Time to break down the Silos between the *DT's?

What started out as a personal need for writing and debugging JNI-based applications, both based on Eclipse and for Android, has turned into something bigger, a lot bigger. The hardest problem we face for what I'm doing is supporting multiple debugger technologies in the same debug session and ensuring a nice seamless experience. Showing both Java and C/C++ stacks merged together and stepping back and forth between them would be the cat's meow.

As I'm starting to hear from the greater Eclipse community, there is need for cross language/cross technology debugging in other areas as well. One example is Rhino which is being used by the e4 team to support writing plugins in JavaScript. Having a debug session with JavaScript and Java in the same stack would also be awesome. Similarly, we have JavaScript or ActionScript running in the browser interacting with a Equinox server, or maybe PHP running in Apache. Web applications are the manifestation of distributed applications and, as promised, those applications tend to involve multiple languages.

Traditionally, the language tooling projects at Eclipse have lived in silos. The CDT team has have very little interaction with the JDT team, for example. And that's not generally the fault of the team members. It's just a symptom of the lack of investment in Eclipse towards common technologies. Being an engineer, I have no idea how to solve that except to ineffectively whine about it. ;)

But one objective we've had with the CDT was to ensure that the C wasn't just for C/C++. Many of our frameworks are language independent as much as we practically could. We haven't had enough investment to be able to push that out to the general Eclipse community, but we do have projects like Photran (Fortran) and the fledgling Hibachi (Ada) and the new but remote ObjectivEclipse (Objective-C) doing that.

I think in particular, our new debug framework, DSF, could be used for much more than C and related languages. DSF started out as a solution for the difficult debug environments we face in the embedded space and actually started as the Device Debug project of DSDP. We've migrated it down into the CDT in 6.0. We've often quipped that it really should be down in the Eclipse platform itself. There will be challenges, technically and otherwise, to make that happen.

What I want to do is start prototyping multi-language, multi-debugger debug sessions based on DSF. That would initially include Java and C/C++. I'll also take a peak at JavaScript debugging and consider how that impacts it. I'm confident the flexibility we brought with DSF can be leveraged to make the Eclipse side of this relatively straightforward. The bigger challenge will be co-ordinating the different debuggers.

If others are interested in this work, we should co-ordinate our efforts. Let me know and we could set up a mailing list to talk about this area, and hopefully we can start breaking down the silos.

Using Git GUI with Eclipse

Here's my next set of screencasts showing how I use git and git gui in particular with my Eclipse projects. There are two parts. The first shows how to set up a workspace based on a git clone repository, i.e. copying a remote repository to your local machine and setting up an Eclipse workspace for that repository. The second part is how I commit and push my changes to the remote server as I develop code. Hope this is useful.

BTW, This is best viewed by clicking on the YouTube link and watching it full screen in HD mode.

Part 1 - Creating your Workspace

Link to YouTube

Part 2 - Committing and pushing a code change

Link to YouTube

The JNI Debug Problem

One thing I noticed the other day was that I'm doing a lot of JNI coding lately. In our Wind River Installer, based on p2 BTW, I have native code for doing a few things like compression and getting at the Windows registry. The CDT has native code for doing advanced process management, and getting at the Windows registry. I've played with Android native development which is all based on JNI. And I was thinking of hooking up the ALSA library to do Audio management with my prototype "Eclipse OS". That's a lot of Java/C coding. And, unfortunately, all without a debug solution :(.

JNI debugging was one of the early goals of the CDT. Unfortunately, it has never really materialized, at least not generically in a way we could incorporate into Eclipse. And given that I see a strong symbiotic relationship between Java and C/C++, I am getting more motivated to tackle this problem and see if we couldn't come up with a solution that we can integrate into the JDT and CDT (or maybe just the CDT).

But the first thing you run into when looking at the code, where do you start? I'd like to be able to step into native methods, hit breakpoints in native code and see up the stack all the way into the Java stack. And really have an integrated debug experience where you don't have to do much of a paradigm shift when going between the two worlds. And given the way the Debug platform is structured, that should be possible.

So there's different ways to slice the cat (not that I slice cats, I like cats). You could add an extension point to be able to plug in native handling into the JDT debugger. I'm not sure what the JDT gang feel of that, or whether they've hopefully thought of that. Another solution would be to build a new Eclipse Java debugger component, but base it on CDT's Debug Services Framework. That may make a more natural solution, but I fear it would be a lot of work and it would take a lot of investment to reach parity with JDT's debug solution.

