Virtual conferences: the killer app for social networking?

Irving Wladawsky Berger, one of my favorite former IBM’ers, talks about how the real killer app for social networking will be conducting meetings in-world. The idea is to gather together people (or their avatars) into a virtual meeting space and do seminars and training sessions. The ability to communicate with the attendees (via the built-in chat software) as well as view videos and other materials make for a more compelling experience. While my own experience with Second Life is still as a rank beginner, I think he is going in the right direction.

I think that it would be a huge breakthrough if we can significantly improve the quality of meetings through the use of new technology-based capabilities like virtual worlds – simultaneously making them more appealing to the people involved as well as making them more effective in achieving their goals.   I am convinced that such breakthroughs will inevitably lead to serious financial returns for the companies involved.

Toolbars are hazardous to your browsing health

Every browser-based toolbar should come with a warning like what the cigarette makers have to put on their products: WARNING: Use of this product may be hazardous to your PC’s health and cause all kinds of viruses and other infections.

I am being somewhat serious. The news last week of the potential exploits from the LinkedIn toolbar should be a sobering thought for anyone who has this or other toolbars installed on their system.

No one has actually observed this proof-of-concept exploit used by any malicious hacker, yet. But obviously this is just the tip of the virus iceberg here.

I don’t know what the big deal with browser toolbars are, anyway. No one I know will admit to using them, and most people have them inadvertently because they downloaded something else and the toolbar got installed as collateral damage. Most of these toolbars are there for better access to search sites, but if you are already using IE 7 or Firefox you have this already as part of your browser without having to download something that will consume more screen real estate.

I actually was using the LinkedIn toolbar for a few days earlier this summer when I was experimenting with using the site for more than just finding where my friends now were working. But alas the toolbar didn’t stick – it was buggy and kept crashing and causing me all kinds of grief, so now I am very happy going back to just bookmarking the site and coming in manually like ordinary civilians. I didn’t see much savings and the notifications were getting annoying after just a few days, a sure sign that its toolbar didn’t have staying power.

Now, my dissatisfaction with browser toolbars doesn’t extend to browser extensions, which are an entirely different story. There are lots of useful ones that help me access FTP sites, Greasemonkey programs, and create TinyURLs, just to name a few.

Browser security is still a big, gaping chest wound for desktop computing. And having a toolbar just opens up another point of infection and isn’t worth the trouble. I’m actually interested in this topic and doing some research this week for a story about honeyclients for Information Security magazine. If you are familiar with honeynets, these are a bit different: they are automated search programs that try to uncover new browser exploits by browsing thousands of Web sites and recording what they see. Obviously, lots of fertile ground. In the mean, if you have any toolbars installed, uninstall at least the LinkedIn toolbar, if not all the others.

How to do your next teleconference

If you are like me, you probably spend a lot of time on teleconference calls. And like it or not, these calls rarely have everyone joining at the same time, so you end up spending a lot of time waiting at the beginning of the call for everyone to dial in. A new Web-based service is trying to fix that and make these calls more useful.

The service is called Gaboogie.com, and while it isn’t cheap, the productivity gains could pay for the cost of the calls. Here is how it works. You sign up on the company’s Web page with your email address, and you get an account with 100 free minutes to try out the service. You enter your participants names and phones numbers using your browser, and set up when the call is to begin. Then the service calls everyone and joins them together for the conference.

NOTE: As of 9/1/07, they are redoing the service and rebranding it under lypp.com. So not sure if it is still working at the moment.

Since the service is making outgoing calls, they charge you for each minute that everyone is connected. So if your call last ten minutes and has five people – including you – then that consumes 50 total minutes. You can buy minutes in bulk (250 minutes for $30, 1000 minutes for $80) to recharge your account when you run low.

There are a lot of Web-based free conference calling services out there that work the old-fashioned way: you email people a dial-in number and a password, and you have to wait for your parties to initiate the calls and connect in. (I have a list of them on http://yourpersonalgeek.tv if you are interested.) Gaboogie is the first one that I know that initiates the calls. You can create teleconferences in Skype, but it isn’t as simple and you are limited to a maximum of five participants.

So I like the idea behind Gaboogie, but the service still has some quirks. The Web control panel for the moderator is somewhat terse. If you want your conference call recorded, you can set this up ahead of time but then you have to listen to a recurring beep to indicate the recording during the call. That is somewhat annoying. Once the call is done, however, the recording can be downloaded as an mp3 file or as an RSS feed for others to listen to. (It would be nice if the mp3 file could remove the beep indicators from the recording, then these could easily become nice podcasts.) And the recording includes about a minute of music on hold at the beginning and about another minute at the end of the call.

