As virtualization on the desktop becomes more and more common, largely thanks to VMWare and Parallels, open-source projects are also adopting virtualization. VirtualBox appeared as the amazing program no one had heard of but everyone used, the choice of open-source virtualization software is huge, and distros are starting to include virtualization built-in. The latest to do so is Ubuntu, which will ship Hardy Heron with a front end to the already included KVM easily available, according to Phoronix. (The packages are not new, but rather they come from Fedora, just FYI.)

While simply making already existing software easily available may not seem like a big deal, it can open up a lot of potential. A lot of people are tied to Windows for a single program. While the long term solution is to find an alternative, it is often easier to set up a dual boot system or use virtualization. This is already very simple for a user familiar with Linux, but it would be great if a new user could be prompted on the first boot up to see if they want to set up a virtual machine. This could be implemented either by Ubuntu or by a company like Dell. With virtualization software right at hand, Dell could make a little modification to the Ubuntu they ship such that users would be prompted to set up a virtual machine if they wanted, hopefully making people feel safer buying a Linux computer, knowing they can easily run Windows programs if they need to.

Note: Although I cannot confirm these announcements on the Asus website at this time, both RegHardware and DigiTimes are reporting on it, apparently independently.

Asus announced three new products today that extend the Eee PC brand and basis, low-cost and Linux, according to RegHardware. The three new products are the E-DT, an inexpensive desktop, the E-Monitor, an inexpensive all-in-one PC, and a 42-inch TV-Computer called the E-TV. (You asked for a bigger screen, is this big enough?) I am expecting a check from Asus for the idea behind the TV-Computer, because I already said that someone should make a Linux-based computer to be connected to your TV. All they did is glue my idea to the TV. (Just kidding about them stealing my idea, but I really did write about this.) Here is what I wrote in an earlier post:

“However well the Eee PC does, Linux is not going to suddenly be the most used OS for the desktop. I believe that a logical next step to ease people into Linux would be a set-top box that could browse the internet, edit office files, play media, and do almost anything a normal computer could. As media moves online, the market for an internet-connected set-top box will expand. Additionally, because technology is so much a part of everyone’s life, the ability to browse the web or work on a word document is very useful. Since Linux is free and requires minimal hardware, the box can be cheap enough so that more than just geeks will use it. Although most people would buy a box like this for the media playback capabilities, as long as the box also has the capabilities of a computer, users of the box will become familiar with the full Linux OS, even though they did not buy the box to be a computer.”

OK, getting to the real news here. All three of these products serve the same purpose in terms of Linux adoption - bringing the success of the Eee PC to computers that run a more complete Linux (assuming they do run a more complete Linux.) We don’t have many details, so right now the E-DT, the inexpensive desktop, is not really that interesting. There are already three of them (gPC, Mirus PC, Shuttle PC) out there. I suspect that when the E-DT is launched, it will have something that distinguishes itself from the competition, but no one knows what yet.

The E-Monitor and the E-TV, on the other hand, are very interesting ideas. (I would say new, if I hadn’t already thought of it. If Asus follows the path of the existing all-in-ones, and I hope they do, the E-Monitor will be largely focused on style, making it possibly the first Linux computer that can compete with the design of Apple’s products. (Face it, they make pretty stuff.)

The E-TV is potentially even more interesting. When I wrote about my similar idea, I had no idea someone would actually make something similar, especially Asus. If Asus manages the E-TV as well as they managed the Eee PC, I believe it could revolutionize the definition of TV. As I said in my earlier post, “as media moves online, the market for an internet-connected set-top box will expand. Additionally, because technology is so much a part of everyone’s life, the ability to browse the web or work on a word document is very useful.” Right now, the TV is for watching movies, playing games, and watching TV, but with the E-TV you could do your work on it, browse the web on it, and do almost anything on it.

Asus’s new products, especially the E-TV, could introduce Linux to many, many people as well as revolutionizing the way TVs get used. I just hope they sell these products as well as they sold the Eee PC.

It seems like everyone is talking about Barracuda, Trend Micro, ClamAV, and what it has to do with open-source. The whole issue is made complicated mostly because of a lot of FUD (fear, uncertainty, and doubt) that the two companies have been throwing at each other. In fact, it is getting hard to tell who is right and who is wrong through all the FUD.

At the bottom of all this is Trend Micro’s patent on an implementation of anti-virus software on servers. The details of this are not important, but for anyone who is curious, here is what Ars Technica says about the patent:

“Trend Micro claims that its US Patent 5,623,600 broadly covers the concept of server-based antivirus software on FTP and SMTP gateways.”

