Group items tagged

A recap of Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols talk at All Things Open "This is a report from the All Things Open conference, held this year at the Raleigh Convention Center. I attended Steven Vaughan-Nichols session on marketing and using the press in open source-this is a recap." [# ! The Same Old #Tools... # ! ... for Brand #New #Goals: # ! #Freedom, #transparency, #performance...]

A recap of Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols talk at All Things Open "This is a report from the All Things Open conference, held this year at the Raleigh Convention Center. I attended Steven Vaughan-Nichols session on marketing and using the press in open source-this is a recap."

"Summary: Public PCs aren't safe, so what's a PC user to do? Carry a Linux distribution on a USB stick in their backpocket of course! Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols By Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols for Linux and Open Source | July 15, 2014 -- 23:42 GMT (16:42 PDT)"

"Summary: Public PCs aren't safe, so what's a PC user to do? Carry a Linux distribution on a USB stick in their backpocket of course! Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols By Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols for Linux and Open Source | July 15, 2014 -- 23:42 GMT (16:42 PDT)"

"Fedora adds multiple Linux desktops, OpenShift cloud Origin and Fedora Atomic Host to drive containerized application development and deployment. Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols By Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols for Linux and Open Source | June 21, 2016 -- 17:29 GMT (18:29 BST) | Topic: Enterprise Software "

"Christine Hall Last week when Microsoft and the Linux Foundation separately announced a partnership that would see Redmond issuing a Linux certification called Microsoft Certified Solutions Associate Linux (MCSA), Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols felt the need to add the words "not a typo" to the headline of his coverage on ZDNet."

"Christine Hall Last week when Microsoft and the Linux Foundation separately announced a partnership that would see Redmond issuing a Linux certification called Microsoft Certified Solutions Associate Linux (MCSA), Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols felt the need to add the words "not a typo" to the headline of his coverage on ZDNet."

In an interview with Bloomberg News, Samson Hu, chief of Asus' Eee PC business, said Asus has assigned engineers to develop an Android-based netbook by the end of the year -- though he said it hasn't decided whether to ship such a product. But in this economy, would any company waste expensive engineering on a project that might not ship? I don't think so. Android makes sense for Asus, which has already shown a willingness to back a Linux maverick. As for applications, the wide array of open-source software that all Linux distributions share would be available, but so would Google's Chrome Web browser and its wealth of Web-based applications. You can bet those are going to work very well with Android/Chrome. I'm sure Asus won't be alone in adopting Android. According to Barclays Capital analyst Israel Hernandez, netbooks are the one bright spot in the PC market. Android just makes them cheaper and more profitable.

"Summary:Microsoft has had trouble getting people to use its Windows Phone operating systems, however, it might make as much as $3.4 billion on Android phones. By Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols for Linux and Open Source | May 8, 2013 -- 19:43 GMT (20:43 BST)"

Well well well. The experts are finally starting to get it. WebKit is extraordinary, not as a browser, but as the "Open Web" foundation for web application (RiA) development that spans device and desktop.

The vastly improved hardware and network throughput are not the primary drivers of this sea change. "The biggest jolt to the mobile Web development experience, in my view, has been the iPhone. Its implementation of mobile Safari, while imperfect, has given handsets the real Internet, rather than a hobbled, niched version that was typical in devices that preceded it." What that means for the future, according to O'Grady, is that the mobile application space "will mirror the development on the client, honestly. It will evolve into a platform barely distinguishable, in many respects, from the traditional desktop browser experience."

Good analysis by Stephen Vaughan-Nichols. He gets it right. Sort of. Stephen believes that Chrome is desinged to kill MSOffice. Maybe, but i think it's way too late for that. IMHO, Chrome is designed to keep Google and the Open Web in the game. A game that Microsoft is likely to run away with. Microsoft has built an easy to use transiton bridge form MSOffice desktop centric "client/server" computing model to a Web centirc but proprietary RiA-WebStack-Cloud model. In short, there is an on going great transtion of traditional client/server apps to an emerging model we might call client/ WebStack-Cloud-RiA /server computing model. As the world shifts from a Web document model to one driven by Web Applications, there is i believe a complimentary shift towards the advantage Micorsoft holds via the desktop "client/server" monopoly. For Microsoft, this is just a transtion. Painful from a monopolist profitability view point - but unavoidably necessary. The transition is no doubt helped by the OOXML <> XAML "Fixed/flow" Silverlight ready conversion component. MS also has a WebStack-Cloud (Mesh) story that has become an unstoppable juggernaut (Exchange/SharePoint/SQL Server as the WebSTack). WebKit based RiA challengers like Adobe Apollo, Google Chrome, and Apple SproutCore-Cocoa have to figure out how to crack into the great transition. MS has succeeded in protecting their MSOffice monopoly until such time as they had all the transtion pieces in place. They have a decided advantage here. It's also painfully obvious that the while the WebKit guys have incredible innovation on their side, they are still years behind the complete desktop to WebStack-RiA-Cloud to device to legacy servers application story Microsoft is now selling into the marketplace. They also are seriously lacking in developer tools. Still, the future of the Open Web hangs in the balance. Rather than trying to kill MSOffice, i would think a better approach would be that of trying to

There are five reasons why Google is doing this, and, if you read the comic book closely - yes, I'm serious - and you know technology you can see the reasons for yourself. These, in turn, lead to what I think is Google's real goal for Chrome.

I'm still keeping the door open on a suspicion that Microsoft may have planned to end the life of MS Office after the new fortress on the server side is ready. The code base is simply too brittle to have a competitive future in the feature wars. I can't get past my belief that if Microsoft saw any future in the traditional client-side office suite, it would have been building a new one a decade ago. Too many serious bugs too deeply buried in spaghetti code to fix; it's far easier to rebuild from the ground up. Word dates to 1984, Excel to 1985, Powerpoint to 1987, All were developed for the Mac, ported years later to Windows. At least Word is still running a deeply flawed 16-bit page layout engine. E.g., page breaks across subdocuments have been broken since Word 1.0. Technology designed to replace yet still largely defined by its predecessor, the IBM Correcting Selectric electro-mechanical typewriter. Mid-80s stand-alone, non-networked computer technology in the World Wide Web era? Where's the future in software architecture developed two decades ago, before the Connected World? I suspect Office's end is near. Microsoft's problem is migrating their locked-in customers to the new fortress on the server side. The bridge is OOXML. In other words, Google doesn't have to kill Office; Microsoft will do that itself. Giving the old cash cow a face lift and fresh coat of lipstick? That's the surest sign that the old cow's owner is keeping a close eye on prices in the commodity hamburger market while squeezing out the last few buckets of milk.