Linux evolves for mobile devices with UBUNTU

A version of the increasingly popular Linux operating system Ubuntu will be developed for use on net-enabled phones and devices.

The Ubuntu Mobile and Embedded project aims to create the open source platform for initial release in October 2007.

The operating system will be developed by members of the Ubuntu community, along with staff from chip giant Intel. Its development was prompted by the growth of power hungry portable devices that place new demands on software.

"It is clear that new types of device - small, handheld, graphical tablets which are Internet-enabled - are going to change the way we communicate and collaborate," said Ubuntu CTO Matt Zimmerman.

"These devices place new demands on open-source software and require innovative graphical interfaces, improved power management and better responsiveness." Mobile firms such as Nokia are already using open source technologies in some of its products.

Big deal

Ubuntu is already a popular choice of operating system on desktop and laptop computers. In contrast to offerings from companies such as Microsoft that earn money by licensing and charging for use of their products, Linux code is freely available.

That means anyone can modify it or develop applications for it. As a result, there are many different types, or distributions, of Linux operating systems. The driving force behind the Ubuntu project is Mark Shuttleworth, one of the world's first space tourists.

The self-made millionaire from South Africa founded the firm Canonical in 2004 to promote and support open source software projects. The firm's partnership with Intel to develop the mobile operating system is just the latest deal with some of the powerhouses of the technology world.

In April this year, Ubuntu announced a deal with Dell, the world's second largest manufacturer of PCs, to offer certain computers with the operating system preinstalled. "We are delighted to be working with Intel on this version of Ubuntu," said Mr Zimmerman. "Intel is making significant contributions of technology, people and expertise to the project."

Power drain

The chip-maker has already shown off a device running a prototype of the Ubuntu mobile platform. At a recent meeting Intel CEO Paul Otellini held up a prototype device, like a large cell phone, running the system, although he said it was also capable of running versions of Microsoft's Windows.

Intel is keen to grab a slice of the fast growing market for net-enabled phones and devices. It has already endorsed another open source project to develop applications for mobile devices known as the Gnome Mobile & Embedded Initiative (GMAE).

The firm also recently unveiled plans for a tiny low-energy chip designed specifically for mobiles and portable computers. Codenamed Silverthorn, the chips will be one-seventh the size of conventional processors and consume just 10% of the power, Intel said.

Hardware developments such as this are important to maximise battery life for portable devices that are required to run increasingly sophisticated software and deliver relatively power-hungry applications like the web. The new Ubuntu platform will also aim to maximise energy efficiency whilst offering a graphical interface designed specifically for the small screen.

More details of the new operating system will be announced at the Ubuntu Developer Summit being held in Seville, Spain from 06 to 11 May.

An initial version will be released in October this year.

Source: BBC News, May 8

Top 10 things Microsoft loves and hates about Open Source

Over the years, Microsoft has had some pretty harsh words (and actions) for the open source community in general and for Linux in particular. And with news this week that the company reportedly wants open source software users to pay royalties on 235 alleged patent violations, the relationship is obviously changing. We take a look at five ways Microsoft is embracing open source or Linux and five ways it is doing to battle against those same forces.

Microsoft loves open source

1. Silverlight runtime and scripting language opened up from the start

Last week at its Mix07 conference (which mimics a “conversational” style familiar at open source confabs), Microsoft said its new IronRuby dynamic language and the Dynamic Language Runtime (DLR) will be offered under Microsoft’s BSD-style Permissive License, which lets users modify and distribute the code. The intent is to add cross-platform support for dynamic language programming in .Net (DLR works in conjunction with .Net’s CLR) and to encourage developers to implement other language on top of the DLR. Last year, Microsoft made its IronPython available under the Permissive License.

2. Deals with open source vendors

Integration-style deals with SugarCRM and JBOSS show that Microsoft understands non-Windows components must be able to attach reliably to Windows server software. The company works with vendors to make that happen. Also “co-opetition” agreements with the likes of XenSource and MySQL, an open source database, show that Microsoft understands the pressure is coming from all sides. A similar deal with Novell on Linux had its good points, but one aspect landed it on the Top Five Battles list below.

3. Port 25

In August 2006, Microsoft launched (at LinuxWorld no less) Port 25, a Web site that provides a look inside Microsoft’s Open Source Lab, which is under the direction of Bill Hilf, who once helped lead Linux strategy development for IBM. The blog-style site digs under the research lab’s testing, analysis and interoperability work.

