Intel have announced that their open source projects will be merged with Nokias. They are urging the three main players from The Linux Foundation to join forces for future platform development.
The full press release can be found here.
Wednesday 17 February 2010
Intel and Nokia Merge Software Platforms for Future Computing Devices
Intel have announced that their open source projects will be merged with Nokias. They are urging the three main players from The Linux Foundation to join forces for future platform development.
The full press release can be found here.
Microsoft's Windows Phone 7 Series: Too little too late?
Posted by Larry Dignan @ 2:30 am
Microsoft has finally come up with an answer for its mobile phone operating system conundrum: Take the Zune software and extend it into something unique and fresh. The big question is whether Microsoft has solved the Windows Mobile puzzle too late.
At the Mobile World Congress 2010, Microsoft introduced Windows Phone 7 Series (statement, Techmeme). Clunky name aside, the software giant’s take is solid. If you have a Zune HD you’ll recognize Microsoft’s phone platform immediately. The Zune HD software works well and does what it’s supposed to without a lot of clutter. One can only hope that Windows Phone 7 does the same.
Microsoft said Windows Phone 7 represents a “fresh approach” that will layer in simplicity, context, applications and the Web. In a nutshell, Xbox Live games and Zune music are now features of Windows Phone 7. These phones arrive by holiday 2010.
First off, Microsoft appears to be generating some real return on investment for its Zune adventure. Sure, Microsoft is an also-ran on the music player front, but at least it started a mobile operating system. Kudos to the software giant for starting over from scratch.
The elephant in this mobile room is whether Microsoft’s move is a case of too little, too late. Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer acknowledged that it is in “a crowded market filled with phones that look the same and do the same things.” Ballmer added that he challenged his team to deliver a new experience. The team actually built on the Zune experience.
All of that is swell, but at some juncture the mobile phone platform wars will settle out. I’d be more optimistic if Windows Phone 7 devices were going to launch in the second quarter. The fourth quarter launch complicates matters for Microsoft. If Windows Phone 7 devices land in September the software giant has a shot. If these phones launch in November, Microsoft may have issues.
Ten things we still don’t know about Microsoft’s next-gen Windows Phones
- Image Gallery: Windows Phone 7 Series
- Will all Xbox games work on Windows Phone 7 devices?
- Is Microsoft’s Windows Phone 7 Series a game changer?
- Windows Phone 7 Series … what we know, and what we don’t
- Old dogs show they can still rock the mobile world
- Microsoft Phone press conference, Mobile World Congress ‘10
- Microsoft announces Windows Phone 7 Series with Xbox and Zune integration
Why? If Microsoft is taking share from any company it will be RIM. It’s highly unlikely that Google Android and Apple phone buyers will even consider a Windows-powered phone. In addition, RIM hasn’t rolled out its next-gen plans. If Microsoft beat RIM to the punch it would have a nice shot with Windows Phone 7.
Today, we’re clearly in a mobile renaissance period. We’ve got innovation from Google’s Android, Apple’s iPhone, RIM’s BlackBerry—assuming the company delivers something next-gen in 2010—Palm’s WebOS and a new flavor of Symbian from Nokia. If Microsoft gets its mobile act together you can argue that the mobile industry will have six perfectly fine mobile platforms across the globe.
We all know how this movie turns out. You have six companies duking it out. A few years from now it’s four. Then three. Then the days of a happy duopoly.
We’re far from duopoly days, but you have to wonder if Microsoft can make the first cut to four. Android is coming on strong with an army of devices. Apple’s iPhone’s App Store alone will keep it in the game. RIM needs to innovate, but still has a commanding 41.6 percent smartphone platform market share in the U.S., according to comScore. Microsoft has 18 percent behind Apple’s 25.3 percent in the U.S. based on comScore data.
Microsoft’s challenge will be to hold market share for about 7 months (best case scenario) as Android grows at a frenetic pace. Microsoft says its Windows Phone 7 devices won’t launch until the holidays. Meanwhile, the days where Microsoft could announce a platform and freeze a market are long gone—especially in mobile. How much will Microsoft have to play catch up by the holidays?
Chances are Microsoft will have a huge gap to close by the fourth quarter. ChangeWave Research recently documented future smart phone buying intentions. It’s all about the iPhone and Android. Windows Mobile is an afterthought at this point—and that’s the OS that’s holding the fort.
If you assume Microsoft’s mobile platform share further erodes the Windows Phone 7 launch will have to be big to compete. That’s why you hear the stray rumors about Microsoft buying Research in Motion.
There’s a lot to be excited about with Windows Phone 7. Indeed, I think Microsoft has finally figured it out. We’ll see if Microsoft has found the answers too late to matter though.
End note: As a Verizon Wireless customer with an upgrade available I just don’t see the point in moving. For starters, RIM’s OS upgrade has made the Storm more palatable. In addition, the app selection for the BlackBerry has improved dramatically (amazing what a Sirius app can do). Every time I research a platform I find some sort of dealbreaker—tethering is a big one. Simply put, there is no perfect platform yet. And given the way handsets are developing I see no need to jump on the latest greatest thing—especially when I know it’ll be trumped in 3 months anyway. While the mobile space is in a renaissance today, it must be damn confusing for the consumer that doesn’t follow this space daily.
