Those were more dramatic times than now, with people risking their
lives and taking other great risks for the cause of independence. But
one thing has not changed, and that is the eternal fight between
freedom and tyranny. The contemporary version is much less bloody, and
more sneaky and insidious. It's big businesses invading our personal
privacy in every way they can get away with, and buying and selling our
personal data with no oversight or accountability. We don't even get a
cut of the swag. It's the erosion of our civil liberties, aided and
abetted enthusiastically by business in pursuit of profits, no matter
how unethical. It's the manipulation and ruination of the courts, for
example the insane unchecked litigation by the RIAA that has brought
ruin to so many people, and the never-ending SCO saga. It is absurd
that these weiners should have so much power for destruction and
obstruction. In a sane world their top exec
utives would spend their
weekends in the stocks in the public square, being mocked and pelted
with offal.
Back when the Internet was brand-new, the paint wasn't even dry
when governments and special interest groups started putting up fences,
and trying to control citizen's online activities. I don't know what I
loathe more, this pathological busybody-ness and control-freak
interference in our lives, or the near-ruination of this fabulous
invention by spammers and marketers. I think it all springs from the
same root cause, which is a total disregard and disrespect for other
people, and a willingess to exploit them for any purpose. What's the
difference between a spammer, a marketer, a government censor, and a
vandal?
None.
We've all heard the scornful criticism against idealism, as
though it were something to be ashamed of, and mocking of the
fundamental ideals of Free Software. I'm not embarrassed to have
ideals, I am proud. Ideals elevate us above situational ethics. Ideals
guide us into trying to be better people, and give us strong bases for
making difficult decisions. (Such as No, little Bill, it is not OK to
do anything in the name of making a buck.)
This may seem like reading apocalyptic meaning into Free
Software, and I think it does have nearly-apocalyptic importance.
Openness, accountability, honesty, success based on merit,
community---hey, call me a nasty red Commie, but that sure sounds like
the fundamentals of democracy. Who in the proprietary world is looking
out for us? If it weren't for Free Software we'd be shorn skinless.
Tor, OpenSSL, OpenSSH, PGP, open standards, formats, code, protocols,
free intellectual inquiry and sharing, a culture of stubborn
resistance-- they're more important than ever. Technology is part of
the foundation of modern life, and it's too important to let the greedy
exploiters control it.
Ubuntu Enterprise Cloud brings
Amazon EC2-like infrastructure capabilities inside the firewall. The
Ubuntu Enterprise Cloud is powered by Eucalyptus, an open source
implementation for the emerging standard of EC2. This solution is
designed to simplify the process of building and managing an internal
cloud for businesses of any size, thereby enabling companies to create
their own self-service infrastructure.
Set-up
Users can install Ubuntu 9.04 Server Edition and enable partner repositories.
Ubuntu Server Edition offers easy package deployment and configuration.
Users can configure multiple clusters into a single cloud.
Cloud
Interface
compatibility with EC2 reduces the cost of learning a new interface
when moving from a private to a public cloud. It enables users to adopt
popular management tools for private cloud computing and to develop
skills using the same techniques that they would deploy on Amazon's
popular public cloud.
An
extensive range of popular development services including an elastic
block storage (EBS) equivalent and an S3 compatible storage manager
eases integration.
Support for elastic IP assignment enables users to assign static public IPs to any virtual instance.
SOAP with WS-security ensures secure internal communication.
Support
for instance control operations enables users to reboot virtual
machines. This helps users troubleshoot more effectively.
KVM hypervisor provides users with best-of-breed virtualization technology.
Management
Ubuntu
Server Edition comes with basic 'Cloud Administrator' tools for system
management and a web-based interface for cloud configuration.
Red Hat Announces Premier Cloud Provider Certification and Partner Program to Enable Wider Enterprise Cloud Adoption
Amazon Web Services becomes first member of Red Hat's Program;
providing benefits to end customers, software partners and cloud
providers
RALEIGH, NC - June 30, 2009 - Red Hat, Inc. (NYSE:
RHT), the world's leading provider of open source solutions, today
announced the Premier Cloud Provider Certification and Partner Program,
designed to simplify and expand the adoption of cloud computing by
enterprise customers. The program enables industry leaders in cloud
computing to become certified to offer Red Hat technology solutions.
Premier Cloud Provider Partners will collaborate with Red Hat on
technical support, security updates, hardware certification, sales and
marketing, and business models. As part of the announcement today,
cloud computing pioneer Amazon Web Services will extend its technology
relationship with Red Hat to become the first Red Hat Premier Cloud
Provider Partner.
The Red Hat Premier Cloud Provider Program has been established to
address the increased interest in cloud computing from Red Hat
customers, both in building virtualized internal infrastructure systems
and extending their applications into the clouds. Red Hat customers
seek the flexibility to transfer and use Red Hat subscriptions on
premise and/or in cloud environments, with support and compatibility.
