Richard Fieldhouse, Updated 8 December 2010.

An updated version of this article is available here.

In the beginning there was Windows, and Bill looked out and saw that it was good...

Well, it was.

Five years ago, there wasn't so much of a debate on Operating Systems: if you bought a PC, it would run Windows  XP, because they all did; and if you bought a mobile phone, you wouldn’t really care what it ran because you didn’t ask it to do many complicated things.

Oh, for the certainties of the antique world?  Well, not really.  

With a virtual monopoly, Microsoft could charge plenty for Windows and make all sorts of decisions where the users - especially the more technical ones - might have preferred to make their own choices.  Some disaffected techies started writing viruses and the rest of us ended up paying, not just for Windows itself, but for the antivirus package to protect it and the power to run the antivirus as well as the basic operating system (OS).

Apple, with their own OS and a tiny market share were not so hated as Microsoft and their OS (MacOS) did not attract so many virus writers.  However, it did have some technical problems.  

Change has come to the OS landscape since Apple decided to rewrite their OS from scratch and to create a separate OS for their new iPod and iPhone.  

For one thing, the OS is now often known as the "platform", and for another, Apple lets us buy “Apps” from an App Store.  These Apps (applications) can be installed to run on the iPhones more or less effortlessly.  It felt like a big change.  Quick and painless installation was a big step for casual users.  We learnt how handy it felt to have Facebook on your screen - or the current temperature in Weymouth.

While Apple supply their OS on their own hardware only, Google responded with a mobile phone platform (Android) which is open source and can be installed by any manufacturer.  Android comes with its own App Store called the Android Market and while this still does not have as many Apps as Apple, the Android user base is now growing more quickly.

In April 2010, to follow up on the huge success of the iPhone, Apple launched a tablet, called the iPad.  It has a variant of the iPhone platform and users have access to the App Store.  The iPad too has been a runaway success and, after a pause for thought, other tablets followed in time for Christmas, led by the Samsung Galaxy Tab.

So now we have a question, where previously there was none: which operating system should we choose?  

1. Should we go with Apple
2. Or with another tablet manufacturer trying to stretch the Android OS from mobile phones to tablets.  There are some areas that it does not yet cater for (e.g. most USB peripherals, like printers and cameras).  
3. Or perhaps we should stick with Windows and try and squeeze its power hungry form - designed for use with a mouse - into the smaller tablet.  
4. Or then again, could one of the manufacturers have an OS of their own that would fit the bill better still.

There are a number of options and below is an attempt at presenting the pros and cons of each.  The outline contains some assertions about the relative popularity of each platform which are discussed in more detail by CNN Money.

iOS - for the iPad - and other Apple Gadgets

There can’t be much doubt that this is the best platform available at the moment - it’s the first one to be tried, tested and approved by demanding tablet users.  There also a level of technical support - especially from the Apple stores - that the other suppliers can only dream of.

There is a problem though - you can only buy iOS the Apple iPad.  The iPad is expensive, perhaps you might think it's too big, it has no camera, no phone...

Does all this matter?  As they've at last stopped saying on Big Brother - you decide.  

iOS itself does have a couple of niggles that can be frustrating.  In many ways it hides what’s under the bonnet - for instance most of its files.  It also likes to strike up a lifetime monogamous relationship with the first copy of iTunes (its partner software) that you introduce it to.  iTunes can run on an Apple Mac or a Windows PC.

Android

The Android OSwas written by Android Inc. and acquired by Google in 2005 for $50 million in "the best deal [they] ever made." Initially for mobile phones, like many other platforms, it is based on a cut-down version of the common - and free - Linux OS.  Android is also distributed free of charge.  It doesn't take up much space and it has an application library called the Android Market.  Perhaps partly because it’s open source, techies tend to prefer it.  Smartphone users have been impressed too.  

Google produced one Android phone themselves (the Nexus) and it is rumoured that a Google tablet may appear soon.  However, Google has not been built around providing one-to-one support and delivering a phone direct to customers was not a great success.

The platform has evolved quite fast so that devices can be bought now which run a number of different versions.  This introduces some confusion for users and means that some Apps will work differently on different devices.  The problem is known as fragmentation.  It is exacerbated by Google’s attempts to police who gets access to the Android Market.  A device has to conform to a number of specifications before it will be allowed official access.  In many cases, the Android Market is instead loaded unofficially by the seller or the buyer.  This isn’t a desirable state of affairs but even as mainstream tablets begin to appear, the problem persists.

Here’s an outline of the different Android versions that are currently under discussion.

1. 1.5 Cupcake  Android versions have names as well as numbers.  They seem to have afternoon coffee connotations.  Cupcake is the oldest version that is commonly in use.  Some tablets found on EBay may be running it and this  is a very good sign that they should be avoided
2. 1.6 Donut (Released 15 September 2009)  The Android Market was introduced at this stage, together with support for higher resolution screens and a few other things that one might have expected to be in there from the start.  The Dell Streak was released with this version of Android, and still sells with it.  An update to version 2.1 is expected this week.
3. 2.0/2.1 Eclair  (Released 26 October 2009)  This release has a number of speed and presentational improvements and support for the Microsoft Exchange business Email server.  At this stage Google stipulated that the RAM memory should be at least 512Mb and generally devices with less memory than this are not upgraded.  Thus, a device with less than 512Mb should be avoided.
4. 2.2 Froyo (Frozen Yogurt)  (Released 20 May 2010)  The upgrades here are quite significant and perhaps it is this fact that has caused some delays in its rollout and the delays for tablets in general.  Three months after the formal release, the smartest of Smartphones are only now beginning to get updated.  Here are the highlights:

