Results tagged “Microsoft” from CLICK

Microsoft watcher Mary-Jo Foley of ZDNet says that the T-Mobile Sidekick data-fail at MS' Danger subsidiary isn't connected to Microsoft's Azure cloud platform.

Instead, says Foley, Danger is responsible for Microsoft's Pink (which is supposedly part of an initiative called Premium Mobile Experience or PMX), MS' planned foray into branded (or co-branded) mobile devices for Generation Y (aka everybody under 30; presumably the rest of us will be Logan's Run-ned, but once again, I digress).

More than obviously, Pink already has quite a black eye.

That's a long title, eh? I suppose I should tighten up on it, but in the wild-west world of blogging, it's writer's choice, am I right?

Anyhow, the two big topics these days are the new apps.gov site which helps government agencies choose cloud-based applications, and Microsoft's unveiling of an early version of its Office Web suite, which brings longtime cash-generator MS Office into the cloud and accessible via a Web browser near you.

So if the federal government is recommending cloud-based applications, and Microsoft is making cloud-based apps, if only to compete with Google Apps (which is eating Microsoft's lunch and eyeing its breakfast and dinner, too), then apps and data in the cloud are starting to look a whole lot more mainstream.

And the city of Los Angeles' interest in adopting Google Apps isn't looking so out there.

I give Microsoft a whole lot of grief in this blog, and it's pretty obvious that the company has been reacting (instead of acting or innovating) since its founding. How can you argue with it? It's probably one of the most successful companies in American history.

And in this case, the development of Office Web is a reaction to the innovation of Google and others in developing browser-based applications.

Still, Microsoft is Microsoft, and Office is Office, and if you're a big entity like the City of Los Angeles, I encourage you to test out all the alternatives, including Google Apps, Microsoft Office Web, Zoho and anything else I've either forgotten to mention or haven't ever heard of.

Many of my fellow users of free, open-source software think cloud computing is going to take away our freedom, hurt open-source innovation and compromise our data. I don't know whether all, some or none of these things will happen.

What I do know is that in the near future, data and apps in the cloud is going to happen, government and the enterprise is already going there, and millions of others will soon follow.

And I believe that there's a place in this paradigm for huge makers of proprietary software, huge Web-based companies, plus companies and developers of software both free/open and otherwise to create new ways of creating, accessing, storing and manipulating the data that we derive from our personal and professional lives.

While I've known about the free, open-source desktop publishing application Scribus, until I happened across this article today I didn't know that Scribus is a cross-platform program that runs not just in Linux/Unix but also on computers using the Macintosh OS X and Microsoft Windows operating systems.

That raises my opinion of Scribus immediately. I strive to use as many cross-platform applications as possible because of the flexibility they afford me across the many operating systems I run. Other apps that fall under this category (and there are more than you'd think) include the Firefox Web browser, Opera Web browser, Thunderbird mail client, GIMP image editor, Inkscape drawing app, Blender 3D-animation creator, Audacity audio editor, OpenOffice productivity suite, Filezilla FTP client, Abiword word processor, Pidgin instant-messaging client.

(Tangential discussion on cross-platform concepts continues ...)

And with the ability to run "true" Unix-like applications on Mac OS X via the Fink Project (and to some extent in Windows with Cygwin), there are many more Unix/Linux applications that have the potential to work across platforms than you'd think.

Add to that the WINE project that allows Linux users to run many Windows apps, and then look at the rapidly evolving world of virtual machines and you can see that we seem to be converging on a point where if not any then at least many applications not coded for different operating systems will be able to run on them in some form or fashion.

But for now, for the unwashed masses that includes me (I've never been all that successful with WINE or virtual machines though moderately successful with Fink), when I see a cross-platform application I immediately want to start using it on every kind of computer to which I have access.

One of the main reasons I'm using Thunderbird to manage my e-mail is the ability to take those files from one system to another and not have to re-learn a different application every time.

So on to Scribus ...

I'm about to get involved with a project where the publishing platform of choice is Microsoft Publisher. I've never used MS Publisher, so I'll reserve any judgments about the application at this time, but it runs on Windows only. Not even the Mac.