4. Codeplex

The year-old open source project hosting Web site started by Microsoft lets users share open source development projects. The big news is that portions of Visual FoxPro will be posted as open source on Codeplex. A new version of the Web site is released every three weeks adding additional features and updates. As of early March, there were 1,029 projects on the site.

5. Identity

Led by Kim Cameron, Microsoft’s identity architect, Microsoft has fostered a community discussion with identity that has involved open source movers and shakers such as Doc Searls, independent developers and those with a fascination for the technology. In Sept. 2006, Microsoft announced its Open Specification Promise, which gives developers access, without need for licenses or fear of legal action, to 35 Web services protocols Microsoft has developed, including many Microsoft uses in its own identity technology.

Microsoft hates open source

1. Open Document Format (ODF)

Microsoft likes to make money and its file formats have kept users anteing up for new Office versions for years. With governments far and wide evaluating or adopting open file formats, Microsoft came up with OpenXML (the default format in Office 2007) and is pushing it to the same standards bodies that christened ODF. There are debates over the merits of each, but it’s likely to get uglier before it gets better.

2. $3 software bundle in foreign countries

See above. With Linux and open source representing a major threat in emerging markets (those not already saturated with Windows), Microsoft is playing defense with a bundle that includes Windows XP Starter Edition, Office Home and Student 2007, Windows Live Mail and other applications. Chairman Bill Gates said Microsoft will work with local governments to get students low-cost PC’s that include the software.

3. Novell patent deal

While some of last year’s Novell deal around joint sales and R&D efforts drew praise, the part dealing with protecting customers from patent lawsuits and intellectual property infringement, the Covenant to Customers, ruffled major feathers in the Linux and open source community for its many loopholes and missing details and led to accusations that Novell was bamboozled again by Microsoft.

4. Attack on the GNU General Public License (GPL) 3.0

Microsoft has been a longtime contributor to the lobbying organization Association for Competitive Technology, which critics charge is a Microsoft puppet organization, for spreading fear, uncertainty and doubt about the forthcoming upgrade to the GPL. And just to connect dots, Richard Stallman, the leader of the Free Software Foundation says GPL 3.0, which is nearing final draft, will be crafted to block the type of patent/IP deal Novell and Microsoft cut.

5. Digital Rights Management (DRM)

Microsoft’s digital rights management is incompatible with Linux and open source tools, where users could use the source code of document or multi-media software to work around DRM controls. Microsoft has locked down its DRM capabilities, thereby locking non-Microsoft approved clients out of the DRM loop. Purists say content control should be in the hands of content providers not imposed by Microsoft and out of reach of users with open source software.

Is RSS Secured Enough?

RSS is growing at a lightening speed. What was once only known as a “techie tool”, RSS is becoming a tool that is continuously being used by the general population. Along with the good comes, the not so good. And while some have mentioned the emergence of RSS spam, where content publishers dynamically generate nonsensical feeds stuffed with keywords, the real concern relates to security. While an annoyance to the search engines, spam in RSS feeds pales in comparison to the possible security concerns that could be in RSS’ future.

Security Implications Related to RSS.

As RSS gains momentum security fears loom large. As publishers are quickly finding innovative uses for RSS feeds, hackers are taking notice. The power and extendibility of RSS in its simplest form is also its achilles heel. The expansion capabilities of the RSS specification, specifically the “enclosure” field which has launched the podcasting phenomenon, is where the vulnerabilities lie. The enclosure field in itself is not the problem, in fact the majority of RSS feeds do not even use the enclosure tag. The enclosure tag is essentially used to link to file types, things like images, word documents, mp3 files, power point presentations, and executables and can be thought of in similar terms to email attachments.

The fact that RSS can be used to distribute these file types has opened a myriad of doors to users of the syndication standard, but also has created cause for concern. Most people do not feel that the risk is significant because people “choose” the content that they receive, and while it might make the distribution of malware, viruses and spy applications via RSS less prevalent, their is still the inherent risk of a infected file being distributed.

The problem is one of both technology and lack of education.

The danger lies in the fact that many RSS readers, news aggregators, or pod-catchers automatically download the information contained in the enclosure field regardless of its file type or source.

Most RSS developers acknowledge the risks associated with the enclosure field, but few have had the forethought to include filtering, screening or authentication capabilities and many automatically download enclosures.

Nick Bradbury of Bradsoft/NewsGator seems to be proactive, designing FeedDemon with security in mind. FeedDemon uses an editable safelist of file types as well as allowing users to monitor what files are automatically downloaded. FeedDemon also contains hard-coded warnings related to specific file types.

