Google Chrome and Unity

For a long time, I really wanted to get into Linux. I wanted it to be my operating system of choice and I wanted to support the ideals that open source software stood for. But frankly, at the time every major distribution didn't make it practical enough for me to do. It seemed like spread out between all of them were the necessary features for any useful PC user, and despite so many of them working toward the same thing, all of them lacked some basic things expected from any viable desktop OS.

One of the major selling points of developing OSS is that you have a TON of people all working toward some goal, and when one person develops a quality implementation of a feature, everyone then benefits. So why was it that despite popular distributions numbering in the double-digits, no one had produced something as basic (albeit certainly not simple) as the functionality BulletproofX, which has been around in Windows since what? '95?

My theory is that when so many people are in a room where there's a big, ugly piece of code that needs to be written, and there are a hundred other skilled programmers in that room aside from themselves, everyone waits for someone else to do it. Everyone wants to be working on the new, revolutionary piece of code, or the piece of code that'll add some glitzy eye-candy.

And this is where I come to the topic of this entry: what will the fate of open source browsers be following the introduction of Chrome?

Prior to Chrome, Firefox has been enjoying a steady rise in popularity and adoption, taking a noticable bite of IE's marketshare, and an even more significant portion users that realize they have a choice in browsers (as evidenced by available statistics from websites frequented by this demographic; i.e. Slashdot, Digg, etc). Being the only major open source browser anyone really cares about, they are the major innovators and implementors when there's a new idea in the world of web surfing.

With a heavyweight like Google entering the playing field, I have very high hopes for innovation. They're known for going out of their way to do things differently, and whether or not that results in a successful browser, I have no doubt that the open source community will be richer for their contributions. I'm glad that this is already how they've come out from day 1 with the browser, that its intention is to be a "next-generation browser" built from the ground up, as opposed to the others like Safari, IE, and FF - all built on much older platforms slowly being upgraded.

My only fear is that Chrome muddies the waters and attention that was previously given to FF is now split with Chrome, and both browsers end up somewhere lost in the sea of mediocrity that was once a mainstay of the Desktop Linux environment.

On Operating Systems

Microsoft has recently released its newest operating system, Windows Vista. This has caused what seems like quite a ruckus in some places. The United States Department of Transportation has gone as far as banning its employees from upgrading to it or IE7 (on their work computers). The reasoning behind the mandate was quite simple: there's no reason to.

That move alone made me question my own move to Vista. I upgraded largely because I like playing with the latest and greatest, but other than that I really have no reason to, except for perhaps testing applications I develop on it. Vista is largely an eye candy upgrade for the casual user. We've been told that much has changed under the hood, and that's all well and good, but to a user, why should they pay hundreds of dollars for a new OS that has some shiny buttons?

I've used pretty much every OS in contention for users, from Solaris to Windows, to Linux (and many of the flavors in between), and I believe I've noticed a trend that we will begin to see emerge in the next decade.

Operating systems are getting to a point where there just isn't much left to do in terms of features and usability. I should correct myself, Windows is getting to that point - Linux and the others have a ways to go before they're done evolving. What I find interesting here is that the operating system is way ahead of everything else as we make our way to the cool-as-hell computers of the future we see in movies like Minority Report. I'm talking about the human-computer interface. Right now we're still using keyboards and mice with the occasional stylus or touch screen thrown in. Voice recognition is a cool novelty, but ultimately I don't think it will be much more than that - it's not only less practical, but it will always be slower than a keyboard.

Until our hardware catches up, the very cool innovations that will mandate purchasing a brand new OS will have to be put on hold. It is because of this lack of technology that I don't see there being a reason for users to upgrade past an operating system like Vista. I think that our technology has gotten to a point where it's nice that the OS takes advantage of the fact that nearly every computer has a graphics accelerator, but what's left after that? Can you even fathom anything in the near future?

I believe that Microsoft is going to have to change their business model. Instead of selling a brand new version of their OS every 3-5 years, they are going to be offering small incremental innovations to plug into the OS, replacing or adding features as they develop them. This is already largely the state of affairs in the open source world, with the exception that there are new releases of distributions frequently as they work their way to the point that I mentioned above.

Operating systems will be purchased piecemeal. You will buy the OS and from then on you will just upgrade features when you feel it is worth it - whether it be for that extra piece of eye candy or something that might increase your daily productivity. Nothing you don't want will be forced on you - there won't have to be any compromises. I, for one, really like a lot of Vista's new UI, but I can't stand the folder explorer (where the hell did my "up one directory" button go?!).

Vista's adoption looks to be one of the longest in the history of the Redmond company's OS, and I don't think people are going to be looting the store shelves when their next OS comes along in another few years. The system is going to have to change whether or not the suits want it to. This is a game that the users are in control of, and they are beginning to figure out that they don't have to upgrade just because the next version is out.

Creative Progress

What is wrong with our country?

Undoubtedly this question has a myriad of answers, not the least of which would be our (read: our president's) penchant for war and unnecessary spending. I don't have the exact figures for how much we've spent on war under the Bush adminstration, but I'm fairly certain it's in the billions somewhere.

Recently I was doing some morning reading online and I decided to read more about Honda's humanoid robot, ASIMO. For those of you that don't know, this is a robot that is so advanced it can recognize up to 10 human faces, even if those humans are in motion, and remember them by name. Furthermore, it can connect via a network (wirelessly, I presume) to get more information about them - perhaps this person's schedule, or other handy information. In other words, Honda has already created a viable personal robotic assistant. Sounds like science fiction, doesn't it?

Over the last couple of decades, Japan has been a leader in all things technology. With companies like Sony, Toshiba, Pioneer, and Honda, they have literally dominated the new technology market as well as spearheaded innovative research.

It seems as though Japan has almost become a Utopia for what human life should be. Nonstop technological innovation without concentrating on what the rest of the world is doing and what they can do to play international babysitter. They are making the worlds of Isaac Asimov and Stanley Kubrick a reality while we've been building the next missle to rain destruction by remote control.

Japan hasn't had a war in half a century. America hasn't stopped getting involved in wars since then. I want to get a figure on how much America has spent on wars in the past 50 years and compare it with how much Honda has spent on developing ASIMO. I bet it would be staggering to see how much we put into the destruction of life versus technological innovation.

I think it's damn embarressing that we have shown that we can put a robot on Mars for $230 million, yet we plunge billions into our war efforts. I can only hope the next president we elect will have a new vision for this country.