Trend Micro has already sued both Symantec and McAfee over allegedly infringing on this patent. Both companies choose to settle out of court, rather than fight an expensive court case. When Trend Micro sued Barracuda, an enterprise-level security company that uses the open-source anti-virus software ClamAV in their products, however, Barracuda decided to fight the case, rather than settle with Trend Micro.

Although things could change a lot between now and when the case is decided, Ars Technica (look for the heading “The search for prior art”) points out that Barracuda has fairly convincing evidence that this implementation of anti-virus software was used before Trend Micro got their patent.

Beyond this, the FUD starts. Barracuda frames this case as an attack on open-source and ClamAV and is attempting to gather support from FOSS supporters and even asking for people to contribute examples of prior art. Trend Micro denies that this case has anything to do with open-source or ClamAV, saying that they are simply protecting their patent and what anti-virus software is being used is not important. At the same time, however, Trend Micro refused to comment on their views on enforcing this patent on non-commercial use or on other open-source projects, according to Linux.com.

Whether or not this case is an attack on open-source, it seems to be a case of patent trolling and if Trend Micro’s patent is considered invalid, it would set a good precedent.

As one blogger points out, Opera’s minimal success is difficult to understand, because Opera is filled with innovative and useful features, yet it has no where near the adoption of Firefox. The blogger’s explanation is that the user interface and experience is too different from Firefox and IE, and therefor not appealing to new users. While this may in part be true, I believe that openness is the key difference that prevents adoption. By openness, I mean the ability to customize the browser to be what you want it to be. Firefox accomplishes this on multiple levels. First of all, everyone is encouraged to write extensions (and a lot of people do.) These extensions are enough for most people to customize their browser to be anything they can think of. (Skins should be mentioned too, but Opera has those.) At the base of this ability of customize Firefox is that it is an open-source project. You can’t get any more customizable or flexible than that.

The author of the post mentioned above dismisses these differences as not things the average user would care about, but I think this misses a key point. Firefox is mostly spread through word of mouth, originating at tech-savvy users who care enough to do the research. These tech-savvy users tell their friends to use whatever browser they like and soon enough their friends are telling their friends and so on. In this way, some one who has no idea what an “extension” is or what “open-source” is may be using Firefox because it is open-source.

There is no reason this should only apply to Opera and Firefox. This same reasoning can be used with almost any piece of software. If you can think of any more examples of this, go ahead and post them in the comments!

The Wine team has recently announced that Adobe Photoshop CS2 works under Wine, a program to enable Windows programs to run on Linux. (Softpedia news article) Although Photoshop CS2 on Wine may not be perfect yet, it may well be soon, potentially opening Linux up to many people who rely on Photoshop. CS2 is one version back from the current version, but it has not been long since CS3 was released, so it is likely that most users are still on CS2. While it is great that Photoshop CS2 works, this is just the beginning.

Adobe’s applications, ranging from pro photo management, to web design, to video, are widely used by many, many people, including web designers (of course, I use GIMP and it works just fine), photographers, graphics people, videographers, and so on. One application might not enable many of these people to use Linux, but as time goes by and the Wine team makes it possible to use more and more of these applications, many people who have been tied to Windows will suddenly be cut free and able to choose Linux.

Once every couple of months someone claims that product x is better than product y based on absolutely no legitimate evidence and every time the argument is the same. This time around, Jeff Jones, a security expert who works for Microsoft, is claiming on his blog that Windows Vista is the most secure operating system of all the modern operating systems (which, by the way, does include Linux, specifically a version of both Red Hat and Ubuntu.) The headline is great, but the argument does not stand up to, well, anything.

In this comparison, the metric for security is the number of reported bugs. It does not matter if they have been fixed or not, it does not matter what the level of severity is, and there is no adjustment for the fact that Microsoft or Apple might not report all the bugs that exist, while in open-source software, almost any bug that anyone finds is reported. Do I even need to say any more?

One of the main reasons the Eee PC is as attractive as it is to so many people is the price. $400 for an ultra-portable is incredibly cheap compared to other ultra-mobile computers, which often cost over $2000. (See the Sony VAIOs.) As a post on Crave points out, though, the Eee is not really quite a full computer. (Both due to the hardware and the pre-installed software, which is what most people will use.) That post proposes an alternative computer for those looking at an Eee PC, a refurbished 15″ HP notebook that goes for $465 and includes 1GB of memory and a 120GB hard drive. Although this machine may have better specifications, it is not an Eee PC competitor for a number of reasons. (To be fair, the writer did mention that these differences existed, but still pitched the HP notebook as an Eee PC competitor.) First, there is a huge difference between a 15″ and a 7″ screen. The HP’s 15″ screen is starting to approach desktop replacement size, while the Eee PC’s 7″ screen is in the ultra-portable range. Second, the HP notebook that is referenced is a refurbished model. It is not at all uncommon to have huge discounts on refurbished models. If the Eee was refurbished it would cost even less.

