CE beat Palm OS :(

K then. New thread. Yes, my personal thought on things is that Microsoft pretty much ignored the system after CE 3.0, and was even starting to move away from them then...It really amazes me that they come out with such a good system after working on it since the early 90's, and drop it for what I believe is a stupid powerful toy that was created to uproot Palm. And I actually believe that Palm would have kept that class if it didn't have to compete with the power and eye candy of ppc's. I also believe Apple would have done the same if Microsoft didn't attack them for so many years either. If Microsoft uprooted them with the good old hpc's, e.g. 1.0-3.0, then I would respect this whole thing of them winning (again) much more. Personally, I hate dominancies. IBM had it, then lost if, and now many people only know of a computer being a Microsoft product and that they have to deal with Microsoft's problems, but they don't. ENTER Linux. (Or buy an old mac that runs on OS 8.1...the last REAL Mac OS.

Incompatible file system formats, incompatible document formats. Developers stretched left right and centre among numberous distributed, low margin platforms.
Like or loath Microsoft they have consolidated the way businesses operate into a more common set of file formats.
Just like with Adobe Systems' PDF.

Microsoft have created wide scale and viable business models for countless OEM's Hardware, software, service and professional providers. Just as 3Com's Palm did and Apple have.
It has made business easier, and rapidly aided the take up of both the internet and digital transactions and commerce.
I sincerely doubt that had it been left to the Linux community that we would have the take-up of the internet that we do today. Sure you can argue that some other company would have filled the void - Apple perhaps. We would still be having this discussion about company X in place of Microsoft too.

Windows CE
Microsoft pretty much have not touched the H/PC since the days of H/PC Pro. The HPC2000 platform itself was basically the service updated Pro application suite and the updated browser. At least with the PPC they made it look different

One thing that the article doesn't specifically state is the boundaries of the triumph. Which platforms does it encompas?
WM2003, WM2003SE, the last breath of PPC2002? How about the CE 4.2 and 5.0 core and the last whimpers of HPC2000? Or indeed the SmartPhone OS?
All devices still readily available at points during 2004.

What equates to the same device yield with Palm's sales?

Windows CE equates to a vast array of devices, superior in just how excentricly different one CE based device can be next to another CE device. Palm are a lot more rigid in what defines a Palm OS device.

It is no secret with me as to what I feel about Platform Core devices. 4.x devices aren't a soloution they are part of the problem.
Sure there is a market for them. However for the H/PC to remain a consumer device, it needs the PDA put back in the box.
I feel that I have said enough on my opinions there over the last couple of years. I'm still waiting for someone to take the Windows Mobile jump with a clamshell. I will continue to wait.

Palm
Yes, Microsoft's ambition with the PsPC and PPC was to uproot Palm from the market place, I don't believe that they made any secret of that either.
If Microsoft hadn't then Palm would be a Monopoly in the market, as you stated you dislike, the dominant player. There aren't too many industries that could compete with the power of 3Com - they got their foot out of the blocks first and were well established before Microsoft started sniffing around. In order to challenge that you would need a corp. with the power and budget of Microsoft.
If Microsoft hadn't got involved in the 'fight' would we have seen Plam release their low budget range - aimed to draw users from the substantially more expensive PPC while providing the same functionality?
In my opinion doubtful.

You also have to appreciate that Palm are strangling themselves. They are drawing be in for central control of the entire manfacturing process. They have taken the reigns back in on Sony and the Handspring.
For the benefit of those like Chiark who like statistics I do have documented evidence to back this up.
Alas I cannot make it public as it isn't my research, but I've no doubt it will get a mention on the site once Kevin has completed his research.

Suffice to say you have the dwindling Symbian and Palm trailing down the bottom on the vendor licensing table - flat lineing almost. Linux somewhere in the middle with a positive correlation. Microsoft way out in front again with a positive correlation.

There is also a case with Palm - that you touched upon with its "class". The original devices had PIM functionality and that was it. Lasted for 3 months on two AAA's. The formula remained the same until Microsoft came along. No denying that. Afterwhich the power in the PDA's exploded.
Ok, so Microsoft and its CE with the power to do these things already there catalysed the process.
However given the rise in mp3's, broadband, Cellular phones and Third generation networks. I think that the, what some see as corruption of the Palm formula was an innevitability. Just like colour screens were.

