September 11, 2007 (Computerworld Australia) Microsoft Windows' infamous "blue screen of death" has become synonymous with an operating system crash or freeze, but that's nothing compared with what users of pirated copies of Vista worldwide can expect from now -- a black screen of darkness.
In an e-mail to a large Windows Vista distributor titled "Pirated Vista -- A darkness descends!" -- a local Microsoft representative made it quite clear what Vista pirates can expect to happen to their unlicensed installations.
A copy of this e-mail was obtained by Computerworld.
"Good afternoon, as of this week, Microsoft has activated a function in Vista called 'Reduced Functionality.' This is a specific function in Vista that effectively disables nongenuine copies of Windows. Therefore anyone who has a pirated copy of Vista will experience:
A black screen after one hour of browsing
No start menu or task bar
No desktop
Please communicate this antipiracy initiative from Microsoft to your resellers -- note this function has only just been activated in Vista worldwide and therefore any issues with nongenuine versions will start to arise from now onward."
Microsoft's new tough antipiracy move also proves the company still controls its software releases with an iron fist, but it marks the first global use of heavy-handed tactics for pirated copies of Windows.
The e-mail message also included what resembled an advertisement of the new antipiracy initiative.
Titled "Don't let this happen to your customers," the advertisement indicates nongenuine copies of Windows Vista will lose access to key features, have limited access to updates, and thus risk attack from viruses, malware and spyware.
"If Windows Vista is not activated with a genuine product key, your customers will experience reduced functionality," according to the ad. "The blocking of nongenuine product keys is an ongoing process, not a one-time event. To help protect honest partners and fight piracy, Microsoft will continue to block product keys that are determined to be pirated, stolen or otherwise deemed nongenuine."
The ad concludes with "Don't risk it!" and "make sure your customers always get genuine Windows Vista preinstalled."
Thursday, September 27, 2007
10 things you should know about Microsoft's Silverlight
Crafting a Web strategy is important for any thriving business. However, implementing that strategy with rich Internet applications (RIA) is not always as easy as it should be. To ease that pain, Microsoft recently announced Silverlight, a cross-platform, cross-browser plug-in for Web application developers. The plug-in, currently available as a "Release Candidate" (which for all intents and purposes means it's released now), enables rich application development including media, interactivity and animation. The Silverlight plug-in currently works with Internet Explorer and Firefox Web browsers on Windows and with Firefox and Safari on Mac OS X.
I've been using Silverlight since I taught a course for internal Microsoft developers, shortly before the software's public unveiling as "WPF/E." I've written several books about Microsoft-based software development (such as Pragmatic ADO.NET [Addison-Wesley]), I co-wrote four Microsoft developer certification books, and I have invested quite a bit of time in examining the promises that the company is making for this "Flash killer." It's always hard to be critical of software that isn't fully released yet (for one thing, it's impossible to point out serious bugs since they may be addressed by the time you fire up the development tool), but the following reflects my professional and technical judgment based on several months of hands-on experience.
With the public release of Silverlight imminent, now is the right time to become familiar with Silverlight and how it might impact your Web application strategy. With so much Silverlight information available right now, it is difficult to distill what is important and what is hype. I'll do my best to lift the fog with these 10 things that you should know about Microsoft's Silverlight.
1. Silverlight Avoids Cross-Browser/OS Issues
For most development teams, developing a website that will work identically with the popular browsers of the day (including Internet Explorer, Firefox, Safari and Opera) is a difficult proposition. The problem is not simply the necessity for multiple code implementations but also exponentially large testing sets. As a developer creates matrices of browser versions and operating systems, the number of test beds needed becomes enormous.
Usually there are two ways that a development project addresses this: support only a small subset of Web browsers, or increase the number of quality assurance personnel.
In contrast, the Silverlight plug-in enables an identical development model regardless of user operating system and browser. Currently, two operating systems and three browsers are supported. Microsoft is promising to add support for the Opera browser on Windows and Mac. In addition, the Mono project has made tremendous strides in its Moonlight project, which intends to bring Silverlight to the Linux platform.
2. Silverlight 1.1 Is the Real Story
The recent Release Candidate of Silverlight 1.0 has many organizations considering whether they should start working with Silverlight. While Silverlight 1.0 has many important and interesting features, in reality most Silverlight adoption hangs on its anticipated 1.1 release.
