Open Web

Oliver has a short post concerning Google Wave and the new world the Wave will have wrought. Once section in particular caught my eye:
Two behemoths going after each others markets
..."Google apps, while a very popular tool for students, has never caught on in the enterprise due to security concerns, with a few exceptions - Microsoft Office is the default in cubicle land. Google search meanwhile is currently the global market leader, and is a popular enterprise solution in the form of internal appliances behind the firewall, while Microsoft's search and associated electronically stored information taxonomy and tagging has been famously weak."
"While these two giants slug it out for the others coveted market the playing field may well change significantly as the third big internet revolution unfolds. We've gone from Web 1.0, the read only static html website world to Web 2.0, the read-write, 'user generated content' web. The explosion in interconnectedness is at the expense of information fragmentation: the third web generation (Web 3.0?) is all about the meaning and context of data and information.
"Behaviorally suggested content; the personalized experience of a web that seems to know you and anticipates what you want is just around the corner...."

Good article from Stephen Shankland describing how the Wave-HTML5-O3D-Web Worker pieces fit. He left out GWT. But this after all, one very big picture. Google has thrown down a game changer. Wave represents one of those rare inflection points where everything immediately changes. There is no way to ignore the elephant that just sat on your face. Google has been demonstrating its sandboxing technology for making web applications perform at similar levels to those associated with native desktop applications. Google Native Client, still highly experimental, lets browsers run program modules natively on an x86 processor for higher performance than with web-programming technologies, such as JavaScript or Flash, that involve more software layers to process and execute the code. But to use it, there is a significant barrier: people must install a browser plug-in.

Whoops. This is the better article! ZDNet got the dregs. CNET got the real thing: Google Native Client, HTML5, GWT, Wave, Web Worker Threads, webkit/chromium, Chrome, O3D "Google wants its Native Client technology to be a little more native. Google Native Client, still highly experimental, lets browsers run program modules natively on an x86 processor for higher performance than with Web programming technologies such as JavaScript or Flash that involve more software layers to process and execute the code. But to use it, there's a significant barrier: people must install a browser plug-in.

The Justice Department's antitrust division is preparing to give a quick thumbs up to Oracle Corp.'s proposed $7.4 billion purchase of Sun Microsystems Inc., according to a lawyer briefed on the case. Swift approval surprises the many antitrust experts who predicted a long, scathing review. A difficult investigation was expected for two key reasons. First, Assistant Attorney General Christine Varney, who has a special area of expertise in high technology matters, rode into office promising vigorous antitrust enforcement. Second, skepticism lingers among DOJ staff about Oracle's business practices. Oracle CEO Larry Ellison thwarted the DOJ in 2004 when he defeated an attempt by the agency to block his purchase of rival PeopleSoft Inc.

Nice catch and cast from Michael Hickens. He walks us through some strange goings on at SalesForce.com. It seems Commander Benioff has ordered the good ship SlaesForce to turn on a dime, drop everything, and set a course for Wave. Good stuff: "...... Could Salesforce be reengineering its AppExchange platform to run standards-based code like HTML 5? The reason I ask is that none other than Salesforce CEO Marc Benioff listed his status on Facebook this weekend as: "working on salesforce.com's new architecture." There would have to be a very good reason, or a transformational event like Google's introduction of its Wave, for the company to change a key element of its strategy.

More details on the new DoJ investigation, including confirmations from Google and Genentech.

