Novell got Evolution, the email and calendaring app, along with the other Ximian technologies. Now Evolution is compatible with Exchange servers, and almost as goog as Outlook... and there is a Win32 port on the go.
Exchange and Outlook are key components for Microsoft, there are lots of places were they're the only reason to keep Windows Servers. If Novell offer an equal, or better replacement, it will be a cash cow almost as goog as Netware was.
IMHO thats an important piece of software that OpenSource lacks... a complete, integrated Email-Calendaring server and clients... And I have tested most of them, including Kolab, OpenXChange, Horde, etc, etc... none is an Exchange killer.
This metadata can be mined localy, at your computer, before your files are encypted and sent to their servers. This way they will be also sparing their server time, using your machine to process the metadata needed to feed TextAds.
This theoretical GDrive could encrypt your files automagically, this way only YOU from YOUR COMPUTER should be able to view them. Google can skip all these legal problems claiming that they just provide the storage, but doesnt have acess to the contents of the files.
Of couse GDrive will send some meta-information about the files to feed Googles TextAds, probably the same info that GoogleDesktop send, and keep some kind of hash to identify identical files, in order to save server storage.
My mother is a lawyer and I convinced her to move from MSOffice to OpenOffice exactly for the same reason. Many of their documents got corrupted by different versions of Word, or by anti-virus software trying to repair macro-virii infected files.
I'd like to point out that several of her files that Word couldn't open anymore were opened flawless by OpenOffice.
She was so glad that now she refuses to use anything but OpenOffice.
Using these technologies as services outside the company network is a serious security risk. But they don't need to be outside the company.
Imagine this "online" Office suite as something you can deploy inside your company network, this can really help to increase productivity. Sharing documents will be a breeze, immagine be able to interconnect complex documents using a Wikki-like structure! Be able to collaborativelly edit them, and keep several versions and revisions. And do this with nothing more than TCP/IP and HTTP.
Now imagine that Google starts to sell these, a GMail server, Calendaring, Text processor, Spreadsheet, Database and Instant Messaging... all integrated, searcheable, and ready to deploy. Can you picture those blue Google servers selling like hot cakes?
In this scenario the OS will really become irrelevant, you'll be able to use simple solutions, as thinclients running a kiosk-style browser. This makes support dead simple, and cut a lot of costs.
And if you really need to do your work offline, there's always the option to include an export to OpenOffice feature, after all it's a standart and anyone is free to implement it, including Google.
They don't want you to have Free-WiFi because once you have it, you won't want to pay for it.
These companies see WiFi as another service they can charge you for, and all of those free hotspots spoils them a future revenue source.
They're scared of the future, because the communication services are getting cheaper and cheaper. You don't have to spend that much bandwidth just to do voice communication, with all those bandwidth potential being laid over the planet it will be so cheap to do voice that some company might decide they can afford to give it away, for free, just for the sake of publicity. And once one company had done it, every other will have to do the same.
Imagine a "free" cellphone network, where you just have to pay for the phone device. If whe switch over to VoIP this can be a reality... And of course if you're using a 100% digital network you just could offer free internet as well, only with a limited bandwidth.
And I picture this for countries that have a private telecommunications network, on countries where the teles are owned by the governament this can happen even sooner.
While FreeHand is a great product, it really can compete with Illustrator on smaller shops that do Web and Print, but Illustrator print capabilities are better and even if you make your art entirelly on FH you'll need Illustrator to generate a professional-grade printable file (be it TIFF, PS or PDF). Think about FreeHand as a companion for Flash, it is the ideal place to generate all those flashy graphics that you'll animate on Flash.
Fireworks goes the same way, and it's even more web-centric than Freehand.Fireworks actually complements Photoshop and Dreamweaver so I don't think that it will be discontinued. You won't use Fireworks to retouch you photos, but you may use it to put them inside a flash animation, or on a static web page made with Dreamweaver.
I bet things will work like this: Create with ADOBE and publish on the web with MACROMEDIA.
Actually I think that's a pretty good move for the OpenSource community.
This way there still be a need for an OpenSource JVM, and enought interest behind the Apache Harmony project to keep it moving.