I'd like to hear what the community thinks. What is the right solution. Hopefully we can come together, find the development resources, and finally reach this Holy Grail for the CDT.

What could an Eclipse OS be?

I got some really positive feedback on my quick little demo of the "Eclipse OS" prototype that I've started building. So I've started to capture ideas on the github wiki for the repository that I created there. Feel free to add your thoughts there, or here. Maybe if there's enough interest we could grow a little community around the idea. If not, that's fine too. I'm really just exploring a role Eclipse technologies could play in a browser based "OS" such as the announced Google Chrome OS.

Here's the link to the wiki and here is what I've started with: http://wiki.github.com/dschaefer/eclipseos

What should the Eclipse OS be? Take one of those new fancy 10" netbooks. Install enough Fedora to xinit the Google Chrome browser with the Flash plugin (necessary in my books for a full web experience) and launch an Equinox standalone server. What local web applications would you need to manage your netbook? Feel free to add to this list.

• Power Off. To shutdown the OS and power down, i.e. run the poweroff command. (Update: this is the first app and is now working).
• Install Manager. To install new web apps into the server using p2. Integrate p2 with yum to install native components that the web apps may need.
• Audio Manager. Similar to ALSA mixer but as a web app. To control the volume of the audio in the least. This could be a good first test of writing native code to help implement the service.
• File Manager. To look at and manipulate the files on the system, maybe even open them in the browser.
• Connectivity Manager. To manage wireless and wired network connections.
• Power Manager. To manage power saving modes.
• Office “Suite”. To prepare documentation and presentations while disconnected, like on long flights.
• E-mail. For those who would like offline access to e-mail.
• An IDE so I can build my web apps locally (thus the connection with my Web IDE (W-IDE) prototype).

Screencast Test

After asking around twitter, I had a number of people recommend TechSmith's Jing for doing screencasts. These are the same guys that do the masterful Camtasia which is a more full featured, i.e. expensive, solution. Jing does a good job at capturing my screen and audio. It's limited to 5 minute videos, but give that my main purpose is to share quick ideas with my blog readers, I think that's fine.

So here's my first screencast test. I'm showing the current state of my "Eclipse OS", i.e. Fedora minimal install + X + Chrome Browser + OpenJDK + a standalone Equinox app server. There's not much new here. But I'm really just learning how to use this media. One thing I learned as you'll hear half way through, is that my laptop fan kicks in. Drives me nuts, but anyway. Expect a lot more of these in the upcoming weeks. And hopefully, I'll improve the quality as I go to (like talking louder :).

Update: uploaded to Youtube which gives a much better viewing experience, especially in fullscreen mode.

Update 2: Planet Eclipse seems to filter out the embed object. Click on the title to come to blogger to see the real thing.

Eclipse OS?

I left a pretty cryptic entry last time. Essentially, I am trying see how easy it is to build a Chrome OS using Fedora as a base. It was pretty easy, and I have the instructions on how to do it. I'm going to put together a series of Jing screencasts (my new favorite screencasting tool), to show you how. That'll take a few days to get together, especially given the beautiful weather we're finally getting here in Ottawa.

But I wanted to show you a screenshot of the final result. Because, not only am I doing a Chrome OS look-a-like thing, I'm also putting Fedora's OpenJDK and an Equinox server application on it to run applications locally. In this case, it's the GWT Greetings app that you get when you create a new GWT project in Eclipse.

As I mentioned when I first heard of Chrome OS that it would be great if we could put Equinox on there to run local apps. Now I have a chance to expand on that idea and see whether it makes sense. Once I get the instructions together you can try it to. Could this be a start of an Eclipse OS?

Chrome OS Preview?

I'll be posting more on this later, especially how you can do it yourself. But I've built what could be the upcoming Chrome OS. I did it starting from the Fedora 11 net install and added what I needed, which wasn't much. Here's a teaser screenshot until I can firm up the recipe :)

Web apps make me think MVC

I'm blogging more than I'm coding lately, so I'll try to keep this brief. But I noticed someone mention MVC while I was googling around for practical information on GWT. After I thought about it a while, building a web app is a great example of the Model-View-Controller paradigm.

The model is data you store or derive on the server. You can use GWT's RPC mechanism to get at this data. The Controller is also on the server. You can send commands, like build my project, to it via GWT RPC too. The server may then farm that out to other specialized servers to actually perform the action. The View is the JavaScript code running in your browser that takes the data and draws it using GWT's widgets and invokes the control using GWT's Handler mechanisms. Having a well defined RPC mechanism, and having a requirement to reduce the traffic over the wire to help with responsiveness, you get pushed to keep your web app MVC clean.

