VCSY - A Laughing Place #2

Saturday, 23 May 2009

TICK TICK TICK DAMMIT
Mood:

cool
Now Playing: Driven Cuckoo by the Clock - Audience finds halftime comes after every quarter (stressed spring)
Topic: Notable Opinions

There has been a great deal of discussion as to whether or not VCSY could be deferring reporting revenue. Now, the Vertical Computer Systems company filing under a new accounting system gives some specifics:

"Where VSOEFV (Vendor-Specific Objective Evidence of Fair Value) has not been established for certain undelivered elements, revenue for all elements is deferred until those elements have been delivered or their fair values have been determined."

In the dotcom era, software companies announced revenue on every item in a contract long before the item would be delivered and often long before an accurate value on the item could be determined. Times have changed and companies must now comply with a more stringent assessment of value for every component deliverable within a contract:

"SOP 97-2, which was later amended by SOP 98-9. These rules say that when software and other items are bundled together in a contract, a company cannot recognize any of the revenue from the contract until the last item has been delivered — unless it can prove the separate value of each item. For example, if a company sells a software license with installation services and 12 months of maintenance, it must either defer all that revenue for 12 months or recognize it proportionately over the 12 months, depending on the particular circumstances, unless it can establish the independent values of the undelivered items."

For background on VSOE (Vendor Specific Objective Evidence) and the difficulties software companies face in complying with the Federal rules:

http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Software+revenue+recognition+on+the+rise:+technology+boom+expands...-a0173554521

http://www.cpa2biz.com/Content/media/PRODUCER_CONTENT/Newsletters/Articles_2008/CorpFin/Spells_Trouble.jsp

Thanks to various posters on Raging Bull, the readers have example articles for some self-education and edification regarding intellectual property and the value determinations thereof.

http://www.allbusiness.com/legal/intellectual-property/757921-1.html

http://www.tenonline.org/art/8905.html

More...

http://www.contractualcfo.com/documents/WhatstheBigDealaboutVSOE.pdf

http://www.nysscpa.org/cpajournal/2005/405/essentials/p38.htm

Posted by Portuno Diamo at 3:51 AM EDT

Updated: Sunday, 24 May 2009 12:38 PM EDT

Share This Post

Post Comment | Permalink

Wednesday, 15 April 2009

Happy Tax Day
Mood:

celebratory
Now Playing: "Worms in the Waffles" - Exploration crew finds old news they should have read long ago. (family internment))
Topic: Microsoft and VCSY

FYI

http://messages.finance.yahoo.com/Stocks_(A_to_Z)/Stocks_V/threadview?m=tm&bn=33693&tid=18704&mid=18704&tof=1&frt=2

Now, compare what you've read in that article to this:

http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=/netahtml/PTO/srchnum.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=6,826,744.PN.&OS=PN/6,826,744&RS=PN/6,826,744

and this:

http://www.vcsy.com/pands/responseflash.php

See how easy it's been all this time for those who've taken the time to learn the technology and architecture? You should see the view from up here.

Posted by Portuno Diamo at 2:59 PM EDT

Updated: Thursday, 30 April 2009 9:22 PM EDT

Share This Post

Post Comment | Permalink

Tuesday, 31 March 2009

Monkey see monkey doo.
Mood:

celebratory
Now Playing: "Spark Plug Polka" Dancers undergo electric shock therapy without commercial interruption (ritual mutilation))
Topic: Pervasive Computing

Take these 10 principles from the manifesto and present them as the opposite stand. That's what Microsoft, Google and Amazon will have to sell to the industry and the market. IBM has a very easy job and has a marketing hammer by which to allow clients and the market to ask the recalcitrants critical questions.

Simply applying a "not" in front of each sentence subject sheds light on the way traditional software companies have done business and how they want to continue operating.

1. User centric systems [DO NOT] enrich the lives of individuals; education, communication, collaboration, business, entertainment and society as a whole.

