As part of its energized mobile push, Redmond is getting close to chip maker ARM. 
Microsoft has what's called an "architectural license,"  which gives Microsoft access to ARM's chip innards. 
ARM is also used in the iPhone, and Microsoft clearly wants  to level this particular playing field. Rumor has it that Microsoft may use ARM  as the basis of a tablet, just like Apple did with its ARM-based iPad. Good  luck with all that!
 
	Posted by Doug Barney on August 04, 20100 comments
          
	
 
            
                
                
 
    
    
	
    		Here's your thoughts on billionares, like Gates and Allen, giving away chuncks of their wealth to chariatable causes:
"Is this true charity, or just a way for successful  business people to feel better about themselves?"
  Neither, thanks to Obama. Being successful business people,  investing, job creation and doing something that actually has a role in  stimulating the economy doesn't pay anymore. You might as well give your extra  cash to the charity of your choice rather than the government.
    -Anonymous
  Considering  what the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation has done so far, and the fact that  Paul Allen has parted with a billion dollars, the motivation of the act truly  doesn't matter if there is good work being done. I mean, I can donate a hundred  dollars to a local charity and believe that I've made a small contribution to  some good cause, but a billion dollars? The impact that gifts on that scale can  make are sufficient that the personal intent of the donor stops being relevant.
  If  wealthy individuals like that were putting all their money into funding museums,  symphony orchestras, endowing country clubs or some other similar thing, there  could be room to criticize them. But given the causes that these resources are  being directed to, there's very little that can be said against this.
  I  hope others in similar circumstances get this bug. It sets an example that a  lot of us could benefit from, in our own spending habits.
    -Dennis
You asked what lurks within the hearts 
and minds of wealthy  people who give huge gifts to charitable causes. I
 think you are asking the  wrong people. You should ask the givers, not 
the bystanders. However, since you  asked your readers, I will try to 
rise to the challenge:
  - Our government is so clueless with such a complicated  tax 
system that the wealthy can actually save money by giving it away. Ask a
  CPA/tax attorney how. I don't know how.
 
- Government intrusion into the private sector skews  professional
 judgment about proper investment strategies. Government encourages  
irrational decisions. This is to be expected because the government is  
considered by many people to be the champion of irrational 
decision-making.
 
- Too much wealth is personally embarrassing to an  individual 
with any kind of moral values. The antidote for embarrassment is to  
contribute to an alleged honorable cause.
 
- They feel guilty because they sense that they earned  their 
wealth through dishonorable means.  Guilt remission is obtained via a 
charitable "sin  offering."
 
- They hate their beneficiaries, or love them enough not  to 
entrap them into their financial fate. Therefore, they want to minimize 
the  worth of their inheritance by giving away their assets before their
 death.
 
- They think their spouse is a gold digger. They want to  minimize
 their spouse's access to their money. Since there was no prenuptial  
agreement, the only way to deny access is to give it away before the 
spouse can  file for divorce.
 
- They are bored and need something useful to do.
 
- They realize that they are mortal and cannot take their  wealth 
with them. They also believe that they will be judged based upon what  
they did for others, not for how successful they were. They are working 
on  their "final exam" with their religious maker.
-Roger 
   I hate to be a cynic, but the only other motive is tax  avoidance.
    -Anonymous
Share your thoughts with the editors of this newsletter!  Write to [email protected]. Letters printed in this newsletter may be  edited for length and clarity, and will be credited by first name only (we do  NOT print last names or e-mail addresses).
 
	Posted by Doug Barney on August 04, 20104 comments
          
	
 
            
                
                
 
    
    
	
    
		Mary Jo Foley, Redmond  columnist and renowned Microsoft watcher, has been hearing rumors and pleas for  Bill Gates to return to full-time Microsoft duties. Don't get your hopes up,  Foley says. Bill is thoroughly, and for me, thankfully, ensconced in his  humanitarian efforts.
Many of those wishing for a Gates return are not huge fans  of Steve Ballmer. But as Foley points out, Steve has said he wants to remain in  Redmond till  his oldest kid goes to college, some eight years in the future.
I don't share these views 100 percent. While I'd love to see  Bill back full time, his charity work is far more important that cutting deals  and reviewing code (yeah, Bill is famous for his code reviews). And I'm not a  Ballmer basher. I've known the guy since the mid-80s and this is one smart,  intense dude. He's probably the most fun CEO in existence today. 
Those that question Microsoft's methods must not track their  financials -- which keep getting better and better. Maybe someday the stock  price will catch up to this phenomenon. 
Do you or did you own MSFT stock? Tell me whether you won or  lost, and what Redmond  needs to do to get the stock price moving at [email protected]. 
 
