IE 8 is edging
closer
to release, and the reaction to the news has been mixed. Some are excited
about a safer, more reliable, more capable Microsoft browser, while others see
just more bloated, insecure software.
Meanwhile, many are giving Google's Chrome a whirl and finding it clean and
fairly fast, but way short on features. In fact, I did a long
analysis of Chrome based entirely on Redmond Report readers' feedback.
An IE 8 release candidate (which is more polished than beta code but not quite
ready for release -- so it really should just be called a late beta) is due
out the first quarter of next year. For me, I'll wait for fully finished code
before blasting or toasting the new release.
Posted by Doug Barney on 11/24/2008 at 1:16 PM0 comments
Dell, FedEx and Allstate are all Visual Studio users and are all being sued
by WebXchange, a company that claims to own e-comm technology that's implemented
in a similar way by the Microsoft IDE.
Microsoft is suing
back, trying to protect these three rather large customers. Hopefully, this
will all get settled soon.
Posted by Doug Barney on 11/24/2008 at 1:16 PM0 comments
Wi-Fi Protected Access (WPA)
has
a new hack -- but only for those that also use Temporary Key Integrity Protocol
(TKIP). TKIP traffic can be decrypted, so your passwords, corporate info and
love notes could well be compromised.
The answer? Moving to WPA 2 or adding the Advanced Encryption Standard.
Posted by Doug Barney on 11/20/2008 at 1:16 PM0 comments
You gotta love Steve Ballmer. Here's a man who doesn't need to work but toils
harder than any of us, speaks his mind the way many of us could only dream,
and heads a company that makes more profit in one day than the big three automakers
make in a year. Ballmer is just plain interesting.
Yesterday, Ballmer was in his element, helping to oversee the company's annual
shareholder meeting.
Despite overt pleas from Yahoo shareholders and the resignation
of Yahoo's CEO Jerry Yang, Ballmer has less interest in buying Yahoo than
he does bailing out the auto industry -- which Microsoft could actually afford
to do (or at least try). As I've suggested here many times, Microsoft would
be better off spending its billions in cash on building things no one of has
ever thought of, not buying me-too technology.
Ballmer, who always answers my e-mails but I'm pretty sure doesn't read my
newsletter, agrees. He told shareholders the company must continue to invest
in smart people doing pure research as well as product development. And like
all of us, Ballmer is tightening the old Microsoft belt, and is actually looking
toward a shrunken head count. Layoffs, anyone?
In other news, former Microsoft president and longtime board member Jon Shirley
retired as a director. At one of the last shareholder meetings, Shirley gave
me a ride in his black Porsche 944 to a Microsoft reception. Shirley, along
with Mike Maples, was one of the truly great Microsoft presidents.
Posted by Doug Barney on 11/20/2008 at 1:16 PM0 comments
If you're bombarded with malware -- and I've gotten an
earful
about scareware from many faithful Redmond Report readers -- free help from
Microsoft is on the way.
Excited? Sorry to bring you down, but the reality is this new free help won't
arrive for at
least a year.
I have no clue why Microsoft announced this so far in advance. Viruses and
other rogue code scum are a problem now! What should we do with this
information -- not use Trend Micro HouseCall (which I love) or defer re-subscribing
to McAfee or Symantec?
The good news is that it seems Microsoft will get rid of its problem-plagued
Live OneCare, a direct but less effective competitor to solid partners like
Trend, Symantec, McAfee, Sunbelt and others.
Posted by Doug Barney on 11/20/2008 at 1:16 PM0 comments
On the heels of yesterday's
deluge
of letters about the "Vista Capable" labeling suit, here are more
of your thoughts on whether Microsoft should win or lose:
M$ should lose. The (assumed) point of the Vista label was to provide
a quick ID to the general public, implying that "you're all set"
to enjoy all the features we advertise, without the need to investigate further.
Those with enough tech savvy to investigate further would find readily
available info that there may be limitations with the labeled hardware, but
this would only point out the label was "misleading." Hardly a defense.
-Jack
I hope Microsoft pays through the nose. This was a fraud perpetrated on
the average consumer and it needs to learn a lesson.
-Curtis
If it runs any version of Vista, then it meets the test. It's dirty marketing.
