More action this week on the subject of bandwidth throttling as practiced by the Canadian ISPs, namely Bell Canada and Rogers Telecommunications. All very shortsighted.

http://www.itbusiness.ca/it/client/en/home/News.asp?id=52207&PageMem=1

As one article leads to another, you will find a link to: http://www.saveournet.ca/ in the above article where you can express your point of view.

And as always the CRTC, champion of the rights of the user forever looking out for their rights and freedoms: http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/home-accueil.htm. Except not this time. The CRTC has come out in favour of deep packet inspection by saying there is not enough evidence to prove it is not necessary.  (Read: Telecom Decision CRTC 2008-108)

Every technology has good and bad points. The technology that spreads viruses, in essence brings us updates as well. The purpose if a virus is to spread doom and gloom and wreak your working environment. Agreed, terrible stuff. But the virus program looks for the existence of certain applications, and takes advantage of a computer that meets its requirements. By the same token, programs that update themselves look for opportunities within your computer that meet their requirements. While their purpose is at opposite ends of the spectrum, the basic process is similar.

And so it goes with P2P as championed by BitTorrent technology. Originally created to share large files across the Internet which meant music and movies (as in piracy), BitTorrent is now used to share all sorts of other legitimate files as well. It is an amazing piece of programming. Basically BitTorrent uses existing downloaded files across all shared PCs to facilitate each request. This reduces the load placed on each computer. It cannot reduce traffic, since the size of the file does not change. Just reduces load distributing it across computers all over the place.

Deep Packet Inspection from our ISPs invade our privacy (for those that assume we still have any) and discriminate against a technology that has perfectly legitimate uses. This might backfire on the ISPs. One of the goals of, it seems everyone, is to have the Internet be the official carrier of everything. From telephones conversations, to TV signals,  to eMail and anything else you could possibly imagine.

Our telcos have been abysmally slow at getting fibre to our door, but they will have to do that sooner or later. Once that is done, we will be able to get our TV channels through the Internet. One wire into the house as opposed to three or four. Once we can watch television programming, it follows that we will also be able to watch our movies through the web. These are large files necessitating a lot of traffic.  Unless of course, the telcos come up with a miraculous bit of programming that could somehow reduce the load by using the files already downloaded as a source for each request. Oh my God! The telcos will have to deep packet inspect themselves.  

Add to this the existence of Dark Fibre. This is the fibre that the telcos have installed but not lit. There is a lot of it under ground and is leased out to companies such as Cogent. What is stopping our telcos from using these lines to increase the available bandwidth?

Some friends of mine were discussing the demise of the newspaper as we know it. It’s a complicated issue. Journalists must be paid by someone to get the news and report it. Newspapers have to make money. They cannot continue to give away their inventory. One of the solutions is the micro payment technology that keeps promising but fails to deliver. The survival of news appears to be at stake. Would you be willing to pay 1 cent per hit of a page? What if that hit lasted a week so you could revisit the story for 7 days without any additional charge?

One of the comments that was also made is that newspapers provide a graphical representation of the news, at least from the perspective of the editor.  A newspaper page is laid out i a particular manner and one’s eyes naturally drift from one story to another placing a value on stories based on their position or size. This is lost on the computer screen where the main story is front and center, and other stories are links on the side with no particualr importance placed on any of the stories. On one hand, this is cool, since the reader is left to make their own judgement. On the other hand, the news becomes a large morass of information that is hard to wade through.

A few years ago, a company called Marumushi came out with the concept of creating a graphical representation of the news. The project was launched in 2004, with details outlined on their project page.

The newsmap site is now my home page:

http://marumushi.com/apps/newsmap/newsmap.cfm

The news services are abuzz with news that Microsoft is planning to open their own retail stores. Emotions appear to be mixed as to whether this is a good idea or not, with most coming out against the idea.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20090213.wgtmsft0213/BNStory/Technology/home

In a related article, today’s Globe and Mail discusses the health of retail stores based on their inventory levels. (http://snipurl.com/bvkfa  [www_theglobeandmail_com] ).