And it costs money. It's either part of an MS Office suite (think big bucks) or available on its own for $169.95.

And while I do have a Windows XP box at work, this isn't a work project. At home we have laptops that currently run Mac OS X and the Ubuntu and Debian distributions of Linux.

I don't know if the other people involved in the project I'm slated to be working on are using "legit" copies of MS Publisher, or are stealing it like just about every Mac and Windows user I know does with the apps on their "personal" personal computers.

As I've written many times (the link eludes me at present, or I'd link up to something suitably sanctimonious), I'm both uncomfortable and unwilling to steal software. That's why I pretty much quit using Windows on my "personal" personal computers. Besides all the things that Microsoft does that are more than a little distasteful, I love the performance gains I got by using the Unix-based OS X and Linux/BSD operating systems. And at least with true Linux/Unix, I love having thousands of free, mostly open-source applications just sitting there in easily accessed repositories and available to install with a few mouse clicks (or, heaven forbid, a few words typed into a text-based terminal).

So the bottom line is that I hope Scribus does as well as some are claiming, because having a free, open-source application for creating high-quality printed documents, and having that application run on just about every computer out there is just what I'm looking for.

Never mind that I haven't been concerned with actual printed on paper output in more than a couple of years (I leave that to the software that somehow manages to get the Daily News to press), but if I do have to re-enter that world on a smaller scale, I'll be much happier if I can help myself and others shed the confining shackles of expensive, proprietary and often stolen software for all that is free and (hopefully) good.

My first step will be to install Scribus on my Ubuntu 8.04 LTS laptop and try my hand at a few document layouts that I'll output to PDF (increasingly the standard for high-end printable document output; yep, even the Daily News uses it) and then present right here.

Cnet's Microsoft reporter, Ina Fried (disclaimer: we worked together back in the stone age) has some interesting things to say about how Microsoft should respond to the Google OS threat — by acting more like Apple.

ZDNet's new Community, Incorporated blog (written by recently minted OpenSuse community manager Joe "Zonker" Brockmeier) links to a CNet post about Microsoft applying for a patent on something called metered computing.

The idea is that Microsoft will sell you a really cheap, subsidized PC and then charge you continually for its use. And yes, MS points out in the application that a user could very well pay more in fees than the PC is worth.

From CNet:

Microsoft's patent application does acknowledge that a per-use model of computing would probably increase the cost of ownership over the PC's lifetime. The company argues in its application, however, that "the payments can be deferred and the user can extend the useful life of the computer beyond that of the one-time purchase machine."

The document suggests that "both users and suppliers benefit from this new business model" because "the user is able to migrate the performance level of the computer as needs change over time, while the supplier can develop a revenue stream business that may actually have higher value than the one-time purchase model currently practiced."

"Rather than suffering through less-than-adequate performance for a significant portion of the life of a computer, a user can increase performance level over time, at a slight premium of payments," the application reads. "When the performance level finally reaches its maximum and still better performance is required, then the user may upgrade to a new computer, running at a relatively low performance level, probably with little or no change in the cost of use."

And what if you don't pay up? According to the patent application, there would be a mechanism to turn off your computing faucet.

Remember, this is all speculation; it's just a patent application. But if MS is trying to patent this idea, chances are they're seriously considering implementing it.

Gives new meaning to the term "Microsoft tax," does it not?

If Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer were to make a Windows commercial, it would be very much unlike those "crafted" by Bill Gates and Jerry Seinfeld.

In fact, Ballmer has already done this. Watch the above video, if you dare.

And don't think that Seinfeld hasn't done TV ad duty for Apple as well (look for him at the end of this "genius" ad; I think it's a legit ad and not something put together by Apple fanboys to make a point, but I can't be 100 percent sure ... and I really don't know how Seinfeld fits in with Gandhi and Picasso):

For those of you who don't know, I've been writing a weekly tech column for the Los Angeles Daily News. It's usually available on the Technology page, where I've archived as many past columns as I've been able to find in the system.