MS may win this lawsuit but it will lose the trust of its customer base. If
it's wise, MS will make a concession and allow free upgrades to licensed owners
of Vista.
-Jeremy
One might assume that anything labeled "Vista Capable" would
be better off using Windows XP! But more on the point, if savvy tech people
are misled by labeling practices, then Microsoft is playing word games and
should be held accountable for misleading a public that is much less savvy
about such things.
-Paul
As a consumer, a "Vista Capable" machine should be able to run
Vista out of the box, without any additional modification. In my case, I am
running Vista Ultimate SP1 on an Inspiron E1505, 1GB memory. The machine is
"Designed for Windows XP" and is labeled "Vista Capable."
Since it runs Vista without problem, I take "Vista Capable" as being
an accurate statement.
-Jim
It depends on what you mean by "Vista Capable" machines. Does
this label mean that the machine must be capable of running all the eye candy
such as Aero Glass and other graphics-intensive, eye-catching features? Or
does this label mean that the machine must be capable of running Vista? If
the latter is the case, then most older Pentium 4 PCs with at least 2GB of
RAM and all dual-core processors with at least 1GB of RAM are Vista Capable.
I installed Vista SP1 Enterprise Edition on an older Compaq Pentium 4,
1.8Ghz W4000, which I gave to my wife. After upgrading it from 1GB to 2GB
RAM, it runs just as good or better than XP ran on it. I gave my daughter
my old HP nc6120 laptop with 2GB RAM running XP. With the latest available
Wi-Fi driver, it kept disconnecting continually from our home wireless access
point (using WPA encryption). I did a fresh install to Vista SP1 Enterprise
Edition, and it runs better now than when XP was installed, and has not disconnected
from our home wireless network ever since. Now, if the machine must be able
to run Vista as well as all its eye candy to have a "Vista Capable"
sticker, that is a different story.
-Asif
I'm really not one to complain, but if we are talking semantics, then
M$ may lose this one. I'm thinking that if you have a product that can only
be used in ONE fashion, then it should be clearly stated. There are multiple
versions of Vista available and many beginners would not have the vaguest
clue about which one they would want for their particular needs. Somebody
should have taken a little extra time on product label design so this would
not be a problem.
-Edward
I think Microsoft should win. Here is my defense of that statement: To
me, it is no different than a car manufacturer stating 33 MPG, and in the
real world getting 25 MPG. By that I am saying, if you did drive as claimed
by the letter of the test that claimed it got 33 MPG, then in fact you would
be as close to achieving their claim as stated. This MPG claim has been going
on for years.
I could go on with more examples, but this one clearly exposes the "devil
in the details" as good as any example I can think of.
-Scott
You know, like in car sales, there has to be an asterisk to show that
the ad doesn't imply you get everything. Like air conditioning, cruise control,
which size engine, etc.
This IS what Microsoft omitted doing and given the nature of marketing
and legalities for other products, I'd say it's guilty of being outright misleading.
-T.
I think that Microsoft damaged the reputation of Vista so badly by allowing
those stickers, it has already paid the price. By saying those low powered
boxes could run Vista, many people had a horrible first experience with Vista,
and those same people are still using XP to this day.
Also, many of them told people about it, and those people still "hate"
Vista. Some of those people buy things in the corporate world, and they did
not adopt Vista. Microsoft is already paying for this.
-Anonymous
This is yet another Microsoft way of putting a spin on the Vista fiasco.
Either a computer runs an OS or it doesn't. For the public to have to differentiate
the multitude of Vista versions available and determine which ones a computer
can run is borderline absurd. Set the bar high as to what is needed to run
Vista. Then, any of the less robust versions of Vista will run better than
expected. Hardware is so inexpensive these days that it is foolish to take
the approach MS has taken.
-Scott
Fortunately, when we purchased my daughter's new laptop, we listened to
the sales associate and bought a higher-end machine. Vista is OK for her on
this platform and does pretty much what she needs (but I still like Windows
XP).
The bottom line is that I am sure there are a lot of folks out there
who were misled. There is such a thing as truth in advertising. Microsoft
should lose this one -- and it will either way, in terms of legal fees, should
this go to court.
-Tom
I for one think that the whole Vista Capable logo was a complete line
of bull. I have not read all of the documents and e-mails that have been made
public on this matter, so I do that not have the perspective on the case.
