Im not sure what the Foundation does except for Zemlin's fluff pieces that pass for interviews but I have to give credit to Intel:

>

We spend a lot of time criticizing with just reason certain things which endanger Linux like Novell's patent extortion deal which protects its user and helps Microsoft continue their FUD (when Ballmer says in that Youtube video that Red Hat users owe Microsoft money because Linux has stolen IP, he SPECIFICALLY mentions that Novell respects those IP and has paid up) that I feel it necessary to mention when companies like Red Hat sign deals and go out of their way to mention what the deal does NOT do/say that protects us non-RH users as well.

I think we have to also give kudos when companies do things that will help the WHOLE Linux ecosystem such as the recent video drivers releases, Nokia planning to open source Symbian and Intel doing a move which is more about perception (perceptions can be true or they can be false and specifically they can be molded to create FUD. I dont know if Sun is too controlling of OO but I do know there are a lot of companies that want you to believe it to be so because it suits their agenda).

Im not that interested in it as a platform especially since v2 is specifically designed to run on an Intel Atom processor in a netbook but there are definitely some things to learn about speeding up processes. The advantage with FLOSS is that we all can benefit down the line.

I started in the industry when IBM was the evil empire and I now work on GPLed projects with IBM employees so I have no problem with a company's past deeds (Intel and XO still leaves a bad taste in my mouth) if they bring something to do the table AND play by the rules we all use.

Im not sure where they are going with Moblin and what their plans are but with this move it seems more and more to me that Intel "gets it" and wants to be a part of the community.

We can blast them another time for sleazy things they might do but today, let's lift a glass and toast them.

QUOTE:

You write: "There is still some fragmentation in the mobile Linux landscape in my opinion. LiMO has its vision for mobile and Google has its Android handset too. Then there is also AMD and their views.

"With moblin under the auspices of the Linux Foundation though - perhaps those disparate groups will be able to come together for common cause and advance mobile Linux as a whole."

Do you advocate that for the Linux community to create a quality mobile platform, all developers should team together on one platform only??

IMHO, different linux distros (including mobile distros) are good and necessary. They allow developers (and users) with different needs and ideals to drive innovation in unique directions. Innovations by driving in direction "A" for example, could be implemented also by those working on direction "B". Cross-fertilization, so to speak...

There is so much to show that in nature, homogeneity is dangerous and can lead to weakening of organisms. Example: a farmer plants all the same crop, all the same variety, in a field, gets a scourge, ALL crop dies. Example 2: computer world, windows is pretty darn homogenous, viruses are rampant and run from one computer to the next, because they are ALL the same and share the SAME weaknesses.

I think that the strength of computers and resistance to malware necessitates many different platforms.

So bring on the multitudes of mobile linux platforms!!!

D, TDS

IBM should be applauded by open source enthusiasts.

Hopefully Moblin can become strong enough that it will compete with Windows on the next generation of netbooks. That means it must offer more than Windows for the average computer user, but require less effort and expertise. My experience with Linux on netbooks has been fun, but far too complicated for the average computer user.

That brings us to the problems of IBM relinquishing control.

First, Linux enthusiasts expect too little from Linux. They applaud efforts that fail to compete. The software is fine for FOSS fans, but always there are problems that require Google, forums, adding repositories, RTFM, and CLI which discourage vendors and many customers.

Second, there is resistance to offering a one-click choice to use non-free software.

FOSS enthusiasts just don't believe that the average customer will not understand, for example, why Audacity doesn't edit MP3 files, and would rather use Windows than research and execute the steps required to solve their problem. Actually the resistance to Linux exists even if the Linux solution is truly simpler than Windows. More than one-click is a deal killer.

With strong IBM influence, there was more hope for a new emphasis on satisfying the average customer. Now, well, we will see.

Well stated, Dulwithe, but there is more to say. Fragmentation may be good or bad, depending on your goal.

Fragmentation means that no single system will have a big slice of the market. Thus, vendor support is unlikely to improve any time soon. The average consumer won't be able to get the latest and greatest hardware for his Linux netbook. Although this isn't as big an issue for netbooks as desktops, reports of incompatibility will impact public perception.

Fragmentation means that average consumers don't have access to much of the latest FOSS out there. The dependency and system-structure issues are too much for developers to deal with, too difficult for non-technical users, and too time-consuming for distro maintainers to update their repositories.

Linux is fun, stable, secure. I like it just the way it is. It is distributed by people with ethics.

However, if the goal is to promote Linux on netbooks for the average customer, less fragmentation does have some advantage.