Linux

True enough, people are sheltered from many other platforms, just take where I am - there are no Apple stores near me that I know of, and the nearest one that I do know exists is 3,400 miles away in New York. Now you woudn't find me in the store if it were there - but that is a personal choice.
However in the same stroke if you install Linux or Mac OS, you have to deal with Linux or Mac OS's problems. Lets not pretend now that they don't have their share of problems.
Open source firefox has had more critical security flaws reported recently by independant security firms than IE has. There is a case that they are more ready to fix the bugs in double time while Microsoft admitedly will um and arr to see fi they can get away with not until they can roll it up 3 months later. However the case that open source makes for more secure products is a faux argument in respect of it is quantity where people like to slam IE.

We are also talking about PDA Linux here, not PC linux. The rules of the game change. If the OEM can go make their own PDA OS, and doesn't have to pay for the software license. It's a ROM based device, there's no room for expancive paid for documentation. The business model comes from the Hardware, not from the software.
What if Joe Geek wants to compile his / her own Linux distro and flash it to the device. What if the flash goes wrong? Is that a claim for a warranty replacement. If the OEM says no are they going to get slammed by the Open Source community for being anti-open source. Just like has been done with Asus and some of their main board firmware.
The intrinsic dangers of constantly flashing ROM chips still exist. Just because there is a penguin on the box doesn't remove the risk.

My point with going off into Linux is to state that I don't believe in the "got a problem? Here have linux" mentality. I'm much more content with the corporate infighthings between PalmOne and Microsoft.
I feel safer in the hands of "Please don't sue us" than in Joe Geek and his friends from linuxrules.com.

I like good replies I do

Yes, I do understand that Linux has MANY problems, and that people would not use computers as much today if that was the only system. Yet, I have watched in the past 6 months as it is getting almost as easy to install and set up as Windows. (I was talking about pc Linux, as Linux was never built to be on pda's. At all)

But yes, I do see the good things from a competition, as I do not like absolute dominancies. But, what I did not like is that 1. Microsoft is now winning in the pda section too, in addition to computers and even servers, though that they will most likely lose to Linux for rather obviouse reasons, at least to small businesses. (Now I do not mean commercial Linux like RedHat which I absolutely despise, as it ruins the whole point)

And 2. Because all pda's really are are personal digital assistants, hpc's can't even be compared fairly to them, and ppc's with all the unnecessary graphics and stuff for a pda, taking away the original functionality of storing contacts and replacing it with ever more powerful media players. I see the same thing in cell phones, which I do not understand. (Mine only calls people, no ability for pictures, ringtones, or all that other useless junk) I really did like the fact of a pda that you could find absolutely everything within its processing power for, and openly program on.

When I found out about hpc's, I got mine to use as a portable computer, not as a pda, as it is so powerful that I use it as a computer instead. As far as pure pda functionality, you can't beat a tiny device that lasts for months on AAA's. (I liked my old Compaq hpc that lasted very long off AA's, that was also more of a pda) Unfortunately, with color screens you just can't go off of dry cell batteries anymore. I would definitely like to see Microsoft create a new hpc system that had the pda functionality and not mini-windows functionality.

We really could use the old pda back, where the only way to create problems is to do crazy hacks (I mean a lot worse than overclocking) or cracking the screen . Other than that, everything works. The hpc's have that, although it is just not the same. I do not want it to be the same, hpc's are not palms. But the whole new pda platform (ppc's, clie's, tungsten's) should have that same functionality and pure simplicity, not all the menus and features. Microsoft has messed up the platform, with their ppc's causing Palm to make theirs similar for the money.

Like I said earlier, I guess if I want a real pda, I'll just get an old one off ebay that has more functionality than a ppc for $20, a miniscule fraction of the price. I got my hpc for the power-app's, I can use that for web browsing and essentially a micro-laptop, which is why I am working to make it have all the software it needs to be absolutely independent. (Once I finally get a 512mb cf card I'll be there )

Going back to the hpc's/ppc's, given the past with Microsoft, once they scrap a system (I'm thinking of Windows 9.x here, and other old software from them) they not only stop supporting it, but even try to pretend that it didn't exist, and isn't important anymore (even though many people are stuck with old Microsoft software). It was a pity when they removed the updates for 98, though I can't complain much about that. But anyways, that just doesn't happen with open source. You can get open source stuff made on ancient systems to still run, and even get support on it. I have actually always gotten better support for Linux, and once its running, there are never those crazy problems that lead you into Joe Geek's hands, it just works from then on. (changing subjects again)

I hope you understand what I am going at here.

