Jason Whitmire

An Industry and Technology Revolution is on the Horizon

Limo, and in a slightly different way Android, have killed the standards-based approach to open source development in mobile. In the Linux world, creating an esoteric, theoretical application standard not based on market-driven code requires too much speculative investment without any clear mitigation of ROI risk for anyone to take up anymore. Indeed, the days of a bunch of representative techies flying to exotic locales to dream up the theoretical perfect system are over. It’s just too expensive to completely retool an entire stack without a known intrinsic return.

Because of the concentration in the mobile market (83% of handsets manufactured by five companies), when market leaders have invested in a stack, it is a standard whether certified by an arcane standards body or not.  The  Open Handset Alliance has created a de facto market standard not because a group of market leaders have adopted the standard, but because of Google’s overall singular market weight. The effect is the same (Trolltech and OpenMoko did the same thing that OHA did, and took it one step further by actually building a phone, but no one came running to embrace their reference designs because they lacked the market weight that Google has).

The Check is in the Mail, Do No Evil and Other Matters of Trust

All will agree that mobile Linux suffers from fragmentation today, and that fragmentation
•    creates significant challenges to Linux adoption in mobile phones (lack of interoperability et. al.) 
•    presents barriers to innovation
•    increases the carrier cost to Linux terminal deployment.

For Linux to succeed in the mobile market, we need to minimize fragmentation and its resulting incompatibility.  In the early days of the PC revolution, this type of incompatibility was similarly rampant, and the Wintel monopoly provided the standard.  More importantly, the Wintel monopoly created the incentive to rally around the standard. 

But suggesting that the industry set up Google as the mobile Linux gatekeeper, including issuing all the keys to the various feature phone middleware/applications framework kingdoms (which account for about 90% of all phones deployed today), to take on the monumental role of software guardian for mobile Linux, is possibly antithetical to the open source movement, regardless of Google’s motto.  And perhaps this is not the role that Google ultimately seeks in the mobile market.  Indeed, there are multiple thrusts to Google’s mobile terminal strategy, all of which are underpinned by the principle of radically improving the efficiency and experience of the end-user’s mobile internet time.

Open Handset Alliance and LiMo – Why both initiatives are here to stay

It's easy to take the fragmentation of the mobile phone industry for granted. With over 40 different proprietary and Open Source Middleware and Application Frameworks addressing Ultra Low Cost, Entry, Feature and Smart Phone market segments, software costs have exploded and are expected to hit some 25% of the entire Bill of Materials on a mobile phone this year. No wonder mobile network operators are asking the industry to stop the madness and consolidate around a limited number of pre-defined platforms.

Many operators very clearly see Microsoft, Symbian and one to two versions of Linux as the only future software platforms that will comprise their terminal roadmap.  Linux is unique in that most Tier 1 OEMs – with the exception of Nokia – plan to gradually replace the proprietary software addressing the feature phone segments (where by far the most volumes of phones are shipped today and in the future).

With this in mind, two juggernauts – Open Handset Alliance and LiMo – promise to alter the landscape for the third software platform – Linux – for good. The LiMo Foundation’s goal is to defragment the Linux handset market by creating a Linux-based mobile platform that lowers development costs, increases flexibility, and yields differentiated devices. The goal of the Open Handset Alliance is to deliver solutions to enable complete open software, open devices, and an open ecosystem. Are these movements destined for perpetual conflict?