Posts with tag "Microsoft"

Stopping DRM could be real easy

A shell game we all lose at It is a pretty well acknowledged fact that the majority of tech oriented folks have a profound dislike for DRM (Digital Rights Management) and ballyhoo it as a waste of time; not mention a technology that makes users feel like criminals due to the corporate reliance on it to protect their turf and pocketbooks.

It is a technology that enables media corporations – probably the most technophobic of all types of companies – to try and build a wall around their business model and forces technology users to either use crippled machines and software in order to comply with this archaic method of control, or to break the law on a continual basis.

DRM continues to be used because the majority of computer users don’t have the first clue as to what DRM is. About the only time they come up against it is when some song title or video won’t play or they can’t copy it to watch on another system of their choice. At times like this it’s not the music or video file they’ll blame but the computer or software that they’ll blame. Microsoft or some other OS of choice get’s the blame, the software developer who has to play within the boundaries of specifications get cursed at.

The media companies may want to play a shell game of semantics by changing the name of the technology they use to guard the gates of their fortunes but it doesn’t change the fact that at the core it isn’t the computer manufactures or software developer’s fault when things go wrong.

It is their fault however for allowing this use of DRM to continue. All of the major OS vendors and hardware manufacturers seem to be under the illusion that without bowing to the pressure of the media industry and implementing a flawed technology that they’ll be out of business or at least severely hampered.

What they don’t realize is that they are dealing with an industry that is built on illusions and the thought that the technology industry would fade away to nothingness if it doesn’t comply with DRM; or any other shell game name they want to it, is just another illusion.

If tomorrow every single technology manufacturer and major software OS vendor stood up and said DRM is dead, DRM is making criminals out of our customers and is wrong what do you think would happen in the long run?

Nothing, other than the fact that the media companies would finally be forced kicking and screaming into the modern world.

However there is one important ingredient missing to this scenario and that is consumer backbone. We, in the tech influencer world especially, whine and cry about DRM and bemoan backhandedly acts of DRM cracking but the moment a new toy comes out we are the first to line up to buy crippled products. Whether it be hardware or software we just have to be the first on the block to use it.

So while hardware and software manufacturers may be to blame for allowing DRM to infect our lives we are as equally to blame for allowing it to continue. Companies like Microsoft or Apple won’t enter into a battle with the media corporations if they don’t have to. Companies will always take the path of least resistance to make their money; but if the source of that money is threatened in any fashion DRM would be history.

It’s not like we don’t have any power over the situation, it’s not like our voices aren’t heard – the recent incident of digg.com and a certain integer is a good example of that. Instead what we get is dribbling’s of discontent from the tech blogging world and tech press in general. We can’t expect profit driven corporations to have a backbone if we the consumers keep cutting them off at the knees which we do with every purchase of DRM infected media, software and hardware.

Microsoft and Apple alone could stop DRM but as long as we vote yes to DRM with our wallets this is one fight they won’t take on.

Hey, like this post? Why not share it with a buddy?

My Wallet is bigger than yours – neener neener

Microsoft/Yaho! .. not bloody likely In a move sure to spice up the lives of weekend pundits and enrich the wallets of more than a few Yahoo! stockholders, the story of a possible *cough* merger *cough* between it and Microsoft has hit the b’sphere.

With headlines that range from MicroHoo! to YaSoft the reactions have ranged from “Buying Yahoo would represent a hugely risky bet for Microsoft..” to “But I think what really bugs me is Yahoo! may have no choice but to merge” and even as I write this post the reports are coming in just as furiously that there are no talks in the works. How predictable was that eh?

So now that the stock exchanges are closed and wallets around the world are little fatter one wonders that other than a way for some folks to make some weekend spending cash just how realistic such a buyout would have been. After all other than securing a place in the corporate history books as the largest amount paid for acquiring a corporate name there is a lot that point to this as being a difficult purchase.

As pointed out in the article on WSJ-online (behind subscriber wall – so hat tip to Rough Type for the quote) there is a fairly big and fundamental problem with such an acquisition – the founders of Yahoo!

Top Yahoo executives could be a big obstacle to any deal. Co-founder Jerry Yang, for one, has a reputation for disliking Microsoft and avoids using Microsoft products, says one person familiar with the matter. Top Yahoo staff might leave if Microsoft acquired the company and triggered a vesting of their Yahoo options.

Now supposing that this hurdle was overcome does it make sense for either company to seriously entertain merger talks? On the one hand Microsoft would get a chance to flex it financial muscles; reminding everyone in the process of how much richer they are than Google, and it would give Yahoo! a chance to retire from the game as very wealthy players. On the other hand the inherent problems of trying to mesh two such huge workforces and ideologies are immense.

