Stop The Censorship - SOPA = CRAPA!

If you haven't heard of the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) - then listen up, people!
It's basically a bill (you can read it for yourself here) that allows any intellectual property holder to shut down any website's online advertising and block credit card payments - all without the need for that whole "due process of law" thingie getting in the way.

It works sort of like the Digital Millennium Copyright Act's (DMCA) "takedown notices". You know - the ones where someone can claim copyright on a YouTube video and they pull it?

In this case, if this thing passes (and it looks like it very well might), the people who own the intellectual property only have to file some "specific facts" (yeah, really - that's what it says) to back up their claim that a site stole their property - and the payment and ad networks have five days to cutoff all contact with the accused site.

Well at least they can't take the site down completely... right?

Right!

BUT - they don't have to - because then the US Federal Government will have the right to file an injunction against any site with a hearing with a judge. If it gets the injunction, the US Government has the right to block all US access to said site - at the DNS level!

It also means that search engines have to be careful - because they could get into trouble because they have the duty to prevent the site in question "from being served as a direct hypertext link."

Let's not forget all the ad networks and payment processors that also have a duty to cut the site off.

Oh yeah, and there's one more thing: Internet service providers and payment processors can simply block access to sites based solely on the belief that the site(s) are "dedicated to the theft of US property". Oh, and the ISPs and payment folks can't be sued, either.

Nice.

Listen, I'm no fan of priracy in any form - whether the intellectual property owner is American or not. It is a big problem. It is a legitimate problem. However, censorship legislation is NOT the answer. There are definitely "rogue" sites out there that are making money from what amounts to "stolen [IP] goods". Fine, go after them. Shut them down.

It's bad enough that ICE (Immigration Customs Enforcement) can seize domains at will and have, in fact, wrongly shut down 84,000 subdomains of mooo.com just last year.

One can only imagine the chaos and confusion, incorrect claims of ownership, cost, complexity, and general cluster this bill would cause.



SOURCE

Goodbye Bookstores - Hello... book "stores"

Yesterday I went to a strip mall that used to have a Borders bookstore in it. It was sort of sad - I had frequented it more than a few times - just browsing the latest releases, looking over the titles in the technology "section", maybe taking one or two volumes back to a reading table with a cup of coffee...

Ah, yes - the "good old days."

As I was reading the Google blog - they had a short video about a new Chrome experiment they were toying around with - a virtual bookshelf application. The idea is that you have an infinite, virtual bookcase that shows (literally) hundreds of thousands of books - organized by one of 28 categories.

You can choose a category - and the bookcase zooms into position. You can then "spin" the thing and because it's like a coiled double helix (think Slinkee) - you can just go round and round and move the entire thing up and down to browse to your heart's content.

When you see a book you would like more information on - simply click it, and you'll see the front cover. When you click the book - it opens (like a real book) to reveal a synopsis and a QR code (those strange barcodes you see everywhere) so that you can open the title on your device.

Now, it's still in the "experimental" stage - and they recommend you use Google's Chrome browser (naturally) and a "powerful computer with a good graphics card" - and there are plenty "your mileage may vary" disclaimers - but it's still well worth a look-see.

They are visually presenting a lot of information that could be (and is) presented in the typical "list" format. I mean, you've seen the listing of books with covers but it just lacks the brevity and excitement of looking through a bookstore shelf.

Apple was at the forefront of this type of visualization - but they did it with your music collection. Their "Cover Flow" technology allows you to "flip through" your collection of "albums" by displaying the cover artwork - rather than a listing (like a playlist).

I think this is where the future of software and user interfaces is going - especially given the fact that our devices are getting smaller (less screen real estate) and there is more information. This type of visual paradigm is perfect for displaying huge amounts of information in an itty bitty space.

How To Get a Job At Google, Apple or Facebook [INFOGRAPHIC]

As I was trolling the interweb this morning, I came across this infographic that was showing what kinds of job openings there are at the "big 3" (not automakers, tech employers).

It seems like there's a "Top 3" formula to getting hired at one of these companies:

3. Be smart;

2. Be able to communicate and use SEO words on resume (NOT "CV", but "Resume");

... and the number 1 way to get hired at one of these great tech companies....

... wait for it...

KNOW SOMEONE!

Buzz kill.




