7 posts • joined Thursday 1st May 2008 13:31 GMT
Beware Presumptive Marketing of Bigger Data Loss
They really asked some dumb leading questions there, didn't they? A lesson in how not to do presumptive marketing of a bleeding edge technology by a person who has no idea what marketing is or how it works in a knowledgeable technical B2B 'ish market place.
We use RAID hard drives for backup and tape for archive supporting many Terabytes per day of high value content created in multiple clients, managed by Archiware Software suite, BTW. It works well and is the best price/performance cost option, secure and reliable when called upon.
Flash is far too unreliable/volatile/corruptible as any stick user know - and expensive. OK for temporary memory that is also kept somewhere else but nowhere near backup or archive grade you can rely on. Why change what is reliable, secure and mostly recoverable if things go wrong for something that isn't ANY of these things, and was ever designed to be. You Flash if you want to........... if you feel l that lucky. Well, do you?
Paul Hunter is RIGHT!
HP is going nowhere. Period.
I swear the current 3 are also my last HP printers. Great printers and good on volume cartridges BUT the ink deciding it is too old and switching itself off when it isn't at £25 per cartridge is a blatant rip off, and the software's failure to work with OS upgrades on the Mac, and hang the computer which NOTHING else does is just utterly abysmal, means I have to use my PC to scan, etc.
What on Earth is This About? The rest of the world just want it to work
Lot of meaningless stuff above about strange techy things no one understands, outside techies and maybe gamers of limited social skills, which is why Macs sell.
The computer for the rest of us. Easy to use , truly intuitive and looks good, it does all the things techies like to control and the majority of users don't understand or care about for you. That alone is worth a few hundred to most users, and is only a negative to the minority who have a clue what any of that speccy stuff is about. I am technical, just not self absorbed enough to think most of the world is or wants to be. Owning a PC is nghtmare of inpenetrable UI, incompatibilities and upgrades that don't quite work out, because they are modular not integrated.(and HP's printer software if you made that mistake as well.
PS Could not believe how MS trashed all the hard workwe put in learning 2000/XP Interface and hid the same old familiar PC BS, which almost worked well in XP, under yet another impenetrable layer of new unintuitiveness called Windows Seven (Now! - with added network "security" difficulties). How disrespectful of our time are they? Now if you could run OSX on a PC .... but its not integrated enough....... back to the real world.....
Not Quite, Mr. Ballmer.........
Engineers in charge is not a good idea unless these guys represent the customer and understand intuitively what they obviously want to do. Closed computing supporting mainstream applications vs cool nested menu driven stuff for the autistic no one ever has time or aptitude to find except minority power users..
Engineers designing cool technology has always been a problem - of technology push. Most car buyers don't share mechanics skills or interests. They just want ti to go and can't switch off their fog lights because theyry don't know which button it is. What IS needed is people from an engineering background who get the problems and can extrapolate them forwards - and want to deliver what the mass of users want, the requirement often precedes the technology to deliver it. Steve Jobs does that. Most tech companies fail at it because engineering creates technology to market, not marketing creates solutions for engineers to deliver, but working symbiotically, no heirarchically.
The engineers job is to meet the need with the best available technology. e.g. I specified a fixed/mobile smartphone cloud resident solution in 1990 and asked Gassee (Apple Tech VP) when Apple expected to deliver such a device, back then there was no public network bandwidth or cloud based resources, and the computing technology had not shrunk enough. The cloud was an enterprise mainframe on leased lines. He didn't even get it and said he didn't like Swiss Army knives.. blah blah. lost the plot with Be as well. Now there is the Internet instead of X.400, MPLS (out of mainframe SNA), Flash and optical memory and mental CPU power enabling the mass access to computing and consumer commoditisation in the cloud.
