It worked with browsers -- so does that mean it will work with hypervisors?
Microsoft apparently thinks so, as it's now giving
We've called Hyper-V virtually free since it was only supposed to cost $28
(a strange price indeed). Now it's literally free. The $28 price cut was made
during a huge Microsoft virtualization rollout announcing the imminent delivery
of the standalone rev of Hyper-V.
Trying to match the attention this is getting, VMware in turn announced that
customers were eschewing the Microsoft tool (which hasn't even really shipped)
in favor of ESX. The VMware
press release pointed to a couple of companies that recently had large-scale
ESX rollouts. Not sure how that turns into "VMware Momentum Builds as Customers
Select VMware Platform over Microsoft Hypervisor"!
Red Hat Goes Virtual
The greatest virtualization company you've probably never heard of is now
part of Red Hat.
Qumranet was unknown to me before Redmond magazine Editor Ed Scannell
did an interview
with its CEO. I found out from Ed (and CEO Benny Schnaider) that Qumranet
has an open source Type 2 hypervisor. That means the hypervisor runs on top
of an OS (in this case Linux) and the OS runs against the processor.
Red Hat, which paid just north of $100 million for Qumranet, is now hoping
to push this hypervisor, called KVM, as the primary solution for Linux. With
Red Hat's muscle and Xen owner Citrix's love of Hyper-V, Red Hat might just
get its way.
Red Hat also gets a commercial desktop virtualization product out of the deal.
There are quite a few of those in the market already.
Supercollider To Clobber Earth?
The new multibillion-dollar supercollider in Switzerland has many scientists
excited about discovering the origins of our universe -- and others claiming
it will spell
our doom. The collider has the potential to create microscopic black holes,
which turn into larger black holes that could literally eat the earth alive.
My take? The thing is probably safe, but when you're manipulating the very
structures that created the universe, you better be darn sure you know what
Is it worth the risk? Are the fear mongers crackpots or the only ones making
sense? Hurry and send your thoughts to firstname.lastname@example.org.
Mailbag: Microsoft and Standards,
John writes that while new technology is great, backward compatibility is nothing
to sneeze at:
I had a nightmare this past weekend. I dreamed that Office 2007 would
not read all the old Microsoft Word documents. This was particularly terrifying,
because I work at a courthouse and we have more than 10 years of historical
and legal electronic documents from various Word versions that we may have
to read and print. If the most recent version of Word won't do this, we will
have to keep older systems and software versions for that purpose.
For 10 years, I have been telling people to move to a paper-less world,
but the threat of unreadable electronic documents scares me. There has been
a lot of noise in the past few years about electronic document standards.
Microsoft seems resistant to the idea. The threat of having unreadable electronic
documents in the public or private sector is very real and should scare people
to think about standards. I have been using personal computers for almost
30 years and have many documents at home on hard-sectored 5 1/4-inch and 8-inch
floppy disks. I suspect I may never see these documents again. Already, the
3 1/2-inch floppy is fading from use, but how many home computer users have
photos and documents on such disks? New technology is great, but we must have
a backward eye for both legal and personal reasons.
And Dave thinks that you can pan
Apple's Newton all you want -- it still had a few things going for it:
In a recent article, you spoke about Apple's Newton as a big mistake,
and rightly so. Even so, take a moment to reflect on what Apple got right.
No matter what else Apple missed with Newton, one thing it got right was the
form factor. Right now, it would be the ideal size to replace my ultra-Micro
PC and my iPhone. In landscape mode, we could have a virtual keyboard that
we could actually type on. In either mode, we would have a screen big enough
for useful free-hand drawing. Don't get me started about how much better it
would be for videos or the maps we use in navigation. Ideally, we could have
it use cellular IP for everything, including phone and answering service.
With the newer technologies used in producing the MacBook Air, we could have
the whole package in a slim, light tablet. Wow.
In the world of personal computing, the future's so bright, you gotta
Share your thoughts by filling out the comment form below, or sending an e-mail
Doug Barney is editor in chief of Redmond magazine and the VP, editorial director of Redmond Media Group.