Between the Lines

Larry Dignan, Andrew Nusca and Rachel King

Open source's UI handicap explains Google's Honeycomb move

By | March 25, 2011, 6:09am PDT

Google is reportedly holding back Android 3.0 Honeycomb code from open source developers in a move that’s causing a good bit of angst. However, the move may make some sense considering the high stakes in the tablet market.

BusinessWeek reports:

Google says it will delay the distribution of its newest Android source code, dubbed Honeycomb, at least for the foreseeable future. The search giant says the software, which is tailored specifically for tablet computers that compete against Apple’s iPad, is not yet ready to be altered by outside programmers and customized for other devices, such as phones.

In other words, Honeycomb isn’t ready for prime time or to be released to the masses. The unfortunate thing is that Honeycomb is already on the market and dinging tablets like Motorola Mobility’s Xoom. Google’s Android chief Andy Rubin admitted that “design compromises” were made to get Honeycomb to market.

Add it up and Android is open—until the stakes are really high. But what about Android for smartphones? The phone version of Android had a different table stakes. The field—aside from Apple’s iOS—was fairly open. RIM was snoozing as was Microsoft.

The tablet market is different. Apple dominates the field and there’s a bevy of rivals gunning to be No. 2. You have one shot to make an impression. Google realizes that Honeycomb isn’t the first impression it was looking for. Now the company needs to shepherd Honeycomb more, bake the code and then release to developers. Honeycomb, an OS built by geeks for geeks, may not cut it.

One interesting question here is the role of the open source community in consumer applications. Linux picked up in the data center because it’s cheap, effective and largely future proof. Then again, data center wonks aren’t looking for aesthetics. Open source is functional, but can it be beautiful?

Frankly, we don’t know. When you play with Android it’s clear it doesn’t have the polish of Apple’s iOS or Microsoft’s Windows Phone 7. On the desktop, it’s worth noting that Ubuntu has taken control of its user interface fate. That move makes sense too. Desktop Linux needs to do more than mimic existing operating systems to lure the masses. You need more pizazz. See: Gallery: Ubuntu 11.04 Alpha 3

I’m left to conclude that an open source army can take you far, but when the user interface matters it’s hard to herd the cats.

Google will get developers the Honeycomb code, but it needs to control more of the process to have a shot against Apple. Android is open—until it matters the most.

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily e-mail newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Topics

Larry Dignan is Editor in Chief of ZDNet and SmartPlanet as well as Editorial Director of ZDNet's sister site TechRepublic.

Disclosure

Larry Dignan

Larry Dignan has nothing to disclose. He doesn’t hold investments in the technology companies he covers.

Biography

Larry Dignan

Larry Dignan is Editor in Chief of ZDNet and SmartPlanet as well as Editorial Director of ZDNet's sister site TechRepublic. He was most recently Executive Editor of News and Blogs at ZDNet. Prior to that he was executive news editor at eWeek and news editor at Baseline. He also served as the East Coast news editor and finance editor at CNET News.com. Larry has covered the technology and financial services industry since 1995, publishing articles in WallStreetWeek.com, Inter@ctive Week, The New York Times, and Financial Planning magazine. He's a graduate of the Columbia School of Journalism and the University of Delaware.

For daily updates, follow Larry on Twitter.

108
Comments

Join the conversation!

Just In

RE: Open source's UI handicap explains Google's Honeycomb move
tringo007 27th Sep
very good publish, i certainly love this website, keep on it gout diet foods to eat
0 Votes
+ -
Linux has always been ugly, there is no changing that.
@Loverock Davidson
What do you mean ugly? I don't get it when people say Linux is ugly, It's strange when people say Win 7's Aero is soo much better than Linux. Ehhemmm have you ever heard the word "compiz", "emareld", "kde", ha? ha? have you? No? then, Google it.
0 Votes
+ -
@asdacap
I don't use google.
0 Votes
+ -
@asdacap

Up till Ubuntu, Linux and all of its various "skins" from kde to gnome were simply ugly. Functional but the proportions, colors, shading, basic shapes, mouse...

Everything.

Was ugly.
That isn't very bright, Bruizer. KDE among other window managers can be made to look however you want it to look.
0 Votes
+ -
@michael "KDE among other window managers can be made to look however you want it to look. "

If you're a top-notch artist and have time to burn.

Otherwise, this claim is pretty laughable.

You want me to burn the midnight oil with Photoshop trying to make the UI look exactly how I want it to look?

Seriously?

