A victory for open-source software...

If there were any doubts that open-source software is the way to go, the fact that Microsoft just released version 1.0 of .NET Core should go a long dispelling this idea.

.NET Core is a open-source cross platform implementation of Microsoft's .NET Framework development environment that runs on OS X and Linux. While it isn't the same thing as Microsoft open-sourcing Windows, its a sign that open-source software is here to stay and its making inroads with a lot more users that many are willing to admit.

Not that long ago, Microsoft was an enemy of everything open-source. Now, its embracing it in order to stay relevant. Let's face it, open-source software has never been the problem that Microsoft made it to be, but rather a solution for developers and users for a whole host of problems.

Most importantly, it give credence to the idea that open-source software is a valid development tool. This helps both developers and users, since it gives both a better and faster way to address their needs. There is no need to wait for Microsoft address their needs or correct the bugs that affect them, since now they can now independently develop their solutions and have them approved by Microsoft in a matter of hours.

There is still some way to go until open-source software gets to the place it deserves to be. Yet, that Microsoft conceded this victory is an important step to get there. It validates open-source software,  while it opens the way for more people to use it and to be aware of it as a valid tool.

I'm all in for more competition on the mobile OS ecosystems...

Smartphones are one area where I'd like to see more OSes to choose from, that can be used by more OEM. Another thing, is that while apps are relatively easy to keep updated, the OS itself is a whole different story if you're on Android.

While I prefer Android over iOS, one of the main things I have against Android and in favor of iOS is the ease of keeping the OS updated. Other than that, Android is by far the mobile OS for me.

Yet, I'd like to see a wider selection of mobile OSes and apps that would run on your OS of choice easily. The only reason against this is not a technical one, but because companies prefer to have you locked in on their ecosystem. While that is good for them, is bad for the user. While I don't see hundreds of different OSes, there is space for more than Android and iOS.

For one thing, more mobile OSes based on Linux would be great. That would help making the point to create a common standard to create apps that run on them, since all would have a common base. I see some apps being exclusive to one or two of those OSes, but most apps would do better by being available on all the OSes or at least as most of them.

Once, I was really happy to see Mozilla getting into the game with it's Firefox OS. It looked to be a solid OS for entry and mid-level devices, specially for those people who were getting their first smartphone or just wanted something not that fancy.

Its a shame that is didn't had the market share it deserve, since it could have been quite the option for entry and mid-level smartphones arena to Android.

Ubuntu Touch is the OS I see as the competition to Android on the mid-level to high-end smartphones. True, the OS still needs more apps on it's ecosystem and to be supported by more OEM. Yet, for the looks of it Ubuntu Touch could be a viable option for those looking for a good smartphone other than an Android device when an iOS one doesn't make the cut.

For the time being we need another option on the entry to mid-level areas while Ubuntu Touch need to do more to be a viable option on the other side of the spectrum.

Android is the mobile OS for me at the moment. Ubuntu Touch could be an option for me, but it still isn't available on Mexico easily and the apps I use aren't supported on it. If Ubuntu touch came to Mexico, and supported the same apps as Android does, I'd give it a chance in a heartbeat.

At the end, I'd love to see more Linux based mobile OS being successful at the market.

Some welcomed news for SteamOS...

A few days ago I shared some of my thoughts about the state of SteamOS, and gaming on Linux in general. While on both counts things aren't as good as I would like, they are in good standing. There is a healthy selection of titles, mainly indie ones.

While there is a need for more AAA titles on SteamOS, and the Linux client, to make them more appealing to mainstream gamers that new games are added continuously is encouraging.

The other important question, is hardware support for the SteamOS. While most SteamOS capable machines are built by Valve, there some other vendors who also make Steam machines. The OS can be installed by the user like other Linux distros as well, giving user ever more options where they want to run the OS.

But, there is some great news that could give us hope for the future of SteamOS gaming on Linux in general. Dell announced that its introducing new Alienware based on the OS. These means that users can have access to well know gaming rigs based on SteamOS, giving a good incentive for game producers to publish their games for the platform.