This week's column is Stealing is still stealing. It's about the ethics of proprietary software. Is it OK to steal non-free software? How does free, open-source software factor into this ethical stew? It's nothing I haven't covered in this blog before, but it is a bit more up-to-the-minute as far as where I'm at goes:

Microsoft charges what it does because that's what the corporate market is willing to pay. And if the average guy sitting at home can pay hundreds of dollars for software, they'll take his money, too.

To a company like Microsoft, they'd prefer that home users steal its software and become familiar with it rather than use anything else. That way, when those same people go to work, they'll demand their bosses pay for the programs they know.

Bill Gates is talking about using Microsoft technology to end the tyranny — TYRANNY, I TELL YOU — of ... telephone numbers.

I ripped this Gates quote from the ZDNet blog items linked above:

"Right now the mobile phone, the desktop phone, the e-mail that you have on the PC, or instant messaging, these are all very different things, and the issues about how much of your information or your schedule, your current activity you share with people who communicate with you is not well designed.... By bringing together all of these kinds of communication, we can greatly simplify them. We can get rid of phone numbers, have it so when you say you want to contact someone, based on who you are and where that person is, they can decide whether to take the call or take a message about that, and so a great efficiency improvement that can be made there."

It's all part of a product called Echoes that uses Windows Live Messenger to somehow synchronize contacts across mobile platforms.

I can't say I understand a damn thing about it, so I won't.

To clear up that understanding, here's another ZDNet item from Microsoft-focused Mary Jo Foley:

Phase 1 of Echoes will provide carriers with a variety of services, ranging from a common network address book, to SMS in/out messaging, simultaneous ringing, click-to-call, single-sign on and more.

I need a visual ...

Microsoft didn't get where it is today by being stupid.

And they've got a plan. From the Novell deal over intellectual property in Linux to the company's less legalistic initiatives, Microsoft has its hands in the free, open-source software pie, and it wants to dig even deeper.

Here are a few things to keep an eye on:

• CNet blogger Matt Asay writes about open source in The Open Road from a decidedly business-friendly perspective. He's pretty cozy with Microsoft. And he's all over the Sun/MySQL story. So when it comes to FOSS and the huge corporations involved in it, Matt has a lot of info that we would all do well to keep track of. Again, his apparent closeness to Microsoft might rub you the wrong way, but Matt's perspective is a very important one -- to me, anyway. From Red Hat to Sun, Google, MySQL, IBM and more. I find him less biased and way more realistic than a lot of writers out there. He did work for Novell, and now he's an executive at Alfresco, a company that bills itself as "the open-source alternative for enterprise content management," and if the point doesn't get across, there's this from the Alfresco Web site: "Our goal is to not only provide an open source offering but to surpass commercial offerings such as Documentum or Microsoft® SharePoint® in terms of features, functionality and benefits to the user community." He may be cozy with the huge companies that have interests, positive or negative, in open source, but somebody's gotta be on the inside.
• O'Reilly has a Microsoft-sponsored open-source page called Port 25. It's yet another page we would all do well to keep track of.
• And in the "Microsoft is smart" category, the company, along with Novell, is starting to push Moonlight, an open-source version of MS' Silverlight technology. Silverlight is seen as a competitor to Adobe's Flash, and an open-source version of the software, even if it originates from Microsoft, could gain some significant traction ... or it could prompt Adobe to open-source Flash. (If open-source Flash clone Gnash would work for me, I'd say there's another Flash-killer in our midst, but I need to see an app that actually shows a damn YouTube video ... or anything else).

The average Linux geek isn't going to buy any of this, but Linux geeks in the proverbial basement aren't who this is aimed at.

Instead, Microsoft wants to reach the free-spending people in the enterprise who are now using a mix of proprietary and FOSS solutions. Those IT managers want everything to work better -- and especially to work better together -- and they want to keep people happy, both their users and the people who sign off on their budgets.

In other FOSS news, Microsoft is also pushing Novell's SUSE Linux pretty hard ... in China, as I learned in this Matt Asay post.

I don't think we're going to see an open-source version of Windows anytime soon, but you never know what's going to happen with Microsoft.