SOURCE

How Google (and the Internet) Are Making Us Smarter and Dumber At The Same Time [INFOGRAPHIC]

Remember the "good old days" - when you wanted to read a good book you didn't flip on a screen? Or, when you were looking for work you waited for the Sunday classified section of the "newspaper" (Google it). Or, when you needed more information on something you would go to a "library" or look in an "encyclopedia"?

When was the last time you actually manually dialed a phone number on your phone more than once? Do you even remember your password to your favorite sites - or do you just let your browser "remember" for you?

Yeah, me neither.

Apparently, we're not alone:



SOURCE

Google To Acquire Motorola Mobility - Sad

Unless you've been living under a rock, you've probably heard that Google has agreed to acquire Motorola Mobility (yeah, the part of Motorola that builds the phone handsets) for $12.5 billion in cash (at $40 per share -  a 63% premium over the market close price on Friday).

I know, right?

It's clear that Google is buying the moto unit, not to expand their market share, not to get into the handset business, not to add shareholder value - but to get their trove of 14,600 patents (and the 6,700+ pending patents).

Personally, I think it's an extremely sad state of affairs.

Clearly, Google feels threatened by the Oracle lawsuit, and the Apple lawsuit and the Microsoft lawsuit. All these large, deep-pocketed, industry leaders are trying to do a single thing: sue the Android operating system into oblivion over patent rights - OR, at the very least, make Google pay a patent "toll" for the right to distribute the operating system for free.

Why are they not going after Palm's WebOS? Or Symbian? Both of those are free (and open) as well.

The answer is: they don't matter. They have no market share. They have no mind share. They have a small installed base.

On the other hand, Android commands a majority of not only the phone market (Apple hates that - as does Microsoft), but they're starting to make noises about making inroads into the tablet market (Apple clearly doesn't want that) - and Oracle is laughing their asses off since they acquired Sun (the folks that invented Java and hold key patents to the underlying technology).

So - what's a company with $39 billion in cash to do? Sure! Buy a patent rich handset company that will be - according to Larry Page on a Google conference call this morning:

I’m really excited about this deal. There are competencies that aren’t core to us, but we plan to operate it as a separate business, so they have competency there. I’m really excited about protecting and supporting the Android ecosystem.

Thump (other shoe dropping).

TRANSLATION: "We don't know the phone business and don't care. Motorola has been struggling and their getting their lunch eaten by HTC anyway. The handset business will do whatever.... the main thing is - we got their patents before someone else did."

So here's the latest tally: patent trolls 3; innovation: 0.

"Innovention" Is Alive And Well

"Innovention" is alive and well, thank you very much. No, I'm not talking about the make-over of the old Disneyland "Carousel of Progress" - but I'm talking about innovation + invention = "innovention."

ICANN (andSoCanYou.com)

Well, the governing body for Internet top level domains (also called TLD's) like .com, .org, etc. took a historic vote yesterday that will allow anyone with $185,000 (and $25,000 annually after that) come up with their own TLD.

Could You Live Your (Computing) Life Only In The Cloud?

So the first batch of Chrome OS computers started shipping this week - one by Samsung and one by Acer. They're basically like a standard laptop, albeit an under-powered one - think netbook specs. They both have about a 12 inch screen, weigh under 3.5 pounds (1.6 kg), have a couple of gigs of RAM, a solid state 15-20GB hard drive, a SD card reader, couple of USB ports (no ethernet), built-in WiFi (no ethernet - but Samsung has a 3G radio option) and a built-in webcam/microphone. They both retail for about $350 (WiFi only) to $500 (WiFi + 3G).

Short Rant: Adobe - Patch THIS! (UPDATED)

Holy crap. Really? ANOTHER set of patches for Flash? This is the second time in 9 days that Adobe has issued a "zero-day" patch that affect Flash (and also, Google's Chrome browser that includes Flash). Oh yeah, and it also updated Adobe Reader and Acrobat fixing 13 MORE vulnerabilities at the same time.

If you use Gmail - you REALLY, REALLY need to make sure that you've got the latest patch - because on June 5th Adobe issued an "emergency" patch to fix a vulnerability that would allow nefarious baddies to steal your Gmail login credentials.

I don't know about you - but I have more than one device that uses Flash. I use Google's Chrome browser at work (3 Windows machines), at home (2 Macs + 6 virtual OS instances) - and I'm just getting pretty damn tired of updating all this stuff - all the time. But yet, if Adobe comes out with a "critical" patch - and you ignore it - your machine might get hacked - or your identity stolen.

Really? Identity theft from a browser plug-in used to play media or display a PDF document?