But I have always thought that the logo program was to be used to show that
a PC was capable of running the OS, be it slow at times. And now we have a
new logo that was being introduced just so manufacturers could continue to
ship lower-end computers that are already coming through the retail channels.
This label was very deceiving because it clearly states that the computer
is "Vista Capable." Why not say "Vista Basic Capable"?
One simple reason: to try to deceive the consumer into buying hardware that
is not really capable. But they may not notice since so many different people
are buying computers now.
There is a very wide range of expertise and understanding in your typical
PC consumer these days and this label was developed and used in hopes of continuing
to sell a sub-standard experience and users would not understand.
-Chris
Share your thoughts on this issue -- or on any of the other topics covered
here -- by leaving a comment below, or send an e-mail to [email protected].
Posted by Doug Barney on 11/20/2008 at 1:16 PM0 comments
Within 24 hours of releasing an
item
on the Vista Capable program, I got 25 e-mails from Redmond Report readers --
which may well be a record. Thanks to all who wrote! We'll run as many of these
letters as we can, so check in tomorrow for more:
Microsoft should win this suit. Who buys because a sticker on the box
says it can do something? Most of us read reviews first and check the specs.
But then, phishing scams wouldn't work if everyone was that way.
-Bill
Microsoft should lose this case. If the logo is "Vista Capable,"
then it should apply to any Vista product. Microsoft should have incorporated
it for the computer hardware that could run any of the Vista products.
It is definitely a misleading statement and users don't need the frustration
in these trying times. It might direct them to the nearest Mac.
-Karen
My own feeling is that Microsoft ought to lose this one. It quite obviously
betrayed its own standards by lowering the specifications it set for qualifying
for the label to apparently help Intel meet its quarterly financial target.
HP apparently thought it was a rotten deal. I doubt if it's the only one.
Even though I use Vista on my personal desktop and notebook PCs and really
have no complaints about it, I think that the sooner Microsoft can successfully
leave Vista in the rearview mirror, the better it will be for us all.
Notice I said successfully; Microsoft really has to succeed with Windows
7. Maybe it could be called the "Magnificent 7." Do you think that
name would raise the bar too high? The current promotional campaign isn't
hitting a note with me. Life without walls? What kind of nonsense is that?
If you don't have walls, you don't have anywhere to hang your Windows. Truly
goofy.
-Dennis
"Vista Capable" should mean what it says. I think of this as
a consumer-satisfaction issue. Everyone who buys one of these "Vista
Capable" machines and tries to use it to run anything but Vista Basic
is going to be a dissatisfied customer -- dissatisfied with the computer company
and with Microsoft. Eventually, they will turn to another company, as they
should.
Any company that doesn't put their customers' best interests first (like
GM with its gas-hogs) deserves what will inevitably happen: going bust! And
it is beyond comprehension that today's "captains of industry" continue
to behave as stupidly as their predecessors.
-Erik
It would seem to me that if it is advertised as "Vista Capable,"
it should run any version of Vista. If it only runs one version of Vista,
then the software company has a legal obligation to say so. That is why some
cars require premium fuel, even when they will probably run OK on regular.
It is good of you to offer Microsoft cover, but it would have been better
if the company showed real concern for the customers. It seems to be more
concerned with damage control than making this right. It is not like it does
not have the money to fix this. If a system won't run Vista, say so. If it
only runs Vista Basic, say so. Microsoft knows when it is being deceptive.
So do you.
-Anonymous
I may not fully understand all aspects of the issue, but it seems to me
that if a machine is only capable of running Vista Basic, then the labeling
should say "Vista Basic Capable" or "Vista Basic Compatible"
or, better yet, "WARNING: This machine is only rated for Vista Basic.
Other versions of Vista have not been certified to operate on this machine."
If I bought a new machine that had a label saying "Vista Capable,"
I would be invited to purchase or upgrade to a version of Vista that has the
features that I want to use. If those features did not work, then I would
certainly want to sue somebody, either Microsoft or the machine manufacturer
who misled me with the ambiguous label.
-C.T.
In the early days of Vista Ultimate, I loaded it onto the only expendable
computer I had access to at work. It was a P4 1.8 GHZ with 512MB of RAM and
a 40GB HDD. I dual-booted this with XP Pro so I could have a look at Vista,
locations of user files and other functions. By the way, the computer had
on-board video, networking. Though with an experience rating of 1, I would
say it was barely capable.
