Windows 8 is here Jun 2, 2011

At work I have a set of floppy disks in my desk draw, three or four of them are MSDOS 6.22 and the rest are Windows 3.11.  It’s been a while since I installed them on anything, but the last time I did a couple of years ago it was enough to demonstrate that a) Windows 3.11 was blindingly fast on a modern PC and b) the user experience wasn’t really all that different from today.   Sure Explorer has replaced the old File Manager, and Windows 7’s Aero is whole lot nicer than Program Manager, but you don’t feel completely out of sync, the metaphors are still the same.

Windows 8 is looking to change all of that:

It’s quite a change, and one that’s long overdue.  Desktop operating systems, whether Windows, OSX or the various flavours of Unix shell all use the same basic metaphors, its incredibly refreshing to see Windows 8 try something new.  It’s clearly borrowed much from Windows Phone 7’s UI and it’s Metro design language.

As someone who’s IT background is in enterprise desktop deployment and management, what’s most interesting for me is the complete separation of the traditional Windows UI from the new Metro interface.  As the video above shows ‘Legacy’ Windows apps (I can barely believe I’m say that given the effort I’ve put into those apps over the years!) launch in what looks like a traditional Win7 Aero interface, but this doesn’t seem to be part of the Windows 8 experience – in fact I’d bet that part of the OS has barely changed from 7.

It’s easy to speculate about all of this, but the separation of these user experiences may be more than just visual.  Windows 8 will be delivered on both on the x86 platform that PC’s have used for years, and the ARM platform.  These are completely different architectures and this would almost certainly introduce application compatibility issues.  One way around this however may be some form of virtualisation.  This in itself this would be tricky, but perhaps the traditional Windows desktop is able to runs within a virtual machine which is surfaced though the new Win8 interface – much like parallels is able to surface Windows applications within OSX on a Mac.

The enterprise IT people among you might also have thought of another interesting idea… what if that traditional desktop could be redirected off to a centralised Virtual Desktop (VDI) infrastructure.  Low cost ARM devices all of a sudden look very tempting as thin client devices.

No matter how it’s delivered, that old Windows desktop will be a welcome site for enterprise IT departments.  Many of organisations are spending a lot of time and money migrating to Windows 7, and by far the hardest part of that is application compatibility.  Microsoft would do well to minimise the application compatibility differences in the new OS, if Win8 breaks apps that work in 7 – on x86 at least – then it would be difficult for organisations who have invested in Win7 to adopt Win8.  Just look back to Vista.  It looks that may not be a problem for Win8, which is a good thing.

With MS keen to adopt ARM as a way of competing in the tablet space, where x86’s power consumption destroys battery life, the new interface also gives them some interesting options to make a ‘clean break’ away from their legacy.  If they have found a way to run the old interface virtually upon other hardware platforms, that could well spell the end for the old Windows.  One of MS’s traditional strengths, the backward compatibility of apps (ok, that’s always true…), has also been a shackle around it’s legs stopping Windows developing into something new.  Abstracting the old from the new would allow MS to move Windows on while still retaining its legacy apps.

The big assumption there of course is that developers adopt the new interface and development environment.  Of course at the moment we don’t really know whether the new Win8 interface is able to present the heavy duty apps that PC’s run day in day out.  I guess that Office 15 will be the first real test of this.  Will it surface through the new interface in Win8 or revert back to the old Windows.  I really hope its the former – the Office apps on WP7 are slick and fast, it would be fantastic to have the full fidelity apps presented though the Metro front end.  How long it would take the big third party apps like AutoCAD to follow is another matter of course, but if Win8 upgrades are made easy and cost effective it might happen sooner rather than later.

I’m also very pleased to see MS asserting some control over Windows 8’s hardware.  Whilst it’s nice to have choice, I’m no longer convinced that the vast PC ecosystem is a positive thing.  It’s a volume market so margins are low and its too easy for poor quality hardware and software to slip though.  Problematic driver software and the sheer amount of ‘crapware’ that litters new computers does nothing to help the end user in the long run, and is one of the main reasons for the PC’s poor reputation for performance and reliability.

If by asserting control MS can improve the quality of the overall end product, I have to say that I’m not all that concerned by a restriction of choice – though I know some manufacturers are crying fowl.  In the past I’ve spent too much time dealing with problems caused by crappy hardware and software, and I can still see those same problems today if I talk to the people doing those jobs now.

So all in all I’m quite impressed with what MS have shown us today.  Added to the other information that’s leaked out Windows 8 it’s looking like a very positive move.  The only concern I have it timescales… late 2012 is too late.  In my view they need to RTM this in the new year.

By Tom Basham | Posted in Tech, Work | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments (0)

Lewis Hamilton at Monaco May 29, 2011

Today’s Monaco Grand Prix was probably the most enjoyable race from Monte Carlo since Senna and Mansell fought their way to the finish there in ‘92.  Usually Monaco is a glamorous setting but a dull race but the 2011 race was a real classic.  Perhaps the only disappointment from today was Lewis Hamilton.

