Disk defrag maven Diskeeper has a free new tool that can test drive across the network and report in real time. Disk Performance Analyzer for Networks 3.0 relies on a single access point, server scans can be scheduled and computer groups defined -- through IP addresses or Active Directory groups.
Posted by Doug Barney on 05/05/2010 at 1:17 PM1 comments
Exchange 2010 is so great that nearly half of enterprises will migrate to it in the next year and a half? Who says so? A Microsoft messaging partner, of course. It's not a Microsoft partner per se, but a report from Osterman Research which was paid for by Azaleos, a Microsoft e-mail services company.
While 44 percent of shops plan the move, the remainder claim budget pressures are holding them back.
The fact that Azaleos paid for the research does not negate the findings. A good research company won't risk its reputation doing shoddy work, nor would Microsoft risk the black eye.
My bigger concern with researchers is not the numbers, but that sometimes their opinions are informed by whomever they are working for.
Exchange 2010 is about six months old, and many shops are waiting for the first Service Pack later this year.
Are you moving to Exchange 2010? Why or why not? Or do you use another vendor? Which one and why? E-mail your answers to [email protected].
Posted by Doug Barney on 05/05/2010 at 1:17 PM5 comments
Has Apple turned to the "dark side" after its handling of the Gizmodo situation? Here are some of your thoughts:
Up to some time ago, Apple looked customer friendly, nice to everyone and even their cute commercials of PC vs. Mac became popular.
Ever watched the TV series Supernatural? Where one of the guys at a certain point goes completely dark?
I'm wondering what is going on? It started with Apple asking editors to increase ebook prices (amazon priced them at $9.99...then Apple came and made them raise to $15.99). After that, the crusade against Adobe Flash, and finally the police and Apple raiding the Gizmodo editor's house.
But in the end, the real question is: Did apple change? Or has been like this all along?
-Dave
Apple is a dangerous company run by a weirdo.
Geekdom has a large percentage of weirdos -- that's why they're geeks to begin with. Birds of a feather flock together, so they worship the Apple weirdo. When the weirdo passes away, Apple will fall like a deck of cards. Just like it did last time.
-Anonymous
The term ‘sinister' is a little over the top. Maybe heavy-handed is a better term for the case at hand. Nevertheless, Apple is every bit as self-serving as Microsoft, or any other company out to make money for its shareholders. Not cuddly at all!
Apple is as insistent on protecting its interests as any other successful company. They are no more or less moral than any other corporate entity. Such entities are amoral. Only humans can actually be moral or immoral (ethical or unethical, if you prefer) in their actions.
The real difference between Apple and any other company is in the genius of its marketing department. Apple (mainly through its founder, Steve Jobs) makes people want products they don't need -- and they want them so badly that they will pay exorbitant prices from the IT equivalent of ‘scalpers' to be the first on their block to own them.
Apple products are sexy in every conceivable respect -- to the point that you are willing to pay premium (some might say exorbitant) prices to own them.
Is this bad? Not necessarily. Every company decides which customers they seek. Mercedes-Benz is not fleecing people who buy their cars -- but they really are not all that interested in attracting the average Chevrolet owner -- and neither is Apple interested in attracting the average PC owner. Apple wants to sell to people who will buy a premium product in the first place, and then go back to Apple to buy software -- be it applications, music or video content!
Most people compare Apple to Microsoft but they are really quite different. Apple's customers are all consumers. Apple makes very little effort to attract enterprise customers. Instead, enterprise customers get the same 5 to 10 percent off their prices as any other volume buyer. For this reason alone, Apple does not sell a lot of product to the enterprise.
Microsoft, on the other hand, markets to OEMs -- companies who sell computers or the enterprise which uses lots of computers -- and buy large numbers of licenses with little or no media changing hands. Microsoft is not too interested in dealing with people who BUY computers because they buy software licenses, one at a time. Microsoft OEMs are another story. Companies like Dell offer enterprise customers 20 percent or more in discount pricing in order to sell and ship large numbers of systems all at once. Microsoft takes a small profit on a very large number of licenses and the consumer/customers goes to the OEM for aftermarket support.
Whether you are buying from Apple or from Dell/Microsoft, Mercedes-Benz or Chevrolet, the rule is caveat emptor. Know exactly what you are buying and why -- and don't blame the company that sold you their product because you didn't do your research.
-Marc
Share your thoughts with the editors of this newsletter! Write to [email protected]. Letters printed in this newsletter may be edited for length and clarity, and will be credited by first name only (we do NOT print last names or e-mail addresses).
Posted by Doug Barney on 05/05/2010 at 1:17 PM0 comments
SharePoint Services 3.0 and Office SharePoint Server 2007 are both affected by an elevation of privileges flaw.
Similar to a recently announced IE 8 flaw, hackers use cross-site scripting to wage attacks. Here, malicious code is embedded into SharePoint-based Web pages. Similar to phishing scams, users are led to these sites through spam.
