Slashdot Mirror
The End of .Mac and Google Apps?
mattnyc99 writes "In his weekly tech column for Popular Mechanics, Glenn Derene predicts that everyone will have a home server to network their house within 10 years—rendering Apple's .Mac accounts and Google's productivity software useless. As prices for products like HP's MediaSmart Server drop and as processing power becomes more pervasive, Derene says, 'you'll ultimately need a centralized server—that high-powered traffic cop—to coordinate the non-stop exchange of information between your new multitude of devices.'"
It's called Plan 9 from Bell Labs.
Those who don't understand Plan 9 are doomed to reinvent it, poorly.
I have a server at home, with over a TB of storage. I still use most of google's apps, especially Gmail.
... we're all dead. -John Maynard Keynes
Hmm, the summary says we'll have home servers "rendering Apple's .Mac accourendering Apple's .Mac accounts and Google's productivity
software uselessnts and Google's productivity software
useless".
But TFA's only mention of Google or .Mac says:
which is not the same thing at all.
ccalam - acoustic versions of new songs.
This basically assumes google and apple are going to be sitting on their hands for the next decade not changing their products in the slightest.
Obviously as things change they'll evolve their services to meet demand.
MABASPLOOM!
...that in 10 years time some ninety percent of current technology will be rendered useless.
Even in the future the main problem with this setup is reliablity. I have had a server in my home doing these functions for many years. However I would never rely upon it to be the same as a real internet server providing these services. When the power goes out at home, most of the time it will stay down until I get back home. I do agree that in the future we may not have to pay a premium to get 'business class' type access that we do today.
I have old copies of Popular Mechanics going back twenty years, and let's discuss some of their predictions. According to them:
* I have a landing pad built into the roof of my house for my flying car.
* When I need to get to Europe from New York, I take the subway to a special terminal that connects me to a train that shoots under the Atlantic at thousands of miles per hour in a vacuum.
* On the rare instances I don't take the super train, I take a Bell Osprey derivative shuttle to the local airport where I don't even need to get out of my seat, because it follows a track built into the shuttle and the airport and automatically zips me into my waiting hypersonic sub-orbital jetliner (which, for some reason, seems to go nowhere but Tokyo).
* I can fix my hot water heater by removing the broken heating element and replacing it with a new one from the hardware store. Possibly the most ridiculous prediction/claim of all.
I like their enthusiasm, and the pictures and ads are great, but I'm not quite ready to start shorting stock in companies based on a Popular Mechanics prediction.
With Google apps and such, you just need to log in and take care of your business. No need to worry about server updates, hacking, spam, etc. A home server takes a little effort for someone who knows how to run one, but can take a lot of time for someone unfamiliar with servers.
The major things i like about google's web based word app are:
1) it is someone else's responsibility to back it up, cluster it, load balance it, and improve it,
2) it is social, i can include other people in on my document edits easily,
3) i can effortlessly access it from anywhere, be it uni, work, home or a cafe.
Home based servers currently have none of the above, and until we get cheap at home clustering and easy ability to host apps on home adsl we still wont.
Let me be the first to say that Glenn literally pulled this assertion straight out of his ass.
.MAC (the two examples citied) not only provide value as a collaboration platform, but they are also extremely well designed, and cost effective for the business community. If anyone thinks that I'm going to plunk down 2K on an HP Media Server, and all the sudden declare my independence from Software as Service for the business purposes... well... you get the point - it's utter BS.
No one can argue against home media servers driving innovation into the household, especially around automation and media management - but to displace software as a service? GoogleApps? I don't even in the slightest see where these two things correlate.
GoogleApps and
Glenn literally did 2 things.
1. Plugged HP's products (successfully)
2. Showed how absolutely absurd some columists can be (successfully)
Lindsay Blanton
RadioReference.com
Why do I want an extra "hub" computer in my house when it's already a pain in the ass to keep a WEP-enabled wireless router working, and I actually know what I'm doing.
I'd rather let the guys at Google provide my word processor without my having to find room for another plug in my power strip. I've had enough DIY in my life. But y'all feel free.
su root /etc/apache2.conf
:wq
vi
i
listen 8000
listen 8080
apache2ctl restart
There - fixed it for ya.
now type http://examplehomeserver.com:8000/ or http://examplehomeserver.com:8080/
BTW - The article is wrong - not everyone will be running a home server in 10 years. Most people don't want to be bothered, and won't want to spend the extra $$$ on electricity, etc. Cheaper and easier to just have one family member/friend run a linux/bsd box and offer user accounts with ssh, sftp, and ~usr/public_html access (or symlink /home/user/public_html /htdocs/user for people who can't figure out how to type a tilde.
It's called "Windows Botnet Home Server Edition"
This article seems to be in the typical tradition of Slashdot sensationalism. HP bringing a new product to market that competes with Google's and Apple's products doesn't mean that one should automatically assume that older products become obsolete. HP's product doesn't solve the fundamental purpose of the other companies' applications. Google's and Apple's products are able to be used anywhere simply by logging into the web interface. This is the simplicity that people want. People have enough problems just from setting up their computers, so it is doubtful that within five, or even ten years, that people are going to want to manage a central home server. For better or worse, software as a service is something that big companies are pushing more and more. Despite technical or philosophical objections, its adoption will come down to one thing: whether a significant number of people believe that it increases their quality of life. Software as a service makes sense to a lot of people. Only their willingness pay for it will dictate how quickly it becomes popular.
