Make your own free website on Tripod.com
Blog Tools
Edit your Blog
Build a Blog
View Profile
« September 2019 »
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
You are not logged in. Log in
Entries by Topic
All topics
Apple Fritters
Calamity
Chinadotcom and VCSY
DD to da RR
Endorsements
Facebook
GLOSSARY
Gurgle
HP and VCSY
Integroty
Microsoft and VCSY  «
Nobody Can Be That Stupid
Notable Opinions
Off the Wall Speculation
Panama
Pervasive Computing
Reference
SaaS
SOA
The DISCLAIMER
The Sneaky Runarounds
TIMELINE
VCSY
VCSY / Baseline
VCSY / Bashed
VCSY / Infotech
VCSY / MLE (Emily)
VCSY / NOW Solutions
VCSY - A Laughing Place #2
Sunday, 20 November 2011
Microsoft Jupiter and Apollo
Now Playing: Opinions and Speculations
Topic: Microsoft and VCSY
A little deeper:

Remember the complaint of the Microsoft MVP's about the ADO.net data entity framework? They said that it was unnecessarily confined to handling only data representation (see below) at the expense of expanded incorporation of many other behaviors into the data object namely that of "governance (govern business rules) and business logic". They saw the linkages possible yet being ignored and sandbagged by Microsoft management and decided to say so publicly. Oddly they did so one month before the VCSY v MSFT Markman hearing.

Here is what they said:
==================================
Entity Framework
http://efvote.wufoo.com/forms/z7x3p9/
While entities are data objects from the perspective of data storage and data storage technologies, entities are more significantly behavioral objects from the perspective of entity-oriented applications.

The Entity Framework’s focus is on the support the data storage aspects of entity objects at the expense of the primary use case for entities in software applications, which is to govern business rules and business logic. Without recognizing this key architectural enabler and distinction, the ADO .NET Entity Framework team has built only half of the story into the framework, and has over-produced the features and functionality for the aspect of the framework that a data storage product team might be predisposed to.
====================================

This was the case before the settlement. Jupiter being a framework for using so many different languages together along with linkages to the COM OS environment plus cherry-picking dll functionality using P/Invoke makes the idea of developing applications without governance a dangerous proposition. Therefore I conclude Microsoft has solved the prime complaint the MVP's had in June 2008 above and Jupiter is able to provide business rules and business logic to the behavioral entities within the applications built.

That means Microsoft Jupiter is able to treat data objects as full fledged entity objects meaning they may be used to build applications under a managed process that may be automated. Very good. Very encouraging. Looking forward to picking apart what Microsoft says at BUILD. It's increasingly more difficult to hide how a development environment works at this kind of level because the patent claims are quite clear and the marketing claims will have to be specific enough to educate those developers currently in shock because they believe Microsoft is crazy for putting so much emphasis on HTML/Javascript and denegrating their established culture and legacy.

Posted by Portuno Diamo at 2:56 PM EST
Post Comment | Permalink
Interwoven
Now Playing: Opinions and Speculations
Topic: Microsoft and VCSY

 

 

smooth I think the meter's running on Autonomy. The longer they stretch things out the more uncertain the final terms become.

Given what we see in Microsoft's Jupiter the pressure is doubtlessly high on HP to get cracking on development and marketing new concepts to their clients. Microsoft knows the Markman hearing is in December and will play that card in any way they can to hurt HP. Same with Oracle since now HP is Oracle prey in ways Apotheker could never have imagined.

The journalists/watchers writing about Microsoft say Jupiter is either more of the same phony Microsoft BS or it is "the greatest leap forward since the introduction of the 32-bit Windows API in 1993". Microsoft management is either really stupid or really smart. At one time my anger toward Microsoft (and a deep seated distrust of them) caused a "really stupid" reaction. Now that I see what Microsoft's own people are speculating about Jupiter (presumably when none of them know anything about 744) I realize a company the size and weight of Microsoft is not so stupid as to commit their future to HTML5/JS at the current state of HTML5 work with nothing in reserve. Anybody who says they are doesn't understand the importance and scope of Microsoft's legacy development population. That or they're deluded by anger and prejudice as I was. I once was blind but now I see. Hallelujah brethren and sisterns.

If Jupiter is as revolutionary as all that HP has no time at all to waste and the only way HP will be able to apply Autonomy's IDOL and CAPS systems will be to get the issues resolved or face an escalation of the lawsuit while Microsoft ridicules and FUDs HP's reputation to every HP client they can take to a three martini meeting.

As you say once they go into the claim construction process the stakes rise substantially as both sides see what each other has to claim per the discovery process which is supposed to be wrapped up by October 12, 2011: Completion of claim construction discovery.

Then October 27, 2011: Vertical shall file its opening claim construction brief. That means the public will be able to examine for themselves what Vertical says about Interwoven's position. Not good for public relations at all and not good for all those who can read a patent claim and use a dictionary.

Hold on for the "prior art" opportunity? It won't come until after the Markman hearing. And the Markman hearing will determine which party owns the claims language. Autonomy/HP will take their chances on the Markman? Big risk.

I can assure you the USPTO exam covered everything Interwoven could possibly raise as a challenge or contrary definition to VCSY's claims. How can I be so sure? Because VCSY and MSFT went right up to the line on the Markman hearing without actually pulling the trigger. That means both sides (VCSY and MSFT) went through discovery so both sides saw what each other had in terms of claims interpretation and the characteristics contained in the target software. Any prior art Microsoft could have dug up went before the USPTO during the prosecution of the continuation which conducted a re-examination of the original claims before even considering the new claims.

And Microsoft had 8 years to dig up whatever they could find. Interwoven? I doubt Interwoven even bothered to examine the patent until they were served a C&D. That's how plausible deniability works; "Heck yer honor I didn't even knowed they was a patent like that." If anybody believes Interwoven could have discovered prior art Microsoft could not find I have some swamp land for sale that would be great for growing pumpkins.

Any new claims of prior art Interwoven could have dug up had over a year of opportunity for that information to be given to the USPTO during the continuance exam and the continuance was granted in spite of all that. So prior art from Interwoven is laughable. That's why it looks like Interwoven has gotten much more friendly.

I do think the HP acquisition decision did change things for Interwoven. They're running at the Markman hearing date like it's a brick wall and HP's standing there watching them run. They can't be all that comfortable with their new bosses watching over their shoulders. I would say HP advised them to wrap it up and get legal so they can get the show on the road. 


Posted by Portuno Diamo at 2:53 PM EST
Post Comment | Permalink
Microsoft Jupiter Apollo
Topic: Microsoft and VCSY

These will be various old posts made in various locations. You can probably find the original locations by searching unique phrases. 

 

MICROSOFT JUPITER and APOLLO?

 

arthur "Go behind the scenes and learn all about the new app model that allows you to create powerful new apps. All while retaining the ability to use your existing apps. "

That would be Jupiter which would be using XAML to encapsulate and abstract HTML5/Javascript and the .Net capabilities together. I suspect Jupiter is going to be 744.

If that's the case it means for all Ballmer's BS and bluster the Microsoft engineers won the faction wars and Ballmer is going to go out on the cusp of Microsoft's rising ability to interoperate between smartphone and PC/laptop/tablet. He will look like a hero instead of a sloppy drunk.

I draw that inference from this:

https://channel9.msdn.com/Forums/Coffeehouse/Jupiter/e7960a6237024c1598639efc00d8e394
Jun 08, 2011 at 6:09 AM
@Ian2:

As far as I can see, Jupiter is not Silverlight nor WPF, its another kind of framework that kinda similiar or compatible to Silverlight/WPF code.

so Sinofsky is right, that 'Silverlight', as we know it, is still a Browser/Desktop thing.

what he didn't say is, the 'Jupiter' framework will enable you to leverage your Silverlight/.NET skills to write Immersive (or desktop) applications in XAML/C#/VB/C++, its very very similiar, but not exatcly the same thing.

(-- Now THAT looks very much like arbitrary use of different language components to me. )

the situation is similiar to the relationship of Silverlight and WPF and Silverlight for Phone, you need to create different project in VS, then you can write very similiar UI/code...

