i-software.info

A сo-worker stopped over by my business office today and we’d a friendly disputation on the challenges that software and hardware marketers are having backing up the impending daylight savings switch in the United States of America, a switch that is mandated by late lawmaking. Particularly, Microsoft and Sun have had considerably advertized complications, and on additional DST software bugs thread on the internet site, I posted this verbal description of a consumer appliance whose implanted software won’t be patched eventually. I am sure one could do a survey and find a long list of software marketers and hardware producers having alike issues.

In my co-worker’s view, suspending the issue of whether or not this lawmaking was a beneficial idea, the blame for these issues rests forthrightly on the shoulders of the software and hardware marketers whose goods demand patching, help, etc.–they should have ascertained this coming, they should have configured their goods to be more flexile, etc. This is their shift, plain and mere. After all, he states, DST isn’t a force of nature; it is not implanted actually at such a cardinal degree as something like the New Style calendar or the metric organization.

On the other hand, commenter Kevin Dean posted lately on a ZDNet thread an approach that we should give these marketers a break:

Why is this Microsoft’s defect?

Microsoft isn’t the exclusively one having issues with this. I spread out a case with Sun considering the accessibility of their DST-patched Java runtimes and got a declaration to the issue only last calendar week. Presently I am scrambling to get all my customer workstations, my administration server, and my database decently patched.

The fault for this debacle lies forthrightly with Fred Upton for frequenting the amendment to the Energy Policy Act of 2005. The portion of energy saved is minuscule at this time of year (contrary to summer with its longer daytimes) and the dislocation they have induced to computer systems and transfer schedules (particularly airways) is fantastic.

I, like everybody else, would have enjoyed it if Microsoft could have made matters more flowing, but this is a massively complicated attempting that each computer software package provider is having difficulty with and the fault lies forthrightly with a political system that advantages style over matter.

Again, suspending the issue of the wisdom of the lawmaking (which is for certain also a legitimate issue of argumentation), Mr. Dean’s attitude is that the complexness of this issue orders that we should edit software marketers and hardware producers a break on this.

Is there an approach that marketers and designers could have annulled this? Or is this an ineluctable issue once you choose to cross the limit into making your software package “smart” about altering the time mechanically relative to DST, rather than just holding on your software package “dumb,” such as my micro-cook oven, which I have to alter manually twice a year.

In a DST software bugs place I composed in April of 2006, prior to I had heard anything about this impending DST commence date switch, I took the attitude that we have ourselves to blame for complications with software package bugs and system synchronism jobs linked up withn DST, as afterwards all, the time switches occurs twice a year, each year, and we shouldn’t be caught with our pants down, pagers going off, help phones ringing, every time it occurs. Nevertheless, I believe the context of that discourse was a bit another (but perhaps not); Scott Rosenberg posted alike opinions lately, more from a support/logistics point of view.:

Back when my ocupation as Salon controlling editor involved superintending our day by day production, I commented that, each spring and fall, about without fail, our issuing system would feel a glitch of some sort on the weekend that the times got moved ahead or back — nothing dangerous, mind you, but sufficient to throw a pull in the works of our internet site updates. It was not a exclusive bug, but some succession of associated bugs, so we would fix one and then 6 calendar months later something else would appear. At length we got in the habit of just making a point that one of the developers kept a close eye on matters when that weekend came around. It was prudent.

It appears that this is one of the forced outcomes of living in a world ran by software: new risk zones lie where individual abstracts — borders, measurings, languages — alter or fight or fail to behave as anticipated. Clocks and calendars and maps are no more just aids for human apprehension; they’re symbolizations at the heart of arrangements upon whose execution lives depend. I guess this commenced with the first railroad schedule, but with the dateline puddled F-22 it has entered a whole fresh realm of discomfit.

What do you consider? Are there cardinal lessons here that software package designers and corporations should be minding? Are there several products or makers that got this *right*, who have not knew complications with the great 2007 DST conversion? And so, what can we know from their instance?

Essentially, my attitude is that if your good or application is a timepiece; if that’s part of your functionality; then any aim that treats DST as a afforded, or hard-codes it in at any rate, is poor design.

To anticipate DST to stay carved in stone for the appliance of technology corporations, when the measure is a preservation measure less than forty years old… that’s just a deficiency of proper projecting.

Congress did not enact this “late” switch without an decent execution window, either. They were surely aware of the capability for disturbance and the demand for time to adjust. If your implicit in design admitted the possibility that the execution dates of DST were subject to shift, there was surely sizable time. What I am stating is that any computer architecture that addressed DST as not being subject to switch in the initial place is at mistake. Additionally, given the generous execution window, any IT services master struggling to patch *nowadays* is arguably to fault as well.

