Southwest Virginia Blogs

Peter Gutmann, a well known software security expert from Australia, has posted a long piece on the some of the problems he sees with Vista. Gutmann's piece is not the typical anti-Microsoft rant; he has done extensive research and consulted with many other reputable experts. His focus on on Vista's new "features" that are designed to prevent unauthorized use of copyrighted content like videos and music.

The article is very long and provides extensive detail, but the key concept is that the Vista code that degrades the quality of music and video if the output device (like a TV or a stereo) does not have the same kind of software content management as Vista. In some cases, Vista will completely disable a video or audio card or certain other kinds of hardware installed in your PC if Vista decides it does not have the appropriate level of content protection.

To illustrate this, Gutmann cites someone who purchased a new HP Media Center computer that came with an HD video that would NOT play on the buyer's flat panel HD TV because the TV was not "Vista compatible." In fact, Gutmann says virtually all audio and video entertainment systems lack the software Microsoft expects.

Gutmann characterizes these new controls as a blatant attempt by Microsoft to monopolize all entertainment content, in the same way that Apple has monopolized music with the iTunes store. It is worth noting that Gutmann is equally unhappy with Apple and the way it has structured digital rights management (DRM) with iTunes content. And I have to agree; I still buy music the old fashioned way, by purchasing a CD, which does not have DRM limitations on it.

Gutmann sees a dreary future for PC users, and predicts that ultimately, Microsoft will fail, because we simply won't bother using our PCs to play videos and music....we'll buy cheap CD/DVD players for $50 that do not come encumbered with all this nonsense. Finally, Gutmann raises the spectre of real damage arising from Vista. Gutmann mentions a medical professional who says he cannot run the risk of having vital medical systems shut down autonomously because Vista software has decided some medical device does not have the correct DRM installed. That's something to think about the next time you or someone you know is checked into a hospital.

Peter Gutmann, a well known software security expert from Australia, has posted a long piece on the some of the problems he sees with Vista. Gutmann's piece is not the typical anti-Microsoft rant; he has done extensive research and consulted with many other reputable experts. His focus on on Vista's new "features" that are designed to prevent unauthorized use of copyrighted content like videos and music.

The article is very long and provides extensive detail, but the key concept is that the Vista code that degrades the quality of music and video if the output device (like a TV or a stereo) does not have the same kind of software content management as Vista. In some cases, Vista will completely disable a video or audio card or certain other kinds of hardware installed in your PC if Vista decides it does not have the appropriate level of content protection.

To illustrate this, Gutmann cites someone who purchased a new HP Media Center computer that came with an HD video that would NOT play on the buyer's flat panel HD TV because the TV was not "Vista compatible." In fact, Gutmann says virtually all audio and video entertainment systems lack the software Microsoft expects.

Gutmann characterizes these new controls as a blatant attempt by Microsoft to monopolize all entertainment content, in the same way that Apple has monopolized music with the iTunes store. It is worth noting that Gutmann is equally unhappy with Apple and the way it has structured digital rights management (DRM) with iTunes content. And I have to agree; I still buy music the old fashioned way, by purchasing a CD, which does not have DRM limitations on it.

Gutmann sees a dreary future for PC users, and predicts that ultimately, Microsoft will fail, because we simply won't bother using our PCs to play videos and music....we'll buy cheap CD/DVD players for $50 that do not come encumbered with all this nonsense. Finally, Gutmann raises the spectre of real damage arising from Vista. Gutmann mentions a medical professional who says he cannot run the risk of having vital medical systems shut down autonomously because Vista software has decided some medical device does not have the correct DRM installed. That's something to think about the next time you or someone you know is checked into a hospital.

Peter Gutmann, a well known software security expert from Australia, has posted a long piece on the some of the problems he sees with Vista. Gutmann's piece is not the typical anti-Microsoft rant; he has done extensive research and consulted with many other reputable experts. His focus on on Vista's new "features" that are designed to prevent unauthorized use of copyrighted content like videos and music.

The article is very long and provides extensive detail, but the key concept is that the Vista code that degrades the quality of music and video if the output device (like a TV or a stereo) does not have the same kind of software content management as Vista. In some cases, Vista will completely disable a video or audio card or certain other kinds of hardware installed in your PC if Vista decides it does not have the appropriate level of content protection.

