As you know, every year VMware holds its VMworld show, and for the past few Microsoft has crashed the party with a few announcements. This year, Microsoft unveiled Hyper-V Server 2008 R2, a far more enterprise-worthy product than its departmental-oriented predecessor.
Besides Live Migration, which lets a VM easily move from a failing server to one that actually works, R2 has far more capacity. The new tool can address a full terabyte of RAM (I'd like to see the bill for that!) and eight processors, which themselves can be multicore, as I understand it.
While it usually takes two product revs for Microsoft to get things right, Hyper-V is already pretty slick on its second showing. What do you like/dislike about Hyper-V? Send your thoughts -- real, imagined or virtual -- to [email protected].
Posted by Doug Barney on 09/02/2009 at 1:17 PM1 comments
Directions on Microsoft is one of my favorite research firms. In fact, I don't trust many firms or analysts, but Directions on Microsoft I do trust. Nearly all (or maybe all) of its analysts are ex-Microsoft executives.
Analyst Michael Cherry is particularly smart and particularly opinionated. So when Mr. Cherry argues that Windows 7 is a great fit for businesses, I believe him. Cherry's main point is that Windows 7 is a huge improvement over XP and solves the most glaring Vista problems.
I like the Windows 7 release candidate, but have to say that it hangs far more than it should. When my laptop lays itself down to sleep, it often dies before it wakes. That's not good for a human or computer!
Do you have any Windows 7 bugaboos? Send your error reports to [email protected].
Posted by Doug Barney on 09/02/2009 at 1:17 PM3 comments
The Associated Press is a venerable news institution that has brought us solid reporting for 163 years. AP syndicates articles, which means newspapers around the world pay to run them, and that money pays for more reporting and AP's staff of over 4,000 employees. It was a nice little virtuous circle -- at least, until Google and the other aggregators came along and began killing off AP's biggest newspaper clients.
While Google has an AP licensing deal, it shows little interest in paying other news organizations, nor does Google have any interest in developing stories on its own. Instead, it wants to pull those stories into Google News and sell its own ads against them. It's kind of like me selling beer out of your refrigerator.
As he sees newspapers collapsing like over-leveraged banks, the head of AP, Bill Singleton, says he'll track who uses its contents and seek compensation.
Google's top geek, Eric Schmidt, has his own self-serving take on the matter. Schmidt argues that "the vast majority of people only want the free model," which is something the papers better get used to. (Wonder if he'd tell a drowning man to get used to water?) He then lectured newspapers to "understand what my readers want," argued that intellectual property rights are not eroding, then tossed out a feeble free speech reference.
Will you miss your favorite newspaper, and is Google good or bad for media? Reports, analysis and bulletins all welcome at [email protected].
For her part, Redmondmag.com Editor Becky Nagel disagrees with me on the aggregators. She wrote the following to me a few months ago after reading this article:
I like how the AP says that the aggregators are relying on "misguided legal theories." The underlying case law for the application of summaries in for-profit publishing was decided years ago when mainly legal book publishers tried to sue other publishers who summarized their findings. They lost.
I think all this is just the AP trying to extend its Google deal (which it was lucky to get in first place) to its customers in an attempt to stay relevant at a time when newspapers are realizing they can share content with each other without paying anyone. Added bonus: It gets to squeeze cash out of the smaller aggregators who can't afford the legal fees to defend themselves.
Even if they could win, the AP isn't helping anyone. The only newspapers who don't want traffic from aggregation sites are the ones that can't get past the old "we can only sell local traffic" mentality -- the ones that are completely failing online. So now they can all go down together, with the AP leading the charge.
I'm not the only one who thinks this is heading to folly. There's a great follow-up blog post by The New York Times' Saul Hansell who sums up the entire situation perfectly in his first sentence: "If The Associated Press could completely win its war on search engines and news aggregators, it's hard to see that the news association or the newspaper companies that own it would be even the slightest bit better off."
And finally, one more kernel of information: Media moguls such as Rupert Murdoch are now promising to charge for content. So who's right and who's wrong? Write me (free, of course) and express your thoughts at [email protected].