I’ve been a fan of Lewis since he joined the F1 circus in 2007.  I liked the way he took his McLaren by the scruff of the neck and hustled it around the race track whether it wanted to or not.  In the first season of his career he did things in an F1 car that no other driver did.  He pulled off some fantastic passes like the one at Monza above.

Today however I thought he let himself down.  Not by the after race comments that will grab the headlines, I can understand the frustration leading to his unwise words.  More I thought his driving was reckless and destroyed the races of others who did little deserve being hit by his McLaren.

I wonder whether when he looks back at the videos he’ll regret his comments blaming the other drivers.  He was never going to get past Massa in the inside of the hairpin, and his attempt on poor Maldonado was ambitious at best.  I do hope that Lewis comes to realise that those incidents had more to do with his own driving that theirs.

Following his championship win Lewis seemed to be maturing as a driver.  He toned down his do-or-die style and whilst he wasn’t perhaps as exciting to watch, it did make him a more consistent driver.  Since the middle of last season though he seems to have taken a step backwards.  The composure that kept is aggressive driving in check isn’t always present leading to silly mistakes like those today (or Monza and Singapore last year).

Lewis is clearly a world class driver, he’s shown a natural talent for racing that lets him haul even a slow car to a competitive position.  I don’t think its his driving per se that’s at fault.  Attitude and mental state play an equal part in success and I suspect that this is the problem.  Looking back at some of the performances below I hope Lewis gets the support he needs to regain his composure as the sport will be all the better with an on form Lewis Hamilton.

Silverstone 2006 (GP2)

Lewis and Kimi in the rain at Spa in 2008

Oh… and just because I can, the Senna and Mansell footage from Monaco.  Sorry about the Japanese commentary!

By Tom Basham | Posted in Cars | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments (0)

Chrome Laptops for $28 a month? May 12, 2011

google-chrome-toon

Google has been holding it’s I/O conference this week and has been announcing all sorts of wonderful things.  One of the more interesting is a plan to sell it’s Chrome OS based laptops to businesses and educational establishments on a monthly subscription basis.

Four different laptops from Samsung and Acer will be available for between $28-33 for business and $20-23 for education.  This will include the laptop itself, warranty, support and updates for the 3 year term of the contract.  Organisations will have access to a management console in which the devices can be configured and managed.

So do the maths add up?  The devices are available outside of a subscription for between $350 and $499, the subscription will cost the organisation over a $1000 over the 36 month term.

That’s quite a premium, and it’s not really clear how much value the support and management capability will add.   Most, if not all, organisations would spent more than the $500 mark-up supporting a normal computer over three years, so in that sense it makes sense.  However I thought one of the main selling points of Chrome OS, and the Chrome Laptop, was that they weren’t a full OS, so wouldn’t need the sort of support, management and patching that traditional computers all need.  If these devices are meant to deliver on that promise then why wouldn’t a business just finance the capital cost cheaply elsewhere and simply buy the devices outright?  They’d still have the manufactures warranty, and the beauty of Google's services is that the end-point is disposable as it hosts no data.

I suspect there are details yet to come as I think there has to be more value there that we’re not seeing – or I’ve just missed something! :)  Either way it’s a highly disruptive move and something that could well change the shape of how IT is provided into businesses.

By Tom Basham | Posted in Tech | Tagged , , , , , | Comments (0)

Office 365 and Skype May 12, 2011

skype_logo_1_medium

I've been a bit slow to post about this I know, I've been offline for for the past few days so have only just started reading reactions to Microsoft's $8.5 billion purchase of Skype.  The odd thing is that most commentary on the deal seems to be concentrating on video conferencing as the main driver for the deal.  Sure, the integration of Skype with Messenger, Xbox and WP7 etc. is good news, it might even be the making of Skype as the de facto standard for web and home video conferencing. For MS it could be one of those 'good enough' solutions that business adopt ahead of the better, but expensive Cisco/Tandberg solutions.  But, would MS spend $8.5 Billion for that?

Skype has never been particularly profitable, though it does have a significant and loyal user base, something that its rivals in the video conferencing world don't necessarily have.  Of course MS itself has a huge number of Messenger users, and can probably use its shareholding in Facebook to encourage further integration with Skype.  So in the long term there may well be some significant revenues there, especially if MS can drive wider adoption of Skype's chargeable services. There is however another area of Microsoft that is crying out for some of the services Skype has to offer.

Microsoft has invested huge amounts of time and effort in its unified communications tools, in little more than 5 years it has taken the OCS/Lync platform from being a half decent corporate instant messaging tool to a genuine competitor in the corporate telephony market.   Whatever you might think of MS, make no mistake Lync is a very good product, if I were Avaya or Cisco I'd be scared of it.   With the Office 365 platform Microsoft is taking Lync's core functionality to the cloud and offering organisations Exchange 2010 mailboxes (including voicemail), Lync instant messaging, presence, audio and video conferencing, SharePoint and even a copy of Office 2010 all as a per user per month subscription.  The one large gap between 365 and the boxed product is the ability to make voice calls.

