Things are getting smaller in our tight economy. If you're not outsourced already it's probably just because IT jobs are fairing better than your typical service job. Perhaps one bright prospect in our ever constricting belt-tightening scenario is Microsoft's rollout of two servers aimed at the small business market.
Microsoft last week started letting its TechNet and MSDN subscribers get their hands on Windows Home Server 2011, now available in 64-bit, which supports up to 10 PCs. It also released evaluation copies of Windows Small Business Server 2011 Essentials, supporting up to 25 users with no Client Access Licenses required.
Are these the solutions that small businesses want? Are there good partner opportunities associated with the small business market or are the margins just too narrow. Weigh in with Doug at [email protected].
-- By Kurt Mackie
Posted by Doug Barney on 04/11/2011 at 1:18 PM0 comments
HP used to be my favorite brand of printers. They were cheap, reliable and pretty innovative. The best one I ever had was a LaserJet 1000. This is a major workhorse that, after years of trusty service, finally gave up the ghost. My next laser was an HP 1012, which isn't all that old. Despites its relative youth, there is no Windows 7 driver for the HP 1012, not the 1000.
This is egregious and one of the worst forms of planned obsolesce I have ever seen.
I also have a DeskJet All-in-One 5600, which is fine, but it's slow and rips through ink faster than Fyodor Dostoyevsky (he wrote extremely long books). The HP 5600 has a driver, but it is incredibly intrusive. I tried to remove the Web printing feature and was told it might disable the rest of the driver library. And there's an HP popup for an update that flows off the right side of my screen but can't be closed. And the text doesn't even fully fit into the stupid little box!
I'm sure HP has heard these complaints but doesn't seem to care.
My new printer is a Xerox. I'll let you know how that all works out.
What is your favorite and least favorite printer of all time? Vote at [email protected].
Posted by Doug Barney on 04/08/2011 at 1:18 PM20 comments
The second Tuesday of every month is when Microsoft releases its batches of patches. That way IT only has to spend one day rolling out all the fixes, rather than randomly going around repairing and plugging machines whenever Microsoft wants to release a fix.
Some Patch Tuesdays are light. Next Tuesday will be a doozy.
No less than 17 patches will be pitched IT's way, with eight of them being labeled 'critical.' I know you are tired of me saying it, but remote code execution (RCE) flaws are the key culprit.
IE 6 through 8 have long been plagued by a major flaw which is finally fixed this cycle while Windows itself gets eight fixes that focus on RCE.
Microsoft is taking all the blame. The company says many of these fixes are due to holes in key third-party products. More on this hopefully next week when the patches are released.
Posted by Doug Barney on 04/08/2011 at 1:18 PM4 comments
I'm not a mergers and acquisitions expert. The only thing I'm good at buying is motorcycles, bicycles and groceries. And I'm not too shabby at flea markets. But a couple of my colleagues, Lee Pender and Jeff Schwartz, aren't shy about giving Microsoft advice on what companies to buy. And with a $40 billion cash war chest, Microsoft should be able to afford most of these (maybe with the exception of Facebook, a private company valued at around $50 billion).
Here are a few top prospects: We already mentioned Facebook, but I'd have to see what they have in the pipeline before I agree it's worth $50 bill.
Amazon Web Services is more of a clear-cut option. Amazon is a leader in cloud services, and Microsoft would get an instant customer base it could migrate to Azure.
Citrix could make sense, but Microsoft and Citrix are so intertwined I'm not sure Microsoft needs to give up the cash. Citrix has a market cap a bit north of $13 billion -- about a third of what Redmond has in the bank.
Who do you think Microsoft should snap up? Send your best financial advice to [email protected].
Posted by Doug Barney on 04/08/2011 at 1:18 PM1 comments
We received a ton of responses to Doug's post about his Firefox 4 thoughts. Here's the first batch:
I have Firefox on a Linux machine that I use to access software upgrades I need in my lab (that I cannot get to via the corporate network). Now understand that this is not the fastest machine on the planet but still...
I have found that Firefox sucks the life out of the machine, while Chrome seems to work fine. I haven't looked under the hood, but it seems that Firefox relies heavily on the CPU -- changes to the memory don't seem to make much difference.
-Peter
Firefox 4 installed correctly the first time for me. It also updated on another PC correctly. On my installation, I right click and sort bookmarks, with no problems. I right click and delete a bookmark, no problem. It never has crashed.
Maybe a complete install would have helped with your experience?
Hey, if you want to run IE9, go ahead. Eventually you will have to because Microsoft will force it in some way. However, if you want to run Mozilla Firefox, install it correctly and it will run just fine.
You can shill for Microsoft if you want, but masquerading as being objective is transparent and ruins your opinions.
-Robert
I loaded IE 9. It was blazingly fast compared to IE 8. But, maybe it was just coincidence. Google began stopping me from going to iGoogle from the Google toolbar button and put up a big button saying 'TRY CHROME' on the Google seach page.