The Silverlight 1.1 release (currently in an Alpha preview) is the first to support .NET in any appreciable way. This includes the basic .NET languages, C# and Visual Basic. In addition, according to Microsoft, Silverlight 1.1 will have .NET support for dynamic languages, such as Ruby, Python, dynamic Visual Basic and managed JScript. In my opinion, the important languages for Silverlight to support are C# and Visual Basic, as they allow current .NET developers to create interesting Silverlight applications. In the Silverlight 1.1 release, any .NET language should be supported, since what is actually delivered to the browser are .NET assemblies.
In contrast, Silverlight 1.0 only supports ECMA languages that are interpreted in the client. Silverlight 1.0 works well for existing Web developers who are already using client-side script for their work.
Silverlight 1.1 also supports a rich custom control model, which is important to ensure an integrated development experience. The Silverlight 1.0 experience is much less mature and is unlikely to get third parties interested in control development.
I've been using Silverlight since I taught a course for internal Microsoft developers, shortly before the software's public unveiling as "WPF/E." I've written several books about Microsoft-based software development (such as Pragmatic ADO.NET [Addison-Wesley]), I co-wrote four Microsoft developer certification books, and I have invested quite a bit of time in examining the promises that the company is making for this "Flash killer." It's always hard to be critical of software that isn't fully released yet (for one thing, it's impossible to point out serious bugs since they may be addressed by the time you fire up the development tool), but the following reflects my professional and technical judgment based on several months of hands-on experience.
With the public release of Silverlight imminent, now is the right time to become familiar with Silverlight and how it might impact your Web application strategy. With so much Silverlight information available right now, it is difficult to distill what is important and what is hype. I'll do my best to lift the fog with these 10 things that you should know about Microsoft's Silverlight.
1. Silverlight Avoids Cross-Browser/OS Issues
For most development teams, developing a website that will work identically with the popular browsers of the day (including Internet Explorer, Firefox, Safari and Opera) is a difficult proposition. The problem is not simply the necessity for multiple code implementations but also exponentially large testing sets. As a developer creates matrices of browser versions and operating systems, the number of test beds needed becomes enormous.
Usually there are two ways that a development project addresses this: support only a small subset of Web browsers, or increase the number of quality assurance personnel.
In contrast, the Silverlight plug-in enables an identical development model regardless of user operating system and browser. Currently, two operating systems and three browsers are supported. Microsoft is promising to add support for the Opera browser on Windows and Mac. In addition, the Mono project has made tremendous strides in its Moonlight project, which intends to bring Silverlight to the Linux platform.
2. Silverlight 1.1 Is the Real Story
The recent Release Candidate of Silverlight 1.0 has many organizations considering whether they should start working with Silverlight. While Silverlight 1.0 has many important and interesting features, in reality most Silverlight adoption hangs on its anticipated 1.1 release.
The Silverlight 1.1 release (currently in an Alpha preview) is the first to support .NET in any appreciable way. This includes the basic .NET languages, C# and Visual Basic. In addition, according to Microsoft, Silverlight 1.1 will have .NET support for dynamic languages, such as Ruby, Python, dynamic Visual Basic and managed JScript. In my opinion, the important languages for Silverlight to support are C# and Visual Basic, as they allow current .NET developers to create interesting Silverlight applications. In the Silverlight 1.1 release, any .NET language should be supported, since what is actually delivered to the browser are .NET assemblies.
In contrast, Silverlight 1.0 only supports ECMA languages that are interpreted in the client. Silverlight 1.0 works well for existing Web developers who are already using client-side script for their work.
Silverlight 1.1 also supports a rich custom control model, which is important to ensure an integrated development experience. The Silverlight 1.0 experience is much less mature and is unlikely to get third parties interested in control development.
GOood News:: Microsoft Space Available
Windows Live Spaces is here! It’s easy to create your own personal Web site.
http://spaces.live.com/signup.aspx
http://spaces.live.com/signup.aspx
Microsoft Expression Web (Final Key For Activation)
Microsoft Expression Web Final Key for Activation
DDWJC-VFGHJ-7GFK6-9QK3D-PFTHW
DDWJC-VFGHJ-7GFK6-9QK3D-PFTHW
Download Free Silverlight Book
http://rs165.rapidshare.com/files/58534005/OReilly.Essential.Silverlight.Sep.2007.pdf
Saturday, September 15, 2007
Microsoft Issues 10 Reasons Why Enterprises Shouldn't Use Google Apps
Up till now, Microsoft has been very quiet about the nascent Web Office threat from Google. But today, in response to the news that IT systems consultancy CapGemini has partnered with Google to sell Google Apps Premier Edition (GAPE) to enterprises, Microsoft issued an email listing 10 "top questions that enterprises should ask when considering the switch to GAPE." The questions read more like reasons why enterprises shouldn't choose Google Apps. This list was first published by Mary Jo Foley, who says it was an unsolicited email from a Microsoft "corporate spokesperson".
