Web2.0, WebOS, WebOffice, We… Whatever.
Posted by: Shrikant Joshi in Community, Tools, WebThe WebOS Market Review by Richard MacManus delves into the WebOS market, which is currently being played by small-timers like YouOS, eyeOS, XIN, etc. A WebOS is an OS on the Web that allows you to browse, eMail, chat, etc. Basically, the online counterpart of your desktop OS.
Ok. Stop. Let’s go back to that last one. Online counterpart of an OS? uhh, erm…
Hmm. Let’s try Wikipedia. Wikipedia defines WebOS as:
More generally, WebOS refers to a software platform that interacts with the user
through a web browser and does not depend on any particular local
operating system.
What? Let’s go through this one more time, step-by-step:
I boot my desktop OS. I fire my desktop browser. I connect to the World Wide Web. I access the WebOS. I see my WebDesktop. Now what? I fire up my WebBrowser and access the Internet again?
Er, excuse me, but isn’t that where I am already? So, which one is my, ‘true’, definitive OS? The one I booted to fire the (desktop) Browser, or the one that I accessed on the web? Moreover, how would you access such an OS in the future, given this logical inconsistency?
When I put forth this question, AutomanG replied with the following:
One solution would be to have something, say…, linux embedded into a box that’s sole purpose is to fire up a browser and initiate a tunnel to a remote server (where your webOS of choice is located.) It would be a borderless browser so to you, it would look just like you booted a computer arriving at a desktop.
This sounds really weird! No offense meant, but I just want to explore this a bit further:
Currently, looking at the larger picture, we have three OSes in the Desktop Market. Windows, Linux and MacOS. With this proposal the intention to make Linux a standard (irrespective of whether all people want it or not). Or Windows or MacOS. Some OS which can be universally accepted and moulded as and when need be. Which inevitably brings us back to Linux.
Agree though, the argument that Automan provides makes some sense on some level. Okay, it doesn’t matter what boots the embedded browser as long as what they see on their screens is the same all throughout. Interesting point, I admit.
But again, then there are many options for WebOSes now. There will come a time when we will have to choose one of them as a standard, or maybe, define some standard specs for a WebOS. How do you do that, then?
And if you were to do it later, why not do it now for the desktop OSes? And if you intend to write embedded software to run the necessary hardware, it still is an OS!
I still can’t fathom the need for a WebOS. The ability to store data online, more than makes up for the inability to access my personal desktop everywhere. After all the applications that you intend to put on the Web will be run by their desktop counterparts. What is the point?
Ok, I guess, I oughtta stop. I sound almost desparate now!
(Not to be taken seriously)
Entries (RSS)
August 10th, 2006 at 8:12 pm
I know this is an old blog post, but here goes:
The core benefit of a WebOS would be in the corporate sector, where multi-user licensing is expensive. Here’s an example:
I run a corporation with 1000 employees. I now need to purchase 1000 licenses of MS Windows Professional, at a cost of $115/unit (that’s with the discount). Now we’re up to $115K in costs… Now let’s throw in the cost of office applications for all of those computers - that’s another $100K. Then, the server-side software is somewhere around $5K… Now we have to add client-side stuff like Novell, which would put us up to $50K/yr. Altogether, we’re talking about $370K every few years.
Okay, let’s look at the WebOS model. Someone comes along and shows me a demo of their server-side “O/S” software (intended to run on our intranet), and a way to seamlessly “install” a very thin linux-based operating environment (notice I didn’t say “system”). Now each user has the ability to login from anywhere within the intranet, and their data is still on our servers. We have now eliminated the MS Windows O/S cost, the MS Windows Server cost, the MS Office cost, and the cost of Novell. Now we’re down to something like $25K/year in TOTAL cost.
It solves a huge problem for sure - the problem of cost in the corporate environment.
August 11th, 2006 at 5:30 pm
Robert,
Quite an interesting thought, there. Let me paraphrase what I understand:
>> A WebOS will help you manage your resources more efficiently (tangible + intangible asset-wise) and will act as an alternative corporate intranet.
Why not VNC or Remote Desktop Sharing, then? They would achieve the same objectives, better and faster, I suspect…
From your comment, (if I read it correctly,) I suspect you are looking for an efficient and effective corporate intranet to manage all your internal communication.
Well, it is true that a Web OS would serve you well as a File Management system.
But what about communication systems? How would you send memos and notes to the employees in your organization? The usual eMail?
That would mean you would have to invest in a network anyway…
It’s a pity you haven’t left your contact details here..
Regards,
Shri.
August 13th, 2006 at 2:17 am
Actually, internal messaging could be handled quite efficiently across the system. Walk up to a terminal, login, check your messages.
You could then add applications the utilze RSS, and maybe even expand some of the “web2.0″ concepts to the enterprise market.
As for VNC and remote-desktops: I have used VNC over a 10mbit/s connection and it’s definitely slow.
On the consumer side of things, I’m not sure how well such a system would perform. You would now lose the ability to perform intense applications… However, it could work as an embedded solution within hardware like TV’s, vehicles, etc.. The telco would have the server-side software installed and could sell storage packages.
If you ever want to get in touch, my e-mail addy is: rdewey (*at*) aggrio (*dot*) com