To illustrate this, Gutmann cites someone who purchased a new HP Media Center computer that came with an HD video that would NOT play on the buyer's flat panel HD TV because the TV was not "Vista compatible." In fact, Gutmann says virtually all audio and video entertainment systems lack the software Microsoft expects.

Gutmann characterizes these new controls as a blatant attempt by Microsoft to monopolize all entertainment content, in the same way that Apple has monopolized music with the iTunes store. It is worth noting that Gutmann is equally unhappy with Apple and the way it has structured digital rights management (DRM) with iTunes content. And I have to agree; I still buy music the old fashioned way, by purchasing a CD, which does not have DRM limitations on it.

Gutmann sees a dreary future for PC users, and predicts that ultimately, Microsoft will fail, because we simply won't bother using our PCs to play videos and music....we'll buy cheap CD/DVD players for $50 that do not come encumbered with all this nonsense. Finally, Gutmann raises the spectre of real damage arising from Vista. Gutmann mentions a medical professional who says he cannot run the risk of having vital medical systems shut down autonomously because Vista software has decided some medical device does not have the correct DRM installed. That's something to think about the next time you or someone you know is checked into a hospital.

Peter Gutmann, a well known software security expert from Australia, has posted a long piece on the some of the problems he sees with Vista. Gutmann's piece is not the typical anti-Microsoft rant; he has done extensive research and consulted with many other reputable experts. His focus on on Vista's new "features" that are designed to prevent unauthorized use of copyrighted content like videos and music.

The article is very long and provides extensive detail, but the key concept is that the Vista code that degrades the quality of music and video if the output device (like a TV or a stereo) does not have the same kind of software content management as Vista. In some cases, Vista will completely disable a video or audio card or certain other kinds of hardware installed in your PC if Vista decides it does not have the appropriate level of content protection.

To illustrate this, Gutmann cites someone who purchased a new HP Media Center computer that came with an HD video that would NOT play on the buyer's flat panel HD TV because the TV was not "Vista compatible." In fact, Gutmann says virtually all audio and video entertainment systems lack the software Microsoft expects.

Gutmann characterizes these new controls as a blatant attempt by Microsoft to monopolize all entertainment content, in the same way that Apple has monopolized music with the iTunes store. It is worth noting that Gutmann is equally unhappy with Apple and the way it has structured digital rights management (DRM) with iTunes content. And I have to agree; I still buy music the old fashioned way, by purchasing a CD, which does not have DRM limitations on it.

Gutmann sees a dreary future for PC users, and predicts that ultimately, Microsoft will fail, because we simply won't bother using our PCs to play videos and music....we'll buy cheap CD/DVD players for $50 that do not come encumbered with all this nonsense. Finally, Gutmann raises the spectre of real damage arising from Vista. Gutmann mentions a medical professional who says he cannot run the risk of having vital medical systems shut down autonomously because Vista software has decided some medical device does not have the correct DRM installed. That's something to think about the next time you or someone you know is checked into a hospital.

This short article talks about the Google/Microsoft war, and suggests that Google may be winning. The theory is that Microsoft is way behind Google in being able to deliver Web-enabled applications. The author points to Google's still fledgling word processing and spreadsheet applications that run via the Web.

I am not so sure. Vista is going to be a very painful upgrade, and the high cost may drive a few more people to look at the Mac and Linux as alternatives, but Microsoft makes a lot of money in the corporate and business environment, and very few serious businesses are going to try to save a few bucks by using Google's free or low fee Web apps. Are you willing to store all your company secrets and financial information on a Google server that you do not control? It is not a likely scenario. Microsoft has the deep pockets to play a long game of catch up with Google, and another flawed assumption here is that Google is doing everything right. Google has already had several flops, and it still has been unable to significantly improve its search engine, despite the long lead it has had over competitors. This will remain an interesting horse race for a long time.

This short article talks about the Google/Microsoft war, and suggests that Google may be winning. The theory is that Microsoft is way behind Google in being able to deliver Web-enabled applications. The author points to Google's still fledgling word processing and spreadsheet applications that run via the Web.

I am not so sure. Vista is going to be a very painful upgrade, and the high cost may drive a few more people to look at the Mac and Linux as alternatives, but Microsoft makes a lot of money in the corporate and business environment, and very few serious businesses are going to try to save a few bucks by using Google's free or low fee Web apps. Are you willing to store all your company secrets and financial information on a Google server that you do not control? It is not a likely scenario. Microsoft has the deep pockets to play a long game of catch up with Google, and another flawed assumption here is that Google is doing everything right. Google has already had several flops, and it still has been unable to significantly improve its search engine, despite the long lead it has had over competitors. This will remain an interesting horse race for a long time.

