Comments on: WebOS, WebTOP, OOS - how should we call the online OS?

By: Xcerion, new WebOS from Sweden, launching soon - franticindustries.

Xcerion, new WebOS from Sweden, launching soon - franticindustries. — Mon, 12 Mar 2007 09:48:12 +0000

[…] For those not familiar with the concept of a Web OS, Internet OS or a Webtop - whichever you prefer - and the controversy behind it, I suggest one of our old articles on the subject. […]

By: What’s in a Name? « SaaS-a-fras

What’s in a Name? « SaaS-a-fras — Wed, 10 Jan 2007 03:57:18 +0000

[…] I wanted to post a link to this article over at franticindustries. It’s another post on our prior topic of the ‘WebOS’ which was basically just agreement with simplerich. I’m still not convinced OS is the right nomenclature. […]

By: Stan Schroeder

Stan Schroeder — Sun, 07 Jan 2007 15:06:09 +0000

@Jadon: I don’t mind, your article is a really interesting read.

By: Jadon

Jadon — Sun, 07 Jan 2007 06:40:56 +0000

Hope you don’t mind, but the end period got stuck into the link of my last comment: http://clamoring.blogspot.com/2006/12/characteristics-of-winning-webos.html

By: Jadon

Jadon — Sun, 07 Jan 2007 06:38:30 +0000

For me, the term “webtop” seems best when talking about a framework that allows rapid development of applications in a web browser that can be easily accessed from any computer with a browser (and perhaps Flash). Of course, some of the frameworks you reviewed have the potential to grow into something much more than *just* a “webtop”.

For my full opinion on that, you can read:
http://clamoring.blogspot.com/2006/12/characteristics-of-winning-webos.html. I think the key to calling something an operating system is determining what it abstracts, though that can still be quite fuzzy.

The fact is, a WebOS is whatever people believe it is. That is simply the way language works. Wikipedia is a great feedback system to reinforce the meaning of new terms in technology, so I tend to defer to those definitions. I may need to find a new term for what I like to call a WebOS to better align with the public view. Your blog with the great summary of this new bread of web applications is making a significant impact on that public view.

By: Mikael Bergkvist

Mikael Bergkvist — Sat, 06 Jan 2007 19:30:41 +0000

Agreed.

By: Stan Schroeder

Stan Schroeder — Sat, 06 Jan 2007 17:04:56 +0000

@Mikael: The bottom line is that with Web 2.0, things are changing. I think it’s important to realize that it’s too early to say “WebOS is not a real OS, it will never be able to this or that”. We may yet be surprised at what WebOS-like applications will develop into.

By: Mikael Bergkvist

Mikael Bergkvist — Sat, 06 Jan 2007 15:37:29 +0000

When developing webapps, you decide if you want to make it stand-alone or part of an existing application/framework, like a firefox extension/plugin.
In that case, firefox is the focus and the extension is just that, something that gives added value to the browser experience.
However, if the extensions are being added to a generic platform that in itself is transparent, perhaps only appearing as a window system, then that platform is more deserving of the title ‘webos’.

If there is no such underlying framework that makes the development of apps easier, then the window system in itself is not enough.
A window manager is not a webos, not even if it’s bundling a set of apps using iframes.

A webos might or might not deploy a window manager, and if it does, it’s just another app developed on that platform.