Larry Dignan is Editor in Chief of ZDNet and Smart Planet as well as Editorial Director of ZDNet sister site TechRepublic. See his full profile and disclosure of his industry affiliations.
Follow Larry on Twitter.
Thursday 11 February 2010
Task Squid: Task Management Meets Activity Streams [INVITES]
About 12 hours ago 
Name: Task Squid
Quick Pitch: Collaboration focused on completing the tasks that ultimately complete the project. Its group tasks done easy.
Genius Idea: In the spectrum of project collaboration tools you have the completely free form Google Wave (
) and structured enterprise tool from SAP called 12Sprints. In the middle is Task Squid, a private beta project management tool (we’ve got invites!) that takes an activity stream approach — designed with productivity in mind — to project collaboration.
The Task Squid experience is centered around task management, with you as the focal point. Upon login, the service displays the tasks assigned to you or those that you assigned to others. The activity stream also highlights all recent items — tasks, subtasks, comments, files, time — in reverse chronological order and color-coded by type for an overview of all recent project activity.
During the initial setup process you can connect your Twitter (), Facebook (
), and Google Calendar accounts. You’ll also want to start the process by predetermining categories — which you can treat like separate projects — for tasks. Those categories will be shown on the right-hand side of the page so you can filter through tasks. Should you wish to be notified of new or completed tasks you can add your mobile number to receive SMS messages for updates.
Tasks themselves can be basic notes or robust action items, which means you can include stylized text, rich media (including flash), add files, assign multiple owners and add a due date. Each task also supports comments (with replies), subtasks and time entry options. Tasks can even be shared via direct URL or Facebook and Twitter, though login will be required to access the shared task.
For those of you with a penchant for aesthetics, TaskSquid doesn’t disappoint. The experience looks and feels clean, and the comments are treated as colored chat bubbles that make back and forth repartee visually appealing. Task Squid won’t work for everyone’s project collaboration needs, but it does get simple task management right.
The service is still in beta, but Mashable () readers can enter “sparkofgenius” in the invite code field to get in early. That code will work for 1,000 users, so get in there, try it out and let us know what you think in the comments.
Windows 8 Will Blow Your Mind. Hopefully Not Like Vista
About 1 hour ago The folks at Microsoft Kitchen dug up some cool quotes from Microsoft employees about the upcoming Windows OS, currently codenamed Windows 8. Though it does bring up painful memories of what was promised about Vista (the marketing campaign, you may remember, was called “the wow starts now”), Microsoft did partially redeem itself with Windows 7, so we can put some (if not all) trust in what’s said about the next version.
First, John Mangelaars, regional VP of consumer and online at Microsoft EMEA, simply said that Windows 8 will be “mind-blowing.” Doesn’t really reveal much, but OK, we can set our expectations to “unreasonably high” if that’s how Microsoft wants to play this.
Another quote, this time from an unknown employee, tells us a little bit more:
“So what are our plans for this next version…The minimum that folks can take for granted is that the next version will be something completly different from what folks usually expect of Windows – I am simply impressed with the process that Steven has setup to listen to our customers needs and wants and get a team together than can make it happen. To actually bring together dozens and dozens of teams across Microsoft to come up with a vision for Windows.next is a process that is surreal! The themes that have been floated truly reflect what people have been looking for years and it will change the way people think about PCs and the way they use them. It is the future of PCs…”
So besides “mind-blowing”, we can now add “surreal,” “the future of PCs” and “completely different”. I’m not exactly sure I want to enter an altered state of mind upon launching my brand new Windows 8 PC for the first time, but I agree it’s time for something completely different. Because, you know, Windows 7 wasn’t really all that different from Vista…
Wednesday 10 February 2010
Adobe's Flash flap: Are concerns overblown?
by Larry Dignan @ 5:57 am
Adobe’s well-publicized battle with Apple over Flash’s future on the iPhone and iPad may have cast some doubt on the ubiquitous software, but the flap is way overblown, according to an analyst who is putting his money (or at least his buy rating) where his mouth is.
Jefferies analyst Ross MacMillan upgraded Adobe to a “buy” because the flap over Flash has drawn attention away from a more critical component: The Creative Suite 5 (CS5) buying cycle.
In a research note, MacMillan writes:
We continue to believe that the CS5 product cycle will be decent, driven by attractive features, some new product additions, a healthier end-market, some pent-up demand and perhaps a little tailwind from Windows 7 upgrades. If total cycle revenues with CS5 resemble total cycle CS3 revenues, as we believe, there is money to be made here. If we are wrong, we like the fact that the company’s late CY09 cost reduction provides EPS support. We also think concerns over the future of Flash are overblown. While we don’t think Flash will be the only rich media container for the web, neither do we think it will disappear. More importantly, Flash has almost zero bearing on revenues for Adobe over the next 18 months.
Also: Adobe’s creative legacy & the proprietary aspirations of Apple & Google
It’s hard to argue with MacMillan on the Flash point. The big argument is that HTML5 is going to make Flash irrelevant. And HTML5 just might—years from now. This HTML5 vs. Flash debate, which according to early adopters you’d think was already decided, played out on the Enterprise Irregular email list recently. Among the key points:
- Flash is a runtime. HTML5 is a specification. Today, they aren’t all that comparable.