So Port 25 and Matt Asay's The Open Road -- both things I need to add to the blogroll.

Google fired its latest shot across the bow, this time aimed not only at Microsoft's bread and butter but at Amazon, too.

Google's new Apps Appliance, which has just been opened -- for free -- to 10,000 developers, enables those programmers to use the open-source Python programming language (with more languages on the way) to develop online applications that will live in Google's computing cloud -- much like the current MS Office-killer Google Apps.

The initiative also aims directly at Amazon, which has not so quietly been developing and marketing its own computing cloud, offering storage, Web, online payment and database services, among others.

And not at all coincidentally, Microsoft is developing its own online-application initiative, with plans to reportedly sell a software bundle that includes the traditional MS Office apps along with online access to those very same programs for those who wish to work that way.

But when Google's in the house, can Microsoft (or even Amazon) play with the big boys when it comes to online apps?

Storage Bits blogger Robin Harris of ZDNet thinks it's Microsoft in full retreat mode:

Today’s mid-range Vista PC is tomorrow’s ULCPC. The reasons vendors
and customers balk at Microsoft’s $50 Vista tax today won’t change.
Consumers will pay $50 on a $600 machine. But $50 on a $200 machine? No
way.

People are realizing that for much of what they do - web surfing,
email, online video - can be handled by much smaller and cheaper
systems. As Linux continue to refine the GUI and simplify its distros,
the Windows advantage continues to fade.

The Storage Bits take

First time users who learn Linux will have no reason to ever pay for
Windows. Just as I deciphered the Apple II’s CLI 30 years ago, today’s
eager, but poor, first timers will figure Linux out.

Microsoft’s Vista is a slow-motion disaster. Bloated and inflexible,
expensive and late, Vista is a continuing drag on Microsoft’s business
flexibility.

For another view from ZDNet, Adrian Kingsley-Hughes says it's time to pull the plug on Windows XP:

Don’t get me wrong, it’s not that I didn’t like XP, but that time
has passed.  Long passed.  The last few XP installs that I’ve carried
out have shown me how painful the process is compared to Vista.  First,
the install process demands that you stand around the system for an
extended period of time to answer a variety of questions.  With Vista
the process has been cut down to a few choices at the beginning of the
installations process and afterwards I can walk away and leave it to
finish on its own.  Then there’s finding all the necessary drivers.  A
system that needs me to find half a dozen or so drivers with XP
installed doesn’t need any with Vista.  That’s a hassle I’m happy not
to have any more

Also, as I increasingly move over from 32-bit to 64-bit, with
Vista I finally have a 64-bit platform that works reliably and allows
me to break the 4GB barrier without having to suffer much in the way of
downsides.  XP Pro 64-bit couldn’t deliver me that no matter how often
I tried.

...

Maybe SP3 will rejuvenate XP a bit, maybe it won’t.  Either way, I
doubt that the service pack will change the fact that XP is long in the
tooth on a number of fronts.  It’s time for me to put my XP CDs into
the drawer of doom.

And what would an analysis of a Microsoft vs. Linux issue be without Rob Enderle, as quoted by eWeek, on the continuing availability of Windows XP Home for ultra-portable machines like the Asus Eee that are currently shipping with Linux:

But to Rob Enderle, the
principal analyst for The Enderle Group, Vista just is too heavy for
many of these devices and likely would not have been sold on them.

"For Microsoft, it was a choice of letting Linux go unchallenged in
this segment or block it using XP, which provides a slightly better
user experience and has some software compatibility advantages over
most of the Linux implementations I’ve seen so far," he said. "They
wisely chose not to hand this market to Linux on a silver platter, but
Linux will improve while XP won’t, and some of the Linux stuff I’ve
seen lately is actually competitive with Apple."

And there's always Steven J. Vaughn-Nichols of Desktop Linux playing up the problems with Vista in another eWeek story:

Goodbye Vista. It has not been fun knowing you.

I predicted that Microsoft was giving up on Vista in January. It seems I was right. Microsoft's own top brass had hated Vista when it first came out, why should they expect anyone else to like it?