-(You can always tell when I am posting from my computer as I use a ridiculous amount of emoticons when I do )

Edited by programsynthesiser 2004-11-30 7:34 PM

By the way, www.linuxrules.com doesn't exist for some reason, I guess that I will purchase that domain.

Where to start answering that one? There's so many threads of debate that it's difficult to know where...

Starting on topic, with the HPC form factor then...

Back in the mists of time, when Palm was a twinkle in the eye of Jeff Hawkins, Psion 0wn3d the PDA market pretty much utterly with the Psion 3 series of devices - the 3a, 3c and 3mx were popular, and largely the only choice if you wanted organisation functionality. The units were British (unusually!) and displayed clever engineering, particularly around the hinge which moved in a way to provide a rest for the keyboard and screen. Of course, it was a weak point of the design in physical terms, but it was a beautiful piece of engineering. The weakness was fixed after the 3a.

Enter stage left the Palm Pilot from US Robotics - a company best known for modems... A touch screen PDA with a novel "graffiti" input mechanism. Users loved 'em, the Psioneers couldn't understand the appeal of a device with such a limited input mechanism.

Psion continued its success launching the Series 5, which legend has it prompted Bill Gates to utter that Psion, a comparatively tiny British company was "the biggest threat to Microsoft". Again, beautiful engineering in a small package.

It may have been bluster or whatever from Gates, but Microsoft launched Windows CE 1.0 in the HPC form factor. It was abysmal: you only had to try using Windows CE and then a Psion 5 to see how awful it was. However, it had a spark of something about it, and Microsoft had made no secret of how it had, until now, dealt with its competition that it could not engulf... Just ask Novell about netware.

Psion licensed their OS to other manufacturers: Geofox, Oregon Scientific, ... however these were again small volume manufacturers relatively speaking compared to the likes of Philips, Casio, Hewlett Packard et al in the WinCE camp.

WinCE 2 came around, and it was a revelation (comparatively speaking). 2.11 actually saw a decent, usable OS, and by now the hardware had caught up to the point that it could run the cut-down Win32 API - which is essentially what WinCE is - at a decent lick, using decent applications such as the Microsoft Pocket Outlook and Pocket Office suite. CE2.0 also saw the launch of the "Palm-size PC", with a different UI, but the same "guts"... MS had recognised that Palm were doing well, and decided they wanted a bit of that, too.

Psion, being a relatively small company, couldn't (or chose not to) invest in hardware, so the series 5 gained a faster processor, but still an awful screen... In the age of whizzbang colour graphics, the Psion didn't have the wow factor, but still had arguably the better suited OS and applications to PDA usage. It still could, like the original Psion Organiser 1, be programmed on the device, and still had a huge enthusiastic user base. It ran for weeks on AA batteries - by now, Windows CE devices couldn't do this: the colour screens needed too much juice.

At this point, Psion effectively gave up on the consumer PDA. Microsoft had won through larger hardware manufacturing base, massive R&D budget and had crushed its competitor.

The PDA had gone mainstream, and was selling to people who wanted cool toys rather than PDAs. The criteria that people bought on was skewed: people didn't ask "what do I need out of a PDA", they asked "How much ram has it got, what clock speed is the processor, and does it look sexy?"

Psion was sunk. It cottoned onto this, and got out.

Palm had continued to grow... The form factor was popular and, like the Psion, it had a wealth of users, and a very healthy after market developer community. Palm started licensing its OS, and did very well out of it. Jeff Hawkins left to form Handspring, which was a PalmOS device with arguably cleverer hardware design, and others picked up the OS too to embed in their own devices.

Microsoft's Palmsize-PC begat PocketPC, and never looked back. Colour screens, decent processors and usable applications all meant Microsoft now just had to wait until performance outshone that which Palm could muster to take advantage of the (relatively) straightforward portability from Win32 which meant more complex applications could be delivered at a lesser cost than on other platforms. Releasing the toolset free was a good move too, which always endears the amateur developer to a platform.

Sony fought the good fight on the PalmOS front with the Clie, and is a company that really does understand what to do to push a consumer's "oooh, gotta have one" buttons, but have just announced that they're giving up.