- Enterprises and most of the content companies that build around Flash aren’t going to suddenly drop support.
- Flash is more than videos—it’s about rich clients on thin computing devices.
- The Flash ecosystem is rich and that attracts developers.
- It will take a decade for HTML5 to eradicate Flash if everything goes just perfectly (it won’t). Keep in mind Web standards are messy and take time to develop.
Regarding that final point, MacMillan writes:
We believe the stock has come under additional pressure recently, due to concerns over the future of Flash. Apple’s ongoing persistence to not include the Flash plug-in or run-time on the iPhone/ iPad coupled with Steve Job’s comments regarding Flash is one thing. Google’s YouTube Beta using HTML5 and the H.264 video codec (as opposed to Flash) is another. Adobe has retorted, with the CTO explaining Adobe’s position and point of view on his blog. The bottom line for us is that we think it likely that Flash’s share on the web will likely decline over time, but it is not going away. First, there is no agreed video tag for HTML5 today (with sparring tag technologies of H.264 and Theora supported by various camps). Second, HTML5 in its current specification does not support many of the features that Flash supports, such as audio streaming or games.
Strip away the concerns about Flash and you have a good old fashioned buying cycle to play, according to MacMillan. Instead of worrying about Flash fear, uncertainty and doubt it’s more productive to follow the revenue of CS4 and the launch of Acrobat 10 in the second half.
Larry Dignan is Editor in Chief of ZDNet and Smart Planet as well as Editorial Director of ZDNet sister site TechRepublic. See his full profile and disclosure of his industry affiliations.
Follow Larry on Twitter.
Google Maps for Android Get Buzz Support
Google Maps for Android Get Buzz Support http://mashable.com/2010/02/10/google-maps-for-android-get-buzz-support/
Google Getting Into the ISP Business With Ultra High-Speed Network
Could Google be your next ISP? Maybe. The company has just announced a trial of its own high-speed network that it plans to offer to “at least 50,000 and potentially up to 500,000 people.”
Google says it will be capable of delivering speeds more than 100x faster than typical US Internet connections with up to 1 gigabit per second. It will do so at a “competitive” price.
The next step in getting this potentially massive project off the ground appears to be teaming up with local governments – Google has launched this web site and intros “Google Fiber for Communities” in the video below:
Why is Google getting into the ISP business? Here’s their explanation:
Next generation apps: We want to see what developers and users can do with ultra high-speeds, whether it’s creating new bandwidth-intensive “killer apps” and services, or other uses we can’t yet imagine.
New deployment techniques: We’ll test new ways to build fiber networks, and to help inform and support deployments elsewhere, we’ll share key lessons learned with the world.
Openness and choice: We’ll operate an “open access” network, giving users the choice of multiple service providers. And consistent with our past advocacy, we’ll manage our network in an open, non-discriminatory and transparent way.
Although it sounds like we’re still some time from seeing Google’s fiber service available on a massive scale, this could represent a massive shift in the Internet ecosystem. Keep in mind that Google has also recently launched its own Public DNS service, as well as an alternative to HTTP that it calls SPDY. The company clearly thinks it can build a better Internet than the one we have today.
If it’s successful, Google will not only know what we do on their plethora of services, but also just about everything else we do on the Web (especially if Google becomes our ISP). Now, perhaps more than ever, the question of whether or not that’s too much power for one company to have is at the forefront.
Moblin: A New Generation Mobile OS For Intel Processors
create the mobile internet future
Moblin is an open source project focused on building a Linux-based platform optimized for the next generation of mobile devices including Netbooks, Mobile Internet Devices, and In-vehicle infotainment systems.
Twitter Is Still Growing Rapidly [STATS]
About 1 hour ago 
Maybe Twitter doesn’t have a growth problem after all. According to new stats out today from Royal Pingdom, Twitter saw an all-time high of more than 1.2 billion tweets in January. Perhaps this is what CEO Evan Williams meant last month when he said that the site was hitting records “across all the metrics that matter.”
Diving a bit deeper into the numbers, Royal Pingdom reports that tweet volume grew by 16x from January ’09 to January ’10. Over the past three months, tweet volume has grown steadily at around 17 percent. In other words, if tweet volume is the metric that matters, Twitter is still growing at a very healthy clip.
Questions about Twitter’s growth have stemmed from other publicly available analytics data that shows the site is seeing a flat-to-down number of unique visitors hit its website each month. That data though, as has often been pointed out, doesn’t take into account those that use Twitter through third-party apps, both on the desktop and via mobile devices.
Still, that’s not to say that Twitter is adding users as fast as it once was. It could just be that the average Twitter user is tweeting more (Royal Pingdom doesn’t offer data on this), not to mention the ever-growing number of automated bots that tweet. In any event, here’s what the tweet growth looks like:
Gmail users get on the Buzz...
First there was Google Wave.. https://wave.google.com/
Now there's Buzz for direct blog updates in your inbox..
http://www.google.com/buzz
Now there's Buzz for direct blog updates in your inbox..
http://www.google.com/buzz
LTE or WiMAX digital baseband in an AMC
Friday 05 February 2010 12:01
For LTE (Long Term Evolution) and WiMAX, Loughborough-based CommAgility has announced a complete digital baseband module.