Posted by Doug Barney on 08/31/2009 at 1:17 PM10 comments
So you think your Web e-mail account is safe? Wrong. An increasing number of users, including some Redmond Report readers, are reporting that hackers are breaking into their accounts and using them to mail out worm-laden messages -- to their contacts! Most hackers use brute-force methods to crack your password, and then they're off and running.
Two Redmond Report readers reported such attacks. In one case, Microsoft was very responsive. The other got ignored like Bill Gates at a high school dance.
What's your worst hacker story? Shoot details (worm-free, of course) to [email protected].
Posted by Doug Barney on 08/31/2009 at 1:17 PM2 comments
System Center Virtual Machine Manager 2008 R2 (SCVMM 2008 R2) evaluation version -- whew, what a mouthful -- arrived this week.
Rambling name notwithstanding, it must work fairly well because System Center products remain a bright spot in Microsoft's recently slumping financials. IT pros can give SCVMM 2008 R2 a spin for 180 days and see if they want to buy it when the complete product rolls out in October. The new R2 can even manage virtual machines running on VMware vSphere 4.0 -- imagine that.
Posted by Kurt Mackie on 08/28/2009 at 1:17 PM1 comments
Two of Microsoft's PC manufacturing partners are supporting Redmond's appeal of a final judgment against it in a patent dispute with Toronto-based i4i LP.
Dell and HP both filed amicus curiae documents with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on Monday. Their briefs support Microsoft's appeal in the case which, as Doug covered last week, involves i4i's "custom XML" technology, found to be used with Microsoft Word's .XML, .DOCX and .DOCM document formats. Microsoft will have to stop selling copies of Word that use the technology by Oct. 10.
Both Dell and HP argue that their PC businesses will suffer if Microsoft must comply with the final judgment of the District Court. The PC manufacturers ship Word on the computers they sell, and a disruption in Word sales will affect their operations, the companies contend -- particularly with regard to testing and loading images of the software.
"If Microsoft is required to ship a revised version of Word in Dell's computers, a change would need to be made to Dell's images," Dell's brief states. "Making such a change would require extensive time- and resource-consuming re-testing."
If the appeal isn't granted, the court should push out the compliance deadline 120 days from the appeals court's ruling, both equipment manufacturers argue.
Microsoft critic Groklaw suggested that while end users wouldn't be adversely affected by the loss of Word sales, Microsoft's partners might be.
"End users aren't particularly going to be affected, because i4i told the court it won't go after users for prior infringement, only future, but vendor partners of Microsoft certainly could be affected," Groklaw explained. "I guess they could install OpenOffice.org instead of Word. Hey. Why not?"
Speculation has it that Microsoft will have a patch available before Oct. 10 that will meet the district court's conditions. With Windows 7 slated for an Oct. 22 public release on new PCs, computer makers could still feel the crunch. Oral arguments for the appeal are slated to start on Sept. 23.
And if you're interested, a Microsoft spokesperson provided Redmond Report with Dell's and HP's amicus curiae briefs (though they were censored to remove "confidential information"). The briefs have an almost cookie-cutter similarity in structure and content. You can read Dell's brief here while the HP brief is available here.
Would you buy a new PC without Word? Are PC manufacturers really facing hardship here? Send your answers to [email protected].
Posted by Kurt Mackie on 08/28/2009 at 1:17 PM11 comments
The Free Software Foundation (FSF) kicked off a public awareness campaign on Wednesday called "Windows 7 Sins," which, as you can probably guess from the name, lists seven deadly sins of Microsoft, honing in on its latest Windows 7 OS. (Incidentally, you can check out this feature in our latest issue that covers the seven things Windows 7 did get right.)
The organization advocates that software should be available for free, and not be proprietary. So it's not just Windows 7 that gets the evil eye from the FSF; Vista and even the venerable XP get panned for the same reason: proprietary control. FSF doesn't necessarily advocate open source as the solution. The software just needs to be free, an FSF spokesperson explained to me a few months back. And while this FSF campaign focuses on Microsoft, Adobe and Apple are also in its sights.
