Wednesday 5 May 2010

Intel Moorestown - the pied piper of Hamlet? Doubtful...

Intel's claim is that they will have X86 developers following them in droves to provide their software on mobile devices. I don't buy Intel's arguement about developers following them onto smartphones purely because of experience on the desktop. The arguement is several-fold.

Firstly, Intel don't talk about Windows for the smartphone. Yet the entire back catalogue of software they'd like to associate with their mobile platform almost universally comes from the Windows stable. The one thing that Intel can do that ARM partners cannot do is test the viability of Windows 7 on a smartphone form factor, since Moorestown is an X86 platform so in theory should be able to boot this OS. My opinion is that having done this, they have found it to be a poor user experience, because they have gone down the route of developing their own Linux distribution to fit into the space that Windows is not being trumpeted to fill. Have you ever heard Intel saying their smartphones will run Windows? No, and my opinion is that you won't hear that any time soon.

Secondly, Meego is a merge of Nokia's Maemo, and Intel's Moblin. I have a Maemo device, and there are not that many applications available for it. Nor are there many for Moblin. Meego has only just been released, and it will suffer for a long time without applications - as its parent OSes have done for a long time (especially maemo) - until devices exist in the market place to encourage developers to take part. The beauty of the iPad is the legacy of iPhone applications, and the fact that Apple was partnering with new developers on the larger iPad form factor before its release to take advantage of it in new ways - leveraging a portable legacy unrivalled in the industry. By contrast, Intel's OS offering in this space is starting from a poor base and trying to compete with the iPhone OS and Android, both of which have traction and mindshare in the marketplace. [And why does Android have a growing, and decent, applications base? Because there are devices out in the market that are now receiving critical acclaim...]

So, Intel are effectively having to start from scratch on the software front in the mobile space, and in my opinion they are trying to soften the blow of having to go down this route by referring to their X86 desktop legacy as a potential solution to a software gap that is as yet unplugged, even if that legacy doesn't exist.

The third leg on this stool is the issue of platform ownership. At present, a mobile phone manufacturer will decide what access developers have to their mobile platforms. The two most popular platforms with application marketplaces/stores are the iPhone and Android, with WebOS deserving a mention because of its recent acquisition by HP through its parent company Palm.

If the platform is an openly adopted one like Android for example, there is still an element of control that a manufacturer has to add or subtract the Android marketplace from the phone. If the platform is a closed one like the iPhone OS, the applications store is closed and scrutinised by the company, in order to control the user experience (although they are an exception here).

When you come to Linux, the story gets quite murky. There is no Linux applications store, but if there were it would have to support multiple platforms and distributions. The problem has to be narrowed down to just Meego from Intel's perspective, where the intention is for it to span ARM and Intel platforms in order to build - at present - Nokia-only devices. So far, I know of nobody who has taken Nokia's old open source Maemo OS and used it to make a device of their own except for Nokia, so questions abound regarding the scope of Intel's Meego OS effort in the and its ability to penetrate the marketplace.

The question on this third leg really is whether or not Intel will enforce the inclusion of their applications store into any device shipping with Meego? And also, will anyone really adopt Meego, given the histories of Maemo and Moblin?

The fact that Intel cannot draw upon any of their legacy desktop software for the mobile space - because Mobile is not based around windows - is being hidden behind a smokescreen of talk about the legacy of development that Intel has in the desktop world with Windows. If you waft the smoke away, I don't think that Intel has a strong story here.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Please keep your comment in the spirit of this blog - short, light-hearted and useful.