Computed·Blg

Via OStatic

-----

Mozilla has faced some backlash from IT administrators for its move to a rapid release cycle with the Firefox browser, but you have to hand it to Mozilla for staying the course. For years, Firefox saw upgrades arrive far less frequently than they arrove for competitive browsers such as Google Chrome. Since announcing its new rapid release cycle earlier this year, Mozilla has released versions 4 and 5 of Firefox, and steadily gotten better at ironing out short-term kinks, most of which have had to do with extensions causing problems. Now, Firefox 8 is already being seen in nightly builds, although it's not released in final form yet, and early reports show it to be faster than current versions of Chrome across many benchmarks.

Firefox 7 and 8 run a new graphics engine called Azure, which you can read more about here.  And, in broad benchmark tests, ExtremeTech reports the following results:

"Firefox 8, which only just appeared on the Nightly channel, is already 20% faster than Firefox 5 in almost every metric: start up, session restore, first paint, JavaScript execution, and even 2D canvas and 3D WebGL rendering. The memory footprint of Firefox 7 (and thus 8) has also been drastically reduced, along with much-needed improvements to garbage collection."

Mozilla has already done extensive work on how memory is handled in Firefox 7, and these issues are likely to be addressed further with release 8. At this point, Chrome is Firefox's biggest competition, and ExtremeTech also reports:

"While comparison with other browsers has become a little passe in recent months — they’re all so damn similar! — it’s worth noting that Firefox 8 is as fast or faster than the latest Dev Channel build of Chrome 14. Chrome’s WebGL implementation is still faster, but with Azure, Firefox’s 2D performance is actually better than Chrome. JavaScript performance is also virtually identical."

I use Firefox and Chrome, but my primary reason for using Chrome is that it has been faster. With the early glimpse of Firefox 8, the performance gap stands a chance of being closed, and it looks like these two open source browsers have never competed more closely than they do now.

-----

I use Android every day both on my Droid II smartphone and my Barnes & Noble Nook Color e-reader/tablet. I like it a lot. But, I also have concerns about how it’s being developed and being presented to customers.

Before jumping into why I think Android faces trouble in the long run, let me mention one problem I don’t see as standing in Android’s way: The Oracle lawsuits Yes, Oracle claims that Google owes them billions in damages for using unlicensed Java technology in Android’s core Dalvik virtual machine.

I follow patent lawsuits and here’s what going to happen with this one. It will take years and millions of dollars in legal fees, but eventually Google will either beat Oracle’s claims or pay them hefty licensing fees. So, yes, one way or the other Google, and to a lesser extent Oracle, will spend hundreds of millions on this matter before it’s done. But, so what?

The mobile technology space is filled with patent and licensing lawsuits. When I checked on these lawsuits in mid-October there were dozens of them. Since then, Apple has sued Samsung; Dobly has sued RIM; and Lodsys, a patent troll, vs. Apple and all its iOS developers, By the time I finish writing this column someone will probably have sued someone else!

The end-result of all this, besides lining the pockets of lawyers, is that we’re all going to have pay more for our tablets and smartphones. It doesn’t matter who wins or who loses. Thanks to the U.S.’s fouled up patent system, everyone who’s a customer, everyone who’s a developer, and everyone’s who in business to make something useful is the loser.

That said, here’s where Android is getting it wrong.

1. Too many developer versions

When Google first forked Android into two versions–The 2.x branch for smartphones and the 3.x for tablets–I didn’t like the idea. I like it even less now.

According to the Android Developers site, there are eight (8!) different versions of Android with market presence. If we ignore the out-dated Android 1.5 and 1.6, that still leaves us with six shipping versions that a developer needs to keep in mind when he or she is creating or updating a program. In the case of the 2.x and 3.x lines that’s a lot of work. Oh, and yes there are now two versions of 3.x: 3.0 and 3.1.

Currently used versions of Android.

Who can keep up with this? I couldn’t. But, wait there’s more!