(-- UI/code meaning the User Interface and processing code can be written)

...even sharing most of your portable code in a common library

(-- Bingo. Read 744. A "common library" containing different-objects/different-technologies is an arbitrary object library.)

, but the underlying technology are still very different.

(-- Cryptic statement. what "underlying technology"? "ARE" meaning multiple not "IS" meaning singular. Microsoft in their claim construction argued "arbitrary" to be defined as AN arbitrary object. Vertical argued "arbitrary" to mean ANY arbitrary object. If Microsoft handles more than one technology they are using Vertical's claim construction. So I take this to mean the common library holds arbitrary objects each built using different techologies. THAT is 744.)

that said, I think you can easily port a 'real WPF' app to the immersive ui, just host your WPF content inside an immersive HWND,

(-- see hWnd definition below. So you can port a 'real WPF' app to the UI by containing your WPF content in a container object.)

maybe you can play some trick with 'real' silverlight too, with COM interop or P/Invoke.

(-- Holy $hit. There it is. COM meaning Component Object Model http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Component_Object_Model which is Microsoft's overarching OS connectivity and interoperation capability. P/Invokr meaning Platform Invocation Services (PInvoke) allows managed code to call unmanaged functions that are implemented in a DLL. http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa288468%28v=vs.71%29.aspx  - in other words the "hook" into the operating system code. So what that one phrase means is to be able to use the Silverlight structure to embedded operating system objects and their various coded capabilities for platform interoperation. COM is the old world. P/Invoke is the new world. They are able in these objects to knit both worlds together and I would think "arbitrarily". That's 744.)

Hmm.. maybe Microsoft can have these little tricks offically builtin but that wont make much sense, because in the end of day, you still need to call some new apis to provide a real native experience, so what you get is just a hybrid monster, why not just use Jupiter ?

(-- Blink Blink. OK I'm sold.)

and, the Silverlight is portable, and the immsersive experience is very unique and not portable, you cant use them in the browser or on a Mac, it doesnt make sense to add those into a portable technology. the only exception may be the phone. but Apollo is the son of Jupiter IIRC.

(-- and the Jupiter construction system has a child which is Apollo which I would suspect would look like what VCSY built as a small footprint distributed interoperation system for the Apollo smartcard. It would be in keeping with Wade to force the use of a codename to signal to outside world that VCSY is at work.)

(-- You folks who think I "technobabble" have an easy solution: take this post to somebody you know familiar with Microsoft platforms and have them come up with a rebuttal. None of this "bogus" crap. I want a point by point dissection detailing why and where I am "wrong" or stfu. I get the feeling [although I'm not getting my hopes up that Microsoft will play fair] that there is a real reason for the BUILD secrecy and we already know the secret.)

======================================================
--HWND:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa979055%28v=vs.71%29.aspx
hWnd Property
Visual Studio .NET 2003
Returns a handle to Forms and user-defined Toolbar objects.
Object.hWnd

The Microsoft Windows operating environment identifies each form in an application by assigning it a handle, or hWnd. The hWnd property is used with Windows API calls. Many Windows operating environment functions require the hWnd of the active window as an argument.

Because the value of this property can change while a program is running, you cannot rely on its value (e.g., when stored in a variable).

hWnd is available in user-defined Forms and Toolbar objects and is read-only at both run and design-time. --

--FORM Object
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa975432%28v=vs.71%29.aspx
The definition describes what many would refer to as an object container where events may be trigger and sensed with designed responses to the events.--

--Forms
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa975571%28v=vs.71%29.aspx
You can use forms to give your users a familiar interface for viewing and entering data into a database, but forms provide far more than just an interface. Forms provide a rich set of objects that can respond to user (or system) events, so you can make it possible for your users to accomplish their information management tasks as easily and as intuitively as possible.

I can continue if you like. If you have any questions please ask and I'll dig through the structure as best I can and show the encapsulation process into objects. But so far I think we're seeing an encapsulation process using objects to contain arbitrary coded objects of different technology basis. That's 744 and Apollo being a child of Jupiter is 629.


Posted by Portuno Diamo at 2:49 PM EST
Post Comment | Permalink
Sunday, 4 September 2011
Mooning the Great Behind
Mood:  d'oh
Now Playing: "Moon Over My Army" Attacking the sensibilities (ironclad irony)
Topic: Microsoft and VCSY

Putting this here to make it easier to find and see. I suggest reading the "reply to" posts as well to get a more appreciable view of the discussion.

Come on admit it. Everybody loves a good conspiracy theory especially when it involves cons and piracy.


 http://ragingbull.quote.com/mboard/boards.cgi?board=VCSY&read=308789

By: moonpunk
04 Sep 2011, 02:43 PM EDT

Rating: post rating 0
Msg. 308789 of 308789
Jump to msg. #
Why are industry journalists so blind?

Why are they groping the elephant but refusing to touch the elephant's tail?

The following is a crude first effort assembly of what can be found by googling Microsoft's first attempt at the unified development environment Jupiter.

-- First we establish the current view looking backward:


http://www.osnews.com/story/24233/Is_Microsoft_Working_Towards_NT_Silverlight_Net_Everywhere_
* Is Microsoft Working Towards NT, Silverlight/.Net Everywhere?
posted by Thom Holwerda on Mon 10th Jan 2011 17:01 UTC
This process started with the slow untangling of the Windows codebase somewhere around 2002 and 2003, and it looks like it will culminate into Windows NT everywhere, Silverlight/.Net everywhere, all served by a single, unified application store.

And thus, backwards compatibility would cease to be a major issue.


-- Then we establish the historical view looking forward:


http://www.internetnews.com/dev-news/article.php/1478771
Microsoft Unveils E-Business Game Plan
By Jim Wagner | October 08, 2002
Microsoft officials announced Tuesday the first phase of their Web services suite for the e-business, dubbed project Jupiter, scheduled for release late next year.

Jupiter, according to one Microsoft official, was created to address the problems created by legacy and proprietary e-business applications found throughout the enterprise, which the official called "overly complex."


http://www.internetnews.com/dev-news/article.php/2215441/Microsoft+Mission+to+Jupiter+Rolls+Ahead.htm
Microsoft: Mission to 'Jupiter' Rolls Ahead
By Thor Olavsrud | June 02, 2003

The first phase of Microsoft's 'Jupiter' e-business Web services suite went to beta Monday bearing the new designation BizTalk Server 2004.

Described by Microsoft as the first major milestone in "delivering an integrated, interoperable, modularized, extensible, and secure e-business solution that enables companies to connect information, systems, people and processes," BizTalk Server 2004 represents the first phase of the 'Jupiter' code project, which until now has been known as 'Voyager.'

New features in the beta include:

Business Activity Monitoring, which gives information workers a real-time view of running business processes with the Microsoft Office tools they already know, such as Microsoft Excel
Real-time Tracking, which allows users to follow the real-time progress of documents and processes in BizTalk Server applications
The Microsoft Visual Studio .NET Development Environment
Microsoft Office InfoPath integration, providing a familiar front-end (Office) to BizTalk Server 2004 for entering XML and consuming Web services
Single Sign-on, providing unified authentication between heterogeneous systems and applications (Windows and non-Windows)
Human-based Workflow, allowing the integration of people and processes with a single orchestration engine
Business Process Execution Language (BPEL), currently undergoing the standards process through the OASIS standards consortium, BPEL is intended to simplify cross-platform interoperability for process orchestration
XML Web Services, providing ground-up support for XML Web services standards such as Web Services Description Language (WSDL) and Universal Description, Discovery, and Integration (UDDI)
Business Rules, for dynamically change business processes as the organization evolves
Enhanced Scalability through a scale-out architecture designed for "massively scalable" messaging and orchestration-based applications.

Microsoft first unveiled the Jupiter project in October 2002, with the intention of addressing the problems created by legacy and proprietary e-business applications.

"The challenge with today's legacy e-business software is that much of it can be characterized as proprietary, disconnected and overly complex," Microsoft's David Kiker, general manager of E-Business Servers, said at the time. "The 'Jupiter' project is focused squarely on addressing these issues. In unifying our best-of-breed applications, we are both simplifying the complexity of our customers' infrastructure and providing them with a comprehensive standards-based solution to connect, analyze and react to the information, people and processes that make up the extended enterprise."