Red Hat customers have also requested the ability to rent elastic
computing by-the-hour with access to consistent, technical support,
security updates, and compatibility with existing IT resources. This
program aims to provide more flexibility for Red Hat customers when
developing and deploying their applications.
In addition to customers, Red Hat has witnessed growing ISV partner
interest in providing cloud offerings based on their applications
certified on Red Hat Enterprise Linux and/or JBoss Enterprise
Middleware. As part of its new program, Red Hat will work with
customers to identify secure, optimized and supported cloud providers,
and will work with ISVs to help enable delivery of cloud offerings with
an on-ramp program that spans technology, business and support models.
"A robust ecosystem of solutions providers is emerging around cloud
computing," said Mike Evans, vice president, Corporate Development at
Red Hat. "We believe Red Hat's consistent dedication to open source and
open standards will further the success of a strong cloud ecosystem. By
bringing together thousands of Red Hat-certified applications, Red Hat
Enterprise Linux, JBoss Enterprise Middleware, and Red Hat Enterprise
Virtualization we aim to deliver the next generation of computing
architectures, today."
Building on the experience of delivering the first supported
operating system and first supported middleware offering for Amazon Web
Services, Red Hat is now growing its relationship by choosing Amazon
Web Services as the first member of the Premier Cloud Provider Program.
"As the demand for cloud based technology infrastructure services
rapidly expands throughout larger enterprises, we are expecting that
our expanded Red Hat relationship will help more customers take
advantage of the scalable, reliable and on-demand resources provided by
Amazon Web Services," said Terry Wise, Director of Partner Relations
for Amazon Web Services.
Test drive Red Hat's cloud solutions on Amazon EC2 at the Red Hat Summit, September 1-4, 2009.
In addition, Red Hat will host the Open Source Cloud Computing Forum
on July 22, 2009 to enable a broad industry discussion on the unique
ways that open source can help to break down barriers to wider cloud
computing adoption. For more information on the Forum, visit www.redhat.com/cloudcomputingforum/.
Red Hat, the world's leading open source solutions provider, is
headquartered in Raleigh, NC with over 65 offices spanning the globe.
CIOs ranked Red Hat as one of the top vendors delivering value in
Enterprise Software for five consecutive years in the CIO Insight
Magazine Vendor Value survey. Red Hat provides high-quality, affordable
technology with its operating system platform, Red Hat Enterprise
Linux, together with applications, management and Services Oriented
Architecture (SOA) solutions, including JBoss Enterprise Middleware.
Red Hat also offers support, training and consulting services to its
customers worldwide. Learn more: http://www.redhat.com.
Forward-Looking Statements
Certain statements contained in this press release may constitute
"forward-looking statements" within the meaning of the Private
Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Forward-looking statements
provide current expectations of future events based on certain
assumptions and include any statement that does not directly relate to
any historical or current fact. Actual results may differ materially
from those indicated by such forward-looking statements as a result of
various important factors, including: risks related to delays or
reductions in information technology spending, the integration of
acquisitions and the ability to market successfully acquired
technologies and products; the ability of the Company to effectively
compete; the inability to adequately protect Company intellectual
property and the potential for infringement or breach of license claims
of or relating to third party intellectual property; the ability to
deliver and stimulate demand for new products and technological
innovations on a timely basis; risks related to data and information
security vulnerabilities; ineffective management of, and control over,
the Company's growth and international operations; fluctuations in
exchange rates; adverse results in litigation; and changes in and a
dependence on key personnel, as well as other factors contained in our
most recent Annual Report on Form 10-K (copies of which may be accessed
through the Securities and Exchange Commission's website at http://www.sec.gov),
including those found therein under the captions "Risk Factors" and
"Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and
Results of Operations". In addition to these factors, actual future
performance, outcomes, and results may differ materially because of
more general factors including (without limitation) general industry
and market conditions and growth rates, economic conditions, and
governmental and public policy changes. The forward-looking statements
included in this press release represent the Company's views as of the
date of this press release and these views could change. However, while
the Company may elect to update these forward-looking statements at
some point in the future, the Company specifically disclaims any
obligation to do so. These forward-looking statements should not be
relied upon as representing the Company's views as of any date
subsequent to the date of the press release.
LINUX is a trademark of Linus Torvalds. RED
HAT® and JBOSS® are registered trademarks of Red Hat, Inc. and its
subsidiaries in the US and other countries.
The findings of a survey by document management software company,
Version One, has revealed that 41% of senior IT professionals admit
that they "don't know" what cloud computing is. Version One carried out
the research with 60 senior IT professionals (IT directors and
managers) across a range of UK public and private sector organisations.