Sharp messed around with the Zaurus, including their Linux devices (the move to which alienated a significant part of the Zaurus userbase), but Linux is just an OS and a PDA needs more than that. They've realised that they don't have the appeal that they need to make their volumes work in the USA, and are shifting units to the Asian market alone. Cold, hard market realities...

Through releases 2 and 3, WinCE had kept the PocketPC and Handheld PC separate but based on the same core. Office and PIM Applications were built into the OS as core components.

Through their OEM manufacturers, Microsoft can play the eye candy game and win - the OEMs will fight amongst each other to show the sexiest, sleekest devices, and MS does not have to stump up the hardware R&D costs - however, they do have to grow the platform to incorporate new hardware developments, such as the 640x480 VGA screens that are now being sported by some PocketPCs. Just look at the developer newsgroup to see the fun that this is causing

Having killed the competition (IMHO), Microsoft then decided to do whatever they wanted, and rationalising the OS made sense. Possibly to avoid antitrust or monopoly accusations, or whatever, the OS core changed, and PocketPC became an application suite on top of the OS.

With the advent of CE 4, the OS was now the OS, and did not include things such as the office apps or PIM functions. The PocketPC continued on unabashed, including applications on top of this OS, whereas the HPC died as a PDA - if you want the functionality, you have to rely on the OEM including it, or buy after market applications. There's a few around, but they're expensive and nigh on impossible to buy.

Why did MS kill the HPC form factor? I don't know, but I'd guess lack of volume compared to PocketPC was a large help in making the decision.

PDA market growth is stagnating, so will need something else to kickstart it - perhaps keyboards are the Next Big Thing?

On MacOS:Mac OS 8.1 is IMHO limited in comparison to a modern OS. OS X is, like it or not, a wonderful OS. I'd quite happily use it as my day to day OS...

Linux, and indeed the open source software movement, is all about freedom as in speech, with freedom as in beer coming in a distant second in ideological importance. Companies such as RedHat are ABSOLUTELY needed to take the OS forward into the corporate environment, and I can't understand your bitterness to them. They (along with the other commercial distros) have done *so* *much* for linux that Linux would still be largely unnoticed if they hadn't.

Compare Linux to FreeBSD: I personally believe Linux is the talked-about success that it is due to the licensing which has allowed RH et al to do just what they are doing.

The fact that it is free as in cost is secondary to me: it's the ethos of the movement that buys me into it.

By the way, linuxrules.com was registered on 22 Feb 2001 by "Ultimate Search" of Hong Kong. I suspect it may cost you a bit to buy it off 'em.

So, in summary: I agree that MS used their position/weath/OEM relationships to kill Psion, kill Palm and own the PDA market for whatever reason they wanted.

I agree that the functionality of Palm, and indeed Psion, is still in a lot of ways superior to Windows CE 3.

I disagree that Mac OS 8.1 is any good as a usable OS ;-) , and would take OS X over that every day/week/year.

Linux is great, but it isn't a magic bullet that delivers a utopia. There's still the choice of gnome or kde, distribution, and all sorts of magic. Stuff like Ubuntu helps, but "Enter linux" is not a silver bullet to the world's computing woes, or to MS's domination - but it sure helps!

Interesting debate this!

Cheers,
Nick.

linuxrules.com is registered I'm afraid. Expires in Feb though.

I think that really Linux depends on your experience of it.
You have to go into Linux with a clear objective, it's not really something that you can do "I know I'll have a look at linux today" - Torvalds said that himself.

My experiences with Linux have not been especially fruitful, although I do use it on and off. That however is another story for another day.

While it may not have been built for PDA's it very much is finding its way onto them. Geek fad or viable?
Make is sync with MS Outlook, and it has a chance to cross the platform divide.

"Microsoft are Winning the PDA war", as I outlined I think that the term could be ruthlessly torn to shreads when you actually break down the demographics of what "Palm OS" sales are - raw PDA for the most part, and what Windows CE sales are - Anything you like.
I would also disagree with you on all of the server fronts. They have an outstangind product in MS Exchange, but it is too MS centric and doesn't interoperate well with other systems. You need to be using AD and have a Windows backbone. Many corps are Maninframe *nix.
There is also the web server argument. Apache still outflanks IIS. Apache killed NCSA, not Microsoft. Domination by Open Source allowed?


