For Linux to have got to where it was by 1994 was pretty exceptional, but it was still a very small project being worked on by a handful of users in their freetime back then. The level of contribution was vastly different back then and linux actually developed very quickly all things considered

I think Linux has always struggled by not having a display system which ticked all the right boxes for the end user. This hobbled in as much as it was harder to build desktop apps, which in turn drove all those early installation decisions. (Yes the X window system is very *clever* though).

Server based use isn\’t limited by output device support in the same way and hence linux has seen great support in that area (I personally wouldn\’t use anything else on a server).

Android, Maemo, the Intel thing, etc have basically sponsored turning linux into a really strong \”desktop\” operating system and this is really exciting to see. I just hope that other vendors will see the possibilities here and other desktop orientated systems will appear in the kind of strength necessary to grab a significant market share. Perhaps someone can take an Ubuntu/Redhat derivative and bundle it with some hot laptop hardware, plus an app store and carve out a range of profitable products…

The big problem will likely remain market fragmentation if one clear winner doesn\’t emerge. Android has taken a huge amount of development to get to the position it is and really that work needs to be re-used where possible and not expended developing 3 different user focused linux smartphone derivatives, each soaking up enough development that they all get close to being iThing killers, but none of them ever covering the last mile…

Recently reviewed OS and browser use, particularly of target signups – entrepreneurs signing up to http://www.efactor.com – and this led to looking at mobile devices.

Summary – Apple rules with 90%, with a 10% bit of Android. Nothing else seems to make it…

The blogs with the figures are at:

Main OS/Browser: http://www.efactor.com/p/blogs/id=1797

Mobile devices: http://www.efactor.com/p/blogs/id=1837

Personally, I despise iTunes and it\’s inability to have been written (for Windows) with the slightest regard to the Microsoft style guide. I use Winamp to load content on to my iPod Classic. I accept this is a compromise but I didn\’t have a lot of choice about getting the iPod.

-c

For me, the biggest problem is that most of the populous don\’t see why Apple\’s behaviour is wrong; the lock-in etc. is not a direct problem for me as I will never buy in to it.

Apple builds the hardware, systems and the OS, so they get to focus specifically on user experience, and they\’ve excelled at doing well with specific groups of users doing that with Mac-OS.

The iPhone OS platform made the switch to allowing users to write software that was easily accessible to users. You don\’t have to search the web, wonder across it, hear about it from your friend etc. If you need to use your iPhone OS device to do something, there is a place to go and look for what your choices might be.

There are reviews by real users, with the application, not somewhere else on some web page that is number 1,000,000 on the google results etc.

So many things about the the app-store empower users to solve their own problems and have their needs fulfilled in ways that nothing else has yet accomplished.

Is Apple making money? You bet. Are you making money? Got any Apple Stock? If so, then you are making some returns too. If not, then you might find the \”wall\” of the app-store to be hard to stomach.

It\’s a solution-space and a marketplace all together. There are lots of ways to do what Apple is doing. There will be more movement to standalone applications with less \”web page\” solutions for \”application\”. Especially given the overhead of having a complete HTML-5 browser to do any kind of app.

Times are changing. Either get on the train, or start laying your own track…

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Mac_OS_X

The point of this article is about what is winning in the market place, and why it is winning. I\’m sure that marketing is important here, Apple has a big Marketing Machine, just like many other companies. You have to make your product visible and attractive to your potential customers right? I believe that Apple gets to spend more on Marketing because they have a much smaller technology problem set to waste money on.

Apple now makes many different devices, and we can see that this A4 processor is something that is key in their vision. You may remember the Amiga computer which had 3 different \”key\” processors that worked together to provide features that no other computer, at the time, had. The A4 is a similar notion in a single package.

HTC and others may soon work on custom silicon too…

It is an interesting battle of more than technology, but in the end, people are buying Apple products because they do work, and you can walk in the Apple store and get it fixed/replaced, talking to a person, face to face. For many people that beats a 1-800 call to who knows where.