This research follows-on from a similar survey carried-out by Version
One which highlights that two-thirds of UK senior finance professionals
(finance directors and managers) are confused about cloud computing.
Of
the remaining 59% of IT professionals who profess to know what cloud
computing is, 17% of these understand cloud computing to be
internet-based computing while 11% believe it is a combination of
internet-based computing, software as a service (SAAS), software on
demand, an outsourced or managed service and a hosted software service.
The remaining respondents understand cloud computing to be a mixture of
the above.
Despite cloud computing being in the media
spotlight, only a minority of respondents (5%) say that they use it "a
lot" and less than a quarter of those surveyed (19%) reveal that they
only use cloud computing sparingly. Almost half of respondents (47%)
admit that their company doesn't use cloud computing with the remaining
29% conceding that they "don't know" whether their organisation uses it
or not.
Julian Buck, General Manager of Version
One, says, "Although this is only a small survey of IT professionals,
the results are nonetheless very alarming, especially as IT
professionals are the very people that need to understand cloud
computing so that they can explain its benefits to management."
Buck continues, "It is clear from the survey results that there are a
number of contrasting views as to what cloud computing really is, which
is hardly surprising in light of the many different cloud computing
definitions in the public arena. For instance, Wikipedia defines it as
'Internet-based computing' while Gartner refers to it 'as a service'
using Internet technologies. IT expert, John Willis, writing in his
cloud blog says that 'virtualisation is the secret sauce of a cloud'
and provides different levels of cloud computing. With so many
definitions circulating, clarity is urgently needed."
It
is clear from the survey results that there are a number of contrasting
views as to what cloud computing really is, which is hardly surprising
in light of the many different cloud computing definitions in the
public arena.
- Julian Buck, Version One
Only
2% of respondents say that their company is "definitely" going to
invest in cloud computing within the next twelve months whilst 30%
state that their organisations "may" invest in this technology. 45%
admit that they "don't know" whether their organisations will be
investing in it or not with the remaining 23% stating that they
currently have no investment plans. For those who definitely or maybe
have plans to invest in cloud computing, some of the key business
drivers cited include reduction in overheads and paper, ease of use,
cost savings and the ability to provide collaborative tools for
teaching and learning.
Buck adds, "If organisations are
going to embrace cloud computing in the future it's essential that a
single, simplified explanation is adopted by everyone. Failure to cut
through the confusion could result in organisations rejecting this
technology and missing out on the benefits it provides."
Rivals move to flag IBM as anticompetitive in mainframes
By John Letzing, Dow Jones Newswires Thursday 25 June 2009
International
Business Machines Corp. is drawing fresh scrutiny of its business
practices from rivals and critics banking on a stricter antitrust
regime under the Obama administration.
The
CCIA now has added encouragement from a tiny firm backed by IBM rival
Microsoft Corp., which has lodged an antitrust complaint in Europe,
while pressing a related lawsuit in federal court in New York and
sounding out U.S. regulators. T3 Technologies Inc. argues that IBM
unfairly has sewn up the market for mainframes, the powerful machi
nes
relied upon by virtually every Fortune 500 company to crunch data.
Ed
Black, CCIA's chief executive, suggested that IBM's competitive
behavior has worsened since it was freed from a Justice Department
consent decree during President George W. Bush's first term. He's
hopeful federal regulators will take a renewed interest.
"With
the new administration, I think odds are pretty substantial," Black
said."They're doing the same stuff they were nailed for before, and
very blatantly."
CCIA members include T3, Microsoft and Oracle
Corp. The group was formed more than 35 years ago, in part to draw
attention to IBM's dominance of mainframes. Though it was once presumed
dead, analysts say the mainframe business may now become eve
n more
strategic. That's because of the increasing shift in corporate
computing to an Internet-hosted "cloud" reliant upon mainframes, as
well as on other servers plugged into data centers.
T3 contends
that IBM pens in mainframe customers faced with a high cost of
switching to other systems, while refusing to share blueprints
necessary to offer a cheaper alternative.
"We are hopeful that
with the new administration and a stated change in direction, this is
something the Justice Department will take a look at," said T3
President Steven Friedman."Suffice to say, they've been made aware of
the situation."
Christine Varney, head of the Justice
Department's antitrust division, has signaled publicly that the
regulator intends to generally be more aggressive. Meanwhile, Friedman
said he expects to hear soon whether the European Commission plans to
open an investigation stemming from T3's January complaint lodged in
Brussels.
For Big Blue's part, company spokesman Steve
Eisenstadt said that IBM is confident it hasn't violated competition
laws:"The IBM mainframe has been around for decades, and there have
always been competitive options and alternatives to it." Profitable
Niche
Microsoft invested in T3 in November of last year.
Friedman declined to discuss specifics, though a Securities and
Exchange Commission filing from December shows a $1 million investment
in T3, alongside a credit facility worth up to $6 million, courtesy of
an unnamed entity.
