Practical Technology

for practical people.

September 18, 2006
by sjvn01
0 comments

Microsoft’s Zune DRM Madness

I have little love for Microsoft’s business tactics, but even I was a bit surprised to find that Microsoft’s so-called iPod killer, Zune, won’t be able to play Microsoft’s own DRM ‘protected’ WMA and WMV files.

What were they thinking?

Most DRM (digital rights management) protection is crap anyway. It gets in the way of playing, not to mention backing up, your digital music or video. And, now, Microsoft has taken it one step farther. With this smooth move, you can’t even play Microsoft’s WMA (Windows Media Audio) and WMV (Windows Media Video) files on their forthcoming Zune.

I wonder what Napster 2.0, Rhapsody, MusicMatch, MTV Networks Urge, and Yahoo! Unlimited customers think about this? All their media files are locked up with Microsoft DRM, which won’t play on the Zune.

Continue Reading →

September 13, 2006
by sjvn01
0 comments

Apple’s iTV may be just what we need

Some people seem to think that Apple’s announcement of a device code-named the iTV Box, which will wirelessly stream video content from iTunes to a TV, is a yawn.

They think that because media-extenders for Windows Media Center have been around for years.

My question for these people is: Have you ever tried to use a media extender? I have. They’re a major pain.

Continue Reading →

September 1, 2006
by sjvn01
0 comments

Coming soon: Adobe Flash 9 for Linux

We won’t be seeing it until early 2007, but Adobe is hard at work on bringing Flash Player 9 to Linux. In a series of recent blog postings, Adobe’s lead engineer on the Flash Player team, Mike Melanson, has been keeping the Linux community up to date with Adobe’s plans.

Adobe’s main goal is to create a Flash Player 9 that is feature-comparable to its Windows and MacOS offerings. Another, according to a recent interview with Melanson, is to enable proper audio/video synchronization. In the last version of Flash that was available for Linux, Flash Player 7, this was a significant problem.

Melanson promises that Linux users will get it this time, because, “Adobe is purging … the OSS (Open Sound System) audio API in favor of the ALSA (Advanced Linux Sound Architecture).” While the Adobe engineers have run into some problems with ALSA, they’ve been able to overcome them.

At the same time, though, while Adobe will be using the up-to-date ALSA, it will be sticking with some older technologies that are on their way out. The primary example of this is Flash 9’s support of V4L (Video4Linux) API version 1 for camera input, instead of version 2.

The reason to support V4L1? “Lots and lots of camera drivers provide V4L1 facilities,” and, “comparably few camera drivers provide V4L2 facilities,” Melanson said.

While V4L2 is integrated into the Linux 2.6 kernel, V4L1 is clearly hanging on. As a Video4Linux site states, “A number of drivers don’t support the new v4l2 API yet, so we’ll likely see v4l and v4l2 coexist for some time.”

So why doesn’t Adobe do both? Well, you can only program so many things at one time. Nevertheless, while Adobe isn’t promising anything, it’s possible that the Player will include V4L2 support.

As Melanson said in an earlier blog posting, “To be sure, it’s not that Linux can’t do XYZ, it’s that there are so many ways to do XYZ. And forget about making these different methods interoperate where conducive.”

For the UI (user interface), Adobe is using GTK. But, Melanson said, “People [should] not to get too hung up on this UI issue because Flash keeps its interaction with system UI toolkits to an absolute minimum.”

Still, Adobe is considering native support for both GNOME’s GTK and KDE’s QT. On August 31st, Melanson asked, “Here is a hypothetical: what if the Flash Player were to detect during runtime whether it should use GTK or KDE/QT facilities? The biggest issue here would be reliably and automatically detecting which kit to use.”

Finally, Melanson recently announced that there will be a public beta; it just won’t be as soon as many people would like.

“It will be a beta in the classical software engineering sense — i.e., a version that we believe to be largely bug-free and submitted to the users in the hopes that the last of the bugs will be found and reported,” said Melanson.

“Why are we stubbornly refusing to release, say, an alpha version now” asked Melanson? “Primarily because there are known bugs in the Linux Flash Player, and because we know what the bugs are, and we are on track to fix these known bugs. If we were to release an alpha now, we would likely be inundated with reports about bugs we already know about.”

Look for news of the beta to appear later this fall on Melanson’s blog, Penguin.SWF.

A version of this story first appeared in Linux-Watch.