Now, relating this back to my mobile app interests, I can easily see the View portion of the app being replaced by the native widget framework for the particular platform. As I've mentioned in previous posts, I don't think running a web app in a browser in a smartphone is a good idea. I know the browser on my Android phone is really slow. You're better off using Android's native widget set in Java to accommodate the form factor. That's what mobile app building is all about. What I need now is an implementation of GWT's RPC mechanism in Java using Android's communication APIs, and really interesting things jump into mind.

What this leads you to is having three View implementations for my web-based IDE, that I'm now calling W-IDE. One in the web browser using full GWT, one in Android using Android's native widgets but still communicating with the services defined in GWT, and one using the regular Eclipse desktop UI, theoretically using those services as well.

Now, yes, that's three implementations of the same thing, and I know how that rubs people the wrong way. But my theory is that they are, in fact, not the same thing. Depending on which of the three you have, you are likely to need different workflows. Running Eclipse in a 24" monitor, it's OK to have all those views and taskbars and such visible all at once. In a browser running in a 10" netbook, not so much, and you'd really like to make it page based to take advantage of the browser's history mechanism. And in a 4" smartphone, I really struggle with any workflows that make sense, but they certainly would be limited to one view or editor at a time.

At any rate, this is sure turning into an interesting journey of exploration. In the end, we may decide that this is all crap and IDEs are meant to run on desktops only and that using RAP's server-centric architecture is OK to render in the browser (which if you can't tell yet, I'm not sure I agree with). But this is a 5 year journey and we have time for the different technologies involved to mature and we'll see. I think we have a lot of time to figure this out.

And, yeah, I guess I failed at keeping this short.

Are we de-evolving or on a natural evolution?

Talking around the office about a future with web-based IDEs, it was interesting that people are starting to get it, or at least, not scoff that it's something we'll ever to deal with. There are some good aspects to it for the tools business. At the least it's a great way to quickly get our products out to customers with minimal install fuss (the bane of my existence these days at work), and it's a great way to get immediate feedback on what they find valuable.

The question that needs to be answered is why now? I remember back in the 90's we were clamoring to get away from the client/server model. Everyone wanted a PC or workstation on their desk and former stars of the server world, DEC in particular comes to mind, faded away. Servers found a new life thanks to the web and it seems now, about 20 years later, we starting to climb back onto the client/server bandwagon. Why did we get away from that architecture and what's happening to make us want to go back.

From what I know, looking back, I think one of the biggest problems with servers in the 80's and early 90's was their sheer cost. They were expensive machines. You could buy 100 PCs for the cost of one of these things. Worse, yet, they didn't provide 100 times the compute power. The price/performance ratio made PCs a smart bet. They are both cheep and powerful. That, and they provided freedom to the user. If the server went down, they could keep working, and if they wanted to install some "forbidden" software, they could do it. It was really refreshing come to think of it.

But as any IT professional, or installer guy, would tell you, maintenance of all these machines is a nightmare, for the admin, and for the bottom line. As employees of larger companies well know, there are companies making money on software that beaver away in the background making sure all the other software is kept up-to-date and on the up-and-up. And, of course, some of the more rogue employees know how to uninstall that software and get it out of the way ;).

What the old server model provided was that ease of maintenance. You installed software on one machine and all your users had instant access to it. Of course there are risks to that as all of us tweeters had to deal with today, but with an improved focus on security and robustness with these critical server apps, like we had in the server era, those should become rare.

That, and looking at the cost of servers these days, the costs are way down. I would think that the price/performance curve is turning towards the server side. And just look around your workplace and count the number of CPUs sitting idly. It would be an interesting study to figure out what percentage of CPU power companies have is actually being used. It might make more sense to spend more on servers and less on desktops. You don't need that much power to run a web browser, especially with the ever improving JavaScript VMs that we are finding in them these days.

It's not really far fetched today to see a future, say five years away, where all of our apps are running on servers, in the "cloud" say, and we are accessing them through "dumb" terminals running web browsers, which is what Google's Chrome OS and I'm sure others will provide. The economics are right. The culture though is something else. Are users ready to give up the freedom that traditional desktops provide? I think so, but only if the applications provide significant new value. Tools that integrate with other web apps to allow collaboration over the web could provide that value. Running desktop-style apps that simply display themselves in a web browser, will not.