All in all, Gaboogie is an interesting twist on an old idea. And maybe it will save some time on your next teleconference.

Where’s the remote (selling Web-based remote control)

We all have heard stories about that panicked user call in the middle of the weekend to fix a broken server or restart a downed connection. One of the most productive tools a VAR can use is a Web-based remote control productUnlike client-based products of the past such as Symantec’s pcAnywhere and RealVNC’s VNC, there is no need for software on the client computer, and the remote control session happens through a small piece of software that works with a Web browser.There are two main products in this space: LogMeIn’s Rescue and Citrix Systems’ GoToAssist.

You can read more of my story for eWeek here.

Four ways of remote access

IT managers have more choices when it comes to supporting remote users. The traditional remote-access marketplace has evolved into four different solutions that can provide secure connectivity. The four solutions include two different types of Virtual Private Networks (VPNs) and two different types of shared computing (terminal services and what we’ll call Web-based remote access).

This article for CIOupdate.com goes into more detail.

Microsoft tries to get open source

Here are some addition thoughts on Microsoft’s Technology Summit (MTS07). I wanted to jot down some thoughts, what I learned, and what the role of Microsoft will be in the coming years for the evolution of the Web and open source. (This essay was also posted to Techweb here.)

Microsoft still has this love/hate relationship with the Mac. Some of the presenters deliberately brought Macs, including one who ran Vista under Parallels. Yet when someone asked if anyone had tested interop of Vista with Mac OS X, it was clear that this wasn’t a focus. (And for those of us that have both, a continuing frustration.) For Microsoft to succeed, the Mac has to move from being a poster child OS, a necessary evil and some annoying relative to be tolerated to an actual strategic direction and integral to the company’s success. The people that have moved to Mac desktops are canaries in the coal mine. They aren’t happy with Windows for very real reasons (blue screen and security sinkholes come to mind). It continues to be a platform that is used by many developers.

There is a growing emphasis on interoperability at Microsoft, and they are clearly spending a lot of resources on projects (such as Windows and other OSs, new versions of Windows networking protocols, and new programming languages with older ones) but there is still room for improvement. You can never do too much interop testing. Interop is getting more attention, but still isn’t infused into the core culture yet.

Microsoft is a company of coders, and they respond best to an audience full of coders too. Coders are the heart and soul of what drives this place. They have always understood what developers do and think and eat and drink. Speaking of which, during one of the presentations, an Outlook reminder popped up on screen that listed as overdue the items “eat dinner” and “go home.” That resonated amongst the geeks in attendance.

But let’s face it — in the past several years, developers have moved away from writing code for single-PC applications and Microsoft still doesn’t quite get this whole Internet thing. “We didn’t understand open source and didn’t use the correct words back in 2005,” said Bill Hilf, one of their head open source advocates. During the meetings, the audience took them to task about lack of enthusiasm for various open source projects. I found it interesting that most – not all, but most — of the presenters still were viewing open source as competing with some Microsoft product offering. They need to realize that people are going to use both, and want not only choice but also the ability to freely code in both MS and open source projects. Don Box, one of the developer evangelists, semi-seriously said, “I humbly apologize on behalf of the 70,000 owner operators of Microsoft for the statements our CEO makes to scare all the open source people.” But there was an element of truth of course behind it.

The more that Microsoft can make this ambidexterity possible and successful, the more software they will sell. Some of the presenters clearly understood this, but others still characterize things as “us” versus “them”. Because Microsoft is a big company, it is hard sometimes to identify when or how a particular program or project will ultimately drive bottom-line revenue. Is getting more people to write .Net code going to bring in more bucks than getting more people to buy more Windows servers? Is getting Windows better at running PHP going to drive more revenue than getting Windows to become a more secure Internet-facing OS? I dare say that these aren’t easy or simple decisions, and sometimes they don’t get it right the first time.

What is clear is that Microsoft “is the most fanatically self-critical company that I have ever worked for,” says Hilf. They spend time even examining other people’s code, just so they can learn from their mistakes, at least according to Michael Howard, their security czar. “But I don’t want you to love me, I just want you to buy more of my software, ” says Hilf. Note in that statement is the assumption that we are already buying their stuff. But not enough: “We have failed to convey the power of our platform with the elite,” said Sanjay Parthasarathy, the uber-evalengist and programming manager.