Microsoft's Jupiter Project--An Inside Look
Written by Lee Kroon
Sunday, 13 July 2003 18:00
...Jupiter is Microsoft's response to the challenges that today's e-business software poses to companies with limited IT resources. For such companies, most e-business software is overly complex and requires skills that they do not possess. Much of this complexity is due to the fact that individual e-business products--even those from the same vendor--require different skill sets. For instance, companies often must use one set of development tools for Web application servers, another set of tools for portal servers, yet another set for e-commerce applications, and so forth.

In addition, e-business software products vary widely in their support for industry standards. Even when they do support the same standards, their implementations of those standards can vary in significant ways. This creates further complexity when companies attempt to integrate e-business applications with legacy systems and with each other. Such complexity makes it difficult to integrate business processes across an enterprise, much less integrate processes that involve suppliers and other business partners.

In response to these problems, Microsoft wants to do for e-business software what it did a decade ago for office productivity applications. Just as it entered a market filled with standalone desktop applications and took it by storm with an integrated suite--Microsoft Office--it now intends to transform an e-business software market filled with similar standalone solutions.


http://www.mcpressonline.com/analysis/analysis-of-news-events/microsofts-mission-to-jupiter-takes-off.html
Microsoft's Mission to Jupiter Takes Off
Written by Lee Kroon
Sunday, 20 July 2003 18:00

Of course, many IBM product managers are aware of the threat that Jupiter poses. At the same time, I rarely get the sense when talking with them that they understand the urgency of their situation. If IBM is to compete effectively with Jupiter for mid-market accounts, it must act now to create a fully integrated and aggressively priced WebSphere Express platform instead of the "piece parts" solutions currently in place.


http://www.cmswire.com/cms/web-cms/microsoft-pulls-out-of-jupiters-orbit-000174.php
Microsoft pulls out of Jupiter's orbit
By Brice Dunwoodie (@cmswire) Feb 18, 2004
More commentary and information on the recent announcement from Microsoft that the Discover/Jupiter project has been cancelled.
"licensing issues and other headaches while not adding much functionality"
From TechWorld

Microsoft has shelved its Jupiter project that looked to combine commerce, content management and integration technology into a single suite, because customers said they had no need for it.

While customers can integrate BizTalk Server, Content Management Server and Commerce Server themselves, the resulting suite could create licensing issues and other headaches while not adding much functionality, say observers.

Peter Pawlak, an analyst with Directions of Microsoft, said Microsoft will face new challenges trying to integrate Content Management Server with SharePoint Portal Server because the two have very distinct and different infrastructures. It also plans to integrate other pieces of the Jupiter suite with SharePoint Portal Server 3.0, which is slated to ship in 2005.


http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/90364/Sidebar_Microsoft_Scraps_Jupiter_E_commerce_Suite_Plans
Sidebar: Microsoft Scraps Jupiter E-commerce Suite Plans
By Carol Sliwa
February 23, 2004 12:00 PM ET
The e-business suite of applications that Microsoft Corp. had code-named Jupiter and planned to sell as a single product won't be delivered in the 2004-05 time frame as planned, company officials confirmed last week.
Trina Seinfeld, a senior product manager in Microsoft's e-business server division, said that "it's really going to be up to customers" if the product is ever revived.
Ted Kummert, vice president of e-business servers at Microsoft, sent a letter to 450 customers and partners on Feb. 13 to inform them that, after careful study, the company had determined that customers prefer to purchase their integration and portal technology separately, so Microsoft wouldn't deliver Jupiter as promised.
"Changing the packaging strategy does not in any way change our goals for interoperability between our portal and integration technologies. Our requirements for interoperability remain firmly intact," Kummert told customers.
He added that the "Jupiter vision" would be realized through the Windows Server System, which he called "an effort that aims to better integrate all of our servers technologies."

Kummert noted that customers and partners have made it clear that they want portal technology that is "architecturally unified" and "brings together" Microsoft's Content Management Server and SharePoint Portal Server. The organizations responsible for those products have been unified in response to that feedback, he said.
But there was no mention at all of the word commerce in Kummert's letter. Seinfeld said Microsoft is working on plans for the commerce market and expects to release a road map "in the next few months."

(It's suggested you read all the above articles at their respective URL's to get a flavor for the issues at the time.)
----------------------


There should be little doubt now Jupiter today is a reboot of their Jupiter effort in 2002-2004.

The key to questioning the cancellation of Jupiter back in 2004 is this statement:
"While customers can integrate BizTalk Server, Content Management Server and Commerce Server themselves, the resulting suite could create licensing issues and other headaches while not adding much functionality, say observers."

A study of the various parts and pieces (which are mostly all Microsoft) would tell us why the licensing issues would be such a headache. Obviously it's the integrating technology that's such a headache since Microsoft went on to spend billions in abortive attempts to bring forth useful integration interoperation over the years thereafter. Microsoft's integration and interoperation limitations from this period to 2008 is well known in the industry.

How odd Microsoft's vision and production estimates were around 2 years to produce the entire integrated suite. But it's taken 7 years to get there.


One specific thing to pay attention to is this line: "Of course, many IBM product managers are aware of the threat that Jupiter poses. At the same time, I rarely get the sense when talking with them that they understand the urgency of their situation."

I don't think they were too worried. They knew how it was all done and they knew the development and intellectual issues that would stop Microsoft and all others in their tracks.

 

 
By: moonpunk
03 Sep 2011, 02:52 AM EDT
Rating: post rating 4
Msg. 308733 of 308781
(Reply to 308732 by arthurarnsley01)
Jump to msg. #
I think the industry thinks Microsoft management has lost their ever loving minds. What doesn't make sense to the industry is that HTML5/JS is a UI framework at this point. It may eventually be tooled into something more inclusive but at this point in history Microsoft "appears" to be betting the farm on it. They are definitely not that stupid and XAML showing up as the common denominator in their recent division of labor within the company gives the game away for me.

So you can build a UI with HTML5/JS or you can build a UI with XAML. Either way a UI is content+form and the industry smokescreen mirror touts about HTML5/Javascript being an "automation" means works in Microsoft's favor to carry the "broken wing" camouflage along.

But anyone who would think Microsoft would actually abandon .Net after so much has been made of it is an ignorant assumption. Then again the cat is always fooled by the bird drooping one wing down and hoping around like it can't fly. It's an innate impulse. It's the same thing magicians do and we can't help be fooled by the fake signal.

So HTML5/JS OR XAML for UI (giving the MSFT developer greater latitude than mirror's minions since they can either ride on the back of industry developers or they can use Silverlight development) as the amalgamation of content+form. And .Net or COM objects or P/Invoke dll snippets to build the functional code. And there you have it in a nutshell: arbitrary objects of content form and function available in a single development environment. And policy governance of the objects employed within the scope of the design (UI) plus development (code) environment (framework) and you have a succinct description of 744. Then being able to replicate all that at whatever level of complexity you desire with a different UI (again in either language framework) plugged into a child system and you now have 629. The child to 629 plugs all that into abstracted language components to be used in the language of your choosing and on the derivative products grow from there by simply calling the framework components into being with the favorite language.

The discussion below is enlightening from that point of view since some of them attempt to come up with a conglomerated vision but they complain it's all too complicated and it's all been tried before.

They're right. But McAuley saw the arbitrating quality of XML and he used that to build a scaffolding within which all those complexities could be abstracted away.

"so is the industry thinking that HTML5/Javascript is a sort of sub-set to Jupiter which is acknowledged to be '744/'629? "

Perhaps they are beginning to think that way but most wouldn't know about 744/629 because it's never written about in Groklaw or the other pertinent publications and the original 744 license was so dismissive. So they might suspect a unified suite or some other such image that developers say when you tell them to combine design (content+form) and development (function). This will be interesting.