People may tend to dismiss the FSF, but it depends on your perspective. IT pros responsible for setting up desktops in organizations have practical concerns that must be addressed. They'll install whatever software is easy to use and supported. Things do go horribly wrong, after all, so organizations will pay to ensure that it's someone's job to provide that support. Really, that's the reason why organizations agree to Microsoft's complex licensing, which does seem rather arbitrary and limiting -- and expensive.
For everyday use, free software is great, except when things go wrong. Case in point: I bought a Dell laptop equipped with the free Ubuntu Linux OS. The OS updates every six months or so. One of the updates wiped out the system's sound. I tried searching for the sound driver online, but failed. I contacted Dell's support and they promised to call me to fix the problem. They didn't. Of course, I guess it's my own fault for not knowing how to control my computer using the BASH command line.
On an intellectual level, can people really object to some of the FSF's claims? The group says that Microsoft is pushing its OS monopoly in the public schools, and that its software accesses your computer, which constitutes an invasion of privacy. Security is a problem with Microsoft's software, the FSF adds.
But the FSF's argument that Microsoft has tried to block the OpenDocument Format seems a bit off. Microsoft is now part of the OASIS effort overseeing ODF. In late April, Microsoft released Office 2007 SP2, which includes built-in support for ODF. So instead of blocking ODF, it seems Microsoft is absorbing it.
The FSF could make a strong argument on the document format front, as many institutions like governments and schools need to keep electronic records that won't disappear along with the Wang word processor. Alas, it seems that Microsoft has actually responded to this issue, and now there's support for ODF as well as Microsoft's Office Open XML document format as international standards.
Overall, the FSF is arguing about the ills of capitalism, which is a big topic. However, in the meantime, I'm wondering if someone can just help me fix the lack of sound in my Ubuntu-driven laptop. Any ideas?
Posted by Kurt Mackie on 08/26/2009 at 1:17 PM14 comments
Microsoft delivered IE 8 to IT shops using Windows Server Update Services yesterday. Of course, you didn't ask for it. It just arrived, like a security update.
Some IT shops may still be using IE 6, but Microsoft doesn't really encourage it. IE 6 isn't standards-based like IE 8, nor does it provide the same level of security. For those still using IE 7, Microsoft tried to ease the transition by adding a Compatibility View function in the browser that switches from IE 8 to IE 7 rendering.
Security certainly seems like a compelling reason for any organization to select a browser, and Microsoft cited two NSS Labs studies that demonstrated IE 8 to be a top performer in thwarting malware and phishing attacks. What Microsoft failed to mention, however, is that it paid for those two studies. What's worse, the studies themselves don't indicate Microsoft's sponsorship.
Is Microsoft's IE 8 the most secure browser? Maybe. Unfortunately, Microsoft may have blown some credibility by not ensuring that its sponsorship was properly declared in the NSS Labs studies. In the research and publishing world, this is a major no-no.
Will your IT shop switch to IE 8 in the near future? Is security a compelling reason to make the switch, or are you more worried about breaking apps? Tell Doug at [email protected].
Posted by Kurt Mackie on 08/26/2009 at 1:17 PM4 comments
You may have heard that Microsoft got into some legal trouble recently because of the XML-based file format in Word. Tony writes in defense of .DOCX and of Office 2007 in general:
It is not like MS (or everybody else) hasn't tweaked file formats in the past! It's called advancing the technology, and if it didn't happen, we might as well be running Word version 2 in a runtime version of Windows 2 (yes, I do have lots of gray hair). The file size improvements are good, but the truly cool improvements will show themselves over the next few years -- Office docs getting easier to integrate into other packages, far more intelligent drag-and-drops, that sort of thing.
It's about time Microsoft tried something new -- hence the ribbon. I think Office 2007 is innovative, and MS usually gets bagged for not being that.