This short article talks about the Google/Microsoft war, and suggests that Google may be winning. The theory is that Microsoft is way behind Google in being able to deliver Web-enabled applications. The author points to Google's still fledgling word processing and spreadsheet applications that run via the Web.

I am not so sure. Vista is going to be a very painful upgrade, and the high cost may drive a few more people to look at the Mac and Linux as alternatives, but Microsoft makes a lot of money in the corporate and business environment, and very few serious businesses are going to try to save a few bucks by using Google's free or low fee Web apps. Are you willing to store all your company secrets and financial information on a Google server that you do not control? It is not a likely scenario. Microsoft has the deep pockets to play a long game of catch up with Google, and another flawed assumption here is that Google is doing everything right. Google has already had several flops, and it still has been unable to significantly improve its search engine, despite the long lead it has had over competitors. This will remain an interesting horse race for a long time.

This short article talks about the Google/Microsoft war, and suggests that Google may be winning. The theory is that Microsoft is way behind Google in being able to deliver Web-enabled applications. The author points to Google's still fledgling word processing and spreadsheet applications that run via the Web.

I am not so sure. Vista is going to be a very painful upgrade, and the high cost may drive a few more people to look at the Mac and Linux as alternatives, but Microsoft makes a lot of money in the corporate and business environment, and very few serious businesses are going to try to save a few bucks by using Google's free or low fee Web apps. Are you willing to store all your company secrets and financial information on a Google server that you do not control? It is not a likely scenario. Microsoft has the deep pockets to play a long game of catch up with Google, and another flawed assumption here is that Google is doing everything right. Google has already had several flops, and it still has been unable to significantly improve its search engine, despite the long lead it has had over competitors. This will remain an interesting horse race for a long time.

This short article talks about the Google/Microsoft war, and suggests that Google may be winning. The theory is that Microsoft is way behind Google in being able to deliver Web-enabled applications. The author points to Google's still fledgling word processing and spreadsheet applications that run via the Web.

I am not so sure. Vista is going to be a very painful upgrade, and the high cost may drive a few more people to look at the Mac and Linux as alternatives, but Microsoft makes a lot of money in the corporate and business environment, and very few serious businesses are going to try to save a few bucks by using Google's free or low fee Web apps. Are you willing to store all your company secrets and financial information on a Google server that you do not control? It is not a likely scenario. Microsoft has the deep pockets to play a long game of catch up with Google, and another flawed assumption here is that Google is doing everything right. Google has already had several flops, and it still has been unable to significantly improve its search engine, despite the long lead it has had over competitors. This will remain an interesting horse race for a long time.

I now have the ability to access Google Maps from my Treo cellphone/PDA. I ran across a reference on the 'net about someone doing this, and in a couple of minutes I found the software; it is free. You also have to have Java installed on your PDA, and it turns out that IBM has a free Java distribution for Treos (IBM has really embraced the Free and Open Software movement).

It took about ten minutes to download everything and then upload it to my Treo, and two minutes after that, I was looking at a Google map of Blacksburg on my phone. I travel a lot to new places, and this software is going to make my life a lot easier. I have been experimenting with GPS navigation systems lately (a lot of rental cars come with them now), and I have been underwhelmed by my experiences with them. They are not only distracting to the point of being dangerous, but I find it takes a lot of fiddling to set up routes correctly.

The big attraction of GPS systems, is not, as you might think, the "you are right here" feature. If you are lost, it does not help much to know where you are lost. What you really want to know where to go. And a good map, downloaded on demand, is often all I need. I don't really want something shouting at me, in heavy traffic, "Make an immediate U-turn now!" And yes, one GPS I have used does that quite often.

I now have the ability to access Google Maps from my Treo cellphone/PDA. I ran across a reference on the 'net about someone doing this, and in a couple of minutes I found the software; it is free. You also have to have Java installed on your PDA, and it turns out that IBM has a free Java distribution for Treos (IBM has really embraced the Free and Open Software movement).