Maybe the ratings could have been simplified to "Capable" (eventually
runs Vista) or "Ready" (will run Vista properly).
-Allan
Throughout its history, Microsoft has been misleading the business world
and consumers. It knew perfectly well the implication of this label, yet it
did it anyway without any form of disclaimer. "Vista Capable" means
to most consumers that the computer can run Vista no matter which version.
I am sure there are many consumers who probably didn't even realize there
were, in fact, multiple versions when it first came out. I just cannot wait
until this excuse of an OS passes by.
-Anonymous
Join the fray! Leave a comment below or send an e-mail to [email protected].
Posted by Doug Barney on 11/19/2008 at 1:16 PM0 comments
Cloud versions of Exchange and SharePoint have been put through their virtual
paces by a bevy of beta testers, who now say this stuff is
good
enough for release. As far as I know, the features are the same as the site-installed
versions.
I'm curious to see a real economic analysis comparing the cost of the subscription
services to installing, running and managing it all yourself. Any answers, readers?
Shoot your conclusions to [email protected].
Posted by Doug Barney on 11/19/2008 at 1:16 PM0 comments
Jerry Yang
resigned
this week as CEO of Yahoo, but given the collapse in stock price and fall
in market share -- as well as the bungled deal with Microsoft -- many wonder
if Yang was yanked.
Yang may have been heckled by investors and the financial press, but let's
not forget his accomplishments. He co-founded Yahoo a decade-and-a-half ago
while in college and built it into a huge brand and a site with many innovative
(at least, at the time they were launched) services like Yahoo Mail.
I'd take 1 percent of Yang's success and be happy.
Posted by Doug Barney on 11/19/2008 at 1:16 PM0 comments
IT jobs never used to be cool. Then everyone -- celebrities, girlfriends and
grandparents -- all got PCs. Now music, movies and the making of the movies
all happen on some kind of PC-like device.
So let's all agree that IT is now undeniably cool. The next step is deciding
which areas are the coolest. Security is hot; it's the place where IT fights
off hackers from China, Bulgaria and the little doofus that lives next door.
But what's
ultra-cool within the totally cool world of security, which lies within
the undeniably cool world of IT?
The security jobs worth bragging about in the singles bar are all front-line
positions. Fighting cyber crime hand-to-hand are the top slots. These positions
include hacker investigators, penetration testers (you pretend to hack) and
forensics. We need more of all three, in my opinion.
What is your dream IT job? Send your dreams to [email protected].
Posted by Doug Barney on 11/19/2008 at 1:16 PM0 comments
Last week Tarkan Maner, the CEO of Wyse Technology, came by the well-lit Redmond
magazine offices for a sit-down. Very cool, very smart, and utterly outspoken
-- just the kind of exec I like. After taking about Wyse's approach to client
virtualization, Tarkan showed me how Wyse software can present a virtual PC
desktop on an Apple iPhone. Slick.
Microsoft is also looking this way and promises now to make its new Web-based
Office apps available
on the iPhone.
Seems to me the Wyse approach is harder; it's showing and manipulating the
actual Windows desktop. Microsoft, it seems to me, is simply displaying its
Web apps on a Web-ready iPhone.
Posted by Doug Barney on 11/18/2008 at 1:16 PM0 comments
Microsoft is
shipping
two new servers aimed at small businesses. Windows Small Business Server
(SBS) 2008 is pretty obviously aimed at smaller shops (not sure if Joe the Plumber
placed his order yet) and is based on its big brother, Windows Server 2008 itself.
SBS also comes with SQL and Exchange -- a one-stop shop.
We've looked at an earlier rev and found it solid, pretty easy to set up (some
readers disagreed with this notion as I recall), but not great at scaling by
making multiple servers work together.
Microsoft is also shipping Windows Essentials Business Server 2008, aimed at
mid-size businesses. I was curious about the Essential product. The press release
wasn't clear on what exactly it contained, and it took quite a bit a sleuthing
on Microsoft.com before it became clear that Essentials is really a higher-end
version of SBS with management software, security and SharePoint added to the
mix, and with SQL Server only in the premium edition.
Posted by Doug Barney on 11/18/2008 at 1:16 PM0 comments