© Netcraft

Not in my book no. However Microsoft are far from Winning the server war.
We're IIS here btw, we don't tow the conformist line

I love my 2 AA 320LX, lasts forever. Solid, robust and still productive today.

We clearly have a different approach to how we use our H/PC's. For me it is a PDA with teeth. It is the PDA nature of it that makes it robust and gives it the edge over anything else. Anything else that it can do is secondary, but my oh my, what a boon to have it!
I can use it for network diagnostics and a raft of other things that you couldn't dream of using a Palm OS device of indeed a PPC (as easily) for. It sure beats lugging a laptop around London Underground.

Alas we have to be realistic about it. The era of the H/PC platform as we know it is over. We have to look at a bold futuer where if this form factor, pioneered by the likes of hp and Psion is to survive. We have to look over at our distant cousins in Pocket PC land and move into an uneasy truce with them.
A separate platform will not come. The future of the H/PC is to consolidate with the consumer arm of the Pocket PC, and the commercial arm that the Windows CE core can offer.
What OEM developers need to realise is that they are shipping a flash ROM device. The operating system that they cater for is not really part of the argument. They are buying the tools to create the Windows Mobile devices and the Windows CE 4 devices (as we know them) any way.
So long as the consumer is willing to pay to switch about between the two, the option for having both is there. You can appease the rigid corporate markets who don't need the fluff of Windows Mobile while still providing a consumer orientated version.

Many OEM's are in a state of denial when it comes to looking at the H/PC as a consumer orientated device. Whether that state of mind has arisen exclusivly at the ownus of Microsoft or because of some degree of sales figures verses consumer pentration - I don't have that answer.
I do however know that there is interest in the platform. You just have to sit in a cafe with a H/PC on the table to know that.
Us being here and having this conversation is a testiment to that!

Microsoft do have an odd support policy once a platform reaches a certain age. I've discussed this here on the site before.
Look for Windows CE 1,0x or 2.00 references and you will struggle.
Look for Windows 1 - 3.11 references and you will be in an even worse position. NT 3.1 - 3.51... never existed so microsoft.com would have you believe.

They have this support life cycle, and for some reason have taken to removing self help support after x years now as well. Which to me is just laudable. For the sake of freeing up a microscopic percentage of Microsoft.com's total data capacity.

I agree with you whole heartedly on the Cell phone issue.

Chiark,

The 2.01 Palm PC release - Palm-sized PC come 2.11 was in effect just the Platform Core with a new application front end which pre-empted the later generation devices 'today'
Half of the application core was just a cut and paste from the H/PC. If the program was lucky it had the screen size specifications changed in the code before it was compiled. One or two things didn't even get this.

The separation between the core and the platform actually happened with the 2.10 release, not with the PPC 2000 release. The OEM partner platform builder and the commercial device platform builder were completely difference come the release of the 2.11 core.
The licensing changed, the volumes changed and smaller developer got to take up the Windows CE base OS as a production worthy system. The idea originally being that Windows CE would now become more than just the PDA OS but could branch out and put Microsoft in any device, any where, any time.

Psion lost out because it was lacking the international exposure and marketing budget that Microsoft’s position from the success of MS Office and the steady rise of Windows after the 95 release was affording them.
With sky rocketing development costs, a hardware line that was as you said well engineered but in urgent need of a refresh and with Microsoft turning the worlds focus away from the H/PC now and onto the QVGA's. Going up against a marketing machine like that would have been fatally fool hardy.

It is such an unequivocally British story with Psion. Such a superb idea, it had class and pezas. Doomed to fall by the wayside because of the British industry mentality of running the gauntlet based on what you already have, and avoiding evolution because it means money.
The fundamental structure of the system was at fault. In the far east and even in the states the ethos is quite the opposite. As we can all see to the Pocket PC's benefit.

What you say about releasing the development tool spells out Microsoft to a tee. They played the same game with Internet Explorer, and look what happened there. Very much freedom as in beer there forming a key part of the master plan.
This however is something that they are starting to reign in on. One could read into that as Microsoft getting comfortable where they are and looking to affirm the revenue stream on the annual accounts - understand that Windows Mobile has never yet turned a profit. Accounts for the last fiscal year show a $38 million US loss over a turnover of $61 million. Look at that against the 2002 - 2003 fiscal year and there is a 33% turnover increase though.