It took about ten minutes to download everything and then upload it to my Treo, and two minutes after that, I was looking at a Google map of Blacksburg on my phone. I travel a lot to new places, and this software is going to make my life a lot easier. I have been experimenting with GPS navigation systems lately (a lot of rental cars come with them now), and I have been underwhelmed by my experiences with them. They are not only distracting to the point of being dangerous, but I find it takes a lot of fiddling to set up routes correctly.

The big attraction of GPS systems, is not, as you might think, the "you are right here" feature. If you are lost, it does not help much to know where you are lost. What you really want to know where to go. And a good map, downloaded on demand, is often all I need. I don't really want something shouting at me, in heavy traffic, "Make an immediate U-turn now!" And yes, one GPS I have used does that quite often.

I am constantly surprised at the number of corporate phone systems that ask you to enter your account number, and then as soon as you get a human (if you get a human), they ask you to enter the very same number again.

I called Marriott to make a hotel reservation, and was pleasantly surprised. I entered my frequent traveler number, and was taken to a real live human almost immediately, who greeted me by name; the system transferred the call and put my customer information up on the screen for the agent. That's the way IT is supposed to work. Marriott's IT department is doing its job--not something you can say about a lot of other companies.

Okay, the title of this article is a bit misleading. There will be no pictures of robots exposing their system memory or putting their power supplies on public view. Wired reports on a "robotic" car park system in Hoboken, New Jersey that trapped a bunch of cars in the lot for days. It is one of these systems that optimizes the space available for cars by eliminating ramps. Cars are gobbled up by the machine and stuffed into high rise storage slots. It is all run by software, and therein lies the rub.

The city of Hoboken, which owns the garage, got into a contract dispute with the software vendor, and the vendor remotely disabled the system, which made it impossible to get parked cars out of the device. This is a particularly disturbing example of a long-running problem between software vendors and customers. Some vendors routinely put back doors and trap doors in their code that allows them secret access to software running on customer machines. Sometimes this is just to be able to provide convenient access for updates and maintenance. But some vendors have used the trapdoors as a way of blackmailing, er, I mean "negotiating" with customers when there are contract or service disputes.

Bottom line: If you are buying software that can cripple your business or operation if it doesn't work, read the contract carefully to find out what your rights are.

Much discussion is beginning to develop online as beta versions of the new version of Microsoft Office are getting tested. The new software introduces new default file formats that are not backward compatible with older versions of Office. You can save your files in the old version, but this requires an extra step and is a nightmare if you are trying to send a file to other people--it is impossible to know what version of Office everyone has.

No doubt part of the format change is due to Microsoft's shift to XML as the base architecture for data storage, but conveniently, the change will also force nearly everyone to buy a new copy of Office. It is one more reason to use PDF files as a standard document format when sharing files, but the PDF format does not solve this problem entirely if you want the receiver of a file to make editing changes to a document. And many Windows users have trouble creating PDF files (Macs will create a PDF of any file from any program without requiring additional software--it is built into the operating system).

It is no coincidence that services like Geek Squad and Geeks on Call are proliferating. Keeping a Windows computer running smoothly is a lot of work. With all new Macs able to run Windows natively side by side with the Mac OS, there are fewer and fewer reasons to have a Windows-only computer.

Much discussion is beginning to develop online as beta versions of the new version of Microsoft Office are getting tested. The new software introduces new default file formats that are not backward compatible with older versions of Office. You can save your files in the old version, but this requires an extra step and is a nightmare if you are trying to send a file to other people--it is impossible to know what version of Office everyone has.

No doubt part of the format change is due to Microsoft's shift to XML as the base architecture for data storage, but conveniently, the change will also force nearly everyone to buy a new copy of Office. It is one more reason to use PDF files as a standard document format when sharing files, but the PDF format does not solve this problem entirely if you want the receiver of a file to make editing changes to a document. And many Windows users have trouble creating PDF files (Macs will create a PDF of any file from any program without requiring additional software--it is built into the operating system).

It is no coincidence that services like Geek Squad and Geeks on Call are proliferating. Keeping a Windows computer running smoothly is a lot of work. With all new Macs able to run Windows natively side by side with the Mac OS, there are fewer and fewer reasons to have a Windows-only computer.

Much discussion is beginning to develop online as beta versions of the new version of Microsoft Office are getting tested. The new software introduces new default file formats that are not backward compatible with older versions of Office. You can save your files in the old version, but this requires an extra step and is a nightmare if you are trying to send a file to other people--it is impossible to know what version of Office everyone has.

