OStatic

Stop me if you've heard this one before -- the reason why so many people choose Windows over alternative platforms is because there are too many choices.

All right, hold on to your hats, folks. In a few cases, I think that's an accurate statement. Why? Because people just want to use their computer. I also know that when given a computer running an alternative operating system, this same demographic happily gets on with using the computer.

On the desktop, of course, there's been a long history of vendors pushing proprietary operating systems by default. While it appears that trend will change in the future, it's already changing in the mobile arena.

Microsoft's Robbie Bach is applying the old argument to the new playing field. Linux Foundation executive director Jim Zemlin, unsurprisingly, thinks this is a bad move on Microsoft's part.

Over at ComputerWorld, Seth Weintraub waxes poetic about Microsoft's decision to offer a Windows 7 Starter edition to keep its presence strong in the netbook arena, and why this is a huge advantage for Google's Linux-based Android.

Windows 7 Starter edition is designed to run no more than three applications simultaneously -- purchasing an upgrade allows users to run, presumably, as many apps as their netbooks can handle at one time. Now, three concurrent applications at a shot might be sufficient for a number of users; it might be all that some netbooks can handle, depending on the applications and system resources running in the background. Microsoft isn't hiding the fact it is experimenting with a limited Starter, and hopefully netbook manufacturers will also make buyers aware of this. But awareness and being almost sufficient in even most cases is irrelevant. It's the concept that there is a limit, and purchasing an upgrade for functionality that most won't need every day (but when it's needed, it's really needed) that will make netbooks running alternative operating systems increasingly attractive. It's an advantage not only for Android, but any Linux distribution netbook builders optimize for their hardware.

The patent dispute between automotive GPS manufacturer TomTom and Microsoft has come to a close, with both sides settling the original suit and countersuit. CNet has a short but informative summary of at least some of the terms (certain financial specifics were not disclosed). The terms are written in order to preserve TomTom's compliance with its obligations under the GPL v.2 licenses on its code. TomTom must also remove functionality from its products that are related to the two file management systems that were under contention in the suit.

This is, at least for the upcoming agreed-upon five year period, how it will be between TomTom and Microsoft. It's been settled, and very little (at least from the Microsoft and TomTom camps), has been officially said about the three patents that dealt with TomTom's implementation of the Linux kernel. It's over, but have the final notes been sung?

This afternoon, Linux Foundation Executive Director Jim Zemlin weighed in with the Foundation's view on the recent patent infringement claims Microsoft has filed against TomTom.

Zemlin says at this point, there's no reason to doubt Microsoft's assurances that this is a dispute solely between TomTom and itself, or that the claims against TomTom are in any manner a direct (or indirect) move against the wider Linux ecosystem.

The Linux Foundation is hopeful, Zemlin says, that the dispute will be resolved as quickly and as peaceably as possible. However, he indicates that if the litigation turns towards the Linux environment in a general sense, the Foundation is prepared to defend the platform.

Microsoft Watch's Joe Wilcox, in solemn observance of Friday the 13th, compiled a list of Microsoft's ten most unlucky breaks. The strokes of misfortune chosen were weighted according to heinousness (with #10 being least signficant, and #1 the most).

Checking in at #7 is the development of the Linux kernel. Putting aside Microsoft's whole Schrodinger's cat sort of approach to Linux over the years (Linux is not a threat. Linux is a threat), it is interesting Wilcox (and the analysts who helped him narrow down the list) focused on the kernel as the bad break.

Perhaps it's inevitable -- people react strongly to hyperbole, it gets them talking, it makes them curious, it's a quick way of making a subject hot. For years, every new MP3 player was met with speculation -- would it be an iPod Killer? Perhaps ASUS didn't release new hardware quickly enough before solid competition entered the market, but for a few months last year the term Eee Killer was thrown about. Yet, despite the bounty on their heads, iPods and Eees still exist, as do alternative devices.

As Microsoft allowed people to take an early version of Windows 7 out for a test ride, the -Killer suffix re-emerged. It's not an OS X-Killer. It's a Linux-Killer. I'm sure this is due in large part to the robust netbook market and Apple's absence there. It's interesting that suddenly Linux is seen as competition. It's also intriguing that this is portrayed as the nail in the coffin, and not an opportunity.

Over at ChannelWeb, Kevin McLaughlin gathered some industry insights on the significance of Linux netbooks. In some ways, the subject seems as though it's reached critical mass and there's not much more to say, but McLaughlin's article highlights a few points that aren't often mentioned and are easily glossed over.

When Microsoft announced it was planning to offer lightweight, web-based versions of some of its Office components, there was some speculation that maybe it could be used with alternate browsers. It seemed Firefox would be a likely candidate beyond IE, and some ventured to wonder about Safari.

Even if Firefox was supported, it didn't seem likely this suite would be specifically web based, so it would need Windows, right? According to a few sources it seems as if that might not be the case. Though the source is a Microsoft Community member blog (and not a pronouncement from corporate sources) the concept of this service on Mac and Linux is fascinating because it suggests so much about what Microsoft might be thinking.