August 29, 2006
by sjvn01
0 comments

Results from the 2006 Desktop Linux Survey

The results of DesktopLinux.com’s 2006 Desktop Linux Market survey are in, and the votes are all tallied. This first article of a series offers a perspective on how the various desktop Linux distributions fared, and why.

Before jumping into what the survey of almost 15,000 Linux users revealed, though, I should point out a few things.

First, this is in no way, shape, or form a scientific survey. Anyone who wanted to vote could vote. We did make sure that we didn’t have a Chicago-style election with multiple votes from one person — or IP address, anyway — but that was about it.

We also didn’t include some mildly popular choices — Arch Linux, GNOME’s Epiphany Web browser, and the Fluxbox window manager — in the initial version of survey. Our readers spoke early on, and we added them.

Still, when all is said and done, we do think that our survey does say some interesting things about the current state of desktop Linux. So, without further ado, here’s what we found.

The most popular desktop of Linux today is… well, most of you can already guess without seeing the scores: Ubuntu.

Ubuntu, with 29.2 percent of the vote, has been the hottest community Linux since early 2005. While this Linux has had its problems lately, such as the update fiasco on August 21st and 22nd, users continue to download, install, and love it.

And, why not? It’s an excellent distribution. It’s not just users who think this; reviewers have also labeled it the Desktop Linux Champ.

A little closer peek at the data, and some comparison with the Distrowatch page hit list, reveals that “classic” Ubuntu with the GNOME interface is the real winner. Kubuntu, with its KDE desktop, and the educational Edubuntu distributions have their fans, but Ubuntu is what a plurality of Linux desktop users appear to be running today.

In a distant second place, with 12.2 percent, we find Ubuntu’s ancestor, Debian. Close behind it, there’s openSUSE with 10.1 percent of the users. If you included in openSUSE’s totals its corporate big brother, Novell’s SLED (SUSE Linux Enterprise Desktop) numbers, 2.9 percent, the SUSE-twins would be in second place with 13 percent.

After this, we come to what I think of as the first surprise in our survey. Gentoo took fourth place with a total of 9.6 percent. Gentoo, to me, is a Linux expert’s Linux. I know many serious Linux users who work with Gentoo to better understand Linux, but almost no one who uses it as their first choice for day-to-day work.

In fifth place, we find Fedora, Red Hat’s community distribution. Fedora, while still somewhat popular with 7 percent of the vote, seems to have lost some of its charm to users in the last year.

Mandriva, which used to be quite popular, is also no longer as attractive as it once was. Even though we included all its immediate ancestors — Mandrake, Lycoris, and Connectiva — in our count, it still only came in sixth with 4.8 percent of the vote.

Then, there were the others. These are the distributions that did, well, horribly in our survey. GoblinX, a Slackware-based distribution; Pie Box, a Red Hat clone; and Tomahawk, a Linux from Singapore — none of these was able to muster enough votes to even creep up to 0.1 percent of use by our survey partipants.

GoblinX’s poor showing surprised me. It’s well-regarded, attractive, lightweight, and has a small, but active, development community. I really don’t understand why it received so little support. No, it’s certainly not a big name, but still, I’d expected to see it get some support.

Thinking of big names, Red Hat came in with a mere 2.2 percent of the vote. That’s still better than Linspire (1 percent) and Xandros (0.8 percent) did, though.

What’s happening here?

Well, if you take a look at which distributions did well, you’ll see they have one thing in common: they’re all community-based distributions. I think what we’re seeing with our survey is that the people who’ve invested something of themselves in their Linux desktop are the ones voting. The people who simply use the Linux that’s set in front of them, or just buy it, have less invested in it and so are less likely to vote.

I have no doubt, based on all the Linux desktops I’ve seen in use at tradeshows, homes, and offices, that while Ubuntu is number one, SLED and openSUSE are clearly the real number two in the number of users, with Linspire in third place.

I’d be willing to lay down a small bet that as Linspire’s recent community Freespire release gathers more supporters, and based on what I’ve seen of the distro, it will be near the top in our next survey.

I also suspect that one reason why Fedora did so comparatively poorly is that Red Hat recently made it clear that the company, and not the community, is calling Fedora’s shots. If the users and developers don’t feel like they have a real say in what’s going on with a distribution, they’re not as likely to stick around.

Still, I’m sure that Red Hat, in the form of the older Red Hat 9 or RHEL WS (Red Hat Enterprise Linux Workstation) or Red Hat Desktop, is working on many business desktops. As for Xandros, I’ve seen it in too many places to think that it doesn’t have a small, but significant, number of users.