To be known as AMC-2C87W3, the full-size Advanced Mezzanine Card includes L1 PHY (physical layer), L2 RLC/MAC (radio link control/media access control), transport - including all backhaul and air interface security, and antenna connection requirements of eNodeB.
"It provides end-to-end data handling from raw radio IQ data through to backhaul IP packets," said the firm. "The module incorporates the WinPath3 Network Processor from Wintegra, which provides a flexible means of handling the real-time IP packet and security processing and L2 RLC/MAC demands of wireless base stations."
WinPath3 supports symmetrical multi-processing with 12 cores, with 64 parallel hardware threads for the user plane and two control processors for the control plane.
For L1 PHY processing, two Texas Instruments TCI6487 multi-core DSPs running at 1.2GHz provide a single sector 10MHz, 2x2 MIMO LTE system.
CPRI/OBSAI, DSP co-processing and board control logic are mopped up in a Xilinx Virtex 5 FPGA.
Three SFP optical sockets are configurable as CPRI/OBSAI or Gigabit Ethernet, and provide connections to remote radio heads and backhaul.
Timing and synchronisation support is provided by an integrated GPS or IEEE1588 capability with optional OCXO-based holdover
The module will be available in March.
Wimax Technology
WiMAX is the next-generation of wireless technology designed to enable pervasive, high-speed mobile Internet access to the widest array of devices including notebook PCs, handsets, smartphones, and consumer electronics such as gaming devices, cameras, camcorders, music players, and more. As the fourth generation (4G) of wireless technology, WiMAX delivers low-cost, open networks and is the first all IP mobile Internet solution enabling efficient and scalable networks for data, video, and voice. As a major driver in the support and development of WiMAX, Intel has designed embedded WiMAX solutions for a variety of mobile devices supporting the future of high-speed broadband on-the-go.
Driving standards and global networks for WiMAX
Laying the foundation for broad, cost-effective deployments, Intel is working to easily integrate Intel® WiMAX technology into complex designs and global networks, providing a standards-based foundation for ongoing product innovation.
WiMAX: Connect in more places, more often
Built for the future, Intel® WiMAX technology will allow you to connect in more places, more often, without being restricted to hotspots. When built into notebooks and mobile devices, you'll be able to extend your connected experience beyond Wi-Fi.
- How to get WiMAX
- Demo: Learn how WiMAX works
- Learn how WiMAX works
File type/Size: PDF 1.40MB
Connecting notebooks of the future with WiMAX
Intel is providing advancements in wireless mobile technology for the future of notebooks and a wide range of consumer devices. Intel® Centrino® wireless products provide great coverage and reliable connectivity while consuming minimal power.
WiMAX network rolls out
WiMAX in the News
BSNL, HCL, and Intel expand access to wireless broadband Internet and affordable computers.
WiMAX success stories
Read about Global WiMAX providers successfully launching 4G service.
- Learn more
File type/Size: PDF 8.66MB
DBMS Comparisons: MySQL 5.0 vs. Microsoft SQL Server 2005
Database engines are a crucial fixture for businesses today. There is no shortage of both commercial and open source database engines to choose from. Microsoft SQL Server 2005 is Microsoft’s next-generation data management solution that claims to deliver secure and scalable applications while making them easy to deploy and manage. MySQL has long been the DBMS of choice in the open source community. The recent release of MySQL 5.0 has seen major changes in both features and performance to bring the database system into enterprise-level standards.
This paper aims to give the low-down on features most desirable to database developers and compare both database management systems in light of these features.
Topics in this Paper:
Features
The Open Source vs. Commercial Database Paradigm
Performance
Replication
Security
Recovery
Features
The most obvious difference between the two products is in philosophy. SQL server is essentially a proprietary storage engine. Once you purchase the product, you are only limited to the Sybase-derived engine. By contrast, MySQL is an open storage engine offering multiple choices: InnoDb, BerkleyDB, MyISAM and Heap amongst other supported engines.
The second marked difference between the two database systems is in the technical features and specifications implemented. SQL Server is a fully-fledged database system developed specifically for large enterprise databases. All advanced features of a relational database are fully implemented. MySQL, on the other hand, has only come out of edge in the “relational” front, with recent support for foreign keys.
The latest release of MySQL, the 5.X offering, has rounded up on features that lagged commercial equivalents such as SQL Server. There is now full support for cursors, complete views and stored procedures according to the SQL 2003 syntax. Other features that were a major differentiator between MySQL and SQL Server are now part of the 5.X release. Triggers, stored procedures and foreign keys are fully implemented.
But is MySQL 5.0 really up to industry-level database standards? The features outlined above have only been implemented in the latest release and are yet to fully stabilise. They are yet to be rationalised across the different databases in the MySQL suite of products – InnoDB, MyISAM, MaxDB and the new data clusters. MySQL is still carrying four distinct database architectures and it proves very challenging to fully implement replication, parallel processing, journaling and recovery across different databases.
