Intel drops MeeGo, backs new OS project

Looks like MeeGo is about to join webOS in the graveyard of mobile operating systems that didn’t quite make it. Intel announced this morning that it’s embracing Tizen, a "new Linux-based open source software platform for multiple device categories," and plans to help its MeeGo partners transition to it.

What makes Tizen worth dropping MeeGo like a hot potato? Intel Open Source Technology Center Director Imad Sousou elaborates:

This new project is first and foremost open source, and based on Linux. So it begs the question: why not just evolve MeeGo? We believe the future belongs to HTML5-based applications, outside of a relatively small percentage of apps, and we are firmly convinced that our investment needs to shift toward HTML5. Shifting to HTML5 doesn’t just mean slapping a web runtime on an existing Linux, even one aimed at mobile, as MeeGo has been. Emphasizing HTML5 means that APIs not visible to HTML5 programmers need not be as rigid, and can evolve with platform technology and can vary by market segment.

According to the official Tizen website, the first Tizen release and developer toolkit is planned for the first quarter of next year. Tizen will emphasize HTML5 and "other web standards," and it will purportedly support everything from netbooks and tablets to phones and TVs. Just like MeeGo, the project is backed by Intel and a major handset vendor—this time Samsung. The Linux Foundation is also hosting the project.

More details will come to light "in the coming weeks."

Comments closed
    • cheapFreeAgent
    • 8 years ago

    Do they even care about the developers who have been with “them” since Maemo / Moblin ???
    porting.. porting.. and porting.. and yet another OS.

      • gosh
      • 8 years ago

      Don’t think they need to port, maybe a recompile. Meego apps is just C++. Not like Android where apps runs in a VM (virtual machine) and needs to adapt to that environment.

    • ew
    • 8 years ago

    My prediction is this will go nowhere just as fast as MeeGo did.

      • sweatshopking
      • 8 years ago

      WHAT YOU TALKING ABOUT? MEEGO MADE 1 PHONE!

        • NeelyCam
        • 8 years ago

        MeeGo is so great that a MeeGo phone with a single-core Cortex A8 chip beats anything and everything on the planet.

        Mango is a Meego wannabe.

          • gosh
          • 8 years ago

          Android apps runs in a VM (java virtual machine). MeeGo apps is just compiled C++ apps and therefore much faster.

            • poulpy
            • 8 years ago

            You can use the Native Development Kit to develop apps in C/C++ for Android too.

            The debate over Native vs VM performance has surely been beaten to death by now but IMO most of the VM problems are gone once it is designed to reside in memory (no sluggish start due to VM startup/initialization).
            After that and with JIT optimizations of computing-heavy bits of your application I don’t think you feel any difference in day to day usage.

            • gosh
            • 8 years ago

            C++ runs on JVM components so it isn’t native

            Slow performance in garbage collected languages isn’t related to memory allocations. The lack of control how memory is used is a big problem if you need fast applications.

    • gosh
    • 8 years ago

    [b<][url=https://meego.com/community/blogs/imad/2011/whats-next-meego<]What's Next for MeeGo[/url<][/b<] [quote<]Over the next couple of months, we will be working very hard to make sure that users of MeeGo can easily transition to Tizen, and I will be working even harder to make sure that developers of MeeGo can also transition to Tizen.[/quote<]

      • dpaus
      • 8 years ago

      MeeGo has users?!?

        • gosh
        • 8 years ago

        It is Linux and Tizen is more like new versions of MeeGo, maybe done like that to move away from the connection to Nokia.

    • ludi
    • 8 years ago

    Sounds like a cover story for the [i<]real[/i<] reason MeeGo was dropped: Nobody could stand to work with that stupid name.

    • Game_boy
    • 8 years ago

    Making the same mistake Apple did when they first launched the iPhone: only web apps means developers will not choose your platform. Especially current iOS and Android game developers.

      • codedivine
      • 8 years ago

      From Tizen website: “For those who use native code in their applications, the Tizen SDK will include a native development kit.”

