We've covered (and lamented) OneCare quite a bit. For one, we were concerned
that
OneCare
competed directly with McAfee, Symantec, Sophos and Sunbelt. These companies
all built anti-virus/anti-malware software that saved Windows from a viral meltdown.
Their reward? Having Microsoft compete with them directly, and even denigrate
partners that chose to work with non-Redmond-sourced security software.
We also said that OneCare didn't seem to work very well. It wasn't my opinion
-- it was yours! You told me of all its problems. I never used the thing.
Now Microsoft doesn't care one lick about OneCare and is killing it off next
June. One Microsoft exec explains that putting OneCare on death row doesn't
mean it's guilty of failure. The problem is that poor people need protection
too and can't afford the $50 yearly price tag. (Hmm...I've argued many times
that anti-malware should be built right into the OS, just like brakes and turn
signals and seat belts are built right into the car.)
Microsoft may be turning in this direction with Morro, a free tool that will
replace OneCare. If Morro can stand up to other top-end anti-malware tools,
I'll be a happy computing camper and take back all the bad things I ever said
about OneCare.
Posted by Doug Barney on December 02, 20080 comments
A leader of the open source movement recently penned a
piece
for
BusinessWeek arguing that the "open source business model is
broken."
My first reaction is that open source wasn't founded on a business model, but
on a software development model. This software model was then adapted by companies
such as Red Hat to underpin efforts to make money.
But before I get distracted by too much philosophy, let's look at the argument
made by Stuart Cohen, CEO of Collaborative Software Initiative. Cohen wrote
that selling support for open source tools isn't the moneymaker many thought.
The thing is, open source doesn't need all that much support, Cohen argued.
Open source companies need to find news ways, whether it's adding new layers
of software or building communities, to keep the whole business moving.
Making money off something that's intrinsically free is difficult? Who would've
thought? How would you make a buck from open source? Moneymaking ideas welcome
at [email protected].
Posted by Doug Barney on December 02, 20080 comments
Black Friday is a nasty name for a good thing: It's the day after Thanksgiving
when millions of American shoppers hit the malls in search of smokin' bargains.
Apple had been making noises about some sweet Black Friday dealios, so I checked
it out. The best bargain I found was $100 off its lowest-end laptop -- making
it still a hair under a grand.
As this bad economy continues, I believe Apple will have to lower its premium
prices. Kinda tough to shell out all that money for a Mac when you can't fill
your fridge with groceries.
Meanwhile, "The Simpsons" has soured on Apple, and in the last episode
spent six full minutes making
fun of the company. Since I gave up watching "The Simpsons" 10
years ago, I unfortunately missed this episode.
Posted by Doug Barney on December 01, 20080 comments
Fred thinks the whole "Vista Capable" sticker debacle is a matter
of deception by omission:
So the sticker on the machine reads "Vista Capable." That tells
me the machine can run Vista. Doesn't say how well, though. And it doesn't
tell me Vista can run on the machine, either, without perhaps limping badly.
This is no different from the prior "Designed for Microsoft Windows XP"
stickers, such as the one HP affixed to my 256MB RAM Pavilion that really
needed a RAM upgrade to 1GB to run XP without constant HD swapping.
Typical modern-day, misleading advertising. It's the truth, yes, but
not the WHOLE truth. But I'd put the lion's share of the blame on the OEM,
not on MS. After all, MS didn't FORCE the OEM to affix that sticker.
-Fred
And Paul responds to Floyd's
letter last week, which suggested that it wasn't "average" users
who were confused by the stickers, but users that should've known better:
Floyd makes good points but forgets that these were computers bought
before Vista had been released. So the moms and pops that bought these had
not been told by the seller or the sticker that there would be different versions.
In hindsight, it is easy to see but remember this was before Vista's release.
-Paul
IE 8's release candidate is scheduled
for early 2009, but Liza's been testing out the beta for a while now. So
far, so good:
I've been running the IE 8 beta 2 for a month or two now, and I like
it a lot better than IE 7. Microsoft finally added my favorite Firefox feature:
the ability to reopen an accidentally closed tab. Firefox still does it better,
IMHO (that and many other things -- NoScript add-on, anyone?), but IE 8 is
a step in the right direction.
-Liza
Share your thoughts with us! Leave a comment below or send an e-mail to [email protected].
Posted by Doug Barney on December 01, 20080 comments
Will the soap opera that is Yahoo-Microsoft never end? The hostile takeover
attempt by Microsoft went on for months. Then, as Yahoo expressed interest,
Microsoft summarily called off the hunt and has repeatedly said
it
has no interest in the search company.
A report emerged over the holiday break that Microsoft was offering
$20 billion for the search business. A day later, a "source" claimed
it was all poppycock.
