By Robert Kempf
It was good to see that the initial Sales pitch in the Day 1 talks was not visible anymore on Day 2 at OSiM, but that rather the key topic “Open Source in Mobile” was the focus again.
The presentation from Samsung on how they handle this transition phase from working in a rather closed environment towards using OSS was a good example. A very honest description of the challenges a company phases in this transition and an encouraging outlook for those who are going along the same path.
There were also quite some statements on having too many open source platforms coming up and the potential need to go one step back to see whether there can’t be a unique platform as a common base at least in the Linux space – but to be honest I doubt that anyone speaking about this idea will really invest in making this happen short term.
A very inspiring part of OSiM today were the WIPJam sessions. These 40min open discussions around a specific topic with a very diverse audience were great fun. Having open source freaks, entrepreneurs, senior management people from large companies and people who want to learn about this topic and are more kind of the end-user-type around the same table leads to a very unpredictable but exciting discussion on a topic and gives you new ideas of what could be done. It did also show the very different view of how to interpret benefit and innovation – especially in this area the view of the technical experts and the end-user-type participant were quite different.
It was well worth participating in OSiM 2009, meeting people you haven’t seen for some time, getting new ideas about where open source in mobile will go and seeing the ever increasing momemtum of OSS in the mobile industry.
Thursday, September 17, 2009
Wednesday, September 16, 2009
OSiM Observations Day 1 -September 16th
By Andrew Till
With OSiM now in its fourth year it is establishing itself firmly on the conference circuit. Here are our key takeaways from day one
Overall the conference has a more commercial feel to it suggesting that Open Source Software has clearly made its mark in the mobile space. This was echoed by a number of the first mornings presenters who deviated from their presentation titles to sell their credentials to the audience.
Web based development is now seen as a key platform for mobile application and service development. This was also linked to the future deployment of HMTL 5 browsers further blurring the lines between the desktop and mobile experience. However delegates also agreed that not all development will be web based with the need for native development continuing as a key way for developers to show off the best of the platform.
Another key theme was the need for greater education for companies about how work with OSS. It was observed that many companies do not know how to make the most of using OSS in their development strategy or how to contribute back to the community.
Building on past events the subject of fragmentation came up on a regular basis. This is clearly a subject area that is not going away and while there are concerns about fragmentation of platforms it was also recognised that there is a strong need to enable innovation and differentiation which is key to the long term success of OSS platform.
And finally the question that was perhaps posed the most is does OSS save development costs. While there was not quantitative answer given the general agreement was that using OSS in product developments may not save you money but it changes the way you spend money – for example more focus being place on innovation rather than core plumbing.
And so now it’s time for bed and to see what is in store for tomorrow.
With OSiM now in its fourth year it is establishing itself firmly on the conference circuit. Here are our key takeaways from day one
Overall the conference has a more commercial feel to it suggesting that Open Source Software has clearly made its mark in the mobile space. This was echoed by a number of the first mornings presenters who deviated from their presentation titles to sell their credentials to the audience.
Web based development is now seen as a key platform for mobile application and service development. This was also linked to the future deployment of HMTL 5 browsers further blurring the lines between the desktop and mobile experience. However delegates also agreed that not all development will be web based with the need for native development continuing as a key way for developers to show off the best of the platform.
Another key theme was the need for greater education for companies about how work with OSS. It was observed that many companies do not know how to make the most of using OSS in their development strategy or how to contribute back to the community.
Building on past events the subject of fragmentation came up on a regular basis. This is clearly a subject area that is not going away and while there are concerns about fragmentation of platforms it was also recognised that there is a strong need to enable innovation and differentiation which is key to the long term success of OSS platform.
And finally the question that was perhaps posed the most is does OSS save development costs. While there was not quantitative answer given the general agreement was that using OSS in product developments may not save you money but it changes the way you spend money – for example more focus being place on innovation rather than core plumbing.
And so now it’s time for bed and to see what is in store for tomorrow.
Tuesday, September 15, 2009
Nokia world- a different service perspective Sept.15th
By Jari Saarhelo
Until the recent Nokia World, I thought Services are happening on high-end devices only. There is a tough competition going on over the best user experience on mobile or the best business application connectivity. Mobile services compete against other media, such as mobile gaming versus handheld consoles, browsing on mobile versus browsing on PC, listening music on a MP3 player versus phone etc. But what if there is no other media available? What if the mobile device is the only computer you have?
