Big Brother IS Watching You - Via Your Smartphone (UPDATED)

WARNING: If you're the paranoid type - take a pill or stop reading here - because this information will put you into a spin.

OK - disclaimer out of the way.

I'll start with the bottom line: If you're using a non-Nokia Android device on AT&T or Sprint (not Verizon), or you're using a Blackberry - your phone could be recording and sending absolutely everything you do on your phone from web searches, to SMS, to application use, to continuous real-time tracking and storing/sending the information back to your carrier.

That's because some handset makers (including Apple - more on that in a minute) and some carriers use a piece of software called Carrier IQ that sets at the deepest levels of the operating system (also known as a "rootkit"). This handy-dandy piece of spyware software intercepts every single keystroke, button push, search string, URL, SMS message, email and (potentially) every voice call - before the operating system even displays it to the user.

Don't believe it? To quote an article on Gizmodo:

This video, recorded by 25-year-old Android developer Trevor Eckhart, shows how it works. This is bad. Really bad.

Here's that video - scroll ahead to about the 9:00 mark for the real interesting stuff:

WTH? Ummmm.... "cool." Now, as one might expect, the carriers are insisting that they are only using this data for "diagnostics" - when applications crash, or calls are dropped, etc.

Yeah, sure.

Being in the software industry for as long as I have, I get the fact that it's helpful to get the machine state if something goes horribly wrong - in order to trap for it in future releases and help the application(s) to get better and more resilient over time.

And, although iPhones also have Carrier IQ on them - it has been discovered that Apple really does only use it for that purpose. And, unlike the Android systems - you can easily turn it off by going to Settings -> Location Services -> System Services and setting the "Diagnostics & Usage" to "OFF". By the way - the default setting for this is OFF! (more information)

Personally, I have no problems with companies wanting to improve the stability of their operating system and/or application (although I have my "Diagnostics & Usage" set to OFF on my iPhone).

The thing I have a problem with - is that you as the user are never notified that your phone is spying on you. And that you can't opt-out of this type of information being transmitted/used (on non-Apple devices). And that you can't even stop the service from running in the first place - even when you press the "Hard Stop" kill switch.

Since this video came to light only 4 days ago - it has caused an absolute firestorm of controversy - to the degree that both the US and German governments are getting involved to see what (if any) privacy laws have been broken.

Now, I'm not really big into conspiracy theories - but in my mind just having this software on 141 MILLION devices begs the question: what happens when some hacker figures out a way to exploit this program? What if they already have? What if this software has been exploited by law enforcement (the "hush, hush" kind) for surveillance or illegal wiretapping?

I'm just sayin'... if you're using a wireless device running Android either buy a Nokia device, switch to Verizon, or just buy an iPhone and be done with it.

UPDATE #1 (02-DEC-2011 9:29am): - Ummmmm... you know that whole "illegal wiretap" stuff that I put in there? Well, it turns out that WikiLeaks just released 287 files on surveillance products from 160 companies designed to get around those pesky privacy laws. Allowing "remote forensics" including keylogging, screenshot captures and much more. DOH!

What IS a "PC" Anyway?

I've been thinking about PCs lately (as in "Personal Computers" not "Politically Correct"). When us old timers think of a "PC" we generally think of that first IBM PC or the Apple II - with the glowing green screen, and a hip, cool user interface called DOS.

I bet if you asked my kids what "PC" means - they would say "Politically Correct" (hopefully). To them, there is no concept of a "personal" computer because they grew up in a world where all computers are "personal." In their limited experience these computing devices are the default:

1. A computer (or two) in your house
2. A mobile telephone ("but my phone sucks - I need a smartphone")
3. A tablet
4. An e-reader
5. A XBOX 360 (or Wii)
6. A handheld (non-phone) gaming platform
7. Video screen in the car
8. Streaming custom radio station based on your music preferences (e.g. Pandora, Spotify)

We of the older generation didn't have any of these things growing up. Here's our list:

1. A rock
2. A cardboard box
3. Duct Tape
4. 5 Hot Wheels cars
5. Hammer and nails
6. Firecrackers (or some other equally dangerous explosives)
7. Pong (if you were LUCKY!)
8. 8 track tapes - and then cassettes (if you were a 1%er back then)

When "personal" computers came out - it was a revolutionary concept. "A computer in every home" was such a far-fetched idea that it simply boggled the imagination.