Twenty billion dollars is far less than the $45 billion Microsoft offered for
all of Yahoo, but I still think the money is better spent inventing the future
instead of just buying market share.
Posted by Doug Barney on December 01, 20080 comments
IE 8 is edging
closer
to release, and the reaction to the news has been mixed. Some are excited
about a safer, more reliable, more capable Microsoft browser, while others see
just more bloated, insecure software.
Meanwhile, many are giving Google's Chrome a whirl and finding it clean and
fairly fast, but way short on features. In fact, I did a long
analysis of Chrome based entirely on Redmond Report readers' feedback.
An IE 8 release candidate (which is more polished than beta code but not quite
ready for release -- so it really should just be called a late beta) is due
out the first quarter of next year. For me, I'll wait for fully finished code
before blasting or toasting the new release.
Posted by Doug Barney on November 24, 20080 comments
Dell, FedEx and Allstate are all Visual Studio users and are all being sued
by WebXchange, a company that claims to own e-comm technology that's implemented
in a similar way by the Microsoft IDE.
Microsoft is suing
back, trying to protect these three rather large customers. Hopefully, this
will all get settled soon.
Posted by Doug Barney on November 24, 20080 comments
Last week, Doug wrote about a list of the
"coolest"
IT jobs, as determined by IT pros. Here's one reader's idea of a dream IT
job:
Being the 'Net admin for a giant adult entertainment dot-com.
-Scott
And here are more of your thoughts on whether Microsoft should win or lose
the "Vista Capable" label lawsuit:
According to Merriam-Webster's magic book: "Capable: Having attributes
(as physical or mental power) required for performance or accomplishment."
System requirements meet the basic needs to perform or accomplish the
features included to perform all functions within Vista Basic, in my opinion.
I don't think the Vista Capable labels are misleading.
-Rob
This is the worst sort of "gotcha." Microsoft should lose this
one. Has it completely lost sight of taking care of its customers? Regardless
of the verdict, it needs to re-examine how it is treating customers if this
is how it intends to operate.
-Mike
Frankly, I find this argument laughable. I've been around since the days
of PC-DOS 2.0 and whatever Microsoft claimed to be a minimum configuration
was always off by a factor of two! (If you wanted acceptable performance.)
So why are people just now complaining about this? "Vista Capable"
means an 800MHz Pentium-class processor, 512MB of RAM and a 20GB HDD. Microsoft
has always been upfront about this.
Well, guess what? In June 2006, I was able to get my circa-2000 Dell
Dimension 4100 (866MHz, 512MB RAM, 100GB HDD) to run Vista. Granted it was
UGLY and dog-slow to boot, but once booted, it was stable on this six-year-old
machine. I could even use it to run Outlook against my employer's Exchange
server using 802.11b and VPN, and still browse the Internet! In the spring
of 2007, I bought a low-end Celeron with 512MB RAM with Vista Basic from Compaq
and it ran reasonably well without Aero. I upgraded it to Vista Ultimate and
it even ran Aero with only 512MB of RAM, but it really needed 1GB to run satisfactorily.
As RAM prices dropped, I upgraded it to 2GB and it has had absolutely no problems.
Even this lame, entry-level PC sold in 2007 went from being "Vista Capable"
to being "Vista Premium Ready" by doing nothing more than adding
a $10, 512MB DIMM. What made it even better was spending $32 on it to put
in 2GB of RAM. Over all, not a bad investment.
In the end, if you expected "Vista Capable" to mean that any
six-year-old computer would run Vista well, you were just plain naive. If
you bought a new computer since January 2007, you got what you were promised.
-Marc
Microsoft should lose. But if it admits this, and it begins to inform
potential Vista users openly about what is REALLY needed to run Vista in all
its incarnations, it will win big-time -- in terms of its reputation for honesty.
It's a new OS. What is wrong with telling people that some machines may not
run it? Or run it well?
-T.
It is my opinion that based on following Microsoft's products and philosophy
from the early '80s to today that labeling PCs "Vista Capable" when
they can only support Vista Basic with their current configuration is not
only deceiving, but also contrary to the company's philosophy.
I agree with your comment regarding the average person not understanding
the difference between the PC hardware requirements for running Vista Basic
verses running the Vista Home Premium, Vista Business or Vista Ultimate. It
is a shame that the current "I'm a PC" marketing campaign strongly
voices that there are no problems with Vista when consumers are bullied into
believing this hype and then perhaps buying a low-end PC marked "Vista
Capable" and a Vista Ultimate Upgrade -- only to discover that the darn
thing won't install.
Granted, one cannot blame the Vista product in and of itself for this
mishap, but one can certainly say that the purchased PC should not have said
it was "Vista Capable" when it can only support Vista Basic. It
should state so on the label and Microsoft should resolve this issue with
its partners instead of trying to sweep another important issue under the
rug.
