A bill that would let the U.S. federal government unilaterally shut down Web sites suspected of harboring copyrighted material has passed the Senate Judiciary Committee.
The bill, as expected, was prompted by heavy lobbying by the music and film industries.
I believe people and companies should be paid for what they create, but there are far worse things happening on the 'net.
There is child exploitation, unfiltered access by our children to all kinds of garbage, radical recruiting, crime, malware and scams. Is protecting Hollywood profits really more important than all these? I mean, what is it? Is Steven Speilberg late on a yacht payment? Does Johnny Depp need another house in France? Is Nicholas Cage looking for another island?
The ironic thing is that the biggest content thief in the world, Google, goes unchecked while college kids who download a few tunes get sued for millions.
What do you think needs fixing on the 'net and how would you do it? Ideas welcome at [email protected].
Posted by Doug Barney on 11/19/2010 at 1:18 PM5 comments
I've been looking into IE 9 recently (if you want to help me with my upcoming cover story, please write to [email protected]).
The beta so far seems solid. Some of you love it, some have had it chew your machine up and spit it back out.
Now here is where it gets confusing: There is an IE 9 beta that is pretty much feature-complete. I'm looking to interview users of that version, so again, e-mail me at [email protected] if you want to talk.
Yesterday's release was a so-called "platform previews" which is not feature complete and aimed at performance and compatibility testing.
The latest PP (see, yet another sketchy acronym) has improved JavaScript performance and lets developers stress performance through Sudoku puzzles and a 3-D map of the planets.
What do you want to see in new browsers? Tell us all by writing [email protected].
Posted by Doug Barney on 11/19/2010 at 1:18 PM0 comments
Here's a response on Doug's blog entry about Russia looking for Microsoft alternatives:
I was fortunate to spend a week in Russia back in the '90s as part of a teacher exchange program. I spent several days living with a Russian family in Ivanovo, and they scheduled a visit to the local university where I spent several hours with a physics professor. Even though their lab, test and computer equipment were ancient, they did wonders with what they had. Their students were very, very sharp and incredibly motivated and thirsty for knowledge. I was quite impressed with the whole experience.
As for ditching Windows, I could only do that if another OS appeared that offered the same feature set, hardware vendor independence, price point and wide availability.
Although I work with Linux/Unix and ESX on the server side of things, I've yet to find a Linux/Unix desktop that floats my boat.
Perhaps the Russians can exert some market influence that others have been unable to bring to bear (yeah, right)!
-Hg
One reader discusses the differences between the Microsoft and Apple OS offerings:
It would be nice if there was less complexity and confusion and more consistency between Microsoft products. And I agree that products from the same company should be easily configured to get along with each other, but comparing Microsoft to a company with such limited and proprietary offerings poorly addresses the issue.
Apple has only two major offerings: OS X and devices (their only real foray into the "cloud" of which I am aware), both of which work only on specific hardware and, as a result, cost far beyond what most of us can afford. Since the introduction of the Macintosh in 1984, the Mac OS has only been written for three hardware lines: Motorola, PowerPC and Intel.
It shocked me when Apple used incompatibility to compete with Vista when the one word that has accompanied the Mac since it first hit the market is incompatibility. Back when I worked on personal computers people would ask if they should get a Mac and I'd say they sure could, but I would point at their [enter any peripheral device here] and say, "I wouldn't plan on using that though." Even today, an amazingly large number of products on Amazon that should work with any computer will have multiple reviews screaming, "DOESN'T WORK WITH THE Mac!"
There's always the Mac OS X servers, but following the "same basic core" logic, why hasn't Apple changed the landscape of the enterprise network?
-g
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 11/19/2010 at 1:18 PM0 comments
Microsoft has high hopes for the recently released Windows Phone 7 -- hopes that have not yet truly materialized. If this phone came out six years ago it would be a home run worthy of Big Papi (hey, I'm from Boston, what can I say?).
But Win Phone 7 emerged in the worst possible environment. The iPhone is legend, the Droid has gravitas and the Blackberry is the basic workhorse of the enterprise market. No wonder there were no huge lines for the new Windows Phone, which only sold 40,000 in its first day. While that is no true slouch, the phone generated nowhere near the frenzy of the iPhone.
Microsoft has been at the phone game a long time and has more patience than Mt. Sinai Hospital.
My guess? Like ERP, the mobile phone arena is a market Microsoft will never truly rule, but it is devoting enough resources for a credible entry and a decent chunk of the space.
What say you, wise consumer of all things digital? What should Microsoft do to stand out in the mobile phone market? Send e-mail from the device of your choice to [email protected].
Posted by Doug Barney on 11/19/2010 at 1:18 PM5 comments
Bill Gates and Steve Ballmer were reelected to the board as directors by Microsoft's shareholders yesterday. They and Chief Financial Officer Peter Klein fended off some complaints that Microsoft pays out too little to its shareholders. They even fielded a question (that might have come from a Goldman Sachs analyst) about why Microsoft has not broken off and sold its core businesses.
