Why Microsoft won't fight moblin

There have been quite a few Moblin related announcements these last weeks: The release of the final version of Moblin 2.0, the Moblin Garage and the preview release of Moblin 2.1. More interesting is the news released by Microsoft's Silverlight team that they will develop Silverlight 3 for Moblin. Unlike Moonlight that is a Novel sponsored open source rewrite of Silverlight available for all Linux distribution, this looks like a binary only package that will be developed directly by Microsoft and made available only for Moblin. Microsoft porting it's technologies to Linux, WTF... Well it doesn't look that far fetched once you think a little bit further.

Intel has a problem

For the past 20 years Microsoft and Intel have been the best of friends: Intel was releasing more and more powerful chips and Microsoft released more and more powerful operating systems to use them. This worked well until a problem cropped up: Intel was not able to increase a processor's frequency anymore. To get out of the the problem Intel tried to put several processor cores on one chip. This only worked to some extent in the consumer market, as most users don't benefit much from having more than 2 cores in their computers. Intel management quickly realized that if they wanted to continue selling CPUs to consumers they would have to sell more chips for less money.

The rise of the Atom

To reach that goal they created the Atom processor, a chip that would propel the Netbook category to the forefront of personal computing and sell countless millions of devices. The chip could also be scaled to Nettops and in the future smartphones, set-top boxes and consumer electronics. Intel is on the verge of attaining its goal: selling a lot of cheap devices with it's processors inside. A problem appeared on the horizon however: Microsoft did not want to play ball!

The price of Windows

Most of these cheap new netbooks and nettop are breaking the relationship that kept Microsoft and Intel happy for so many years: the chips can't support new advances in operating systems (like Windows Vista). Worse, because of the low price of the machines Microsoft can't charge much for Windows on these machines, opening a market for Linux. Linux on netbooks is not much of a problem for Microsoft as long as the interface makes it clear that the netbook is a "device" and not a multi-purpose computer with a start menu and applications able to rival Windows. Once that consumers started to install Windows XP on netbooks and that Linux manufacturers started to release distributions that featured the same interface and capabilities as a Windows computer, Microsoft had no choice but to enter the marked with a very discounted version of Windows.

Moblin: the return to the computing device

Microsoft does not like the current situation, what they want is for the price and capabilities of netbooks to increase so that they can sell more expensive versions of Windows (such as Windows 7). What Intel wants is to continue to sell more and more cheaper chips, meaning that they want the price of netbooks to go down. For this they need an operating system that is not only cheap (or free) but also one that doesn't look like a traditional computer. Why? Because they don't want consumer to purchase these device to replace their computers but in addition of their current desktops or laptops. Because of this Moblin is designed with most of the capabilities of a full computer, but with an interface that is more suited to a mobile use than a desktop use.

What is in for Microsoft?

This is actually a win for Microsoft too as this clearly differentiates Moblin "devices" from Windows "all purpose" computers. Microsoft can continue to sell more expensive versions of Windows on more expensive computers with a traditional desktop interface without fearing too much the competition from the cheap Moblin powered netbooks: these don't look like Windows computers and are clearly for a different purpose. When an OEM complains about the price of Windows 7, now it can be told: use Moblin on your line of cheap netbooks that are companion devices and install an expensive version of Windows on higher end models that can replace a "full" computer. It is in Microsoft's interest to insure that Moblin is a good platform for basic tasks like surfing the web (hence the Silverlight port) to ensure that users don't install Windows in its place as long as the most advanced computing tasks are more intuitively done in Windows.

Moblin vs Windows?

Moblin is a Linux that is very different from Windows: the emphasis is clearly on web based applications, social networks, contacts etc... It is half way between a computer and a smartphone or PDA. It can of course run powerful Linux applications (otherwise users may replace it with Windows or a more desktop-like Linux distribution), but it is not the focus. Windows on the other hand is designed for desktop computing and powerful applications. The web takes a back seat to what is installed locally on the machine. Of course it can run web applications, just like Moblin can run local applications, but that is not the focus.

Conclusion

Moblin is the solution to the problem of Intel: providing a free, lightweight and powerful OS to sell cheaper netbooks and devices. This allows Microsoft to get out of the "bargain basement OS" market and to focus on a more expensive, higher end market with Windows 7. The differentiation between both OS is large enough to ensure that most people won't buy a Moblin device to replace their computer but to complement it. It suits Microsoft better if consumer purchase a Windows 7 desktop AND a Moblin netbook than if their purchase only a cheap Windows XP netbook.

I am back

My regular readers may have noticed that i didn't post for some time. Well there is a simple explanation: I went on holiday to Kos, a nice little Greek island. This made me realize all the challenges of keeping yourself connected when you don't have an internet connection at home.

This also made me realized how helpful a netbook actually was in these kind of situations, as some bars do offer free access to their Wifi access points if you bring your own computer. Internet cafes were they "rent" you a desktop for an hour or two cost a lot on the other hand, so my netbook saved me quite a few bucks in the last 2 weeks!

