Okay, let’s talk about the newest version of Windows that everyone is talking about. No, not
Windows 7 -- that is
so next week. I am talking about all of the rumors surrounding Windows 8, no less. Let the fanfare begin!
I am not kidding: There are unofficial, non-Microsoft-authorized Web sites out there (such as windows8news.com, windows8center.com and windows8beta.com) that talk exclusively about any rumors or news leaks surrounding Microsoft’s next operating system after "7."
These sites are rife with discussions about what milestone or build they might be at, what it might look like, and when it might get released. Videos on YouTube even theoretically show the OS in operation, if you can believe that.
Of course, Microsoft has nothing officially to say on the subject. They usually don’t start to hype a new OS until about a year beforee its release, and certainly not before the current "new" one is out the door.
The latest thing that has these beehives a-buzzing is what looks to be a slide from an Italian Microsoft PowerPoint presentation that shows a timeline of Windows Server releases since 2003, which all of these sites are displaying. And there in tiny white print under "~2012" is "Code Name ‘Windows 8.’" The flurry of opinions as to what this means follows. Is ‘Windows 8’ the code name, meaning they will call it something else at release? Is this referring to the next Server OS instead? Does the year 2012 have anything to do with the Mayan calendar? Okay, maybe I made that last one up. but come on.
Okay, yes, Microsoft is of course already working on the operating system that will eventually replace Windows 7 in about two or three years. They have had to do it this way since they started cranking them out that quickly.
But can we at least get Windows 7 into the stores before we start thinking about its replacement?
Posted on Oct 02, 2009 at 1:40 PM2 comments
I have to admit that I’m not easily impressed by new technology. A decade spent in the GCN Lab hearing pie-in-the-sky ideas that haven’t panned out have made me a bit skeptical. But the new
Google Wave application has some surprising merit in terms of productivity that I can’t ignore.
At first I didn’t really see the advantage of Google Wave, but after playing around with the very early beta, I realized that I had accomplished significantly more in a shorter period of time than I would have with traditional tools such as e-mail and instant messaging.
Wave is basically a huge collaboration engine. Like a fax machine, it only really works if multiple people have the application installed. If they do, they can combine their e-mail, instant messaging and file sharing into one screen. This could be an advantage if set up privately within a government organization, though it could also be disastrous if acting as a link between government and the public. Without any filters, it would be too easy for government employees to type the wrong information, which would be instantly available to everyone looking at the Wave page.
So let’s assume that Wave is set up within an organization. The biggest advantage I found was that, while one person is typing, the characters typed are being transmitted in real time. The person or people receiving the information can even begin typing their response before the first person is finished. You would think that this would get annoying with people talking (or typing) over one another. But really, our brains work so much faster than our fingers that it’s OK. You don’t end up staring at the "please wait" screen in a standard IM window while the other person types.
As a result, you don’t waste any time in formulating your reply. Conversations go so much faster this way and don’t seem to get out of hand even with many participants. Your brain can almost always keep up. It’s just like sitting around a table at your local pub with multiple people talking at the same time. It’s easy to zero in on what you think is important and participate in the chat.
Even with the speed advantages, there are times when you don’t want people to read what you’re saying until you’ve proofed it and hit the send button. In those cases, Google is adding a check box to restrict Wave from showing your text before you approve it. Those that have accidentally replied to all on an e-mail will surely appreciate that feature, though I’m sure someone will find a way for embarrassing situations to crop up anyway.
Google Wave might not be aimed specifically at government users, but if built in a tightly controlled environment where the actual middleware that is hosting and storing the conversations is internal and secure, it could be a great advantage. I’m reminded of the way that Jabber (now owned by Cisco) brought instant messaging into government in a secure setting. Google Wave will probably have to do the same thing if it wants to crack the government market; otherwise it will become one more tool that is forbidden within federal agencies — and really, with good reason.
Posted on Oct 02, 2009 at 2:06 PM3 comments
Those of you who regularly read GCN Lab reviews probably know that a few years ago we standardized on the PassMark PerformanceTest Benchmark from PassMark Software. Some might say it was an unusual choice given that PassMark is located in Sydney, Australia. But the lab ran extensive tests of every benchmark product in the market before choosing the PassMark software.