Time to come clean. I'm a Google fan-boy

I appreciate all the comments on my last blog or two about how e4 is doing a lot of the things I am trying with GWT. I don't dispute that. It's even interesting that RAP is planning to build on top of GWT. That's fine. I respect what the e4 guys are doing, it's a huge task and they are trying to modernize Eclipse as we all agree is necessary.

But I'm just wondering if using GWT directly while using OSGi web services to hook up to the IDE things I need in Eclipse, which is essentially IResource and up, is a better architecture to get us to a web-based IDE. And right now I'm trying to keep it simple and avoid any layers on top that e4 may be providing. Maybe there's a compromise choice. And I'll be open to that once I fail, which will not surprise me in the least. But I need to see first hand at what's possible in the GWT world. In the short term, that probably means I will appear to be anti-e4. But I'm used to being the bad cop by now, I guess.

So why am I doing this? OK. I admit it. While I have no contractual relationship with Google, I am a Google fan-boy. I have an Android phone which I am learning how to build apps for. The Android momentum will be unquestionable over the next few months as new handsets land like the rain in Ottawa this summer, including ones from our Eclipse friends at Motorola. Chrome is my default browser, although I'm using IE8 on my 64-bit Windows 7 laptop to check out its progress (which is actually impressive). I'll go back to Chrome once I get the RTM build installed. I use Google Mail for my Eclipse mails and am finding it nicer to use than the Outlook I use in my day job and I can access it anytime, anywhere, especially on my Android phone.

Google Wave and Chrome OS are technologies I am very excited about, and I have no doubt they will have a dramatic impact on our industry. And it's Google Wave that I have an eye on for this IDE work. That is my end goal. I believe following Google's way of doing things is important in that journey. And while not all Google products use GWT, Wave does, and it was the excitement for GWT I heard in the Wave lead's keynote at Google I/O which has driven me here.

And maybe that makes me the Google fan boy at Eclipse, so be it. You wouldn't bet against Microsoft in the last decade or so. I don't think you should be betting against Google now. And while the relationship is good on the tools side, I want to help make sure Eclipse isn't on the outside looking in when it comes to these run-time technologies.

GWT + Server-side Eclipse = W-IDE

Someone once asked me why we break up things between ui plug-ins and core plug-ins. My theory was that we could eventually swap out the ui with something else. I didn't really believe that at the time, and I'm not sure how well architected our CDT plug-ins are to allow that, but it sounded good.

So as I begin my journey down the road of web-based IDE's it really struck me that this was the time to swap out the UI. My theory goes like this. Google are the experts at creating web applications (and you may disagree with that, but stick with me). They have a framework for building them called the Google Web Tooklit, GWT, which allows you to program your UI in Java which then gets compiled into JavaScript. And, they have a really cool RPC mechanism, again all in Java, that overlays Servlets. Hey, Equinox plus Jetty gives you Servlets. Why not swap out the Eclipse UI code with a GWT implementation that talks to our Core code using Servlets?

A big thanks goes out to Ian Bull who reminded me of the example project he created last year that shows how to use GWT with Equinox OSGi. I have extended that a little to call into the Eclipse workbench, right now calling Platform.getOS(). This is the start of my prototype web-based IDE using GWT as a front end to the Eclipse IDE Core parts. And I am pumped the deeper I get into it. Feel free to follow along as I check my prototype into http://github.com/dschaefer/w-ide. Feel free to fork that and join in the fun. (BWT, I need to show you the cool way I'm using git, stay tuned).

As Ian says, "GWT + OSGi is a great platform!" And I am starting to see why. It really is. So much so that it confirms my earlier conjecture that Equinox would be a great addition to Chrome OS and I hope Eclipse people are talking to Google people about that. Wouldn't it be cool to see Equinox serving up local server pages, presenting a p2 install web UI to download and install bundles into your favorite mobile device. Yes, it would be cool.

Oh, yeah, and here's my vision

Ian pointed out that I actually didn't state what my vision for Eclipse was. I noticed that after I posted, it was probably the wrong title for what I ended up writing. I'll try again, maybe sooner than later, I'll actually get my point across.

I do have a vision for Eclipse, or rather, Eclipse as an IDE. Eclipse is so much more these days, I really need to differentiate myself. I am an IDE guy. Eclipse started as an IDE, turned into a great IDE, let's keep it that way. Maybe that's my vision. Keep a good thing going with focus on stability and quality.