IE 9 gradually slowed over several days. I don't know why. Maybe the Java plugin that I had enabled? The ActiveX deactivation/activation tool reminds me of the early versions of UAC -- a royal PITA.
So, I loaded Firefox 4, my first FF ever. You've got to be kidding me! This is the browser everyone raves about? I stayed with using IE 9 for awhile longer.
Finally, I rolled back to IE 8. Now I'm kind of missing IE 9's tear-off tabs. Maybe when IE9 is more mature I'll reload it.
Or, maybe I'll try Chrome. It was pure sh*% the first time Google wanted everyone to try it out. I don't know about these guys -- idiots run amuck in the Google playroom? If Chrome doesn't work this time I'll never touch it again.
-Rich
Mozilla moved the 'open in new tab' to the top of the list when you right click a link. In the previous version it was the second choice so, consequently I keep opening pages in a new window rather than a new tab. That is really annoying...
-Chad
Sometimes when you click the Firefox 4 icon, it opens up a ton of windows. Started with two and by the end of the day, if I clicked Firefox, it would opening 14 windows at once. All blank. I went back to IE 9 within a day, which has its own quirks, but at least I only get one open window.
Ultimately I found a fix for the problem, but I expected a better experience from Firefox. It was my primary browser for years.
-Steven
I find the interface of Firefox 4 much more appealing and usable then previous versions. I am not married to the home button. I use my homepage, move on and never have to reset myself. I auto load three pages on startup also. Also, Firefox 4 seems much lighter on memory usage than any of the other browsers.
The tabs can be set to a lower position if that feels more comfortable to you. The interface can be tweaked to meet your needs. My right click delete works perfectly fine in my five installs. Four are on Windows 7 platforms and the last is on a home server.
Now I have tried to install IE 9 because I liked the beta. Only three of my machines had IE 9 and all three run Windows 7. Two of the three are completely borked, and the third is still running the beta, which is like a non-curable disease that will not uninstall via any method listed as a fix or workaround. I run IE 9 on the fourth Windows 7 machine now and, like I said, it is nice, but after all the fail that happened to three previous machines, I refuse to use it much. Maybe when I do my regular six month wipe and reloads I will attempt the installs again. Until then I say stick with Firefox 4 for low memory usage or Chrome for fast java loading. Use IE 9 for practice fixing your own operating system issues.
-Robert
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 04/08/2011 at 1:18 PM0 comments
I just upgraded to FireFox, and though I am generally a fan, I have a few concerns. On the good side, it does appear snappier. On the down side, it took me three tries to finally install the thing. I also don't like how the tabs are nearly on top of the page. Not to mention the fact that I can't seem to find the homepage button anywhere. I'm sure I can figure it out eventually, but they don't make it easy.
Finally, bookmarking is still far from intuitive. When you go to bookmark a page, it is truly a Mickey Mouse operation to put that page in a pre-existing folder. I ain't the smartest guy in the world, but this really should be a snap.
And FireFox is incapable of properly sorting your bookmarks alphabetically. FireFox 4 has some of my O's after my R's. Come on guys, get the basics right before moving onto to crazy advanced features few of us need.
Oh, and try to delete a bookmark by right-clicking -- the delete function is grayed out... So now I have to go to organize my bookmarks to get rid of just one? Oh, and now Organize Bookmarks is mysteriously hidden. What a joke.
Oh, and it crashes more than a George Michael sports car.
Maybe I should give IE 9 a whirl. What say you? Do you find the same FireFox glitches that I do? Lay it on us at [email protected].
Posted by Doug Barney on 04/06/2011 at 1:18 PM25 comments
On Monday I got an e-mail from the Marriott. I thought it was about my reservation for Tech-Ed in Atlanta next month. No, this "Important Notice" told me that a company I had never heard of (Epsilon) may have inadvertently leaked my e-mail address and related data. Epsilon is a marketing company, i.e. they do loads of e-mail for Marriott and a myriad of other large corporations to manage customer communications.
Epsilon did not give my information away willy-nilly. Instead, some ninny cracked the Epsilon databases, and e-mails like mine can now be used for spam, phishing and other nefarious deeds.
Like before this break-in, common sense makes sense. Any e-mail that asks you for your information, social security number, passwords, etc., beware!
Posted by Doug Barney on 04/06/2011 at 1:18 PM13 comments
Doug asked readers what they thought about Paul Allen's critical look at Bill Gates in his new book:
Why is Paul Allen complaining? First, I think I could do fairly well with the amount Paul made from and with Microsoft. Second, didn't Paul realize early on what type of personality Gates is? Gates is ruthless and without scruples when it comes to building a business (Microsoft), and he doesn't care whose toes get stepped on. All Allen had to look at in the early stages of Microsoft was how Bill Gates dealt with IBM. After all, Gates's fortunes started with IBM and PC-DOS...
