ExtremeLabs, Inc

ChromeOS: Not Yet For Civilians

For now, ChromeOS is pretty boring: after a bit of work, you get a fast loading browser, the ability to change a few themes, and if you’re a developer, access to a new platform. Google’s new ChromeOS is an operating system, but it’s strongly browser-based, and therefore is different than Mac’s MacOS and Windows– even from Linux. It’s designed to be extremely lightweight. Some call it a web appliance, and that’s partially true. It uses no hard disk, but that’s a red herring, as it uses and needs storage– but not much unless the usage profile of ChromeOS changes. For now, most people can ignore it. There’s nothing revolutionary about it.

There’s also a lot of confusion from Google, as Chrome-the-browser and Chrome-the-OS are used almost interchangeably. We even found this to be true when downloading and compiling ChromeOS for use. The two are separate entities, one the browser application, and the other is the appliance/OS substrate needed to anneal Chrome-the-browser to hardware and give it tools and native apps.

Initially, Google recommends running the ChromeOS guts as a job under Ubuntu Linux. Eventually, ChromeOS fits into a category called a semi-persistent instance. It uses no traditional hard drive for storage, and essentially launches as a completely self-contained browser-only instance. We downloaded Ubuntu 9.10 and installed it as a virtual machine. Indeed ChromeOS eventually becomes an appliance. Handily, Java and Flash are supported. Only the oracles know if Microsoft’s Silverlite components will run.

One of the closest conceptual operating system schemes to ChromeOS is Sun’s Containers system that works with Oracle/Sun’s Solaris, or perhaps Parallel’s Virtuozzo. Both of these ‘sandbox’ applications into their own metaphorically walled areas. Core operating system resources are available, but the applications are highly isolated from the operating system and its components– as well as other running applications.

ChromeOS seems poised towards very small systems (think netbook or notebook or OEM refrigerator display-type) web application running machine. It lends itself towards use of Google’s own web applications, but could conceivably be poised as an Android (Google’s mobile/cell phone OS) for larger platforms. Common interoperability between ChromeOS and Android are unknown at this moment, and probably is doubtful. Both of these operating systems are community/open operating system development platforms. None of them will pay developers the first dime for at least a year– which is Google’s ostensible target release date for ChromeOS.

The much pre-announced ChromeOS is now available for download as a kit rather than something consumers can munch on. If you’re a civilian, don’t even try, as the OS has to be compiled, and even for an operating system, it’s not a pretty picture. It’s do-able if you’ve ever compiled Linux or BSD from a CVS (not the drug store).

What ChromeOS Does

ChromeOS is a cloud operating system in the sense that most applications and storage will be used on hosted computers somewhere else, the kind that comprise corporate data centers and hosted/cloud environments. The light weight part of it has been done as well. FastScale, now owned by EMC, has a black belt in stripping the unused pieces from current operating systems into lightweight server operating systems in virtual environments. Nlight does the same thing for Windows clients, and is used frequently for virtual desktop interface environments that use ‘terminal server’ like virtual machines for remote users.

What Google might be trying to attempt is to bring one of Scott McNealy and Larry Ellison’s ideas to fore: the network as the computer. Of course the fact that Google’s Eric Schmidt once worked at Sun and Microsoft rival Novell (now owner of popular Linux distro Novell/SUSE) probably has nothing to do with this invention in Chrome. After all, be it ever so crumble, there’s no plate like Chrome……

We at the labs use one account for one purpose.

It’s called kitchen-sink at extremelabs.com.

We use it only at NetworkWorld for responses to our reviews. This account, like any other account whose address is listed in the traditional format on a website, gets picked up by spam address harvesters.

Therefore, we get emails like: Dear Kitchen-sink….. please visit our watches website. Get 70% off Viagra. You know the type. Why would an otherwise intelligent site like NetworkWorld list addresses in harvestable format? I don’t know, and don’t understand. Maybe it’s for convenience for you, the readers. Maybe it’s sloth. I wonder.

It was a success!

When Bill Sell asked me to present a keynote and moderate sessions at ITEC this fall, I wasn’t quite sure what I was getting myself into. The economy is in wiggy shape. My own house has been on the market for a while and it seems credit is just as tight as you’ve been reading. Would people in Detroit come to the show? What would it be like?

It was pretty packed. The technical depth of the audience was much higher than I expected– this is a good group. We talked about the challenges facing CIOs, Windows 7, systems security, SANs. I was more than amazed that the crowd stayed after lunch. It was a good conference and a lot was accomplished. See you in KC on Thursday?

