Re: Apple's Yawn and Windows Apology
Apple are becoming like Nintendo every day.
Slightly different hardware platform, same software franchise.
20 posts • joined 23 Jun 2012
Apple are becoming like Nintendo every day.
Slightly different hardware platform, same software franchise.
Or better still, Facebook can go to one of the Far East ODMs and get ARM boards made for them at a fraction of the cost that Qualcomm would charge and stuff them into their hyperscale DCs.
Facebook doesn't need Qualcomm - just like they don't need IBM, HP, Dell or Windows for their Intel servers.
NASA hit the nail on the head.
Private Cloud is dead, long live Public Cloud!
What's the point of me hosting 'on-prem' in my own dc, when I can throw it all into the lap of an MSP to do it for me?
I believe private cloud is dead - you don't need it. If you have a virtualised infrastructure already, that's good enough, you just need decent deployment tools and even the standard tools supplied by VMWare, Microsoft and others tend to be good enough. However, one might want to consider using containers (LXC or Docker) but beyond that, private clouds don't give you anything above what virtualisation technologies do.
Public clouds have been only good for a handful of 'consumer' applications. You're only now seeing the likes of IBM, SAP and Oracle slowly moving their apps into a cloud model - so when they mature in a few years, that would be the time to start considering them. Having said that, as others claim on here, public cloud is not for everyone due to security concerns/laws.
Hybrid clouds might work better, but not in their current guise. I think once what they offer can be componentised (not an entire application, but a subset) into offering things like Docker in a seamless and dynamically interchangeable model - whereby application subsets are loaded and offloaded, into/out of the private side of a hybrid cloud, as the business needs change - then you'll be in a real position to consider a move to cloud computing. I'm predicting a capability in a hybrid cloud environment, whereby application subsets (based on something like LXC or Docker), come in and out of one's private cloud (from a public cloud - probably supplied by an apps vendor) to deliver a particular function or application service. This movement of apps/subsets creates a hybrid cloud (because you have a mixture of app types - in-house developed/running and those coming in from a public cloud) and breaks things down to beyond an application; actually using subsets delivered by something like LXC or Docker.
Until then, it's all marketing and a repeat of what one already has at the moment = virtualisation.
I think the biggest threat for all server vendors comes from the Original Device Manufacturers, who are producing throw-away servers for the likes of Facebook, Google, Amazon and Rackspace, under the banner of the Open Compute Project.
If the Hyperscale data centres do not contain kit from IBM, Lenovo, HP or Dell, then how long is it before others catch on to doing the same thing or merely relying on the cloud services of some of these internet/cloud giants (Google, Amazon, Rackspace), to do their IT?
Don't think it will happen? Just look at Linux merely 10 years ago - no one even thought of using it in their data centres and now, it's so popular and in production that any major bugs (such as the recent Heartbleed and Shellshock) are headline news!
You sound like you've been watching Michael Moore's "Capitalism: A Love Story" film.
I do agree with you but I really don't understand why all this 'behaviour' and 'patterns' of capitalism need to be pointed out...not only is it academic but it's inherent.
Nobody's that stupid. The point being made was that it was just poor headline taste, considering some journalists really ARE being decapitated.
Unfortunately, he forgot to mention two very important points:
1. US/UK went over the head of the UN, stating that they did not need any further resolutions and now the UN has a broken credibility in the world, and that's why you see the US now leading such crisis, rather than the UN.
2. He forgot to mention the half a million civilians that have been killed since the US/UK invasion.
The reason they're currently only doing exoskeletons is because the Terminator has not come back in time yet and they haven't gotten hold of its 'revolutionary' microprocessor, in order to build the Skynet in the first place...as Sarah Connor says: "God. A person could go crazy thinking about this stuff."
There's no doubt that the Moto G is a good phone at a very good price and for the novice/average Android user, it's a bargain.
However, this does come indeed at a price - something this article has mentioned only in passing
- No SD Card slot - I really don't know why Google is doing an Apple 'me too' with their products, when really, one of their differentiators IS having extra expansion on Android phones. This to me, seems like an evident shooting of their own foot.
- The phone only has about 4.5GB of the internal storage free for the user, which essentially cripples the phone from doing anything useful, aside from holding a few vids and photos and the odd MP3 tune. After about a year, you're looking for an upgrade out of sheer desperation and the 16GB model is probably no relief to anyone either.
- 5MP camera - is that it...? For that lovely screen?
When you consider that the hTC Desire 500 can be picked up around the same price, but includes an SD Card slot and an 8MP camera - the Moto G soon looks a bit inferior.
"What if Richard Dawkins had been bumped off the zoology course at Balliol College and sent to a seminary instead?"
Well, it would've at least stopped him from releasing all those baseless books of fiction that he seems to enjoy writing and that, sadly, Joe Bloggs takes as being (if you will pardon the pun) gospel and never go and check for themselves the actual facts.
Pardon me, but didn't MS just write off $1B worth of the first gen Surface?
What are they doing pumping out 'more of the same' then?!
This strategy of releasing a faster, better product does not make sense. There are far more fundamental strategy points to deal with than adding "2" at the end of the product's name.
Things like deciding on one architecture and not two; either go with Intel (not recommended, since they don't have even 1% market share in the mobile/tab market) or ARM (defo!) architecture, so that developers don't have to write (or at least, compile) their apps twice, for two different architectures.
Second, more focus on an entry-level, cheap tablet is more of a priority, since MS is so late to the party - they simply cannot afford to slap an arrogant price on it (as Apple continue to do on their's), because they're not setting the trend here. So, a cheap entry-level 7"/8" tab would be a really good idea right now, to get their foot in the door; here's hoping Nokia will show them how to do it with the Lumia 2520 ("Sirius") tablet.
