26 posts • joined 13 Nov 2009
Just a few thoughts on this post:
"2) Distribute under the GPL."
"Microsoft need an App store to compete with the convenience of Apple and Linux distros."
These two competitors to Microsoft who don't have desktop app stores?
"When they have an App store, they remove distributors' motivation to pre-install Windows. When that happens, Microsoft will have to compete for real."
Have you seen mobile carriers desperation to get the iPhone due to its huge app store? Thats assisted by a big developer base supporting the iPhone SDK, on the Desktop Microsoft are developer kings, whatever people say they just are with the vast majority of software compatible with the PC, therefore an app store for Windows would provide a massive revenue stream for developers and Microsoft (if they follow the 30% cut Apple take) as well as provide additional functionality/value addition to hardware vendors who'll then seek to follow the platform with the largest app store. Which at the moment is Microsoft....
Exactly, if the government just decided to turn round and renege on all contracts it would effectively stop anyone trading with the public sector for a year before the general election, in case the contract was cancelled.
Basically this would mean 20-25% of the time, the government would be unable to get anyone to sign a competatively priced contract as they would effectively know it was going to be cancelled by the next government, even if it was good value just to fulfil politcal whims...
Indeed the training is free, I've used it in my own company this year and it was all downloadable from Microsoft's website for free. Even hosted it on our intranet for people to use when they wanted.
Even more, if you've got a millions of licenses and SA benefits the public sector has, then you'll just use the free training vouchers microsoft gives you.
Is Open Office going to pay for all that retraining? nope. Is every member of staff going to moan when suddenly if they send a document out of the organisation they work in they have to keep checking its in the right file type? nope.
Yes OO is feasible, and even a good solution for the consumer as it's free and provides as much functionality as what 99% of home users use MS office for, but in the interconnected corporate environment, it just doesn't stick it to have just a local solution anymore, as reflected by MS connected updates to Office 2010, and again this is something else that OO isn't going to offer.
Final thing, but who's going to support all this OO implementation? Sure they're not going to do it for free...
Is it just me that thinks this shows how completely useless the information commissioner's office is?
They've looked at the Street View cars and the data they collect, apparently, then Ok'd it for UK use.
Think after this issue, we can all realise what they did was asked Google what it did and trusted them. Sure they're a massive company, but no two parties should be treated differently and i'm pretty sure if i requested to drive around taking pictures of everyones house they would go over my kit inside and out, rather than just accepting my word for it.
Ah well, another reason the ICO is a completely toothless organisation
True, but think health and safety
Whilst in normal flight the cabin is pressurised, in a rapid decompression at 30,000ft I would imagine no airline wants an exploding ipad as the air inside it shatters the screen into the face of everyone in first class whilst repressurising itself.
Definately problem with installing such things on a plane, remember seeing a programme about private jets, and although you only get a couple of leather chairs and tables in them the interior costs a fortune as it all has to be fire tested to ridiculous levels, pressure tested etc just to prevent this kind of thing happening.
Although I guess if you were a true fanboy, you would be happy to get just that little bit more of apple inside you (even if it's in about 2000 small shattered pieces of ipad)
You're completely correct. However this isn't a failure in Google's understanding of the five forces (which they seem to have completely ignored) they truly believe that anything that holds the Google brand will cannibalise the market it's placed in.
This is a pretty dim view to take, but follows core digital strategists such as downes & mui who stated that any digital company or approach would cannibalise a tradition one. In this case, both Downes & Mui and Google seem to have assumed as they offered a purely digital service, they would revolutionise and cannibalise how phones were sold.
This level of ignorance of basic business strategy, from reputable and proven theorists such as Porter should sound a strong warning to any Google shareholder about how the company is being controlled. After all the only real market they've completely dominated is search, since then most of the offerings are advertising subsidised and still don't take massive chunks of the market.
So maybe it would be good if the Reg did a comparison of Google Docs first release (the orignal release, before Google bought out all the start ups) I would imagine they were less feature filled than this.
Also, you're right that the main people who will use this will host it internally alongside sharepoint to allow people to quickly update and edit documents from sharepoint in the browser. This is an excellent feature, and something Google will struggle to compete with as they've got an obcession with getting all your data into Google servers, not just putting Google software on your server.
Also, with Google's new print around the world solution, will this affect Google Docs?
Ironic, Mac tore Windows Vista and UAC apart for asking people to enter their password to confirm they're sure they want to do something they've just told a PC to do, and now an idential issue pops up on the mac and the Mac defence is to say there's no possible infection vector.
Please, this kind of stuff helps issues, but in the end stupid people do stupid things and they'll just type the password in to open iPhoto as far as they're concerned.
2000's - decade of Windows problems
2010's - decade Apple begin to realise the problems they've created by telling people they can't get malware....
You're missing a bit problem here
Yes, you're correct current postscript/PCL is generally on high end stuff, and home users who want the cheapest basic netbook with no software on it, are going to have the cheapest basic printer with no options on it. However, without a second PC or one of these currently non-existant 'Google Print Server Router Thingys' then they're screwed anyway, as most cheap printers are unlikely to spend money developing an IP accepting port when they're quite happy being reamed out for £35 a go at the moment and a USB 1.1 port.