What exactly does Microsoft intend to sell in these stores? While most people think of Microsoft as the company that makes Windows and Office, they actually make a whole host of products including hardware and software. The one thing they do not make is computers. They just make stuff that runs on other people’s computers. And the stuff they make is available pretty much everywhere, from online to offline sources. 

Microsoft is in a tail spin. Their ideas are far from novel. They keep following paths blazed by others. But there is nothing new in this. DOS was not theirs, nor was Windows, or Office, or just about anything else they have come up with. Even their internet ventures are lacking. They are geniuses at marketing, but even that seems to be waning.

They have the money, they have the people with brains gallore, all they seem to be lacking is the vision to move forward in a particular direction. Small stuff.

Opening stores is a bad idea for Microsoft. Time for a reboot, something Windows users are only too familiar with.

******

An interesting article that supports Microsoft in their new ventture:

http://snipurl.com/bzgzl  [blogs_eweek_com]

One of the biggest challenges facing Cloud Computing is the interoperation of the data. Applications like Microsoft Office have allowed us to use information stored in Outlook to create a letter in Word. We can insert spreadsheets in Word documents linking back to the original. Double Click on the spreadhseet and Excel opens. Cool.

But Cloud Computing does not give us that luxury. In most cases, your data sits in disparate locations, never the twain to meet. Wanna create a letter from your eMail program, copy and paste it. Sounds simple. Maybe for one letter. What about a mail merge? Ouch.

But Amazon and IBM have now joined forces. (http://news.cnet.com/8301-1001_3-10163603-92.html?tag=nl.e433). In case you do not know, Amazon does more than sell books. For years now, they have been providing the backend data storage for a number of companies providing us with online storage, backup, or data sharing services. IBM has been making a lot of noise about the Cloud. Their latest foray being the collaboration site: https://www.lotuslive.com/. And finally, two giants have joined forces ushering in, hopefully, more cooperation between Cloud Computing initiatives.

There has been a lot of talk about Cloud Computing. The situation in which your applications and data reside on the web freeing you from the hassles of buying, downloading, and installing anything on your precious PC.

I happen to be a big proponent of Cloud Computing and see it as the future of the computer experience. Those who are squeamish about keeping their data online on someone else’s server, can keep their data on their own hard drives, or a USB key or whatever.

Keeping applications away from computers should reduce the possibility of virus infections. A PC that cannot have applications has fewer opportunities to host a virus. We can stop relying on a user to keep their PC up to date moving virus protection schemes to the server rooms of the service provider.

Keeping an application up to date also should become easier since the update does not have to be distributed to millions of users. Instead, the server is updated allowing the user to experience the benefits without the hassles.  The user may not like the update, but this is no different from a user not liking the latest version of a particular piece of software. True, you are not forced to upgrade right now specially if you do not like the interface, but sooner or later, an upgrade has to take place.

I read a report a while ago that said few upgrade to a new version of a software application. The article referred specifically to Microsoft mentioning that users typically are reticent to upgrade to the latest version. I wonder how much of that reticence has to do with the amount charged for the new application. What if the upgrade was built into the cost of your purchase, would a user then upgrade? I would venture to say that there would be a lot less resistance.

So, virus checking is moved to the server; upgrades are automatic and part of the service; tech support is provided by eMail or through communities much as it is right now; data is kept on the web, or in an attached storage device that is hopefully password protected and encrypted. What’s not to like?

Well for starters, the bandwidth requirements may be onerous. We tend to talk of these technologies as if the whole world is on a high speed Internet connection. But there are large parts of the world where dial up access is as good as it gets, and slow dial up at that. And then, there are varying degrees of high speed. Countries like South Korea are running at 20mbps, while Canada lags behind barely etching out 5mbps. Our country is then saddled with providers who are throttling bandwidth. This all makes Cloud Computing a hard sell.

We are now seeing variations on the pure Cloud Computing initiative. Microsoft, for instance, offers Office Live as its Cloud platform. But the service uses a copy of the application that is loaded on your PC. This makes the online service, effectively, more of a storage space, with some added frills, such as meeting rooms for collaboration. This defeats the very idea of Cloud Computing.