However, without that community boost, I don’t see either one doing well in our open survey. For a realistic look at how many people are using them, we’ll need to wait for the IDGs and Gartners of the world to do a CIO/CTO survey of business Linux desktop use. Come that day, I suspect we’ll find RHEL WS and SLED neck and neck.

For now, though, what I can say with perfect assurance is that Ubuntu is the number one desktop Linux distro, and that the community Linuxes are far more popular with our readers than their commercial brothers.

In my next look at our survey results, I’ll talk about what desktop interfaces and applications are favored by our Linux desktop readers. There won’t be any surprises at who’s on top, but I think you will be surprised by the ones that are closest to catching up with the big names.

A version of this story was first published in 2006.

August 25, 2006
by sjvn01
0 comments

Thank you, Mr. McNealy

Never forget that while he was unable to right Sun in recent years, McNealy wasn’t just an industry giant. He changed the IT world forever. In 1982, Scott McNealy founded Sun Microsystems with three graduate student friends — Andy Bechtolsheim, Bill Joy, and Vinod Khosla from Stanford University.

I doubt they knew they were making history.

Sun’s first workstation was in many ways the world’s first workstation. The Motorola 68000-powered Sun-1 had a network protocol, TCP/IP; a slogan, “the network is the computer”; and an operating system, briefly a port of Version 7 Unix, to be followed quickly by the open-source version 4.1 BSD Unix. This soon became known as SunOS.

The computing world would never be the same.

With that one system, which would launch a billion-dollar-plus enterprise, the foundation network protocol of the Internet was laid. Other companies would also make TCP/IP popular. Sun made it the heart of the Internet.

Workstations, while never as popular as PCs, would for decades be the defining platform of scientists, engineers, and high-end design. When I started working on the Internet in the ’80s, we didn’t use PCs. We, all of us, used workstations, and most of them were made by Sun.

And, while Sun has had its ups and downs with open source, by using BSD Unix it set in motion a culture of bright, inquisitive developers who would eventually turn the software world upside down with open source.

Under McNealy, Sun grew to be a computer hardware giant. Then, when PCs began to erode Sun’s market share, he presided over the transformation of Sun from the workstation company of choice into being the high-end server power.

With the rise of the dot-coms, Sun rose to its zenith.

Always colorful — to put it mildly — McNealy would war with his fellow IT super-CEOs such as Microsoft’s Bill Gates. He was never able to unseat Gates as the top dog of technology, but no one gave it a better, or more spectacular, try.

Unfortunately, while the fall of the dot-coms didn’t destroy Sun, it did almost bring the company to its knees.

McNealy, still energetic, still striving for the top, now ruled over a company that, in its frantic efforts to capture its glory days, kept trying one approach after another — network computers, Linux-powered appliances, and Java.

Some of them — such as the wasted $2 billion purchase of Linux-powered Cobalt Networks in 2000 — only hurt the company. Others, such as the very popular Java programming language, have been technological success stories, but have done relatively little to help Sun’s bottom line.

McNealy was correct when he said, on announcing that he was leaving the role of CEO, that “The time is right. Our product line is fixed … our customers are probably happier with us than they have been in years.”

But it was the stockholders, who watched Sun’s losses mount to more than $4 billion between 2002 and 2005, who were doubtlessly the happiest with the change.

That McNealy would announce that he was leaving Sun on the tail end of a quarter that saw losses of $217 million, or 6 cents a share, compared with a loss of $28 million, or 1 cent a share, in the year-ago quarter, was only too appropriate. It was not the technology that had failed McNealy; it was a technology market that he no longer mastered.

The driving man who had led Sun to the heights in the ’80s and ’90s was not the man who could lead Sun back to the top in the ’00s.

I will miss McNealy. Some may say he won’t really go. That he’ll still pull Sun’s strings as the chairman of the board. I don’t see that. I see him riding off into the sunset. His day, I’m sorry to say, has passed.

But let us not forget, let us never forget, that without Scott McNealy we would have neither the Internet nor the open source that powers so much of it.

Hyperbole? I don’t think so.

I was there in the early days. When the Internet moved from college computer rooms into every home. When open source moved from being an academic curiosity to being a driving engine of software.

As I think of those days, I see Sun workstations and servers — pizza boxes, we called them — running SunOS and Solaris, knitting the Net together. I see programmers tinkering with Unix on SPARCstations and wondering what they could do if only they had the source code. I see, in short, our modern computing world as an infant.

Thank you, Mr. McNealy, thank you.