I'm especially worried about those "less technically savvy" people in my life - since I'm the "family IT guy." If they don't patch, it means I'm going to have to do all kinds of stuff to un-gunk their computers - because (technically inclined brethren) you KNOW they DO click on every single "pretty picture" on every single site they visit on the inter-web.

Now, I love PDFs - don't get me wrong - and because reader is now installed on 95%+ of all computers in the world - getting away from using it will be a challenge.

For those of you who are really smart out there - why don't you come up with a PDF to HTML5 converter that would just bundle up the PDF into a double-clickable HTML document? At least then we could be free from the eternal Adobe Patch Cycle...

... until someone hacks HTML5 readers... sigh.

UPDATE June 17, 2011 - Well, it seems as though the good folks over at Mozilla are SICK of the buggy Adobe Reader as well - and are going to build an extension (and eventually put into the codebase)... wait for it... a 100% HTML5/JavaScript PDF rendering engine! Hot off the wire from ComputerWorld:

Mozilla is working on a project that will add PDF rendering to Firefox using HTML5 and JavaScript, eliminating the need for users to run Adobe's own plug-in.

We can only HOPE the other browser folks get behind the open-source pdf.js project as well! God speed Mozilla folks!

IE9 "INNOVATION!"

DOH! I just noticed that my last blog here was 6 MONTHS ago... ummm... oops - my bad. (to my loyal 10 readers - I'll try to be better about updating this thing on a more timely basis)

So Microsoft just released Internet Exploder 9.0 and a "special" download site beautyOfTheWeb.com. Now, let's get this out in the open right from the start - I am NOT a huge fan of Internet Explorer. In fact, it's such a bloated, slow and outdated piece of crap that I've long since changed the default browser on every computer I touch to Chrome.

Before I get hate mail from die-hard Mozilla users - it's not that I dislike Firefox - it was the "cool kid" and unlocked the door of the tyrannical IE lock-in suffered by so many for so long. However, Google's Chrome browser simply blew the doors off Firefox in terms of performance, simplicity and elegance. To be fair, Firefox 4 is just about ready to be released - so we'll see how it goes - but for now, for me and mine - Chrome is the bee's knees.

OK, so I hope you get the fact that I like Chrome. A lot.

What was I talking about again? Oh, yeah - IE (small internal groan - followed by a sigh).

It was with great fear and trepidation that actually downloaded and Installed IE9 on my Windows 7 box. I was expecting the "usual" 10 minute download of the installer, the 20 minute install process, the inevitable reboot, etc.

BUT - the download process was pretty easy - they have a little "shell" downloader (like Chrome) app that comes down and actually does the download/install. The installation process itself was actually pretty quick (less than 5 minutes)... I was beginning to think it was going to actually be a "good" experience!

Did Microsoft finally "get it?" Did they finally realize that customers hate bloatware? Did they actually give a crap about the... dare I say it... "user?"

Answer: nope.

You STILL have to do a restart. After you install a BROWSER. In 2011.

Really.

"Well, it IS Microsoft after all", I tell myself. It's almost reassuring that they have kept the process somewhat familiar regardless of how screwed up it is... but I digress.

After installation and reboot, I'm finally ready! IE9! Here we GO!

What the ??

Did I launch Chrome by mistake? (I literally had to check the task bar)

Wow. Microsoft managed to copy Chrome! Gone are all the "crap bars" that hose it all up (like Chrome). Gone are the menus, replaced by a cute "gear" icon (hey, they couldn't use a "wrench" like Chrome - that would be "copying"). You can type in address bar to perform searchs (like Chrome). The rendering speeds ARE significantly and noticeably faster than IE8 (like Chrome). They added process isolation (so if one tab crashes - it doesn't take the whole app down - like Chrome).

Hmmmmmm... it actually doesn't suck.

It's like Chrome - but rather than using an open-source, standards-based HTML rendering engine - they're still using their closed-source, Windows-only, born in 1998 "Trident" engine. And, although Microsoft claims they've updated it to support CSS3 and HTML5 - you gotta' just KNOW that they're "embracing and extending" (read: making stupid, incompatible changes to standard tags and putting in new ones that no other browser supports).

Microsoft doing a browser update can cause a number of different responses - depending on what camp you find yourself in:

If you're a casual user: NO IMPACT - you're probably still using the default IE 6 that came with XP and either your computer is so filled with viruses that you've given up using it - or you don't actually use it to surf beyond your webmail.