2. Philanthropic initiatives can [NOT] greatly increase the well-being of mankind.

3. Openness of standards, systems and software [DOES NOT] empower(s) and protect(s) users.

4. Transparency [DOES NOT] foster(s) trust and accountability; decisions should [NOT] be open to public collaboration and scrutiny and [NOT] never be made "behind closed doors". (The double negative means "decisions... should be made behind closed doors" to the anti-manifesto player.)

5. Interoperability [DOES NOT] ensures effectiveness of cloud computing as a public resource; systems must [NOT] be interoperable.

6. Representation of all stakeholders is [NOT] essential; interoperability and standards efforts should [NOT] not be dominated by vendor(s). (The double negative means "interoperability and standards efforts should be dominated by vendors" to the anti-manifesto player.)

7. Discrimination against any party for any reason is [NOT] unacceptable.

8. Evolution is [NOT] an ongoing process in an immature market; standards may [NOT] take some time to develop and coalesce.

9. Balance of commercial and consumer interests is [NOT] paramount.

10. Security is [NOT] fundamental, [NOT] not optional. (The double negative means "Security IS optional" to the anti-manifesto player.)

Of course, each party will argue they are NOT putting a "[NOT]" against each point. They will argue for more finesse. But, each finessing point will require a rationale made public and arguing against each of these points in public will damage each party's future posture.

IBM must have a large list of notable players already signed on to force these anti players to engage in "negotiations". Negotiations for what? What strength does the manifesto have behind it and how damaging will an anti-manifesto be for these players in the future?

The manifesto is a baseball bat corporations may now use against those who are posturing to build universal platforms but are angling to present proprietary lock-in platforms.

Google and Amazon and Salesforce, to name the top few, have found themselves unwittingly forced into posturing precisely like Microsoft. Not a good thing when you're trying to differentiate yourself for the beginning of a new age.

What do they have to fear from these?

IBM

Sun Microsystems

VMWare

AT&T

Telefonica

Cisco Systems

EMC

SAP

Advanced Micro Devices

Elastra

rPath

Juniper Networks

Red Hat

Hyperic

Akamai

Novell

Sogeti

Rackspace

RightScale

GoGrid

Aptana

CastIron

EngineYard

Eclipse

SOASTA

LongJump

NC State

Enomaly

Nirvanix

OMG

Computer Science Corp.

Boomi

Reservoir

Appistry

Heroku

Plenty.

Posted by Portuno Diamo at 3:51 AM EDT

Share This Post

Post Comment | Permalink

Friday, 27 March 2009

From the other side of the mouth
Mood:

accident prone
Now Playing: "Slap Stick" What they used to use on students (history)
Topic: Endorsements

But, seriously, folks...

Who's strong enough to make Microsoft keep a secret?

From http://messages.finance.yahoo.com/Stocks_(A_to_Z)/Stocks_V/threadview?m=tm&bn=33693&tid=18020&mid=18020&tof=1&frt=2

From comments to this:

http://www.microsoft-watch.com/content/web_services_browser/cloud_manifesto_is_microsoft_afraid_of_rain.html

portuno_diamo :

These are from a "cloud manifesto" on wikipedia:

1. User centric systems enrich the lives of individuals; education, communication, collaboration, business, entertainment and society as a whole.

2. Philanthropic initiatives can greatly increase the well-being of mankind.

3. Openness of standards, systems and software empowers and protects users.

4. Transparency fosters trust and accountability; decisions should be open to public collaboration and scrutiny and never be made "behind closed doors".

5. Interoperability ensures effectiveness of cloud computing as a public resource; systems must be interoperable.

6. Representation of all stakeholders is essential; interoperability and standards efforts should not be dominated by vendor(s).

7. Discrimination against any party for any reason is unacceptable.

8. Evolution is an ongoing process in an immature market; standards may take some time to develop and coalesce.

9. Balance of commercial and consumer interests is paramount.

10. Security is fundamental, not optional.

As reported by Mary Jo Foley, a Microsoft representative won't comment on whether these points are in the top-secret "cloud manifesto" Microsoft has been asked to sign.

I thought everybody said nobody can keep a secret?

What kind of power is behind a document that prevents Microsoft’s Senior Director of Development Platform Management Steven Martin from speaking?