Nokia Money in emerging markets opened my eyes. I had been looking at it from a developed world point of view. I.E: yet another way to execute ecommerce transactions, which may be more convenient in some situations, but maybe not too often. The situation is totally different, if you have a mobile phone, but no access to banking services. Yes, this is not a special case, there are a 4 billion mobile phones out there, but only 1.6 billion bank accounts. Suddenly, we are talking about providing basic infrastructure.
It seems that mobile services have a potential to address totally different needs in emerging markets than in developed. Nokia is planning to offer a portfolio of services, which are running on lower end devices. The focus is not on the most responsive and coolest touch UI, but actually providing services, where the infrastructure is not available, such as banking, email/messaging, agricultural information.
Services are happening both on high-end and low-end devices after all. However, what services are successful and the needs of the consumer will be very different depending on the market. In looking at future opportunities emerging market services should not be evaluated from developed market point of view and vice-versa.
Until the recent Nokia World, I thought Services are happening on high-end devices only. There is a tough competition going on over the best user experience on mobile or the best business application connectivity. Mobile services compete against other media, such as mobile gaming versus handheld consoles, browsing on mobile versus browsing on PC, listening music on a MP3 player versus phone etc. But what if there is no other media available? What if the mobile device is the only computer you have?
Nokia Money in emerging markets opened my eyes. I had been looking at it from a developed world point of view. I.E: yet another way to execute ecommerce transactions, which may be more convenient in some situations, but maybe not too often. The situation is totally different, if you have a mobile phone, but no access to banking services. Yes, this is not a special case, there are a 4 billion mobile phones out there, but only 1.6 billion bank accounts. Suddenly, we are talking about providing basic infrastructure.
It seems that mobile services have a potential to address totally different needs in emerging markets than in developed. Nokia is planning to offer a portfolio of services, which are running on lower end devices. The focus is not on the most responsive and coolest touch UI, but actually providing services, where the infrastructure is not available, such as banking, email/messaging, agricultural information.
Services are happening both on high-end and low-end devices after all. However, what services are successful and the needs of the consumer will be very different depending on the market. In looking at future opportunities emerging market services should not be evaluated from developed market point of view and vice-versa.
Thursday, September 10, 2009
3 Lessons to learn about security
By Volker Schütz
The first lesson to learn about security of products is that security is not a chip in the upper left part of your design. It’s nothing you buy as "fire and forget" solution. Security is a process. You need to consider it during your first design ideas and you still need to consider it when being in the maintenance phase of a product. At each stage you can easily completely ruin your security system.
The second lesson to learn is to list the possible threats and to decide which of those you want to protect against and which not. This is hard to understand, especially for people not deeply involved in the security area. "Why should I allow a certain attack?" or "Can't I just have a secure design?" are typical questions which arise. The lesson is that security is a trade-off between having secure designs and not spending too much money, time and resources. Finding the right balance is the key to having products with an acceptable time-to-market and budget on the one hand and a secure design protecting against the most dangerous attacks on the other hand.
The last lesson is that security by obscurity doesn't work. First, your enemies will find out what you have done anyway. You can't keep your security features secret. Second, if you just have a small men-in-black security team designing obscure security features, you miss the chance to review and audit your whole security system by enough experts to find weak points before the attackers do. Share your design; let it be reviewed by many experts.
Following these three principles is no guarantee for a secure product. There are many other pitfalls and the attacker just needs to find one of them, whereas the product owner needs to know and prevent all of them. This is a clearly outbalanced game. But when playing it with the right team you definitively have a chance to be successful with your product!
The first lesson to learn about security of products is that security is not a chip in the upper left part of your design. It’s nothing you buy as "fire and forget" solution. Security is a process. You need to consider it during your first design ideas and you still need to consider it when being in the maintenance phase of a product. At each stage you can easily completely ruin your security system.