I'd rather have a program launcher that looks and acts professional out of the box, thanks.
0 Votes
+ -
Windows Aero is better
jscott418 25th Mar 2011
Windows Aero is the best UI on the OS market. But I realize that the small percentage of Linux users will never admit it. Linux users are much like Apple fans. They defend their minority. I say good for you! But your still wrong!
0 Votes
+ -
@asdacap

Even with a different skinning, the usage and overall feel and layout is very ugly. I have used manny different KDE tweaks and schemes and they all feel like they were born in the 90's.

So yes, KDE is UGLY. Ubuntu finally started taking UI design considerations into place in their layout, color and behavior so it works and looks right from the start.
@CobraA1
I use KDE, I'm a visual designer, and I don't think it looks ugly. Besides you have no need to use a image processor to customise the interface. Your comment shows that you have never use something like Gnome or KDE.
@asdacap Mac is Linux silly boy.
@asdacap

yeah what do they mean ugly ,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bKQbN6tpYXw&feature=related

people today dont know their ugly... but its functional for the time funny enough
@jscott - Without Quartz Extreme and Aqua, Microsoft would have nothing worth copying from and the Windows UI would still look like something from Fisher Price. And even with Apple to copy from, Microsoft still got some usability things wrong (it shouldn't take more than 3 steps to change my display resolution).

@bellum80 - Wrong, but thanks for playing. Here's a copy of the Darwin variant of BSD, which is a compliant UNIX distribution and the backbone of OS X.
@Champ_Kind
I don't think it takes more than 3 steps to change the display resolution (on Windows 7), although it depends on what you call a step.
You can either right click on the disktop and select "Screen Resolution", or you can hit the windows key and type the first letters in [then hit enter].
Select the desired display resolution.
Click Apply.
0 Votes
+ -
@Loverock Davidson
I dont use google either! You are the best!

MS rules!
@BarneytheClimber
I always find it interesting how people react when you tell them you use bing. "Google" appears to be the only socially accepted answer.
@Loverock Davidson
It's time for you to find Enlightenment
http://www.enlightenment.org/p.php?p=about&l=en
0 Votes
+ -
Ugly for sure!
jscott418 25th Mar 2011
I have always thought of Linux as a poor mans OS. Or just a corporate hater dream. For as many times groups have tried to spruce up Linux. Its still not much to brag about. Could it be that its time has already passed? All I can say is that if Google can't make it happen. Nobody can.
0 Votes
+ -
Ugly??
kzahorec@... 25th Mar 2011
@jscott418
Is that all you compare to determine what IT solution is best. Linux blows Windows away in what it can do and what you are permitted to do with it. So you like how pretty Windows is, so that makes it better? You choose expensive bloated cripple-ware over fluid technology that gets the job, any job, done with far less strain on your system and your budget, and your mind. Just because you don't know Linux and do not care to learn it, you find silly inane excuses to discredit it. Foolish on your part indeed--keep suffering by your own choice my friend. I'll pick Linux any day over anything out there.
0 Votes
+ -
Ugly??
kzahorec@... 25th Mar 2011
@Loverock Davidson
If you want to see ugly, then read the Windows EULA. THAT is ugly. If you want to see beauty and opportunity read the GPL. Now if you want to get something done in in a very big way you will want to pick Linux because the proprietary alternatives are designed mostly to feed a business, not deliver effective solutions.
@Loverock Davidson

My 13yr old son recently asked me to take Windoz "off" of his Netbook after he watched the new release of openSUSE LINUX on my notebook. He loved it! "AND", after I put it on his Netbook, it ran much, much faster than Windoz did.

Why? Because it doesn't have all the sloppy programming in it to slow it down! And it was the "GUI", the thing you call "ugly" that he loved the most about it!
very good publish, i certainly love this website, keep on it gout diet foods to eat
0 Votes
+ -
What, where do you do your research?
Jon Hubert Bristol 25th Mar 2011
First of all Linux is a kernel. Secondly, what do you consider ugly? Are the Desktop managers KDE, Gnome, Unity and Enlightenment ugly? Or are the Oses that use linux like Android, WebOS, Meego, Limo (all mobile) ugly?
Your generalization belittles your insight...
0 Votes
+ -
Yeah, it's a distro!
Bit-Smacker Updated - 25th Mar 2011
@Jon Hubert Bristol
I was just thinking the same thing! And, even when people do think of "distributions", each can provide you with a completely different desktop experience.

I use Linux primarily for servers, and it functions perfectly for that purpose. However, I've always used Windows for a desktop OS. I had a bad taste left by Slackware back in the early '90s when I had to recompile the kernel to add a video/audio/mouse driver! I knew that things had improved since then, but I just never wanted to revisit old sources of irritation.