SQL Server continues to have the edge, as the advanced features list has long stabilised. The latest release of SQL Server 2005 provides the necessary technological underpinnings to keep it in the higher-end of database systems. There is now a far greater integration with Microsoft’s .NET Framework, a development environment that greatly facilitates coding without the need to learn advanced features of SQL. It is also tightly integrated with Visual Studio .NET. This will provide better support for XML, querying multi-dimensional data in the SQL server and a set of advanced reporting controls. Finally, XML is now a native data type within XML. This enables a DBA to modify an XML document within the DBMS environment, query the document and validate it against an XML schema.
The Open Source versus Commercial License Paradigm
Another difference between the two database engines is licensing costs. Both databases have a two-tiered licensing scheme, but have little else in common.
The first licensing scheme is essentially free. SQL Server provides a free license for "development use only". What this means is that the database system cannot be deployed in a commercial environment. MySQL, on the other hand, is free to use under any environment, provided one abides by GPL license rules.
This brings us to the second-tier of licensing. For use in a commercial environment, one would need to purchase the SQL Standard Edition license. It costs a whopping $1,400, a substantial investment for a small business. However, it is a fully-fledged relational database system complete with all features needed to develop and deploy enterprise databases. This goes a long way towards justifying the hefty price tag.
MySQL also provides licensing schemes to circumvent some of the restrictions of the GPL license. This is especially important for companies that deal with proprietary information. These commercial licenses are piloted by MySQL AB, the company behind the development of MySQL, and cost a very affordable $400. Non-profit organisations and educational establishments are exempt from this fee.
Performance
In terms of performance, MySQL fairs better than SQL on a variety of platforms thanks to the default table format of its MyISAM database. They are compact on disk and use less memory and CPU cycles. While the database system performs well on Windows, it is better suited for UNIX and UNIX-like systems. The performance can further be tuned on 64-bit processors (such as SPARC stations) because of the internal use of 64 integers in the database. The latest release of MySQL 5.0 has seen further improvements in engine performance, through compact mode support. Engines such as InnoDB and NDB Cluster uses 20% less space than it required in previous versions.
For additional non-default MySQL features, there is an increased demand on resource usage and this has obviously an effect on performance. For instance, alternative table formats on MyISAM or transactions on Berkeley DB will require additional memory usage. These features will, however, offer additional functionality.
For SQL Server, the full-set of powerful features that surpasses that of most competitors has a negative effect on performance. It's true that many of these features are geared towards performance tuning,ut overall the system is more complex, places additional requirements on memory and disk storage. This results in a poorer performance compared with MySQL. The performance will benefit greatly with RAID and a dedicated hard drive for the data store.
Replication
Both Database systems are scalable and support replication to a different degree of complexity.
Replication on MYSQL is easy because all SQL statements that change data are kept in a binary log. Because of the binary nature of the records, data can be replicated easily and quickly to one or more slave machines. This also means that data remains intact and replication takes place even when the server goes down. On the scalability front, MYSQL scales easily into large, query-heavy databases.
Unlike MySQL one-way replication, SQL Server offers replication in a number of models: snapshot, transactional and merge. A snapshot application is a simple snapshot of the entire replicated database. It is a time consuming process but can be useful for databases that rarely change or as a way to establish a baseline for replication between systems. A transactional replication is a more flexible solution for databases that regularly change. The database is monitored for any changes by a replication agent monitor. When changes do take place, they are transmitted to the subscribers. Finally, merge replication allows simultaneous changes to the database by both the publisher and subscribers. Changes can be made without an active network connection, and any conflicting changes are resolved through a predefined conflict resolution algorithm.
However, increased replication support comes at the expense of a greater degree of complexity. This is due to SQL's complex transaction and record locking mechanism, cursor manipulation and synchronisation of dynamic data replication. If you’re skilled in these elaborate mechanisms, then replication and migration shouldn’t be an issue.
Security
Security remains a major concern for most businesses and a compelling consideration in choosing a database system.
Both DBMS support security at the base level. MySQL is limited to supporting basic security at the table level, via the SQL command. By contrast, SQL server fully supports security at the column level.
Another important consideration is security certificates - the verification of the database security by a third party. SQL Server has been certified as C-2 compliant, which means the database system has adequate security for government applications. MySQL has no such certification.
Moving on to more advanced features of protecting data on the database, the SQL Server 2005 have implemented more advanced authentication and authorisation features. The database supports native encryption capabilities, obfuscating the DBA from writing user-defined functions using column encryption APIs. The encryption mechanism is based on a combination of third-party certificates, symmetric keys and asymmetric keys. You can specify asymmetric keys for increased security or symmetric keys for better performance. A DBA has also the choice of specifying his own user-defined security functions through the encryption facility implemented in the .NET Framework.
Recovery
SQL Server is more failsafe and less prone to data corruption. SQL has a robust checkpoint mechanism whereby the data passes from the keyboard to the hard drive before showing in the monitor. Even if the databases shut down unexpectedly without warning, the data can be recovered.
New features in the SQL 2005 release provide enhanced mechanisms to manage data protection and rapid restoration. Mirrored backups allow you to create multiple copies of the backup file. These backups have identical content, so you can always mix the files in case one of the sets becomes corrupt.
Copy only backups enable you to make a copy of the database without interrupting the sequence of other backup files. This copy can be used to restore your database, instead of going through the full backup and translation log. You can also save time by using partial backups for all filegroups, except those marked as read-only.