Google have gone miles to figure out how they can be lazy about a problem, instead of doing what everyone else does and makes the print drivers local, they've just decided to create massive amounts of global network traffic and server usage to print a PDF 3 foot away to a printer, let alone the environmental impact of replacing what are perfectly good printers and networking kits with Google friendly versions.
Also, final moan, but i'm guessing like anything else that goes through google they'll be taking a copy of whatever i print to 'optimise' some service they provide, and to generally keep an idea on what the worlds up to.
Is is bad that this didn't seem unbelieveable.
Honestly, having read this if it was any other day than april 1st, this wouldn't have been a huge shock. Its pretty much following apple's corporate strategy to restrict access to their platforms. So who knows, maybe come april 1st 2011, we'll be seeing the deployment of required iHTML protocol for the iphone/ipad devices....
People really should look at this from an impartial position. Yes, we may morally object to the imformation restrictions China imposes, but as a sixth of the global population, they can decide that on their own. We cannot determine this for this, and therefore global companies should learn to accept global rules, rather than just whining about it, threatening to withdraw from the country they're being allowed to trade in. China could have just completely banned any company working with Google, which they haven't done, it's only Google who have thrown the toys out of the pram here. If only people would see that....
Typo I assume...
"(£133) for the 32MB product"
That is just a tad pricey, think i got a 32mb card with a phone about 3 years ago, for free! These companies now, bit of a credit crunch then in recovery they just charge what they like....
They have all completely failed to realise that the only people who search for/follow/join these groups are already supporters.
Furthermore, I use twitter/facebook everyday for social networking/just getting marketed at by everyone and I wouldn't give a hoot what was said on them by a political party. They're all run by people who are paid to say stuff and all that, its just PR and spin, but clearly thats the way the government thinks politics works now.
Exactly, basically people just need a basic understanding of what a browser is (lots of people don't they generally assume facebook is indeed an application installed on the PC), and that it does need to be updated like anti-virus every now and then.
You're correct, neither is better in security TBH, and things like chrome and safari are only 'secure' as they have such small market shares there is little point in developing weaponised exploits for them.
You're correct that Google will loose, people think Google has big cash pots, they're peanuts compared to Apple.
However, Google buy Nokia? Doubt it, Nokia have more cash and market than pretty much any other phone company/most companies full stop, they would seriously struggle to purchase Nokia outright, especially when Nokia are seeking to challenge Android with Symbian/Maemo.
Finally, while it might be amusing Apple & Microsoft aren't really at war as such, they compete sure, but they also work together on things such as MS licensing Activesync for the iPhone etc. Look for an area where Google and Microsoft work together, the same for Apple? pretty much none as Google continually seeks to be the disruptor in a market.
The thing is, put the cat amongst the pigeons too much and the pigeons might just all team up and take the cat out (read through this metaphor to companies getting fed up of an online advertiser disrupting all their core businesses with ad funded models).
I think this is the crux of the point, I would imagine the Google plug in would be something similar to the Office Live plugin, which just adds a menu option in the standard Office GUI, people will struggle to notice the difference which you're right, in one way weens people off Microsoft (they'll skip sharepoint instead of Google Apps), however they're then keeping them tucked into that MS office skillset and mindset than will stop them transferring to anything else.
You're also right about the need for google to abandon everything in the browser. Does anyone remember a couple of years back when they stood up and said that the OS was a layer that didn't matter, it was all about the browser (Oh and here's Chrome for you). Then suddenly, hmmm, people are just using Chrome as a browser, they still care about the OS. Well here's Chrome OS, but we're still all about the web so its completely useless offline. And then the Google Phone, so in a couple of years they've moved from saying its only the browser that matters, to now its the hardware they're making!
I think Microsoft's Software plus services strategy is the best one in comparison (its definately the one most people are adopting at the moment anyway)
Actually Not Disruptive
I can't entirely see why this would piss Microsoft off. In the corporate world if people use this they're paying for Google Apps, but not using the web interface (which Google harp on about forever and a day) and still paying the license fee to Microsoft. Both companies make money from this arrangement. Also, as a user is likely to upload to Google apps through the Office client, and Download through the Office client, why will they ever need to use the Google interface? They wont. They'll just see Google Apps as this dumb box in the cloud to store their documents. Which is exactly what Microsoft Office Live is which comes free as of June/July when Office 2010 comes out.
Really can't see the disruptive angle Google are pitching with this one, and can only see it fading away in a couple of months when built into office is the same feature but going into a Microsoft server/internal sharepoint site rather than Google Apps.
Hang on, after the BBC releasing a post stating they're looking to create applications on the various platforms for iplayer and news, surely if they just bought this application, or even just a license to use it it would prevent them wasting money on litigation/developing their own?
But you've still got the fact that the majority of US citizens couldn't point out Britain on a map, so are they likely to know the union jack from a couple of miles up, however big it is?
Who's Getting The Fees?