Does Microsoft pay too little to its shareholders? Does it make sense for Microsoft to sell off its core business segments (like mobile OS software) and become more focused on...let's say Windows? Or are some shareholders just being unreasonable? Tell Doug what Microsoft should do at [email protected].
-By Kurt Mackie
Posted by Doug Barney on 11/17/2010 at 1:18 PM2 comments
One reader shares his experience with a new Windows Phone 7 device:
I bit and bought a Samsung Focus Windows Phone over the weekend. I had been reading quite a bit about it and have been following Paul Thurrott's experiences with it as well. After verifying that it would do what my company requires for phone security, I gave up my iPhone 3Gs. I figured, worst case, I could get my iPhone fix from my iPad. With only having it a few days, I have to say I'm impressed with the first version. I especially like how the e-mail/calendar functionality works. Especially the calendar. I hate the way the iPhone's calendar works and rarely use it to set up appointments. I'd simply wait until I had my Outlook client. The look and feel of the Windows Phone is sleek and easy to use.
Are there things that I'd like to see in the Windows Phone? Yep. And I believe that I will get them in the not-so-distant future. Applications are far behind, but most of the ones I used on the iPhone are already available and there are hundreds of new apps being added to the store every day. In another six months I believe that the Windows Phone will begin cutting into the market share of the iPhone and Android, at least from an enterprise perspective.
 P.S. This is only based on usage over the weekend. We'll see how it works in the weeks to come.
-Andy
Â
Doug asked about your mainframe strategy and thoughts. Here are a couple responses:
Today's "mainframe" is not the same thing as the massive MVS-based boxes of the 1980's. Instead, A GREAT DEAL has changed!
"Microcomputers" did not replace mainframes, they replaced Selectric typewriters and ledgers with word processing and electronic spreadsheets.
The mainframes of the 1980s were transaction processors for moving customer data around and making it accessible to anyone with a direct-connected terminal attached to it. Today's "mainframes" also do transaction processing but now they run Unix or Linux and they provide data access to anyone connected to the Internet -- provided they have the credentials which permit that access.
It's true that during the 1980s, microcomputers (especially those from Sun Microsystems, HP and others running various flavors of Unix) permitted smaller transaction processing systems to be distributed to offices and desktops and those systems have now been returned to the machine room -- mostly due to security concerns and the availability of centralized maintenance, common resources and support, but today most of those "mainframes" are really racks of blade servers, with each of those physical servers housing a dozen or so "virtual servers."
Logically, the distributed model of computing that grew out of the 1980s is still distributed into small to medium desktop-like services which are physically housed together in a single location -- often housed on a single physical box, but they are individual virtual servers just the same.
This is "the cloud" and it will prevail -- but so will desktop systems when versatility, flexibility and bandwidth needs trump the need for economies of scale.
Thanks for the opportunity to comment.
-Marc
Sorry Doug, I just couldn't resist since I got my start on IBM 360s and 370s using COBOL 74.
000010 IDENTIFICATION DIVISION.
000020 PROGRAM-ID. Â Â DOUGBARNEY.
000030 AUTHOR. Webster.
000040
000100 ENVIRONMENT DIVISION.
000200 CONFIGURATION SECTION.
000300 SOURCE-COMPUTER. RM-COBOL.
000400 OBJECT-COMPUTER. RM-COBOL.
000500
000600 DATA DIVISION.
000700 FILE SECTION.
000800
001000 PROCEDURE DIVISION.
001100
001200 MAIN-LOGIC SECTION.
001300 BEGIN.
001400 Â Â DISPLAY "I completely agree with you." LINE 15 POSITION 10.
001500 Â Â STOP RUN.
001600 MAIN-LOGIC-EXIT.
001700 Â Â EXIT.
-Carl
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).Â
Posted by Doug Barney on 11/17/2010 at 1:18 PM2 comments
Microsoft Lync officially launched today. The company posted
a nifty infographic on the many ways to use Lync, which makes us wonder who is using it beyond simple instant messaging. Check out the graphic, then comment here
and vote in our poll at
http://poll.fm/2fy0o (takes you to Polldaddy.com).
-By Michael Domingo
Posted by Doug Barney on 11/17/2010 at 1:18 PM0 comments
Cloud talk is ubiquitous, but we seldom hear why organizations can trust hosting companies to deliver their data and applications securely over the Internet. Microsoft, which went "all-in" the cloud in March, has made a few scattered attempts to address cloud security, even though security might prove to be a deal breaker in the long run for its cloud services businesses.
Microsoft's latest explanation comes in the form of a new white paper, announced this week, detailing the general approach the company follows when it comes to cloud security. The company's main emphasis is on its Information Security Management System, based on the ISO/IEC 27001:2005 standard.