The second lesson to learn is to list the possible threats and to decide which of those you want to protect against and which not. This is hard to understand, especially for people not deeply involved in the security area. "Why should I allow a certain attack?" or "Can't I just have a secure design?" are typical questions which arise. The lesson is that security is a trade-off between having secure designs and not spending too much money, time and resources. Finding the right balance is the key to having products with an acceptable time-to-market and budget on the one hand and a secure design protecting against the most dangerous attacks on the other hand.
The last lesson is that security by obscurity doesn't work. First, your enemies will find out what you have done anyway. You can't keep your security features secret. Second, if you just have a small men-in-black security team designing obscure security features, you miss the chance to review and audit your whole security system by enough experts to find weak points before the attackers do. Share your design; let it be reviewed by many experts.
Following these three principles is no guarantee for a secure product. There are many other pitfalls and the attacker just needs to find one of them, whereas the product owner needs to know and prevent all of them. This is a clearly outbalanced game. But when playing it with the right team you definitively have a chance to be successful with your product!
Tuesday, September 8, 2009
Consider going to OSiM next week ? -September 9th
Teleca welcomes you to OSiM/WIPjam September 15th-16th in Amsterdam
Ever wanted to put a face to a name ? Well if your are at OSiM next week then you can do exactly that with two of Teleca’s regular bloggers.
Robert Kempf and Andrew Till will both be at OSiM and WIPJAM to both give presentations and host round tables so if you want to meet them and discuss what’s happening in the market, innovative new ideas or other exciting areas then send us a mail at solutions@teleca.com
OSS, cross platform applications, E2E services and how to get it all work is a concern on everybodys mind right now. Seeking answers ? See you at OSiM and WipJam !
Didn´t consider OSiM ? Check out here first http://www.teleca.com/Home/news_room/events.aspx
Ever wanted to put a face to a name ? Well if your are at OSiM next week then you can do exactly that with two of Teleca’s regular bloggers.
Robert Kempf and Andrew Till will both be at OSiM and WIPJAM to both give presentations and host round tables so if you want to meet them and discuss what’s happening in the market, innovative new ideas or other exciting areas then send us a mail at solutions@teleca.com
OSS, cross platform applications, E2E services and how to get it all work is a concern on everybodys mind right now. Seeking answers ? See you at OSiM and WipJam !
Didn´t consider OSiM ? Check out here first http://www.teleca.com/Home/news_room/events.aspx
Friday, September 4, 2009
What do You think is happening in Open Source ? -September 4th
By Andrew Till
In the coming weeks we will be attending a number of industry events such as OSiM and the Symbian SEE. During these events we expect to hear a lot about the changing face of open source software and its impact in the mobile world. We will also hopefully be stimulating some industry debate through the presentations and round table events we are participating in.
-So why not comment about your expectations for the key drivers in OSS over the next 12 months?
I will start of with a couple of expectations ;
-I expect part of the debate to move from OSS for handsets to other devices such as Netbooks, ebook readers and maybe even gaming consoles.
-I also believe that we will see OSS move in to the service domain with companies starting to use OSS more and more to deliver end to end mobile services. This is something I will be presenting on at OSiM so if you want to know more come along and listen.
So enough from me and tell us what you think, now!
In the coming weeks we will be attending a number of industry events such as OSiM and the Symbian SEE. During these events we expect to hear a lot about the changing face of open source software and its impact in the mobile world. We will also hopefully be stimulating some industry debate through the presentations and round table events we are participating in.
-So why not comment about your expectations for the key drivers in OSS over the next 12 months?
I will start of with a couple of expectations ;
-I expect part of the debate to move from OSS for handsets to other devices such as Netbooks, ebook readers and maybe even gaming consoles.
-I also believe that we will see OSS move in to the service domain with companies starting to use OSS more and more to deliver end to end mobile services. This is something I will be presenting on at OSiM so if you want to know more come along and listen.
So enough from me and tell us what you think, now!
Thursday, August 27, 2009
Ceding (Seeding?) Change -Aug 27, 2009
By Martin Wilde
Consider, if you will, a situation wherein you have a new product you want to bring to the market. However, being an ideas guy, you don’t have the resources or know-how to actually build the thing, so you have to find someone else to build it for you. You make the effort to put together an RFP laying out all the details and requirements of how you want the product to look, feel and behave. You solicit several reputable firms who have the demonstrated capacity to build such a thing, and wait for their responses.