-Vernon
I think the argument between Microsoft and the hardware manufacturers
was probably like junior high:
HP/Dell/IBM: Can we say our two-year-old hardware will run Vista?
MS: Well, it won't run the most likely Home version, Vista Home
Premium, so you probably shouldn't say it can.
HP/Dell/IBM: But come on, it will run ONE version of Vista.
And we already have so many of them built. If you don't let us sell them
as capable, we'll have to NOT sell them and eat the cost. And that's not
our fault that we built too many that wouldn't be compatible. It's not like
WE control what WE build.
MS: ???
HP/Dell/IBM: OK, maybe we do. But can we, can we please?
Make up some fancy sticker that doesn't say *which* version of Vista, just
*a* version.
MS: Fine, whatever. But you better not later offer to roll
back those computers and offer XP.
HP/Dell/IBM: We've learned our lesson. We would never do
that!
-George
Tell us what you think! Leave a comment below or send an e-mail to [email protected].
Posted by Doug Barney on November 24, 20080 comments
Years ago, it was pretty easy to keep track of ScriptLogic; the company had
a handful of programs aimed directly at Windows admins. But after an acquisition
or two, and lots of internal development, the company now has some 21 products
-- and that's not counting the half-dozen or so Quest products ScriptLogic now
offers (Quest bought ScriptLogic last year, but wisely kept it as an independent
brand and company).
Recently, the company enhanced Security
Explorer, a tool to manage access to Windows networks and applications,
which is now up to version 7.0. ScriptLogic also made a new push into Exchange
management with Security
Explorer for Exchange, a tool that helps admins handle Exchange permissions.
Posted by Doug Barney on November 24, 20080 comments
If you're bombarded with malware -- and I've gotten an
earful
about scareware from many faithful Redmond Report readers -- free help from
Microsoft is on the way.
Excited? Sorry to bring you down, but the reality is this new free help won't
arrive for at
least a year.
I have no clue why Microsoft announced this so far in advance. Viruses and
other rogue code scum are a problem now! What should we do with this
information -- not use Trend Micro HouseCall (which I love) or defer re-subscribing
to McAfee or Symantec?
The good news is that it seems Microsoft will get rid of its problem-plagued
Live OneCare, a direct but less effective competitor to solid partners like
Trend, Symantec, McAfee, Sunbelt and others.
Posted by Doug Barney on November 20, 20080 comments
On the heels of yesterday's
deluge
of letters about the "Vista Capable" labeling suit, here are more
of your thoughts on whether Microsoft should win or lose:
M$ should lose. The (assumed) point of the Vista label was to provide
a quick ID to the general public, implying that "you're all set"
to enjoy all the features we advertise, without the need to investigate further.
Those with enough tech savvy to investigate further would find readily
available info that there may be limitations with the labeled hardware, but
this would only point out the label was "misleading." Hardly a defense.
-Jack
I hope Microsoft pays through the nose. This was a fraud perpetrated on
the average consumer and it needs to learn a lesson.
-Curtis
If it runs any version of Vista, then it meets the test. It's dirty marketing.
MS may win this lawsuit but it will lose the trust of its customer base. If
it's wise, MS will make a concession and allow free upgrades to licensed owners
of Vista.
-Jeremy
One might assume that anything labeled "Vista Capable" would
be better off using Windows XP! But more on the point, if savvy tech people
are misled by labeling practices, then Microsoft is playing word games and
should be held accountable for misleading a public that is much less savvy
about such things.
-Paul
As a consumer, a "Vista Capable" machine should be able to run
Vista out of the box, without any additional modification. In my case, I am
running Vista Ultimate SP1 on an Inspiron E1505, 1GB memory. The machine is
"Designed for Windows XP" and is labeled "Vista Capable."
Since it runs Vista without problem, I take "Vista Capable" as being
an accurate statement.
-Jim
It depends on what you mean by "Vista Capable" machines. Does
this label mean that the machine must be capable of running all the eye candy
such as Aero Glass and other graphics-intensive, eye-catching features? Or
does this label mean that the machine must be capable of running Vista? If
the latter is the case, then most older Pentium 4 PCs with at least 2GB of
RAM and all dual-core processors with at least 1GB of RAM are Vista Capable.
I installed Vista SP1 Enterprise Edition on an older Compaq Pentium 4,
1.8Ghz W4000, which I gave to my wife. After upgrading it from 1GB to 2GB
RAM, it runs just as good or better than XP ran on it. I gave my daughter
my old HP nc6120 laptop with 2GB RAM running XP. With the latest available
Wi-Fi driver, it kept disconnecting continually from our home wireless access
point (using WPA encryption). I did a fresh install to Vista SP1 Enterprise
Edition, and it runs better now than when XP was installed, and has not disconnected
from our home wireless network ever since. Now, if the machine must be able
to run Vista as well as all its eye candy to have a "Vista Capable"
sticker, that is a different story.