A Microsoft spokesman said that while it
isn't a party to T3's legal cases against IBM, the company "believes
there needs to be greater openness and choice" in the mainframe market.
"Customers
want greater interoperability between the mainframe and other
platforms, including systems that run [Microsoft's] Windows Server,"
the spokesman elaborated."That's why we continue to invest in companies
like T3."
Tampa-based T3 develops mainframe technology compatible with IBM software that is designed for small and midsize enterprises.
Microsoft's
Windows software runs on servers capable of some of the work of a
mainframe, and other IBM rivals offering competitive server technology
include Hewlett-Packard Co. and Sun Microsystems Inc., which is being
acquired by Oracle. Eisenstadt noted that IBM mainframes actually make
up a relatively small portion of the overall server
While
a bit player in a larger market, mainframes still are lucrative - a
business line that includes hardware, software and services. Mainframes
function as a cash cow for IBM, according to Louis Miscioscia, an
analyst who covers the company for Brigantine Advisors.
"It's
not explosive from a revenue standpoint, but it's incredibly
profitable," he said, noting that related gross margins are "in the
seventies," meaning that 70 cents of every dollar made is pure profit.
In
2008, IBM said mainframe revenue rose 12.5%, while it shipped 25% more
MIPS, or computing horsepower contained in mainframes, than in the
previous year.
Looking ahead, cloud computing may provide a significant shot in the arm for the mainframe business.
Analysts
generally expect companies to begin deploying more critical
applications and data using the Internet cloud, and IBM and other
companies zeroing in on corporate data centers are expected to benefit.
"They're
very focused on it," Miscioscia said of IBM, though questions remain
whether cloud computing will make heavier use of the servers offered by
rivals. The analyst pointed out that functions such as airline
bookings, which are already based on mainframes, could well be
integrated into a cloud-computing system. Case For Antitrust Action
Unclear
Until roughly a decade ago, large competitors in the
market for mainframes compatible with IBM software included Amdahl
Corp. and Hitachi Data Systems.
When those rivals pulled out,
IBM continued investing."Customers need to go to IBM now to buy new
hardware to continue operating those systems," said IDC analyst Jean
Bozman."They don't have anyone else selling that particular thing."
More
recently, companies such as T3 and Platform Solutions Inc., which was
spun out of Amdahl, developed technology enabling the use of IBM
mainframe software on less expensive hardware. IBM, however, sued
Platform Solutions for patent infringement in 2006, and Platform
Solutions later countersued IBM in conjunction with T3 for alleged
antitrust violations. IBM ultimately acquired Platform Solutions last
year.
"What they've done just isn't right," T3's Friedman
commented on IBM."If you want to buy a mainframe today, you have one
choice in Europe and one in the U.S."
Friedman also said that
IBM's anticompetitive behavior began in earnest shortly after the
Justice Department's consent decree, instituted in 1956 to limit IBM's
monopoly in the computer market, was lifted in 2001.
Yet the
market definition for mainframes may be unclear, with competition
coming in a certain sense from other server products. In addition, a
business not widely seen as a growth enterprise may do little to draw
antitrust scrutiny.
John Harkrider, antitrust practice co-chair
at the law firm Axinn, Veltrop & Harkrider LLP, said the Obama
administration already has proven to be more active in policing
competition.
But Harkrider, who has been retained by the Justice
Department to investigate antitrust issues in the past, said it's
unlikely that IBM will be confronted anytime soon."That consent decree
was during a period when IBM arguably had a monopoly powered on the
hardware side. I'm not sure anyone would make the argument they have
the same influence today."
Antitrust regulators are more likely
to be interested in businesses with "network effects," or a connection
between the value of a product and the number of people using it, such
as software operating systems or Internet search, according to
Harkrider.
Keith Hylton, a law professor at Boston University,
said that companies such as IBM that have operated under consent
decrees are more likely to be able to manage their business in such as
way as to avoid being flagged again.
"It changes their culture,
with lawyers playing bigger roles," Hylton added."They're probably less
likely to get into trouble, or if they do, they'll be better prepared
for it."
For the last eighteen months, the GNU/Linux desktop has been in a period of radical innovation. KDE 4 introduced new features and workflows. Mark Shuttleworth launched Ubuntu on a unilateral redesign campaign, starting with notifications. GNOME announced a new desktop that, so far as anyone can tell, will profoundly change the user-experience.
These innovations are likely to continue for at least another couple of
release cycles, with upcoming versions of KDE scheduled to put social
networking into applications and remote windows on to the desktops of
passing computers.
Yet in the middle of all these experiments, nobody seems to be
asking a basic question: Does the average user want any of these
things?