I also have a vision on where IDEs are going, and I mentioned that in a previous blog where I stated the prediction that the desire for software developers to write software using mobile devices will drive that vision. But in the end, I think it's more than that.

This vision comes from watching the Google I/O keynote on Google Wave. If you haven't seen it yet, do so. Whether Google Wave is the right technology or not, the workflows they present are the future. I have no doubt of that. And it's all about collaboration, including real-time collaboration, through your web browser. And that let's it run on any platform with a web browser, which is pretty much everything.

I was especially struck with the demo of the team working and commenting on documents. Everything becomes a document, or a Wave in Google's terminology, and everyone can contribute to it. And it keeps track of who contribute what and when.

The first thing that popped into my mind, being the IDE guy, what if the document was a source file? Wouldn't it be cool to post a source file for review, have people attach comments to it, maybe even edit it to propose changes, maybe even work on it together live? Pair programming accross the internet? Doesn't that make sense in the global world we live in with software teams spread accross the world? Working in the same environment I do other collaboration. A bugzilla front end in Wave is a natural, integrated with my source in Wave, a truely integrated development environment?

Given that as a vision for IDEs of the not so far away future, how does Eclipse fit in. We have so much invested in making Eclipse a good IDE, I'd hope to keep as much as I can. And I think we can, removing the UI front end, which would be handled in Wave, and providing services that provide access to all the good information that our indexers and such provide. Even providing access to remote build and test machines to complete the edit, build, debug cycle. I think there's a significant role for Eclipse there, and thanks to Jetty and the HTTP Equinox/OSGi service, we could do that today.

So that's my vision, long and short. In the short term, though, I need to keep customers happy and try and convince new customers that Eclipse is right for them. And that's where stability and quality are criticial. And that's where I'm coming from. I'm Walt Mossberg, uh never mind :).

What is the Vision for Eclipse?

I'm on vacation, it's rainy, so I might as well write and maybe provide a little more insight into my thinking on e4.

Now, to start, I must first apologize for the tactless way of bringing this up as I did. As the title stated and I tried to reiterate throughout the entry, these are my fears for how the CDT fits in with e4. Nothing more, nothing less, and certainly not meant as a personal attack on anyone working on e4 (and no, despite common belief, I don't work on e4). It was really targeted at those outside the e4 community to take some time and understand how e4 impacts them.

I've sent a request for feedback to the cdt-dev list, so if you're there or even if you're not, please send me a response. I really want to know what the needs of the CDT community are so that I can properly feed them to the e4 team. The feedback I have so far, and so far it's been private, but that's OK, is that e4 is OK if we don't have to do anything significant to adopt it. Which then brings up the point of why adopt it if we're not going to take advantage of any of it. The other feedback that I got is that e4 isn't solving problems that our community has. Hopefully I'll get some more information. But, so far, it does justify asking the question and justify my fears.

My biggest fear for Eclipse is apathy. We're all working on our projects and being successful at it. As I said, I'm a happy user of the Eclipse SDK and CDT, especially with the new CDT 6.0. And I'm bragging about it to the Android NDK community as we speak. I know a lot of people question e4. I just happened to be dumb enough to blog it out loud.

My Biggest Fear for e4

A buddy of mine noticed that I don't get as many comments on my blog as I used to. He thought it was because I wasn't being controversial enough. He's probably right. Most of my readers follow this on Planet Eclipse and I haven't really commented on that much lately other than the great fun I'm having using it for my Wind River Installer work and for Android native development in my hobby time. I'm just a happy user now, I guess.

"Linus is a wise man"

Following Ian Skarrett on Twitter, he points us at an article in Linux magazine where they discuss Microsoft's Linux driver patch that I'm sure you all heard about. They quoted Linus, who is indeed a wise man with a cool head. He's just happy to get a contribution from a new member of the community and doesn't care who it is. That's certainly one of the big factors to the CDT's success as hard nose competitors worked together peacefully. It's the only way to be successful. Don't let emotions cloud your judgement.

Selfish need drives contributions

The other thing that Linus pointed out was that "I agree that it’s driven by selfish reasons, but that’s how all open source code gets written! We all scratch our own itches". He's bang on there. All of the vendors I work with on the CDT are contributing to it to make their products better. I'm sure that's true for many open source projects. For the most part that's a good thing, since open source users get the benefits of that work. But it also means, if there is a feature you need that none of the vendors do, you aren't going to get it. And as much as we beg people to contribute, it rarely happens. ~350,000 open source CDT users, ~3 contributors, that's pretty rare.