Really, no other benchmark software gives as detailed a look inside systems. It lets us see not only that one system is faster, but why. Sometimes a computer that is generally slower might actually be better in a specific area,such as disk access or 3-D graphics, which would make it more attractive to a specific government agency, even if it’s slower overall.
We have been using Version 6.1 of the software for about two years and it’s been a real workhorse. It was even able to properly benchmark systems running Vista when the switch from XP was made.
However, Windows 7 is a bit of a different animal, apparently. It will require us to upgrade to PassMark PerformanceTest Version 7.0. We’ve done some initial testing with the 7.0 benchmark and it does work on systems running Windows 7. More importantly, it also works with systems that we previously benchmarked using Windows XP and Vista. And the numbers match up. So we are happy to announce that the lab will continue to use PassMark and that all of our previous scores are still valid. A notebook running XP with a PassMark score of 450 is still faster than a notebook running Windows 7 that scores 400. There is no need to adjust anything for it all to match up.
From a reader standpoint, nothing will change, and that doesn’t happen very often when benchmarks have to adapt to new operating systems. I suppose kudos go to PassMark Software, but also some credit probably needs to be placed in front of Microsoft for keeping the core functionality of older OS versions in their newest offering.
Anyone can download a trial version of the PassMark Benchmark software too. Simply go to www.passmark.com and you can use the same benchmarks we do in the lab for 30 days without having to pay. I would recommend it if you want to see how your current system is performing, and how well it does compared to others that PassMark keeps in an extensive database.
Posted on Sep 30, 2009 at 2:05 PM1 comments
In the twilight period between the end of Vista, or XP if you are like 86 percent of corporate folks out there, and the introduction of Windows 7, I can see that reviewing is going to be difficult.
Case in point: Blue Ridge Networks. The company has a product called the Pixie that I thought sounded really interesting. It’s a key drive designed to be inserted into any computer to create a VPN connection between that machine and your home servers. It’s really an extension to Blue Ridge's RemoteLink product , which lets users do basically the same thing with a smart card. We were all setup to do the review and even had the product submission form in hand. Yet at the last moment, Blue Ridge pulled out.
Now, people just don’t do that. I have at this very moment over a hundred products competing for very limited review space.For one of them to get to the final step and then be pulled out is a rare occurrence. As in, it never happens.
Because I’m so nice, I decided to look at another Blue Ridge product in that newly opened slot, the AppGuard anti-malware software suite. It was in the middle of this review that I saw that there was “limited availability for Windows 7.” It suddenly dawned on me why the Pixie suddenly flew the coop. It probably wasn’t ready for Windows 7, or at least the company didn’t know if it was.
A few other companies that have been asking me to look at their software suites have recently gone quiet, though none had gotten into the process as far as Pixie. Those products were all security related. My guess: Blame Windows 7. Microsoft says that apps that work under Vista will continue to do so under Windows 7, but companies probably aren’t completely sure, especially in areas such as security and authentication. And having an independent test lab point out flaws is not the best way to discover any problems. So until the big Windows 7 release, expect an unusually early frost in the new software market.
Posted on Sep 30, 2009 at 2:05 PM1 comments
Microsoft has selected a group of technology fans to host official launch parties. The party hosts will have a chance of winning a Windows PC valued at $750, Microsoft said.
A video on YouTube shows the lucky finalists how to throw their own Windows 7 launch parties.
No offense to the four cheerful people in the YouTube video, but they seem to be promoting a pretty pedestrian affair, offering their guests a basic menu of fruit, cheese and what appear to be devilled eggs before getting down to showing off the actual operating system.
And is it me, or did one actress in the video also appear on a “Magic Bullet” infomercial?
Hey, it worked for Tupperware, it just might work for Windows 7. And if launch parties don’t catch on, maybe Microsoft could get a better response with memorial services for Windows 7’s predecessor. “Vigils for Vista” has a nice ring to it.
Posted on Sep 29, 2009 at 2:59 PM0 comments