Have we all forgotten that the huge monolith known as Microsoft started just as humbly as any other company? And MS most probably would not have gotten as big as it did without having snatched the OS contract with IBM, which Gates then unceremoniously dumped into the ditch...
As much as we may dislike Bill Gates, I say more power to you Bill!
-Anonymous
Frankly, I don't really care. Paul might have felt that Bill was not being fair with him but you know, he DID accept the deal. He DID leave Microsoft. Bill Gates is undoubtedly a shrewd businessman. Paul Allen chose a different path. That's fine.
Criticizing Bill Gates after all of these years is a little like criticizing Gates because he paid $75,000 to Seattle Computer Products for QDOS and then licensed it as MS-DOS to IBM for millions. Had Gary Kindall (of Digital Research) been home one evening, IBM would have done business with him instead of with Bill Gates. Fate has a way of stepping in.
Steve Wozniak chose to go his own way too after he and Steve Jobs founded Apple. Nobody is criticizing Steve Jobs.
-Marc
One reader responds to the overly optimistic forecast for Windows Phone 7:
The IDC report looks like it is assuming (we know what happens when we do that) everyone with a Nokia/Symbian phone today will have a Nokia/WP7 phone in 2015, or that those leaving Nokia will be replaced by Nokia newbies. If that occurs, yes, Microsoft will have a 20.9 percent market share of smartphones and the number two rank. But a chance exists that Nokia owners will move away to the iPhone or Android. According to IDC, this report came from their Worldwide Quarterly Mobile Phone Tracker, which among many other data sets, uses vendor interviews and guidance, a.k.a. Kool-aid. Good call, Doug!
-Scott
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 04/06/2011 at 1:18 PM0 comments
When an industry comes up with as many acronyms as the computer biz, some are sure to sound funky. Remember when Microsoft changed Windows Update Services (WUS) to Windows Software Update Services (WSUS)?
Well not all acronyms with sketchy double meanings have been modified to be family-friendly. I scoured the market and came up with 41 of the sketchiest and sometimes creepiest acronyms.
What across do you find offensive, mildly or not? Give me your best shot at [email protected].
Posted by Doug Barney on 04/06/2011 at 1:18 PM2 comments
April Fools was last Friday (no, really), and I purposely decided not to play any jokes (though my four-year-old daughter Kiley more than made up for it with her pranks directed at me).
That doesn't mean Redmondmag.com didn't have any fun. Web editor Chris Paoli knocked it out of the park with this gem about Steve Ballmer being replaced by the returning Bill Gates. Even some staffers fell for it at first!
A couple of readers pointed out the item couldn't be true because MSFT stock didn't immediately shoot up.
The Seattle Post Intelligencer rounded up the best Microsoft items and posted them here.
Posted by Doug Barney on 04/04/2011 at 1:18 PM0 comments
Here are a couple more responses to Redmond's licensing requirements and procedure:
Just thought I'd chime in about Microsoft Licensing. It is a mess.
We recently signed on for an enterprise agreement. Prior to this, we paid for each CAL and Office license individually, which was cumbersome, but was very easy to know what we were licensed for. With the enterprise agreement, the biggest problem I have is when it comes time to buy something that is not covered explicitly. Often MSFT will give us a discount on items not covered by the agreement, but it seems hit or miss. Also, there are times when the deal through our agreement is not as good as one of the options available outside of our agreement. I cannot make a purchase of a license anymore without calling a licensing specialist.
With regards to Live @EDU / BPOS / Office 365, I was aware of the 'per user, per month' pricing model and have been told that no firm details on what the prices will truly be will be made available for a few months. I do know that they plan to charge the education market for tools that other 'big-name competitors' are offering free of charge. My organization was looking very closely at our options, but it appears as though our mind will be made up for us. I'd rather invest a bit in training on a free tool than pay for a tool and not get any training on it. Either way, I am anxious to see the pricing scheme, but have no plans to pay for this service at this time.
- Chris
The fact that there is a market for a Microsoft Licensing Boot Camp to run multiple times a year says it all...
-Douglass
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 04/04/2011 at 1:18 PM3 comments
A recent Glassdoor survey of employees of 12 tech titans showed how much workers like their CEOs. Topping the list is the recently deposed Google CEO Eric Schmidt, with a 96 percent approval rating. They really do drink the Kool-Aid in Mountain View... This guy puts his foot in his mouth so much his toes are wrinkled.
Bringing up the bottom is our very own Steve Ballmer, with an Obama-like employee approval rating of 40 percent. This is so dramatically bad that I question the survey methodology. I just don't hear this kind of discontent.
One reason Steve's ratings may be lower than others is the fact that Microsoft is no longer a place where you can work for a few years and walk away a millionaire from stock options. It is much more a blue chip, "steady, as she goes" kind of company. And I'm sure the newer, non-rich employees resent the older folks who come to work from their lakeside houses in the latest Porsche.
Posted by Doug Barney on 04/04/2011 at 1:18 PM4 comments