It’s only been a few days since Microsoft’s rollout of the browser choice screen for European Internet Explorer users. But already, the European Committee for Interoperable Systems (ECIS, not to be confused with the European Commission, a legislative body), which is credited with pressing the EC forward on the browser bundling issue, is claiming victory not just with regard to exposing users to the choice they have, but with helping to advance the developmental progress of the Web.

Now, ECIS legal counsel Thomas Vinje is calling upon other trade regulatory and legislative bodies worldwide to follow Europe’s example, arguing in a statement yesterday (PDF available here) that everyone should be entitled to the same ballot.

“The ability of…applications to run quickly and with improved features depends upon progress in Web browsers. As we know from experience, that is driven by competition that offers rewards to companies that build the quickest, most versatile browsers,” Vinje stated. “The European initiative will help spur competition, but leaves most of the world’s computers with operating systems that are tied to Internet Explorer. We call on competition authorities around the world to look closely at what has happened in Europe, and to act on behalf of their consumers. Only then will we get a fully competitive market that will drive intense competition to build better browsers.” (more…)

The battle over RealNetworks’ DVD copying software, called RealDVD, has finally come to a close, and Real has lost.

Judge Marilyn Hall Patel of the United States District Court, Northern District of California ruled today in favor of the DVD Copy Control Association, who argued that RealDVD actually made illegal copies that violated the Content Scramble System (CSS) license agreement.

The case began in late 2008 when RealDVD was only a couple of weeks old. RealNetworks preemptively sued the DVD Copy Control Association for the right to copy DVDs, using a previous case (DVD CCA v. Kaleidescape Inc.) as a hopeful legal precedent.

A temporary injunction was imposed as the case played out, and lower courts banned the software. One year into the case, Judge Patel determined that RealDVD’s methods for avoiding CSS were at the very least a breach of the Digital Millenium Copyright Act, and upheld the lower court’s ruling.
(more…)

Raxco Software Introduces the PerfectDisk 10 Product Line that is Truly Revolutionary Suite of disk defragmentation tools provides all-encompassing solution for PCs, laptops, servers, and virtualization environments including Virtual-Aware Defragmentation supporting VMware ESX Server and Microsoft’s Hyper-V, plus industry’s first support for Windows 7, and new Home Edition. Raxco Software, the leader in disk defragmentation, now provides the power of enterprise defragmentation for desktop and laptop users with PerfectDisk. PerfectDisk’s easy to use interface and powerful defrag engine were designed for users who do not require the capabilities of network defragmentation and advanced features for the enterprise. If you want to optimize your computer to run faster and perform better so you can do more – whether work or surfing the Web – and don’t run in a networked environment like many companies, then PerfectDisk is for you.

PerfectDisk provides new and enhanced features and easier navigation for home users, SMB (Small and Medium Business), and enterprise users. There is better performance on very large drives, scheduling and automatic defragmentation enhancements, reduction in system resources used, improved reporting and manageability, full 64-bit support, and many more exciting new features and enhancements.

• Keep your computer running like new. With patented SMARTPlacement™ technology, PerfectDisk10 Home Edition makes more free space available on your drive and speeds up everything you do. Browse the web, download music and edit pictures – faster.
• Work faster and get the most free space possible. PerfectDisk 10 Professional combines the power of SMARTPlacement™ with exclusive Space Restoration Technology™. You’ll see faster boot times, fewer crashes and optimum desktop and laptop performance.
• Optimize your entire Windows Home Server environment so that you can access your photos, music and videos quickly. With it’s Windows Home Server console integration, PerfectDisk 10 for Windows Home Server speeds up processing times so that your Windows Home Server and attached home computers works more efficiently.

Delivering a unique set of easy-to-use features and benefits not found in any other solution, PerfectDisk® will make your computer run like new. Work and play faster – and smarter. PerfectDisk makes everything you do on your computer faster – so you can be more efficient at your work or play. PerfectDisk patented SMARTPlacement™ optimization is paired with its exclusive single-pass defragmentation and Space Restoration Technology™ to maximize PC and laptop performance. All controlled and automated according to your unique requirements through AutoPilot Scheduling™ or StealthPatrol™ unattended background processing.

cFosSpeed is a network driver, which attaches itself to existing Internet connections. It then optimizes data transfer by means of Traffic Shaping.

Traffic Shaping is a method for optimizing the Internet traffic. It allows maximum speed while ensuring minimal Ping.