If you're a web developer: HAIR ON FIRE ALERT! Refill your Starbucks card immediatelty - because now you have to support yet ANOTHER incompatible version of IE!

If you're a die-hard Microsoft-only shop: REJOICE! You can now actually "load pages quickly". Make sure you update all your customers/users immediately - and for goodness sakes make sure that you immediately hard code all your external-facing sites to only render in IE9!

If you're a die-hard Mac/iOS user/developer: IGNORE - the Mac team at Microsoft uses the same Safari/Chrome WebKit rendering engine in the Mac version of Office 2011.

So, do I "like" IE9? Sure. It's a helluva lot better than IE6, IE7 or IE8! But that's like saying Windows 7 is better than Vista. It IS. But it had BETTER BE!

The inspiration for this post was not that IE9 came out. It was all about a very insulting quote by Dean Hachamovitch (the head of the IE development team) came out with:

"Other browsers dilute their engineering investments across systems," Hachamovitch said. "Because we focus exclusively on one, IE can make the most of the Windows experience and the hardware."

Ummmm... excuse me? Yeah, you're right, Dean... why the hell would you want to support other platforms? Why would you want the same browsing experience across multiple devices? Why would you want to go with a standards-based approach - when everyone at Microsoft KNOWS that closed-source and proprietary is the future.

Non MS OSes Gaining Ground

In order to celebrate my 300th blog entry - I decided to revert to one of my favorite topics: slamming Microsoft... and predicting the demise of this (truly) evil empire.

In what is just the latest in a long history of time-sucking, headache-inducing, blood-pressure-raising events - I stupidly set the auto-update of my parent's aging Dell (XP Professional) to on.

When it decided to do an SP3 update - it hosed the boot block of the hard drive. So, I used the recover CD to "repair" the install, issue a DOS "fixboot" and "chkdsk" commands - and go it to book back into windows.

The BAD news is that as soon as one of the profiles is clicked on - the installation script - in its infinite wisdom and desire to "help" - promptly resumed where it left off and proceeded to hose the boot block again.

The end result is that my parents have a useless computer - with outdated backups, and now I need to spend the better part of 2 days doing a full wipe/install/update.

THANKS Microsoft! Awesome QA!

Yes, I know - just because I'm pissed off about having to restore yet ANOTHER install of Windows (I've done it on my own machines countless times) - I'm really at the point of turning Windows into my occasionally-used-for-testing-only operating system.

I'm just sick of it. Sick of the 10 minute boot time, sick of the endless patches, sick of Service Packs that render printers useless, sick of the bloat, just sick of the OS, period.

So, I did a little looking around the Internet - and I'm seeing that there are LOTS more people just as fed up as I am - AND they're voting with their dollars.

People are into "mobile" and anything "small" and "portable."

I mean, really - when was the last time you bought a "desktop" computer? Sure, there are uses for dedicated desktop boxes for things like video-editing, music composing, hard-core software development, etc.

But, in the main, people are buying laptops - and now, netbooks.

Ah, netbooks. Netbooks are the new Model T - but they come in more colors than just black. And with more than one choice in processors. And with more than one choice of operating system.

These (usually) sub-$500 machines come with solid state 128MB hard drives, 1-2 GB of RAM, a VGA-out port (ok, ok, so the 1024 x 768 resolution sucks), a battery that lasts between 5 and 9 hours and an operating system that can be Windows XP, Ubuntu, and now - TA DA - Android (for less than $300!).

The combination of the price point, the capabilities and the fact that most people use their computers to surf the web, check email, do some word processing and spreadsheets - oh, and play games - and viola! It's huge hit in the making.

"Sure, sure", you're saying - "but that's just on the consumer side. Everyone knows that consumers will jump at anything that's inexpensive and shiny."

That's true - but these consumers WILL buy and adopt - and that WILL force corporate IT (and web designers, and major company webmasters) to sit up and take notice. Ever hear of the iPhone? Look what a profound change has (is) occurring because of it... sits have dedicated iPhone "versions" of their sites, IT has been forced to make MS Exchange work nice, and IT - at the end of the day - has had to bow to the mighty forces of "cool" and "useful" over their (in some cases) strenuous objections.

"Well, OK" - you concede. "But Windows is more than just a consumer OS - it's what powers more than half of all the back end servers in the world."