However, I recently downloaded the "LinuxMint 10" Gnome-based distribution and was blown away after enabling all of the hardware-accelerated 3D desktop effects! It's finally something I'd actually WANT to use as a desktop OS. Lots of YouTube videos exist to take you step-by-step toward creating a truly awesome Linux-based desktop experience that can even make current Windows/Mac users jealous.

If you don't try it for yourself, you're just arguing on hear-say or cult brainwashing. Try it. And don't think you can run it in a VM and get the same experience. A bare metal installation really brings out the smooth GUI experience.

So, to answer the question in this article: YES, open source can be beautiful. Since graphic artist types are typically not very technical, the functional platform simply has to mature before they can get past that barrier to entry. Otherwise, I think lots of artists would love to be a part of such projects.

Open source projects need to start making the artistic contribution conduits of the project more accessible to people who may not have the skills or interest in navigating and using complex source control systems. That type of person would more likely contribute with a high-level Web 2.0 style interface with which to work.
@BitSmacker
U R right on.

In addition, consider what the general emphasis is with Linux distros (take for example Debian) - utility, robustness and open-access to the source.

From the point of view of an R&D lab guy (that's me), Linux is perfect - it has a Swiss Army knife package of toolchains, number crunching utilities, graph packages, servers, etc. etc.

Sure, you can do other things with it. You can base consumer-focused gadgets on it easily. But if you want to do so, and make something that really sells, expect to put a lot of effort in. Not like you wouldn't have that same thing happen if you were using any other system - Apple did it with the Mach kernel to make OSX, so did Google to make Android from Linux, so did MSFT to make Windows from the NT kernel family.

Making something look good and be highly usable to a broad population is an expensive and time-consuming process that has (sorry gearheads) very little to do with software engineering and a lot to do with UE design.

I _like_ Ubuntu, I really do. But I still would not base a consumer-oriented app or device on it without hiring a UE person and at least one graphic artist - not to do that would be stupid and a waste of money and time.
Open source UIs have always sucked. Open source developers have always put UX on the back burner, and concentrated more on actual program development. That may have been fine back in the 9x/XP days when Microsoft was less than stellar with their UI as well, but nowadays with Vista/7 I don't want menubars, or jumbled up toolbars filled with misc icons. AERO brought Windows into the 21st Century. Those old XP holdouts who still need menus and a dozen toolbars shouldn't speak for those of us who want conformity and a sleek, slender looking UI.

We're not in 2001 anymore.
@Cylon Centurion 0005
You do realize that with Linux you can make it look however you want right?
Do you also realize that all the wizbang effects that are in Aero have been in Compiz for years?
@30otnix

"You do realize that with Linux you can make it look however you want right? "

I can make a Rube Goldberg device do whatever I want too! If I ignore the time it takes to set up a Rube Goldberg machine and the productivity lost to tweaking the thing.

The idea of spending a lot of time configuring and tweaking an OS is a concept that is misguided and leads to a loss of productivity. Today's users want to jump in and get to work right away; they do not want the hassles of messing around with a program launcher that constantly whines for attention and adjustments.

"Do you also realize that all the wizbang effects that are in Aero have been in Compiz for years?"

Aero has never been about the effects. The effects are the tools used by engineers and artists to accomplish their goals for the Windows UI. When you understand that, you will understand why Linux has troubles with its UI.

Transparency isn't there to be boastful - the idea is to focus on the application, and to make the OS less prominent.

Live previews aren't there just for fun - they're there so that the user can view the status of an application without having to switch to it completely.

There's a difference between a toy and a tool. A toy is cool, fun. A tool is functional, useful. Compiz is a toy. Aero is a tool.
0 Votes
+ -
@30otnix You are missing the point. Yes Linux has had the whiz-bang interface for years. However, you have to configure and get it setup... etc. 98% of the users out there do not want to do that. That is why Windows and OSX, and now maybe Ubuntu do what they do. The linux community does not seem to understand the users...and marketing. That's my impression, if these blogs are anything like the Linux community.
@CobraA1

SHENANIGANS! Simple desktop customization /= "tweaking and configuring," hell most desktop environments allow you to install one of thousands of fully customized themes in just a couple clicks. WAY simpler than doing the limited stuff you can do with Windows, too.
"Simple desktop customization /= 'tweaking and configuring,'"

"simple" desktop configuration pre-Unity was never "simple."