Think about it, there is already lots of free JVMs, like GNU GCJ/Classpath, Kaffe, SuperWabba, etc... They're just not 1.4 compilant yet. But they're usefull for lots of tasks, and they're free.
If Sun releases Java under an OpenSource licence, it will kill the Harmony Project. And as a java web developer I'm very exited about Apache Harmony. Think about it, Apache has the Struts framework, TomCat servlet container, Geronimo application server, and will have the JVM powering them... the possibilities for performance tunning, and optimization are endless!
Yes, and GNOME will mount it immediatly.
But the point is, Windows detect it, and ask if you want to open it using WMP or iTunes. There is one more level of refinement, do you see?
Windows detect it as a Storage Device, AND as a Media Device. Why Linux/BSD doesnt do the same? And I mean LINUX/BSD, not KDE/GNOME! Because hardware detection events should be generated and parsed by the OS, and then passed to the Desktop Environment!
I know this is a stupid little detail, but these things help to cacth the average user.
Last time I checked it was iPod only... may be it has changed.
But, anyways... A MP3 player is just a USB Storage device, why cant say this to the Desktop Environment? This way Amarok, Rhythmbox and others will be automatically aware of it.
Ubuntu might be as stable as Debian Etch (TESTING), but it isn't stable as Sarge is.
Also, why not support Debian? It's an easy target... there are no frequent release cycle, there are no frequent compiler toolchain changes, no frequent libraries updates.
Debian should be easier to support than Ubuntu, with their 6 month release cycle, and constant binary compatibility breakage between releases!!
From the user point of view, Windows is a Desktop Environment. Just like Gnome, KDE and Aqua. So, if we're comparing desktops, we should be talking about these.
And even among Gnome and KDE, each distribuition implements them in a different way. So we can have bad, good and fantastic implementations depending on what distro you're talking about.
Personaly I prefer Gnome as my desktop environment, and Ubuntu/Debian as a distro. I fell that they provide a better "desktop experience" over Windows most of the time. Most of the hardware is detected instantly, and just work, and there are nice interfaces to customize and configure the OS.
But there are a few rought edges too. For one, there is no integration between my MP3 player and the various jukebox programs that exist on linux, I have to manually copy them to the player. And the "Add Printer" interface could use some advanced options, like its KDE counterpart.
I'm telling this because I think that most of the work is finished for both the GUI and the underling OS, be it Linux or BSD. The problem now is how interconnect them, how integrate the GUI and the OS, to make them act as one. There has been lots of improvements on this, but Gnome and KDE need more handlers to hardware events, and more graphical configuration interfaces.
We're almost equal to Windows in terms of features, and ease-of-use. It's time to take a better standart, it's time to look at MacOSX and make something as-good-as it, or simply better!
Ok, Ubuntu might be a peach to use on the desktop, but I won't give up on my STABLE Debian Servers.
Seriously, is it because there is no big enterprize behind Debian? I went to an Oracle presentation, and when we asked for Debian support they say that Debian doesn't have "official vendor support". Then I replied, "What do you mean? We're the support, we know our needs and we know our servers, there is no need here for vendor support!".
Debian has been a mature, rock-solid stable distribution for yeas now. And it has a looooong life cycle, so there is no libc or gcc changes that make difficult for any major software vendor to support it!
Why IBM and Oracle forces me to buy a support licence from RedHat or Novell to run their products? Why can't them support Debian? Why IBM support UBUNTU and fail to support Debian?
Of course you don't need any special skills to install an OS, it's an trivial, automated task nowdays.
Now, try to setup a cluster of mail servers, using LDAP authentication, Spam Checking, Anti Virus protection, IMAP access and a WebMail. This is not trivial as install Fedora, is it?
Yet, it's a lot easier to go the Microsoft way, and do "next-next-finish" until Exchange is installed, and maybe you could set up a Symantec AV on the same machine too. Presto! Instant eMail server! Almost anyone can do this, its soooo easy!
The problem is, it's not that easy. You have to worry about mail routes, relays, performance, security, etc... Enven on the automated Microsoft environment. But Microsoft won't tell you that, they'll say to upgrade to their's software next version, and all the problems will magically disapear.