How the web changed the way we shop: a keyboard retail story!

Recently I went into town to shop for a new computer keyboard. I could have bought one on the web but I wanted the item before the week-end, so I could not wait for it to be delivered and decided to shop at retail. A computer keyboard is a fairly common item and I expected to find a suitable model quite easily, but I actually ended up at 7 different shops before I finally made a purchase. How did that happen? Ten years ago I would not have done that.

What happened was that I did perform some research on the web for the best keyboard and the average retail price of the models I might want to purchase. At the first shop they has a suitable model, but it was sold for a full 50% more than the average retail price if purchased on the web, so I walked out. The second shop I entered had very good price, but only offered one model and it was out of stock, so I was out of luck. I then decided to try the shop that sold Macs around the corner, but they only sold apple branded keyboards. Apple keyboardsare great, but I am not ready to pay the $50 retail price, it's only a keyboard even if it is a stylish one. Mac accessory retail is obviously a lucrative business. The 4th shop was also flat out of stock on keyboard, and the next one was exceptionally closed.

When I entered the 6th shop my attention was drawn by a big sign: "sale today: buy two items and the second is half price". My hopes of a retail bargain were quickly squashed though: the shop only carried fairly high end wireless keyboard models that were overkill for my purpose, and I did not have any need for anything else in the shop, so the wonderful retail offer was not so wonderful after all. Finally I purchased my keyboard on my way out of town at a large entertainment shop that is part of a local retail franchise. That shop had a wide assortment of keyboard models from Logitec and Microsoft, and the prices were close to the best deals I could find on the web. The Microsoft branded keyboard I purchased cost me about $20 and is very pleasant and silent to type on.


So how did the web change the way we shop at retail?

Ten years ago when a consumer entered a shop he or she usually had very little knowledge of what products existed and at what prices. Some compared the offers of 2, maybe 3 retailers, but that was it. The salesman could afford to sell equipment above the average price, or to carry only high end items. If the same situation had happened ten years ago I would have purchased either the overpriced keyboard of the first shop or the apple keyboard of the third shop. Maybe I would have waited for the first shop to restock, but I doubt it.

Nowadays a lot of consumers do some product research on the web and compare the prices and models on several sites before they go to the shop. When they push the store door they already know what category of product they want, how much they will pay for it and probably which models and which brands they would consider an acceptable retail purchase. The salesman job is not to convince his clients to purchase the items he has in stock anymore, but to have in stock what his clients have already decided they want to buy.

Also web retail has the typical consumer spoiled for choice. With practically every model available on the web consumers are much less willing to settle for a second choice or an unknown brand than before. If the model they want is not in stock they don't buy an alternative, they just go look somewhere else, confident in the knowledge that they can always buy the model they want on the webshould "brick and mortar" retail fail to provide it.

Why Linux does not look like Windows

One interesting remark I read in some comments is that Linux distributions are not successful because they don't look enough like Windows. Apparently if someone completely copied the interface of Windows and slapped that on top of Linux, Windows users would migrate in droves and Microsoft would be bankrupt. Well, not really. Let me explain.

We can nor plagiarize the Windows interface.

A lot of people agree on the fact that Microsoft copied the MacOS interface when creating Windows. Does Windows look exactly like MacOS? Absolutely not, if it did you can bet that Apple's lawyers would quickly have sent cease and desist letters to Redmond. The same is true for Linux: if a distribution copied the Windows interface to the point that users could be confused in believing that the Linux distribution actually was Windows, that distribution would quickly be taken to court. Remember the story of Lindows? In that case it was only a name!

We should not copy the Windows interface.

There are two major reasons why Linux distributions should not blindly copy the Windows interface. First because it not the best interface for everybody. Most people switched to Linux for a reason, usually because they didn't like something with Windows. That may very well be the interface! Even if the Windows interface is very familiar to a lot of people that does not make it the best interface there is!

The second reason is that Linux is different from Windows, so the interface should reflect that. For example in Windows the "Add / Remove program" applet is not very important as it is only used to remove programs. Many people may never bother with it and it is OK to bury it somewhere in the control panel. In Ubuntu the "add / remove program" applet is much more important as it is needed to install new applications and customize your computer to your purpose. As a result it should have a much more important place in the interface.

Delivering a familiar interface.

Some distributions like Linux Mint manage to deliver a very Windows-like interface while remaining true to Linux. The start menu, system tray and windows switchers stay where they are in Windows, but the theme and colors are very different from Windows. This way new Linux users will find their bearings easily, but will never be unaware that they don't use Windows. The start menu has been customized so that the "Add / remove program" applet is much easier to reach to reflect it's bigger role on a Linux system.

The future

There is no doubt that the user interface is one of the most important part of a desktop operating system, and it is one that has been somewhat neglected up to now. Desktop distributions like SUSE and Ubuntu are starting to change this by making usability studies and polishing the look of their desktops. Soon people will maybe not want Linux to copy the Windows interface but the other way around.