One would have to ask Steve Ballmer which of these 10 tenets Microsoft finds so onerous. There seem to be quite a few in there that have run counter to Microsoft's demonstrated way of doing things, so I would have to say "all the above".

I would caution Mister Ballmer to use a rare better judgment and sign what he can see.

It's the things one can't see that end up bringing nightmares into the barn.

Posted by portuno_diamo | March 27, 2009 7:56 AM

Posted by Portuno Diamo at 8:36 AM EDT

Share This Post

Post Comment | Permalink

Sunday, 22 March 2009

X Marks the Spot
Mood:

a-ok
Now Playing: "Stupid Goes to School" Imposter finds himself surrounded by experts (reality)
Topic: Calamity

Sorry the text rendering on this site is screwed up so, here's a much more readable version:

https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=3810960476663402897&postID=2251760952382393551

We ask that you be patient with us in this transition.

WHAT'S WRONG WITH THIS PICTURE?

http://humourvideosonline.blogspot.com/2007/09/stupid-mirror.html

The following text was cut and pasted and didn't do well in the execution:

Poor mirror needs a reason to post on Raging Bull and Yahoo very badly. So he's resorted to chasing Portuno the Great anywhere he can have a chance at getting a response. Mirror intentionally holds a dying view on the new technology era. He must actively ignore and dismiss new developments as only a delusion and marketing hoax. Time has not been kind to Mirror's credibility. Time has crippled the Microsoft shareprice. Mirror's mindset is what is responsible for the Microsoft shareprice. Ballmer was an early proponent of Mirror's views. Time has now shown Mirror lost the argument. Now he's about to lose his job. Those he represents have lost much because the software industry positions they have tried so hard to protect have changed to what VCSY intellectual property predicted from 2000. http://vcsy.blogspot.com/2007/11/lets-do-ragingbull-tos-dance.html August 25, 2008 8:19 AM mirror said... Portuno has been completely discredited by VCSY's own management and has been under legal scrutiny for penny stock pumping. Be careful when reading anything Portuno says. He does not have a technical background. March 13, 2009 6:55 AM mirror said... Portuno has abandoned his delusional VCSY cause and you won't seem him posting about it here, or anywhere. It seems like there has been legal action taken against him for pumping this his favorite penny stock with lies and deceit. You should ignore everything he has ever written. It will all be removed in due time anyway. March 22, 2009 10:33 AM Anonymous said... Portuno says: Poor mirror is desperate for a chatting partner so he can justify his vociferous campaign against VCSY. Mirror missed being able to even understand the significance of the powers in VCSY's IP to predict massive, interoperable distributed computing which came to be known as "cloud" computing circa 2008-2009. Microsoft's entry into the cloud computing era is Azure which Microsoft announced November 2008. Azure matches claims of patent 6826744 quite well. Microsoft's hesitance to move Silverlight 3.0, Azure and Sharepoint as a full-force integrated concept indicates they don't have hold of the 521 patent permission. We see VCSY delaying the court date indicating VCSY is in the middle of negotiations. We see Ballmer talking about all kinds of "future" work but not able to say he's on top. "If I win..." is how he describes the future for him. And Mix09 fritters by with nothing but IE8 being released as a "surprise" that was sorely needed by Microsoft. Here's IBM and Sun about to strip the market share off Microsoft partners and Ballmer still has nothing to power his partners and client into the heart of the internet platforming concept TODAY. But, today like every other day since 2000 mirror has been pushing one view that's been continuously eroded as time marches on. Mirror missed it because he's been dedicated to the same attitude Larry Ellison used to describe cloud computing as a hoax and bogus and "been done before". Mirror's been shown by his own declared ignorance to be a consistent loser in arguments and events. Of course, Larry Ellison has long since changed course and become a cloud computing vendor. But he's very far behind the curve as Fusion shows only limited capabilities when compared against what IBM and Adobe are able to show. Those who believe like Mirror have suffered a serious setback in their ability to match the current track of those who adopted cloud computing concepts. Mirror continues to hold a failed technology view with no-one to debate any technology with him... while the market shows his technology views are all dated and wrong. VCSY's IP predicted the cloud computing age and the delays taken by VCSY in ending the Ross trial shows VCSY could play a card in the Ross trial that may impinge MSFT given the trail MSFT and CDC/Ross took over the years. Remember, the court hearing of March 18 was to show reason why Judge Solomon should not end with a judgment - that judgment being against Ross. Apparently VCSY has some reason to hold Judge Solomon from rendering their verdict. Sounds like a hammer sitting above the head of anyone who thinks they can simply wait and muscle VCSY out of their position. VCSY has all the time they need. Microsoft does not. CDC does not. As they continue, they must show cards to the industry as IBM + SUn and Adobe walk into formerly owned Microsoft territory and replace the costly Microsoft software with Microsoft-like solutions that cover the 95% of Office use cases. The longer Microsoft walks timidly in the web world, they are vulnerable. Mirror knows that. He knows the game is to play the hammering as long as they can to drive VCSY into accepting what Microsoft is offering. Apparently it's not good enough for Wade. So mirror's work is to distort and damage the public conversation about VCSY and the reputation of VCSY and VCSY's management and shareholders. Wade has had to keep things as secret as he can legally do. Mirror adapts to that defense by using it as an offensive weapon. Mirror characterizes the silence as "suspicious"... all the while unable to explain why his excessive time on message is supposed to be not suspicious. As he applies his work in the last few days before this next Ross case hearing of March 28 he has to be wondering who will blink first; Wade or Ballmer. Ballmer has Ozzie's harried and bewildered engineers pounding on him to get Microsoft into the web game before it's all over for Microsoft. Wade has VCSY shareholders demanding answers to questions they themselves can't create. Mirror's future depends on the outcome. I like watching the whole thing, actually. It proves a great deal to me and justifies my time spent writing about VCSY technology.

