a smart phone over getting a new PC, but I don’t know of any studies that actually test that hypothesis. In any case, it is plain to see that phones and tablets, too, are enjoying a great deal of popularity and are here to stay.

    To me, it is equally plain that Microsoft and Windows with it are also here to stay.

    Equally plain, too, is the fact that Android is not your grandfather’s Linux. Android is a personal device platform with extensive abilities used effectively for phones and, maybe, tablets. Conventional Linux “distributions” are curiosities that have failed to gain very much traction in the PC arena.

  21. Brillo says:

    @RP

    The many businesses and schools that permit employees to BYOD seem to believe the gadgets are computers.

    I honestly have never heard of cellphones, PDAs or suchlike being “computers” until the Android fanatics come along. You know, after all, we have had Blackberry for quite long time and I don’t recall anyone likening it to a desktop PC.

    @Oiaohm

    Most Desktop and most servers by hardware configuration is a mini computer.

    A “mini” computer? You sure have the penchant to take some well-known history and butcher it just to fool children with, don’t you?

    Take a look inside your PC. See that thing sitting on that large socket there with a lot of holes/pins on it? That thing is microprocessor. Your computer is, thus, a microcomputer.

    High end super computers are your true Mainframe computers.

    Excuse me? Supercomputers these days are mostly built from repeated units of commodity hardware for the sole purpose of parallel computing. The fastest supercomputer in the world, the PowerPC A2-based “Sequoria”, is a massively parallel cluster:

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2012/jun/18/ibm-sequoia-worlds-fastest-supercomputer

    Mainframe, on the other hand, is a completely breed of cat. A mainframe is designed to handle complex transactions, which you simply cannot do efficiently on a cluster. There exists such thing as a “gameframe”, which is essentially a hybrid of the two things, but that’s about it:

    http://www-03.ibm.com/press/us/en/pressrelease/21433.wss

  22. oiaohm says:

    Clarence Moon the statement is correct. That a Android is Linux and smartphone is a computer.

    Smartphone by hardware configuration is a micro computer.
    Most Desktop and most servers by hardware configuration is a mini computer.

    High end super computers are your true Mainframe computers. Since they normally have racks of cpu power racks of storage and so on.

    The first XT PC’s were micro computers in-design. The change happens in the early cloning from micro to mini when they get the means to upgrade cpu ram and so on. Mini computer you can replace core parts without replacing the complete motherboard that all expand devices plugged into. On a micro computer to change the cpu or all the ram is replace the motherboard.

    Yes some of those current day netbooks due to soldered in ram and cpu are micro computers.

    So there is an existing overlap between defined types.

    Clarence Moon so the fact that PC machines evolved from micro to mini in most cases says this is possible. Interesting with the introduction of the netbooks and a few other things the PC has also devolved.

    The big change would be an Android appearing on a Mini Computer hardware by default.

    Just saying its not a computer is lieing Clarence Moon. This is the interesting thing Linux has control of the Mainframe and doing very well in the Micro. Its the mini computer market it is having trouble with.

    When you break down to hardware classification its a interesting turn of events right.

  23. Clarence wrote, “If you want to make your living in the IT business, though, you will need a better filter as to what is what.”

    The many businesses and schools that permit employees to BYOD seem to believe the gadgets are computers. Many of them would certainly score as well as a PC on a Turing test. In fact they are computers with stored programmes, logic units, storage, I/O and RAM. In fact some ~$100 gadgets are superior to the performance of the typical PC of a decade ago. Tell us those were not computers…

  24. Clarence Moon says:

    Android is Linux and smartphone is computer.

    Keep telling yourself that. Over and over. It will help you sleep at night, eh? Maybe it will get you a prize!

    If you want to make your living in the IT business, though, you will need a better filter as to what is what.

  25. Mats Hagglund says:

    Clarence Moon is 100% wrong. Android is Linux and smartphone is computer. Denying these facts is the key to understand why people like him can’t never understand this current huge revolution of IT.

    Read it Clarence: the statistics of Q2 2012

    Linux 43-44%
    Windows 33-34%
    Others 22-24%

  26. Clarence Moon says:

    Now we can say it clearly: Linux is leading platform for new clients of IT.

    You could say that if you ignored the reality of the commerce, but so what?

    Android as a platform and environment for accessing apps is not really Linux other than in some hair-splitting definition that is purely academic. Using Android puts phone makers in a common sort of barrel wherein they can beat each other up on price since they have nothing much else to differentiate themselves. They avoid the cost of developing their own OS and pay Microsoft a few bucks per phone to avoid patent litigation, but they lose out to Apple in terms of product differentiation.

    If they cannot offer a user anything but a low price, only the lowest price producer will eventually survive. What will disappear first is any innovative spark that stems from wanting to as well as being able to outdo the other guy in terms of features, functions, and ultimate benefits from product use.

  27. Mats Hagglund says:

    New statistics by Canalys showing how Androidin is gaining some 68% marketshare of smartphone. If we counted smartphones + tablets (=mobiles) we have some 63% slice for Android in Q2 2012.

    http://techcrunch.com/2012/08/02/canalys-q2-68-of-all-smartphones-shipped-were-android-chinas-the-biggest-market-by-a-wide-margin/

    Now we can say it clearly: Linux is leading platform for new clients of IT.

  28. Mats Hagglund says:

    Canalys report: Android got 68,1% of smartphones in Q2 2012. If we calculated both tablets and smartphones we have 65% for Android (of mobiles). Sale rate between mobiles and non-mobiles is 2:1. So clearly – Linux is now were near of 50% marketshare on new devices.

  29. oiaohm says:

    Chris Weig
    “It amuses me to see that a self-declared Linux advocate (remember: free as in freedom) tries to push Google’s cloud, just because Linux is used by Google. The Android desktop, sure. With a compulsory Google connection.”

    Funny there is a lot of Android in china with all Google connections removed.

    Also amazon kindle running Android does not out box contain anything Google.

    So pushing android does not equal pushing Google cloud. Android works very well in fact with owncloud.

    Chris Weig of course you would forget the freedom of the USA one key battle would have been lost without pirates bringing in supplies that after the war they disposed of by bullet.

    Chris Weig what is more free Google offering or Microsofts. I think the answer is clear here Googles. What has the best chance of allowing a fully free platform Google’s again.

  30. Chris Weig says:

    It amuses me to see that a self-declared Linux advocate (remember: free as in freedom) tries to push Google’s cloud, just because Linux is used by Google. The Android desktop, sure. With a compulsory Google connection.

    That shows once again, Mr. Pogson, that you’re not to be taken seriously as an advocate of freedom. You’re just in it for the Microsoft hate. That’s a pathological condition then, and you should see a specialist soon. Perhaps your good pal Mr. oiaohm knows someone.

  31. Agent_Smith says:

    I see a merge between Android and Chrome as the successors of XP in the desktop.

  32. Phenom says:

    While 8 is being ridiculed for being touch-optimized and not handy with a mouse and keyboard, suddenly the touch-optimized Android is deemed as a perfect desktop OS.

    Go figure.

    Btw, Windows 8 is already released for production. In two weeks it will be available to ISVs via MSDN and MAPS. Google wasted too much time with Chrome OS and trying to replicate iOS in Android.

Leave a Reply