Personally, I love these innovations, every one of them. I'm a
tinkerer who likes to play with new things and write about them. Some
of these experiments may succeed more than others, and some I consider
outright failures, but I don't tire of any of them.
Their number suggests that the free desktop is in a healthy state and has surpassed proprietary ones, and I'm proud of that.
However, people who share my enthusiasm for innovation seem to be the
minority. Whenever KDE 4 is mentioned in an article online, the
comments are sure to include complaints that KDE 3.5 was better.
Similarly, an article I recently published on GNOME Shell, the basis
for the new GNOME desktop, inspired only condemnations of the program,
even though its final form at this stage is anybody's guess.
Admittedly, commenters may not represent general attitudes. We have
no way of knowing whether they do. Yet the fact that most of the
praises for these innovations come from people who participate in the
projects involved seems suggestive.
Under these circumstances, the free software community needs to
consider the pros and cons of these innovations -- not one at a time,
but as a whole.
Is there a compelling argument for innovation? Or has the free
desktop reached a point where it satisfies most users and any attempt
to change its current state is going to be regarded as an unwarranted
intrusion on the average person's activities?
And, if so, what can be done to improve the situation?
The case for change
On an abstract level, few free software users are likely to find much
that is objectionable in the arguments in favor of innovation.
For example, a year ago, Shuttleworth is reported
as saying, "The great task in front of us over the next two years is to
lift the experience of the Linux desktop from something that is stable
and robust and not so pretty, into something that is art . . . . I see this [need] for free software - beautiful, elegant software. We have to
invest in making this desktop beautiful and useful."
More recently, KDE developer Aaron Seigo defended KDE's upcoming social desktop with similar rhetoric.
Many online services, Seigo points out, are not free software, and
cannot ensure protection of data or privacy -- the implication being
that, in contrast, KDE's social desktop suffers from none of these
problems.
He notes, too, that "The innovation essentially stopped at 'things I
used to do on paper'. I want to do more than just have an easy place to
dump my embarrassing photos of others from last night, keep up a public
journal, read an annotated map or exchange small blocks of text with
others. I want the network to make my computing life more interesting,
more immersive and more useful. The innovation has all but dried up in
social networking, however, and what we have is an electronic version
of the library and post office. A really freaking cool library and
post-office, but that's about it. We can do better than that, can't
we?"
Seigo goes on to say that free software is uniquely positioned to
improve on the current standard. As a community, it already understands
the concepts of community behind social networking. Nor is it
constrained by financial considerations in its quest for innovation.
Then Seigo paints a utopian vision of the possible future: "I see
our computers becoming helpers rather than mildly frustrating tools; I
see services becoming a true web of interacting greatness rather than
silos with the occasional rickety handmade (and often one-way) rope
bridge between them; I see 'social networking' and 'personal rights and
freedoms' being mutually supporting at every level."
Like Shuttleworth, Seigo is invoking the motherhood issues of the
community. Both are talking about concerns close to every free software
advocate's heart. Reading their rhetoric, you can easily be swept away
by its visionary scope, and find yourself nodding excitedly.
Not only are they talking about realizing your dreams, but they are talking about doing so in the very near future.
Who could resist?
The desktop is not a destination
The trouble with the rhetoric of innovators is that it exists on an
abstract plane, not a practical one. Many of the same people whose
hearts beat faster at the rhetoric's promises are likely to behave very
differently when they turn from reading to focusing on what they have
to.
If you have been having trouble finding Linux on a netbook, you
can stop wondering why. I suspected it was being monopoly-crushed.
Here's the smoking gun, at last, thanks to Dana Blankenhorn of ZDNet, who attended a press conference at Computex and asked the right question:
Later, at a press conference sponsored by TAITRA, the Taiwan trade
authority, I asked executive director Walter Yeh (third from left in
this picture) about where the Linux went.
He passed the question to Li Chang (to the right in the picture), vice president of the Taipei Computer Association.
Chang mentioned a press conference yesterday where Google announced an
Android phone to be made by Acer. But then he put it to me straight.
"In our association we operate as a consortium, like the open source
consortium. They want to promote open source and Linux. But if you
begin from the PC you are afraid of Microsoft. They try to go to the
smart phone or PDA to start again."
Taiwanese OEMs would love an alternative to Windows, but the
sale comes first, before production. The chicken comes first. And since
the chicken belongs to Microsoft, the penguin is helpless here.
Mystery solved. Totally blatant. Does this not give legs to Charlie Demerjian's report, MS steps on a Snapdragon?
It appears Snapdragon on Asus is just the most recent horse to fall
down shot in the starting gate and then get dragged off the track.
So next time you hear Microsoft bragging that people *prefer* their
software to Linux on netbooks, you'll know better. If they really
believed that, they'd let the market speak, on a level playing field.
If
I say my horse is faster than yours, and you says yours is faster, and
we let our horses race around the track, that establishes the point.