Third, invest in bringing Windows Phone 8 to work on tablets, not slap on there the desktop Windows 8 version. This will mean one code base, one API for devs and hopefully lower licensing costs - a bit like what Canonical is trying to do.
Can someone who knows someone in MS, please pass on these suggestions...?
Why not just buy a Chinese clone Andy (Android - you heard it here first) phone from the likes of ThL instead?
They are as fast as anything like this one from Who Are We (sorry, couldn't help that) but cost as less as 2/3 the price of such over-priced-cos-we-make-you-pay-their-import-duty models!
A quick search for on the web will find you all the models you can handle, at throw-away prices, from importers who now have UK warehouses and offer full refund (unlike CarPhoneWarehouse and Phones4U) and fix etc.
Microsoft's problem with Surface is not related to the hardware, marketing or even the price; well, at least, not after the RT discount.
It's problem stems from the fact that it went with 3 architectures, around the time when Surface was being developed.
Rather than extending Windows Phone 8 to cover tablets as well as mobile phones, or redeveloping it to 'cope' with the requirements of a tablet product, and thus maintaining binary compatibility and sharing the ARM architecture between the two, Microsoft decided to go for a THIRD architecture - that's Windows RT.
So devs have 3 architectures to contend with, when they develop their apps; write for normal Windows 8, write for Windows Phone 8 and port/rewrite for Windows RT.
Why did Microsoft do that?! That's the question they should be asking themselves, because if they had combined WP8 and WinRT into the same architecture and binary, then they'd have had a much larger apps base.
The fact that Windows RT (and thus, Surface tablets) is not compatible with either Windows 8 or Windows Phone 8, puts it in no-man's land, rather than taking advantage of the complete portfolio of already-developed apps for the other two platforms.
Crikey! If I didn't know any better, I'd say that either Dell paid El Reg loadsa money to plaster Dell news articles all over their main page or it's been a slow news week (the industry's on holiday, is it?) so they've just copied and pasted all the press releases from the beleaguered PC maker.
I count no less than six (6!) news articles that are directly about some 'me too' product or another that they're releasing.
Did HP manage to update the blade's power connections while they were at it - from one to two - or is it still a single point of failure?
"seven years ago...no one but Google was doing custom, high-density machines". Except of course, IBM, which launched its BladeCenter product way back in 2002.
It's amazing how the processor is dropped into this article with a complete vacuum, when it comes to it's specification; that being quad core at 1.5GHz.
What's of more concern and smacks of a conspiracy by all the Android phone vendors, is that they've now started dropping the feature of an SD Card slot from their phones!
Sony is at it with the NXT models, Google is now doing it on Nexus 7 and this unimpressive phone and I think hTC has started down this disappointing behaviour as well, with the Desire X.
I don't want my storage capacity dictated to me (as Apple fanboys have to endure) - I want to decide how much capacity I want and I certainly don't want to blow my monthly data allowance, on streaming all my content, just because my phone hasn't got a SD Card slot.
Crikey. After all this time and jurnos still can't spell. "But not AN pinchy as expected"? Don't think sooo.
VMWare's decline is in sight, thanks to a fast-growing KVM for Linux, PowerVM holding its own for IBM Power Systems and a shockingly good catch-up by Microsoft (yes, those guys!) with Hyper-V in Server 2012.
" In a proper smartphone, if you need more storage you can buy it and slot it in yourself. "
Incorrect! Even Google and Sony are at it now; both the Nexus 7 tablet and Sony's latest Xperia NXT Series DO NOT have SD card slots either, so it's worse than people think.
There's an underlying 'conspiracy' here, started by Apple, but now seems to be perpetuated by the Android brands as well, which is undermining the whole freedom idea that goes hand-in-hand with open source.
"companies like Facebook, Google, Red Hat, and more have learned to sell services based upon or built around software" - that's because their products are not good enough for enterprise-class solutions. So they have targeted social, search and companies that cannot afford business software. Microsoft has been a corporate stalwart since the dawn of the PC- where was open source during that time? This really is apples and oranges you are comparing here.
"free as in freedom" - if by this statement you mean software fragmentation, then you're right.
Regardless of the software that Apple uses, how it presents this software to customers is COMPLETELY and UTTERLY closed.
"Apple sells iPhones, not iOS." But it has and still does charge for OS X, even though that might be perceived as being 'cheaper' than Microsoft. Do you really think every Microsoft corporate customer pays the off-the-shelf price for Windows? That's a naive.
"Google has open sourced Android" - not quite. It's not a view shared by everyone, especially phone manufacturers. And besides, Android is so mobile-phone oriented, there's really no point in developing it for any other type of device. Some have tried to offer a desktop/notebook version, but come on, that is nowhere really, isn't it? All one has to do is type in "is android truly open" in (ironically) Google search and you'll soon find differing and contradicting opinions.
"a holistic product that embeds software but doesn't attempt to sell that software." - well, the mobile phone/tablet market is different from desktop/notebook/server. Surely you didn't think that Microsoft would insist that customers pay for the hardware AND the WinPhone 7 as well, did you? I mean, who is doing that in this market? No one! So why would Microsoft shoot itself, so stupidly, in the foot? this is really common sense, it's not a revelation or something to write about; it goes without saying!
Other vendors are just not as successful as Microsoft in the other industries, so people - like the author of this article - continue to attempt to compare apples with oranges. What's Google Docs' market share in contract with MS Office, in office productivity tools? How many corporates use Apple servers versus Wintel? How many people do you know that own a ChromeBook?