They are trying to regain Web thought leadership with IE7 and IIS7, but the open source group (or at least the group that was assembled) has moved on to Firefox and LAMP. “Seventy percent of the Web sites are scripted with PHP and under 20% of those are deployed on IIS,” says Sam Ramji, the director of their open source labs. “We are losing these developers and doing something wrong.” Many of the attendees that I spoke to had a “nothing to see, let’s move along” attitude about IE and IIS: they haven’t used the new versions, didn’t really care, and weren’t interested. I surprisingly learned that a full copy of IIS7 has been shipping in Vista – did I miss that memo? Gotta wonder with all the stuff that I read (and wrote) about Vista, why this key factoid eluded me until now.

Part of the problem (for Microsoft) with Web development today is that it is too pluralistic. Microsoft thrives best when it can focus on a single competitor – Don Box mentioned how they are laser focused on Google, made even more ironic by a developer who works for Google sitting right next to me. “We are a lot of little companies inside here and one of them will figure out a way to crush Google. Still, they are the best thing that happened to us, and are going to make us better.” But focusing on Google isn’t the only answer, and the problem with open source is that a thousand flowers are growing out there, and maybe ten or a hundred of them will bloom and blossom into something useful. It is getting harder to keep track.

A corollary to this is that the c2007 world of programming is all about being able to teach new programmers how to learn new languages. This is somewhat of a challenge for the compsci departments of today, who are trying to find a new curriculum and state of purpose for their students. No one knows this better than Microsoft. Kevin Schofield, who runs Microsoft Research, called Microsoft “the world’s largest compsci department.” They have published almost a paper a day for the past 15 years.

It was quite a learning experience this week. I apologize if these are more like notes than a coherent essay, but I am still digesting what I heard, and reading the various blogs of the attendees and presenters. I have posted links to all of these discussions (Ben and Travis have the most complete coverage of the MTS meetings) on my strominator.com blog here:
http://tinyurl.com/267muy

Real time from the Microsoft Technology Summit (MTS07)

It isn’t often that I get to spend several days listening to the people that are creating the software products at Microsoft. In the past, when I have been to Redmond it was usually on a press junket with colleagues from mainstream IT and business media, listening to spin doctors and marcom folks who were trying to get “coverage”. This week I am in the company of people who write code, and have a deep knowledge of the tools, software, and applications, as part of the company’s Technology Summit.

It is an interesting mix of both attendees and speakers. They come from all corners of the world, and from various parts of our industry: corporate IT development group managers who have dozens of coders working for them, consultants that also develop their own applications, academics who run compsci departments, and so forth.

To give you an idea, I am posting links to many of their blogs, many of whom are so multi-tasking that they are coding while they are listening (or half-listening) to the presentations, and posting to their blogs in near real-time. So we have this new phenomenon, where everyone is typing at their tabletops. The speakers are also posting to their own blogs too and reading the attendee blog postings. The ones who have yet to give their speech can thereby self-correct their presentations, or refute what the audience has posted. It is so introspective and self-absorbed, all part of the new world of social media.

(Click here for a podcast commentary on MTS.)

Attendees

Travis' blog: http://www.travisswicegood.com/
Dianne's blog: http://www.srtsolutions.com/public/blog/60881
Michael Wise http://blogs.omnieffect.com

Bryan Hansen http://ldsarchitect.org/ Scott Preston http://codegin.com/blog/

Ben Galbraith http://galbraiths.org/blog
Dion  Almaer http://www.almaer.com/blog/
Channy Yun, Korea Crunch http://koreacrunch.com
Microsoft presentor blogs
Michael Howard, security http://blogs.msdn.com/michael_howard
Sam Ramji, open source labs
Don Box http://www.gotdotnet.com/team/dbox/
John Lam http://www.iunknown.com
Joe Stagner http://www.joeon.net 
Bill Staples (IIS) http://blogs.iis.net/bills/default.aspx

The Mac Web Ghetto

I don’t like to toot my own horn (much) but back in 1998, I wrote about how Microsoft was making it so easy to develop Web applications that soon most corporate development shops would think of the Web as something that originated in Redmond. Well, I was reminded of that realization this week when surfing around on my Mac, and finding out that I can’t get to certain parts of the Internet. I now live in a Mac ghetto as far as the Web is concerned, and like most ghettos, it isn’t easy getting out of it – unless you happen to have a Windows PC nearby.

I couldn’t connect to the Web site of my doctor’s office to make any appointment, because their site only wants patients to enter on IE and Windows. I am testing some security appliances for Information Security magazine, and some of their configuration pages also expect to see IE and Windows. I thought I would upgrade to QuickBooks online rather than buy some new software — but guess what? It only runs on IE and Windows! And the OfficeLive service from Microsoft – which by the way is very cool and is an absolutely free Web hosting solution – only runs on IE and Windows. The list goes on and on.

Fortunately, I run both MacOS and Windows here, so it is more of an annoyance than a showstopper. But still, the message is clear: if you use anything other than Windows, you are not worthy. Go the store and buy a real OS.