The lesson here? Don't just rely on patches, but train you end users to avoid clicking anything that is the least bit suspect.
Do you train your users in security? Does it work? Share your best advice with us by writing to [email protected].
Posted by Doug Barney on 05/05/2010 at 1:17 PM0 comments
Microsoft isn't just fighting Google's Android in the market (a battle that will heat up with the release of Windows Mobile 7), it may also wage a patent war in the courts.
Microsoft has patents upon which Android apparently infringes. Microsoft reached an agreement with phone-maker HTC which releases them from patent action.
This deal legitimizes, to some degree, the Microsoft patents, making it easier for Redmond to press its case against Android creator Google -- which I'm sure they'd love to do.
These cases may be legit, but they can also harm users as royalties drive up prices and sometimes good technologies are yanked. And if a patent war ensues, I'm sure Google has plenty to pester Microsoft with.
Are patents an evil that only harms customers or a necessary protection for true inventions? Send your thoughts, royalty-free, to [email protected].
Posted by Doug Barney on 05/03/2010 at 1:17 PM9 comments
There is now an embedded version of Windows 7 aimed at thin computers, industrial devices and other machines that used embedded OSes. Both HP and Wyse have already announced thin clients using the new OS.
What does this mean? My guess is that as reliable as embedded-OS devices are, they will become more so with Win 7.
Windows 7 Embedded also now supports Media Center, giving it a play in set-top boxes and other entertainment devices.
Am I wasting my time telling you about embedded operating systems, or do they have a role to play in your shop? Come clean at [email protected].
Posted by Doug Barney on 05/03/2010 at 1:17 PM1 comments
In more than a month's time, a flaw that allows hackers to launch cross-site scripting (XSS) exploits against IE 8 should be fixed.
Microsoft has already patched an XSS hole, but security researchers have found new forms of XSS attacks, prompting the new patch.
This type of attack is pretty tricky. It requires a Web site that lets outsiders post content. Then those users have to click and follow a link to a malicious Web site.
Posted by Doug Barney on 05/03/2010 at 1:17 PM0 comments
After Doug discussed the problems associated with upgrading to the newest Microsoft OS, here's what a few of you think regarding Windows 7 compatibility testing:
Our experience with Windows 7 application compatibility has been very positive.
The only small hang-up is our very old accounting/ERP system. The only way we could get it to function was by turning off user account control. We had the same issue under Vista, so this was not a surprise to us.
A somewhat larger problem had been hardware compatibility, especially for printers. The printer compatibility problems are even more problematic on the 64-bit version. For example, we have a couple of HP Color Laserjet 2600n printers. These are vista-era printers. Under 32-bit Windows 7, no problems. But under 64-bit, the printer will work fine via USB, but becomes very difficult to get working over a network.
However, all that being said, nothing has been show stopping. We are bringing in all new computers with Win 7 factory installed.
Here's an aside on app compatibility -- sometimes "run as administrator" just isn't enough.
In my off-time I am a PC gamer, so I 'play' with my computers at home quite a lot. I just can not list the number of games and other programs that won't run under Vista/Windows 7 until User Account Control is disabled. I don't recommend turning off UAC to most folks because the security benefit it provides is well worth it. UAC is fundamentally behind much of the compatibility grief with older software. So if you absolutely need to run something, try disabling UAC and hope you stay safe on the net.
-Dennis
Either an application is compatible with Windows 7 or it's not. Few (if any) applications should be dependent upon features found in "Professional" which are not found in lesser versions of Windows 7.
I assume they chose "Professional" because it's the least feature-rich (and least expensive) edition which is designed specifically for business networks utilizing ADS. Kind of a "lowest common denominator" for business apps.
Maybe the point is that if they are running under Windows XP Professional now, then it may 'require' Windows 7 Professional.
Let's be honest though, the NT 6.x kernel was designed specifically to enforce Windows XP certification standards. Programs which were certified to run under XP should work fine.
Sadly, many applications written for XP ignored Microsoft programming standards and never sought certification. The problem was even worse for in-house developed programs and drivers.
Microsoft did not enforce those standards because they were more concerned about supporting legacy applications than they were about protecting the integrity of the operating system. That has all changed.
Microsoft paid a high price (and is still paying a high price) for not enforcing standards under XP and then not driving home the point with its ISVs during the Vista launch.
Undoubtedly, late adopters (those still on Windows 2000/XP) will continue to suffer until all of the software has been upgraded. (But Microsoft will be the one getting the black eye!)
-C. Mark
One reader shares his thoughts on Palm in the wake of last week's buyout news:
Five years ago I got my first Palm, the Treo 650 -- solidly built (it's still working perfectly), stable platform, lots of great apps, free and paid.