Excellent explanation and review from the Tim Anderson. I wonder how i missed this? Here is the summary statement: "..... You can also extend XAML with custom objects. The main requirement is that classes used in XAML must have a parameterless constructor. The procedure is straightforward. Define a class; make sure your application has a reference to the assembly containing the class; then add a namespace declaration for the assembly. You can then define elements in XAML that map to your class, and at runtime these will become object instances. XAML has a curious story when it comes to formatted text, especially in Silverlight. In one sense it is rather limited. XAML has no understanding of common formats such as HTML, CSS or RTF, let alone the fancy new OOXML. Silverlight developers have to interact with the browser DOM in order to display HTML." "... No escaping it: Silverlight .XAP bundle preserves the original XAML. That said, XAML with WPF actually is a document format. The full WPF has an element called FlowDocument and rich formatting capabilities. Silverlight lacks FlowDocument, but does have a TextBlock with basic formatting options via the inline object. It also supports the Glyph element. This is interesting because it is the core element in XPS, Microsoft's invented-here alternative to Adobe's PDF." ".... XPS uses a subset of XAML to describe fixed layouts. In consequence, and with some compromises, you can use Silverlight to display XPS." "..... The bottom line is that XAML is a way of programming .NET declaratively. Its more intricate features improve the mapping between XAML and .NET. The result is we have design tools like Microsoft's Expression Blend and a clean separation between UI objects and program code, which is a considerable achievement." ".... As ever there's a downside, and with Microsoft it's the classic: this is thoroughly proprietary, and the schema issues make it difficult to validate with standard XML tools." No

This is amazing stuff. With all the talk about OpenOffice ODF compatibility problems with existing MSOffice productivity environments and documents, this comparison is stunning. I stumbled across this Compatibility Comparison reading this article: ThinkFree Set to Launch The First Complete Android Office Suite. Documents To Go is currently the only provider of Word and Excel documents on Android. The ThinkFree Office comparisons to OpenOffice cover a number of familiar compatibility issues, with layout at the top of the list. ThinkFree Write 3.5 vs OpenOffice Writer 3.0 ".....When using a word processor to create documents, you really shouldn't have to worry about whether your client will be able to see the document as you intended." ".... However, if you use a low-cost solution like OpenOffice, you should be prepared for frustrations and disappointments....."

MindTouch was by far and away the hottest property at the 2009 Web 2.0 Conference. And for good reason. They have figured out how to tap into the productivity value of enterprise collaborative networks. Most their underlying stuff is based on REST based data objects and services, but they also allow for proprietary data bindings. The key to MindTouch seemd to be the easy to fall into and use collaborative interface: imagine a workgroup project centered around a Web page filled with data objects, graphics and content, with each object also having a collabortaive conversation attached to it. Sounds complicated, but that's where the magic of MindTouch kicks in. It's simple. One the things that most impressed me was an interactive graph placed on one of the wiki project pages. The graph was being fed data from a local excel spreadsheet, and could be interacted with in real time. It was simple to change from a pie chart to a bar graph and so on. It was also possible to interact with the data itself and create what-if scenario's. Great stuff. With considerable persistence though, i was able to discover from Aaron that this interactivity and graphical richness was due to a Silverlight plug-in! From the article: "..... Rather than focusing on socialization, one to one interactions and individual enrichment, businesses must be concerned with creating an information fabric within their organizations. This information fabric is a federation of content from the multiplicity of data and application silos utilized on a daily basis; such as, ERP, CRM, file servers, email, databases, web-services infrastructures, etc. When you make this information fabric easy to edit between groups of individuals in a dynamic, secure, governed and real-time manner, it creates a Collaborative Network." "This is very different from social networks or social software, which is focused entirely on enabling conversations. Collaborative Networks are focused on groups accessing and organiz

This new technical committee IPR mode may not make much sense to the legally-inclined without reading the new section 2.7 definition of "Covered Product." There we learn that the patent covenant extends only so far as the implementation is conformant with the standard. I count that as a good thing, curing a defect in the Sun Covenant Not to Sue in regard to ODF, which at least arguably extended far enough to confer immunity on those who embrace and extend a standard. But the reciprocity provision allowing contributors to counter-sue for infringement if sued clashes with many definitions of an "open standard" adopted by governmental entities for procurement purposes. So a question remains as to who must bend, government or OASIS members.