Yep - for sure. However, Linux is no slouch with almost 1 in 3 computers using that OS for their back end servers. Linux, in its various distributions and forms, has been battle-tested and has been proven in the real world over time. Linux isn't going away any time soon.

Sure, it won't displace Windows Server in the near term - but I think the adoption rates will flip-flop as more and more consumers get used to non-Windows devices. As consumers drive the adoption of more non-Windows devices and as more IT folks get used to supporting non-Windows devices - it's only logical that IT's adoption of non-Windows devices will increase as well.

Will the "winner" be Android? Or Oracle's Solaris? Or Ubuntu? Or Red Hat? Or some new operating system not invented yet? Dunno... all I know is - the sooner the better!

Google Is The Next Linux Desktop

Since HP announced that it was "thinking about" using Android as the operating system for its new netbooks, and since both Asus and Freescale have also announced plans to do so - I got to thinking about Linux on the desktop.

It's been the "holy grail" of Linux to find a home on the desktop as a real, viable alternative to Windows. However it's taken many, many years and there is still a lot of "competition" among the various Linux distributions as to who is best for the desktop user.

The current reigning champion in the desktop Linux world is Ubuntu - and it's been embraced by Dell and HP in various combinations and configurations for some time. HP even went so far as to write their own user interface for Ubuntu (be THAT was fun!).

Now, I really like Ubuntu - and I've installed it and have used it (at the GUI level - not at the command-prompt level) and it's pretty cool. It does take some getting used to - it's like switching to OpenOffice from MS Office. The features are "similar" and the paradigms are "similar" - but there are enough differences to where there is a slight learning curve.

The problem with Ubuntu is not the distribution. It's not the still somewhat lacking UI, it's not the limited number of applications (that part is improving in general). The reason that Ubuntu hasn't become the "real" alternative to Windows is the fact that Canonical, Ubuntu's developer, hasn't beat the consumer drum and put out a really slick GUI that people will love.

They haven't spent the marketing millions that it would require to drive "pull" adoption (people asking for it). They really don' t have the industry muscle to drive wide adoption.

However, there IS one company that has all those things and more: Google. Yep, ever since Android first appeared (and the collective groan about yet another mobile operating system rang out) - both developers and consumers have been interested in seeing if the search giant could bring to an operating system the "coolness" and simplicity it had to search.

It wasn't long after the first Google mobile phones shipped that some smart folks got the OS to run on a netbook - instead of just a phone. The netbook, just like a phone - uses the Atom processor - rather than an x86 processor found in "regular" computers. These little powerhouses sip the power and don't heat up to microwave-hot temperatures like the other chips do.

So, we have the brewing of a perfect storm: an operating system based on the free, open-source Linux kernel; a huge, international company with a huge consumer and business base of customers; a huge, international company with extremely deep pockets to spend on marketing (not to mention that 1 in 3 people who use the web visit their site EVERY DAY); brand-name hardware manufacturers who want to leverage Google's brand to move inexpensive hardware.

To be sure, there are other operating systems that might have a run - the WebOS by Palm (not likely), the Symbian OS (could be interesting - but it's years away) - or maybe even Ubuntu itself (but not until it runs on a phone!).

But, given Google's track record to try things; and the fact it's already invested a huge sum to make Android work on phones; and given the fact that iPhone users are turning into Mac users at a record rate... they could be on to something.

Microblog: Gmail Is Only Human

Nothing in the world works 100% of the time. That's a fact of life.

Why is it then when Gmail goes down for two hours - or the Twitter "fail whale" comes up - people go crazy? Hey - people - do YOU ever do anything 100% of the time - every day, all day, every day of the year?

Neither do I.

Why, then do most people just expect all software, hardware and Internet connections to be up 100% of the time? Well, I guess because we're starting to come to see them as utilities like electricity and phone. They're just supposed to "work" all the time.

And, when they don't - we get a little panicked. Do you remember the last time the electricity went out?

It also means that if you have only a single source for your email (or social networks or whatever) - then you're choosing to put all of your eggs in one basket. That means - that WHEN (not IF) your favorite service goes down (and they ALL will at some point) - take a chill.

Pull out some paper and jot down your notes with a "pen" - or save them in a text file so you can immediately flame the company and have your inflammatory blog post all ready to go when the service DOES come back up.

That's what I do...

Micoblog: Enough With "Beta" Already

So, I don't know about you - but I'm getting a little tired of the word "Beta" when it comes to commercial software and especially with Web 2.0 applications.

