We used to just have alpha and beta software. Then Microsoft came along with a complicated new nomenclature with pre-release, CTPs, RCs, RTMs, TPs and (finally) GA. This is more complicated than the code itself!
And when it comes to IE, we also have a platform preview (PP), which means the interface is really there, but developers can test the engine and core functions.
IE 10 is on its second PP, and the main item of interest is HTML 5, whose graphics will likely turn SilverLight and maybe even Flash into flashes in the pan.
The browser wars have certainly given up a ton of new features, but I don't think they have fundamentally changed the way we surf. I used Netscape and the first rev of IE, and now have IE 9 and Firefox 5 -- I see little difference between the two pairs. Am I a browsing dufus or have browsers really not advanced much over the years? You tell me at [email protected].
Posted by Doug Barney on 07/06/2011 at 1:18 PM1 comments
A particularly vile rootkit called Popureb had many advising victims to clear their hard drives of all traces of Windows and do a total reinstall.
Fortunately, Microsoft found a way to remove this little demon without all the fuss. But some experts think the advice of starting from scratch was probably right the first time, and that the only way to truly excise the malware is a full system rebuild.
Have you or your end users been hit by Popureb? If so, what was your cleansing method? Experiences and advice equally welcome at [email protected].
Posted by Doug Barney on 07/06/2011 at 1:18 PM1 comments
With the release of SP1 for Office 2010, it's only fitting to catch up with your present thoughts on the Ribbon:
You asked about 'What do you think of the Ribbon?' Versus the Office 2003 approach Tabs?
I use both and have used Office 2007 for almost three years now and still can't come to terms with 'intuitive nature' of 2007 vs. 2003. In general, I'm only looking to perform the same activities that Word 5.0 could manage -- the desktop publishing features seem to cloud ordinary work. Mind you I have been in the IT industry for 41 years and was a very early adopter of word processors and spreadsheet tools.
I have written code and developed systems and processes for many of the Fortune 50. Perhaps my legacy aspect is the limiting factor on wanting to adopt 2007. It lacks intuitiveness for me, just as WordPerfect was created for editors and those using bookmarking and markup characters, WordPerfect lacked intuitiveness for me as well but I understood all the crazy keystrokes were customized for a specific industry group.
I would have to think a little more to come up with the most annoying specific issues that I find bothersome, but, suffice it to say, I have migrated to the OpenOffice environment on my latest home laptop and plan over the longer term to minimize or disassociate from MS completely. Ribbons belong on packages like GIFs.
-Rick
I hate it and despise it also in Excel. I use classic menus for Excel and Word and cannot find anything.
-Allan
Microsoft should take the 'brilliant' team that revamped Word and Excel with its Ribbon in 2007 and hang them from the tallest poles at the entrance to the Redmond campus.
I've been using spreadsheets and word processors since they were invented, and I was all for making these products more intuitive and user friendly -- not just for heavy users but everyone. The Ribbon was a huge face plant. NOT intuitive, NOT user friendly. It caused an enormous waste of time to transition when working on my client's new computers and actually made the user experience worse. Burying obvious features several levels deep and not in an obvious place was unbelievably frustrating.
If they did usability testing, they didn't listen very well.
-Dwight
The Ribbon is awful. Maybe it's not the Ribbon per se -- the menus are illogical and non-intuitive. If I want to edit the existing header in a Word document, I have to go to the INSERT tab. Microsoft broke many of the things that were working fine (hey, maybe that's why it hid them deep in the Ribbon somewhere). And it's not just the Ribbon that broke things, it's what MS put in it -- once I find that Insert->Header location, I get 25 useless new preformatted styles. I've never used them, and I've never seen anyone else use them.
The Charts and Pivot Tables are probably the things it broke the worst. If there were any reasonable alternatives to Word and Excel, many people would be moving to them. Personally, I did the Office 2010 free trial, and when it expired and they wanted money, I went back to 2003 knowing that I'm not really missing anything. I dread the day when I have to force the executives off of 2003 and onto 2010 -- I'll have my resume ready.