A road map Isaac Asimoc laid downin a short story back in the 60s, OBTW. There's someone MS should have employed as its visionary, not some young technology de jour led techy who doesn't know what went before and can't project into the future. MS is not an innovator, its a mechanical market satisfier now run by an accountant. Can't innovate. Its semi autistic. It has a track record of innovation by acquisition (as in - "You can be bought or you can be put out of business when we buy your competitor. How lucky do you feel, punk?", not creativity, its core skills have been as a ruthless borderline monopolist with Mafia like marketing practices - look at Ballmer! He's Tony S and acts like it. MS won because they exploited a monopoly OS cash flow and control of the low level software links and mass marketed properly to the undiscerning computing masses, the competing innovators marketed to techies on excellence and got devoured by less capable but volume me too solutions acquired by MS and bundled, remember? Visionary marketing with grasp has to co-exist with the ability to apply evolving technology to old problems and create totally new but dreamed of solutions as well as re invent better solutions to old problems, not one predominate - as in Apple whose leader can do both and whose approaches' time has come.
Larry Ellison will do enterprise in the cloud. MS will slowly whither to some lesser status under Ballmer's vision by-pass. Maybe Oracle will buy it as the work station software, but they have Open Office so only need the customer base, not the software....I rest my case. Sell Microsoft. Your mileage may vary.
Why Does it Matter?
Why should we care? Another overpaid CEO goes. Its not good or bad. Never saw any use for Verisign's products anyway. Just make's life more expensive and complicated, there are other ways to create trusted electronic relationships. Its like saying Blahnik, YSL, Versace, Picasso, died, none did anything of value to the greater mass of humanity, just took money off the rich, don't care. Brian Catt
It All Depends on the User and The Service and the Provider
Um, for a number of business applications termainla computing works extremely well, and also for public service applications like homework, taxes, etc. e.g. Where people (most) don't create but complete forms other design or get data others have input - a pre structured dialogue. The few power users who understand what they are using will need smart terminals capable of local processing, but not the mass of no technical users who just access a service in a bewildering tech world imposed on them by arrogant techies. They need a connected Play Station for Grown Up Apps.
How you construct a cloud is totally dependent on your applications, it could be all Intranet/extranet on private infrastructure to run ERP/SCM say, or broad public/consumer access to hosted servers - which may be publicly available but come with a level a of security most MNC data centres would love to have.
etc. The totally opinionated views of the hard of thinking tech bigots above are well exposed by the more considered objective replies, its horses for courses, but the lack of understanding of what most people need from pervasive computing services (to access a service) is indicative of the reason PC technology is still inaccessible to the majority of people and we don't have computing for the rest of us from well integrated consumer devices - sealed boxes that look after themselves. It doesn't suit the techies who have run the IBM architecture PC based industry to date. See:
For one I made a few years ago. Coming one day...
Well Quelle Surprise - Another Biased "Expert"
I was involved with this thru the Inst of Physics.
Asking a University Prof is the same as asking any other so called upper class unaccountable establishment employed expert with a vested interest, as in baby murders by innocent mothers and minders, DNA evidence, etc, etc..
They just get a chap who can be relied on to do the right thing.... (what the establishment/Whitehall want).
If anything these people do is not subject to expert peer review it will almost certainly horribly skewedand subjective, as here.
Most in academe are ego centric self seekers promoting their own view of the world and their own pet subjects or projects - highly partial, utterly arrogant and blind to any reality but their own. Those who seek these senior offices certainly care as little about the effects of what they assert on anyone else as top management does in its grasp for wealth in commerce.
The academic chapter of utterly untrustworthy great and good. Lord Hutton or Roy Meadows - only for science, etc. Wrong people.
These ego maniacs are the last people we should trust to decide our future for us, after the secret society that is the Public School output/establishment and the politicians who front our democratic totalitariansim for too short a time to change it much.
In my view. You can almost see the episode of Yes Minister, Humphrey deciding who should chair this secret policy review of some other academic toff's cock up thaty has been discovered ....
- Facebook offshores HUGE WAD OF CASH to Caymans - via Ireland
- Microsoft teams up with Feds, Europol in ZeroAccess botnet zombie hunt
- Justin Bieber BEGGED for a $200k RIM JOB – and got REJECTED
- Review Bigger on the inside: WD’s Tardis-like Black² Dual Drive laptop disk
- Inside Steve Ballmer’s fondleslab rear-guard action