But if you shoot my horse, that leaves questions in the air. Is your
horse *really* faster? If so, why shoot my horse?
Here's the story on what happened to Android on Asus' EeePC at Computex Taipei, reported by Dan Nystedt and Sumner Lemon on ComputerWorld:
A day after an Asustek Eee PC running Google's Android operating system
was shown at Computex Taipei, top executives from the company said the
project will be put on the backburner for now.
The Eee PC with Android is not ready yet because the technology is "not
mature," said Jonathan Tsang, vice chairman of Asustek, on the
sidelines of a press conference at the show Tuesday.
"For the time being this project is not a priority because our engineering resources are limited," he added.
So, this was a good day for Asus right? A new ARM-powered Asus netbook with Android, the Linux everyone has been talking about, and at a price-point that will given Intel's Moblin 2.0 some real competition. Wrong.
The very next day, Asus' chairman, Jonney Shih, after sharing a news
conference stage with Microsoft corporate VP, OEM Division, Steven
Guggenheimer, apologized for the Android Eee PC being shown.
Shih said, "Frankly speaking ... I would like to apologize that, if you
look at Asus booth, we've decided not to display this product. I think
you may have seen the devices on Qualcomm's booth but actually, I think
this is a company decision so far we would not like to show this
device. That's what I can tell you so far. I would like to apologize
for that."
Is there no regulatory body that can get Microsoft's
fat fanny off of Linux so it can get some air? Instead the DOJ are
investigating *Google*? What Microsoft is reportedly doing is a pimple
on the antitrust regulators' noses. We see it. Why can't you? Where are
you? Please don't wait until Linux is totally crushed.
Let us customers choose what we prefer from a fair and even playing
field, please. I'd like to buy the products that are being squashed. A
lot of us would like to. And we are not being allowed to get the
products that we desire. I don't want Microsoft software. I'd like a
choice. And I shouldn't have to buy a netbook with Microsoft on it and
install Linux myself. I will, but I should not have to.
Update:
A reader collected some nice YouTube videos for us on the withdrawn Snapdragon Eee PC. View them and weep:
AND THEN ADD TO IT A REALLY GOOD SCREEN (they just got to figure out
the multi-touch for these below, and... check out the new videos from
Computex on the new screens:
Videos of power saving direct sunlight readable screen from Pixel Qi
Just
like I don't know what exactly will be in the Ark of the Covenant, I
have the same questions about Windows 7. What exactly is the "treasure"
inside 7? Will Mr Rose be the person to solve the mystery for me?
I recently saw a twit from user stephenlrose , allegedly a "Sr Community Mgr for Windows (IT Pros)" and
asked him the question Openbytes has been asking for many months and
never recieved a proper reply. As readers here have seen, many of the
Microsoft supporters that I've had discourse with are rude and
insulting (IMO) and take great exception to Microsoft products being
challenged and/or alternatives being suggested.
With that in mind, it appears I have messaged someone in a
position of some authority within Microsoft, so I knew that the
childish antics of others would be absent. I'm happy to say that so
far, this is the case.
The question I put to Mr Rose was:
"........ what exactly is the incentive for users to upgrade XP to 7? Is it purely gfx? I would honestly like to know what feature 7 offers that cant be done either natively or via 3rd party software in XP."
And Mr Rose kindly responded with:
"DirectAccess/BranchCache/BitLocker to go with AD support/Federated Search. Visit www.talkingaboutwindows.com for IT pro interviews on why Win 7."
Right, firstly the site runs off Silverlight so it is
useless to me. I don't want to bring up the comments/feelings on that
particular product since we've been there before and the last thing I
want is Mr Rose having a justification to ignore on the basis of a
"trolling/flaming/cyber bullying" claim. I'm not for one minute
suggesting that Mr Rose would choose this avenue, but since its been a
common theme with difficult questions before (in respect of other
people) I decided to be very "gentle"
So lets look at the first part of his answer. I am
going to try to keep this as simple as possible and there are reasons
for this. I believe these type of answers are what convinces the
"average user" that Windows is the only platform to consider. In my
opinion an average user sees a fancy name they cant understand and
presumes its important/unique, ergo they must have that product over
all others.
Bitlocker
This is simply a disk encryption tool. You can encrypt
the contents (or even a whole) drive. That is it. There are plenty of
3rd party alternatives available. Some free, some not. This is not a
feature that is "unique" to 7 since you can do it in XP (albeit by 3rd
party software). PGP is one such package that has built a very good
reputation with this type of software.
Directaccess
From the Microsoft site, I quote "DirectAccess is a new
feature in the Windows® 7 and Windows Server® 2008 R2 operating systems
that gives users the experience of being seamlessly connected to their
corporate network any time they have Internet access." Basically
(unless Im totally wrong here) You can go home and access your work
machines/system/software from there (or any other location with
Internet access). Well, as much as I am blown away with that feature,
again, its something that can be achieved with 3rd party software.