They signed me up.

ITEC Detroit – October 21, 2009
ITEC Kansas City – October 29, 2009
ITEC Indianapolis – November 9, 2009
ITEC Philadelphia – November 12, 2009
ITEC Atlanta – November 17, 2009
ITEC Seattle – December 8, 2009

I’ll be doing the infrastructure and data center side.

The Fall ITEC 2009 Tour

CU there…..!

I’ve tried drawing parallels from the birth of the computer industry to what’s going on inside the mobile/cell industry. There aren’t many parallels.

The microcomputer industry was built on populism and platform competition. Ok, there’s one parallel. People like my friends and I build our own computers. We might even make or modify an operating system to go with them, because we were geeks and willing to learn things like assembly languages that made things tick.

There were early adopter civilians that did the job of learning obtuse user interfaces on early micros, hassling printers into submission, and generally becoming self-appointed wizards in a quest to make use of technology in a productive, profitable, and occasionally fun way.

Cell phones, on the other hand, started out as an analog of the landline telephone. At best, you could see the number you were dialing. A few small applications were added on. You couldn’t use them for data unless you were willing to pay mind-boggling prices, and wait for extremely slow data transfer rates.

Things changed. Computers picked up graphical user interfaces and microcomputers grew exponentially in raw computing power. Security stank, stunk, and stinks, but that’s another post. The graphical user interface (GUI) allowed programmers and hardware makers to allow their stuff to work together through common communications points. Several GUIs emerged, often modeled from research done long ago at Xerox’s Palo Alto Research Center (PARC).

Personal computers with power the size of huge mainframes emerged, and adaptations of personal computers started to permeate data centers across the planet. Today, the vast amount of corporate and government computing power rests on the advancements made from microprocessor technology and incumbent operating system advancements– with power programs that are fueled by these advancements.

In the palms of our hands, by contrast, phone technology evolved slowly until data communications entered the picture. A cat and mouse game of features versus data communications versus useful applications within the small form factor that mobile/cell phones represent, began.

Phone makers took it upon themselves to fund operating system and application development. Phones with a few smarts came onto the scene, starting with offering from RIM, Palm, and others. Ubiquitous mobile data helped improve demand for email apps. SMS, unavailable on some systems, became a competitive application. Basics were standardized, like alarm clock apps, rudimentary contact managers, and even web browsers. Several years later, the mosh of what’s possible across the world of cell/mobile phones has no standards, just customers that have become used to being brutalized.

Because carriers subsidize phone costs, they have controlled the development of phones, and often limit the features of the phone to increase their revenues. Those phone makers that attempt to control their platform have also thwarted applications development on their phones as well. This sort of chicanery flies in the face of the compatibility and open standards that the computer industry has come to accept as a hallmark of open technology and evolution.

That phone vendors try to convince consumers that their phones are HDTVs, fully functional replacements for personal computers, becomes a fantasy gap between reality and convincing consumers of the lies. There has been a successful bridge where consumers now use phones as entertainment devices, as well as short-message communicators. But you can’t change the size of tiny keyboards and displays into those of personal computers, and voice-to-text command of phones is at best, unreasonable– and for many reasons.

Does this mean that phone development will shelve? No. Consider the myriad applications that are evolving. But the platforms have become for the large part closed, in terms of hardware. It becomes necessary for software developers to increase functionality and find markets. In the meantime, the brutishness of carriers and phone platform vendors cripples the industry’s growth. A reality check is due.

Google Voice. Google Talk. Verizon VoIP. Comcast Triple Play. Upgrade plan. Free minutes. Visual Voice Mail. Call Forwarding. Friends and Family. iPhone. Samsung. HTC. Android. Opera. AppStore.

Enough.

Judge Greene: you did it wrong.

I found today by calling Comcast, that they can’t add a third-party phone line to an existing VoIP (Comcast phone) account. Say you move in with a roommate, and they already have Comcast’s ‘triple-play’. They have a phone number attached to that account. You move in. You ask to move your Comcast (or any other) phone number to that account.

Can’t do it. Nope. Sorry.

Have a nice day, Comcast. Perhaps Vonage or another telco will get the business. Fools.

This comes after three truck rolls to get the initial service running satisfactorily. And it doesn’t count the other three truck rolls necessary to get the Lab’s service running. Truly mind-boggling.