======================
http://channel9.msdn.com/Forums/Coffeehouse/None-of-us-at-Microsoft-can-say-anything-until-build-in-September
None of us at Microsoft can say anything until Build in September
Jun 08, 2011 at 9:26 PM

"They are also touting this as the biggest thing since Windows 95. That's a hard sell. Therehas to be a reason, and it's not HTML5/JS."

er, new touch shell, new touch UI, new app distribution/deployment and sandboxing model, new cloud integration stuff, support for a new processor architecture, new C++ APIs, new COM replacement/revamp? And new HTML/JS integration as well. Seems to already meet that standard, just from what we already know.
=================
By: moonpunk
03 Sep 2011, 05:42 PM EDT
Rating: post rating 3
Msg. 308766 of 308773
(Reply to 308738 by smoothsailing20)
Jump to msg. #
smooth I think the meter's running on Autonomy. The longer they stretch things out the more uncertain the final terms become.

Given what we see in Microsoft's Jupiter the pressure is doubtlessly high on HP to get cracking on development and marketing new concepts to their clients. Microsoft knows the Markman hearing is in December and will play that card in any way they can to hurt HP. Same with Oracle since now HP is Oracle prey in ways Apotheker could never have imagined.

The journalists/watchers writing about Microsoft say Jupiter is either more of the same phony Microsoft BS or it is "the greatest leap forward since the introduction of the 32-bit Windows API in 1993". Microsoft management is either really stupid or really smart. At one time my anger toward Microsoft (and a deep seated distrust of them) caused a "really stupid" reaction. Now that I see what Microsoft's own people are speculating about Jupiter (presumably when none of them know anything about 744) I realize a company the size and weight of Microsoft is not so stupid as to commit their future to HTML5/JS at the current state of HTML5 work with nothing in reserve. Anybody who says they are doesn't understand the importance and scope of Microsoft's legacy development population. That or they're deluded by anger and prejudice as I was. I once was blind but now I see. Hallelujah brethren and sisterns.

If Jupiter is as revolutionary as all that HP has no time at all to waste and the only way HP will be able to apply Autonomy's IDOL and CAPS systems will be to get the issues resolved or face an escalation of the lawsuit while Microsoft ridicules and FUDs HP's reputation to every HP client they can take to a three martini meeting.

As you say once they go into the claim construction process the stakes rise substantially as both sides see what each other has to claim per the discovery process which is supposed to be wrapped up by October 12, 2011: Completion of claim construction discovery.

Then October 27, 2011: Vertical shall file its opening claim construction brief. That means the public will be able to examine for themselves what Vertical says about Interwoven's position. Not good for public relations at all and not good for all those who can read a patent claim and use a dictionary.

Hold on for the "prior art" opportunity? It won't come until after the Markman hearing. And the Markman hearing will determine which party owns the claims language. Autonomy/HP will take their chances on the Markman? Big risk.

I can assure you the USPTO exam covered everything Interwoven could possibly raise as a challenge or contrary definition to VCSY's claims. How can I be so sure? Because VCSY and MSFT went right up to the line on the Markman hearing without actually pulling the trigger. That means both sides (VCSY and MSFT) went through discovery so both sides saw what each other had in terms of claims interpretation and the characteristics contained in the target software. Any prior art Microsoft could have dug up went before the USPTO during the prosecution of the continuation which conducted a re-examination of the original claims before even considering the new claims.

And Microsoft had 8 years to dig up whatever they could find. Interwoven? I doubt Interwoven even bothered to examine the patent until they were served a C&D. That's how plausible deniability works; "Heck yer honor I didn't even knowed they was a patent like that." If anybody believes Interwoven could have discovered prior art Microsoft could not find I have some swamp land for sale that would be great for growing pumpkins.

Any new claims of prior art Interwoven could have dug up had over a year of opportunity for that information to be given to the USPTO during the continuance exam and the continuance was granted in spite of all that. So prior art from Interwoven is laughable. That's why it looks like Interwoven has gotten much more friendly.

I do think the HP acquisition decision did change things for Interwoven. They're running at the Markman hearing date like it's a brick wall and HP's standing there watching them run. They can't be all that comfortable with their new bosses watching over their shoulders. I would say HP advised them to wrap it up and get legal so they can get the show on the road.

 

By: moonpunk
03 Sep 2011, 06:06 PM EDT
Rating: post rating 3
Msg. 308767 of 308773
(Reply to 308757 by bikeman66)
Jump to msg. #

bikeman How much longer? There is a risk to Interwoven in making the VCSY claims construction document public. It gives Autonomy's competitors an understanding of what Interwoven is up against. In other words: what in Teamsite is in question and how does it match up to what VCSY IP is able to do?

The meter takes a big jump after September 13 Build when Microsoft will tell whether they can do what 744 says or not. If no Microsoft starts their slide into the pit for dismemberment. If yes HP starts their slide into the pit for dismemberment.

October 12 is the point where Interwoven and VCSY know what each side has. Interwoven then has 15 days to debate whether they can beat VCSY's arguments. It also gives VCSY a chance to petition the Judge to add to or alter the case based on what they've discovered.

If Microsoft can do what 744 says September 13 to October 12 is 30 days in which HP will be getting hammered by a rejuvenated Microsoft.

If Microsoft can not do what 744 says those 30 days are more relaxed for HP.

But either way until the case is settled HP/Autonomy won't be able to say a word in response to Microsoft's situation regarding 744 without risking a slap by the judge.

October 27 is the tripwire because the public gets to see a preview of the core Markman arguments. That public view will tell Microsoft precisely what they can do to cripple Interwoven's image in the eyes of clients and journalists.

By November 14 Interwoven will have to deliver a knockout punch or the public view will be permanently skewed.

November 28 is inconsequential.

December 14 is deadly for Interwoven unless the November 14 document delivers the knockout.

So all said and done I would expect Interwoven to settle before October 12. If not they are playing chicken and Microsoft then has an opportunity to ally with VCSY to hammer HP.

All based on the following schedule:
October 12, 2011: Completion of claim construction discovery.
October 27, 2011: Vertical shall file its opening claim construction brief.
November 14, 2011: Interwoven shall file its responsive claim construction
brief.
November 28, 2011: Vertical shall file its reply claim construction brief.
December 14, 2011 at 10:00 a.m.: Claim Construction Hearing

 

By: moonpunk
03 Sep 2011, 06:20 PM EDT
Rating: post rating 3
Msg. 308769 of 308773
Jump to msg. #

A little deeper:

Remember the complaint of the Microsoft MVP's about the ADO.net data entity framework? They said that it was unnecessarily confined to handling only data representation (see below) at the expense of expanded incorporation of many other behaviors into the data object namely that of "governance (govern business rules) and business logic". They saw the linkages possible yet being ignored and sandbagged by Microsoft management and decided to say so publicly. Oddly they did so one month before the VCSY v MSFT Markman hearing.

Here is what they said:
==================================
Entity Framework
http://efvote.wufoo.com/forms/z7x3p9/
While entities are data objects from the perspective of data storage and data storage technologies, entities are more significantly behavioral objects from the perspective of entity-oriented applications.

The Entity Framework’s focus is on the support the data storage aspects of entity objects at the expense of the primary use case for entities in software applications, which is to govern business rules and business logic. Without recognizing this key architectural enabler and distinction, the ADO .NET Entity Framework team has built only half of the story into the framework, and has over-produced the features and functionality for the aspect of the framework that a data storage product team might be predisposed to.
====================================

This was the case before the settlement. Jupiter being a framework for using so many different languages together along with linkages to the COM OS environment plus cherry-picking dll functionality using P/Invoke makes the idea of developing applications without governance a dangerous proposition. Therefore I conclude Microsoft has solved the prime complaint the MVP's had in June 2008 above and Jupiter is able to provide business rules and business logic to the behavioral entities within the applications built.

That means Microsoft Jupiter is able to treat data objects as full fledged entity objects meaning they may be used to build applications under a managed process that may be automated. Very good. Very encouraging. Looking forward to picking apart what Microsoft says at BUILD. It's increasingly more difficult to hide how a development environment works at this kind of level because the patent claims are quite clear and the marketing claims will have to be specific enough to educate those developers currently in shock because they believe Microsoft is crazy for putting so much emphasis on HTML/Javascript and denegrating their established culture and legacy.