A new report by research analyst, Forrester says that 80 percent of enterprise customers are using some version of Microsoft Office. This reflects the stranglehold Microsoft has on the office productivity market, despite increased awareness of alternatives such as Sun's OpenOffice.org suite, and the rise of web-hosted variants such as Google Docs. I had a chance to comment on this brief lament regarding Microsoft's iron grip, desktop monopoly.

Cisco's James Urquhart discusses the NIST definition of Cloud Computing. The National Institute of Technology and Standards is a non regulatory branch of the Commerce Department and is responsible for much of the USA's official participation in World Standards organizations. This is an important discussion, but i'm a bit disappointed by the loose use of the term "network". I guess they mean the Internet? No mention of RESTfull computing or Open Web Standards either. Some interesting clips: ...(The NIST's) definition of cloud computing will be the de facto standard definition that the entire US government will be given...In creating this definition, NIST consulted extensively with the private sector including a wide range of vendors, consultants and industry pundants including your truly. Below is the draft NIST working definition of Cloud Computing. I should note, this definition is a work in progress and therefore is open to public ratification & comment. The initial feedback was very positive from the federal CIO's who were presented it yesterday in DC. Baring any last minute lobbying I doubt we'll see many more major revisions. ....... Cloud computing is a pay-per-use model for enabling available, convenient, on-demand network access to a shared pool of configurable computing resources (e.g., networks, servers, storage, applications, services) that can be rapidly provisioned and released with minimal management effort or service provider interaction. This cloud model promotes availability and is comprised of five key characteristics, three delivery models, and four deployment models.

Gary, NIST really is not "responsible for much of the USA's official participation in World Standards organizations." Lots of legal analysis omitted, but the bottom line is that NIST would have had to be delegated that responsibility by the President, but never was. However, that did not stop NIST from signing over virtually all responsibility for U.S. participation in international standard development to the private ANSI, without so much as a public notice and comment rulemaking process. See section 3 at http://ts.nist.gov/Standards/Conformity/ansimou.cfm. Absolutely illegal, including at least two bright-line violations of the U.S. Constitution. But the Feds have unmistakably abdicated their legal responsibilities in regard to international standards to the private sector.

Digital Daily is carrying John Paczkowski's point-by-point twitter stream of the Google Apps Event. Fascinating stuff. Especially Dave Girouard's comments comparing Google Apps to MSOffice. One highlight of the event seems to be the announcement of a Google OutLook integration app. Sounds like something similar to what Zimbra did a few years ago prior to the $350 million acquisition by Yahoo! Zimbra perfected an integration into desktop Outlook comparable to the Exchange - Outlook channel. If Google Apps Sync for Outlook integration is a s good as the event demo, they would still have to crack into MSOffice to compete with the MSOffice-SharePoint-MOSS integration channel. Some interesting comments from Google Enterprise customers, Genentech, Morgans Hotel Group, and Avago ....... At an event in San Francisco, Google is expected to discuss the future of its productivity suite and some enhancements that may begin to close the gap with Microsoft (MSFT) Office, something the company desperately needs to do if it wants to make deeper inroads in the enterprise area. As Girouard himself admitted last week, Apps still has a ways to go. "Gmail is really the best email application in the world for consumers or business users, and we can prove that very well," he said. "Calendar is also very good, and probably almost at the level of Gmail. But the word processing, spreadsheets and other products are much less mature. They're a couple of years old at the most, and we still have a lot of work to do."

Excellent presentation discussing the AtomPub protocol as a key Open Web API . 52 slides, and everyone worth some study.

.... "I recently described how Google's Wave, a collaboration tool based on the new HTML 5 standard, demonstrated the potential for Web applications to unglue Microsoft's hold on customers. My post quoted Gary Edwards, the former president of the Open Document Foundation, a first-hand witness to the failed attempt by Massachusetts to dump Microsoft and as experienced a hand at Microsoft-tilting as anyone I know......"