What does this mean for e4?

Well as much whining as the CDT community has done over the constraints we have to deal with via the IResource system, we only got one contributor to the e4 flexible resources project. And even there, the changes being done should end up in the 3.x series and isn't a major break from current system. So I can only assume that vendors are dealing with what they have and the need isn't really there for them. But I do know there are some big open source users who need it. Time will tell if they are big enough to invest in it.

But my biggest fear is the rest of e4. There are some pretty major changes in it. Will the contributor community feel the need to adopt it? And what do you do when certain vendors don't want to adopt it? What do we do with the CDT if none of the vendors step up to support e4? Stay on e3? What if Mylyn decides to support e4 and drop e3? What if we're forced to adopt e4 if the rug gets pulled out from under us on e3? And don't let backwards compatibility fool you, there is a massive verification activity in the least to make sure old plugins work on the new platform.

My big fear

I've stated this before, and it remains true today. We're headed into uncharted waters with e4. I fear that the contributing vendors to the CDT will not put the effort into supporting e4, because they don't have the need. And I think this is too big to artificially "create the need". Eclipse can't afford two platforms. Yet that's what we seem destined to have. A lot of CDT vendors consider the CDT finished. We have very few new features on the horizon. That will likely mean less contributions. How are we supposed to pull off adopting a new platform? That's my biggest fear.

Project Navigator: Apologies to all

I have to apologize to the Platform team and Francis in particular for my earlier complaint about duplicate entries showing up in the Project Navigator. It turns out that the problem was actually all CDT, or more specifically, how I set up the CDT part of my combo JDT/CDT/Android project.

By putting my source and build output into their own subfolders in the the project and setting the C/C++ Paths settings to point to them and not the root Project folder, the CDT stopped trying to display the other folders in the project in the navigator, the JDT folders in particular. No more duplication!

My disappointment has turned into happiness. I can now work on my Java and C++ files using the same perspective. The only thing that still doesn't make sense is the tool bar where the new Class button still depends on the perspective, but that's minor.

I'll have to come up with some way to automate the creation of what I call JNI projects that have the mix of Java and C/C++ so others don't run into the same thing I did. Maybe an improved Convert wizard.

At any rate apologies all around and thanks!

Mobile will drive "IDE in the Cloud"

I'm in the middle of making some last minute code changes for work before I start my vacation, or staycation as I hear lots of people calling it these days. We have a pretty big JUnit regression suite to test our p2-based installer, and I made the mistake earlier this week of not running it and ended up having to rewrite the algorithm to solve scalability issues. Lesson of the day, don't create too many Java objects in long running native code, Lord knows when they get garbage collected.

This mobile machine's hot, man!

The main reason I didn't run them was because I was working at home with my laptop that day. These long running tests create some massive heat build up in my machine. I lost a hard drive a few years ago doing something like that and it's made me nervous ever since. I really don't think laptops are built to handle the intensive compute and disk workloads that I need as a software developer. I think I'm pushing the envelope too far. In fact, I was going to start this blog while the tests were running earlier this evening but the heat knocked out my wireless.

The ultimate mobile developer platform?

I'm sure you've all been following the Chrome OS "shiny object of the week". The technical details of the OS itself and the supposedly sinister plot by Google behind it aside, there is no doubting that the designs for the upcoming sub-netbook, aka smartbook, machines are pretty exciting. All day battery life, integrated 3G or WiMAX connectivity anywhere, and with big enough screens to actually be useful. And, yeah, looking at the processors that allow you to do that, you aren't running Eclipse and gcc on these things to any great scale. But I'd love to use one of these things around the house or on trips to write code with. Especially if it lets these burn marks on my legs heal ;)

Mobile will drive IDE in the Cloud

So assuming you want to write software using a mobile device, how would you do it? And, you know, after all the naysaying I did about "IDE in the Cloud" at EcilpseCon, I finally get it. Wouldn't it make sense to have a workstation setup where you keep all your development tools and do your builds and run your tests, and then be able to access that all from a web browser anywhere in the world? from any mobile device in the world?

That flexibility will drive demand for this architecture, for similar reasons we used this architecture in the pre 1990's where we used to have dumb terminals connected to powerful DEC VAXen (at least they were powerful for the time). What we're talking about isn't much different than that, only the terminals, i.e. the mobile devices, are a bit smarter. But then the compute servers are probably equivalently faster if not more so.