 

By: moonpunk
03 Sep 2011, 07:18 PM EDT
Rating: post rating 3
Msg. 308771 of 308773
Jump to msg. #

Why companies are flocking to HTML5:

Because Apple had no choice. They're stuck in a no win situation trying to run for the fence with nothing to cushion the landing on the other side of that fence.

http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2011/08/30/why-companies-are-flocking-to-html5/?section=magazines_fortune
Why companies are flocking to HTML5
By JP Mangalindan, Writer-Reporter August 30, 2011: 11:06 AM ET

HTML5 apps are often limited when compared with their native counterparts. In LinkedIn's case, the feature sets are similar but the user interface is noticeably less flashy. Some mobile device's assets, like the camera, remain off-limits to HTML5. "Generally, there are certain areas where native is going to do better for you, like media photos and pictures," explains Joff Redfern, LinkedIn's mobile product head. "It's sometimes a little harder to get at via HTML5. Other areas, like say, 'infinite lists' that scroll with dates that continue on and on, are handled a lot more gracefully in native code." Box.net's Levie admits certain programming tasks are still difficult to achieve in HTML, like getting the iPhone and iPad's built-in Safari browser to allow file uploads.

Amazon's (AMZN) Cloud Reader made waves when it was announced a few weeks ago. While it has a polished user interface and offline reading capability, it's still rough around the edges with limited web browser support and a lack of notable features Kindle e-reader users already take for granted, including text highlighting, notes and full-screen reading.

It may take years before new HTML5 apps tackle more rigorous tasks that process lots of data, like video editing for instance.

=========================

Pressure created the HTML5 project in 2003.

Why? Because Microsoft was going to strangle everybody.

http://www.mcpressonline.com/analysis/analysis-of-news-events/microsofts-jupiter-projectan-inside-look.html

Microsoft's Jupiter Project--An Inside Look
Written by Lee Kroon
Sunday, 13 July 2003 18:00

Over the last several months, news has been drifting out of Microsoft about a project that will dramatically change the software giant's e-business solutions. The project, which bears the code name Jupiter, will create an e-business platform that could be attractive to many companies, particularly small and medium-size businesses. In the process, Jupiter could challenge Java-based alternatives from Microsoft's competitors, including IBM and its WebSphere franchise.

To a great extent, Jupiter is Microsoft's response to the challenges that today's e-business software poses to companies with limited IT resources. For such companies, most e-business software is overly complex and requires skills that they do not possess. Much of this complexity is due to the fact that individual e-business products--even those from the same vendor--require different skill sets. For instance, companies often must use one set of development tools for Web application servers, another set of tools for portal servers, yet another set for e-commerce applications, and so forth.

In addition, e-business software products vary widely in their support for industry standards. Even when they do support the same standards, their implementations of those standards can vary in significant ways. This creates further complexity when companies attempt to integrate e-business applications with legacy systems and with each other. Such complexity makes it difficult to integrate business processes across an enterprise, much less integrate processes that involve suppliers and other business partners.

In response to these problems, Microsoft wants to do for e-business software what it did a decade ago for office productivity applications. Just as it entered a market filled with standalone desktop applications and took it by storm with an integrated suite--Microsoft Office--it now intends to transform an e-business software market filled with similar standalone solutions.

The Elements of Jupiter

While Microsoft wants Jupiter to become the Office of e-business software, it realizes that it will take several years and at least two to three versions to make the new suite comparable to its desktop predecessor. As such, Jupiter is both a product and a long-term strategy to integrate key technologies from numerous Microsoft products. These technologies will include the following:

A single development environment--One of Jupiter's main design points will be the ability to create all types of e-business solutions--including commerce, portal, and content presentation applications--via a consistent development environment. Naturally, Microsoft's Visual Studio suite of development tools will fulfill this role. Within Jupiter, the two Visual Studio tools that will likely play the most prominent roles will be Visual Studio .NET 2003 and Visual Studio Tools for Office. While the former product is already shipping, the latter tool is currently available in a beta version for download.

A single runtime environment for all e-business applications--As developers write applications for Jupiter, they will--at least in theory--be able to deploy them to a single runtime environment. To achieve this, Microsoft intends to integrate the runtime components from its Commerce Server, SharePoint Portal Server, and Content Management Server products onto the Jupiter platform. This would allow users to deploy and seamlessly manage a wide variety of e-business applications through a consistent set of interfaces. These interfaces would provide a single set of services for content management, catalog management, personalization, and Web site management across all applications.

While Jupiter will act as a convergence point for Commerce Server, SharePoint Portal Server, and Content Management Server, it is unlikely that Microsoft will discontinue these products. Just as the software giant continues to sell individual Office products, so it will continue to offer its server products on a standalone basis.

An integration engine for applications and business processes--Microsoft wants to position Jupiter as the preeminent platform for Web-enabling legacy applications and integrating business processes that involve both employees and automated systems. To deliver these functions, Microsoft will make BizTalk Server 2004, which the vendor intends to ship in the fourth quarter of this year, a core component of Jupiter. The application integration product includes improvements in the areas of business process workflow management, support for XML Web services, and integration with Microsoft Office and Visual Studio .NET.

Integration with Office applications--Naturally, Microsoft wants companies to use Office applications as the interfaces of choice to Web applications built on Jupiter. To encourage such choices, Microsoft is already developing linkages between the products in Jupiter and Office 2003, the next version of the desktop suite, which will likely ship in the fourth quarter of this year. Office 2003 features XML Web services that will link Office applications with each other and with Windows server products, including those slated for inclusion in Jupiter.

Clearly, Microsoft's plans for Jupiter are ambitious ones. However, does the company have the right stuff to make its latest brainchild a giant among e-business platforms?


=================

Fortunately for everybody Microsoft was stopped cold by patent law. It gave HTML5 a chance to gestate and develop. No it's not mature yet. But at least it gave all of Microsoft's competitors a chance to rope Steve Ballmer and Bill Gates in to keep them from trampling the web.

Now if you haven't read patent 6826744 I suggest now would be a good time to start.
http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsrchnum.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=6,826,744.PN.&OS=PN/6,826,744&RS=PN/6,826,744

 

By: moonpunk
03 Sep 2011, 09:17 PM EDT
Rating: post rating 3
Msg. 308774 of 308781
Jump to msg. #
"If it’s not clear from the technical details..."

"Before you throw Microsoft developers under the bus for failing to jump on the HTML5 bandwagon, you have to understand that they’ve invested a lot of time and money over the course of many years to learn all the technologies Microsoft has pushed, including Win32, COM, MFC, ATL, Visual Basic 6, .NET, WinForms, Silverlight and WPF, explained Bright. It sounded like Microsoft was asking them to throw away decades of experience and switch to HTML5.

"While obviously, HTML5 has come a long way in recent months, it’s arguably not quite ready to drive the entire Microsoft platform just yet. It’s an option, of course, as it is on iOS, Android and other modern operating systems with modern Web browsers.

"But it’s not going to be Microsoft developers’ only option, it seems."

http://techcrunch.com/2011/08/20/is-jupiter-the-future-of-windows-pc-phone-tablet-tv/
Is "Jupiter" the Future of Windows-PC, Phone &Tablet?
August 20th, 2011

-Jupiter is supposed to make all the developers happy, whether .NET (i.e., re-use XAML skills), VB, old-school C++ or Silverlight/WPF. (Source? See all the above!)

That last item is especially important, since to date, Microsoft’s only public comment about Window’s 8′s development platform is that it’s "based on HTML5 and JavaScript." As Peter Bright of Ars Technica pointed out, Microsoft developers were "horrified" by this news.

Before you throw Microsoft developers under the bus for failing to jump on the HTML5 bandwagon, you have to understand that they’ve invested a lot of time and money over the course of many years to learn all the technologies Microsoft has pushed, including Win32, COM, MFC, ATL, Visual Basic 6, .NET, WinForms, Silverlight and WPF, explained Bright. It sounded like Microsoft was asking them to throw away decades of experience and switch to HTML5.

While obviously, HTML5 has come a long way in recent months, it’s arguably not quite ready to drive the entire Microsoft platform just yet. It’s an option, of course, as it is on iOS, Android and other modern operating systems with modern Web browsers.

But it’s not going to be Microsoft developers’ only option, it seems.