On the other hand, if you use a *NIX solution, probably only people that know exactly what they're doing will be capable to deploy such a system.
My point is... of couse we have bad, unqualified, uderpayed professionals on the *NIX field. But it's a lot easier to be unqualified and sloppy when you're working with Microsoft products.
So, to the employers out there it seems a lot cheaper to buy new licences from Microsoft, than invest on their employees. This is the worst lie that Microsoft ever said, and that's the one that hurt us more.
Microsoft Products are really easy, I must admit. Even a person not familiar with them, or not so well qualified for the job is capable enough to deploy a working environment.
Unfortunatelly this is a major drawback for us, IT professionals. Microsoft sell the illusion that you don't need to invest on training and qualifing your professionals, you don't need to spend lots of money with highly trained people, with lots of experience. No, no, no, no... just upgrade your Microsoft products to the next great version, and you'll be able to keep you current underpayed employees.
With Linux, on the other hand, you must employ real qualified people, people with experience and that really knows "how stuff works".
Let's face it... most business won't invest on their employees unless they're forced to. And that's what Microsoft is exploring, saying that's cheaper to buy licences, than hire qualified professionals.
Re:Google Consolidating All Info For Advertising?
on
Google Base Launches
·
· Score: 1
If they host everything, and it's better than all the websites that host their own info in order to run advertisements, then those websites will disappear with time.
I don't think so. These sites can add up value to Google Base, acting as a frontend to it offering a nicer way to retrieve and store the data. And they'll gain lots of resources, instead of mantaining their own databases, they'll share one HUGE common database.
Now, try to immagine a Wiki engine powered by Google Base. No matter where your site is, or how new it is, it will have access to hundreds, thousands of searcheable nodes!
This Google Base can start a revolution on information sharing.
Google alredy has nice APIs for Java, Perl, PHP and.NET. My bet is that someone eventualy will come up with a JDBC compatible interface, and start using GoogleDB as a traditional database engine just for the sake of doing it!
I was already wondering uses for an online, searcheable, public avaliable database. And there are dozens... One for example is to make every post on my blog indexed by Google, an online store would benefect from this by posting their itens on the database, and get some eventually showing up on froogle.
Imagine posting the CDDB database into GoogleDB... Or creating a free Thesaurus tool that can be updated online... Almost every site that offers some kind of free information can use GoogleDB!
... and a government employee, I have one or two things to say:
First, actualy there is no coerent effort to push OpenSource solutions in the Federal Government. There are isolated efforts, and little coordination between them.
I work at the Rio de Janeiro Municipal Dept. of Health Care (Secretaria Municipal de Saude), we has been working on a really open framework for the past 3 years, based on Java + Tomcat + Hibernate + Firebird runnig on Debian. It's already used on a social program called Medicine at Home (Remedio em Casa), that delivers medicine by mail for people with diabetes and high blood pressure.
We had plans to extend this, and use the same framework to devellop a full hospitalar management solution, based on opensource sollutions, and enterprise ready. But it has been put aside, in favor of a project develloped by the Federal Ministery, called SNIS.
SNIS (National System for Health Information), is a nightmare of ill concepted technologies. Everything is based on proprietary solutions, such as Oracle Forms, Windows and even WindowsCE.
But the worst part are the special build PCs running WindowsCE, made of an ITX motherboard, 320x240 LCD touchscreen, termal printer, and SmartCard reader. They are meant to be used for data input, such as schedule consults on a ambulatory. The idea is that those custom "thinclients" would be cheaper to mantain than regular PCs... This could be true, if they didnt cost U$900,00 each! And, to make things even worse... the only firm that makes those babies is Procomp, a firm that is owned by DIEBOLD!!!
So, belive me when I say that OpenSource is a priority for the Brazilian government only when there are political interests behind it.
Slashdot Mirror
You're wrong.
Novell got Evolution, the email and calendaring app, along with the other Ximian technologies. Now Evolution is compatible with Exchange servers, and almost as goog as Outlook... and there is a Win32 port on the go.
Exchange and Outlook are key components for Microsoft, there are lots of places were they're the only reason to keep Windows Servers. If Novell offer an equal, or better replacement, it will be a cash cow almost as goog as Netware was.