-Asif
I'm really not one to complain, but if we are talking semantics, then
M$ may lose this one. I'm thinking that if you have a product that can only
be used in ONE fashion, then it should be clearly stated. There are multiple
versions of Vista available and many beginners would not have the vaguest
clue about which one they would want for their particular needs. Somebody
should have taken a little extra time on product label design so this would
not be a problem.
-Edward
I think Microsoft should win. Here is my defense of that statement: To
me, it is no different than a car manufacturer stating 33 MPG, and in the
real world getting 25 MPG. By that I am saying, if you did drive as claimed
by the letter of the test that claimed it got 33 MPG, then in fact you would
be as close to achieving their claim as stated. This MPG claim has been going
on for years.
I could go on with more examples, but this one clearly exposes the "devil
in the details" as good as any example I can think of.
-Scott
You know, like in car sales, there has to be an asterisk to show that
the ad doesn't imply you get everything. Like air conditioning, cruise control,
which size engine, etc.
This IS what Microsoft omitted doing and given the nature of marketing
and legalities for other products, I'd say it's guilty of being outright misleading.
-T.
I think that Microsoft damaged the reputation of Vista so badly by allowing
those stickers, it has already paid the price. By saying those low powered
boxes could run Vista, many people had a horrible first experience with Vista,
and those same people are still using XP to this day.
Also, many of them told people about it, and those people still "hate"
Vista. Some of those people buy things in the corporate world, and they did
not adopt Vista. Microsoft is already paying for this.
-Anonymous
This is yet another Microsoft way of putting a spin on the Vista fiasco.
Either a computer runs an OS or it doesn't. For the public to have to differentiate
the multitude of Vista versions available and determine which ones a computer
can run is borderline absurd. Set the bar high as to what is needed to run
Vista. Then, any of the less robust versions of Vista will run better than
expected. Hardware is so inexpensive these days that it is foolish to take
the approach MS has taken.
-Scott
Fortunately, when we purchased my daughter's new laptop, we listened to
the sales associate and bought a higher-end machine. Vista is OK for her on
this platform and does pretty much what she needs (but I still like Windows
XP).
The bottom line is that I am sure there are a lot of folks out there
who were misled. There is such a thing as truth in advertising. Microsoft
should lose this one -- and it will either way, in terms of legal fees, should
this go to court.
-Tom
I for one think that the whole Vista Capable logo was a complete line
of bull. I have not read all of the documents and e-mails that have been made
public on this matter, so I do that not have the perspective on the case.
But I have always thought that the logo program was to be used to show that
a PC was capable of running the OS, be it slow at times. And now we have a
new logo that was being introduced just so manufacturers could continue to
ship lower-end computers that are already coming through the retail channels.
This label was very deceiving because it clearly states that the computer
is "Vista Capable." Why not say "Vista Basic Capable"?
One simple reason: to try to deceive the consumer into buying hardware that
is not really capable. But they may not notice since so many different people
are buying computers now.
There is a very wide range of expertise and understanding in your typical
PC consumer these days and this label was developed and used in hopes of continuing
to sell a sub-standard experience and users would not understand.
-Chris
Share your thoughts on this issue -- or on any of the other topics covered
here -- by leaving a comment below, or send an e-mail to [email protected].
Posted by Doug Barney on November 20, 20080 comments
You gotta love Steve Ballmer. Here's a man who doesn't need to work but toils
harder than any of us, speaks his mind the way many of us could only dream,
and heads a company that makes more profit in one day than the big three automakers
make in a year. Ballmer is just plain interesting.
Yesterday, Ballmer was in his element, helping to oversee the company's annual
shareholder meeting.
Despite overt pleas from Yahoo shareholders and the resignation
of Yahoo's CEO Jerry Yang, Ballmer has less interest in buying Yahoo than
he does bailing out the auto industry -- which Microsoft could actually afford
to do (or at least try). As I've suggested here many times, Microsoft would
be better off spending its billions in cash on building things no one of has
ever thought of, not buying me-too technology.
Ballmer, who always answers my e-mails but I'm pretty sure doesn't read my
newsletter, agrees. He told shareholders the company must continue to invest
in smart people doing pure research as well as product development. And like
all of us, Ballmer is tightening the old Microsoft belt, and is actually looking
toward a shrunken head count. Layoffs, anyone?
In other news, former Microsoft president and longtime board member Jon Shirley
retired as a director. At one of the last shareholder meetings, Shirley gave
me a ride in his black Porsche 944 to a Microsoft reception. Shirley, along
with Mike Maples, was one of the truly great Microsoft presidents.
Posted by Doug Barney on November 20, 20080 comments