Developers of ByteScout took a different approach to the handling of enclosure files, ByteScout does not automatically download anything without user intervention for each download.

Unfortunately, not all RSS readers, aggregators and podcatchers consider the possible security implications associated with RSS feeds and podcasts, some will automatically download enclosures without warning or any thoughts of security. Be sure to examine how your RSS reader handles files contained in the enclosure field of an RSS feed.

With the increased use of RSS and podcasting, the security risks increase with it. Their is cause for concern, however proactive users and conscientious developers can easily subvert the risk by taking precautions seriously. Computer viruses and malware are cause for legitimate concern, there is ample time and action that can avert potential problems.

Open Source - Major Trends To Watch

The Open Source market, when viewed by drivers, has following four trends that are increasingly overlapping:

1) Cost driven and centered on the Linux Operating system

The original market based on the simple idea of the need for an adaptable O/S that could be tailored to suit circumstances and allow the production of code and techniques to suit new circumstances. This market has remained largely focused on the Server as there is more need for flexibility and more opportunity to develop more applications at a server level than at a PC level. This has led to RedHat having been accused of abandoning the desktop market and the ‘faithful’ starting to back the new Ubunto distribution for desktops.

Today this market can be regarded at a Server level as relatively mature in acceptance and understanding, there are more question marks over the degree to which progress has been made in Desktops (other than France) or in cell phones where Motorola lost market share after the adoption of a Linux O/S. However if factors 2 and 3 below start to accelerate then this will almost certainly change. The challenge with this market is that it is based on cost reduction and is therefore an industrialized market on low margins.

2) Standards driven and centered on the need for non differentiated common software

There is a broad consensus in the technology industry that this is really the core driver by introducing business level software with new, and different,t functionality usually based upon the use of the Internet. In these areas the ability for wide spread sharing of a common set of functions to handle a non differentiating task creates both a new market, and challenges the previous generation of licensing terms. Many of these ‘intra user’, or ‘intra enterprise’, applications are increasingly viewed by the mainstream software venders as extending the market for their own ‘internally’ oriented products.

This is introducing active relationships where they believe they can gain leverage, as an example the Microsoft release of nearly 30 open source code elements to speed this up. To date SAP is the only major vender to have released nothing, and that may change following the release of ‘New Leaf’, their Open Group TOGAF based initiative this spring. From the perspective of a MNC, this is potentially a serious market built on adding value through designing and integrating the new external open standards for trading, and interacting, with the existing internal systems for recording transactions.

3) Requirements driven and centered on new forms of ‘applications’ and their delivery

This shift towards this new ‘intra’ standards based business from Web 2.0 through to CRM, and on to individual vertical sector trading standards outlined above has led to an emphasis on ‘how’ to deliver as the value moves from ‘what’ to deliver. Put another way, if the product is none differentiating and does not carry a margin, then the attention has shifted towards delivery as a service in order to find the margin. This is a very complicated shift that does not only affect Open Source and is worthy of a full discussion in its own right.

From the perspective of a MNC, the real issue is the increasing move these new types of applications are bringing away from major upgrade projects but towards continually small changes. This is bringing some new definitions to AM as well as SaaS, most of which are more closely associated with our core competencies than ‘pure’ SaaS.

4) Politically driven around the desire to overcome ‘monopoly’ providers

For a MNC, this is the easiest one to identify, and accounts for the booming market in France where the Government has driven the adoption of Open Source. However as this is not driven by technology but by the local market it is not part of this brief. However there is one note to make. The North American software vendors who feel this is a deliberate political stance are watching the moves carefully, and if they feel the situation goes too far have a stated intention to identify code corruption and take legal action.

As several actions have already shown license infringements are difficult to avoid, especially when integrating solutions with a mix of Open Source and Proprietary. From the perspective of a MNC, this is a potentially a huge risk as we would almost certainly be the liable party in such an action, and in the adoption of Open Source the legal aspects must be clearly identified and managed at a project level.

Source: Report where the CTO of a Major MNC is talking about the company's plans for Open Source

Linux is NOT Windows

As you are visiting this page, the chances are that you're relatively new to Linux and you might be facing some problems / issues while switching over to Linux from Windows. Welcome to the real world - you are not the only one! Many individuals face multiple issues, so I have divided this article as per multiple problem areas.

Note: In this, the word LINUX refers to the GNU/Linux OS and various Free & Open-Source Software (FOSS) projects.