IMHO thats an important piece of software that OpenSource lacks... a complete, integrated Email-Calendaring server and clients... And I have tested most of them, including Kolab, OpenXChange, Horde, etc, etc... none is an Exchange killer.
This metadata can be mined localy, at your computer, before your files are encypted and sent to their servers. This way they will be also sparing their server time, using your machine to process the metadata needed to feed TextAds.
This theoretical GDrive could encrypt your files automagically, this way only YOU from YOUR COMPUTER should be able to view them. Google can skip all these legal problems claiming that they just provide the storage, but doesnt have acess to the contents of the files.
Of couse GDrive will send some meta-information about the files to feed Googles TextAds, probably the same info that GoogleDesktop send, and keep some kind of hash to identify identical files, in order to save server storage.
Just my $0.2
Probably because everyone wants to know what Apple will be using on their computers a year from now
Funny thing...
My mother is a lawyer and I convinced her to move from MSOffice to OpenOffice exactly for the same reason. Many of their documents got corrupted by different versions of Word, or by anti-virus software trying to repair macro-virii infected files.
I'd like to point out that several of her files that Word couldn't open anymore were opened flawless by OpenOffice.
She was so glad that now she refuses to use anything but OpenOffice.
Agreed,
Using these technologies as services outside the company network is a serious security risk. But they don't need to be outside the company.
Imagine this "online" Office suite as something you can deploy inside your company network, this can really help to increase productivity. Sharing documents will be a breeze, immagine be able to interconnect complex documents using a Wikki-like structure! Be able to collaborativelly edit them, and keep several versions and revisions. And do this with nothing more than TCP/IP and HTTP.
Now imagine that Google starts to sell these, a GMail server, Calendaring, Text processor, Spreadsheet, Database and Instant Messaging... all integrated, searcheable, and ready to deploy. Can you picture those blue Google servers selling like hot cakes?
In this scenario the OS will really become irrelevant, you'll be able to use simple solutions, as thinclients running a kiosk-style browser. This makes support dead simple, and cut a lot of costs.
And if you really need to do your work offline, there's always the option to include an export to OpenOffice feature, after all it's a standart and anyone is free to implement it, including Google.
Oh, yeah... and this will really hurt Microsoft.
I got two Apple logo stickers with my iBook...
If I put one of them on my Dell desktop it's ok to install MacOSX on it? After all, with the sticker it will be an Apple-abeled computer!
Just wondering...
If someone, from China, choose to use google.com instead of google.cn, the results will be censored too?
I'm sure that if that technology really make some difference, Intel will be able to licence it too. No problem here.
Also, Intel has the best mobile processors, and what Apple really needed was a mobile processor.
Based on this, I think that Apple did the right thing.
Imagine that Google had managed to licence MacOSX, and decide to sell rebranded MacMinis, much in the same way that HP sells rebranded iPods!
Ohhh... I can picture the small blue boxes, wiht those colorfull letters spelling "Google" all over it. It would be fantastic!
They don't want you to have Free-WiFi because once you have it, you won't want to pay for it.
These companies see WiFi as another service they can charge you for, and all of those free hotspots spoils them a future revenue source.
They're scared of the future, because the communication services are getting cheaper and cheaper. You don't have to spend that much bandwidth just to do voice communication, with all those bandwidth potential being laid over the planet it will be so cheap to do voice that some company might decide they can afford to give it away, for free, just for the sake of publicity. And once one company had done it, every other will have to do the same.
Imagine a "free" cellphone network, where you just have to pay for the phone device. If whe switch over to VoIP this can be a reality... And of course if you're using a 100% digital network you just could offer free internet as well, only with a limited bandwidth.
And I picture this for countries that have a private telecommunications network, on countries where the teles are owned by the governament this can happen even sooner.
Actually, no.
While FreeHand is a great product, it really can compete with Illustrator on smaller shops that do Web and Print, but Illustrator print capabilities are better and even if you make your art entirelly on FH you'll need Illustrator to generate a professional-grade printable file (be it TIFF, PS or PDF). Think about FreeHand as a companion for Flash, it is the ideal place to generate all those flashy graphics that you'll animate on Flash.