Why does Jupiter matter so much? If it’s not clear from the technical details above, it’s because Jupiter may end up being the "one framework" to rule them all. That means it might be possible to port the thousands of Windows Phone apps already written with Silverlight to Windows 8 simply by reusing existing code and making small tweaks. Or maybe even no tweaks. (That part is still unclear). If so, this would be a technical advantage for developers building for Windows Phone 8 (code-named "Apollo" by the way, the son of "Jupiter") or Windows 8.

Post-PC World: Microsoft vs. Apple vs. Google

Imagine if Apple was to announce something similar, an easy way to port iOS applications to the Mac, for example. Right now, there’s no simple method for this.

=====================================================

"...up until yesterday I had no idea that Jupiter existed, so it doesn’t surprise me that many of the outraged developers wouldn’t have known about it either."

"In a nutshell it looks like Microsoft is looking to unify at all of the platforms that run Windows under the Jupiter banner, enabling developers to port applications between them without having to undergo massive rework of their code."

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:A6MKmzzqRUoJ:www.therefinedgeek.com.au/index.php/2011/08/24/microsofts-jupiter-a-panacea-to-developers-ills/+2010+microsoft+jupiter&cd=12&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us
Microsoft’s Jupiter: A Panacea to Developer’s Ills.
August 24th, 2011

If you’re a Windows developer the past few months of Microsoft’s various announcements about Windows 8 and the future of their developer ecosystem haven’t been particularly kind to you. With Microsoft announcing that their new Windows Phone 7 inspired UI for Windows 8 will be based on HTML5 and JavaScript many were left wondering if the heavy investment they had made Silverlight and .NET technologies was going to be wasted. It didn’t help matters much when Microsoft told everyone to wait until BUILD in September for more details, which let speculation run rampant amongst the community.

However it has come to my attention that Microsoft has been hinting at a potential panacea for all these woes, for quite some time now.

Back in January there were many rumours circling around the new features we could look forward to in Windows 8. Like any speculation on upcoming products there’s usually a couple facts amongst the rumour mill, usually from those who are familiar with the project. Two such features which got some air time were Mosh and Jupiter, two interesting ideas that at the time were easily written off as either speculation or things that would never eventuate. However Mosh, rumoured at the time to be a "tiled based interface", turned out to be the feature which caused the developer uproar just a couple months ago. Indeed the speculation was pretty much spot on since it’s basically the tablet interface for Windows 8, but it also has a lot of potential for nettops and netbooks since underneath the full Windows 8 experience is still available.

The Jupiter rumour then can be taken a little bit more seriously, but I can see why many people passed it over back at the start of this year. In essence Jupiter just looked like yet another technology platform from Microsoft, just like Windows Presentation Framework and Silverlight before it. Some did recognize it as having the potential to be the bridge for Windows 8 onto tablets which again shoe horned it into being just another platform. However some did speculate that Jupiter could be much more than that, going as far to say that it could be the first step towards a unified development platform across the PC, tablet and mobile phone space. If Microsoft could pull that kind of stunt off they’d not only have one of the most desirable platforms for developers they’d also be taking a huge step forward towards realizing their Three Screens philosophy.

I’ll be honest and say that up until yesterday I had no idea that Jupiter existed, so it doesn’t surprise me that many of the outraged developers wouldn’t have known about it either. However yesterday I caught wind of an article from TechCrunch that laid bare all the details of what Jupiter could be:

It is a new user interface library for Windows. (source)
It is an XAML-based framework. (source)
It is not Silverlight or WPF, but will be compatible with that code. (source)
Developers will write immersive applications in XAML/C#/VB/C++ (source, source, source,source)
It will use IE 10′s rendering engine. (source)
DirectUI (which draws the visual elements on the screen, arrived in Windows Vista) is being overhauled to support the XAML applications. (source, source)
It will provide access to Windows 8 elements (sensors, networking, etc.) via a managed XAML library. (source)
Jupiter apps will be packaged as AppX application types that could be common to both Windows 8 and Windows Phone 8. (source, source, source, source)
The AppX format is universal, and can used to deploy native Win32 apps, framework-based apps (Silverlight, WPF), Web apps, and games (source)
Jupiter is supposed to make all the developers happy, whether .NET (i.e., re-use XAML skills), VB, old-school C++ or Silverlight/WPF. (Source? See all the above!)

Why does Jupiter matter so much? If it’s not clear from the technical details above, it’s because Jupiter may end up being the "one framework" to rule them all. That means it might be possible to port the thousands of Windows Phone apps already written with Silverlight to Windows 8 simply by reusing existing code and making small tweaks. Or maybe even no tweaks. (That part is still unclear). If so, this would be a technical advantage for developers building for Windows Phone 8 (code-named "Apollo" by the way, the son of "Jupiter") or Windows 8.

In a nutshell it looks like Microsoft is looking to unify at all of the platforms that run Windows under the Jupiter banner, enabling developers to port applications between them without having to undergo massive rework of their code. Of course the UI would probably need to be redone for each target platform but since the same design tools will work regardless of the platform the redesigns will be far less painful then they currently are. The best part about Jupiter though is that it leverages current developer skill sets, enabling anyone with experience on the Windows platform to be able to code in the new format.

Jupiter then represents a fundamental shift in Windows developer ecosystem, one that’s for the better of everyone involved.

We’ll have to wait until BUILD in September to find out the official word from Microsoft on what Jupiter will actually end up being, but there’s a lot of evidence mounting that it will be the framework to use when building applications for Microsoft’s systems. Microsoft has a proven track record of creating some of the best developer tools around and that, coupled with the potential to have one code base to rule them all, could make all of Microsoft’s platforms extremely attractive for developers. Whether this will translate into success for Microsoft on the smartphone and tablet space remains to be seen, but they’ll definitely be giving Apple and Google a run for their developers.

 

By: moonpunk
03 Sep 2011, 09:55 PM EDT
Rating: post rating 3
Msg. 308776 of 308781
(Reply to 308774 by moonpunk)
Jump to msg. #

So how did the HTML5/JS panic start in Microsoft?


"Microsoft community program manager Pete Brown, "None of us at Microsoft can say anything until //build/ in September. No one likes that, including me. That's all we can do, however." "


http://www.osnews.com/story/24846/Windows_8_HTML5_JS_Comment_Causes_Panic_Among_Developers
Windows 8 HTML5/JS Comment Causes Panic Among Developers
posted by Thom Holwerda on Mon 13th Jun 2011 18:30 UTC

As Julie Larson-Green was running through the new Mango-inspired Windows 8 interface, she loaded the weather application with current weather conditions and forecasts, she made her now infamous comment. "This is written with our new development platform, which is based on HTML5 and JavaScript [...] And so people can write new applications for Windows using the things that they, that they - are doing already on the internet," she said.

It may be hard to believe, but that's it. This is all that was said about HTML5 and JavaScript during the presentation. Larson-Green loaded a demo weather application, and stated this application was built using a new development platform that uses HTML5 and JS. Nothing more, nothing less.

She didn't say this would be the only development platform. She didn't say this was the preferred platform. All she said was - this specific application is built using a new development platform we're working on. Considering this is a demo about new stuff, it makes sense to mention that for Windows 8, developers can now also use HTML5 and JS to write applications.

If you think going from this to "zomg windows 8 will be 100% html5 and js only!11!" seems like somewhat of a stretch, you're not alone. Comments from Microsoft employees since then would seem to indicate that, by golly, of course Windows 8 isn't going to be HTML5/JS-only just because Microsoft is adding HTML5/JS as a way to write applications. It's just that they're not allowed to talk about it until the BUILD conference in September.

The comment was entirely ignored by Walt Mossberg and Kara Swischer, and Larson-Green, too, didn't seem to think too much of it. The same thing was said in an article on Microsoft's press website - one aspect of Windows 8 is "web-connected and web-powered apps built using HTML5 and JavaScript that have access to the full power of the PC".

 

By: moonpunk
03 Sep 2011, 10:05 PM EDT
Rating: post rating 3
Msg. 308777 of 308781
(Reply to 308776 by moonpunk)
Jump to msg. #

Note: "Windows 8 will include something called 'Jupiter'"

This statement is from the URL in the previous post #308776.

It is important because it describes precisely the same situation Android finds itself in VCSY v LG and Samsung. The issue is that the development environment which handles content form and function is an integral part of Android - the ecosystem is inside the operating system.