The 10 reasons make for fascinating reading - and show just how concerned Microsoft really is about not only Google Apps, but Web Office in general. Here is a copy of the email list:
“1. Google touts having enterprise level customers but how many “USERS” of their applications truly exist within the enterprise?
“2. Google has a history of releasing incomplete products, calling them beta software, and issuing updates on a “known only to Google” schedule – this flies in the face of what enterprises want and need in their technology partners – what is Google doing that indicates they are in lock step with customer needs?
“3. Google touts the low cost of their apps –not only price but the absence of need for hardware, storage or maintenance for Google Apps. BUT if GAPE is indeed a complement to MSFT Office, the costs actually become greater for a company as they now have two IT systems to run and manage and maintain. Doesn’t this result in increased complexity and increased costs?
“4. Google’s primary focus is on ad funded search. Their enterprise focus and now apps exist on the very fringe and in combination with other fringe services only account for 1% of the company’s revenue. What happens if Google executes poorly? Do they shut down given it will them in a minimal and short term way? Should customers trust that this won’t happen?
“5. Google’s apps only work if an enterprise has no power users, employees are always online, enterprises haven’t built custom Office apps – doesn’t this equal a very small % of global information workers today? –On a feature comparison basis, it’s not surprising that Microsoft has a huge lead.
“6. Google apps don’t have essential document creation features like support for headers, footers, tables of content, footnotes, etc. Additionally, while customers can collaborate on basic docs without the above noted features, to collaborate on detailed docs, a company must implement a two part process – work together on the basic doc, save it to Word or Excel and then send via email for final edits. Yes they have a $50 price tag, but with the inefficiencies created by just this one cycle, how much do GAPE really cost – and can you afford the fidelity loss?
“7. Enterprise companies have to constantly think about government regulations and standards – while Google can store a lot of data for enterprises on Google servers, there is no easy to use, automated way for enterprises to regularly delete data, issue a legal hold for specific docs or bring copies into the corp. What happens if a company needs to respond to government regulations bodies? Google touts 99.9% uptime for their apps but what few people realize that promise is for Gmail only. Equally alarming is the definition Google has for “downtime” – ten consecutive minutes of downtime. What happens if throughout the day Google is down 7 minutes each hour? What does 7 minutes each hour for a full work day that cost an enterprise?
“8. In the world of business, it is always on and always connected. As such, having access to technical support 24/7 is essential. If a company deploys Google Apps and there is a technical issue at 8pm PST, Sorry. Google’s tech support is open M-F 1AM-6PM PST – are these the new hours of global business? And if a customer’s “designated administrator” is not available (a requirement) does business just stop?
“9. Google says that enterprise customers use only 10% of the features in today’s productivity applications which implies that EVERYONE needs the SAME 10% of the feature when in fact it is very clear that in each company there are specific roles people play that demands access to specific information – how does Google’s generic strategy address role specific needs?
“10. With Google apps in perpetual beta and Google controlling when and if they rollout specific features and functionality, customers have minimal if any control over the timing of product rollouts and features – how do 1) I know how to strategically plan and train and 2) get the features and functionality I have specifically requested? How much money does not knowing cost?
“I invite you to speak with customers, partners and analysts who can validate Office’s business model.”
There's no doubt these are compelling reasons why an enterprise should choose Microsoft Office over Google Apps, at this point. But it's noticeable that the list doesn't mention the word "collaboration", which is probably the key benefit of Google Apps compared to MS Office.
Nor does Microsoft adequately rebut that Google Apps will be a complement to Microsoft Office (as CapsGemini and Google claimed yesterday). Microsoft says in point 3 that "the costs actually become greater for a company as they now have two IT systems to run and manage and maintain." But that doesn't address the features that Google Apps offers and how it might complement an enterprise's office software set-up.