Now, most people aren't in the technology field - but I am - and the word beta has a traditional meaning that's getting more and more obscured as time goes on. Traditionally, a piece of software was considered beta - when it was feature complete and undergoing the final bug fixes and performance tweaks.

Software was considered "shipping" software when companies put it out to the public and charged money for it.

That's all changed.

Companies now are putting up services like hotcakes labeled as "Beta" - which either means they're doing some market fishing and seeing if what they came up with will actually stick or not - or they expect customers to be their quality assurance team and find all the bugs.

Microsoft has labeled it's Windows 7 operating system as "Beta." I'm sure it's feature complete and is just getting the final bugs worked out...

Yeah, right!

Gmail has been in "Beta" for over 5 years now (and counting) - and yet they are charging money for it. What the??

It's time companies stepped up and grow a pair and put a "1.0" label on their stuff. Call it "shipping" - and stop being total wussies about it.

When they do have a release that's meant to get public opinion or to show off the future of what they're working on in the labs - that's terrific! Call it a "Public Preview" or "Pre-Release" or something else - but just please stop calling all your stuff "Beta" for 5 years. Same thing for you Web 2.0 folks - having a "closed beta" is fine - even a public "beta" period is good - but a product should not be in "beta" if:

1. People are paying for it
2. It's been more than 3 months since you made it live
3. If you have more than 5,000 people using it
4. If you advertise the new version as if it were shipping
5. You're just doing it to create FUD in the marketplace to stop people from buying a competitor's product (Microsoft - take note!)

Apple: All Your GUI Are Belong To Us

Some of the biggest complaints about the new Google phone is its lack of multi-t0uch interface. You can thank Apple for that.

Palm is trying now to figure out how to not have the bejezus sued out of itself for having multi-touch capabilities on their soon-to-be-shipped Pre phone. You can also thank Apple for that.

It all stems from Patent No. 7,479,949 (originally filed in September 2007) that covers the multi-touch interface and all its gestures (swipe, pinch, rotation, etc.) that are used on the iPhone.

How heavily is Apple going to protect this new patent? The day after the patent was awarded, Apple COO Tim Cook warned any potential iPhone competitors about Apple's stance: "...[Apple] will not stand for having our (intellectual property) ripped off, and we'll use whatever weapons that we have at our disposal."

Whoa, Tim - don't blow a gasket, man! We know you guys came up with the multi-touch interface and that it's THE competitive advantage that sets the iPhone apart from all the other handset makers. Relax!

Yes, we all know Steve is on leave, and you don't want anyone to accuse you of sinking the ship while he's gone - but dude, take a chill.

There's this really cool thing - it's called "licensing." See, here's how it works: you retain ownership of the intellectual property and then you "license" it to other people so they can use it in their handsets as well. This way you make an absolute boatload of money, and the general consumer wins by getting a device that's really useful.... oh. Wait. Now I get it.

You figure that since every other handset maker on EARTH can come up with a much more feature-laden handset at a much lower price... that if you license the multi-touch stuff to them - then no one will ever buy another iPhone again?

Yeah, you got me there.

The good news is that your stock would be able to break 100 and you would have "recurring revenue" (that's where you make money over time rather than on one-off purchases). Hmmmm.... but what about the fact that you're now using that multi-touch stuff in your trackpads on your laptops as well?

This whole "licensing" thing might mean that other companies might come out with a device that would clean your clock, right? Something... oh I don't know... like a netbook with a 10.5 inch screen that would operate as a laptop, phone, tablet, music player, etc.?

Yeah, you got me again.

So, hats off to the foresight to Mr. Jobs again - it looks like it will be a Small Apple World after all.

Microblog: The Insidious Latitude

So the mighty behemoth released "Latitude" - a service that allows you to broadcast your current location to your friends (or the world). It works by using Wi-Fi access points, cell towers or GPS to figure out where you are.

Now, I know the "Big Brother is coming!" paranoid among you have probably already written, called and emailed your Congressperson about what an affront to personal privacy this is, and the other end-of-the-world-is-near folks probably have their panties in a bunch over the "potential" for abuse, stalking, etc.

My view is - it's pretty cool and I can see some uses for it. As with any changing technology - at first there is the FUD factor ("Those horse-less carriages will be the end of civilization I tell you!"), and then the marketplace will decide if it's something they like (iPod) or if it's something that sucks (Zune).