No doubt part of the format change is due to Microsoft's shift to XML as the base architecture for data storage, but conveniently, the change will also force nearly everyone to buy a new copy of Office. It is one more reason to use PDF files as a standard document format when sharing files, but the PDF format does not solve this problem entirely if you want the receiver of a file to make editing changes to a document. And many Windows users have trouble creating PDF files (Macs will create a PDF of any file from any program without requiring additional software--it is built into the operating system).

It is no coincidence that services like Geek Squad and Geeks on Call are proliferating. Keeping a Windows computer running smoothly is a lot of work. With all new Macs able to run Windows natively side by side with the Mac OS, there are fewer and fewer reasons to have a Windows-only computer.

In an interesting tale of two companies, Apple has dumped its experiment in offshoring telephone support to India after just one month. Meanwhile, Dell is rapidly expanding its offshore tech support. What's going on? Apple, while not perfect, consistently gets high ratings from consumers for support. Dell, on the other hand, has been receiving a steady stream of criticism lately for poor customer support.

I attribute the difference to finances. Apple is extremely profitable, and seems to have figured out that taking good care of customers pays off over the long term. Dell, on the other hand, is on the ropes financially and appears to be trying to save its way out of a money hole. In my experience, cost-cutting at the expense of highly visible parts of the company like customer service never works out well. Dell's slide will likely continue.

Personally, I have rarely had a good experience with offshore customer support. I've observed two chronic problems. First, the heavy accents, even with someone who might speak English as a first language, often makes conversations quite difficult. And second, offshore staff seem to be often stuck following a script when trying to figure out what the customer wants. If the problem doesn't match the script, they can't adapt. I find that less so with American-based customer support (though not always).

In an interesting tale of two companies, Apple has dumped its experiment in offshoring telephone support to India after just one month. Meanwhile, Dell is rapidly expanding its offshore tech support. What's going on? Apple, while not perfect, consistently gets high ratings from consumers for support. Dell, on the other hand, has been receiving a steady stream of criticism lately for poor customer support.

I attribute the difference to finances. Apple is extremely profitable, and seems to have figured out that taking good care of customers pays off over the long term. Dell, on the other hand, is on the ropes financially and appears to be trying to save its way out of a money hole. In my experience, cost-cutting at the expense of highly visible parts of the company like customer service never works out well. Dell's slide will likely continue.

Personally, I have rarely had a good experience with offshore customer support. I've observed two chronic problems. First, the heavy accents, even with someone who might speak English as a first language, often makes conversations quite difficult. And second, offshore staff seem to be often stuck following a script when trying to figure out what the customer wants. If the problem doesn't match the script, they can't adapt. I find that less so with American-based customer support (though not always).

In the bottom story of the day, heavy-handed search powerhouse Google is complaining that Microsoft doesn't play fair. In a NY Times story that probably won't be available for very long, Google is upset that Microsoft intends to make MSN Search the default search engine in the next release of Internet Explorer.

The story is good mainly for laughs, as both companies have used every monopoly trick in the book to try to pound competitors into the ground. It is comedic to read their whiny objections to each other's tactics as each company tries to assume the moral high ground while seeking to continue their "We're king of the world" hegemonies at the expense of the rest of us.

As I predicted a couple of weeks ago, Apple has officially announced that the company's new Intel-based Macintosh computers can run Windows. I thought it might take as long as a year for Apple to get around to offering this, but Apple often manages to surprise everyone.

The new Intel Macs are extremely fast, and are performing very well against existing Windows machines. Few current Mac users are likely to spend much time running Windows, but a lot of Windows users may be more willing to buy Apple hardware knowing they have an easy transition. Apple has more up its sleeve, though. It has already announced the next version of OS X will be able to run Windows and OS X concurrently (the current Boot Camp software requires a compute restart to switch between the two operating systems). There is further speculation that OS X 10.5 will not only run Windows and OS X side by side, but will also support Linux at the same time. Apple would be the only hardware manufacturer that would give customers the option to run whatever operating environment they choose, making everything much more interesting. Dell and HP are gnashing their teeth right now. Bill Gates probably is not sure what to do...in the short run, Microsoft will sell more copies of Windows. In the long term, many Windows users will be tempted to switch to OS X. Either way, Apple wins.