All posts by onlyconnect

Google’s offline problem

Here at Developer Day I attended the workshop on new Maps API features. Unfortunately I was one of the last into the session and could not connect to the internet. I suspect a problem with IP number allocation but I don’t know for sure. I spend some time trying to get it working, then gave up and returned to the blogger lounge, where the wi-fi worked perfectly.

A let-down; yet nicely illustrates the reason why we need Gears.

That said that, even Gears isn’t going to enable offline Geocode lookup.

Next up is the session on Gears.

 

Technorati tags: , ,

My question to Google

I grabbed the first question after the opening keynote today. It was prompted by my visit to the Google Gears site – I’d intended to install the beta. I was confronted with this dialog:

I asked:

Why does Google display an 8-page agreement in a box 7 lines high?

More significantly, why does it include this clause which strikes me as unreasonable:

12. Software updates
12.1 The Software which you use may automatically download and install updates from time to time from Google. These updates are designed to improve, enhance and further develop the Services and may take the form of bug fixes, enhanced functions, new software modules and completely new versions. You agree to receive such updates (and permit Google to deliver these to you) as part of your use of the Services.

Of course I’ll have to install Gears; I can’t do my job otherwise. But I’m inclined to do so in a virtual machine, because I prefer to keep control of what gets installed.

There’s plenty more in the agreement that you might object to- have a read and see.

It all sits uncomfortably with the stuff we’ve heard about how much Google loves open source, Creative Commons licenses and so on.

My question wasn’t answered, but Chris DiBona invited me to email him with the question, which I’ve done, referencing this post.

Technorati tags: , ,

Google Developer Day begins

I’m early to the London event; but registration is open and I get a flimsy red bag with oddments including a tin of “Goo” which turns out to be thinking putty. The event is at The Brewery in the heart of the City. We are ushered into the Blogger Lounge – stylish, with bright-coloured cushions, soft pastel lighting, fresh-squeezed orange juice and no chairs. A quick glance around the room tells me that Macs outnumber Windows by about 4 to 1.

The event will kick off with a keynote from Chris DiBona “Developer message” and Ed Parsons “Geo Message”. Then I’ve got API workshops – lots of AJAX and Maps – and closing with another keynote live from Mountain View.

I’m already familiar in a broad sense with Google’s developer offerings, but what is the strategy? Getting closer to that is one reason to be here. The other to assess how useful all this stuff is in the real world – to developers that is, rather than to Google.

Delegate using laptop station at Google dev day in London

More as it happens.

Technorati tags: ,

Not convinced by LINA

Set for public release next month, LINA is a new approach to cross-platform development. Write your app once, for Linux, then deploy using a lightweight virtual machine, implemented for Windows, Mac and Linux. Why even Linux on Linux? Well, on Linux compatibility is a problem, with a multitude of different distributions out there. A VM provides a secure, reliable and predictable environment for your app. LINA’s creators claim to have solved the obvious problems: access to resources in the host operating system, and matching the look and feel which the user is expecting.

I’ll look it with interest when it appears next month, but I’m sceptical. It strikes me as a heavyweight approach, and I’d like to see the extent to which LINA blends with the host O/S before believing all the claims. Some of the publicity annoys me too. Here’s a quote from the white paper:

All computer users – individuals and organizations alike – make the most fundamental software decision when they choose an operating system. Historically, this choice locks the user into a single, clearly-demarcated realm of available software. As a result, Windows and Mac users have virtually no  access to the vast world of Open Source software.

I do most of my work on Windows Vista, so apparently I have “virtually no access” to open source software. Yet happily installed on the Vista box in front of me is:

  • Open Office
  • FireFox
  • Filezilla
  • Apache web server (installed with Delphi for PHP)
  • Tortoise SVN (Subversion client)
  • 7-Zip file archiver
  • Audacity sound editor
  • Ethereal Network Protocol Analyzer
  • NetBeans Java IDE
  • Eclipse Java IDE

and I’m sure there is more if I spend time looking. All open source, mostly cross-platform. Some of this is on the techie side; but the first two above are true mainstream apps.

Writing cross-platform apps is still a challenge, but easier than was the case a few years back, with numerous viable approaches available. So do we really need LINA?

 

Offline blog authoring with Word 2007

After writing a blog with Adobe’s Contribute, part of the new Creative Suite, I thought I should try the same task in Microsoft Word 2007. It’s quite a contrast. Word does not attempt to display the surrounding furniture of the blog, so it feels less cluttered than Contribute, and you get the benefit of Word’s proofing tools. The famous Office ribbon is reduced to three tabs: Blog Post, Insert and Add-Ins; ironically, the only add-in available is Adobe’s Contribute toolbar. It’s a comfortable editing environment, but it does not feel safe. For example, I can insert a WordArt text object, or shapes of various kinds, but it’s not clear what sort of code it will generate, and as with Contribute there is no easy way to view the HTML.