No doubt, cloud security at some point becomes a very technical issue. But does a technical discussion really lead to the kind of assurances that organizations can rely on when deciding to outsource their companies' data to the cloud?
It was in 1999 that then-Sun Microsystems CEO Scott McNealy told reporters about consumer Internet security that "You have zero privacy anyway... Get over it." Will organizations accept the risks of cloud outsourcing in the same way? Tell Doug why you trust the cloud to securely handle data, or not, at [email protected].
-By Kurt Mackie
Posted by Doug Barney on 11/17/2010 at 1:18 PM2 comments
Last week was one of the lightest Patch Tuesdays in recent memory, with a scant three fixes covering 11 known flaws. Two of the patches involve remote code execution, that old pest, and the third handles an elevation-of-privilege exploit.
Windows came out clean as the patches are only for the Forefront United Access Gateway and Office.
However, there is still a hole in IE that Microsoft plans to fix next month. Let's hope Redmond coders are faster than the hackers!
While the patch pickings are slim this month, it always pays to install whatever fixes Microsoft offers.
Posted by Doug Barney on 11/15/2010 at 1:18 PM0 comments
There's plenty of times where I'm overwhelmed. The phone is ringing off the hook, my inbox is flooded and I'm behind in all my writing assignments.
Based on a new survey, I now believe that the top bosses -- CEOs in particular --have it far worse. Kelton research interviewed over 500 C-level types. The report finds that big bosses waste time dealing with data that has no real relevance to their decision making. And over half of these execs admit to feeling overwhelmed by all the information staffers collect and present.
Like most of us mere mortals, CEOs also complain of a deluge of Word docs, e-mail messages, PowerPoint presentations and so on.
We've actually made some strides, but I'm not sure they are really paying off. Data mining and warehousing and executive dashboards are all meant to sift the wheat from the chaff. Apparently, none are working as well as execs would like.
The survey leads to an interesting question: If these folks are that busy, why did they take the time to take the survey?
Are you besieged by e-mail, spreadsheets, meetings, databases and all the rest? How do you cope? Your best advice welcome at [email protected].
Posted by Doug Barney on 11/15/2010 at 1:18 PM1 comments
I've long been interested in Russia. My favorite watches are Vostoks, my favorite vodka is Stoli and one of my favorite authors is Dostoyevsky.
Russians are also tops in the tech world. When I launched Virtualization Review I was amazed at how many startups had Russian origins. So when I heard that Russian government is spending nearly $5 million dollars (or 150 rubles) to create a version of Linux that will replace the need for Windows, I had to take it seriously.
The Russian rationale is two-fold: For one, it wants a more secure OS, and for two, it hates being that dependent on Microsoft.
Are you as impressed with Russian culture and technical expertise as I am? Share your opinion, in English, at [email protected]. And would you ditch Windows if you could? Answers to that also readily accepted at [email protected].
Posted by Doug Barney on 11/15/2010 at 1:18 PM2 comments
With this week's commercial release of Windows Phone 7 devices, Doug asks who is jumping in:
The BlackBerry Enterprise Server works perfectly well with Exchange so I cannot imagine that a Windows Phone 7 can do any better. Maybe not even as well...
-Marc
I had a few Windows phones in the past (Palm Treo) and wasn't all that impressed with them. I briefly went to a Blackberry but I never did like it.
When the HTC Hero came out, I checked it out and got hooked on the Android OS. I upgraded to an HTC Evo 4G, which I absolutely love.
I've read about the Windows phones, but I have no interest in getting one, and when I am eligible to upgrade again, the Windows phone would have to offer significantly better benefits to make me switch as I have several apps that I've paid for that I wouldn't want to have to do so again.
I think MS waited too long to come out with their phone and allowed Apple and Android to get too much of a foothold in the market.
However, history has shown that market share can be overcome. IBM was the Big Kahuna and then along came MS. Blackberry owned the market and now look where they are. iPhone looked unbeatable and then Android came along. So, if MS really innovates, they may have a chance. If they strike a good balance between the tightly controlled iPhone where Steve would like to control which screen you look at in what order, and the fragmentation of the Android community with all the versions, hardware platforms and UI skins, they may pull it off.
-Anonymous
I am not usually a first-generation buyer but I am going for WP7. I have been wanting to dump my Blackberry ever since I fell in Lake Michigan with my Motorola Q. The Zune pass, Exchange integration and the apps which will come have me sold.
-Roy
Is VMWare the next Netscape? Here is one response:
Nope, but VMWare is the next Novell. They will still be around in ten years due to the cost of their product, but will be considered a dinosaur by the IT industry. Microsoft has name and flare, Citrix has performance and a tight relationship with Microsoft. VMWare won't be able to squeeze out performance, won't have the MS name and will price themselves out of the market.
 -Alan
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). Â
Posted by Doug Barney on 11/12/2010 at 1:18 PM2 comments