On top of this is that while the dollar amount of $50 Billion is being batted about as the price of having the party no-one appears to take into the additional costs that Microsoft would incur with such a move. Given that Yahoo! is a portal slash search engine slash advertising platform Microsoft would be looking at what to do with their portal (MSN), search engine (Live.com) and advertising platform (AdCenter) and the billions that they have poured into them all.

Unless Microsoft is willing to make some really hard decisions about cutting off their own properties at the knees after spending billions on them in order to integrate Yahoo! services I don’t ever see such a merger being anymore than rumors to enliven up a boring weekend news cycle.

Hey, like this post? Why not share it with a buddy?

What a waste of an adjective

I might make your life difficult but damn I look tasty. This past week Microsoft caused quite a stir at the MIX’07 conference when they announced the the age of Silverlight and the tie in with a slimmed down cross-platform version of the .NET Framework. Surprisingly the response from around the tech world; even from those that are not Microsoft fans, has been positive even bordering on wow.

This version of wow followed closely on the heels of the Vista wow that turned out to be more of a ya so?… As much as the Vista release may have turned out to be a non-event I think that Silverlight does indeed hold out some serious future wow. That said though our current state of wow sucks big time.

I realize that Microsoft held out great hope and fantastic amount of advertising dollars for the Vista wow factor and even when I was running the RC releases of Vista I liked the OS but I definitely didn’t see anything that bowled me over and made me go running through the streets yelling “Vista is here .. Vista is here”.

So when I finally was able to install the full retail version of Vista I decided to give the big wow calling card for Vista – DreamScene – a try and once again I came away unimpressed. Unimpressed because it is useless and this is not counting the fact that explorer.exe suddenly jumped up by 60,000K and memory usage climbed well into my 2gig of RAM.

With all the hoopla around the Areo interface and things like DreamScene one would have thought that there would have been some serious wow reactions; but I think I know why there wasn’t.

Microsoft is looking for wow in the wrong places. They are looking in the candy store because that is the easiest place to look rather than trying to figure out how to promote the boring things that are done with every release and update to the Windows OS. The fact is that Vista does have a lot of wow in it but the problem is that it is all the boring stuff like networking stacks and IP thing-me-bobs. You know – the type of things that can make you fall asleep sitting at your desk.

Baldy Ballmer has always made a great fuss about being for developers and as a result Microsoft has made the programming part of a developers life fairly easy; dealing with the Windows API notwithstanding, but in doing so they and the developers MS courts with every release of VisualStudio have let the users down.

Life for a programmer may be easy; what with things like Isolated Storage and profile pathing etc, but with each release of Windows and other 3rd party software the user’s life gets more and more difficult. Sure the new eye candy and program skinning makes the user’s computer world prettier but things like DreamScene don’t make the user’s interaction with the OS more productive.

A good example of this is one of the simplest things that just about every computer user comes up against – the famous re-install and the time consuming and soul sucking update dance that always follows. Microsoft may have made things easier for developers when the registry became a universal junk drawer of setting. They may have thought it easier by having massive settings and data files like Outlook’s *.pst file or Windows Live Mail mishmash of *.dbx files. The fact is however that things like have made things incredibly more difficult for the end user.

For the end user nothing is easier anymore whether it being backing up and restoring programs, transferring programs between machines or having to drill down though dialog after dialog to change settings within Windows itself.

You want true wow then stop making what should be simple one point and click actions so damn difficult. Stop making backing up, restoring and moving programs something that nightmares are made of.

If you want some serious wow then start thinking of the users lives being truly made easier instead of giving them chocolates at every turn.

Hey, like this post? Why not share it with a buddy?

I hate countdowns – especially software ones

Windows Vista I found myself for the last few days having to take a rather forced break from anything that meant any position other than lying flat on my back. It happens every once in awhile for varying lengths of time but makes trying to do any work kind of pointless.

Finally today I managed to hobble my way with coffee in hand to my office desk and the pile of email, unread blogs that awaited me.Not to mention the reworking of TwitBox that needs to be done given the feedback that was littered through my mail and post comments.

I was about halfway through my reading and working on my second cup of coffee when I noticed the first of many posts about the pending expiration of the pre-release versions of Vista. I knew this was coming and had hoped that by that time that I would be able to afford even the Home Professional version; but at over a hundred bucks that isn’t going to happen for me before the dreaded May 31st deadline.

So it looks like I’ll be spending some of my time in May prepping for a return to the world of XP Pro. This means taking care of fun things like backing up all my data (x2 just incase :) ) and getting new versions of my usual line up of programs. I gotta say though, that even with some of the problems I’ve had with Vista I’ve liked it as an operating system and I will miss it.