I've been asking friends lately what they expect 10 years from now will be like for the average computer user. About ten of us have, after some long coffee breaks, decided that it'll be something like this:
:)
No one will buy desktop PCs. in 2017 everything will be similar to what we call a laptop today. Data won't be stored on the laptops. Some people will have servers at home, but these people will be eccentric folks like us that host our own web, mail, et cetera in 2007 -- the fringe users. Everyone else will store their data online somewhere. Bandwidth will be charged by the pound instead of flat rate, but it will be very afforadable -- copying a terabyte to home won't cause more than a second of consideration. People will still have workstation caliber desktops, but those will be specialized machines much as they are today, overpowered for a certain task. By 2017, ipv6 is finally mainstream but just barely. Mobile devices will have aggregated down into a single device-- music, cell, radio, visual-- everyone will have the same typical device they carry that does everything, and it will work well. By then, everything will be aware of your biostats if you let it, so your music can follow your general mood, et cetera. They won't be psychic, just dumbly intelligent. Other than that, we decided that technology will be a lot less visible-- as it gets good/small enough to start hiding away in things, so it shall. Presentation will lose its glamour for the most part, and homes will actually look less teched out like they did before the 80s rose.
I'd love to hear other people's imagination reply to these inevitably wrong projections
slashdot: where everyone yells sarcastic metaphors to themselves to understand the issue
You sound like you go through something similar.
I have to guide people through typing a colon key every couple of days and 99% don't know what I mean.
"OK, in the host name box, type our domain name followed by a colon, then the number 1"
"Yes, the colon key, hold down your shift key - thats the big key with the up arrows on it - then press the colon key, its the one with with the 2 dots, its next to the "L" key."
Invariably (after hearing them rustling to put the phone on their shoulder) they manage to type a semi colon.
I hope I never have to try anything more complex with my users.
liqbase
One of the big reasons that I believe home based servers will triumph over hosted apps is the very same reason that they do in any organization -- security and privacy. Case in point, about 6 months ago after being a fan of Gmail for a long time I pulled the plug. Why? Reading the local newspaper one day I saw an article about how the courts have ruled that if your e-mail is stored on someone elses server they don't need a warrant for it. I'm not sure how universal this is, or if it was just in one particular jurisdiction, but that was enough to make me switch. I now run my own mail server.
Similarly the same goes for hosted apps. It's great they are backing it up, but remember, it only takes one rogue employee to sell your secrets to your competitor. If you are a business storing business-related documents on a hosted service you are at the mercy of the hosted company. You can say "it won't happen because of XYZ" all you want, but again it only takes one rogue employee working for the hosting company. Furthermore, if you are a public company or deal with sensitive information -- forget about it -- unless you want to be out of business tomorrow.
Centralized storage and data manipulation is the key -- whether that be in the home or the workplace. We are just now entering into this market and I think we are going to see some really good innovations come of it.
And, personally, yes I've tried out the Beta of Windows Home Server. My thoughts? I love it. It has a few features missing, but when it goes "gold" I plan on switching my home server over to it.
There are strong political and commercial interests who activily oppose such a vision. First, there are the telcoms and cable companies who want to be gatekeepers to people's email and maintain monopolies on other services as well. Try setting up an email server on a residential service, and getting it both to successfully send email without interference by your isp, and having your email messages "accepted" by existing services, regardless of whether you have domain keys setup on your dns, etc, and you will see some of these forces in action.
As for media servers that may feed media where you want it on demand. I imagine if the RIAA and similar gangs can secure root access to your shiny new internet connected media server, say through trussed computing, and control where you are allowed to listen to your own music, along with an automated billing service, maybe then they may promote it rather than activily oppose such a vision. I could imagine such gangs buying laws that state operating "unlicensed" media servers is "intent to infringe" or some other similar kind of nonsense.
Finally, the traditional media providers and a particular software monopoly prefer a captive internet "consumer" model, starting with asymetric speeds, cemented by restrictive use contracts and finding common interest with governmental desires for increasingly filtered services, whether for imagined security threats or for unpopular governments keeping tabs on restless populations. Home servers where people can be liberated as true publishers and equals as information producers, rather than reduced to mear consumers captive to external hosted sites for what may become an ever decreasing set of tolerated forms of expression and activities, is certainly not in their agenda.
Not while ISPs like Comcast get away with charging $60 to remove the 'you may not run a server' clause from their TOS. (I actually did call them to see how much that would cost. $40 a month for what I have, $100 a month for the EXACT SAME SERVICE but with servers allowed.)
I didn't think you lot would be interested in my dwarf porn searches.
Oh shit, did I just post that out loud?
liqbase
My flatmates and I had a server running in our living room all through uni. At first we used it to share our ADSL connection, which was accessed with a PCI modem that our ISP provided. We used it as a Quake server and a file and ssh server after that, so when we bought a wireless NAT router we kept it around.
In my last year of uni, I was working in a special lab where we were allowed to bring in our own laptops and connect to the university network. This was all by special provision, and we were behind an additional firewall. POP, SMTP and IMAP were all blocked, so were were unable to access email services not only from the internet, but even from elsewhere in the same department. So we set up an email service on our living room server, that would check all our accounts and provide IMAP access when at home, and Horde webmail access when we were in uni.
It wasn't an ideal solution, because Horde was difficult to set up and use, and very slow, mainly because although we had close to 8mb downstream, we were still on 512mb upstream. If this kind of approach is to take off with ordinary users, there needs to be a slot-in solution, and upstream speeds need to come closer into line with downstream. The other issue was power consumption. In these days where we're being told to consume less energy, an always-on machine in the house isn't going to look attractive.