Posted by Portuno Diamo at 3:13 PM EDT

Updated: Monday, 23 March 2009 1:18 PM EDT

Share This Post

Post Comment | Permalink

Monday, 9 March 2009

The latter half of my Yahoo posting history
Topic: Notable Opinions

For some reason I can't access my Yahoo posts prior to March 23, 2008.

I'm posting this so the reader can at least thumb through posts from March 2008 and decide for themselves who's who.

http://search.messages.yahoo.com/search?.mbintl=finance&q=portuno_diamo&action=Search&r=Huiz75WdCYfD_KCA2Dc-&within=author&within=tm&off=4001

This is a good place to start:

The skeptic's view:

http://messages.finance.yahoo.com/Stocks_(A_to_Z)/Stocks_V/threadview?m=tm&bn=33693&tid=2570&mid=2570&tof=-1&rt=2&frt=2&off=1

and my response:

http://messages.finance.yahoo.com/Stocks_(A_to_Z)/Stocks_V/threadview?m=tm&bn=33693&tid=2570&mid=2587&tof=-1&rt=2&frt=2&off=1

Of course, we all know Microsoft settled with VCSY the day before the Markman Hearing of July 25, 2008.

Posted by Portuno Diamo at 5:11 PM EDT

Updated: Monday, 9 March 2009 5:23 PM EDT

Share This Post

Post Comment | Permalink

Monday, 1 December 2008

Driving a nail in the wall.
Mood:

a-ok
Now Playing: Walking on the plank - It's a short walk and a long drop (extreme violins)
Topic: Microsoft and VCSY

I thought I might take this time of boredom and waiting to do some housekeeping. I'm storing some things here to make it easier for those who care to pull things together.

-------------------

ITEM 1

Regarding 237056 http://ragingbull.quote.com/mboard/boards.cgi?board=VCSY&read=237056

It's funny out of the 5 speculative explanations Irule listed for the "confidential" portion of the MSFT settlement, there is only1 that is negative (#4) and that one is not confidential since all has been revealed about that item.

#1 would be knowledge passed on to Microsoft only if Microsoft had a real use for 744.

#2 would be necessary if VCSY would be shepherding and marshalling the use of 744 in MSFT's projects and future uses ("non-exclusivity" indicates #2 would be in place to segment the areas VCSY would allow MSFT to use to prevent conflicts with other future uses VCSY anticipated developing for themselves or other partners).