Another problem with Word is the lack of any Insert Tag option. A Technorati tag is just a hyperlink, so I could do this manually, but that is extra work in comparison to Contribute or Live Writer, which have Insert Tag built in. Word does offer an Insert Category button, but you can only select one category each time you drop down the list, whereas in Live Writer you can add multiple categories in one operation, by checking boxes.

I can see the appeal of blog authoring in Word for someone who is familiar with Office and does not want to learn a new tool, but this is my least favourite of the three tools I’ve been trying. So far I prefer Contribute for its features, and Live Writer for its focused design. I suspect Writer will remain the tool I actually use.

 

Offline blog authoring with Adobe Contribute

I generally use Microsoft’s Windows Live Writer to write my blog entries. It has a few annoyances, but I like it better than trying to type directly into WordPress. After installing Adobe’s Creative Suite 3 I noticed a new Contribute toolbar appearing in my web browser, including a Post to Blog button, reminding me that blog authoring is a feature of the new suite and that I ought to try it out. I opened Contribute and set up a connection to this blog; in fact, I’m writing this post in Contribute now.

As you would expect, Adobe has provided a sophisticated tool. Contribute sets up a template that lets you edit a blog entry within an editable area on a page that replicates the blog itself. It is more WYSIWYG than Live Writer. The editing tools are impressive too: along with basic HTML formatting, there is an Insert menu offering Flash, Video and PDF, a spell checker, a table editor, and an image editor with options to rotate, crop, sharpen, set brightness and adjust contrast. Inserting Technorati tags is easy, as is selecting categories from those I’ve defined.

Any complaints? Well, I miss the clean, uncluttered appearance of Live Writer. It feels a touch over-engineered. And if you want to inspect or edit the HTML code, you have to open the blog entry in Dreamweaver, which isn’t a great experience because you get the template as well as the blog entry.

It may sound strange, but Contribute does more than I need. I might use it for authoring WordPress pages, as opposed to blog entries, but otherwise I’m likely to stick with Live Writer. Unless Word 2007 can tempt me away; mini-review coming shortly.

,,,,,

How many XBox 360s have failed?

Simple question. In the early days Microsoft stuck to its story about 3-5%, muttering about “industry average”. More recently Peter Moore, in an interview with Mercury News, ducked the question, saying:

I can’t comment on failure rates, because it’s just not something  – it’s a moving target. What this consumer should worry about is the way that we’ve treated him. Y’know, things break, and if we’ve treated him well and fixed his problem, that’s something that we’re focused on right now. I’m not going to comment on individual failure rates because I’m shipping in 36 countries and it’s a complex business.

In the absence of official figures, there is anecdotal evidence. It’s the folk with broken consoles who make a noise, so it can’t be trusted. Yet a notable feature of surveys like this one in 360 gamer is the number of users with multiple failures – 3, 4, 5, even more.

Another intriguing aspect is that users with broken 360s report significant success rate with a crude repair technique – deliberate overheating. There are several variations. In one you remove the motherboard and apply a heat gun or even a hairdryer. In another you wrap the XBox in towels and turn it on. It suggests that that the most common problem with the 360 is that soldered joints fail. Overheating causes components to expand and if you are lucky remakes the connections. It’s not a good repair and the XBox will likely fail again soon. In particular, the towel trick is silly – apart from the obvious fire risk, overheating in general is bad for electronic components and likely to shorten their life.

The evidence suggests an inherent manufacturing or design problem with the XBox 360. I think 3-5% is wildly optimistic; it would not surprise me if the true figure is 30% or higher. Multiple failures suggests that, at a minimum, entire batches of faulty machines were produced. And because Microsoft is tight-lipped we still do not know when or whether the problem has been fixed. Is it still present in new 360s today? What about the forthcoming Elite?

There is another long-standing irritation connected with the 360’s DRM. A 360 supports muliple profiles, so that family members can maintain their own game progress, high scores, XBox Live accounts and so on. If you download and purchase a Live Arcade game, it is available to all the profiles on that machine. However, if you replace the machine the rules change. The games can be re-downloaded by the original purchaser for free, but on the new machine they are only unlocked for that player’s profile, not for the others which share the machine. In other words, if your 360 breaks and is replaced, you have something not quite as good as what you had before.

Microsoft’s standard policy on receiving a broken 360 is to send out a refurbished model immediately. This means you never get your original machine back, so you always suffer this problem. Third-party repairers are likely to be better in this respect, though you will have to pay, of course, and hope that they use a more effective technique than towels or hairdryers.

Nothing can be done about the number of faulty 360’s now out there, but Microsoft could do a couple of things to improve the situation. First, come clean about the problem and tell us how many are affected and what has been done to fix it. Second, figure out how to restore unlocked Arcade games properly on replacement machines.

Perhaps you guessed: my own (December 2005) 360 failed this weekend, three red lights, code 0020. Another particle of anecdotal evidence.

 

Sutter on Concurrency

Herb Sutter, Software architect at Microsoft and C++ guru, has posted his slides (PDF) from OGDC, a game development conference. His talk was on the challenge programming for concurrency. If you’re not familiar with the subject, the earlier article The Free Lunch is Over is a great starting point.