“Sure, we can build that for you,” says device manufacturer #1. “Only we can’t meet X, Y and Z requirements, and it will take two years to build. Deal?” What!?!? Two years? That’s an eternity in technology. And you can’t even build what I want? Forget it! On to the next supplier.
“Yeah, those #1 guys are blowing smoke,” says device manufacturer #2. “We can build it for you in 18 months, guaranteed! But is there any way you can relax requirements A, B, J and Q?
We don’t think that stuff’s very important, and our research says people don’t want that anyway.”
Now wait just a cotton-picking minute. Your time to market is shorter, granted, but not that much. That’s still a VERY long time in technology cycles. Besides, I’m the customer! I know what I want, or I wouldn’t have asked you to build it that way. I couldn’t care less what you think. I just want to get this thing into the market before the competition catches up to me.
Same goes for suppliers #3 and so on. They’re either not able to meet the timetable, have competing projects for the right technical expertise, or try to redirect what you want. So no option yields the solution you really were looking for. What do you do now?
This is not unlike the situation that many companies trying to bring new innovative solutions to market find themselves in. For example many operators find themselves in when trying to bring new experiences to the marketplace. The speed of innovation is determined by the suppliers capacity on both the software and hardware levels. But what if the operators could supply their own software platform, that crucial part of the experience they want to deliver, and then work with the various ODM vendors just on hardware implementation alone? Suddenly the control would shift to the software platform supplier which in this example would be the operators. Time to market would, potentially, be greatly reduced, with customized experiences and multiple handsets available to lead the way.
This idea is utopia to some, refreshing to others, and downright scary to those invested in the status quo. However, this scenario appears close to the reality of how the mobile market is shapping up today. But to the larger question, does this benefit the consumer, our ultimate measure of success? Are we simply replacing one bottle neck with another? And will this ultimately lead to higher levels of innovation ?
Consider, if you will, a situation wherein you have a new product you want to bring to the market. However, being an ideas guy, you don’t have the resources or know-how to actually build the thing, so you have to find someone else to build it for you. You make the effort to put together an RFP laying out all the details and requirements of how you want the product to look, feel and behave. You solicit several reputable firms who have the demonstrated capacity to build such a thing, and wait for their responses.
“Sure, we can build that for you,” says device manufacturer #1. “Only we can’t meet X, Y and Z requirements, and it will take two years to build. Deal?” What!?!? Two years? That’s an eternity in technology. And you can’t even build what I want? Forget it! On to the next supplier.
“Yeah, those #1 guys are blowing smoke,” says device manufacturer #2. “We can build it for you in 18 months, guaranteed! But is there any way you can relax requirements A, B, J and Q?
We don’t think that stuff’s very important, and our research says people don’t want that anyway.”
Now wait just a cotton-picking minute. Your time to market is shorter, granted, but not that much. That’s still a VERY long time in technology cycles. Besides, I’m the customer! I know what I want, or I wouldn’t have asked you to build it that way. I couldn’t care less what you think. I just want to get this thing into the market before the competition catches up to me.
Same goes for suppliers #3 and so on. They’re either not able to meet the timetable, have competing projects for the right technical expertise, or try to redirect what you want. So no option yields the solution you really were looking for. What do you do now?
This is not unlike the situation that many companies trying to bring new innovative solutions to market find themselves in. For example many operators find themselves in when trying to bring new experiences to the marketplace. The speed of innovation is determined by the suppliers capacity on both the software and hardware levels. But what if the operators could supply their own software platform, that crucial part of the experience they want to deliver, and then work with the various ODM vendors just on hardware implementation alone? Suddenly the control would shift to the software platform supplier which in this example would be the operators. Time to market would, potentially, be greatly reduced, with customized experiences and multiple handsets available to lead the way.
This idea is utopia to some, refreshing to others, and downright scary to those invested in the status quo. However, this scenario appears close to the reality of how the mobile market is shapping up today. But to the larger question, does this benefit the consumer, our ultimate measure of success? Are we simply replacing one bottle neck with another? And will this ultimately lead to higher levels of innovation ?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