#3 would restrict MSFT's dissemination of 744 capabilities to partners and would work in conjunction with #2.

#4 is what a whole bunch of very energetic and insistent people appear to want everyone to believe. If it were truly so, why would they not simply sit back and quietly watch the company fall apart and die?

#5 is what Microsoft settlements historically turn out to be and the same bunch energetically advancing #4 with no proof emphatically insist #5 is impossible.

4 out of 5 ain't bad.

looking back to 237024 http://ragingbull.quote.com/mboard/boards.cgi?board=VCSY&read=237034

Irule lists 6 items Irule brands as "speculative". Apparently he doesn't know that just about everything in developing small cap companies like VCSY is "speculative". It reminds me of the scornful way in which Microsoft principals and offical apologists announced as "speculation" the rumor Vista was being rewritten during the first half of 2006. Robert Scoble was one of the most insistent in claiming such "speculation" was unethical. Scoble quit as an offical MSFT blogger when the company failed to back up his righteous indignation. It turned out the "speculative" rumor was correct.

So, the speculative positives are:

#1 could very well fit into the "confidential" definition especially given the scope and difficulty in assessing the true value of something like 744 as it relates to projects and products Microsoft has only recently been able to divulge. I seriously doubt MSFT and VCSY could come to terms with the bulk of what MSFT could be planning on doing with 744 for the future in the few weeks surrounding the immediate settlement for past infringement to be completed before the Markman Hearing.

#2 as Live-Mesh, Silverlight 2.1, Synch, various aspects of Azure inoperability and many other areas (including any emulation of AJAX MSFT might want to build to compete with the rich web-GUI industry built by open-source developers since Google introduced the concept in early 2005) would be a necessary component of a Microsoft web ecosystem, I consider 521 as the shotgun in this wedding. Without 521, Microsoft would be forced to use their own SOAP and SmartClient technologies to build out their web vision. These systems have serious deficiencies which essentially made .Net unfit for large-scale, deterministic transaction frameworks on less than ideal private networks.

#3 the similarities of IBM and Adobe products to 744 and 521 are striking. In fact, it's easier to see overt uses of claims similar to 744 and 521 in IBM and Adobe than were those same claims in MSFT. This would be logical if MSFT were hiding the use of 744 and 521 and IBM and Adobe were confident they would be able to deal with VCSY when the time came.

Regarding recent patent rulings, it would appear Bilski has little effect based on the two criteria of dedicated computer application and innovative data transformation as both are easily expressed by describing 744 and 521 uses. I would think a patent lawyer could argue the easily visible points much better than I've been able... mainly because they would be getting paid to do so and they would be writing the arguments without the distraction of "America's Next Top Model" and the History Channel.... and without the impediment of chili in the keyboard.

#4 whereas NOW Solutions emPath was able to integrate Microsoft and third part applications together for interoperability and place those packages on the web for SaaS deployment long before Microsoft was able to deliver such capabilities (not because MSFT lacks the technology but they could not openly show they were using 744 or 521 claims) I would think NOW Solutions has a very valuable platform made SaaS capable by 744 and 521. I would say emPath is a very valuable asset.

#5 as VCSY has had years to refine ResponseFlash, I would think ResponseFlash could prove to be a very valuable asset.

#6 the fiber optic is "possibly" a monstrously valuable asset given uses far beyond whatever Verizon may find uses for. In other words, if Verizon can make the FO patent work, there are many thousands of potential uses for such a capability for the future.

All told , I would rank the VCSY possibilities to have more substantive information behind the speculation than rumor-mongers had when speculating about the Vista rewrite... and we know what a dirty word is "speculation" in the technology industry.