The Microsoft Web has been happening for some time. As I wrote several years ago, developers are building Web-based applications using tools and servers from Microsoft. They run on IIS with ASP, and use Visual Studio and of course assume that Internet Explorer is the intended browser so they write these apps accordingly. And if they dabble in Java, they use the Windows version of Java that doesn’t quite work on non-Windows platforms.

Microsoft’s tools certainly can deliver the richest, coolest Web stuff in the shortest time. Of course! That is their not-so-secret plan. They get what makes developers tick and then they supply the Microsoft-flavored crack that keeps their programming mojo pumped. It is a wonderful thing, no? Sun, bless them, still can’t figure this out. IBM with all of its Eclipse and open-this-and-that, can’t figure this out.

Well, there are some bumps in the road, especially with the latest version of IE, version 7. Some of the IE faithful are finding out that things can be painful under the Microsoft Web. IE7 breaks a lot of stuff, and not everyone has tested – or adjusted — their apps for the new browser. Eventually, we will all work out the bugs, I am sure, because we have no choice.

Remember the days when the Web was “browser-agnostic” – meaning that you could run anybody’s browser to view any Web page? That’s so over, so quaint. Now we can’t even build a Web that is “IE agnostic” to run on any two IE versions, let alone versions of IE back to say, v5, which seems like ancient history but is still pretty much in active use on many desktops today. That is one of the problems of the Microsoft Web: it flies in the face of what the Internet used to be all about: writing to internationally accepted standards that actually meant something.

Oh, come off it, Strom. (You might be saying.) So what? Look at what happened to Netscape, who took the standards high road? They got AOLized, and then sank after a cameo appearance at the Microsoft monopoly trial. Who needs standards when Uncle Bill can take care of all of us? Aren’t we better off with just running Windows?

Not really. The Web deserves better than to become yet another Microsoft business unit. There is a reason why I still use my Mac as my main business computer, so I can save the countless hours that I would have spent fixing spyware attacks and redoing my OS when it gets messed up with somebody’s idea of a good joke. But it means that I have to live in my Mac ghetto, and that’s a shame. Because it means that now we are locked into the Microsoft Web.

What becomes a conversation most

Lately, I have been noticing a lot more talk about “enabling conversations” with the use of various communications tools such as blogs, podcasts and the like. Let me take a moment to dissect this trendlet and give you my thoughts.  Back in the day, we used the phone to have conversations when we weren’t physically in the same place. Few of us have that luxury anymore. So what would you consider second best – maybe an email exchange? But we all get too many emails, and besides, it might go into my spam bucket for some reason, so you can’t be sure that I will get your message. This is especially true when I send out my Web Informant, not that there is anything wrong with sending it out. It is just that a lot of newsletters get caught by the filters and trashed, so you can never be sure that someone actually got them.  Another issue with newsletters is that they are one way. Sure a lot of readers will respond and I enjoy your responses, but then the others don’t get to read these responses. I can post these to another newsletter (and sometimes I have in the past), but that still is a cumbersome process and far from the natural conversation of a phone call.  Another choice is Instant Messaging. I have taken to using IM for those critical conversations where I need to locate a source or a PR person Right Now, and that works relatively well — for those people that I have their IM address, and are available during the day, or at least deem to say to me that they are available.  

Perhaps better than IM is the blog. Our readers can post at will, or at least, when we approve the postings to weed out comment spam. But not every reader is going to take the time to read our blogs every day/week/month. That is where RSS was invented, to alert people when new comments or content arrives. But many PR people still don’t know what RSS is or how to use it. Shameless plug: I am giving a talk next week in Vegas on this very subject at the New Communications Forum, you can find the information on the conference here:.

 Then how about podcasts? Some podcasts are recordings of actual conversations between two or more people — and some of the best ones like Steve Gibson’s Security Now podcasts are just that, him and Leo Laporte just talking for 45 minutes or so. Is this “better” than reading comments in a blog? It could be — and in the particular case of Gibson, you can learn a lot about security tech in those 45 minutes, and much better use of your time (especially if you listen while driving or flying) than reading a transcript or an article.  And finally we have video blogs, where you would think this would be the height of conversation since we are talking to a camera, not just recording audio. But to make an engaging video isn’t as easy as it seems, and I’d rather watch those pirated Colbert/Stewart clips than some of the things that I have seen posted on You Tube. Plus, finding the more relevant ones isn’t easy either.  So many of us have gone full circle on this conversation thing and are back to just calling people on the phone — perhaps first after IMing them to make sure that they are actually available. Gee, isn’t this tech stuff wonderful?