What do I mean by that? Well look at the eVC release, it wasn't eVT just the C++ module. If you wanted to tap into VB and C# then you needed to invest in the more streamlined and rather hefty on the wallet Visual Studio.
They also have implemented controls under CE4 WM2003 to restrict the use of back catalogue applications from previous Windows CE released, and are heavily moving to adoption of the .net CF.
There is also the strong possibility of Microsoft entering back into the Windows CE software path as a secondary point of entry into the CE world. We could be looking at an Office release for it. I've no doubt also an updated SQL and a continuation of the commercial mapping system for CE.

Unlike Chiark, I'm not a developer. I'm a business man. The ethos’s of Open Source doesn't appeal to me as I'm increasingly wary of the business model that flows with it.
I've no doubt that there are many, many advantages if you are a developer - in fact I know there are. However my premise for this argument you have to understand isn't as a Open Source developer.

Ultimately, whether we like it or not. The rise of the over powered PDA is here to stay. The sass and pep that has become the decisive purchasing factor is an area where the H/PC needs to move into.

I would be very interested actually, to hear your views on where you feel Palm and especially Psion devices stand out over what the Windows CE H/PC currently offers. My Psion experience is extremely limited - truth be told.

I really do not see Linux as being suitable for a pda. It was always meant for desktop/server platform. Though, if it works well, what the heck. As far as Red Hat, they have gotten Linux out there a lot, I do know this. But they used to be better. They now have a system so commercial that its just not the same. And there are free distributions that I believe to be much more stable and can be modified more (I'm thinking slackware here), which has been around for I think 12 years now, being one of the first and longest-lasting distributions.

I do understand your business point of view, C:Amie (or is it C-Amie, I can never tell...) though, 1. what about the companies that lose millions/BILLIONS of dollars because of viruses? They then have to rely on someone else to fix it (Norton) because Microsoft may take many months or even a year to release a remover for a virus on THEIR operating system that businesses pay so ridiculousely much for. If a company that big makes a system, it should be supporting it very quickly. And it should be checked constantly for security vulnerabilities that malicious users find, so they are blocked BEFORE a virus is released. If there was one for Linux, the whole community would help out, and it would be eradicated very soon.

2. Windows doesn't even come with office for free, or many other apps that come with a standard install of Linux, though that isn't necessarily that important, because it would be a big security risk for companies to o a full install. I am at least glad that firefox has made a browser so good that I am seeing many pro-Microsoft people who would never touch open source using it as their core browser.

Apache

As far as serving, there are actually not more Linux servers online. They are just so much more efficient that most of the internet is run on Linux. I really don't see any reason for Microsoft to be making server editions of their expensive software, as Linux is a very good, reliable, and secure server (Only if you set it up right will it be secure!!! But these are companies, so it would be).

Palm

Trying to get this more on-topic here, there are certain major advantages I see to having a palm (an older one that is)

1. Software. If you can think of something you want your palm to do, you will most likely find someone who has already done it. The palm community is huge, and mainly this is because palm actually released a GOOD emulator, kinda something that you would expect from Microsoft (geez...).

2. Simplicity. I compare Palm OS to pre Mac OS 9 because it is so simple to use. Someone who has never used a computer before could pick one of these up after a hard reset, and learn how to use it instantly. Tap something, it opens. You don't see any filesystem, just a bunch of icons. Syncing works more often, and just everything works.

Mac OS

Apple had something revolutionary before OS 10 or even 9. In the 80's, there was no real useable computer to non-experienced users. Everything just worked, like the Palms (I can back this up to as I have a few of the old machines) and even what people would think as harder tasks (reinstalling the operatings system) were easy, and always worked, with no hard menus.

The system (This includes all of them up to the late 8.x OS) had such an amazing compatibility setup too. Its ROM must be amazing, as you can put a hard drive as large as you want on one of these machines (32bit ones really) and as long as it FITS, it will work. They seemed to have surpassed the barrier of other bios's, as those could only handle drives of a certain size (8.4gb on my 1997 VIAO (pc) ). Even more amazing, thy made the Macintosh SE/30, and that was made in 1988. The thing can be stuffed with 128mb of ram!!! Thats amazing. And the system was just really hard to screw up to. Viruses were so rare purely because it was so hard to program on the system...not the best thing really though. Mac OS X is unix. That was revolutionary. 30 years ago when unix came out. Nothing really Macintosh-special there.