So yes, eventually (seriously, 3 years?) Ebay have done the right thing whether they were asked to or legally required to is a different thing. However look at the percentages Ebay takes from these sales, if the guy made millions on Ebay, Ebay have taken a cut.
Therefore, directly, Ebay have profited from this criminal enterprise. Now I don't know/Can't be bothered to work out how much but the last time i sold something on Ebay a good percentage (about 4%) went to Ebay of the final sale price, plus a 50p or so listing fee.
I'm guessing this was paying the wages of the Ebay investigators/just lining their pockets while they make gestures towards preventing counterfeiting, while quietly continuing to profit from its massive spread on Ebay's marketplace.
Hang On Indeed
So yes you're correct for a country to successfully adopt Windows on 98% of its computers is a boost for them, they're all IT literate in an internationally recognised product. That's great if you want to be the new outsourcing capital of the world.
However what happens when someone in China actually invents something. Whats the motivation to innovate or develop their own software, rather than just peddling US stuff? There's not one because as Kevin Turner correctly said, the Chinese IPR are just a joke and unenforced.
Therefore while yes, they're all getting something for nothing now, they're also preventing innovation and development within their own country by their own people.
BTP are always present at major stations and have a decent sized station at Birmingham New Street, so it's misleading to state the police were called. It's more likely to have been:
Sir, do you have a ticket
Um, wait i'll find it (real answer being no, I just got on here without one and hoped you would go away)
2 Minute Awkward Silence filled with rummaging
Sir, you'll have to leave the train if you don't have a ticket
YOU WHAT, IM NOT LEAVING THIS TRAIN YOU W****R WHO DO YOU THINK YOU ARE, DO YOU KNOW WHO I AM?!?!
Sir, my friend John from the British Transport Police will be able to assist you with your enquiries from now onwards.
Exactly, all that needed to be implemented was the ability for OEMs to completely remove it if they wanted (with legally removed strong arming) as well as givin users the option to remove IE once they've got a new browser.
Also, Opera's metaphor that it's just like going to the supermarket and getting only one choice of shampoo is complete rubbish. Its in fact like choosing to buy a product at the supermarket, taking it home then the EU now forcing the shampoo company to give you a set of options of which shampoo you want.
The problem is that whilst it is true Microsoft do have a 90%+ market share, they're still selling their own product. If people are too stupid/lazy/just don't care to change, then they don't change. It's Operas problem for not advertising, everyone else does, even Google have had a recent spate of paper based adverts for chrome, they've got the idea that they can't just make something and hope that people download it!
Finally, I would like to know where all those billions of fines have gone. The software industry is a soft target, nobody has been made redundant directly from these fines, however if these kind of fines were placed on another industry with a monopoly (there are other monopolies out there!) and it caused any job losses, everyone would be up in arms. As it's a software company though, clearly the EU can just tax them until they stop selling products to the EU.
We need the two types of plane, its important to understand the difference.
Originally in the 1960s when we last went through this debate, we picked the C130 (for whatever reason) to tactically move stuff (troops, ammo, light equiptment and even some of the lighter armour we had such APCs etc) around. This was also designed with the core capability of not requiring a runway much more than a dirt track 600-700 metres long and then being able to unload a relatively large amount of kit quickly, then take off again.
The large stuff was then going to go via the navy/commercial shipping. It will always be ridiculous to fly a challenger division out to a warzone. Even with C-17's, they can only take 1 tank each, it will take an age to fly the armour out one tank at a time, plus all the support staff, gear, REME support tanks etc. Not including the fact that we still then need a friendly airport waiting with unloading facilities for a fleet of 60+ ton MBT's.
This difference in role is important, C-17s are good at airlift, and yes they can lift at lot. However they're not going to be lifting tanks, so the weight limit on A400's is irrelevant. The increased capacity does make a difference, but then again, try and land a C-17 on a dirt track and you'll quickly have the answer as to why we need TACTICAL airlift, not just strategic.
And at the end of the day, why don't get just keep hiring the C-17s/Antonov's anyway? Seeing as Lewis is stating that £100m is purchase cost, plus £100m support (plus training and running the actual bases to keep these things in i imagine) It may well be cheaper to pay by the lift.
Maybe FedEx or UPS will start a military shipping service that would commercially challenge the airlift capabilities of the MOD? We do live in a capitalist country after all, free market and all that.....
re: Anonymous Coward
Quite a few 6.1 version phones run that kind of resolution, Touch HD, Xperia etc, mainly very high end ones, but still they're out there.
I've got an Xperia, and the market place is awesome, bit thin on the ground at the moment which might let it down, but hopefully once it gets going this will improve.
Also, installing software from the web to your phone is seamless which is great.
Surely this should have been a blank sheet of paper? until a month or so ago, GM were looking at a decidedly blank future.
Also, re: someone comparing this to Xbox Natal, how is that the same? these, ridiculous drawings with no technical specifications just marketing speak. Natal, an actual product, people have tested them and used the live and it works, and unless you sit with your head pressed against the screen already, you've probably got a house that's big enough.