An opportunity to simplify

And, yes, we do use VNC and other remote desktop protocols and clients to accomplish this today. And maybe you can so something similar in a browser (in fact I know you can, ever see WebHuddle?). But with these things I think you'll run into the screen size issue. Myself and a lot of my Eclipse community colleagues have presented Eclipse on 1024x768 projectors and it's brutal. The IDE just doesn't scale that small to be useful. But this is the screen sizes you have to deal with on mobile devices.

While working through this new architecture and solving that problem, I think it's also a great opportunity to simplify the IDE. New users find Eclipse overwhelming with all the views and toolbar buttons and menus, it's really tough to know what to do next once you fire it up. Being in a browser opens the door to new ways of working. I think we're still trying to figure out how to do content creation via a browser, and from Google Apps and Microsoft's upcoming web-based Office suite, we'll learn a lot and maybe some of these things can be applied to software development.

Is it time for a new platform?

Mobile is driving a lot of change in the software and device world. I really believe the software developer will be able to benefit from it. But I wonder whether the platform we've built with Eclipse is the right vehicle for this. I know the IBM team is scrambling with e4 to address that. But I'd like to see real innovation here, something that breaks away from the old desktop IDE paradigms of the past. Maybe Eclipse's "Black Swan" is out there. If it is, we'll have to make sure we recognize it and welcome it to the community.

Android versus Chrome OS in Netbooks?

Just a quick one. There were a lot of rumours about Android running on laptops, with Acer especially. Now they're wondering if Chrome OS wills squash those plans. People, Android was never meant to run on netbooks. You are worrying about something that was never going to happen in the first place.

If you ever watch the Android UI presentations at Google IO, they pretty much confirm that. At one point one of the designers commented that Android developers need to deal with screens with more pixels, but to deal with that by checking density, not physical screen size.

All Android apps are being built assuming a 4" screen. It would suck if you try to stretch an android list widget to a 10" netbook screen. Big screens isn't what Android is about.

Update: I just read that Schmidt and friends just mentioned the two projects working closer together in the future. Chrome on Androids Linux/BSD OS but without the Java based UI and the Dalvik VM that drives it makes sense to me.

More Thoughts on Chrome OS

As quickly as it came, the hype has died down over Google's announced Chrome OS. There hasn't been much to stoke the fire so it's died down naturally. And that's a good thing. There's a lot of lead time to figure out how we all fit into this story, if we want to fit in at all. Here are a couple of more thoughts that came to me as I read all the stories. BTW, it seems some writers have already played with the OS, or they're making a lot of assumptions...

Equinox as a local app server

One of the coolest features of OSGi and the Equinox/Jetty implementation at Eclipse is as an app server. This is something I've always wanted to spend more time with. I don't think Chrome OS will be successful without some means of running local applications and the marriage between Equinox and the Chrome browser is a natural. I'd hope the two of these groups are talking.

GWT or SWT browser edition?

To be honest, I'm a neophite when it comes to what's happing with running Eclipse in browser mode, be it RAP or the new e4 SWT browser stuff. All I've seen are demos that try to make the browser look like a desktop app. I think that's doomed to failure. The more you make it look like a desktop app, the more users are going to expect it to work the same as a desktop app, and that just isn't going to happen.

I'd take this opportunity to reinvent my application's UI, to break away from the paradigms that the desktop has locked us into and to come up with cleaner, more workflow driven UIs. Having good tooling is still a must. The Google Wave guys were quick to pour praise on GWT which they used to build the Wave app. I'd pick that if I were starting down this road.

Is there a role for native in Chrome OS?

Believe or not, I think the answer is yes. We'll I'm sure you believe that I think that but anyway. Chrome supports the NPAPI native plug-in API that was started by Netscape/Mozilla/Firefox and is now supported by WebKit/Chrome/Safari and Opera. If you have the need for a high performance app that does it's own rendering, like a game say, then NPAPI is for you. Google already does this for it's O3D graphic rendering API. You can too.

Now, what you can also do with NPAPI is present your C++ objects for JavaScript scripting in the browser using this interface. Now didn't Dave Thomas say something about C++ and JavaScript being the future in his Eclipse Summit Europe keynote last year?

ARM versus Intel

It's not a secret that Intel has an offer to purchase my employer, Wind River, on the table. That hasn't closed yet. But I have to agree with the analysts who see this will help ARM and it's partners. More interesting, though, is that this will really be the first time that ARM platforms and Intel platforms will be running the exact same software platform. It'll be pretty easy to see who's netbook/smartbook/mobile solutions are better. More importantly, it'll drive both of them to raise the bar, which at the end of the day benefits the consumer like good healthy competition does.