Although the HP laptop mentioned above may not be directly competing with the Eee PC, it is still an attractive deal that could pull away customers from the Eee PC and Linux. Right now, there is not a compelling Linux-based alternative to regular budget laptops that has gotten any attention. Linux needs something to fill this gap and someone that will do it as well as Asus did. (I know someone will tell me there is one that exists, but if I have never heard of it, they are not doing a very good job marketing it.)

A recent post on Pingdom looked at what Google Trends has to say about Linux distributions, Linux, KDE, and other similar keywords. Although Google Trends, which lets you compare how many searches various terms are getting in Google, has the potential to reveal many interesting trends, it is not clear that the results are an accurate representation of interest in a particular subject. Words that have multiple meanings, for instance, will not be accuratly represented in Google Trends. This, however, is rarely a problem for Linux-related terms, due to the uniqueness of most names.

Apart from these confusions, however, how accurate is Google Trends as a measure of interest? Well, it depends on what you mean by interest. Because Trends is based on total searches, it is basically impossible to distinguish between a few people who do a lot of searching or a lot of people who do a little searching. While this might make it a bad option for deciding which product is more popular and similar comparisons, it does not make it bad for everything. Google Trends is very useful for discovering which term is used more. For example, a comparison of Ubuntu and Linux shows that Linux has gone down while Ubuntu has gone up, indicating that the trend (no pun intended) is for people to talk about individual distributions, not Linux as a whole.

In summary, while Google Trends may not be perfect, it is very useful for comparing trends in how people refer to various things, particularly if the phrases are unique.

A lot of people (myself included) have been closely following OOXML’s progress to becoming an international standard and speculating on its chances of success. I suspect, however, that standardization will not decide OOXML’s death or life, instead the decision will already be clear by the time the ISO finally gets around to voting on it again.

This post makes a very good point about the state of OOXML. As it says, it is simply not safe to save your files in the OOXML format, since it is still being changed and has not yet been adopted (officially or unofficially.) Right now, there is no good reason to save documents in the OOXML format and unless this somehow dramatically changes in the next months, OOXML will already be on the way to death by the time it has another chance at becoming a standard. In short, the OOXML war, much like the Blu-Ray vs. HD-DVD war, will eventually come down to how many people use each format, not which format becomes the standard. In this respect, OOXML is fighting an uphill battle. Formats already exist that people are (for the most part) happy with, so why should anyone go to the effort of converting everything into OOXML?

For me, the only remaining question is could standardization create a significant boost to OOXML’s adoption to pull it back from death? It is hard to say what the answer to this question is. If it did make a significant enough impact, it would be through governments, whose documents must remain accessible for tens or hundreds of years. Only time will tell the answer to this question, if time does ever tell the answer. It is quite possible OOXML will not receive ISO standardization anyway.

It may be too early to say if OOXML will be adopted or not, but I think it is fair to say that international standards will only be a small part of the picture.

For anyone not familiar with the OOXML standardization process that has been going on, OOXML is Microsoft’s new office document format and the ISO is the International Standards Organization. Previous, OOXML was rejected by the ISO, but it will be voted on again in the future.

Don Reisinger, a CNet blogger, just posted a look at the community behind Linux and some thoughts on all the Linux distros out there. His main point is that the community is incredibly helpful and I could not possibly agree with him any more. (Although he mostly focuses on how easy the community makes it to get support and that is very true, it is also worth noting that Linux and open-source software would not exist at all without the community.) He also discussed how there seem to be a few distros that have polished software and are generally very good and others that, in his view, are bad. (Go read the article and than you will understand what I am saying.) On this point, I disagree.

Lets face it, the Linux community has a lot of hardcore geeks in it. These are the kind of people who frequently rebuild their kernel to improve performance, compile all their software from scratch, consider GUIs useless, and so on. There is nothing wrong with that. I may be exaggerating some here, but this is the target audience for many Linux distros. When was the last time you heard Slackware trying to attract the “average user?”

Reisinger’s post suggests that everyone rally around the “good” distros and leave the others behind. This has happened. Distros like Ubuntu and OpenSuse that aim to be a distro for the “average user” are far more popular than the “geeky” distros, but it will never happen completely, because there are people who prefer the “geeky” distros. Instead of eliminating the “geeky” distros, these distros should simply make it clear that if you want a distro designed for the “average user” you should look to somewhere else. This way the right people will download the right distro for their needs and everyone will be happy. Part of the point of open-source software is that everyone can customize it to be exactly what they want.