Other companies have started offering desktop applications to make sure you can work when not connected. Thinkfree is one of these. They have a beautiful suite of online applications that are compatible with Word, Excel, and PowerPoint, but are now offering a desktop version as well. There are rumours that even Google will be offering offline access to the files on Google Docs.

The trend we observed at the beginning of personal computers is repeating itself. First came the server applications, then the client side applications, and finally the client-server application. The latter was a balance between parts of the application running on the server, while other segments ran on the client.

We are now moving in a similar direction with Cloud Computing. Some applications run on the Web, while others run on the PC.  Finally also, we are seeing the data emerging as all important with the application becoming a conduit.

There is a lot of talk on spending money to upgrade the infrastructure as a means of boosting the economy. I do believe that money should be spent on upgrading the infrastructure of our great nation, but this has to be done in spite of the economy.  We surely do not need an excuse to fix things. The physical structures are deteriorating and have to be fixed. Long overdue.

The government does not need to spend money to improve the Canadian economy. We are in trouble because of our very close relationship with the U.S.. No amount of infrstructure spending will resolve that. But the government can use this opportunity to spend money restructuring our economy.

The manufacturing sector is in trouble. The sector that appears to be in trouble, is the one that competes directly with China, India, Mexico and other parts of the world where costs are a lot lower than ours can ever be. Every article I read points out that we are a service economy. Some also mention our activities in the Research & Development area with projetcs such as MarRS in Toronto.

So why don’t we spend money improving this sector of the economy? Improve the high speed networks to catch up to some contries that are boasting 20MB and higher speeds, improve electronic access, and security. Make sure some budget is left over to maintain and regularly update these systems. Change our taxation system to encourage these sectors. 

This will ensure that we are less dependant on a single major customer. It will provide jobs for the many immigrants who come to this country PhD’s in hand. We have everything in place to make this a success, except govenrment participation.

I just read an interesting article in CPU Magazine. (http://snipurl.com/5u0un  [www_computerpoweruser_com] ). No, really, CPU Mag has had a few interesting articles over time.

This one deals with a previous version of Chrome, this one by Microsoft. It was developed in 1998 but never released as Microsoft appeared concerned about litigation over anti-competitive actions.

I was training at Bell Canada one day, so many years ago. During a conversation with a bunch of people, they mentioned that Bell had become timid. They were afraid to take decisions because of possible repercussions from the CRTC. More anti-competitive litigation threats.

There was once a company called Ashton-Tate. Developers of dBase IV. Windows 3.0 had just launched, and like so many developers, Ashton-Tate missed the trend and failed to develop a Windows database. The started losing money. I was working for Ingram Micro at the time and was invited to a meeting called by Ashton-Tate to discuss their state. They told us about some applications they were working on. More specifically, they were working on a system where they developed a kernel for an integrated Office application. Except, they would also allow others to create plugins to perform tasks to add features. Way ahead of the times. Ashton-Tate was purchased by Borland (developers of Paradox) and the project disappeared.

Microsoft did not release Chrome. Worse, it is buried somewhere in the Microsoft Archives, all but forgotten.

All of this makes me wonder how many great ideas bite the dust because of market conditions?

How many of these ideas disappear?

Below are some of the more interesting articles that captured my attention this week. They are displayed in no particular order.

Finally, in the world of I am in the wrong job:

Some of us have been following the dispute that is raging across the country regarding traffic shaping. Both Bell Canada and Rogers Communications have admitted to using this practice in response to a small number of users taking over more than their fair share of the available bandwidth. There is no competition when all players in a market use similar technology, and provide similar services.

It is time for a new player to enter the market.

I would like to propose that Canada Post be given the mandate to provide the public with high speed internet service.

1. They have offices all over the country
2. They need to communicate with their offices
3. They already deal with the public
4. They have a mandate to provide mail service. This can be extended to internet mail service
5. They have excellent technology in ePost, though few seem to know of it. This technology can be used to augment their eMail services
6. Being national, Canada Post would allow a user to access their service from anywhere in the country

I see big wins all around.

The existing providers could use the competition.