Vista SP1 has proven to be a painful upgrade and its performance still lags behind XP SP2 and, the still unreleased XP SP3. Worse still, from a Microsoft executive's viewpoint, Windows is actually losing desktop market share to Mac OS X and Linux. Microsoft never loses desktop market share. But with Vista Microsoft is finally losing customers.

So where do I stand on all of this? My opinion of Windows XP was a whole lot higher a few years ago when I first got my main work box, a Dell with a Pentium 4 at 3 GHz with 512 MB of RAM. I don't thing anybody's eager to run Vista on this kind of hardware, and for the great majority of us, the OS stays the same throughout the life of the box -- there ain't gonna be no upgrading in this office, that I can tell you.

Among the things I'm not happy with are IE 7, which looks better than IE 6 but is dog-slow and doesn't allow me to use it as a full FTP client (which I can still do by opening a "My Computer" window from XP itself, thankfully).

And much of the speed I enjoyed overall when running a fresh XP box has evaporated over the years -- and I have neither the administrator's access nor anybody in tech support who will do anything but wipe the whole box without backing up any of my data (our main publishing system has remote servers, and so our local boxes have no other network storage or backups aside from CD-R discs).

One thing I can tell you is that my 2003-era iBook G4 with OS X 10.3.9 is runniing just as well today as it did when we got it five years ago. Wish I could say the same for XP.

As far as my own boxes, I have one Windows 2000 install left that I never turn on. I'll probably pull the drive at some point and run OpenBSD or Debian on it. I haven't done a Windows install in over a year -- I do have a Win 2000 disc if I need to do it.

I got tired of not wanting to pay for software like MS Office and Adobe Photoshop -- and not wanting to steal it, either, like most of the people out there.

That's why free, open-source software like Linux, the various BSDs and the thousands of applications that run with them are a complete godsend. Why let a couple of very powerful, very rich corporations have such a stranglehold over our technological lives? And no, you're not sticking it to the man by stealing his software either. Two wrongs do not make any kind of right. They shouldn't charge so much, but you shouldn't pirate it either. And with things like Linux, you don't have to.

Yeah, there are quite a few hardware vendors who, like Microsoft and Apple, don't provide open-source drivers for non-proprietary systems and also don't open up their hardware and software specs so others can create those drivers. But there are many vendors who do, who want to create a whole lot of goodwill with the techy-geeky types who run Linux or BSD, because they know these are the kind of people who help others -- both individuals and companies large and small -- make decisions on what kind of hardware and software to use.

And while you can safely run Mac's OS X without a cadre of antivirus and third-party utility products, you can't do that with any version of Windows. Once you pay, you've got to keep on paying to safeguard your system, and even then you can run into plenty of problems.

Don't get me wrong -- Linux, as it exists in today's distributions, is not perfect. But it's getting better all the damn time. And it remains free. And not just free of cost, but free as in freedom.

I'm not saying the world of nonfree software should go away, but for the great majority of users out there, free is what works the most -- and the best.

Free software exists because people want it that way. Most of the developers working on the Linux kernel don't work for free, though many do. Companies that stand to gain from open-source software pay these coders to work on projects that matter to their business. And we all benefit.

I'm not one of those people who say it's Linux or bust. That's why I've done quite a bit of work with OpenBSD especially, as well as NetBSD and FreeBSD. The now open (see, it's in the name) OpenSolaris is going through a rocky patch with its community, but it's yet another alternative, especially for servers. I'm also rooting for projects like Haiku to add more diversity to the desktop.

You see, it's not about free vs. nonfree (although it kind of is). It's about choice, avoiding vendor lock-in and the abuse that comes from that, and about the innovation that comes only from competition. Do you think Microsoft would be working on a next-generation operating system if all these free alternatives weren't holding its feet to the fire? I don't think so.

To sum up, I wholeheartedly believe that freedom on our computers and other devices (be they phones, music players, e-book readers, video devices or just about anything else) is vital to our freedom as a collective people and more importantly as individuals.

So I started with XP's swan song and ended with a "free as in freedom" diatribe. Until next week, that's it from me.