You can use cFosSpeed with a router and/or a DSL-modem or cable-modem. You can also use cFosSpeed with other types of Internet access, ie. whenever you already have an existing Internet connection.

cFosSpeed supports a wide variety of connections, like DSL, cable, ISDN, UMTS, etc.

cFosSpeed has two goals:
1. Keep network delays (ping times) small, in order to make Internet applications as responsive as possible.
2. Improve data throughput by avoiding network congestions.

You can use cFosSpeed with an Internet connection you use exclusively or which you share with several PCs.

The software giant is experimenting with efficient designs that can be ramped up quickly when it needs capacity
In the years to come, Microsoft’s data centers may not be huge buildings tightly packed with server racks, but rather rows of small, stand-alone IT units spread across acres and acres of cool, cheap land.

At the DatacenterDynamics conference in New York on Wednesday, Microsoft data center general manager Kevin Timmons outlined some prototype work his unit is doing to design its next generation of data centers, in collaboration with Microsoft Research.

[ Keep up on green IT trends with InfoWorld's Sustainable IT blog and Green Tech newsletter. ]

His vision is radically different from most of what the company already has in place.

The company is field-testing something Timmons calls IT PACs, or IT preassembled components, which are small, self-contained units that are assembled off-site and can be linked together to build out an entire data center.

Microsoft, he said, is facing the same challenges as most data center operators. It needs the ability to ramp up capacity in short order, but would like to avoid the massive up-front costs and long lead times required to build out traditional data centers. Given this set of conditions, Microsoft’s goal for building its next set of data centers is “ultra-modularity,” Timmons said.

Instead of paying $400 million or more up front to build a data center, Microsoft would prefer to purchase some land, build a sub-station and then populate the acreage with modular units of servers as demand grows.

“We want to view our data centers as more of a traditional manufacturing supply chain, instead of monolithic builds,” he said. “It won’t all be built on-site in one shot.”

By going with this approach, Microsoft can cut the time it takes to ramp up new server capability in half, as well as reduce the costs of building out new data centers, Timmons predicted. “You don’t have to commit to a $400 million data center and hope that demand shows up,” he said.

Over the past few years Microsoft has been moving toward more modular designs, moving from purchasing individual servers to racks of servers to, most recently, entire containers filled with servers. Microsoft built out its past two data centers, located outside of Chicago and Dublin, using, in part, containers.

The new design takes this modularity concept even further.

The IT PACs are “not really containers in a traditional sense,” Timmons said. “They are really integrated air-handling and IT units.”

The units themselves could hold anywhere from one to 10,000 servers. The idea is that when the software giant requires more resources, it can have one of these IT PACs shipped to location and “plugged into the spine,” which supplies the power and network connectivity to the data center.

Microsoft has built two proof-of-concept models so far. Its next data center, which the company will announce in a few months, will use some form of these IT PACs, Timmons said.

The units will be assembled entirely from commercially available components. A single person should be able to build a unit within four working days. The servers will be stacked in rows, sandwiched between air intake and output vents.

For cooling, ambient air can be sucked in one side, run through the servers and exhausted out the other, with some of the air recirculated to even the overall temperature of the unit. No mechanical cooling units will be used. Networking and power buses will run over the tops of the servers.

The construction materials rely heavily on steel and aluminium, both easily recyclable. The water requirements can be met by a single hose with residential levels of water pressure, he said.

The development team considered different sizes of containers, Timmons said, keeping an eye toward making the units easily shippable. They settled on a size that could contain 1,200 to 2,100 servers and draw between 400 and 600 kilowatts.

The units can be placed inside a large building, or when equipped with outer protective panels, reside out in the open.

One of the chief requirements of IT PACs, he admitted, is that they reside in an area where the ambient temperature is mild enough that it can provide sufficient cooling. Because of their highly portable nature, this should not be a problem, he said.

“If we’re doing our job right in site election, square footage will be cheap for me. I want to find a place with lots of room to expand. I don’t want to worry about a watts-per-square-foot problem. I’d like to worry about having enough acreage,” he said. “We’re doing a good job in site selection when we don’t have to squeeze in 500 watts per square foot.”

Due to their minimal use of mechanical cooling, Timmons estimated that the PUE ratio for its IT PACs would be 1.26 to 1.35, depending on the outside conditions. PUE, or power usage effectiveness, compares overall power supplied to the data center against the amount that actually reaches IT equipment.

A typical data center PUE is around 2.1, according to industry estimates.

If the IT PACs are ultimately pushed into production, Timmons said he hasn’t fully decided if Microsoft will build them itself or contract them out. It would probably be a mix of the two, he predicted. “I know how much it costs to build one of these now,” he said.

http://www.infoworld.com