Problem #1: Linux isn't exactly the same as Windows.

You'd be amazed how many people make this complaint. They explore Linux, expecting to find essentially a free, open-source version of Windows. Quite often, this is what they've been told to expect by over-zealous Linux users. However, it's a paradoxical hope. The specific reasons why people try Linux vary wildly, but the overall reason boils down to one thing: They hope Linux will be better than Windows. Common yardsticks for measuring success are cost, choice, performance, and security. There are many others. But every Windows user who tries Linux, does so because they hope it will be better than what they've got.

Therein lies the problem.

The possible solution: Remember that where Linux is familiar and the same as what you're used to, it isn't new & improved. Welcome the places where things are different, because only here does it have a chance to shine.

Problem #2: Linux is too different from Windows.

The next issue arises when people do expect Linux to be different, but find that some differences are just too radical for their liking. Probably the biggest example of this is the sheer amount of choice available to Linux users. Whereas an out-of-the-box-Windows user has the Classic or XP desktop with Wordpad, Internet Explorer, etc. etc.

Does Linux really have to be so different from Windows? After all, they're both operating systems. They both do the same job: Power your computer & give you something to run applications on. Surely they should be more or less identical?

Switching from one version of Windows to another is like switching from one car to another. Win95 to Win98, I honestly couldn't tell the difference. Win98 to WinXP, it was a bigger change but really nothing major.

But switching from Windows to Linux is like switching from a car to a motorbike. They may both be OSes/road vehicles. They may both use the same hardware / roads. They may both provide an environment for you to run applications / transport you from A to B. But they use fundamentally different approaches to do so.

Windows / cars are not safe from viruses / theft unless you install an antivirus / lock the doors. Linux / motorbikes don't have viruses / doors, so are perfectly safe without you having to install an antivirus / lock any doors.

So, to avoid problem #2: Don't assume that being a knowledgeable Windows user means you're a knowledgeable Linux user: When you first start with Linux, you are a novice.

Problem #3: Culture shock

Windows users are more or less in a customer-supplier relationship: They pay for software, for warranties, for support, and so on. They expect software to have a certain level of usability. They are therefore used to having rights with their software: They have paid for technical support and have every right to demand that they receive it. They are also used to dealing with entities rather than people: Their contracts are with a company, not with a person.

Linux users are in more of a community. They don't have to buy the software, they don't have to pay for technical support. They download software for free & use Instant Messaging and web-based forums to get help. They deal with people, not corporations.

So, to avoid problem #3: Simply remember that you haven't paid the developer who wrote the software or the people online who provide the tech support. They don't owe you anything. Also remember that what Linux seems to be now is not what Linux was in the past. The largest and most necessary part of the Linux community, the hackers and the developers, like Linux because they can fit it together the way they like; they don't like it in spite of having to do all the assembly before they can use it.

Problem #4: The myth of "user-friendly"

This is a big one. It's a very big term in the computing world, "user-friendly". It's even the name of a particularly good webcomic. But it's a bad term. The basic concept is good: That software be designed with the needs of the user in mind. But it's always addressed as a single concept, which it isn't.

Clearly, software designed around the needs of the first user will not be suitable for the second, and vice versa. So how can any software be called "user-friendly", if we all have different needs?

The simple answer: User-friendly is a misnomer, and one that makes a complex situation seem simple.

To avoid #4 problems, all you can really do is try and remember that "user-friendly" doesn't mean "What I'm used to": Try doing things your usual way, and if it doesn't work, try and work out what a total novice would do.

What is Open Source?

Wikipedia defines Open Source as the principles and methodologies to promote open access to the production and design process for various goods, products, resources and technical conclusions or advice. The term is most commonly applied to the source code of software that is made available to the general public with either relaxed or non-existent intellectual property restrictions. This allows users to create user-generated software content through either incremental individual effort, or collaboration.

However, according to OpenSource.org, Open source is a development method for software that harnesses the power of distributed peer review and transparency of process. The promise of open source is better quality, higher reliability, more flexibility, lower cost, and an end to predatory vendor lock-in. Open source doesn't just mean access to the source code. The distribution terms of open-source software must comply with the following criteria:

1. Free Redistribution
2. Source Code
3. Derived Works
4. Integrity of The Author's Source Code
5. No Discrimination Against Persons or Groups
6. No Discrimination Against Fields of Endeavor
7. Distribution of License
8. License Must Not Be Specific to a Product
9. License Must Not Restrict Other Software
10. License Must Be Technology-Neutral