2. Too many OEM versions

You’d think that Android 2.2 on a Droid II would be the same on the Samsung Galaxy Pro. You’d think wrong. Every original equipment manufacturer (OEM) insists on tweaking the software and adding their own particular programs to each phone. Sometimes, as James Kendrick points out, the same hardware doesn’t even work with Android on the exact same model.

Kendrick has found that the useless microSD card slot in the Motorola XOOM, even after its Android 3.1 update, still doesn’t work. Or, to be exact, it won’t work in the U.S. In Europe, XOOM users will get a fix that will let them use microSD cards.

Argh!

Here’s a history lesson for Google and the rest of the movers and shakers of Android. I’ve seen a “common” operating system used in this way before during a technology boom. Once, it was with the pre-PC microcomputers. They all ran CP/M-80, but every vendor had their own little tricks they added to make their computers “better.” Then along came PC-DOS, soon to be followed by MS-DOS, and all those companies-KayPro, Osborne, and IMSAI-became answers in computer trivia games.

How did Microsoft make its first step to becoming the Evil Empire? By delivering the same blasted operating system on every PC. If users can’t count on using the same programs and the same hardware accessories, like microSD cards, on Android, they’re not going to stick with Android devices. If things don’t get better with Android, who knows, maybe Windows 8 will have a shot on tablets after all!

3. Still not open enough

Google, for reasons that still elude me, decided not to open-source Android 3.x’s source code. This is so dumb!

I’m not talking about playing fast and loose with open-source licenses or ethics-so Google really stuck its foot into a mess with this move. No, I’m saying this is dumb because the whole practical point of open source make development easier by sharing the code. Honeycomb’s development depends now on a small number of Google and big OEM developers. Of them, the OEM staffers will be spending their time making Honeycomb, Android 3.0, work better with their specific hardware or carrier. That doesn’t help anyone else.

4. Security Holes

This one really ticks me off. There is no reason for Android to be insecure. In fact, in some ways it’s Not insecure. So why do you keep reading about Android malware?

Here’s how it works. Or, rather, how it doesn’t work. Android itself, based on Linux, is relatively secure. But, if you voluntary, albeit unknowingly, install malware from the Android Market, your Android tablet or smartphone can’t stop you. Google must start checking “official” Android apps for malware.

Google has made some improvements to how it handles Android malware. It’s not enough.

So until things get better, if you’re going to download Android programs by unknown developers, get an Android anti-virus program like Lookout. Heck, get it anyway; it’s only a matter of time until someone finds a way to add malware to brand-name programs.

5. Pricing

Seriously. What’s with Android tablet pricing? Apple owns the high-end of tablets. If someone has the money, they’re going to get an iPad 2. Deal with it. Apple’s the luxury brand. Android’s hope is to be the affordable brand. So long as OEMs price Android’s tablets at $500 and up, they’re not going to move. People will buy a good $250 Android tablet, which is one reason why the Nook is selling well. They’re not buying $500 Android tablets.

Here’s what I see happening. Android will still prosper… right up to the point where some other company comes out with an affordable platform and a broad selection of compatible software and hardware. Maybe that will be webOS, if HP drops the price on its TouchPads. Maybe it will be MeeGo. Heck, it could even be Windows 8. What it won’t be though in the long run, unless Android gets its act together, will be Android.

-----

Personal Comments:

In order to counteract a bit what is a kind of severe or pessimistic view for Android's future, I would like to underline that Android has to face major hardware evolution in a very short time. Duplicity of hardware constructors that have jumped in the Android adventure has also participated to version split. But as far as I have seen, it seems to me that constructors are pretty fast in proposing to their customers upgrades of their in-house Android versions, in order to stick to the very last 'official' Android version (the only one that all consumers expect to have on their mobile device). For example, HTC has nicely managed this while adding a very impressive GUI on the top of Android, that kind of GUI that has hardly suggested that Android can be a real competitor to iOS. So I do not see multiple Android versions as a negative point but more as a rewarding one.