Going to DEMO 09, I had some strange feelings. Gone are the photo-sharing websites, and the mainly consumer-ploys of prior DEMOs. Instead, it was business. Business may mean connecting the dots of social not-working into manageable mobility profiles, or it might mean an internal twitter system.

But whether social not-working or web applications, the tone and tenor was business. No more ice cream dispensing machines, or laser machines that scanned your body and cut custom jeans for you. No, this was biz. And lots of it.

I’ve seen other columnists try to tell the DEMO organization (or their readers) how to change DEMO for the better, now that long-time producer Chris Shipley is leaving, and the regime changes over to Matt Marshall, who’s the publisher of VentureBeat. I guess somehow we’re supposed to pontificate about what DEMO should be. I’m not going to do that. The event is up to them, not me. I don’t have to pay their bills or attract their audience. They do.

What I found at DEMO was interesting in that the investment community heavyweights were there, en masse. The press wasn’t there. Many notable people were missing, although a few of the regulars came with big smiles on their faces. Has TechCrunch caused a loss of interest in DEMO? I don’t think so. Instead, publishers are very scared of revenue shortages– cutting budgets– and the press in general is in deep depression….. that is, those of us left. Reporters were missing; even the bloggers weren’t there in the droves that they have been in previous years. Nonetheless, I did an interview with Chris Shipley.

Yes, the event had a smaller head count. It’s to be expected in this economy. But I liked the focus. I liked the directness. I liked the added value. I didn’t care if a presenter was from HP with a new product, or from a tiny startup with a new product. New Products is the theme, along with the trends provided by them. Microsoft could have launched Windows 7, or Apple could have launched Snow Leopard here. They’re new products, and market-makers.

Below are Tom’s Picks as to the products that I really like. No specific order is implied.

EMO Labs: Not What You Think

Were I to predict the organizations that will get the most revenue in the next ten year, it’s likely to be EMO Labs. Why? They make a flat panel sound system that fits over the screen of LCD, Plasma, TFT, and other flat panel technologies. There’s a piezo-electric transducer system in the frame surrounding the film, making the film vibrate sound, so that the sound actually appears to be coming from the speaker on the face of the screen. As it doesn’t reproduce well below 200hz, there are micro-woofers in the design (low frequency sounds here aren’t locatable and therefore the stereo effect is lost in the ear) to complete the system. What happens? No more bad speakers in HDTV and notebook designs.

EMO’s system is ready today, but will be perfected in the next several years for truly mass consumption. Given the number of possible consumers, this one is big, and the advance while not revolutionary, completes the cure to several design problems – and benefits the ear.

HP’s SkyRoom

HP showed SkyRoom (actually they were first up at the show) for high resolution web conferencing. The video conferencing market has been around for more than a decade, and there are literally dozens of choices available for conferencing and realtime document sharing, WebEx, ooVoo, Adobe, and others have varying pieces of this market. HP’s ‘serverless system is actually more appropriately compared to Skype, and has very high resolution document and video camera sharing capabilities.

Oh, and it’s free to $149, depending on whether it came with your newly purchased HP computer. It’s otherwise operating system and application agnostic. How it will work, we’ll see.

The second set of new billionaires from DEMO Fall 09 are clever bunch of people from Micello. Micello has an easily understandable value proposition: the last mile and perhaps few feet in the online mapping world— especially when that’s connected to something like Google Maps.

Drilling down to a shopping center, as was Micello’s DEMO example, doesn’t really go indoors. Imagine viewing a map of the inside of the shopping mall– repleat with store names and so on. Further the imagination to see queries about the mall, as in “mens shoes”. Perhaps tagging might also allow an online coupon to be downloaded to a personal phone or device for incentive and use. Maybe even small commercials could be attached if desired.

The imagination goes crazy. Floor plans in schools and hospitals. Emergency exit plans. Classroom maps. Hiking trails. In all, these can be tagged with outside and satellite maps to the indoor maps.

I worry for these guys that they get the right management teams to do well. It’s nice to shake hands with billionaires when they’re still broke. Micello won’t be broke for long.

WhoDoYouKnow@

is a more dangerous app, as it connects people together and allows users to rate trust. Your contact book could be searched through. It’s ugly that way. Ugly because networks of people are like ancient Rolodexes– people guard them sometimes with their lives for their relative value. It’s more difficult to keep information ‘proprietary’ with this system.

More later…..