---------------

Posted by Portuno Diamo at 1:12 PM EST

Updated: Saturday, 13 December 2008 4:44 AM EST

Share This Post

Post Comment | Permalink

Saturday, 18 October 2008

Mumps and/or Chicken Pox?
Mood:

bright
Now Playing: Dueling Diseases - Disfunctional family contracts a paradox of pathogens (acute itchybitches)
Topic: Pervasive Computing

This Microsoft lawyer can make this statement:

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13860_3-10068367-56.html?part=rss&subj=news&tag=2547-1_3-0-20

"I actually think the war between proprietary and open source is a thing of the past."
--Horacio Gutierrez, Microsoft intellectual property lawyer

...because Microsoft now has licensed use of technology that renders all distinctions about platforms and placement "arbitrary". And who better than an intellectual property lawyer to know?

Posted by Portuno Diamo at 4:11 PM EDT

Updated: Saturday, 18 October 2008 4:18 PM EDT

Share This Post

Post Comment | Permalink

Thursday, 16 October 2008

The Lesson to be Learned.
Mood:

accident prone
Now Playing: Don't c:!###$ With Mother - Nature photog shoots self in lip (focus group)
Topic: Calamity

Mister Frickaseed says "Remember what's been forgotten. You will then own what was never lost."

http://vcsy.com/press/releases.php?year=2000&month=03&day=07&num=00

Luiz Valdetaro, Vertical's Chief Technology Officer, stated, "The Emily Framework should allow Vertical to integrate its international portal linkage without the need for a centralized database."

http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/2008/pulpit_20081003_005496.html

"We’re entering the age of cloud computing, remember? And clouds, it turns out, don’t like databases, at least not as they have traditionally been used.

This fact came out in my EmTech panel and all the experts onstage with me nodded sagely as my mind reeled. No database?

No database."

Posted by Portuno Diamo at 4:09 AM EDT

Updated: Thursday, 16 October 2008 4:13 AM EDT

Share This Post

Post Comment | Permalink

Sunday, 12 October 2008

HAAAARRRRRR. Squeeze me parrot and varnish me leg, Thar's a wind blowin' through the riggings, me hearties.

20-Aug-08 02:31 pm by portuno_diamo

The question has been asked: "if the settlement had been substantial, what would MSFT's motivation be to settle?"

Microsoft settled to be able to use the technology that's allowing them to say the kinds of things they say now about their products and plans they couldn't honestly say before.

Without 521 and 744 they won't be able to extend their interoperability beyond COM/DCOM.

Two innovations made skyscrapers possible: Steel structural frameworks and elevators.

The analogy here is 521 allows the construction of lightweight and robust ties between all types of data systems and applications.

The other analogy is 744 allows the developer, user, engineer, governor to extend a functional presence to any place the lightweight framework build can reach.

Without 521/744 Microsoft would still be trying desperately to buy Yahoo to have breathing room until the March 2009 trial.

That's why you need to understand the technology or at least have advisors who understand distributed functional systems instead of "operating systems". "Operating systems" will be obsolete.

The real "killer app" is the ability to build out on the web... not closed proprietary platforms like Windows.
http://blogs.zdnet.com/hardware/?p=2417

The true "killer app" is the ability to interconnect and interoperate seamlessly across the web. VCSY IP provides the foundation for doing precisely that. NOW Solutions provides the realistic demonstrations for doing precisely that with Microsoft applications - something even Microsoft couldn't do.

That's why the Infinitek news is so important.

$300,000+ drove VCSY to bail the day before the Markman Hearing? That's not even logical.

The bigger question is "why did Microsoft avoid the Markman Hearing if they would have won the claims contest?"

The answer is Microsoft would have lost the Markman Hearing and they would be at risk of a summary judgment and/or injunction.

Microsoft needed VCSY much more than VCSY needed Microsoft.

Now they are partners. Reluctant partners, perhaps. But, MSFT is suddenly able to show and do things they could only talk about for years.

Now, if you'll excuse me, I have to catch a train toward Palo Alto. Talk amongst yourselves.

Thus Spake Portuno

Posted by Portuno Diamo at 10:09 PM EDT

Updated: Sunday, 12 October 2008 10:35 PM EDT

Share This Post

Post Comment | Permalink

Newer | Latest | Older

«	May 2009					»

S	M	T	W	T	F	S
					1	2
3	4	5	6	7	8	9
10	11	12	13	14	15	16
17	18	19	20	21	22	23
24	25	26	27	28	29	30
31