Once the PC came out - there was a "war." The war between operating systems that has raged for 20+ years. Microsoft became the dominant player - because they were first with some business applications that went along with the hardware that IBM was selling into businesses.

Apple was trying (sort of) to do the same thing - but they focused less on business and more on education and the hobbyist. The techie. The artistic nerds.

And so the battle "raged" on (not really - because Apple only had 3% to 5% of the worldwide market, anyway). There are passionate "Windows" guys, and passionate "Mac" aficionados - and even a small sect of Linux lovers.

Then, came the iPhone. The paradigm of what computing "should be" and "could be" changed. Forever. A phone with no buttons. A phone that was a slab of glass. A phone that could surf the web. A phone that could contain "apps" that would amuse/help/inform/guide/save-your-sorry-lost-butt... a phone that would (later) include FaceTime video conferencing (hello, Jetsons!)...

Then, came the Android phone.

Then came the iPad.

Then came the Samsung Galaxy Tab and the Amazon Kindle Fire.

Then came the end of the "personal computer."

What's coming next?

There's talk of a Facebook phone running a modified version of Android (yes, a Facebook Operating System... *groan* ) so you could obsessively update your status 24/7. There are already 5 variants of tablets coming in the next quarter - and desktop computer sales have fallen off considerably. Mac OS X for non-phone, non-tablet computers has been re-vamped to include features from the iOS version. Microsoft is jonesing to get their Windows 7 Phone platform going with Nokia.

There are free applications for personal music, personal text messaging, group text chat, group video chat. We can Linkedin our Tublr Facebook Twitter stream with our Flickr YouTube Picasa stream to broadcast our lives in realtime.

We have phones with 5-10 megapixel cameras. That also do VIDEO. That we can upload LIVE at the event!

We can buy books, movies, TV shows with a single click from our phone then watch them on our TV at home - or on our laptop on an airplane.

Yes, the term "PC" ("Personal Computing") is as dead as Flash. Information is becoming a a commodity - sharing our pictures, where we are, what we "like" and what we stand for in a live 24 hour per day, 7 day per week stream - now that is personal computing.

What Does Your Mobile Phone Say About You? [INFOGRAPHIC]

There's that saying "you are what you eat" - and that got me to thinking... if you are what you eat - what does the operating system on your phone say about you?

Naw, not really.

I'm not THAT lame.

I just found this infographic, and thought it was cool:



SOURCE

Google To Acquire Motorola Mobility - Sad

Unless you've been living under a rock, you've probably heard that Google has agreed to acquire Motorola Mobility (yeah, the part of Motorola that builds the phone handsets) for $12.5 billion in cash (at $40 per share -  a 63% premium over the market close price on Friday).

I know, right?

It's clear that Google is buying the moto unit, not to expand their market share, not to get into the handset business, not to add shareholder value - but to get their trove of 14,600 patents (and the 6,700+ pending patents).

Personally, I think it's an extremely sad state of affairs.

Clearly, Google feels threatened by the Oracle lawsuit, and the Apple lawsuit and the Microsoft lawsuit. All these large, deep-pocketed, industry leaders are trying to do a single thing: sue the Android operating system into oblivion over patent rights - OR, at the very least, make Google pay a patent "toll" for the right to distribute the operating system for free.

Why are they not going after Palm's WebOS? Or Symbian? Both of those are free (and open) as well.

The answer is: they don't matter. They have no market share. They have no mind share. They have a small installed base.

On the other hand, Android commands a majority of not only the phone market (Apple hates that - as does Microsoft), but they're starting to make noises about making inroads into the tablet market (Apple clearly doesn't want that) - and Oracle is laughing their asses off since they acquired Sun (the folks that invented Java and hold key patents to the underlying technology).

So - what's a company with $39 billion in cash to do? Sure! Buy a patent rich handset company that will be - according to Larry Page on a Google conference call this morning:

I’m really excited about this deal. There are competencies that aren’t core to us, but we plan to operate it as a separate business, so they have competency there. I’m really excited about protecting and supporting the Android ecosystem.