-Tony
More readers share their thoughts on Microsoft's idea to make the Internet less anonymous to make identifying cyber criminals easier:
It has always been my feeling that if you aren't doing anything wrong, then you don't need to worry about being anonymous. Yes, I am concerned about losing certain rights of privacy, but if it is truly for the greater good, then so be it.
-Craig
I go with the "Locks are to keep honest people honest" school of thought. We all know that unless someone goes out of their way to hide MAC or IPs, being totally anonymous on the Internet is already impossible. You can use aliases all you want and still be found.
Nevertheless, I put the issue of children having access to the Internet and its content on the parents, not the government. The more we let government intrude into our lives, the less we can control them. Every time the government gets involed "fixing" something, it gets broken worse.
-Bruce
Meanwhile, one reader takes issue with Doug's description of the more ardent free speech advocates:
I never thought I'd see the words "free speech" followed by the word "nuts," but then it takes all kinds, I guess. Luckily, you're free to say something that stupid.
-Anonymous
Tell us what you think! Leave a comment below or send an e-mail to [email protected].
Posted by Doug Barney on 08/26/2009 at 1:17 PM0 comments
Last Friday, Doug wrote about Microsoft's plan to "de-anonymize" the Internet to unmask hackers. Richard likes the plan, but for a different reason:
Totally agree with you. It's all too easy to say whatever you feel like when you can hide. If you are bold enough to criticize, put your name after it.
-Richard
Meanwhile, other readers worry about how that information can be used against law-abiding citizens:
Quis custodiet ipsos custodies is as pertinent today as at any time in the past. Secret phone surveillance (when identified) has been found to have been directed at NON valid targets way too often. Look who's doing the searching: young, gung-ho, non-confrontational kids who could not question their government-appointed bosses.
I'm sorry you think that increased surveillance (excuse me, tracking) will make the world safer. But every technological device developed to gain the upper hand for GOOD has been subverted to crime or repression. Every advance begets its counter-agent. You raise the point yourself: Increased repression already demonstrated within North Korea, China, Tibet, etc by using Internet tracking and identification. Yeah, the downside is that there will be scams, hate-mail and hijacked video. And this is different from before the Internet...how? But the sycophantic momentum is gurgling forth, and all this and more will come to pass. Brave new world.
-Anonymous
I fear that just as some dozens of millions of credit card credentials have by now been compromised and put to identity theft use (what with the loose security at PayPal, TJMX and elsewhere), there's no hope at all that any scheme to provide Internet authentication data for private individuals won't meet the same fate. I'd rather some Internet creep proceed anonymously than wreak his/her havoc while impersonating you or me.
-Fred
I refer you to a quote by one of your own countrymen: "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
-Anonymous
What do you think? Leave a comment below or send an e-mail to [email protected].
Posted by Doug Barney on 08/24/2009 at 1:17 PM0 comments
It's official. Microsoft will fight a court order denying the sale of Word in the U.S. The approach is two-pronged. First up is a hoped-for emergency stay, which will be heard Sept. 23, a solid month before the ban is to go into effect. At the same time, Redmond is seeking a full appeal.
My guess is that this will still be settled out of court. Meanwhile, new patent suits appear to be cropping up, as noted by InformationWeek.
Posted by Doug Barney on 08/24/2009 at 1:17 PM0 comments
I was driving on Cape Cod this weekend when I chanced across an honest-to-goodness hippy -- Jimi Hendrix shirt, worn-out pants, long tangled hair and ratty beard. But it wasn't, in fact, an honest-to-goodness hippy, as this dude was around 20 dressed just like me back in 1974. Ah, but what's old is new again, in fashion, music and even hacker techniques.
Case in point: A bunch of low-life hacker losers attacked sites in South Korea and the U.S. last month with moderate success. These guys (or gals) aren't the brightest hackers the world has ever seen; they simply stole old techniques and code and flung it at unpatched computers to see what would stick. Unfortunately, some of it did.
The lesson? Patch, patch and patch some more.
Posted by Doug Barney on 08/24/2009 at 1:17 PM0 comments