In the same time Apple pushes users to upgrade their devices to the very last iOS version without that much concern about user's wishes. When compiling a program dedicated to Apple devices, you have to declare if it is targeting iPhone/iPod and/or iPad with specifying a minimum compatible version (because of core libraries evolution), which seems very similar to me to handle kind of distinct versions of a similar OS... thus being similar to what's occur at the Android OS level, but may be in less 'democratic' way for the Apple's OS.

About the points 3 and 4, I think this concerns absolutely every mobile OS, and for some of them we may even not being aware about existing problems or privacy issues (refer to GPS tracking issue on iPhone etc...).

Concerning the pricing, the ASUS eee Pad Transformer is an excellent example to what we can expect about (affordable) prices for mobile device based on Android OS. New mobile phones/tablets models are pretty expensive mainly because they include very last chips (Tegra 2, Tegra 3, dual-core CPU etc...). 6 months later the same 'top-level' device can be acquire for one buck just by renewing a mobile network subscription.

Android OS is moving pretty fast in comparison to its direct competitors (on-screen widgets are typically something that is missing in the iOS), and MeeGo or Bada seems like just born dead OS. It sounds pretty clear that a ready to use and effective mobile OS is much more easier to adopt for a hardware constructor than a brand new one built in-house. It looks like much more an optimal solution to invest effort in customizing Android OS like HTC did in a pretty effective way than re-inventing the wheel.

The strength of Android is its community, which is just growing fast... very fast!

Via ReadWriteWeb

-----

Google launched an experimental tool called Swiffy in its Labs today, allowing developers to convert Flash (SWF) files to HTML5. That means you can reuse Flash content on devices without a Flash Player, even iPhone and iPads, explains Google on the project's Labs' page. And Swiffy's output works in all Webkit browsers, including Chrome and Safari.

The idea for the tool came from Google engineering intern Pieter Senster, who joined the mobile ad team last summer and later become a full time employee. Senster wanted to address the challenge of running Flash-like animations on non-Flash devices, specially for mobile ads.

Now, with Swiffy, that's possible. To use the program, you simply upload a SWF file and Swiffy returns HTML5 output. Swiffy is still in its early stages, though, so it won't convert all Flash content, only ads and simple animations for now.

-----

Swiffy

Via Slashgear

----- 

Mozilla has just released Firefox 5 today after only a few short months since the previous version launched. The predecessor was deemed as the last major release version before Mozilla embarks on a Google Chrome model that will bring shorter faster release cycles. Rather than having new features sit waiting for a major release, now smaller bundles of new features will be pushed out as they become ready, making for new releases as quick as every six weeks.

This latest update brings over 1000 new features for both desktop and Android versions of the browser. Firefox 5 isn’t a major overhaul outwardly, but does bring a lot of change under the hood that includes performance and stability enhancements as well as privacy improvements and new CSS animations and improved JavaScript support.

Performance wise, Firefox 5 uses new HTTP optimizations that accelerates content and makes it much faster than before. The “Do not track” option that was introduced in Firefox 4 is now more visible to users and appears as an interface item for users to select whether or not they want websites to track them. New CSS animations support will allow for “Flash-like” dynamic content.

Via slashgear

----- 

Microsoft has released the Kinect for Windows SDK beta, as expected, allowing PC developers to use the motion-tracking accessory. A free 100MB download, the SDK offers support for the depth sensor, color camera and quad-microphone array, along with all the clever skeletal-tracking systems that Xbox 360 game developers have had access to.

There’s also integration with Windows’ speech recognition API. That potentially means developers will be able to use the microphone array – which can pinpoint which user is talking thanks to beam formation – to transcribe speech to text, open and control applications, and more.

Microsoft has thrown in plenty of technical documentation, samples, all the drivers you’ll need and support for C++, C#, or Visual Basic. This current iteration of the SDK is only for non-commercial purposes; Microsoft says it will be releasing a commercial version later on. You’ll obviously need a Kinect sensor, too, which currently costs around $140.