It's not as if this thing is turned on by default on all cell phones without the user's full knowledge and consent. In fact, it's almost annoyingly the other way around. As my friend Dan Tynan points on on his ComputerWorld Culture Clash blog:

You type your cell number into a field on the Google latitude page; it sends you a text message with a download link for the 1.35MB file. Install the app on your phone, click through a bunch of user agreements, and sign into your Google account (or create a new one). You can then choose which friends you want to add to Latitude; they get an email inviting them to do the same thing.

Boy - that sure sounds pretty insidious to me. Making you download it. Then install it. Then give you all those "I agree" buttons to click (along with an explanation of what's what). I mean, hey - YOU might actually have to choose to turn it on. Then choose to invite your friends. Then choose to activate it on the phone. Then choose to allow Google to know your position.

It's a conspiracy, I tell you!

If you don't like it, or you're afraid your privacy will be invaded, or you'll be "stalked" or that it will cause the utter downfall of the human race - don't sign up and install it. Period.

2009 Outlook: Cloud-y

Just as the world was learning about, creating a strategy for, and releasing 1,000 different tools for "Cloud Computing" in 2008 - I predict we'll see more of it in 2009.

Certainly, all the "big" players have announced their strategies - Google, Amazon, Adobe, Microsoft, Salesforce, Sun, etc. - but so far, the thing that's really lacking is some kind of cohesive standard or at least even parity with one another. The big problem is that everyone is convinced they have the "perfect" platform for cloud computing.

I'm sure in their minds they do. They've spent a lot of time and money figuring out how their offering would get some traction in the marketplace and, most importantly of all, gain developer mind share and get people who will actually use it.

They are so vastly different in the way they define things - from Google and their Gears product to Adobe and the Flex/Flash combo to Microsoft's Mesh. It's sort of all over the place.

Some take the approach that they'll just be the host (Amazon), some want to help enable online/offline browser-based apps (Google, Adobe), others think that the platform IS the platform (Microsoft, Salesforce) - and still, no one has come up with a way to actually build and deploy browser-based application in an easy, repeatable, flexible and seamless way (unless of course you count Servoy).

I think we'll see some great improvements in the tool sets and the capabilities of "cloud" vendors. It's just too much of a cluster to try to create (D)HTML and JavaScript applications that run on a server and also on your machine (not to mention all the "moving parts" required. End users want flexibility. Developers want standards-based stuff they can re-use their current skill set with. Bean counters want everything to be free or cheap.

So I think 2009 will continue to be a year of convergence, and in a down economy (at least until Q4) - the pressure of having to do more with less could either help cloud vendors or it might just backfire and cause developers to retreat into "what they know" in order to preserve their jobs.

Only time will tell.

Google Be Nimble

I just love it when Steve Ballmer, CEO of Microsoft, opens his mouth in public. He nearly always says something that is either outrageous, stupid, embarrassing - or all of the above.

This week was no different. He was doing a webcast interview at the Gartner symposium (the equivalent of their "user's conference) and if you watch the video - about 24 minutes into it he tries to completely dismiss Google Apps saying it's not even in the same league as Office.

He cites one example: "you can’t even put a footnote in a document." And, that was the case. Until two days later.

Yep, Google added that feature and rolled it out to its more than 1 million users within 48 hours of his comment.

Nice!

On one hand you have the largest software company in the world - one that is battling the irrelevancy question of their operating system by throwing money at it - and here's another huge software company with a pure SaaS (Software as a Service) offering that is just proving that they're more nimble and in touch with customers while at the same time proving that Microsoft isn't.

You just gotta' love it. I mean really. If that wasn't the biggest bitch slap I've seen in a while - it was close.

The other bitch slap came this weekend while I was watching some prime time TV. I got a glimpse of the new Apple "I'm a Mac" ad - this one feature our dynamic duo - but this time PC is wearing an accountant hat and counting money into two piles - one for "advertising" (with an enormous stack of cash) and one for "development" that has a tiny pile of cash.

Ooops. Looks like poor little Microsoft is getting picked on by the "little" guys - big time. There was a time not too long ago that no one would dare take on Microsoft (at least that publicly) for fears that Microsoft would just buy them and kill their technology.

As Microsoft gets ready to debut Windows 7 (which Steve admitted is Vista [again] - but "better") - they better get this one right because it seems that the world is getting to be a pretty competitive place where just the mention of "Microsoft" doesn't carry the same weight as it once did.