So yes, Microsoft was linked to them having to make an ooh eye candy system, and scrapping what really made a Mac a Mac. A Mac is now a pc with a g5 processor, thats it.

Right, the linux stuff first

Linux *could be* perfectly suitable for a PDA. Part of the problem with Linux is it means different things to different people. It's a kernel to some, and a religion to others . With appropriate kernel mods to support PDA-style functionality (instant on, power management, wake-up routines etc) it'll be useful, but ultimately you need the stuff on top of the kernel in userspace to make it what it needs to be.

Redhat are a business - they're around to make money. I actually think they've improved a hell of a lot, and are focusing in the right area for them and also providing invaluable service to the Linux movement. Corporations trust Redhat, but on the whole do not trust Linux. Personally I run the IPCop distro on my firewall, Gentoo on a web server and Ubuntu when I want to hack around.

Viruses. one thing that makes me smirk is that people running Linux think that they're inherently protected from viruses. These people invariably will log in as root to their desktop, ignore the warning about doing so 'cos they're l33t, and are a timebomb.

Virus writers target the mass market. Given that there's people out there still running Win95 that now leave their machines on day-in, day-out connected to broadband, those are easy places to get to... Hell, just send an email saying "Anna Kornikova nekkid", and wait for the zombies to install .

Come the revolution of Linux on the desktop, which may well be next year, we'll see nasty Linux exploits. There's already been a good number that Joe User with his default install might fall prey to, and as Linux becomes more popular, so the number of viruses will increase.

I would agree that Linux is inherently more secure than Win95, for example, but to assume that Windows=insecure is wrong in the same way that Linux=secure is so horribly wrong.

Security is an individual's responsibility. A firewall, virus checker and most importantly a CLUE as to precautions to take are the most important weapons no matter what OS you run.

I'll climb off my soapbox now



Mo matter how you define "most of the internet", I don't believe that's right.

Apache != Linux. Apache = any OS, including Win32, Solaris, FreeBSD and Linux. In the group of fortune 100 company webservers, Solaris 8 is almost 3 times as popular as Linux, and Win2k is over twice as popular...

I understand your frustration with apple, but they had to do something to move onto a more flexible OS than MacOS classic. I rue the day that the Amiga died (sadly!), and still am pretty amazed at how the platform just rolled over, kicked its legs in the air, and refused any attempts to revive it. (Yes I know there's things going on in the amiga world now, but they ain't amiga in the same way that you think OSX ain't MacOS).

The days when I truly knew what *every* file in the OS did, and how to configure every aspect of the system are over - well, except for something like a roll-your-own gentoo that you've spent a hell of a lot of time being at one with

One thing's for sure, you haven't a cat in hell's chance of understanding the purpose of every file on any Win platform since 3.11.

The brutal reason that I think Apple had to commoditise hardware, and that's what they did, was because they had to realise that hardware manufacturing is not what they want to do as core business - or at least, that's what it appears to me. By making the Macs conform to industry standards (and the classic macs even had PCI slots, standard memory slots, etc...) they made their machines more commodity-like.

Computing, like it or not, has changed. My first computer was a Vic-20. I'd say that my first "real" computer was an Amiga 500. All were custom hardware with a custom OS that only had to deal with one set of hardware - like the early macs. Computing hardware is now a commodity, and the OS and applications are the differentiators - or at least I think that's what Mac feels.

The parallel does not apply to the HPC world yet, as miniaturisation will always require clever thinking and a bit of creative flair to manufacture something that works well...

Why do I like Psion? Why do I still carry my 5mx? Because in both OS and hardware it is elegant, efficient, "beautiful" and fit for purpose. Its processor may be slow, but it is more performant in some aspects than my Jornada 720. The web browser works well - although connecting to wireless is a no-go area , the organisation applications are legendarily good (Agenda), and I can do practically whatever I want with it - providing I don't want multimedia, MP3 or whathaveyou.

Why do I still use my 3mx when the fancy takes me? see above. PDA Functionality is king in some instances, and the Psion has what it takes...

I keep meaning to write a comparison between the 3mx, 5mx, 360lx, 200lx and 720 - when I get a few weeks spare, I might well do that.

We ought to get together in a pub, it'd be great to chew the fat over beers. One thing's for sure, we've all got our own opinions, a good knowledge of the subject, and the ability to talk the hind legs off a donkey.