-Todd
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 06/29/2011 at 1:18 PM3 comments
With most Microsoft products, we spent months (and sometimes years) talking about them before they actually ship. Often when they arrive we stop the jibber jabber because they didn't live up to all the anticipation.
Now we'll have to see if Office 365 will live up to the hype -- this puppy is now officially available.
Redmond magazine writer Jeff Schwartz interviewed a bunch of Redmond Report readers beta testing the product, and the reports were pretty good. Features were abundant, and the price wasn't too shabby. The biggest problem: performance was dictated by network latency -- never a good thing.
Here are the key issues to contemplate: Does this make economic sense? Is the performance good enough to keep the IT person who buys it employed? And how reliable is the service and data protection?
But to get the real skinny, I'll turn it over to Ian, a regular Redmond Report contributor, who said this:
"I've just put my first customer on the cloud using Office 365. Their first comment was, why is it so slow? But for $6 per user per month (P1 plan) that's a bargain compared to BPOS.
But, back to UC. The Lync on Office 365 is dumbed down, just like Exchange, and you can't use Office Communicator (MOC) AND Lync on the same computer. Lync isn't compatible with OCS 2007 R2 and MOC isn't compatible with Lync Server 2010. Now that's a problem. Let's hope Office 365 Service Pack 1 has some answers. Microsoft bought Skype, but what they need is Vonage. Wonder if they have enough cash left over to buy Vonage?
I'm not sure the cloud will ever be as big as anyone hopes. Not a single customer wants to go slower. Ever. Go ask any computer user if slower is OK and see what they say. Opening a large PDF on the cloud can be agony."
Posted by Doug Barney on 06/29/2011 at 1:18 PM2 comments
A couple weeks ago I was hit by a scareware virus, one that run fake virus scanners and fake alerts saying your system is infected. The alerts were correct, I was infected -- the scareware creeps are the ones that installed the virus.
And with the clever ones, you don't even have to click anything for installation. I got mine reading an old Hotmail message from my sister.
These tactics work. The FBI claims a pair of Latvian creeps pulled in nearly $75 million selling antivirus that only removed their virus. Now the young hackers are facing two decades in the hoosegow. Couldn't have happened to a nice pair of jerks.
Posted by Doug Barney on 06/29/2011 at 1:18 PM1 comments
Many IT pros wait for the first service pack before adopting new software. Well, for those individuals, the coast is clear when it comes to Office 2010 and SharePoint 2010, both of which just got their very first service packs.
Here's another bit of good news. Office 2010 users can transfer their hard drive-based licenses to Office 365, and use the same software. And some Office 365 plans allow organizations to add Office Web Apps, allowing access to files from wherever.
For those Office 2010 users who are current with updates, there's not all that much new with SP1 (besides a few new repairs).
SharePoint 2010 SP1 is much the same and is mostly a bundle of previously released fixes and updates. The only really new thing is that SharePoint can now work with Denali, the upcoming upgrade to SQL Server.
Posted by Doug Barney on 06/29/2011 at 1:18 PM1 comments
I have mixed feelings about reports that law enforcement know pretty much everything that alleged child-killer Casey Anthony searched for on her computer. The details are shocking. With her beautiful daughter dead, it turns out there where searches for chloroform, ruptured spleens and other grossness. And as a dad, I am glad this evidence can be used against her in a court of law.
As an Internet denizen, I am less happy. I know we can use private browsing and erase some semblance of where we've been. But our computers (and certainly Google) forget very little.
I have never done anything as awful as it seems this low-life chick from Florida did. So why should I give up my liberty so the prosecution has a better shot at this open-and-shut case?
On the other hand, I've railed against total Internet anonymity because it protects criminals, creeps and hackers.
Can I have it both ways? I defer to your far better judgment by readily accepting your missives at [email protected].