1. Flash.  This is an application which is used to support many different kinds of video display (like BBC iPlayer) and many interactive graphics (like those of Google’s own financial webpages).  It also supports annoying flickery adverts on web sites and thus it can absorb a tremendous amount of the device’s resources displaying things you really don’t want to see.  The inclusion of Flash, though, is quite significant because it is very widely used and is not available on the iPad.
2. WiFi Hotspotting.  Using this, the Froyo phone or tablet can become a WiFi hotspot allowing devices (for instance laptops) which have WiFi but not 3G to access the Internet via the Froyo device.  In a similar way, they can gain Internet access through a USB connection to the Froyo device - this is known as USB tethering.  The bigger step though is allowing the Froyo Device to act as a hotspot.  While carriers can and do charge to use the function, it might be that their concerns about its impact on other parts of their business (like the sale of 3G dongles) and on the amount of data to be carried has been delaying the upgrade.
3. Browser Upgrades.  While some of these are a little arcane - like the addition of support for Google’s V8 JavaScript engine, one might be more significant for business users: proper file upload in the browser.

5. 2.3 Gingerbread (released 6 December 2010) Initially available on the Nexus S [mobile phone] just before Christmas. It adds improved copy and paste, built-in Voice over IP (VoIP) for Skype-like calling, and Near Field Communications (NFC) for making small purchases like sandwiches. Other changes are incremental, but welcome.
6. 3.0 Honeycomb (for the first half of 2011) This promises to be the first true tablet version of the platform offering things like multiple views of an app - you might call these "windows" onto what the app is doing.

Chrome (expected release, mid 2011)

With Android, probably the most promising volume OS for tablets, already in their stable, it was a puzzling move on Google’s behalf when they announced the Chrome OS in July 2009.  It’s a second operating system apparently dedicated to people on the move - lightweight and mostly using personalised information downloaded from the Cloud.  Although the product is not meant to be confused with Google’s Chrome browser, it obviously is a bit confusing as they have pretty much the same name.

Is this a move to help in getting money from users by making them access their lives via the Google website?  Is it an outward sign of an internal turf war between different teams deep with the Googleplex?  Or is it just a mistake?  It’s hard to say.  For example, Electronista have pondered over the question

In search of a strategic rationale, it has been suggested that Chrome will be better suited to netbooks - with a physical keyboard.

Users, too, have worried that when they are away from the Cloud, for instance on holiday, their shiny Chrome gadget might become as handy as a brick in the luggage.

Since the initial announcement, things have gone rather quiet.  The mid-2011 release date is delayed from the original one. However, in the last month or so, new rumours have emerged - for instance Toshiba is promising a tablet.  So far, though, these are just rumours.

Windows

Apart from the problems with viruses mentioned above, Windows also has support for legacy features (those maintained to ensure compatibility with older applications, documents and users).  Some cynical outsiders suspect that are some legacy processes running in Windows that no one - not even in Microsoft - remembers.  They just daren’t take them out in case something breaks.  So the OS is bloated taking lots of memory, storage and CPU.  Tablets and slates are meant to be small and battery-efficient.  This is a basic mismatch.  There are two potential solutions

1. Go ahead anyway and make the tablet even though it will be heavy, hot and slow.  A number of tablets like this may have failed to make it to market because of heaviness, hotness or slowness.  These tablets run a full version of Windows, for instance Windows 7 Pro.  This OS will only run on Intel processors, which are themselves less efficient than the competing ARM designs adding further to the heating effects and short battery life.
2. Use a different OS which is still called Windows.  There are three flavours, as follows

1. Windows 7 Starter.  This requires only 1 Gb of short term memory (RAM).  That’s still twice as much as Android stipulates, but less than for Windows 7 Pro.  The OS lacks some of the bells and whistles and visual effects of the full version and most significantly, it’s limited to 3 concurrent processes.  Despite this, it still needs an Intel processor.
2. Windows CE.  This will run on an ARM processor and has been around for quite a while.  It’s been tested in action.  The trouble is, it’s been found wanting.  It is pretty much a complete re-write, but one concentrating on leading the user through to applications elsewhere rather than hosting them on the local device.  It started life as an OS for a “thin client” paired with a more beefy server to run business applications or perhaps an Internet Cafe.
3. Windows Phone 7.  This is the new generation of Microsoft’s phone OS.  While it’s not so bloated, again it is not popular.

While Microsoft have made lots of money out of Windows in the past, now they are perhaps paying the price.  The techies that Microsoft seemed to want to ignore are out for revenge.  Not only do the Pro and Starter versions of Windows have to labour under a constant threat from viruses, but no Microsoft OS will ever attract hoards of enthusiastic App writers and there’s no proper App Store for them.  There’s also perhaps an intangible feeling on the street that’s now against Microsoft and would be against them even if they produced something fantastic. I think it’s fair to say that Microsoft haven’t tested our resolve by producing anything very fantastic so far.

The Rest

All these fall under the heading of Linux-based proprietary systems.  In each case they are used by one manufacturer only.  The ones below have, at least, been tested by plenty of users.

1. WebOS This is owned by HP.  It was bought by them as part of the takeover of Palm - maker of the Palm Pre smartphone.  WebOS was well received when it first appeared in 2009, but with Apps counted in hundreds, rather than tens of thousands for iOS and Android, it will be an uphill struggle
2. Blackberry OS.  Initially, Blackberry held the number one spot amongst smartphones and their system has an established user base.
3. Amazon Kindle and Sony Reader.  These systems have been tested by users, but with few Apps available, neither OS has had to do much.   They are targeted at the task of reading books.