But the single-tasking became a problem in a fast-moving world, and Palm was too slow to address that deficiency -- especially outside the U.S. where Windows-based Palms weren't readily available. So came the move to Windows Mobile on HTC -- which had to wait until 6.1 for decent message threading, and whose hardware is nowhere near as well built.
Time to upgrade again, so I was looking forward to the Pre, having monitored its release a year ago. But, after a year, there is still no real take-up by developers. On top of which webOS doesn't support my (coerced) investment in Windows Mobile apps. In any case, the Pre has not been type-approved in South Africa yet.
Hmmm... hopefully HP will take the highly-promising webOS and make use of its marketing muscle and worldwide reach to increase turnover. This would ensure that Palm doesn't die out.
-Ian
Share your thoughts with the editors of this newsletter! Write to [email protected]. Letters printed in this newsletter may be edited for length and clarity, and will be credited by first name only (we do NOT print last names or e-mail addresses).
Posted by Doug Barney on 05/03/2010 at 1:17 PM0 comments
This is from my associate, Lee Pender: "We're putting together a story for Redmond magazine about the worst experiences you've had with software licensing. Has the Business Software Alliance or Microsoft ever raided your office? Have you had trouble clearing your name? Have you actually had to deal with a problem you didn't even know existed? Send us your worst tales of licensing woe -- confidentiality guaranteed, of course. The address is [email protected]."
Posted by Doug Barney on 04/30/2010 at 4:59 PM3 comments
Years ago I read a book, "Piloting Palm," which chronicled why the Palm handhelds were so dang hot. Turns out founder Jeff Hawkins was obsessed with creating the most efficient, not the most feature-rich interface possible. Palm simply worked better and ran longer -- and much this was based on what seemed to be minor design decisions.
Hawkins has long since left, and Palm has slipped greatly.
HP thinks it can bring Palm back and paid just north of a billion dollars for the company. The company is serious about Palm and plans to invest big bucks to move Palm's webOS to more devices and platforms.
Have you used Palm? What would it take for you to come back? What's your mobile device of choice? Answers to any and all questions welcome at [email protected].
Posted by Doug Barney on 04/30/2010 at 1:17 PM2 comments
With Microsoft's Vail hitting beta, one reader discusses his thoughts on Home Server:
I tested WHS RC on a 1 GHz PIII machine, purchased and installed the WHS OEM version when it was released and have been running backups on occasions ever since. WHS works well. Each service pack has installed without glitches using a wide variety of disk drives, both internal and USB external.
I don't presently use any of the file-sharing features.
WHS has one glaring unmet requirement -- off-site copy. My current WHS machine is not 64-bit capable so an upgrade to Vail will be big decision. Without wizards or other procedurized means for off-site copy backups, I am hard pressed to see improvements that warrant new WHS hardware and software. I am not an expert in the new Vail WHS version but I have observed any references to the off-site copy requirement. I am keenly interested in whatever future direction guidance Microsoft may be giving in regard to the off-site copy requirement.
-Eric
Here's another opinion on Windows XP reliability after news broke of a security hole associated with the OS and McAfee Antivirus:
I've never experienced an XP crash in all the years I've been using it. I can't remember anyone else in my department ever complaining of such a thing.
I've had applications freeze up, but I usually have 40 things open and I'm starting and stopping code in Visual Studio in debug mode way too fast. And even that is rare and my fault, as I've probably written something that the system just can't handle or haven't waited long enough for the pieces to properly fall back into place. But during normal usage, never. Same for Vista. And I give these OS's a workout, believe me.
And crashes, never. At least, as of me writing this. Hope I'm not jinxing it.
-Anonymous
Finally a reader writes in to discuss Microsoft's overall vulnerability after Barney discussed a report that says most problems come from third-party software vendors, not the OS:
I have used Microsoft products professionally since 1983. The critical jump in reliability for me came with the jump from Windows 95 to Windows NT4. (Windows 98/98se/Me were simply too unstable for me to use.) I have not had an attack by malware or a virus of any kind since I took that leap.
Along the way, I have worked professionally with a number of flavors of Unix and even tinkered with Linux. In my experience, Windows has been, by far, the easiest and (ironically) the least costly to maintain.
If one takes a few simple precautions, keeping your Windows system reliable and up-to-date is a snap.
-C. Marc
Share your thoughts with the editors of this newsletter! Write to [email protected]. Letters printed in this newsletter may be edited for length and clarity, and will be credited by first name only (we do NOT print last names or e-mail addresses).
Posted by Doug Barney on 04/30/2010 at 1:17 PM1 comments
If you are running Windows 2000 Server, there is a fix for a fix. Microsoft prepped a fix for a remote execution flaw, only to pull the patch because it wasn't entirely effective.
Now the patch has been done right, and was released earlier this week.
If you installed the first fix, you need not uninstall before putting on the new patch.
Posted by Doug Barney on 04/30/2010 at 1:17 PM0 comments