	Posted by Doug Barney on August 04, 20101 comments
          
	
 
            
                
                
 
    
    
	
    		When I heard an ex-Microsoft employee was busting Redmond's chops, I  chalked it up to bitterness. Then I learned the critic, Don Dodge, now works  for Google, and realized Dodge's primary motivation is probably arrogance. 
Dodge wrote a blog arguing that Microsoft is no longer a  growth company (guess he hasn't tracked its latest quarterlies) and should stop  spending money on R&D. I'm sure Google would love Redmond to stop inventing new technology, but  does Dodge know where a lot of this money actually goes? I do. Microsoft  researchers work with top scientists and academics around the world on issues  such as population growth, starvation, global warming and disease. 
I'm not a Microsoft fanboy, but when the company does things  right, it deserves praise. 
Is Microsoft a better corporate citizen, or am I just  sipping the Kool Aid? You tell me at [email protected].
 
	Posted by Doug Barney on August 04, 20102 comments
          
	
 
            
                
                
 
    
    
	
    
		Microsoft and Adobe have become so close of late, I'm  wondering if an acquisition may be in order (that would be Redmond buying Adobe, not vice versa). 
Adobe is using a Microsoft-built sandbox to protect PDFs,  and Adobe patches will be part of Redmond's  Patch Tuesday.
Microsoft is taking this a step further by distributing  Adobe vulnerability information through the Microsoft Active Protections  Program (MAPP). 
MAPP gives software vendor info on exploit flaws before  they are patched, giving Microsoft partners a head start on closing their own  holes. 
 
	Posted by Doug Barney on August 02, 20102 comments
          
	
 
            
                
                
 
    
    
	
    
		Readers discuss the release of Microsft's  consumer-minded security tool:
  I have to say, I am  hooked on MSE. I tested it out pretty extensively and researched it to see how its  detection rates compared to other major engines. For detection and  false-positive rates, it is one of the best in class -- at least according to  the guys (and gals) who test virus scanners. 
  As for how well it  works in the real world, I have been a very big fan of McAfee VirusScan Enterprise prior to MSE.  I have since been replacing VirusScan with MSE on everything I own. I have  noticed a LOT less speed slowdowns when using MSE. On VirusScan, I used to have  the system go slow when occasionally opening programs. The VirusScan engine was  scanning everything being opened. MSE hasn't slowed my machines down yet.  Another benefit with MSE is that it includes an anti-spyware program. Most  virus scanning engines do not do spyware at the same time. MSE does and, from  my experience, it has caught things that would have been missed by VirusScan.  The updating process being integrated with Windows Update is a bonus, but not  game changing. All engines update themselves (or can be set to). I just like it  being in Windows Update. Lastly, the price is right. Free, fast, and good beats  any paid combination there is. 
  The big issue facing  MSE adoption in the Enterprise  is the lack of centralized console and distribution. If Microsoft builds it in  to System Center in the near future, I think a few  of those third-party security vendors better find new products. It is typical  of Microsoft. The first few revs of a product are garbage. They just seem to  persevere until they come up with a product that is a "must have." So  far, I am satisfied with MSE and assume it will only get better.
    -Daniel
  I have installed MS  Security Essentials on several client XP machines (Pro Version and Home Edition).  It works very well, easy to install and configuration is automatic. The GUI  interface is easy to understand, even for novices.
  It runs more  efficiently than other paid anti-virus programs (not bloated, slow startups,  etc). Also, it found a virus that a very popular antivirus suite did not! I  recommend it for home users.
  Thank You Microsoft!
    -Mike
  I use MS Security  Essentials (SE) on my three home PCs and love it. I found out yesterday one of  our clients, which is a multinational corporation, will be using SE on all of  the PCs/notebooks at their two U.S.  locations. I'd guess that is a total of 250 nodes. I looked into the EULA and  discovered it is meant for home use and also for home-based small businesses. I  don't think he should be using it for that -- but he says it works great.
    