----

Kinect for Windows SDK beta

Via Lambda the Ultimate

-----

See one of his example tests on Github.

-----

Rule 110 (Stephen Wolfram)

Via cnet

----- 

 If you miss your Android apps when using your PC, a start-up called BlueStacks says it has the answer.

Today, the company announced first-round funding of $7.6 million from Ignition Ventures, Radar Partners, Helion Ventures, Redpoint Ventures, and Andreessen Horowitz for its virtualization technology that provides a foundation for Google's mobile operating system atop Windows. It's got partnerships with Citrix for distribution to interested businesses and with assorted as-yet unnamed PC makers for consumers.

"The idea is very simple," said Chief Executive and co-founder Rosen Sharma, who previously was McAfee's chief technology officer. It started when the 6-year-old daughter of another company co-founder was using Android apps on his smartphone. "She went to a Netbook, and she wanted the same apps on it," Sharma said. But it wasn't possible at the time.

"The number of people who want something like that is very, very large--both consumer and enterprise," Sharma said.

Consumers could be interested in having a Windows version of their LinkedIn app for social and work connections, their sports app for staying on top of the latest game results, or Pulse app for reading news, Sharma said. And businesses are interested in extending the reach of mobile apps they've created for their employees.

"A lot of people are doing their own apps" inside the company, Sharma said. "The GM dealership app is an Android app. People who were doing BlackBerry apps earlier are doing Android apps now."

The company, incorporated in 2008, plans to release a free beta version of its software for people to download in June or July. It hasn't yet set pricing for the final version, which is due to ship in the fourth quarter. Partnerships with PC makers should be announced starting next week, the company said.

Once people install the software, running an Android app is easy, Sharma said. "From the user experience, it looks just like they're using an app," he said.

Indeed, my CNET colleague Seth Rosenblatt found using Android apps on Windows with BlueStacks a seamless and effortless process.

BlueStacks uses Amazon.com's Android marketplace to distribute apps because Google restricts its Android Market to specific ARM-based devices.

User interface issues are one complication. Smartphone apps are designed for a touch-screen interface and sometimes for a multitouch interface, so some things won't work easily with a mouse and keyboard. Sharma brushed the worry aside, though.

"We are seeing a lot of touch devices. In two years, a standard laptop will have a touch screen," he said. In addition, trackpads on new laptops support multitouch gestures such as pinching and zooming, he said.

"That leaves very few apps that require absolute touch or multitouch, like games," Sharma said. "The coverage you get is pretty large."

There are some caveats. Android today runs on the variety of ARM processors that are used in smartphones and tablets, but Windows machines--for now at least--use x86 chips from Intel or Advanced Micro Devices. BlueStacks therefore runs its own build of the OS from the open-source Android project.

The kind of high-powered apps you could run in Android include Microsoft Word and Adobe Photoshop.

(Credit: BlueStacks)

Another processor complication is that some Android programs--the Firefox and Opera browsers, for example--use the Native Developer Kit that Google provides for software makers that want to write software that runs directly on the processor rather than on Android's Java-like software foundation. Those won't run on BlueStacks today.

But they will later.

"Most apps are cross-platform. But any app that uses native ARM code will not run today," Sharma said. "We will enable those apps by December."

Ultimately, BlueStacks expects to bridge the gap the other way, too, letting Windows apps run on Android. That will work only on x86 versions of Android, which currently aren't on the market.

Campbell, Calif.-based BlueStacks has only 20 employees now, and most are in India where expenses are lower, so payroll costs won't drain the bank account quickly. Instead, the company plans to use its VC money to try to spread its software foundation as rapidly as possible.

"Our question is getting distribution," Sharma said. He expects to have 20 million copies distributed through computer makers and 60 million through Citrix's software channel, he said.

"Our goal is by end of 2012 to have a ridiculous-looking distribution number. Then the game changes completely," Sharma said.

 -----

Bluestacks