Categories
Technology

Forecast: Cloudy

From the lack of interest I’m seeing in my feed list, I would have to assume I’m not the only one less than enthused about Microsoft’s Azure. About the only person I know who has perked up and displayed real interest is Nicholas Carr, and some of his interest is most likely because he wrote a book on cloud computing.

That Azure is a competitive strike at Amazon is a given. What’s missing in Ozzie’s statement, though, is the fact that Amazon originally rolled out it’s cloud computing services as a way of maximizing under-utilized server farms during the company’s quiet times. I don’t know if this has changed, and Amazon is now farming clouds deliberately, but I hope not—the original idea was quite sound.

I am not surprised that Ray Ozzie would urge Microsoft into the clouds considering his background, first with Lotus, and then with Groove. Groove, especially, was cloud-based. Probably one of the more sophisticated cloud-based applications at the turn of the century.

But as far as I know, Groove never did catch on in any big way. I imagine when Ozzie was hired at Microsoft and Groove folded into the Microsoft family, the expertise this acquisition brought into the company played a big part in the implementation of Azure, but it still doesn’t compensate for the fact that Groove never caught on. Not in corporate America, which is Microsoft’s bread and butter.

Amazon can probably make do providing data storage and services for the startups, which seems to be its primary customer. I can’t see Microsoft doing the same, not the least of which, startup and Microsoft are not words that necessarily go together well. Microsoft has always been a corporate company, pricing its products accordingly, and in doing so, giving both Apple and Open Source room to breathe and expand. Apple sold to the artists and mavericks. (Can I use maverick still, or has that term been trademarked by the Republican Party?) Open source managed to capture all the folks who fell in-between, though when Apple released Mac OS X, there was some platform straddling.

Seriously, I have to ask: can you imagine Citigroup or Bank of America farming any of its applications out to the Azure platform? How about Chrysler, or Blue Cross? Oh, there might be some IT in these big companies that will want to experiment around, but I’ve not met a big company yet that didn’t want to control every last aspect of its data. Several industry types can’t do something like cloud computing for most of their data—they would be prohibited by laws built to safeguard private information.

So, Azure isn’t a move to entice the corporates to the cloud (can’t be, really can’t be). It’s seemingly a move to entice the smaller guy, something that Microsoft has not shown itself to be particularly adept at. For one thing, the Visual Studio 2008 application that developers can use to build to Azure is pricey. Microsoft still hasn’t learned that rule number one is you don’t charge the developers money to access the development tools, if you want the developers to drive business to your platform.

Oh sure, Microsoft puts out a baby version of its different developer applications, but I’ll bet you dollars to donuts, the baby version won’t interface with Azure. And SOAP? Seriously, who does SOAP anymore? I thought the whole SOAP/REST thing was decided, a long time ago. We are talking 2009, not 1999.

I must admit to being a skeptic of all the recent cloud fooflah, not the least of which we’ve all seen what happens when a cloud server like Amazon has problems, resulting in several different startups being without service for several hours. I can respect that cloud computing allows startups to get a leg up, but I have to wonder: is that enough for a long-term sustainable business? Is there really enough business for another player in the game?

Once I made the decision to quit writing for a living (there was a living involved?) and return to consulting and development, I looked around at all of the existing technologies and asked myself what I should spend time on, in order to sharpen my development skills. Perhaps I’m a relic of times past (yeah, all of five years, ancient times), but I decided to spend most of my time working with Drupal and one or two other CMS, REST, a little RDFa, a touch of SVG and other programmable graphics tools, and maybe a smidgen of this or that, whatever strikes my fancy, and that includes AIR and OpenLaszlo and some of the other web/desktop platforms. You can never go wrong becoming as proficient as possible with CSS, the markups, the data sources (SQL/RDF/XML/JSON), PHP (or Python or Perl, maybe Ruby, always C++), JavaScript, and REST.

One could say that what I described is all that’s necessary for cloud computing, but there’s a whole new game when you have to create pie slices of your applications and throw them into a black box. It takes no additional time to learn to do cloud computing, true. However, it takes additional time to learn to do cloud computing well. I’m not taking that time, for any cloud. Not Amazon’s. Not Google’s. Not Safesforce.com (Salesforce.com?) Certainly not Azure.