-Locking and unlocking icons individually made tweaking the bars an exercise in micromanagement. This is a horrible UI design as I need to make several mouse clicks FOR EVERY ICON in Gnome if I want to rearrange them.

-Mapping the Start/Windows key in Gnome can't be done with the default key binding dialog; you have to dig a bit to figure it out. On top of all of that, it's not bound to anything by default!

People switching from Windows to Linux will be lost without access to that key. Unity does much better with the default mappings than Gnome does. That is a fact.

-The only professional looking themes are honestly those that rip off Windows Vista/7. I've seen them, and most of them appear to be simple gradients and shapes. Truly professional themes are rare, and most of them are simply borrowing from the already professional artwork of Windows.

"WAY simpler than doing the limited stuff you can do with Windows, too. "

Locking/unlocking individual icons is not simpler than the global lock/unlock of the whole bar in XP/Vista, and certainly not simpler than the ability to drag and drop icons to reorder them any time you please in Windows 7.

Windows 7 may not be as flexible, but there is no doubt in my mind that it is simpler. And it certainly makes a far better first impression.

And I'm going to reiterate what I've said earlier:

The idea of spending a lot of time configuring and tweaking an OS is a concept that is misguided and leads to a loss of productivity. Today's users want to jump in and get to work right away; they do not want the hassles of messing around with a program launcher that constantly whines for attention and adjustments.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Open source's UI handicap explains Google's Honeycomb move
Cylon Centurion Updated - 25th Mar 2011
@30otnix

Correct, but I don't have time anymore to do that. Windows' OOBE is a thousand times greater than what you get from a default installation of, say, Ubuntu, or Linux Mint, etc. My Windows 7 and Windows Vista installations are pretty much out of the box. However I have changed my Win7 'Start' button, as having the same Vista orb in the new taskbar looks absolutely horrendous.

Back in the day though, you would not have guessed that my default installation was Windows XP. I actually still have old screenshots up on my DeviantArt profile - If you can find it. wink
0 Votes
+ -
@30otnix
I have to agree with Cobra3. I sell a vertical. Years ago we would install it and work with the end user to customize invoices, screen colors, printer macros, etc. From installation until the company went live was roughly a month. A 3 user version was $5,000. That was a Unix product.
Today the product goes in completely configured with a basic set of data tables matching the common industry needs. Users are producing good information in the first hour or two after installation. A 3 user version is $1,995. It is for Windows 7/Vista/XP.
Computers used to be an adventure for the forward looking samll businesses, now it is necessary evil.
My current users are far less tech savvy and proclaim to be proud if it.
@CobraA1

HA! Seriously? I was kidding earlier when I said you hadn't seen Linux since 2001, but WOW! Here's the steps I take:

Right-click desktop
Choose Display
Choose Get custom theme
Choose a theme I like, download and install.
Done.

I don't know what YOU'RE talking about, but then, neither do you.
@jeverettk

"Right-click desktop
Choose Display
Choose Get custom theme
Choose a theme I like, download and install.
Done."

Done with what? If you're still using Gnome, your Start/Windows key still doesn't work very well, and you still have to deal with individual icon locks if you want to rearrange your icons. And you still have to deal with lots of tweaking.

You're still running a Rube Goldberg device, you just gave it a new paint job. You must be so proud of yourself for making a totally irrelevant point.
0 Votes
+ -
@CobraA1


See dude, you talk as though I should have time for all this extra complexity somehow, what, because I use Linux, I guess, but I don't. Rube Goldberg? Your favorite epithet for some UI that you think is too complicated, cute. Don't care.

I have a sleek interface that moves fast, looks sick, and even my mom can use it. Sorry that you don't. I'm out.
@30otnix Don't mind CobraA1, his statement that transparent borders and active previews, which are virtually identical in both Linux and Windows, are tools in Windows and toys in Linux speaks more of CobraA1's bias than knowledge of UIs.

BTW: Since Compiz/XGL is much older than Aero, is it just me that wonders where MS got the idea, if not the code, for Aero?
0 Votes
+ -
@30otnix

"I have a sleek interface that moves fast, looks sick, and even my mom can use it. "

So do I. I've used both, so I don't care if you choose to ignore my points.