Fireworks goes the same way, and it's even more web-centric than Freehand.Fireworks actually complements Photoshop and Dreamweaver so I don't think that it will be discontinued. You won't use Fireworks to retouch you photos, but you may use it to put them inside a flash animation, or on a static web page made with Dreamweaver.
I bet things will work like this: Create with ADOBE and publish on the web with MACROMEDIA.
Actually I think that's a pretty good move for the OpenSource community.
This way there still be a need for an OpenSource JVM, and enought interest behind the Apache Harmony project to keep it moving.
Think about it, there is already lots of free JVMs, like GNU GCJ/Classpath, Kaffe, SuperWabba, etc... They're just not 1.4 compilant yet. But they're usefull for lots of tasks, and they're free.
If Sun releases Java under an OpenSource licence, it will kill the Harmony Project. And as a java web developer I'm very exited about Apache Harmony. Think about it, Apache has the Struts framework, TomCat servlet container, Geronimo application server, and will have the JVM powering them... the possibilities for performance tunning, and optimization are endless!
Yes, and GNOME will mount it immediatly. But the point is, Windows detect it, and ask if you want to open it using WMP or iTunes. There is one more level of refinement, do you see? Windows detect it as a Storage Device, AND as a Media Device. Why Linux/BSD doesnt do the same? And I mean LINUX/BSD, not KDE/GNOME! Because hardware detection events should be generated and parsed by the OS, and then passed to the Desktop Environment! I know this is a stupid little detail, but these things help to cacth the average user.
Last time I checked it was iPod only... may be it has changed. But, anyways... A MP3 player is just a USB Storage device, why cant say this to the Desktop Environment? This way Amarok, Rhythmbox and others will be automatically aware of it.
Ubuntu might be as stable as Debian Etch (TESTING), but it isn't stable as Sarge is.
Also, why not support Debian? It's an easy target... there are no frequent release cycle, there are no frequent compiler toolchain changes, no frequent libraries updates.
Debian should be easier to support than Ubuntu, with their 6 month release cycle, and constant binary compatibility breakage between releases!!
You're right.
From the user point of view, Windows is a Desktop Environment. Just like Gnome, KDE and Aqua. So, if we're comparing desktops, we should be talking about these.
And even among Gnome and KDE, each distribuition implements them in a different way. So we can have bad, good and fantastic implementations depending on what distro you're talking about.
Personaly I prefer Gnome as my desktop environment, and Ubuntu/Debian as a distro. I fell that they provide a better "desktop experience" over Windows most of the time. Most of the hardware is detected instantly, and just work, and there are nice interfaces to customize and configure the OS.
But there are a few rought edges too. For one, there is no integration between my MP3 player and the various jukebox programs that exist on linux, I have to manually copy them to the player. And the "Add Printer" interface could use some advanced options, like its KDE counterpart.
I'm telling this because I think that most of the work is finished for both the GUI and the underling OS, be it Linux or BSD. The problem now is how interconnect them, how integrate the GUI and the OS, to make them act as one. There has been lots of improvements on this, but Gnome and KDE need more handlers to hardware events, and more graphical configuration interfaces.
We're almost equal to Windows in terms of features, and ease-of-use. It's time to take a better standart, it's time to look at MacOSX and make something as-good-as it, or simply better!
Stop talking about Windows!!
Why isn't Debian Listed?
Ok, Ubuntu might be a peach to use on the desktop, but I won't give up on my STABLE Debian Servers.
Seriously, is it because there is no big enterprize behind Debian? I went to an Oracle presentation, and when we asked for Debian support they say that Debian doesn't have "official vendor support". Then I replied, "What do you mean? We're the support, we know our needs and we know our servers, there is no need here for vendor support!".
Debian has been a mature, rock-solid stable distribution for yeas now. And it has a looooong life cycle, so there is no libc or gcc changes that make difficult for any major software vendor to support it!
Why IBM and Oracle forces me to buy a support licence from RedHat or Novell to run their products? Why can't them support Debian? Why IBM support UBUNTU and fail to support Debian?
Actually
class Ubuntu extends Debian {
public Ubuntu() {
super();
this.doMagic();
}
}
Of course you don't need any special skills to install an OS, it's an trivial, automated task nowdays.