Though this are news are welcome, its not certain that gaming on Linux will become mainstream. But, at least we can hope that Steam will help attract more publisher to Linux.

Ubuntu and Unity just work for me...

After about six years of using Ubuntu, or Linux Mint, on my personal laptop I simply don't see myself coming back to Windows. All of my needs are covered my Ubuntu or Linux Mint, and both OSes are FLOSS software which is important for me.

At work I use Windows 7, and when I compare it to Ubuntu or Linux Mint it just doesn't hold for long. There is nothing I can't do at least as well on Windows as I can do on either Ubuntu or Linux Mint. While all three OSes are quite good, Ubuntu just takes the cake in my case.

To be honest, if I could use Ubuntu at work I would have asked the IT department to set me up with an Ubuntu machine. The only thing that prevents me to do so, is that we use SAP and it only runs on Windows. For a year now they have been testing running SAP on Windows 10, and so far the only thing preventing us to make the jump is budget concerns.

Ubuntu is far from perfect, but its the Linux distro that fits my computing needs. Linux Mint is a close second, mainly because the Cinnamon desktop doesn't really covers my aesthetic tastes as well Unity does.

When Unity came out Ubuntu 11.04, I had my reservations about it. At the same time Linux Mint Launched Cinnamon, and since GNOME 3 didn't feel right, I tried Cinnamon. At the time, I liked Cinnamon but I felt it lacking compared to GNOME 2. While using Ubuntu, I came to love GNOME 2, so any desktop environment that hoped to replace it had quite a high bar to surpass.

Cinnamon didn't really made the cut at the time, and I decided to give Unity a chance. So, I made the jump to Ubuntu 11.10 and I feel in love with Unity.

So far, I've used Linux Mint 17 for a couple of months to see what all the fuss was about Cinnamon 2. While it got better, Cinnamon still isn't for me even though its a solid desktop environment, specially for those user coming from Windows and want something that just works out of the box.

Ubuntu is a solid distro for beginners and intermediate users that want a solid OS that works well out of the box, while giving some solid extra features for users with more technical knowhow.

Personally, I'm an intermediate user that isn't afraid to get his hands dirty while fixing problems or adding functionalities to his OS of choice. Ubuntu fills the bill while being an aesthetically pleasing OS at the same time. There are people who say that Ubuntu isn't as flexible as other distros, yet I think they miss the point of what Ubuntu is about and the fact that there are some other distros that cover that area.

The truth is that most user would be quite happy with Ubuntu as is comes, while some other would do some minor tweaking. Advance users have Arch Linux or Debian, which is good.

At the end of the day, that's what makes Linux great. There is a distro for every need, and not everyone needs to agree on what's best.

Thoughts on SteamOS, and gaming on Linux...

When Valve announced SteamOS, I was really excited about it. Since its based on Debian, it meant that a serious gaming OS was coming to the Linux side. And if all went right, it meant that at least some publisher might offer their games on other Linux distros in time.

As such, when I read on Extremetech site that Steam's machines sales have been abysmal, I can't help to feel somewhat sad and disappointed. Though I disagree that the games offered for SteamOS are indie is a bad thing, it would help to have more AAA titles available.

Personally, I enjoy far more indie games than I do AAA games. The same goes for many of my friends, we feel that indie games offer something more than AAA games do. Yet I do see the need to at least attract some AAA titles to make the platform more widely appealing, specially to new users or those who prefer AAA games.

To be honest, I'd love nothing more that see SteamOS go mainstream. But, I wouldn't mind seeing it going as a niche product serving indie game producers and gamers who prefer those games. In a way, a place where indie games won't get lost among AAA games.

In some way, SteamOS might become a gathering place for people who look for games that feel more driven by more than the need to succeed commercially. For games that strive to be just fun and challenging, or for those who strive to tell a story. Most of us are willing to pay for such games, and many of us who search for those games are able to do so.

As such, I do want to see SteamOS to succeed. Yet, I'd prefer it to succeed in a way that it'll become the place to go for indie games.