And Aero is again not about effects - things like jump lists and Aero Snap have nothing to do with fancy graphics at all, yet are considered a part of Aero.
0 Votes
+ -
@CobraA1 Compiz is a toy? You are talking out of the wrong end... You obviously don't know any more about compiz than you have seen from watching youtube videos. Management of open windows across multiple desktops, grouping windows based on common tasks, toggling between different color profiles and smooth clean screen scaling and a usable zoom for the vision impaired that beats the thousand dollar middleware I used to sell for windows, and practically every feature you've already described in Aero are just toys in compiz? I cringe when I have to sit down at a windows machine anymore... After years of using these "toys" in compiz, Aero feels like Windows 3.11.

You really need to learn about something before you talk about it.
0 Votes
+ -
@Cylon Centurion 0005
Pardon me, but, in regards to the later three quarters of your rant, isn't the XP gui a proprietary gui? And if some users prefer it, are you saying they, who number in the millions, are wrong to do so?

Oh, those dang users, they are ever so ungrateful when we guardians of the gui move and transform things regarding standard usability. Don't those users get that stasis don't put bucks in the bank?

Let me return from the Ledge of Sarcasm. Believe me, when I say I don't like the ribbon (which is an oversized toolbar in my book, and I didn't think much of toolbars), I speak for myself. I hold no rancor toward those who prefer it.

As a general note to the kill-XP-crusaders, let me break down how the current non-corporate XP user thinks. "How much will it cost me to use XP on this computer tomorrow? $0. How much will it cost me to run something else? Not zero. Unless that computer melts, we're running XP."
@DannyO_0x98

No, but that the same time, drop down menu based UIs are starting to show their age. Go visit Neowin, et al, and you will see many, many people starting to beg OSS developers for new UIs.
Yes isn't Open source great! Thanks Cylon Centurion 0005 for pointing out another of the thousands of Open source sites where users and admins can voice their opinions and suggestions directly to the developers. Developers are the first to say how helpful that feedback is. Everyone, and anyone can contribute. Works just like a good democracy should, and the results show.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Open source's UI handicap explains Google's Honeycomb move
techadmin.cc@... Updated - 27th Mar 2011
@DannyO_0x98 Danny, small business and corporate XP users think that way too...

And Cylon (comment below), drop down menus were never a problem to those who learned the keyboard shortcuts if the gui provided them. The ribbon interface is a nightmare for those tasked with trying to describe a process to a computer illiterate person over the phone.
@Cylon Centurion 0005

Funny you should say that. I myself think Aero sucks liked a tornado... it was actually the reason that made me convert to a Linux Desktop 100% of the time. In fat, it annoys me to no end having to fend off some of the pointless innovations that are being copied from aero into the Linux GUIs (windows that automaximize when moved to the screen boundaries being the worst offender. Yes, I can change that, yadda-yadda-yadda.)

Beauty is often in the eye of the beholder, some folks used to say.

Cheers,
alf
@alf@...
Wow, you don't like the window dragging? Say what you want about Aero, but that's the *best thing ever.*
0 Votes
+ -
@alf@... Alas, you are not a common user. A point that seems to just go over most Linux users heads. At least after all these years Ubuntu and now maybe even Google are getting it...OSX and Windows like it or not, know what people seem to want.
Funny. I made my Windows 7 desktop look exactly like XP.
@Cylon Centurion 0005
"We're not in 2001 anymore."
Yeah, 2001, the last time you looked at an open source UI.
@jeverettk

LOL! You of course realize I have a Linux box sitting right next to me right now? The UI looks the same has it has been for the past 10 years. Same messy toolbars, same drop down menus, etc. The Ghost of UI Past is still going strong in default installations of Linux.
@Cylon Centurion 0005
Sorry, I can't choose your distro for you. Hey seriously, use whatever you like, but don't speak for all of Linux when you were the one who chose the ugliest thing you could find.

Or do you simply equate Ubuntu with Linux? Yeah, maybe you're that dim.
@Cylon Centurion 0005

I miss menu bars! When did we start restricting computer access to the illiterate? Hieroglyphs went out of style 2,000 years ago! There should be a radio box option in the first time wizard setup that asks, "Can you tie your shoes".

Join the conversation!

Formatting +
BB Codes - Note: HTML is not supported in forums
  • [b] Bold [/b]
  • [i] Italic [/i]
  • [u] Underline [/u]
  • [s] Strikethrough [/s]
  • [q] "Quote" [/q]
  • [ol][*] 1. Ordered List [/ol]
  • [ul][*] · Unordered List [/ul]
  • [pre] Preformat [/pre]
  • [quote] "Blockquote" [/quote]
ie8 fix

The best of ZDNet, delivered

ZDNet Newsletters

Get the best of ZDNet delivered straight to your inbox

Facebook Activity

White Papers, Webcasts, & Resources
ie8 fix