Posted by Doug Barney on 06/27/2011 at 1:18 PM6 comments
Just think of what a couple decades can do. Twenty years ago the Feds were all over Microsoft for abusing its operating system and productivity software monopolies. While Microsoft still has ridiculous amounts of market share, for some reason those antitrust charges were dropped as permanently as the O.J. Simpson murder rap. Oh, there were some findings against Microsoft, but the teeth were softer than Grannie Clampet's.
The new monopoly is Google, and now the U.S. FTC is scrounging for evidence of Google abuses. Here the feds are trying to prove that Google dominates search advertising (duh) and abuses this position to take over other businesses.
And get this: One of the witnesses against Google is good old Microsoft which claims that Google doesn't share information with its competitors. Did the Redmond lawyers really say this with a straight face?
Posted by Doug Barney on 06/27/2011 at 1:18 PM3 comments
I've been covering unified communications (UC) for nigh onto 20 years. Back then it was about blending voice mail with e-mail -- and not much else. These days it's all about IP telephony, Web conferencing, IM, presence and blending voice with e-mail.
With these new features, UC is finally starting to make sense. I recently interviewed about a dozen very pleased customers of Microsoft's offerings. Now UC is moving to the cloud, primarily through Microsoft's Office 365, which includes a hosted version of Lync, Redmond's latest UC tool.
But many in IT say, "Not so fast, Buster." In fact, the sour news comes from a survey that a Microsoft partner, Azaleos, paid for. A scant 10 percent of respondents said they will use UC over the cloud in the next 12 months. Almost 60 percent lament the lack of control and inability to customize as the major stumbling blocks. Another possible deal breaker: Can one really trust the cloud to stay up and available?
These are, indeed, the early days of the cloud, and providers need to provide proof that their wares are secure, stable, controllable and customizable.
What do cloud providers need to do to get more of your business? Share your thoughts with this newsletter's readers by writing [email protected].
Posted by Doug Barney on 06/27/2011 at 1:18 PM0 comments
Readers sound off on the issue of viruses invading Microsoft products:
I too battle similar issues on a regular basis. And as you have stated, AV definitions are used against themselves to develop malware that won't be detected, but I have to say two things:
- Although at the present, Macs are not likely to be targeted for such shenanigans due to market share (compared to Windows,) one day, when they are, I think we will see a similar discomfort.
- This Rouge AV software (as I like to refer to it) needs a level of authority to wreak havoc on a system -- i.e. Administrator or Root permission. Since deploying Windows 7 64-bit with UAC, I have not had to rebuild a system yet (whereas before, with XP running as Administrator, I average about one system every two to three months.) One of my biggest pushes to Windows 7 64-bit was the increased layer of protection offered by UAC and Low Priority IE8 functionality.
I've seen just as many attempted malware installs on the new machines, but the success rate has been very low (if the malware is configured to NOT modify the system, but to just make additions to the local users files -- assuming it can get approval by the user to get downloaded in the first place).
Obviously, all of this can be circumvented by a gapping security hole in a program, but that is why I also focus on limiting the programs installed on a system to only what is needed (vs. installing a program to see what it does then never using it again) and then actively maintaining those programs. Or, run a program (like PSI) regularly to uncover known security holes.
Either way, sometimes I find it difficult to imagine a system that can do everything we ask of it (without the slightest bit of protest) while at the same time expecting it to follow our intent versus our actual behavior.
-Travis
Running any computer as a 'local admin' rather than as a 'standard user' today is like building a beautiful new home with the latest security system, gates, window and door locks available, then leaving all the gates, windows and doors open, and the security system turned off. Don't complain when unwanted intruders come in and wreck the place.
Is that the builder's or architect's fault?
-Ken
I had thus far been a Microsoft 'lifer.' I, like many others, owe my career and livelihood to Microsoft and the PC revolution it helped pioneer. But the viruses, spyware, and the horde of careless vendors that bolt their sloppy products onto the Windows platform have challenged my loyalty for the last time. I'm sending you this note from my new MacBook Pro. I can attest to the very real allure of Apple's 'halo effect'. It started with my iPhone, which I reluctantly bought because Microsoft left me stranded with its on again, off again smartphone vision. It was Microsoft's fault, really. But the iPhone lead to the iPad, lead to this MacBook.