Thump (other shoe dropping).

TRANSLATION: "We don't know the phone business and don't care. Motorola has been struggling and their getting their lunch eaten by HTC anyway. The handset business will do whatever.... the main thing is - we got their patents before someone else did."

So here's the latest tally: patent trolls 3; innovation: 0.

Non MS OSes Gaining Ground

In order to celebrate my 300th blog entry - I decided to revert to one of my favorite topics: slamming Microsoft... and predicting the demise of this (truly) evil empire.

In what is just the latest in a long history of time-sucking, headache-inducing, blood-pressure-raising events - I stupidly set the auto-update of my parent's aging Dell (XP Professional) to on.

When it decided to do an SP3 update - it hosed the boot block of the hard drive. So, I used the recover CD to "repair" the install, issue a DOS "fixboot" and "chkdsk" commands - and go it to book back into windows.

The BAD news is that as soon as one of the profiles is clicked on - the installation script - in its infinite wisdom and desire to "help" - promptly resumed where it left off and proceeded to hose the boot block again.

The end result is that my parents have a useless computer - with outdated backups, and now I need to spend the better part of 2 days doing a full wipe/install/update.

THANKS Microsoft! Awesome QA!

Yes, I know - just because I'm pissed off about having to restore yet ANOTHER install of Windows (I've done it on my own machines countless times) - I'm really at the point of turning Windows into my occasionally-used-for-testing-only operating system.

I'm just sick of it. Sick of the 10 minute boot time, sick of the endless patches, sick of Service Packs that render printers useless, sick of the bloat, just sick of the OS, period.

So, I did a little looking around the Internet - and I'm seeing that there are LOTS more people just as fed up as I am - AND they're voting with their dollars.

People are into "mobile" and anything "small" and "portable."

I mean, really - when was the last time you bought a "desktop" computer? Sure, there are uses for dedicated desktop boxes for things like video-editing, music composing, hard-core software development, etc.

But, in the main, people are buying laptops - and now, netbooks.

Ah, netbooks. Netbooks are the new Model T - but they come in more colors than just black. And with more than one choice in processors. And with more than one choice of operating system.

These (usually) sub-$500 machines come with solid state 128MB hard drives, 1-2 GB of RAM, a VGA-out port (ok, ok, so the 1024 x 768 resolution sucks), a battery that lasts between 5 and 9 hours and an operating system that can be Windows XP, Ubuntu, and now - TA DA - Android (for less than $300!).

The combination of the price point, the capabilities and the fact that most people use their computers to surf the web, check email, do some word processing and spreadsheets - oh, and play games - and viola! It's huge hit in the making.

"Sure, sure", you're saying - "but that's just on the consumer side. Everyone knows that consumers will jump at anything that's inexpensive and shiny."

That's true - but these consumers WILL buy and adopt - and that WILL force corporate IT (and web designers, and major company webmasters) to sit up and take notice. Ever hear of the iPhone? Look what a profound change has (is) occurring because of it... sits have dedicated iPhone "versions" of their sites, IT has been forced to make MS Exchange work nice, and IT - at the end of the day - has had to bow to the mighty forces of "cool" and "useful" over their (in some cases) strenuous objections.

"Well, OK" - you concede. "But Windows is more than just a consumer OS - it's what powers more than half of all the back end servers in the world."

Yep - for sure. However, Linux is no slouch with almost 1 in 3 computers using that OS for their back end servers. Linux, in its various distributions and forms, has been battle-tested and has been proven in the real world over time. Linux isn't going away any time soon.

Sure, it won't displace Windows Server in the near term - but I think the adoption rates will flip-flop as more and more consumers get used to non-Windows devices. As consumers drive the adoption of more non-Windows devices and as more IT folks get used to supporting non-Windows devices - it's only logical that IT's adoption of non-Windows devices will increase as well.

Will the "winner" be Android? Or Oracle's Solaris? Or Ubuntu? Or Red Hat? Or some new operating system not invented yet? Dunno... all I know is - the sooner the better!