That's a critical claim in patent 6826744.

Notice the same with Windows 8 from the above statement: "Windows 8 will include something called 'Jupiter'"

Or in other words the Microsoft operating system will contain the application development ecosystem - the ecosystem is inside the operating system.

Same thing. Or as they say in the beautiful deserts of Saudi Arabia "same same".

 

By: moonpunk
04 Sep 2011, 12:05 AM EDT
Rating: post rating 0
Msg. 308781 of 308781
(Reply to 308778 by arthurarnsley01)
Jump to msg. #

arthur There are two ways to look at it. Nobody knows. XOR. Everybody knows.

Everybody that's anybody that is. Developers are routinely cautioned to not read patents. They are admonished to leave that sort of thing to top management architects and attorneys.

The result is that developers become aware of technological advances without ever knowing where those advances originate. They appear to come from on high in the corporate body and those origins are never questioned.

But we have one little article from 2003 here: http://www.mcpressonline.com/analysis/analysis-of-news-events/microsofts-jupiter-projectan-inside-look.html that describes Jupiter clearly and in doing so clearly delineates the fundamental claims of what was to become patent 6826744 the very next year.

Work began on the HTML5 language in 2003 and was enshrined in a body of people in 2004 a month before the USPTO allowed the 744 patent.

June 4, 2004 WHATWG open mailing list announced
"The Web Hypertext Applications Technology working group therefore intends to address the need for one coherent development environment for Web Applications."
http://lists.whatwg.org/htdig.cgi/whatwg-whatwg.org/2004-June/000005.html

August 27, 2004 Microsoft Longhorn rewrite announced. Winfs out of Longhorn.
http://www.microsoft.com/err/technet/content/windowsserver/longhorn/

August 31, 2004 VCSY SiteFlash Patent allowance
See USPTO PAIR Site at: http://portal.uspto.gov/external/portal/pair
and use application number: 09/410,334
Look for allowance notice under Image File Wrapper tab.

Anyone who has any technology background from 2000 to 2005 will recall Microsoft's highly touted and well advertised XML efforts. Central to that effort was codename Longhorn with the radically new XML based WinFS file system. Three days before the patent was allowed Microsoft announced the removal of WinFS from Longhorn.

Now we see Longhorn coming back. How is that possible? The IT industry hasn't a clue. But they get paid to look so they look in the places where the light is brightest. They never think of looking in the darkness where the clues point.

I won't pick through the many various movements made over the past years for brevity. Other timeline artifacts can be found here: http://ajaxamine.tripod.com/index.blog/1682851/but-the-norton-said-i-was-over-rhineshticken/
I include the comments as they may inform someone somewhere. Who knows? Maybe somebody will suddenly know.

Who would have known? Only the architects like Mark Lucovsky whose announced exit from MSFT to Google two weeks before the official grant of the 744 patent and management like Steve Ballmer who threw the chair would know what the real issues were. Their attorneys would certainly know because it's their job to know isn't it?

Steve Jobs obviously knew what was going on. The heads of Mozilla knew. The heads of Opera knew. Whatwg was formed by Apple Mozilla and Opera. I believe they acted in order to counter both the trajectory of the patent and the obvious background work Microsoft had been doing in their attempt to take the XML market before anything could be done by any others.

VCSY was granted the 6826744 patent November 31, 2004.

VCSY was delisted by the SEC December 1, 2004.

VCSY was cleared and relisted December 6, 2005.

We all know Microsoft's ballistic bombing run after that. But the industry acts like Vista and everything else Microsoft tried to do from the chair throwing act through Vista's collapse is an unfathomable mystery.

And they are easily fooled by Microsoft's far too clever settlement the day before the VCSY v MSFT Markman hearing July 25, 2008.

So what do we have? A story about a tiny penny stock company surviving from the dotcom era that should have disappeared long ago according to common consensus. Ignorant consensus made by people supposedly expert in their observations. A patent that sounds "too broad" yet has secured a continuance in 2010 (six f**king years later) with confirmation of the original claims and grant of additional claims.

But who took any of that seriously? The management architects and attorneys in the various companies that would be impacted certainly did. They kept a stone face and feigned ignorance for the furtherance of their paychecks and stock options and their vulgar prides.

"Developers"? Seriously? How many developers today know a tenth of XML theory that every hotshot dotcom era junkie could recite in their sleep? Remember the "Digital Decade"? Bill Gates knew and what did he do? He ran and hid under a boardroom mahogany desk.

"Journalists"? Seriously? How many journalists write contrary to what their editors and advertising heads insist? And where did all these editors and heads come from? They came from the rank and file workers and journalists who wrote about the XML realm from 2000 to 2004 when Microsoft suddenly STFU about XML without explanation. Nobody knew. Everybody knew.

Google began talking about XML after 2004 because Lucovsky seeded Google with what he had been taught in Microsoft and the one tool (XMLhttpRequest) Microsoft thought might allow them to conquer the desktop. That work became AJAX which secured market share while VCSY was struggling for its life against trumped up charges by the SEC.

Yeah. Who knew? Everybody and nobody.

Today Mary Jo is flailing around trying to comprehend Jupiter. Joe Wilson is thumbing through his comments to see if he can remember what happened. Cringely is enamored with his own presence. Mossberg is a religious relic. Scoble is a precocious gadfly flitting about in the cold air of the Ritz Carlton at Half Moon Bay. There is an army of names who've been asked to look into the situation and today they're still just as dumb as a tomato and as silent as a cold stare.

Steve Jobs is dying. So shall we all. If any of us think death does not wait look at the faces of children in Africa if you can stand it. Then look at the harrowing photos of a Jobs made public to soften the shareprice shock of his shriveled stem rotting off Apple's corporate body. If anyone wants to know why he pushed so hard for HTML5 it's getting a little late in the day to ask him isn't it? His sainted presence is spoken in hushed tones. But silence is about to fall from the last breath.

Steve Ballmer is famous for throwing a chair and there isn't one swinging whiteboard marker able to figure out what pissed him off. Google gave turncoat Lucovsky a cushy seat and he failed to provide anything of real substance for Google beyond extra bits to goose the golden search engine and a simplistic comm package to make a browser look like a desktop while providing no real functionality at all.

Who knew? They all did. The ones who "count". The ones who "run the industry". They all did and they kept the secret as tightly as they could and they succeeded with the help of PR firms willing to write for money from the famous or for favor for those in greatest need of secrecy. All good soldiers following orders as tightly as Sinofsky'a instructions from the corporate halo. All just "following orders".

tick tick tick

drip drip drip

There is a tale about an experiment done in India on a convict sentenced to death long ago when the British considered brown men an expendable chattal. He was strapped to a table with a needle inserted into his arm and a tube leading from his artery to a bucket. The rigging was intended to drain his blood as a means of execution. Only the tube was pinched off. Another tube from a bag of blood suspended under the table was opened to drip into the bucket.

Some think it may have been cow's blood although that would be a blasphemy in some people's eyes. But what's one cow when such an important experiment may be tested? It may have been the blood of another man. Perhaps just another doomed soul. But what's one brown death when those in power can learn how to take a life with no harmful guilt?

The man died without losing any of his own blood.

He just thought himself to death.

DRIP DRIP DRIP

The legacies of those who knew and know now are on the line in this business during this time of technological and economic disruption. Their legacies depend on an aura of believability.

I do not know if Microsoft will bother to mention VCSY's name or give them any credit at BUILD.

I do not know if one "journalist" will bother to dig any deeper than the thickness of the paper where the boss' talking points lie.

I do not know if one manager or architect or attorney will stand any taller than the mark their superiors scratched on the corner office doorpost.

But I do know truth is not a commodity. Truth is a jewel.

I know there will always be somebody who is bold enough to steal a jewel and sell it to the highest bidder. And that highest bidder will put that jewel where it will bring that person the greatest attention. And then the aura of believability will have to compete with something anyone can see for themselves with wonder and reality.

Microsoft is about to unveil an idea that will be an obvious means of increasing software productivity. The idea is so obvious nobody thought of it yet unless they read the 744 patent. And Microsoft will want to use that idea to extend their empire and the fame and fortunes of those who knew and who know how it was built.

But in all the adulation that is certain to be shown there is only one question to be asked: Why not sooner?