    • dpaus
    • 8 years ago

    [quote<]..."in the coming weeks."[/quote<] LOL - don't say that to a WebOS fan; they grew sick of hearing it from Palm and then HP. Overall, I absolutely agree with their approach; indeed, it's essentially the WebOS approach updated by 3 years. What I don't see is any compelling reason whatsover to creater a whole new mobile OS to achieve it (proprietary ownership aside, of course)

      • OneArmedScissor
      • 8 years ago

      They’re probably pissy about Windows 8 supporting ARM and want to get in on the [i<]real[/i<] mobile OS war.

      • NeelyCam
      • 8 years ago

      [quote<]What I don't see is any compelling reason whatsover to creater a whole new mobile OS to achieve it (proprietary ownership aside, of course)[/quote<] Maybe it is to create a truly free OS? iOS/WP7 clearly aren't and Android is also crossing over to the dark side. Unlike Google, Intel doesn't focus on extracting revenue from services associated with the OS. Unlike Microsoft, Intel doesn't focus on getting revenue from selling the OS. (On that note, HTC would probably be happy not paying MS royalties for using Android... switching to something royalty-free would sound good to them). Intel is making a free OS to enable hardware revenue (much like Apple..)

        • sweatshopking
        • 8 years ago

        Maybe it is to create a truly free OS? iOS/WP7 clearly aren’t and Android is no different.
        there, fixed it for you.

          • poulpy
          • 8 years ago

          Great to seek cheap pluses with “Android is no different” but would you mind developing that a tad?

          – Android OS is under the Apache license, which is Free Software.
          – None of iOS/WP7 are released under Free licenses which right there ends the argument IMO.

          But anyway as such (Apache licensing) anyone can download the source code, play with it and package/distribute your own flavour to the world.
          Cyanogen springs to mind with north of 650,000 installs last time I checked and which tracks Google releases to the dot (2.3.5 as we speak) with lots of additional value on top.

          Now sure, because nothing is perfect, some of Google’s own applications on top (e.g. GMail, GMaps) are closed source and need to be packaged separately. But they aren’t the core of the OS, they are user level applications for which anyone could write an equivalent if licensing is an issue.
          Look no further than Amazon if you want a commercial example of what a Free OS Android is and how you can do without any of the above closed source applications.

          Some people feel aggrieved that Google is developing “in the dark” and then releasing the new version’s code when it’s all done and ready, and sure enough it goes against the “release early, release often” mantra but that’s still on a completely different planet than either iOS or WP7!

    • bthylafh
    • 8 years ago

    Attention deficit disorder: Intel’s Linux managers have it.

    Moblin, MeeGo, and soon this new stuff will be dropped.

      • crabjokeman
      • 8 years ago

      I think it’s more like, “How do we maximize hardware revenue and put the least amount of resources into OS development?” The answer to that keeps changing, so Intel’s pet OS does as well.

      • kamikaziechameleon
      • 8 years ago

      I liked moblin/meego but it was in dire need of legitimate support and a little market penetration, lol

    • Hattig
    • 8 years ago

    And this move has nothing to do with the fact that HTML5 and JavaScript in particular require higher CPU performance for the same end result than a native binary or even a Java/Android application… thus hopefully requiring a CPU of higher performance than your average dual-core ARM.

      • dpaus
      • 8 years ago

      Oh, so bitter you are…. Could it not be just a recognition of the fact that programming can be done much faster for higher-level environments – like HTML5 – and that hardware is ‘fast enough’ for that now, and only getting faster, so why not embrace the New World Order and get on with delivering applications?

        • rxc6
        • 8 years ago

        Yeah, because mobile hardware must show no concerns about battery life, right?

        Sigh.

          • dpaus
          • 8 years ago

          Of course it must, among other considerations. But bear in mind that anything produced under this platform won’t be seen on the street for a [i<]minimum[/i<] of one year, much more likely two, and quite possibly three - if at all. The amount of computer power available per W-Hr of battery life at that time will certainly be far better than it is now, and - again, all other things being equal - almost certainly 'good enough' that developers working with this toolkit need not overly concern themselves with it.

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This