Google Goggles

So, I'm not sure where this great invention came from - but Google launched a new feature in Gmail called "Mail Goggles" that gives you the ability to make sure you REALLY want to send that email you wrote at 2:00am after your fifth shot of Jack Daniels.

Really, could I make this up? Here's a blog post of the guy that came up with it Jon Perlow, a Gmail engineer.

Remember - Google allows their engineers to use 20% of their time for their own projects - anything that they want to pursue. Well, I guess this Mr. Perlow sent a few emails he regretted so... being a geek... he came up with a technological way to program common sense. Oh, I get it - "beer goggles for email" - brilliant!

I guess it was too much of a hassle to just hit "save" and not "send" then wait until the morning to review the email. Nah, that's too easy.

Jon's "big idea" is to make you do some simple math questions (that you have to get right) before the email will be sent. Ahhhh.... geeks with time on their hands!

I guess the thinking is that if you have to answer some math (or are sober enough) - that it will make you think twice before sending that potentially embarrassing or snarky email. In the Gmail "Settings" (upper right side) click on the "Labs" tab - and turn it on.

It will allow you to set a time range so any emails sent on between the times that you specify will all automatically have the safety blanket enabled. If you're a real hot head or a professional drunk - you can set it up so it will check the mails for you every day of the week - not just on Friday and Saturday nights.

Wow - how did I ever live without this?

I mean, it's a "cute" idea and all - and I'm sure someone, somewhere will find it useful and everything - but frankly, I would appreciate it if the engineers spent more time on stuff that actually matters to more than 8 people.

At a time when Google's stock is down more than 20% - one suggestion would be to actually ship one damn product and get 99% of their current products out of "beta."

Oh crap - I guess they don't have Goggles for Blogger yet... oops.

The Gleam of Chrome

For the past few days - I've made Google's new browser - Chrome the default browser on my system - just to give it a proper test drive.

Ok, so Firefox 3 was eating tons of memory (it even popped into virtual memory on occasion) because I keep a bazillion tabs open in each of 4 or 5 windows. Now, I'm heavily invested in Firefox - it has all the bookmarks, quick links, certain site passwords, etc. all set up - so making the switch for me was a bit difficult.

I decided to take a man pill - and tough it out - and frankly, I'm glad I did.

I'm not one of those users that has 50,000 plug-ins and extensions in my browser - I use my browser to, well, just browse the web. I don't expect it to do my laundry and wash my car - just serve up pages quickly and let me have 1,000,000 tabs open in 5 windows and not slow down or crash.

The interface (or lack thereof) takes a bit of getting used to - it's unlike any browser you've used before. It has a tabbed interface (duh!), but the tabs are above the address bar, not below it. There is no "File", "Edit" menus - and there's not even a "home" button. There are two icons to the right of the address bar that contain all the commands you'll ever use (and keyboard equivalents for everything).

One more thing - there's no title bar (that thing that would normally have the icon and shows the title of the page - with the minimize and maximize buttons on it). NOPE! Not there. Google's intent was to make the browsing experience as stripped down (UI wise) as possible - but still make it powerful.

Each tab is, in effect, it's own browser - so if one page blows up - it doesn't take the whole application down - it just blows that one tab up. Me likkie. The other thing that's interesting - is that because it was built from the ground up to be optimized for browsing - there are some cool, albeit somewhat hidden, features that give you almost too much information about what's going on under the hood.

For example, choosing Developer -> Task Manager (or Shift + Esc) - you can see how much memory every open tab is taking - and how much memory plug-ins (like Flash) are consuming and you can kill any process at any time with the click of a button.

If you're really into code - check out the Element Inspector. Just right click on any object on a page and you'll see the Inspector window come up with the HTML of the page with the selected object highlighted. It will also show you all the CSS information and JavaScript in a collapsible tree view that you can navigate.

There are a ton of other features in there - like when you open a new tab rather than it being blank it shows the 9 most visited sites. Also, when you open a new tab manually - it goes to the far right like you would expect, but when you click on a link in a page and have set it up to open a new window in a new tab - it will open the new tab directly to the right of the selected tab. This really makes it easy to hop back and forth - and is just one example of the neato features that just work.

There are a ton of other features in there - if you're interested you should have a look at the ComputerWorld article by Preston Gralla - he goes into terrific details about how to use them and where they are.

If your idea of what a browser should be is just a browser that's optimized for browsing - and you're on Windows (for now) - then I would highly recommend you check out Chrome.