If I’m wrong in my assessment, I’ll watch the rest of you fly past me, like birds on the wind. If I’m right, though, and today’s cloud is the same as yesterday’s Web 2.0—more hype than reality—I’ll already be well grounded when this bubble pops.

Categories
Diversity

Another WIT from Virginia: Addison Berry

Virginia DeBolt has another Women in Technology series entry, this one on the Drupal community’s Addison Berry.

Addison demonstrates something I’ve noticed: Drupal attracts the women in technology. There’s something about the Drupal that has made the Drupal community friendly and encouraging to women. Other applications/companies/organizations should take note.

The interview with Addison is excellent, a lot more positive and upbeat than mine was.

Categories
Political

The plot

Incredibly discouraging and disturbing, but unfortunately not surprising considering the state of the country: ATF has foiled a skinhead plot to assassinate Obama and 102 others in the black community.

Categories
Books

Reviewing Kindle samples

I purchased my Kindle because I liked the idea of my library of books being at my fingertip. I also liked the fact that ebooks are, typically, cheaper than paper books. What I didn’t expect was how much the Kindle opened up new avenues in reading for me, and it did so through the concept of Kindle samples.

As you’re browsing through books, either with the Kindle, or online at Amazon, if you find one that’s interesting but not sure whether you want to buy it or not, you can download a sample to your device for review. The sample is automatically sent to the Kindle, at no cost. At the end of the sample, you’re asked whether you want to buy the book, or read more about it at Amazon. If you decide you don’t want to buy the book, you can then use the Kindle’s Content Manager to delete the sample.

How big the Kindle samples are depends on the size of books. Some of the samples were quite large, others the briefest of introductions. The structure of the samples differed, too, probably based on the ebook structure as determined by the publisher. Many books started directly in the first chapter, without having to traverse any preliminary dedication or cover. Other books, though, led off with every last bit of paper that proceeded the book in hard format, including copyright pages, forwards, dedications, publisher contact information, and so on.

I have purchased, and enjoyed, several books via Kindle samples—books I probably wouldn’t have bought if it weren’t for the samples. I’ve also avoided many more books because the writing in the samples proved disappointing, or not what I expected.

What was it about each sample that led to the Buy, No Buy decision? In answering, I decided to review the Kindle samples I download, regardless of whether I bought the book based on the sample or not. If I buy the book, the review will then transition into a full book review. If not, then the review will be of the sample, only, including a discussion of why I did not buy the book.

I begin my new sample reviews with an author whose name might be familiar to some of you: Seth Godin’s Tribes.

Categories
Graphics/CSS

Aviary gots business model

I’ve written about Aviary, the online graphics toolset that includes Phoenix, a graphics tool/photo editor, Peacock, a “visual laboratory” (background editor), Toucan, for creating color swatches, and supposedly Raven, for vector editing. I’ve been waiting for Raven, and it is out in alpha, but available only for Blue subscribers. Blue subscribers?

Yes, Aviary now has subscription plans, Blue and Green, each of which provides a different level of support. Blue provides everything, including access to early release software, such as Raven. Blue is also priced at $149.90 a year, though Photojojo readers can get the Blue for $95. At least the first 2000 readers can—the offer is limited.

It will be interesting to see how the Aviary toolset does as a subscription model. Internet users balk at anything that isn’t free, with mumbled, vague assumptions of “ad-based” as an alternative to paid subscriptions. I think the Aviary pricing model is fair, not necessarily great, but workable. The Blue plan is priced high for internet usage, but is much cheaper than Photoshop. Not as cheap as GIMP, though. However, when you consider the plan covers all the Aviary tools, including ones to be released in the future, the deal does seem sweeter. The toolset is also available from all your computers.

Will I be getting a subscription? No, I’m into frugal right now. Very, very frugal. I will miss being able to try out Raven, but I’m content with Inkscape for vector editing. However, for those of you interested in the Aviary toolset and with some bucks to spare, you might check to see if you can get the Photojojo pricing and save $55 bucks.