MySQL falls short in recovery with its default MyISAM mechanism. The UPS assumes uninterrupted data, and in the event of an unexpected shutdown your data can be lost and the data store corrupted.
Concluding Thoughts
From a database developer’s perspective, choosing between a MySQL and SQL Server DBMS is a matter of the scale of the database application. For enterprise-level applications, SQL Server wins hands down. It has advanced set of SQL features, superior replication, clustering, security and management tools.
For lower-tier database applications, MySQL can offer the core functionality you require at a very low cost. Some might argue that the latest offering from MySQL has made the open source database system enterprise “worthy”, but this remains to be seen. The advanced functionalities implemented are yet to stabilise and be rationalised across the database engine. What's more, Microsoft has upped the ante with even more advanced features of its own. It’s up to MySQL to rise up to the challenge, but at this point in time MySQL is nowhere near the competitive enterprise field of the more established SQL Server 2005.ASP versus PHP
ASP and PHP are both programming languages that are commonly used to create websites. Unlike the usual static html web pages, ASP and PHP websites are more dynamic and can allow users to interact and exchange information using the website's databases.
ASP is the short term for Active Server Pages, a type of program that works with Microsoft alongside IIS or Internet Information Server. ASP needs a Microsoft Server for the website to work. On the other, PHP or Hypertext Preprocessor, runs using Linux or Unix server. The more updated PHP programs can now run on an NT server.
PHP programs can also run in Windows, Solaris, Unix and Linux while ASP can only work with Window-based platforms. Just recently, ASP can now run on a Linux platform given that there is an ASP-Apache program installed on its server.
If you were a programmer adept with the C++ language, you would probably be more comfortable using PHP than ASP. PHP uses C/C++ as base language and most syntax are similar to each other. Because a big chunk of programmers are still using C++ language, PHP are by far more popular than ASP.
ASP is very much similar to the syntax and interface of Visual Basic programming. This is basically because Visual Basic is basically correlated with Microsoft products and programs. So if you were a programmer, choosing between ASP and PHP would basically depend on which language you are more adept with.
When it comes to costing and expenses, ASP programs needs to run on Windows with IIS installed on the server. You need to purchase both of these components in order for ASP to work. On the other hand, a PHP would only require running on a Linux server, which you can get at no cost.
PHP is very much flexible when it terms of database connectivity. It can connect to several databases of which the most commonly used is the MySQL. Note that MySQL would not cost you a thing to use. But if you were to use ASP, you need to purchase MS-SQL, which is a Microsoft product.
Loading speed is a big factor in maintaining a website. If you are particular about speed, then you need to go with PHP. PHP codes runs much quicker than ASP basically because it runs in its very own memory space while ASP uses an overhead server and is uses a COM based architecture.
In working with PHP, most tools associated with the program are mostly open source software so you need not pay for them. As for ASP, you might need to buy additional tools to work with its programs.
In conclusion, both PHP and ASP have its own advantages and disadvantages. It basically depends on which part of developing a website you are most concerned with. Are you worried about the cost of creating your website? Do you want to use a programming language that you are more familiar with? Do you want a more stable and faster website? Choosing between ASP and PHP basically depends on your own personal preference. It doesn't hurt to confer with other programmers or webmasters and research more information on which programming would best fit the requirements of your website.
Apple's iPad -- Will it improve the Web?
February 4, 2010 1:56 p.m. EST
February 4, 2010 1:56 p.m. EST
February 4, 2010 1:56 p.m. EST
Apple's Steve Jobs reportedly called Adobe "lazy," blaming the Flash plug-in for Mac crashes.
STORY HIGHLIGHTS
- iPad promises to be best way to view the Web, but it doesn't show Flash animation
- Apple CEO Steve Jobs reportedly called Adobe "lazy" because of Flash problems
- YouTube, others experimenting with HTML5, which could be a blow to Adobe's Flash
- Writer: Tech titans' squabble will create a poorer Web experience for iPad users
RELATED TOPICS
Editor's note: Pete Cashmore is founder and CEO of Mashable, a popular blog about social media. He is writing a weekly column about social networking and tech for CNN.com.
London, England (CNN) -- Apple's iPad launched last week, boasting the "best way to experience the Web."
Except that the iPad doesn't display the whole Web: It fails to support Adobe's Flash player, meaning that Hulu.com, most online video sites (apart from YouTube) and the majority of online games won't work on the device.
Surely the decision will frustrate iPad users -- but is Apple doing us a favor that will improve the Web in the long term?
Apple has yet to make an official statement on the iPad's lack of Flash support, but there's little doubt the move was intentional. A Wired article this week claims Apple CEO Steve Jobs recently called Adobe "lazy" -- he blames the Flash plug-in for a significant number of Mac crashes.
He'd rather see the world move to HTML5, which allows videos to play natively in the browser without installing Flash, adds the report. That could be good news for Web users, as you'd no longer need to install or update the Flash plug-in to view Web video -- installing a Web browser would be enough.
The move would be welcomed by open Web advocates, too. Proprietary technology like Flash is often seen as less desirable than open standards.
Whether the Jobs quote is accurate or not, I'm in the camp that sees HTML5 posing a threat to the Flash plug-in, long term.
