Mobile Tech Minus Open Source is Not the Best Strategy
by Sam Dean - Oct. 08, 2009Comments (1)- Related Blog Posts
- OStatic Buffer Overflow...
- Is the Symbian Foundation DOA?
- Android: Linux--Only Different
- Has Microsoft Suddenly Awakened to Open Source?
- Remember the Milk for Android Updated
Matt Asay and IBM's Savio Rodrigues have a couple of interesting posts up today on the topic of open source and mobile technology. "RIM needs more open source" argues Rodrigues, in reference to Research In Motion, which is behind the BlackBerry. Asay points out that "the future of mobile, however, will be owned by the company or project that best appeals to developers, especially open source developers." From my perspective, that's true at both the software platform and application levels.
Google's Android is finally succeeding with carriers and handset makers largely because of the flexible, open source platform that it is. Application developers have produced more than 10,000 apps for Android Market, and Motorola has come up with its own social network-focused interface for its upcoming Android Cliq phone. Android's open nature has everything to do with these advancements.
IBM's Rodrigues makes the good point that costs can be reduced through effective mobile open source efforts. In discussing RIM's prospects, he points out that the company could have substantiall reduced the costs of its SDK (Software Development Kit) "for a lower investment by starting with PhoneGap or an equivalent open source framework." Much has been written about open source bringing cost reductions to business that deploy it, but it can represent savings in software development costs too.
We're seeing a lot of fragmentation in mobile technology competition. Apple, Google, Microsoft, RIM, Symbian and others have markedly divergent strategies. But among those players, Google and Symbian are the ones putting their big bets behind open source mobile platforms. In the end, that may pay off handsomely.