For know though it’s time to haul myself back to the couch, rest up for a bit longer and get ready to start my goodbye to Vista countdown.

Hey, like this post? Why not share it with a buddy?

Now this is irritating

VB.NET Express Editon - Orca Release In the last couple of days Microsoft released Community Technology Preview’s of the next interation of the Express development packages (Codename Orca) for those of us that like to live or try out the bleeding edge of stuff. Now being a glutton for punishement I figured what hell and downloaded the VB.NET package for a go around.

To read the complete post head on over to the WinExtra Blog

Hey, like this post? Why not share it with a buddy?

High stakes poker – the weak may leave the table

Bluff .. not us Poker is an interesting game – part skill, part luck, part psychology and a big set of balls especially if you are going to sit at the same table as Google and Microsoft and they are playing a game that is definitely not for the weak willed.

The latest round saw the cards of DoubleClick being dealt around the table and a growing pot in the middle of the table. It was going to be a case of who blinks first or possible in this round – who has the best bluff.

Much has been made out of the fact that Google was the winner and apparently gone home to savour its win over Microsoft once more (here, here and here) but two interesting points of view caught my eye as I made my way through my weekend posts relating to the purchase. The first one is the moat idea from Robert Scoble

The thing I see in common between YouTube and DoubleClick is that Google is buying a moat around its search engine advertising business. Google doesn’t want there to be ANY reason you’ll think of going with another advertising company. They are spending billions to protect their core business: contextual advertising delivered to search engine users. Since Microsoft doesn’t currently need moats (its core businesses, Windows and Office, have no real competitors left anymore that’ll try to jump the castle walls) Microsoft is willing to drop out of such deals when they get too rich.

[...]

Which strategy is best? The conservative Microsoft approach? The rock and roll Google approach?

One of the things I think this shows is that while Google lives the Web 2.0 of get in there quick – get what you want and then leave, Microsoft takes a much longer outlook on the way it handles itself. For Microsoft to acquire something doesn’t always mean that it is buying what is lying on the surface. Microsoft looks further down the road and how things will affect a larger base of corporate interests rather than the fickleness of the webOS evangelists.

Then there was an interesting post from Mary Jo Foley where she wonders aloud whether Microsoft just played a massive bluff

But what if Microsoft bluffed? What if the Microsoft didn’t really want DoubleClick and simply wanted to bid up the price that Google had to pay to make its latest acquisition?

[...]

If you look at Microsoft’s spending patterns, as of late, the company is leaning more toward doing less-than-$1-billion-sized acquisitions. In the increasingly rare cases when Microsoft does shell out big bucks (like close to $800 million for TellMe), it’s because it envisions the target as a technology acquisition, not an advertising/customer acquisition.

If this was the case it would be definitely a fine move in depleting your opposition’s warchest and may also indicate that Microsoft understands Google a lot better than some folks might give them credit for.

Maybe Microsoft knows that Google had stopped being a search engine a long time ago and was really nothing more than a high power advertising agency; whereas Microsoft is a platform company where search is just a part of the larger picture.

I know – I’m off my rocker on this one right?

Well think about it for a minute. What has Google done in a long while to revolutionize; or even eveolutionize, what is suppose to be their main focus – search. In contrast they have done more to progress their advertising platform whether it be by internal refinements or external purchases. And really they are no different than an advertising agency – The only difference is target and delivery.

Ad agencies use the traditional media; print and TV, in order to sell their clients products. With Google they use the concept of search to sell their clients products. Same idea – different methods so it really doesn’t matter to Google if search is in maintenance mode. After all it keeps their competitors eyes on a different ball and wasting money in the process.

Microsoft though I think has seen through this and is quite willing to let Google go down that road and do their very best to make it as expensive as possible for Google in the process. In the meantime Microsoft further solidifies it positions in hard dollar income platforms leaving the soft dollar market for others to fight over with only the barest show of putting up a fight.

However out of all of the posts about the purchase that I read the two best had to come from Google Blogoscoped; about how Google in 2017 purchases the whole Internet for a song and a dance, and then from webomatica who said for Google to have at it but to leave Apple alone.

I wonder which of those two will be next on the poker table :)

Hey, like this post? Why not share it with a buddy?

The Hughtrain heads up the mountain….

Hugh Macleod - Micorosoft Blue Monster Series

[via gapingvoid.com - Hugh Macleod and the Microsoft Blue Monster Series]

I have liked Hugh’s cartoons ever since I first came across them and his blog has always had a place in my feed reader; but now I think it has become a blog that could actually see history being made. Many might have wondered when Hugh took on Microsoft on as a client considering in many cases that he was taking up a battle that had seen many larger companies pretty well fail.