What do you make of Microsoft's response? It certainly brings up some valid criticisms of Google Apps and Web Office, but then Google isn't claiming their product is a replacement of MS Office. Their stance is that it's a complement - and so in that respect this list by a Microsoft spokesperson is probably an over-reaction. It looks like someone in Redmond hit the panic button a bit too early.
The 10 reasons make for fascinating reading - and show just how concerned Microsoft really is about not only Google Apps, but Web Office in general. Here is a copy of the email list:
“1. Google touts having enterprise level customers but how many “USERS” of their applications truly exist within the enterprise?
“2. Google has a history of releasing incomplete products, calling them beta software, and issuing updates on a “known only to Google” schedule – this flies in the face of what enterprises want and need in their technology partners – what is Google doing that indicates they are in lock step with customer needs?
“3. Google touts the low cost of their apps –not only price but the absence of need for hardware, storage or maintenance for Google Apps. BUT if GAPE is indeed a complement to MSFT Office, the costs actually become greater for a company as they now have two IT systems to run and manage and maintain. Doesn’t this result in increased complexity and increased costs?
“4. Google’s primary focus is on ad funded search. Their enterprise focus and now apps exist on the very fringe and in combination with other fringe services only account for 1% of the company’s revenue. What happens if Google executes poorly? Do they shut down given it will them in a minimal and short term way? Should customers trust that this won’t happen?
“5. Google’s apps only work if an enterprise has no power users, employees are always online, enterprises haven’t built custom Office apps – doesn’t this equal a very small % of global information workers today? –On a feature comparison basis, it’s not surprising that Microsoft has a huge lead.
“6. Google apps don’t have essential document creation features like support for headers, footers, tables of content, footnotes, etc. Additionally, while customers can collaborate on basic docs without the above noted features, to collaborate on detailed docs, a company must implement a two part process – work together on the basic doc, save it to Word or Excel and then send via email for final edits. Yes they have a $50 price tag, but with the inefficiencies created by just this one cycle, how much do GAPE really cost – and can you afford the fidelity loss?
“7. Enterprise companies have to constantly think about government regulations and standards – while Google can store a lot of data for enterprises on Google servers, there is no easy to use, automated way for enterprises to regularly delete data, issue a legal hold for specific docs or bring copies into the corp. What happens if a company needs to respond to government regulations bodies? Google touts 99.9% uptime for their apps but what few people realize that promise is for Gmail only. Equally alarming is the definition Google has for “downtime” – ten consecutive minutes of downtime. What happens if throughout the day Google is down 7 minutes each hour? What does 7 minutes each hour for a full work day that cost an enterprise?
“8. In the world of business, it is always on and always connected. As such, having access to technical support 24/7 is essential. If a company deploys Google Apps and there is a technical issue at 8pm PST, Sorry. Google’s tech support is open M-F 1AM-6PM PST – are these the new hours of global business? And if a customer’s “designated administrator” is not available (a requirement) does business just stop?
“9. Google says that enterprise customers use only 10% of the features in today’s productivity applications which implies that EVERYONE needs the SAME 10% of the feature when in fact it is very clear that in each company there are specific roles people play that demands access to specific information – how does Google’s generic strategy address role specific needs?
“10. With Google apps in perpetual beta and Google controlling when and if they rollout specific features and functionality, customers have minimal if any control over the timing of product rollouts and features – how do 1) I know how to strategically plan and train and 2) get the features and functionality I have specifically requested? How much money does not knowing cost?
“I invite you to speak with customers, partners and analysts who can validate Office’s business model.”
There's no doubt these are compelling reasons why an enterprise should choose Microsoft Office over Google Apps, at this point. But it's noticeable that the list doesn't mention the word "collaboration", which is probably the key benefit of Google Apps compared to MS Office.
Nor does Microsoft adequately rebut that Google Apps will be a complement to Microsoft Office (as CapsGemini and Google claimed yesterday). Microsoft says in point 3 that "the costs actually become greater for a company as they now have two IT systems to run and manage and maintain." But that doesn't address the features that Google Apps offers and how it might complement an enterprise's office software set-up.
What do you make of Microsoft's response? It certainly brings up some valid criticisms of Google Apps and Web Office, but then Google isn't claiming their product is a replacement of MS Office. Their stance is that it's a complement - and so in that respect this list by a Microsoft spokesperson is probably an over-reaction. It looks like someone in Redmond hit the panic button a bit too early.
Saturday, September 1, 2007
Wednesday, August 15, 2007
Tuesday, August 14, 2007
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)