YouTube already is experimenting with HTML5 in a limited test -- a complete switchover isn't feasible at this point, but would serve a crushing blow to Adobe if it were to transpire.
Other video sites, including Vimeo, are carrying out their own tests. I see no threat to Flash in the immediate future, however.
Only selected browsers -- like Google Chrome and Apple's Safari -- actually support HTML5.
Internet Explorer does not, and Web users are often slow to upgrade to newer browser versions.
Meanwhile, Adobe CTO Kevin Lynch argues in a post this week that the dichotomy is a false one, and that HTML5 is not a replacement for Flash, "certainly not today nor even in the foreseeable future."
He's right that Flash isn't dead in the water, but Adobe must also be aware that HTML5 will chip away at its dominance of the Web video space, perhaps over a period of years rather than months.
So is Apple doing us all a favor by pushing Web developers toward nonproprietary alternatives?
That seems unlikely. Apple is the king of the closed system, frequently rejecting applications from its App Store for inscrutable reasons.
The company is all about control, claiming that it improves the user experience. In many cases that's true, but this isn't one of them. Rather, it looks set to confuse Web users who see blank spaces on many of their favorite sites.
Whatever Apple's reasoning, lack of Flash on iPhones and iPads ultimately confuses users, while YouTube and other video sharing sites look set to popularize HTML5 without Apple's assistance.
It's a squabble among tech titans that will create a poorer Web experience on the iPad.
© 2009 MASHABLE.com. All rights reserved.
Apple iPad - Just a big iPhone?
What's all the fuss about?
I can't help thinking, how can this be your most advanced technology when it's just a huge iPhone without the phone bits? Surely the technology is more advanced in an iPhone than this thing. It's just a tablet document reader (ebook reader) by the looks, which have been around for ages...
http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&safe=off&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla%3Aen-GB%3Aofficial&hs=ejF&q=ebook+readers&btnG=Search&meta=&aq=0&oq=ebook+reader
Check it here>>
http://www.apple.com/ipad/
Looks like Steve Jobs has blagged himself with it anyway.
http://events.apple.com.edgesuite.net/1001q3f8hhr/event/index.html
Now all you have to do is wait life for Quick or should I say SlowTime to load up......
And revel in the Apple Ass Kissing session. Could he blow bubbles any further up his own bum?
Finally, it's good to see how much $'s you have fleeced from the consumer with your rip off devices.
Google Now Has a Street View Snowmobile
First, there was the Google Street View Car, a special vehicle with a 360 degree camera mounted on top, that brings us all that detailed Street View imagery. Then, Google engineers invented the Trike, a tricycle with a camera that can reach all those places where Street View Car cannot go.
Neither of those two vehicles, however, can venture out in the snow, and this is why Google (
) created the Google Street View Snowmobile. Just like the Trike, it was invented by Daniel Ratner, and it was created especially for the Winter Olympics in Vancouver, so expect some beautiful imagery on Street View during the event. See a video introduction to the Snowmobile below.
By
Opera Wants to Bring Its Mobile Browser to iPhone
Opera Mini is a great mobile browser on most smartphones, but we didn’t really expect to see it on the iPhone. The reason for this is twofold: iPhone already sports Safari, which works really great, and second, Apple is unlikely to approve another browser, because it duplicates the functionality its app (Safari) already provides.
Despite this, Opera (
) has announced Opera Mini for the iPhone. At the official page, Opera sounds serious about it, treating is just like they would any other product launch.
“This is a unique opportunity to introduce the fast, feature-rich Opera Mini experience for the iPhone, and to showcase our latest beta releases of Opera Mobile and Opera Mini on other platforms and devices. Opera’s mission is to bring the Web to the world, and by making Opera Mini available on yet another platform, we are one step closer,” says Jon von Tetzchner, Opera’s co-founder.
The problem, however, is that this isn’t yet another product launch. As the folks at Opera themselves admit, “Opera Mini for iPhone is not publicly available,” and it’s quite possible that it never will be. Publicity stunt, a jab at Apple, or a serious intention to compete with Safari () on the iPhone sometime in the future? Time will tell.
Still, Opera plans to unveil several interesting products at the upcoming Mobile World Congress, which takes place in Barcelona from 15th to 18th of February. Visitors will be able to try out Opera Mobile 10 beta 3 on Symbian S60 () and Windows Mobile handsets, Opera Mobile 10 beta running on Android () handsets, Opera Mini 5 beta, running on a variety of handsets and platforms, and finally, Opera’s cross-platform Widgets Manager beta, running on Windows Mobile and S60 handsets.
By for http://mashable.com/
AMD CPU AM2 Athlon 64 X2 5000+ Retail box includes heatsink and Fan MEGA SALE ONLY £29.99
AMD Athlon Dual-Core processors put the power of dual-core technology on the desktop. Dual-core processors contain two processing cores, residing on one chip, that perform calculations on two streams of data to increase efficiency and speed while running multiple programs and the new generation of multi-threaded software. AMD Athlon Dual-Core processors deliver TRUE multi-tasking, allowing users to switch from one program to another without always pausing for the computer to catch up and reducing annoying processing pauses.