Google Is The Next Linux Desktop

Since HP announced that it was "thinking about" using Android as the operating system for its new netbooks, and since both Asus and Freescale have also announced plans to do so - I got to thinking about Linux on the desktop.

It's been the "holy grail" of Linux to find a home on the desktop as a real, viable alternative to Windows. However it's taken many, many years and there is still a lot of "competition" among the various Linux distributions as to who is best for the desktop user.

The current reigning champion in the desktop Linux world is Ubuntu - and it's been embraced by Dell and HP in various combinations and configurations for some time. HP even went so far as to write their own user interface for Ubuntu (be THAT was fun!).

Now, I really like Ubuntu - and I've installed it and have used it (at the GUI level - not at the command-prompt level) and it's pretty cool. It does take some getting used to - it's like switching to OpenOffice from MS Office. The features are "similar" and the paradigms are "similar" - but there are enough differences to where there is a slight learning curve.

The problem with Ubuntu is not the distribution. It's not the still somewhat lacking UI, it's not the limited number of applications (that part is improving in general). The reason that Ubuntu hasn't become the "real" alternative to Windows is the fact that Canonical, Ubuntu's developer, hasn't beat the consumer drum and put out a really slick GUI that people will love.

They haven't spent the marketing millions that it would require to drive "pull" adoption (people asking for it). They really don' t have the industry muscle to drive wide adoption.

However, there IS one company that has all those things and more: Google. Yep, ever since Android first appeared (and the collective groan about yet another mobile operating system rang out) - both developers and consumers have been interested in seeing if the search giant could bring to an operating system the "coolness" and simplicity it had to search.

It wasn't long after the first Google mobile phones shipped that some smart folks got the OS to run on a netbook - instead of just a phone. The netbook, just like a phone - uses the Atom processor - rather than an x86 processor found in "regular" computers. These little powerhouses sip the power and don't heat up to microwave-hot temperatures like the other chips do.

So, we have the brewing of a perfect storm: an operating system based on the free, open-source Linux kernel; a huge, international company with a huge consumer and business base of customers; a huge, international company with extremely deep pockets to spend on marketing (not to mention that 1 in 3 people who use the web visit their site EVERY DAY); brand-name hardware manufacturers who want to leverage Google's brand to move inexpensive hardware.

To be sure, there are other operating systems that might have a run - the WebOS by Palm (not likely), the Symbian OS (could be interesting - but it's years away) - or maybe even Ubuntu itself (but not until it runs on a phone!).

But, given Google's track record to try things; and the fact it's already invested a huge sum to make Android work on phones; and given the fact that iPhone users are turning into Mac users at a record rate... they could be on to something.

The Coming Together of Web and Desktop Apps

Today Frank Ohlhorst did a review of Servoy for eWeek's Channel Insider. It was really a nice review - and it got me thinking (rare, I know)... in the future how far will the line blur between web and desktop applications?

I think for the short term - there's a lot of noise about where vendors *think* it should go. The market and the press has been announcing new paradigms and competing announcements for the-same-but-different tools to try to get developers to adopt their "new" platform.

There is so much confusion and noise out there about all the new technologies that I think we're getting away from the real question - what are real life developers doing to create real life applications (both web and desktop) that real users actually use?

I think there are as many answers out there as there are individual developers. Some are still using the "old school" 4GL products (Access, Alpha 5, FileMaker, FoxPro, Magic, Oracle Forms, PowerBuilder, Progress, etc.) and some are using 3GL languages and products (Basic, C, C++, C#, Cobol, Delphi, Java, .NET, RealBasic, VB, etc.) - because that's what they know and are comfortable with (or it's been dictated to them that they use those tools).

Some have turned to the "new" platform as a service (PaaS) offerings or virtual (100% cloud-based) offerings like Bungee, CogHead, Gears, Force.com, QuickBase, etc. opting for both the development and deployment models to be 100% online.

Yet others are jumping on the connected/disconnected (and "Rich Internet Application" - RIA) bandwagon with AIR, Gears, Flex/Flash, OpenLaszlo, and Silverlight.