Without going on, I'll simply link you to the webpage in regards to
Branchcache (sounds fancy doesnt it) and you can decide for yourself if
these are features you need, want or are truely "unique" to 7 which
make it a must have purchase.
So
on behalf of all the happy XP customers, whats the feature in 7 that
makes it worthwhile them upgrading their OS? Stay tuned, we may get an
answer.
The reason for this article? I am aware that there are users who
will never move from the Windows O/S. Thats fine, the one thing (I
would hope) most FOSS advocates would hold dear is the freedom of
choice. The reason I ask this question is on behalf of the many XP
users who dont want Vista and are reluctant to move from XP to 7. I am
sure many people would like to know why they have to upgrade their
beloved XP and what exactly is the amazing feature Windows 7 offers
that makes it a must have purchase.
As you can see so far, that question is far from answered. (IMO)
I sincerely hope Mr Rose will come here and respond properly. I
would hope he at least tries to keep it as simple as possible, since
many of my readers have no knowledge or interest in the "tech side" of
computing. Im sure the happy XP users would much rather purchase a 3rd
party package for a feature they needed, rather than upgrade their
entire OS, or maybe I'm wrong?
I ask again, what feature does 7 offer that cannot already be achieved either natively or via 3rd party software in XP?
Here's continuing in the quest to find out what exactly is the "treasure" contained within Windows 7.
On May 14th in a piece colorfully titled "Game Over For Linux Netbooks", Bill Weinberg wrote about a very high return rate for Intel Atom based netbooks:
...an Intel executive has stated that some of its computer
resellers selling Intel Atom-based netbooks have seen 30 percent return
rates.
The Brooke Crothers story quotes Intel marketing chief Sean Maloney
as saying at an investor meeting yesterday that the main reason for the
returns was that the resellers were not being honest with customers
about the shortcomings of netbooks versus Pentium-based notebooks. "
Note that the quoted story wasn't referring to netbooks running Linux. It was referring to all
Intel Atom powered netbooks. I am assured over and over again by tech
pundits like Mr. Weinberg that nowadays almost all those netbooks run
Windows, not Linux.
Did it ever occur to people that Windows might actually be the
cause of the disappointment customers face and the high returns? An insightful analysis in the tech-no-media blog on June 1st says precisely that and asks the question: "Is Windows killing the Netbook?"
... a lot of consumer that had purchased netbooks were
returning them when they realized that these small machines were not
able to perform all the tasks of a full size computer, like playing
games or editing video."
That's certainly true if you're running Windows XP, Windows Vista, or
Windows 7, all of which are significantly more resource hungry that any
of the Linux distributions typically offered on netbooks. When you add
anti-virus and anti-spyware software plus a personal firewall, the
minimum requirements for a safe and secure Windows system, the poor
netbook is so bogged down that performance is poor. The fact is that
many tasks that are painful or even impossible on a Windows netbook are
very doable on the same hardware running a well optimized Linux build.
At the computer show we were at on Sunday [...] there was
another exhibitor there with a Win XP based netbook. In comparison to
my Ubuntu powered netbook it was slow [like] wading through molasses to
use. I commented on this, and the bloke said, well it's only supposed
to be used for Web surfing and such, but I can't imagine that
experience would be any too exciting. I pointed out that my Linux
powered netbook was not only not slow, but was capable of being used as
a highly portable stand in for my main desktop machine, he had nothing
further to contribute.
I managed to demonstrate just how
responsive the Linux powered netbook is to quite a number of people,
and explained to them that with Linux on the machine I was able to use
the netbook as a stand in for my desktop machine while traveling.
It amazed me just how slow the Windows machine actually is. It's no wonder people are returning them in droves."
Like Ms. Barlow I have seen Windows versions of netbooks and was truly
underwhelmed by the performace compared to my own system with nearly
identical hardware running Linux. Ms. Barlow was fortunate enough to be
able to demonstrate the difference between the operating systems in a
public forum. Sadly, even in stores that still carry Linux netbooks
most of the sales help simply doesn't have the knowledge and experience
to do the same. Online retailers who carry both Linux and Windows
netbooks also do nothing to tout the performance and security
advantages of Linux. The typical consumer is used to and knows Windows
so that is what they buy more often than not. They get the system home
and the results are disappointing. Had they only been shown Linux as an
alternative they might have been fully satisfied with their netbook
purchase.
Microsoft may actually be benefiting from this state of affairs. They have been engaged in a full court press to do away with the netbook term completely
and simply tout the systems as small, cheap, underpowered notebooks. If
companies just make the machines a bit bigger and more powerful (not to
mention more expensive) Windows will run fine and customers will be
happy as clams. This also suits some hardware vendors who would like to
move their customers up the product line to more expensive and more
profitable machines.