If you talk to MS about Office 365 they're very keen to point out that voice calling capabilities will be coming later this year, they just never have any details.  Talk to some of Microsoft's big telephony partners and the implication is that they will be providing the voice gateways into MS's cloud services.  Partly this is because MS doesn't really want to be a telco, with all the additional regulation that entails.  It all seems perfectly reasonable, and will probably still happen, but the Skype acquisition gives MS another option -  tie the Office 365 platform into Skype's existing telephony services.

This would give Office 365 the ability to make voice calls over the internet directly from the Office Communicator client, Outlook, SharePoint or any other app that surfaces presence. With Skype's VoIP network MS can offer those calls at its preferable rates, and potentially offer included minutes in the same way as a mobile operator would.  You can even envisage MS providing free end-to-end VoIP calls between 365’s end users computers and a shiny new Windows Phone 7 Skype client.

I reckon a combination of Skype and Office 365 could well be a winning combination for Microsoft, it's the missing link in the Office 365 sales pitch.  The universal video conferencing stuff is nice and all, but it won't pay the bills.  On the other hand Enterprise customers pay good money for their communications services, and with Office 365's subscription model they pay per user per month.

By Tom Basham | Posted in Tech | Tagged , , , , , | Comments (3)

Windows 8 Application Delivery – AppX and App Stores Apr 21, 2011

windows_phone_7_marketplace_hub

As information about Windows 8 starts to become more common, a few sites are starting to discover details about the new application delivery model Microsoft are adopting called AppX.

In a world where applications have become ‘apps’, and app stores look set to become the dominant distribution method for software, MS seem to have targeted AppX as a delivery model that will support as many types of application and distribution models as possible.

In it’s structure AppX looks very similar to Silverlight’s XAP format, the distributable file is essentially a zip archive that contains the source media and an XML manifest file that describe:

  • - The applications identity – it’s publisher, the applications name, version etc.
  • - The target architecture for the application – the required processor architecture (presumably important for an OS that will soon once again span more than just x86), OS pre-requisites, any application frameworks required (.net, Silverlight etc.)
  • - Application pre-requisites – other applications which are required on the system, for example if the AppX package contains a plug-in for an application, this section might list the name, publisher and minimum version of the pre-requisite app.
  • - Required Capabilities – any capabilities which the application will request such as file system or networking. It will be interesting to see whether it will be possible for an app to check for specific system performance through the Windows Experience Index. This would help developers ensure applications always ran on systems capable of running them as designed.
  • - OS Extensions – such as file type associations
  • - Tile customization – This an interesting one, as AppX is similar to the formats used in Windows Phone 7 this could be a carry over from there so that the format is reusable, or it could be a hint towards new interfaces within Win8. It covers properties such as logo, name, and colours.
  • (Info from the excellent I Started Something)

One of the interesting questions that AppX raises is what this new format will mean for business and enterprise customers. Many will currently be investing small fortunes in readying their applications for Windows 7, either in traditional Windows Installer (msi) format or through application virtualisation technologies such as Microsoft’s own AppV. Adding a third format into that mix will, and does complicate matters.

It could be that AppX can act as a wrapper for more traditional deployment tools, or it could be an addition – perhaps for surfacing apps though the App Store interface for example. Or it could be that newly developed apps will need to be in that format to make use of Win8’s new features. We also don’t really know whether the format will be limited only to MS’s forthcoming application store or whether it will be more commonly used for traditional download or CD installs.

With many large organisations having made big investments in internal application delivery tools such as System Center Configuration Manager (SCCM), let alone then checking and fixing apps for Vista/Win7 compatibility, it will be interesting to watch how the interaction between the new App Store and these internal systems will develop. If the Apple app store is anything to go by people will want to make use of the tools and utilities on offer even in a business context. Company IT organisations will come under pressure to make these apps available alongside the apps they typically provide.

It could be that the Windows app store will have a mechanism to publish existing applications though the App Store interface, or alternatively App Store applications could be made available though internal mechanisms such as SCCM (much like Windows Update apps are now).

Personally I would rather be able to surface internal application portfolios through the MS store, perhaps though a ‘My Company Store’ section or something of that nature. I think that’s a neater solution and will make it easier for end users – if you want an app on any Windows systems you happen to use, there’s just one place to go. Even if the App Store interface is then going off an using SCCM (or equivalent) for the actual installation tasks.

There are a number of pitfalls to that approach however. Businesses use different purchasing process to consumers – at least for now. People aren’t going to be keen to buy AutoCAD on their own credit card for example! The App Store would therefore need to have some form of approval workflow so people can request an app, their manager can approve the request and some sort of internal billing/purchase mechanism kicked off. It’s all achievable though, even through technology MS already sell and have at their disposal.

The AppX format could work well for surfacing these internal apps. If internal SCCM host apps could be wrapped with an AppX manifest to inform the app store how to publish them, there’s no reason why internally packaged apps couldn’t be included.

By Tom Basham | Posted in Tech, Work | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments (1)