The free lunch is the assumption that faster processor speeds will fix our slow applications. It’s now well-known that chipmakers are running into the wall in terms of speed, but getting very good at providing multiple processors. The secret of faster or smarter software is to take advantage of those multiple processors with concurrent programming.

A few highlights from the slides:

  • Sutter says that manycore processors are improving rapidly: “Intel could build 100-Pentium chips today if they wanted to.”
  • He observes that the issue is largely solved on the server, but not on the client
  • Locking is inadequate as a way of managing shared state. In particular, it breaks composability
  • He favours transactional memory to reduce but not eliminate dependency on locks: “Version memory ‘like a database.’ Automatic concurrency control, rollback and retry for competing transactions”

Finally, Sutter says:

The concurrency sea change impacts the entire software stack: Tools, languages, libraries, runtimes, operating systems. No programming language can ignore it and remain relevant.

My comment: we’ve seen threading get a little easier in programming languages like C# and Java, thanks to wrapper classes, and in C++ OpenMP can work magic, but what is the radical language innovation that will make concurrency achievable for mortals?

Microsoft PDC postponed due to lack of content

Microsoft’s Professional Developers Conference, which was to take place in October, has been postponed.

The stated reason is that the conference, which is meant to be focused on futures, would have been too late for the current round of developer releases:

By this fall, however, upcoming platform technologies including Windows Server 2008, SQL Server codenamed “Katmai,” Visual Studio codenamed “Orcas” and Silverlight will already be in developers’ hands and approaching launch.

The implication is that PDC would also have been too early for the next round of platform updates.

There are other conferences you can attend for a Microsoft fix. There’s another problem though: Tech-Ed developer in Europe conflicts with DevConnections in Las Vegas – and key speakers like Scott Guthrie and Tom Rizzo are already announced for DevConnections.

I tend to agree about PDC. Talking futures is not what Microsoft needs at the moment. Getting developers to engage with the current crop (WPF, Silverlight) is more to the point.

As for me, my next dev conferences are in London: Google Developer Day followed by Adobe Live/Adobe Developer Day. If you’re going to either and would like to chat, let me know.

 

Technorati tags: , , ,

Microsoft: .doc and .xls are dangerous

A common phenomenon in the tech world is when vendors trash their own past products in an effort to convince you of the value of shiny new ones.

Here is an example. Microsoft’s security advisory 937696 and the related KB 935865 tells us of the dangers posed by Office binary formats including .doc, .xls and .ppt:

MOICE uses the 2007 Microsoft Office system converters to convert the Office binary format files into the Office Open XML format. This process helps remove the potential threat that may exist if the document is opened in the binary format. Additionally, MOICE converts incoming files in an isolated environment. This helps protect the computer from a potential threat.

What’s MOICE? It’s the Microsoft Office Isolated Conversion Environment, proving that even after Silverlight, the department of verbose and meaningless names is alive and well in Redmond. It is an add-on to Office 2003 or 2007 that automatically converts Office binary formats to Office Open XML (OOXML). Further, administrators can now choose to implement File Block, which prevents users from opening specified binary document types without first converting them.

The presumption here is that OOXML documents are safer. Probably true, especially since documents containing macros now require a different extension (.docm, .xlm) to flag the fact that they contain macros.

A side effect is that MOICE spreads the adoption of OOXML. Like Joe Wilcox, I can’t help wondering whether it was this, rather than security, which has prompted this release.

OOXML has real advantages, yet it can also be tiresome. Users install Office 2007, email a Word document to someone, then get a perplexed reply saying that the document won’t open. I’ve been known to show people how to set the default back to the old binary formats to avoid this problem – I would love to know how many Office 2007 rollouts do this as a matter of course.

After all, it is late in the day for Microsoft to consider blocking these formats. The Sophos web site has a Top Ten Viruses page with a neat feature: you can see stats for the last 10 years. These confirm my hunch. Back in 1999, there were 9 office macro viruses in the top 10 (Sophos prefixes these with WM or XM). Today? None. Further, note that the top 10, according to Sophos, account for 94.6% of all viruses in the wild.

The reason is that in the intervening years Microsoft has built reasonably good macro protection into Office. A factor here is that emailed documents rarely need to contain macros, so if you double-click an attachment and it wants to run a macro, that’s a big clue that something is awry.

That said, there is clearly still some risk from macro viruses, or from documents with crafted corruptions that infect a PC. Recently, Open Office has also been shown to be vulnerable. So MOICE has a value, but is it enough to compensate for the cost in terms of inconvenience? After all, while Office binary formats are almost universally readable, that’s not the case for OOXML. If you run Windows, and have Office 2000 or higher, and broadband Internet, and sufficient rights to install the converter, then the process is reasonably smooth; but that is a long way from universal.

MOICE strikes me as low priority in security terms, but nevertheless an intriguing development in the battle for XML office format adoption.