    Another client of ours  told me yesterday he will be using ClamWin for his 40-node Windows network that  we will also be migrating to Exchange Online soon. 
    -Dan 
  First off, let me  thank you for putting out two quality products with both Redmond and Redmond Channel Partner  magazines. Both of them are very essential reading for me, and I always look  forward to their arrival.
  I have been using  Security Essentials since it first went into beta over a year ago and have had  nothing but complete success with the product. I was a beta tester for Live  OneCare, and used it until Security Essentials was released. It is what I  recommend to all of my home-user customers, and they have always been  completely satisfied with it. I especially enjoy the fact that it is just an  anti-malware product, without all of the extras that many of the current paid  products include. Windows already comes with an excellent firewall and Internet  Explorer 8 has plenty of security features -- Security Essentials just rounds  them out. The fact that it is available free of charge is just the icing on the  cake. I think many of the other anti-malware vendors could take a lesson from  Microsoft and put out a entry-level consumer product with low overhead and  minimal features at little or no cost to the consumer. 
    -Robert
    
 Share your thoughts with the editors of this newsletter! Write to  
[email protected]. Letters printed in this newsletter may be edited for  length and clarity, and will be credited by first name only (we do NOT print  last names or e-mail addresses).
 
	
Posted by Doug Barney on August 02, 20101 comments
          
	
 
            
                
                
 
    
    
	
    
		A new exploit, the so-called shortcut flaw, is closed as  of today -- so long as you download   the patch. 
Here what this flaw is all about: Hackers use the Windows  Shell to   distribute nasty code that exploits Windows desktop shortcuts. The    biggest problem? One need not to click the shortcut for the malicious   code to  activate.
Microsoft only releases out-of-band, or non-Patch Tuesday  patches in   the direst of circumstances, so I'm guessing this is a pretty big    deal, especially as Microsoft deems the flaw as ‘critical.' Microsoft noted that it also affects XP SP2, but these users won't be getting a patch; Microsoft ended patch support for XP SP2 on July 13.
 
	Posted by Doug Barney on August 02, 20100 comments
          
	
 
            
                
                
 
    
    
	
    
		While it been in the space for more than decade, Microsoft  is a mere   footnote in the world of mobile devices. Steve Ballmer hopes and  expects that Windows Phone 7   will change all that. I saw a quick demo from a  Microsoft employee   showing his personal device, and it looked way slicker than  past Windows   phones. But the iPhone, Droid and Blackberry get slicker with each  new   rev.
Ballmer talked up the new mobile OS at last week's  financial   analysts meeting. It's not just about the phone features, Ballmer    argues, but the back end. The idea is for the phone to access one's   "personal  cloud" where key files are securely stored, in this case,   using Microsoft's  Skyline storage service. Microsoft is also looking to   have Skyline  pre-installed on new Windows 7 PCs.
I recently broke down and bought a new Blackberry, and it is worlds  above the   three-year-old phone I killed  with a dip in the ocean. But I've got to   tell ya, there is nothing remotely  sexy about the Blackberry. Guess I   should have sprung for the iPhone, which I'll  get next time I kill my   Blackberry with salt water!
Does Microsoft have a shot at the mobile phone market?  Tell us why   or why not at [email protected].
 
	Posted by Doug Barney on August 02, 20105 comments
          
	
 
            
                
                
 
    
    
	
    		Sunbelt was quite the  popular company based on the notes I've gotten from readers concerning its  acquisition by GFI Software. Sunbelt has heard  from customers who will miss it, and CEO Alex Eckelberry sent me this note for  all you concerned about the deal. Here goes:
  "We  needed to do this. Three big reasons: a) access to capital and resources,  b) technology and c) new markets.
    
    Running  Sunbelt was like holding a tiger by the tail  -- the growth was phenomenal, but the stress on the business was sometimes very  intense. I needed to find a partner with deep pockets -- and GFI has deep  pockets. I could have gone with a venture capitalist, but there is a whole lot  of other risk that comes with that...
    
    On  the technology side, you don't sit still in this business and last long. GFI  brings a lot of key technologies that we needed in order to continue being a  world-class company -- their MSP platforms, DLP technology, patch and  vulnerability assessment and e-mail SaaS security. 
  Their  access to new markets is also a major part of the transaction. Ninety-five percent of  our sales were in North America. That's not  sustainable, as we needed to move into international markets to sustain and  grow the business. Over 50 percent of GFI's sales are international, and that's  a big pickup for us. 
  Finally,  the issue of culture: GFI's culture is very similar to ours. While they have  certainly had their issues in the past, the current CEO, Walter Scott, has the  same attitudes that I have about customer support, product quality and taking  care of the customer. I have been very impressed with how they run this  business (and it's certainly a world different than what it was two years ago,  before Scott and the new management team came in).
  For  our employees, it's a good thing. Out of 240 employees, there were only a  handful of redundant positions (less than 10). The vast majority of employees  are here and continuing with the new organization. The Tampa Bay  location is going to be growing into an even larger operation. 
  We  had a number of suitors but chose GFI because we felt they would respect the  technology, our support and our culture. And all of the key Sunbelt  executives are still here, myself included. I am now running the security  business for GFI. I expect things will get better, not worse."
    -- Alex
 