Google Chrome OS

Google announced it's initiative to build an OS around it's Chrome browser. About time. The idea of having a browser based Linux platform is one of the things that had driven me to play with Linux in the first place. It was clear from the experiments I did that this was easily possible. Webkit with a good JavaScript engine is a great choice for that, which is what Chrome is. I guess it just took Google's might to make it happen.

So why would Google invest in something like the Chrome OS. It's easy, and people have speculated on it for a long time. Google wants you to spend all your time in a browser. Why? Because it changes the game. Commerce has move to the web in droves and Google wants to get you closer to that so it can get it's cut for getting you there. It's been a long time coming and the planets are finally aligning to make it happen.

Firefox could have done the same, but Google has the dough to make something like this happen. Which again calls into question why this couldn't have been done in an open source project to start with. But I fear the Gnome/KDE bun fight has taken the Linux community's focus away from how the desktop is really evolving. Google knows where things are going. It's helping to drive them to begin with.

Will this impact Windows? I don't think so. We're creatures of habit and Windows already has a good browser experience. Will this impact Linux desktop? Probably. At the least it could be a better place to go if all you want to do is get away from Microsoft, which, if you are Joe average consumer, would be the only reason you go to Linux. Mind you this Joe developer is pretty happy on Linux. Even then, I am sceptically waiting to see a good browser based IDE experience.

But is the web ready for this? I'm not sure. A lot of people are saying Google Docs is pretty good. GMail is my e-mail client of choice outside of work. I could IM using the browser I guess. I think Google Wave will shake the cart here providing a slick collaboration environment that redefines all these things, so we'll see. I'm sure once you adopt a browser-based OS you'll find out quickly whether it sucks or not.

So what does this mean for Android? As I've stated here and on Twitter (dougschaefer, BTW), browsing on a 4" screen blows. I really struggle with trying to pan around a web page to find the information I need. This is not to say that web services aren't useful on smartphones, it just that they work much nicer if there is a thicker client to format the data to the platform, and to just manage the data bandwidth better.

Probably the most interesting aspect of this that crossed my mind is that the Palm Pre already is browser based OS. It's also based on Webkit running on a Linux platform. So the real question is - will Google try to get Chrome OS into the smartphone format? I swear the Chrome and the Android guys don't talk to each other. Or this strategy would already be figured out before the announcement.

Qt, Box2D, and other random musings

First of all, I'm very jealous of the Linux Desktop gang for holding their summit in the Canary Islands. I did a quick look at the cost and it's not any more than what I spent to go to Stuttgart for Eclipse Summit Europe. I can't wait to hear how it really was.

At that Summit, Nokia announced that they were moving from GTK to Qt for their Meamo Linux distribution for their handheld/tablet type devices. They were upfront about the reasons and it makes perfect sense. The plan is to have Qt as the default toolkit for Symbian devices as well. Learn one API and target them all. This is exactly what I hoped would happen with the Trolltech acquisition. So kudos to Nokia for a smart move.

And I hope through the Intel partnership with Nokia this will spread to Moblin too. For app developers, I think it's really critical that we see some consolidation on the number of mobile Linux platforms. The nightmare I see supporting all the different Linux distros in my day job doesn't need to be reproduced for mobile.

Anyway, that got me thinking again about Qt for my hobby activities. I want to learn what it takes to make games for mobile handsets and what kind of things the CDT would need to better support that. Having your work run on both mobile and in a simulation mode on the desktop makes a lot of sense, and one of the main drivers I see behind Windows adoption of the CDT. Qt would be a great framework for this for a few reasons. First you can target Windows and Linux desktop for simulation environments and the growing number of mobile platforms adopting Qt. And for me, Qt's QGLWidget and Android's GLSurfaceView work almost identically, further supporting my cross platform efforts. I'll have to peak at the iPhone SDK and see if that holds true there too.

Speaking of gaming on mobile. Most of the games I see there are actually 2D games. There are probably a few reasons for that, but 2D games are just easier to do. There's less pressure to actually simulate reality as you get with 3D. To help with 2D game development, a couple of guys in the Android community have ported the C++ Box2D physics engine to Androids NDK (Native Development Kit). Looking at all the cool 2D things I see on the iPhone and given the BSD nature of Box2D's license, I can imagine its driving a lot of them. And the results are pretty cool, especially if you hook up the accelerometer on these platforms. I'll have to play with it and see how easy it is to use.