Android Logo Inspired from Atari

Engadget put up an interesting story today, where it shows the Android logo seems to be inspired from a not-so-popular game on Atari, called the Gauntlet: The Third Encounter. Looks to me quite similar and definitely an inspiration when someone was thinking of an Android image. Nevertheless, I do not believe the suing game will start based on the logo alone...

This also reminds me of many other similar inspired logos from popular brands, which once came by email:

 

 

 

How Intel Got Its Name

Have a friend of mine who's attending the IDF and got some news on Intel history, that I thought I should write down. Intel is a very big brand in itself and the name is synonymous with desktop computing. We all know how popular their "Intel Inside" branding was. But just a small history on how Intel got its name Intel was revealed by the founder Gordon Moore at IDF 2007.
Gordon Moore and Robert Noyce left Fairchild Semiconductor, since Fairchild didn't believe in the future of integrated circuits as much as Noyce or Moore. So, when they started this new company, they named it Moore & Noyce. They did the paper work with this name for the first 8 weeks, but didn't think this name was catchy or it gave an idea about the company. Then, a while later Noyce's daughter, Penny Noyce suggest the name Intel (INtegrated ELectronics). This name was liked by both Noyce and Moore and they changed the name to Intel. And now, as we all know its the biggest manufacturer of x86 processors.

So now you know, how Intel got its name!! Some history lesson ha!!

Why should Apple sell OSX?

I know this has been discussed to death and talked for the last 10+ years, but recently I didnt hear much rant about it. So I start the discussion again!! I was recently using my friend's new MacBook Pro and it was just great. What is it that makes Macs so awesome?? Other than the sleek beauties that all Apple products are popular for, Mac is special because of the OS and applications that comes preinstalled on it. Just check out the iLife '08 and the GarageBand, iPhoto, iMovie etc. and you'll know that it's something different to use the Mac. So, why don't we see a larger market share for OSX?? I dont think that Macs are overly priced in the US, they have OSX and other quality softwares installed. But in other countries like India, China, Brazil, South Africa... compared to other computers a Mac is insanely costly. Probably you could get 2 similar performing hardwares for a single Mac!!

So, coming to the point of discussion, why doesn't Apple a.k.a Steve Jobs sell the OSX and the Applications without the hardware?? Why doesn't he really beat Microsoft where it really hurts?? Why doesn't he become "Edison" and "improve the world"?? Why is he acting like Karl Marx and Neem Kairolie Baba and only appealing to a niche?? (If you didn't understand the last 2 questions, read this about Steve's life). Here's the short comparison on what are the pros and cons I could think of, if Apple started selling the OSX and applications without the hardware

1.) Operating System Market: The OS market is a very huge one and has a lot of money involved. Linux distribution companies are making money from it, although giving it for free!! This shows how much money is at stake. OSX currently holds a small market, but then even getting 5% more than what it currently holds would mean somewhere around 1 billion mark or even more!(source). People have multiple OS installed these days and revenue should be even higher than that. But other than the money involved, the intuitiveness and beauty of OSX is something that will help improve the world. Lot more people will get aesthethic happiness !! ;-)

2.) Hardware Sales: A lot of people say Apple hardware sells because of OSX. I completely disagree with them because just look at an iMac or MacBook. Very few systems can match the beauty of design of the Mac. Apple could easily offer coupons for upgrades or special applications to those who buy Apple hardware. This will make buying Apple hardware even more tempting. Say if 30% people, bought Mac for OSX and don't buy it after OSX is released for any x86 hardware, then Apple looses only 600 million.(source).

3.) Technical Aspects: Apple already has an Intel x86 OS running on Mac with Intel chips. So just releasing the package to the shops with a Vista competitive pricing is required. Leopard is also natively 64-bit, which also is an added advantage. So basically Apple could also earn more from the different brandings of 32-bit and 64-bit OS. You could have viruses and malicious code coming in if the market share increases, but I think Apple has the kernel and permission system, good enough to deal with it.

4.) Apple's Server Market: Apple has also a server OS which has some wonderful specialized applications like XSan. The server hardware may be great. But if the server OS is released, other hardware vendors could easily bundle it with their servers. Xserve really doesn't sell much, so Apple really doesn't have much to loose. I think the best part would be if apple could sell support for their OS, just like Red Hat does with RHEL. It really has some money involved!! I couldn't find the dollar numbers, but I know for sure, its quite a lot more than what Apple is earning from selling the Xserve.

5.) Market scenario: Vista hasn't worked enough for Microsoft and isn't new enough for a lot of users. Im not say Vista isn't good, but people are happy with XP. In contrast, when people see the OSX, they find it refreshingly new. They would want to buy it!!

6.) Beat the Hackers: There are a lot of people who are already using OSX on their non-Mac x86 computers. When Apple releases OSX, it'll mean no-more-work for these hackers. These hackers will then automatically move to make some newer application softwares ;-) (some optimism from my side maybe), and in turn we'll have lot more applications to choose from.

7.) Accessory stuff: Apple could really start selling specialized professional softwares like iLife, Final Cut, Aperture to a larger audience of professionals. Thus bringing more revenue.

I may have missed a few other points (please comment them here and not mail, I'll add them), but I think these are enough for Apple to release OSX without the hardware. Leopard is probably the best time to do it!! The iPhone is doing great and so is the iPod. With the OSX released, it could make Apple grow into a very big giant (it already has the respect, how about some money) of the computer industry. And history says that NEXTSTEP and OpenStep ran on x86 hardware... Will history repeat itself?? Only Steve Jobs or time can answer that!!

How Sun Microsystems Becomes Java Centric

We all know how popular Java has become. How everywhere Java is used. Just like its motto, "Write Once Run Anywhere", Java has run everywhere from small JavaCards to big data centers. Java is truly everywhere. Probably no other recent programming language (forget C/C++) enjoys the popularity like Java. May be that's the reason recently Sun CEO Jonathan Schwartz thought of changing the stock ticker of Sun to JAVA

Seems so odd for a company that makes no money from Java (or at least they say so...), change its market symbol to Java. Sun earns most of its revenue from SPARC servers and now Opteron Servers and Solaris boxes. So should it be called SPRC or SOLS?? But that just shows you how much Sun Microsystems is associated with Java and what the Java brand means.

A recent post at Jonathan's blog pastes an email from James Gosling (he's a really nice guy... he gave a lot of encouragement when I was designing a VM for a Hitachi controller). Its an interesting read about how the Java name was selected... and also would bookmark that, so that next time my team wants to start thinking a product name, I'll not just quote Shakespeare, but also show them that the 4th name on the devs list becomes a brand for the company!