Not to mention the mobile platforms that are coming out with their own flavors of operating systems (Android, iPhone, Symbian, etc.) that also may or may not have their own particular languages (Objective C, Xcode, etc.).

Ummmm.... yeah. And the list goes on and on and on and on. I personally think it will get even more "muddy" before it gets more clear. You can bet that there are zealots for each of the various approaches and tools and platforms. There are an equal number of detractors as well.

Everyone's got an opinion. But is anyone getting any work done?

I mean, it's all well and good to take a look at all the various technologies that are coming out - they're all trying to do the same thing: help developers develop stuff that end users will find engaging so that they be more productive - and actually get stuff done.

In my book - any tool that will allow you to reach that objective is the best tool to use.

It's not a one-size-fits-all world - and there will never be a one-size-fits-all language, tool, protocol or way of doing business.

Having said that - it's been my experience that end users, project stakeholders, CIO's and CEO's don't really give a rat's ass what the technology is - as long as it meets the business goals, and comes in on-time and on-budget.

And, in my opinion, THAT'S the problem. These tools are so complex, there is so much code to write, there are so many protocols to support, end user's expectations of how applications are "supposed" to behave are changing so rapidly - it's really difficult to find a tool that will help you be both productive ("get the job done") and easy-to-use ("get the job done on time") and flexible ("meet ever-changing business goals") - it's enough to drive developers nuts.

Couple that with the end-user requirements of a rich browser application, and/or a client/server application and/or a disconnected application that synchronizes, and now the water is even more murky.

Let's not even go down the road of the changing business climate of offering software as a service (SaaS) and the nacient platform as a service (PaaS) initiatives to put stuff in the "cloud" while at the same time coupled with ISV business model of selling on premises licenses...

It's for those reasons that I really like Frank's article on Servoy. Servoy is a tool that will give you the best of all worlds: standards-based, JavaScript/Java power, easy Eclipse-based RAD design - but it also is flexible enough to be extensible (Java), and allow you to sell it as an on premises solution, a SaaS solution (in the cloud with or without PaaS) - deploy as client/server and/or browser (100% HTML/CSS) and/or "headless" client (for use by web services, other Java applications or JSP) - while at the same time doing it ALL from ONE code base.

For my money - that's the best application to use. One that allows you to leverage what you know and handles all the code that's behind the scenes. Who wants to code things like connection pooling, data broadcasting, manage client state, write 1,000,00 SQL queries, etc.?

The part that developers need to develop is less about infrastructure and more about the "inside of the window." It's like an iceberg - 80% of the typical application's code is below the water line: the end user never sees it. They only see the 20% of the code on top.

If you can concentrate on the 20% of the functionality that the user interacts with - and have the other 80% handled for you automatically (but still have the flexibility to monkey with it if you want/have to) - you can finally be productive and actually DELIVER a secure client/server/web/offline application on time and on budget that end users will actually use.

Now that's bringing the desktop and web applications together in a way that makes sense.

Symbian Goes Open

Oh goodie! Another mobile platform is going open source! Now there will be TOTAL fragmentation and a sea of incompatible devices for everyone. Yeah!

Nokia is going to buy out the remaining shares in Symbian that is doesn't already own for $410 million and is planning on contributing Symbian and it's S60 (Series 60) platform to the newly formed "Symbian Foundation."

It seems that they'll also have the backing of Sony Ericsson, AT&T, LG Electronics, Samsung Electronics, STMicroelectronics, Texas Instruments, Vodafone, Motorola and NTT DoCoMo to various parts of this new(ish) platform.

That's some pretty heavy hitters.

Still, Nokia has announced a two-year timeframe before everything is out in the open - and now that the Google Mobile OS - Android - has been stalled for at least the next 1-3 quarters - the mobile wars are heating up. That's both good news and potentially really, really, really crappy news - depending on your point of view.

On the good news side - the investment and opening of the mobile OS systems is a really good thing. There is the potential for some really innovative stuff to come out in the mobile space - and even average-joe coders can get in on the action and make a difference.

On the oh-my-gosh-are-you-kidding-me side of the coin - NO ONE needs yet another mobile OS! Seriously, people - stop with PR b.s. and get some deliverable code before you start shouting it from the rooftops.