In one of his posts today he explains why he took the job with Microsoft and is well worth reading if for no other reason than to understand why he took the job but it also could be the starting chapter for many of us to jump in and watch the transformation of the Big Blue Monster.

From what I have read of Hugh’s writing in the past I think there could be some interesting times ahead both for Microsoft and in the end us the user’s of their products. I for one am looking forward to this “experiment” that Hugh has decided to let us in on.

Hey, like this post? Why not share it with a buddy?

And the real world says: Web 2.0 yer on crack

Please don't let Google go down ... please... In an uproar that started way back with Paul Graham’s (ya I know I’m reaching back here but bear with me will ya :) ) post about the death of Microsoft and with it the world of desktop applications. It was this last point that Ryan Stewart over at ZDNet picked up on as he related an IM conversation between himself and a death of the desktop believer. In the post he and Simeon debated the pros and cons of even developing desktop applications in the first place and how the arrival of Apollo from Adobe might just change that paradigm.

Ryan also pointed to a post by Don Dodge who basically said that if growing by $4 Billion a year equals being dead then call me dead

For the record, Microsoft is growing revenues at over $4 Billion a year and is on track for $50 Billion this year. Since when does growing $4 Billion a year equal DEAD? If that is dead I know a lot of companies that would like to be so dead.

Don goes on to tear apart the original link grabbing post by Paul Graham but I got to thinking at that point about this whole Web App vs Desktop App ridiculousness. I think my record here has pretty well been on the side of desktop applications and questioning of the whole Web 2.0 movement. But to clarify for those of you who might be new to WinExtra let me put it this way. There may well be a day in the future when web based applications will be to norm across the computing world but that day is not now and it won’t be for some time to come.

Sure it has its early adopters and evangelists who push the cause with post like Paul’s but the reality is that the whole Web 2.0 movement is an exceedingly small portion of the worldwide computer user base. It exists in the rarified world of the Bay Area and Silicon Valley and the wet dreams of VC’s with cash to burn.

For the rest of the world desktop applications are the norm and for the real world computer user they will be for a long time to come. However rather than just go by my own gut feeling on the matter I decided to head back to my base – the WinExtra Forums and ask them what they thought on the matter. Now before you discount these folks; many of whom have been members for over 6 years, you have to know  that they are a good cross section of your real world computer users. They are techs, consultants, experienced users and homemakers. They live around our globe in places like Canada, rural Iowa, Australia, New Zealand, France and Iceland. they range in ages of early 20′s to late 70′s. They are a cross section.

So I set up a poll which asked “If you had a choice of equal quality applications which would you use 100% of the time ” and gave them two choices – Web Applications or Desktop applications. Here’s a few of the responses

Joan:

I prefer desktop apps even if they are more expensive. I feel much more secure in access to my computer at any time than I do to access to the internet. If my internet access goes down, it might be for several minutes, hours or even days and then I would have no access to my applications.

Billy:

Ditto here. I don’t want to depend on the security and stability of someone else’s machines to be able to work. If I fux0r my computer, I can fix it. If google goes down, I sit and stare at another game of solitare.

Arni:

I am totally against all forms of Web-based applications. Data on my machine is as secure as I can make it; for better or for worse. Data on some web server somewhere is only as secure as the hosting company’s income and integrity will allow. If said company goes bankrupt, corrupt or blown up, I’m up a very specific creek, without a paddle.

Infinidean:

I voted for the web based application on the premise that is of *equal quality* as the desktop application. By that I understand it to mean that the level of security is just as good, that the stability of the company is as solid as owning the software yourself, etc. If all that is the case, the ability to log on anywhere and pick up where I left off is very, very appealing.
In the real world, I don’t care for web applications because they aren’t of equal quality.

You can read all the replies here (you will need to register to post replies or partake in the poll but it is free) but the most common theme so far boils down to two things – security and availability neither of which Web 2.0 can address with any certainty. Currently the response is 80% or better in favor of desktop applications and I really don’t expect that kind of ratio to change between now and when the poll closes on the 23rd.

Even today there is a report on Google disabling some mail accounts and basically losing any attachments for those accounts even when re-enabled. this isn’t even counting the time times where it has been down for hours on end.

Web 2.0 evangelists might like to blow their horn and proclaim the death of the desktop but the reality is that outside of their tiny rarified world the desktop lives and breaths and continues to evolve. there may come a day when the desktop does have to worry but I really think that by that time the desktop will have evolved into something so different that it will all be a null argument.

In the meantime though I will stick with my desktop and the applications that live on it rather than suffer the vagaries of Web 2.0 companies that exist only to be purchased by bigger companies. At least this way I know my data is mine and that regardless of the state of the web I won’t be shuffled back to the dark ages.

[tags][/tags]

Hey, like this post? Why not share it with a buddy?