BUY ONLINE
http://www.microdirect.co.uk/Home/Product/43549/?source=tradeeshot10Feb10
Google Buzz: What It Means for Twitter and Facebook
So far, Google () has failed to launch a successful social web product to U.S. Internet users. Orkut () has taken off in including Brazil and India, but not in North America. Wave is a neat concept, but it has proven too abstract to catch on.
Is Buzz — Google’s new Twitter () and Facebook ()-like social stream — the product that’s going to win Google a dominant — or at least prominent — place in the social web?
That all depends. Integration with existing social networks are critical for Buzz’s success — especially Facebook. I don’t believe Buzz can enjoy significant success without Facebook integration. When Google unveiled Buzz today, it announced that the app will share your Twitter updates with your Buzz followers. That’s great news, but you won’t be as thrilled to learn that (at least at launch) there will be no integration with Facebook at all.
We ought to consider the consequences of Buzz’s relationships with Twitter and Facebook. What are the relationships? Will Buzz, Twitter and Facebook co-exist elegantly or is this a zero sum game with a winner you can place your bets on?
Google Buzz and Twitter: Probable Peaceful Partners
When you post a new tweet using Twitter, Google can import that tweet and send it out to your Buzz followers with the rest of your Buzz updates. You won’t have to jump through any hoops or use any back-door methods to make it happen. Twitter is officially supported by Buzz — the same is true of Flickr (), Picasa (), Blogger () and YouTube ().
However, you won’t be able to publish out to Twitter using Buzz, which makes this all seem less useful. And since Buzz won’t aggregate tweets from your Twitter followers (unless you happen to be following them on Buzz and they also happen to be pushing their tweets into Buzz as described previously), you’ll still have to keep both Twitter and Buzz open to reach all your contacts across both networks.
That’s disappointing, but it’s no where near as disappointing as Buzz’s completely nonexistent relationship with Facebook.
Google Buzz and Facebook: Cold Shoulders
While Buzz and Twitter have some connectivity, there’s none at all between Buzz and Facebook. Buzz doesn’t import your Facebook status updates. It doesn’t post updates to your Facebook feed. It doesn’t display your friends’ feed updates. There’s no Facebook Connect integration at all. When asked about it this morning, Google said it has nothing to announce at this time.
Google is going to have a difficult time building a userbase when everyone who has a Facebook profile (that’s just about everyone who uses the social web at all now) is concerned that they can’t see their friends’ updates. They’ll have to keep using Facebook to stay in touch with their Facebook friends.
With more than 400 million users, Facebook is the world’s largest social network; Twitter by contrast has only 18 million or so. Gmail’s unique visitors numbered around 36 million as of last year. Clearly, Facebook is dominating. Google is attempting to challenge that dominance with Buzz, but Facebook is at the same time planning to move just as aggressively into Google’s territory.
It was recently discovered that Facebook will eventually launch its own webmail service. You can already send messages to e-mail addresses from Facebook, but the execution isn’t as smooth as it needs to be. The new e-mail plan would address that.
Codenamed Project Titan, the service would offer users e-mail addresses ending in @facebook.com. Facebook would become the largest webmail provider overnight. If the service is functional enough, it could threaten Google’s Gmail (). People will be able to comfortably make the switch because they won’t lose the ability to e-mail their Gmail contacts — even if they move to another mail provider.
The Outlook: Buzz Won’t Win the Social Web Without Facebook Integration
I predicted at the end of last year that Facebook is well-poised to try to pry web dominance away from Google in 2010. Buzz doesn’t change my mind. Facebook is threatening Google, but Google isn’t threatening Facebook because it doesn’t offer any features so great that they incentivize people to leave behind their existing networks or spend their time updating and following yet another one when their friends are already all on Facebook or Twitter.
Facebook now dominates the social web so completely that it’s difficult to imagine an exodus to a competing service, unless that service offered some revolutionary new features that Facebook couldn’t possibly match — Buzz doesn’t.
I can picture one other success scenario, though: a service that aggregates other services’ features and content, and then offers up its own set of unique perks (like Buzz’s noise-control algorithms) that make the social web experience better. People would feel comfortable switching for the extra perks, because they wouldn’t have to leave their existing connections behind.
The outlook could change if Buzz integrates with Facebook the way it does with Twitter. Unless that happens, though, you’re better off keeping your bets on Facebook in the coming year or two — at least if your standard of success is something greater than niche appeal.
By
Swann CCTV Night Vision CCD Bullet Cam - Pro High Resolution
Security Camera Night Vision 32ft (10m)
Description
The Swann NightVision BulletCam™ is a compact, colour, weather resistant security camera that connects to your TV, VCR, DVR or security monitor for live viewing or recording. With its tough, cylindrical metal casing, the NightVision BulletCam™ operates in all weather elements such as dust, rain or snow. Small in size, the NightVision BulletCam™ is also easily hidden for covert monitoring or can be mounted prominently on a wall. Providing clear color images, the NightVision BulletCam™ is ideal for both indoor or outdoor security applications.
Features
* 420 TV Lines for high resolution
* 33ft (10m) infra-red night vision
* Weather resistant with mounting bracket & stand
* 33ft (10m) cable with BNC connectors
* Plugs into any DVR, VCR, TV or Swann Security monitor
* Powerful camera for home or office
http://www.microdirect.co.uk/Home/Product/38754/?source=tradeeshot10Feb10
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