Like Ms. Barlow I use my netbook for everything and anything. I've been completely happy with my Sylvania g Netbook Meso (review) in the over four months I've had it.
Microsoft and the hardware manufacturers may also be misjudging
consumers. Toshiba sold a lot of Libretto netbooks which weren't
called netbooks from the mid '90s up until a couple of years ago, all
at premium prices. There has always been a market for really small and
really portable. There always will be. This is where Microsoft and
Lenovo and yes, even Dell, HP, and Asus, are all now missing the boat.
If they leave a void in the market someone else will step in and fill
it. Many of the ARM powered systems recently announced are similar to
the original EeePC in size and weight. Some are even slightly smaller
and lighter. Asus wasn't considered a major systems vendor before the
EeePC. The original 7" EeePC running Linux put them on the map. There
are plenty of smaller, upstart vendors offering or preparing to offer
ARM and MIPS based systems under $200, each and every one running Linux
and able to do serious work. I expect some of them will succeed in the
marketplace just as the original EeePC did. The small Linux powered
netbook is here to stay.
Microsoft Chutzpah on Full Display in Attempt to Rename Netbook
Jun 7th, 2009, 8:36 pm
Ah,
Microsoft, that crazy company from Redmond, WA is at again. This time
they want to rename the Netbook unilaterally to the...drum roll
please..."low cost small notebook PC."
As first reported in the Digitimes
last week, Microsoft decided on their own that the name was not
appropriate and they were renaming it. I'm fairly sure they didn't
consult with the rest of the industry about this change, but hey
they're Microsoft right? They can do whatever they please. Of course,
it doesn't mean the rest of the world has to go along.
I doubt very much that anyone was actually looking for a new name,
certainly not Intel, the company selling the chips to power these
machines, which actually coined the term. This is after all a hardware
issue and the last I looked Microsoft doesn't actually make PCs, but
why should that stop them from trying to force an entire industry to
bow to their considerable will.
Even if the Netbook industry were looking for a new name, I'm pretty
sure it wouldn't be from the succinct "Netbook" to the mouthful of "Low
cost small notebook PC." Sure, that rolls off the tongue and should
make the folks who write the marketing copy very happy.
It's Really About Selling Windows 7
Digitimes reports that Steven Guggenheimer, corporate vice president,
Original Equipment Manufacturer (OEM) Division, Microsoft said the
Netbook name suggests it's only for internet use and these machines can
do so much more. On this we can agree, but why change the name? If
Netbook sales were anemic maybe one could understand a pitch for a
change, but they seem to be doing quite well.
Could it be that Microsoft doesn't trust the hardware manufacturers to
name these machines correctly or for the public to understand what they
are without being hit over the head? No, as it turns out that's not it
at all. What it's about is selling more expensive copies of Windows 7.
You see, by creating a new higher end Netbook, they can justify forcing
the manufactures to adopt a more expensive version of Windows 7. In the
end. this is just a ploy for selling a few more copies of the more
expensive version of Windows.
Command and Control
It's moves like this that make Microsoft the target of ridicule. When I
first heard about this last week, my reaction was that Microsoft just
makes it too easy for bloggers like me. You can't make this stuff up
even if it sounds like it came straight from the Onion.
Idiocy, hubris, chutzpah, arrogance? Choose your word. Regardless
Microsoft really needs to find a clue. Sure, I get that they are trying
to sell more expensive copies of Windows 7 by creating a new category
of computers, but this is ridiculous even for Microsoft, a company that
seems to continually trip over its own considerable corporate shadow.
This Saturday is Independence Day in the US, celebrating the adoption of the Declaration of Independence on July 4, 1776, which was the colonies' farewell to King George III and British rule.
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=60ecfd99-fcf0-4a99-a122-a1e2f351eaa6)
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=06dc7418-6698-44a9-9696-16817e1d3382)
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=341af8f6-86c0-4891-9347-5681fa16e64f)
It
is clear from the survey results that there are a number of contrasting
views as to what cloud computing really is, which is hardly surprising
in light of the many different cloud computing definitions in the
public arena. 
- Julian Buck, Version One![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=e6871041-3c27-4ae2-9ee2-8761940e1dad)
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=9357578f-c7b5-4204-a471-b9ba7c8380ff)
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=51c95608-2c1e-4585-ab79-fa49dc599018)
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=f787dcee-a057-49de-ae51-5bccca32b8fe)
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=f650eaca-7c8c-4ee5-ad94-c33589c1d0fb)
By 
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=3bc2f190-82dd-4382-ad2a-3f40c91ee297)
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=fd59272f-b379-4ad8-a45b-fb9b8df8cfc3)
Recent Comments