I mean, let's take a look at the cloudy mess we have already:

• Apple - closed OS - but with an SDK you can only program on a Mac
• RIM - closed OS - also with an SDK you can only program on Windows
• Microsoft - closed OS with an SDK you can only program on Windows
• Google - vaporware completely open OS that is now "officially" delayed - based on Linux
• Symbian - long-in-the-tooth OS that is going to be open over the next couple of years

So - where does that leave developers? I mean, really - are you going to write 5 versions of your application in completely different SDKs with 5 completely different operating systems and dependencies?

That doesn't include all the forking of the Android and Symbian projects (once they get out of the gate). At teh end of the day - what will the people that buy the phones go for? Whomever stakes out the platform (and handset and service and reliability and usefulness) that's the most popular will, at the end of the day, win.

There is certainly room in the world for 5 operating systems in terms of vertical devices and other specialty applications - but in the mass market - unless there are some really compelling advances - people are going to choose cool and sexy over features.

That means - Apple will probably win. They will continue to innovate and be copied by everyone else... unless there are some creative people who don't want to use the Apple Store to distribute their apps - and know Linux (or Symbian) and have a passion to put out really kick-ass apps.

Personally, I'm waiting for July 11th - just like everyone else...

Google Joining Platform Wars

It seems to me that, based on the overwhelming success of its first-ever developer conference last week (named I/O at the Moscone center in San Francisco) - that Google is trying to make itself into much more than just a search engine.

There's been two main platforms for the average-joe developer (and ISV and corporate puke) - Java and/or .NET. Both have been around now for a while, and there are scads of developers trained and using both platforms in production of "real" software solutions.

But watch out for the new kid on the block - Google. He may be scrawny and not really interested in "languages" per-se - he's really a well-rounded, well-funded little guy with big dreams.

Google already has their hands in all kinds of things - from end-user productivity applications (Gmail, Docs, Maps, News, Shopping, Picasa, Reader, Talk, Google Earth, Google Health, Google Desktop), blogging tools (Blogger), web site analysis (Analytics), web development (Gears, Page Creator), social media (Orkut, YouTube, Friend Connect), and coming soon even a mobile OS (Android).

Tell me this is not a "platform."

Yet, I think there is a fly in the ointment: they're stuck in the browser. Now, before I get 1,000 flame emails, you KNOW that I'm all for browser-based apps. I like them, I use them.

BUT - it seems to me that Google is poised to really being pushing this notion of a "Web OS." This makes total sense from a business point-of-view. If you made all your money from selling advertising based on what people search for in a browser, then the more eyeballs you can entice, the more advertising you will sell - and the more money you will make.

Therefore, give people more interesting things to do on the web - and the more sticky it becomes, and the more likely people will trust the search results, and the more likely they will be to click on an ad.

Cha-Ching.

Now - let's say that since you've been focusing your efforts on the browser. You've picked up a few things along the way (e.g. that whole AJAX thing) and really have influenced the state of web development (who doesn't do search engine optimization [SEO]?) - your natural tendency is - to borrow a phrase from Microsoft - "embrace and extend" the paradigm.

That's exactly what they're doing. All their applications - except Android (and Earth, Desktop, and Picasa - which they bought in 2003), are all tied to the browser in some way, shape or form.

In a sense, they're betting that sometime in the future, the browser will turn into a real application framework and not the hole-ridden, malware-spreading, basic text-rendering engine it is today.

While pushing the web as an OS - it's great that the underlying technology doesn't really matter (Amazon's EC2 makes it easy and cheap to scale to whatever level you want on any OS you want) - what will happen when all the world's business applications, and games and streaming media come inside such a container?

It will be an irresistible target to bad guys who can now do a lot more damage to a lot more people in a much more efficient way.

Desktop applications, platforms and languages are not dead. I don't think they ever will be. Oh sure, they'll change and morph into things that are better than what we have today- but the applications built on those languages will hopefully rely on something other than the humble browser (at least as we know it today) for delivering they gooey goodness.

When they do - you can bet that Microsoft Google will be right there to "embrace and extend."