	Posted by Doug Barney on July 30, 20100 comments
          
	
 
            
                
                
 
    
    
	
    
		Doug asked you if IBM's plan for '100,000  VMs in one big box' is a sign of the return of the mainframe. Here's some  of your responses:
  The IBM 360/370 was a  great machine back in the day. Multiple partitions, virtual memory, etc.
  And overall, the trend  in IT is moving back to centralization -- Cloud computing is part of that  trend.
  But the bigger  question is how to centralize? One big machine to me sounds like an expensive,  single point of failure. I like the Google model where thousands of simple,  off-the-shelf machines are plugged into a networked machine. And, while the  Google model solves a simple key-value table database structure (Big Table), it  does demonstrate that a networked OS is possible. 
    -Andrew 
  Microsoft should tie up with IBM to explore the  possibilities of taking its Windows Operating System to truly enterprising  levels. I know Windows has an enterprise-class, Data-centre edition that can  support great hardware.  But running  Windows on a Mainframe is something which I would like to see and something  that could put Windows on a level playing field with RISC-based solutions.
    -Umesh  
  So what is the  fail-over path? 
  When your "One  Big Box" goes down then 100,000 applications go with it. And if not, what  is the redundancy scheme?
     -Donald
One reader shares his thoughts on Dell's  shady past:
  Years ago, I remember  that Dell was caught putting used parts back into machines that were sold as  new.
  Maybe it's just a  cultural problem with Dell where they feel they can make their own rules.
    -Andrew
Share your thoughts with the editors of this newsletter!  Write to [email protected]. Letters printed in this newsletter may be  edited for length and clarity, and will be credited by first name only (we do  NOT print last names or e-mail addresses).
 
	Posted by Doug Barney on July 30, 20101 comments
          
	
 
            
                
                
 
    
    
	
    
		I have to admit I got scooped by Harry McCracken, former  editor-in-chief of PC World who now  runs Technologizer. He wrote about  the 25 anniversary of the Amiga computer. As former editor-in-chief of AmigaWorld magazine, I really should  have been on top of this. Harry did a great job chronicling the amazing but  ultimately tragic history of the Amiga. 
In 1985, the Amiga 1000 was launched by Andy Warhol and  Debby Harry in Lincoln   Center. Months later,  Bill Gates was quoted as saying something to the effect of "you can't  multitask in 640K-bytes of RAM." Gates apparently didn't know that his  version of AmigaBasic ran four different tasks simultaneously in 128K.
  
  This machine also had TV quality graphics, CD quality sound  and a multiprocessing architecture. It also crashed a lot -- a feature Gates  stole and put into nearly every edition of the Windows client. 
The standardization of the PC killed off the incentive for  many publishers to support the Amiga, while Commodore's incompetence did the  rest. The machine died right when the hardware was getting really really really  good.
When I was there, AmigaWorld did a video about the history of the Amiga   as well as two volumes of animation done by readers. 
What would the world be like had the Amiga lived? Conjecture  and speculation equally welcome at [email protected].
 
	Posted by Doug Barney on July 30, 20102 comments
          
	
 
            
                
                
 
    
    
	
    
		Bill Gates can be infectious. No, he doesn't have the swine  flu. I mean his personality influences others. Nearly two decades ago, I  noticed that Microsoft folks used many Gates-isms, such as bandwidth (for  ability to think broadly) and golden. Others adopted his mannerisms: the  haircut, the glasses, some even bobbed up and down as they sat -- just like  Bill.
Bill is having a similar effect on the billionaires' club.  First, Warren Buffett joined Bill and vowed to give away the bulk of his vast  fortune. Now, former partner Paul Allen is doing the same, pledging most of his  $13.5 billion bank account.
Hot buttons for Allen include fighting tuberculosis (a  Gatesean move, to be sure) as well as brain exploration. So far, Allen has  given away a cool billion.
I expect to see more of these types of Andrew Carnegie-type  moves. This type of giving may well be more effective than other charities and  clearly more efficient that government-based programs since the givers, as  businessmen, are driven 100 percent by results.
Is this true charity, or just a way for successful business  people to feel better about themselves? Look into your heart and write to  [email protected].
 
	Posted by Doug Barney on July 30, 20108 comments