I think it would be wise to leave the other halves (and offspring) at home

Cheers,
Nick.

I just want a working "undo" in the word processor.

You know, the beauty of Linux at the moment is that stupid computer users don't go near it. There will only be exploits for the people that don't put on firewalls and run in root (ugh). Running in root defeats the whole security layer in Linux, as its main advantage over Windows is that programs installed asa user can only affect them, not the whole system. This is a server system. Another advantage to it is that unlike with Windows, you can configure the system yourself in every way, so others may have a securtiy risk that the good users do. An open source system has the ability to reach much higher levels than a commercial one does if there are many users that work and develop on it. Wise users also know not to go with the default install. They also don't use Lindows, a version of Linux that I consider to be the most insecure system there is (always in root).

I do not look at Linux as a religion, as I don't see a need for it as the system for pda's to use, and I like to experiment with other systems (gotta get a copy of OS/2).

As far as the pda, the second I got my 720, I knew that its powerful processor did not make it necessarily faster than pure, slower pda's. This is because 1. The system runs in color (not a biggie) 2. The programs are bigger, something companies think has to go with faster processors and more memory, making those advances almost useless. 3. The OS itself uses over 3mb of RAM, which surprised me. It is much more bloated than other pda OS's,which use almost nothing (e.g. palm (what does e.g. mean again?!))

So, I never expected my system to be an excellent pda, as I bought it for use as a mobile computer (It still amazes me that my dying battery and a wireless card combination still gets 4 hrs of battery life). Still, pda apps like the calendar open the same instant that I click them, which is nice. The only the that I have seen lag is web browsing, which pda's aren't meant to do (but hpc's are) so for that I can't complain.

Glad for the invite, though it is sadly doubtful that I will be in the UK anytime soon. Though there is always a possibility.

Edited by programsynthesiser 2004-12-02 7:33 PM

Sad. No one on this forum seems to have skype or aim. ;( It would be fun to carry on this conversation in real time. Guess I'll have to get a good old msn messenger account then! (ugh)

-Oh yeah, my email maybe even be G-Mail if I can sort out a mishap with google. (Site went down as I registered and account is still taken even though I deleted it) Go to www.google-watch.com and be mildly surprised with the reasons why I may abandon gmail completely.

LOL, if you want an OS that noone stupid uses, look back at Linux in 1993, and try running it (or FreeBSD) on an Amiga . That's an exercise in futility... But satisfying if you get it to work. Although saying that, I used it, so that may slightly decrease the average intelligence of the user base

The security design of Linux is as you say - "avoid root unless you need it". Sadly, I know muppets who are proud to be running as root day in, day out. These people think they are experts because "they run Linux". They are just waiting to be 0wn3d

I see what you're saying about OSS being able to reach a higher level than commercial, and that indeed is the endgame, but unfortunately developers have to eat and so will require payment. A significant portion of the world's development talent is still tied up in the commercial world... One real advantage of OSS that parallels the scientific world is the subject of peer review - code is available to be reviewed, and learnt from, or the mistakes pointed out. That's why OSS will be a sustainable model, once the IP paranoia that has marred the start of this century is over, and monopolies are no longer granted on the bleedin' obvious (cf "IsNot" patent in Basic that MS has applied for, and that the patent author seems embarassed to put his name to!)

You don't want OS/2 unless you have to. The design is right, but unfortunately I believe it's stagnated. Part of the mission critical stuff that I'm involved in still runs on OS/2 and the biggest headache is the development environment not meeting the expected standard set by VS .Net... The development environment tools make or break a platform IMHO.

As for Skype or aim... I'll stick with Trillian running MSN if I have to .

Uh, kinda lost you there...

Yea, I got a .net account just for fun...but it doesn't work yet, as I haven't spent any time on it. But it is programsynthesiser, what is becoming my main sn. Wow, this site did that! Haha if you have a microphone try out skype and be surprised...(not saying its the best thing in the world, it would be if it was open source ) (I say that too much)

Oh, I never planned to make OS/2 my main OS...I just want to see what the alternative to Windows 95 was like, as experimenting with operating systems is my thing. You used Linux in 1993? Impressive...setting up Mandrake 7.0 as a dual boot with Windows 2000 was the work of a summer...

Scrap that, I would spell synthesizer right, but the mispell that made this my account name has become somewhat of the way to spell it for me now...