Virtualization seems somewhat overhyped
Virtualization is in many ways pure goodness, just as proponents say. But even so, I think it’s being overhyped. As software, hardware, and processor vendors all get larger, economies of scale are allowing very tight development coupling so as to optimize performance, power usage, etc. For example, I’m running into Intel engineers at almost every large company I follow. If you buy software — and who builds their own if they don’t have to? — you’re now likely to get something that’s been carefully optimized for very specific operating environments. And then there are appliances, which are still trending up, not down. (See also what Stuart Frost of DATallegro has to say on that point.) Or check out this ostensibly pro-virtualization article that really is in agreement with me. Read more
Google vs. Microsoft
Richard Brandt responded to my challenge by explaining in some detail why he thinks Microsoft will never catch up with Google. His argument basically boils down to a very well-reasoned “Why would they? The reasons why Microsoft succeeded in overtaking almost all other PC software vendors don’t apply in this case.” And clearly Google has enormous resources to throw at businesses like search, plus a corporate culture that seems from the outside to be a lot more productive than Microsoft’s these days.
But on the other hand – what exactly is Google’s sustainable advantage?
| Categories: Google, Microsoft, Online and mobile services | 8 Comments |
Integrating BI with planning
One of my big themes these days is the integration of various kinds of analytics with each other, and with other kinds of IT. The following got a good reaction when I posted it in an SAP forum, in response to a question about integrating BI and planning. Read more
| Categories: Analytic technologies, Business intelligence | Leave a Comment |
Richard Brandt doesn’t suck!
Richard Brandt is under fire for predicting Google will eclipse Microsoft. Now, I haven’t seen him make the argument convincingly, because I haven’t seen him rebut the claim “Microsoft can change its ways in sufficient time.” But then, the criticism I have seen is a lot more naive and mean-spirited than that, accusing him of bias. Read more
| Categories: Online and mobile services | 2 Comments |
Diskless PCs — a transition path
I’ve been beating the drum for flash-drive-based diskless PCs for a while (see earlier posts in this section). Computerworld now reports that In-Stat says these PCs could take over half the laptop market by 2013.
Of course, that kind of market research study is not to be taken seriously, at least in its detailed dates and numbers. But of interest is the #1 benefit to flash drives cited in a survey they did, because it’s one I hadn’t focused on before — lower power consumption.
What I’ve been talking about is a grand change in personal computing, with removable flash drives replacing hard drives, and being carried from device to device. Laptops with fixed flash drives may be a key step on the path toward that future.
| Categories: Diskless PCs, Hardware | Leave a Comment |
Appliances are not dead yet
Nick Carr and Jonathon Schwartz are predicting the death (or at least decline) of special-purpose computing appliances. Their reasons, so far as I can tell, are pretty much threefold:
- Vendors have economies of scale making general-purpose computers.
- Users have economies of scale running homogenous, general-purpose computers.
- Virtualization will work.
But when one thinks a little bit about what’s really driving the use of appliances, those arguments fall apart.
| Categories: Computing appliances, Hardware, Platforms, Virtualization | 1 Comment |
Unlocking fiscal from technical architecture
Martin Geddes of Telepocalypse is kind enough to call Tariff Rebate Passthrough “the first new idea I’ve seen in a long time on the stale network neutrality debate.” He goes on to express concern about the practicality of the idea, but hopefully I addressed that somewhat in subsequent posts. While there certainly are major systems to build, which I acknowledge, I don’t see why it’s worse than what would be needed if the telcos’ preferred bill successfully makes it through Congress.
| Categories: Net neutrality, Public policy and privacy | Leave a Comment |
So THAT’S why Andrew Orlowski still has a job
Good things can come from the oddest sources, like mushrooms from a guano cave. And thus an amusing and worthwhile article has appeared under Andrew Orlowski‘s byline. It’s over-the-top, of course, but hey — it IS an Orlowski piece, after all.
His basic thesis is that political bloggers feel so driven to just write that they eventually lose touch with logic, and that this plays in to the general paranoid theme in political discourse. (For some reason, he identifies paranoia uniquely with Americans, but let’s overlook that piece of silliness.) In particular, he thinks the pro-net-neutrality arguments are extremist, even as he correctly points out that the bill being rammed through Congress in their despite is horrifically anti-competitive.
| Categories: Net neutrality, Public policy and privacy | 1 Comment |
Simple legislative language for Tariff Rebate Passthrough
One of the best features of Tariff Rebate Passthrough is that, even with pricing flexibility, it can be implemented using simple legislative language. There only have to be three stipulations:
- Pricing of internet services to consumers will be based wholly on technical characteristics such as volume and quality of service, and not on the identity of the information provider, the content of the information, or the equipment (hardware or software) used by the consumer to consume it. (Actually, the telecom providers may yelp at the “hardware” clause.)
- Pricing of “last-mile” delivery to information providers will be based on those same factors only, and be in the form of standard per-byte tariffs only. Pricing will not discriminate in any way among information providers, nor among types of application.
- Telecom service vendors can’t charge two parties for delivering the same byte.
I think that’s it. Maybe I’m missing something – I’m surely no regulatory lawyer – but those three provisions seem to incorporate the essence, and the benefits, of Tariff Rebate Passthrough.
| Categories: Net neutrality, Public policy and privacy | 1 Comment |
Tariff Rebate Passthrough – achieving pricing flexibility
I’ve thought more about the one weakness so far in the Tariff Rebate Passthrough plan – pricing flexibility. Contrary to what I implied a few hours ago, I now believe that Tariff Rebate Passthrough (TRP) is fully compatible with the kinds of service pricing flexibility providers and consumers are used to or would want. To see that, let’s consider the basic kinds of telecom service pricing:
| Categories: Net neutrality, Public policy and privacy | 2 Comments |