Now, try to setup a cluster of mail servers, using LDAP authentication, Spam Checking, Anti Virus protection, IMAP access and a WebMail. This is not trivial as install Fedora, is it?
Yet, it's a lot easier to go the Microsoft way, and do "next-next-finish" until Exchange is installed, and maybe you could set up a Symantec AV on the same machine too. Presto! Instant eMail server! Almost anyone can do this, its soooo easy!
The problem is, it's not that easy. You have to worry about mail routes, relays, performance, security, etc... Enven on the automated Microsoft environment. But Microsoft won't tell you that, they'll say to upgrade to their's software next version, and all the problems will magically disapear.
On the other hand, if you use a *NIX solution, probably only people that know exactly what they're doing will be capable to deploy such a system.
My point is... of couse we have bad, unqualified, uderpayed professionals on the *NIX field. But it's a lot easier to be unqualified and sloppy when you're working with Microsoft products.
So, to the employers out there it seems a lot cheaper to buy new licences from Microsoft, than invest on their employees. This is the worst lie that Microsoft ever said, and that's the one that hurt us more.
Microsoft Products are really easy, I must admit. Even a person not familiar with them, or not so well qualified for the job is capable enough to deploy a working environment.
Unfortunatelly this is a major drawback for us, IT professionals. Microsoft sell the illusion that you don't need to invest on training and qualifing your professionals, you don't need to spend lots of money with highly trained people, with lots of experience. No, no, no, no... just upgrade your Microsoft products to the next great version, and you'll be able to keep you current underpayed employees.
With Linux, on the other hand, you must employ real qualified people, people with experience and that really knows "how stuff works".
Let's face it... most business won't invest on their employees unless they're forced to. And that's what Microsoft is exploring, saying that's cheaper to buy licences, than hire qualified professionals.
Now, try to immagine a Wiki engine powered by Google Base. No matter where your site is, or how new it is, it will have access to hundreds, thousands of searcheable nodes!
This Google Base can start a revolution on information sharing.
Google alredy has nice APIs for Java, Perl, PHP and .NET. My bet is that someone eventualy will come up with a JDBC compatible interface, and start using GoogleDB as a traditional database engine just for the sake of doing it!
I was already wondering uses for an online, searcheable, public avaliable database. And there are dozens... One for example is to make every post on my blog indexed by Google, an online store would benefect from this by posting their itens on the database, and get some eventually showing up on froogle.
Imagine posting the CDDB database into GoogleDB... Or creating a free Thesaurus tool that can be updated online... Almost every site that offers some kind of free information can use GoogleDB!
Well,
One migth think that Microsoft would pursue a position among the top 100. After all, they have a clustering solution, dont they?
... and a government employee, I have one or two things to say:
First, actualy there is no coerent effort to push OpenSource solutions in the Federal Government. There are isolated efforts, and little coordination between them.
I work at the Rio de Janeiro Municipal Dept. of Health Care (Secretaria Municipal de Saude), we has been working on a really open framework for the past 3 years, based on Java + Tomcat + Hibernate + Firebird runnig on Debian. It's already used on a social program called Medicine at Home (Remedio em Casa), that delivers medicine by mail for people with diabetes and high blood pressure.
We had plans to extend this, and use the same framework to devellop a full hospitalar management solution, based on opensource sollutions, and enterprise ready. But it has been put aside, in favor of a project develloped by the Federal Ministery, called SNIS.
SNIS (National System for Health Information), is a nightmare of ill concepted technologies. Everything is based on proprietary solutions, such as Oracle Forms, Windows and even WindowsCE.
But the worst part are the special build PCs running WindowsCE, made of an ITX motherboard, 320x240 LCD touchscreen, termal printer, and SmartCard reader. They are meant to be used for data input, such as schedule consults on a ambulatory. The idea is that those custom "thinclients" would be cheaper to mantain than regular PCs... This could be true, if they didnt cost U$900,00 each! And, to make things even worse... the only firm that makes those babies is Procomp, a firm that is owned by DIEBOLD!!!
So, belive me when I say that OpenSource is a priority for the Brazilian government only when there are political interests behind it.