I've had every manner of Windows device -- from building my own 286 clones back in the day, to the last PC I'll ever own, a laptop tablet; to handhelds -- yes, I even owned the original iPaq the day it came out; to servers meant to manage the many Windows devices around my home. I've had every version of DOS and Windows available. I've been in the game professionally for over 20 years now, having written my first programs as an adolescent on a TI80 hand-me-down from my grandma, a college professor at the time. I was once a Microsoft Certified Trainer, teaching Windows NT and consumer operating systems, back when there were less than 300 people in the world certified to do so. I was a professional developer, systems administrator, and then moved on to manage teams of other developers and administrators. But in the end, I've given up on Microsoft's 'relentless mediocrity.'
If there's to be any future for Microsoft, I believe a serious management shakeup is in order -- maybe even something more dramatic, like breaking the company up by market segment. Steve's got to go, for starters, but others too. There doesn't seem to be anyone running the major product divisions with any real vision anymore. The last time I felt inspired by a new product launch was at the Windows 95 pre-launch some 16 years or so ago, where we were each given beta copies -- nearly 30 floppy disks, as I recall. It seemed like an impossibly huge OS to require all those disks, and I couldn't wait to see what wonders Microsoft had come up with next. But then came Windows 98, ME and a long downhill slide that finally came to rest with Vista. Sure, Windows 7 is good (not great), but it's way too little, way too late.
Only time will tell if the viruses and spyware will infiltrate Apple's products as pervasively as Microsoft's. One can somewhat forgive Microsoft, as its lead in the industry has made them an ever larger target -- the problem has grown as it has grown, forcing it into a reactionary position. Apple, on the other hand, has had plenty of time to study Microsoft's mistakes. It will be inexcusable if Apple fails to understand that it must aggressively engineer security into its products, or suffer the same consequences. I think Apple gets it. Its freakish desire to control the hardware, in an effort to control the user experience, is the same sort of tenacity it'll need to fight the virus and spyware threat to that same user experience.
-S
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 06/27/2011 at 1:18 PM0 comments
Microsoft software is the largest vector for attack ever presented to hackers. The sheer size of the software footprint and the insanely huge user base make it so. Other bits of ubiquitous software such as Adobe Flash are also constantly attacked with new holes found faster than a farmer crossing a prairie dog field.
So I have mixed feelings when Microsoft argues that someone else's software is holier than Billy Graham.
According to Redmond, Khronos' WebGL graphics, used by Firefox and Google Chrome browsers, is a swinging open door with a lighted sign for hackers to enter. Microsoft, not anxious to support the graphics standard that it didn't create, claims it is too easy for hackers to crack WebGL and take over our precious computers. Isn't that the basis of every RCE every waged against Windows, IE or Office?
WebGL is designed to offer 3D and high-res graphics. Could it be that Microsoft simply wants developers to write to IE 9's HTML 5 or SilverLight? I'm waiting for Jesse Ventura to get to the bottom of this conspiracy.
Whom do you believe? Vote at [email protected].
Posted by Doug Barney on 06/22/2011 at 1:18 PM1 comments
Remember when the entire U.S. government was lined up against Microsoft to claim the company abused its monopoly powers? If you are middle-age like me you either remember it well or your synapses have already stopped working.
Those days are long gone. Now Redmond can do whatever it wants, including buying Skype for $8.5 billion and cornering the market on Internet-based telephony and video.
Regulators in the U.S. looked over the deal and can't see any reason to stop it.
This is the same FTC that went after Microsoft before turning the case over to the Justice Department. Amazing what a decade or two can do to government perspectives.
The only thing that can really stop the deal now is international opposition.
Do you use Skype? If so, what do you think? I'm dying to hear at [email protected].
Posted by Doug Barney on 06/22/2011 at 1:18 PM2 comments