Why was the world of IT and their many customers and shareholders allowed to waste so much money for so long when the world could have made a revolutionary leap in capacity and efficiency long ago when Bill Gates proclaimed he knew about the Digital Decade?

Instead the IT customers and shareholders were bled drop by loud drop into contrived buckets through plumbing that went nowhere and they all believed those higher in authority had the right and ability to run any experiment they liked as long as it proved a point from on high.

 

 
By: moonpunk
04 Sep 2011, 10:24 PM EDT

Rating: post rating 5
Msg. 308792 of 308793
Jump to msg. #
A Yahoo post claims some sort of explanation of Jupiter. I don't see it but perhaps the rest of you can enlighten me:

http://messages.finance.yahoo.com/Stocks_%28A_to_Z%29/Stocks_V/threadview?m=tm&bn=33693&tid=56998&mid=57003&tof=1&rt=1&frt=2&off=1
Re: Jupiter on. Jupiter off. Hold. Jupiter on.
4-Sep-11 08:17 pm
by mirrorfuk
This explanation seems reasonable:

http://blog.brillskills.com/2011/06/unde...

Only a delusional idiot would think VCSY's bogus patents have anything to do with Microsoft's internal politics.

==================

It does seem reasonable. It says precisely what I and so many others have been saying about Jupiter.

But "mirrorfuk" can only see political differences. ??? So what does that have to do with explaining the claims in 744 when compared to what's being written about Jupiter?

Of course there are political differences in EVERY software development group or corporation. That's what Jupiter is supposed to level out. What's wrong with that?

So here we go dissecting the article Yahoo poster "mirrorfuk" thinks refutes Jupiter.


http://blog.brillskills.com/2011/06/understanding-the-windows-8-jupiter-fiasco/
Understanding the Windows 8 Jupiter fiasco
Posted on June 15, 2011 by Jon
"Further hampering Dev Div is a need to perform to metrics that don’t favour stabilising on a technology, instead they favour winning new developers and pushing out new stuff, only to drop it and move onto something else the next year."
That's precisely the model for developers which is a huge waste of resources and time. Learning curves create a huge burden on any project. I would think a unified model would help stabilizing any technology as it can be metered against all other techologies by measurement on a level playing field. Perhaps that what scares so many who declare a unified system can't be built.

"One such flavour of the year project is Silverlight, which really pisses off the Windows team as it’s cross-platform, thus potentially eliminating the need for Window altogether."
Actually that's wrong. Silverlight has the POTENTIAL to be cross platform but what really angers Microsoft developers is that Microsoft seemed to intentionally limit that capability. I believe that's because Ballmer wanted to stay out of the way of 7076521.

"The pieces start to fall into place for the Windows team: A new, high performance application and UI framework. All native code, but leaning on the Internet Explorer engine, codenamed ‘Jupiter’. This means it’s all accessible via unmanaged C++, but also trivial to make accessible via a Javascript object model. Of course, they can’t just drop .NET given its pre-existing developer mindshare, so they create a managed wrapper as well, but the important thing is that it’s just a wrapper, so native applications won’t be locked out like they are with WPF and Silverlight."
I don't see where this is BAD do you?

"This new platform is deigned to be the flagship developer feature of Windows 8."
The phrase "developer feature of Windows 8" is precisely what gets Android infringing 744 as it has to do with having the development environment built into the OS.

"Microsoft decides that the announcement of the new platform must be a ‘big reveal’, and plans a new developer event, called ‘Build’ to announce it."
OK. And...

"They make it very clear to all Microsoft teams that nobody is to spill the beans before the big day, if they value their job."
Precisely how corporations keep secrets. People think it's impossible to keep something like VCSY technology a secret but it's very easy in fact.

"However, they want to generate some early buzz, particularly amongst non-Microsoft developers who would usually ignore a Microsoft conference."
Which is unusual because Microsoft typically can't come up with a way to attract outside developers.

"These non-Microsoft developers are extremely important, because a key metric that Microsoft managers and teams are judged on its their ability to increase market share."
Yes. Very correct. So this is one of the first times Microsoft has that opportunity.

"So they plan an early teaser event, at which the new framework will be demoed. At the event, they quite deliberately explain that it will allow development of apps using HTML/Javascript."
Sounds like something Apple would do. And that's BAD??? Heck Apple goes around seeding the population with prototypes so they can exclaim they are SHOCKED. Journalists oblige them with all sorts of free buzz.

"The reason this announcement is phrased so isn’t because the framework won’t support C++ and .NET, but because they want to ensure the HTML/Javascript message gets out, without being swamped by attention being paid to the other development options."
Well if that's really the intention they did it very subtly:
http://ragingbull.quote.com/mboard/boards.cgi?board=VCSY&read=308776

"The plan works, in as much as plenty of heat and light is generated the announcement, particularly by furious .NET developers who believe they are being abandoned."
Yes. They certainly have angered and dismayed their various developers of all types because the entire Microsoft population was whipped into a frenzy thinking Microsoft was going to go ALL HTML/Javascript and even the idea is ludicrous given the current state of HTML and Javascript.

"They’re kind of right, but not in quite so brutal a way as they fear. .NET will be supported, it just won’t really be favoured."
??? So how does this refute the Jupiter model? I don't get it. I suppose this one of the key statements from the article but it seems not just weak but seems to fail to understand what a level playing field is.

"...what will happen come Build-day? My guess is that Microsoft will push this new framework as the one true platform, that will solve the WPF/Silverlight/web and native/.NET/Javascript schisms by providing a single, high performance UI platform that combines the best of all possible worlds."
Yeah. Wow. I can see that's a disaster in the making. Certainly I'm being sarcastic. This is precisely what any software house would want. Every corporation would applaud this as it should mean their future development costs should be reduced...perhaps dramatically.

"Old-school C++ devs will be sold on the ability to write native apps and get high-performance."
I think the fact that such a system as 744 would be primarily effective during the early days of adoption at modernizing legacy systems including mainframes. Here is an example of modernizing an old language.

".NET devs will be sold on the ability to leverage their existing knowledge of XAML and the similar, though not fully compatible, WPF and Silverlight."
"not fully compatible"? If the platform is agnostic (or as agnostic as Steve Ballmer will allow it to be) then what is "not fully compatible"? I would appreciate clarification of that statement. If I can build an application and use C++ for one part and WPF and Silverlight in areas where I have most of that work already done what is the problem?

"Doubtless they’ll be some support for converting existing WPF and Silverlight apps to Jupiter, in order to soften the blow, plus the promise that Silverlight and WPF remain fully supported, even if they will not be receiving major development effort in future1."
??? In "1" the writer worries about Windows Phone under Jupiter. &44/629 provides for inheritance of the entire framework capabilities to children of the original application/framework. So I don't know why the writer thinks Silverlight and WPF won't be receiving "major development effort". Sounds like another of his political worries.

"Finally, web developers will be sold on its ability to integrate with their favourite, open technologies, easing cross platform development while allowing access to the full power of the OS platform."
Duhhhh... you bet they will. Of course. That's what is so striking about the use cases described in 744 and is a wonderful thing.

"It’s going to be a hard sell to please everyone..."
Really? If you give everybody a chance to integrate with all other languages and that upsets a developer? No. That just upsets advocates of vendor lock-in. Microsoft is going to unify their entire stock of development technologies with as much vendor lock-in as they can marshal while attempting to pull in outside HTML/Javascript developers. I suppose that's what corporations want but it seems counter productive to a libertarian.

"...and I suspect, as the Windows team wants, that it’ll be the old-school C++ developers who are smiling the most by the end, finding themselves back at the cutting edge of Windows development after a decade in the wilderness."
A legacy population is brought up to parity with the new population and that's suppose to refute the 744 method? I don't get what "mirrorfuk" means. I don't see it at all. Sounds like he's just plain angry the old developer islands are going to have bridges to each other.

"Of course, a question mark still hangs over the future of the Windows platform itself given the growing competition from Apple and Google."
I think this will make the Windows platform much more powerful than anything Apple or Google has or will have as far as we can tell since Microsoft is the only one to own such IP.

"The Windows team clearly hope that this new framework will be the start of a renaissance along the iOS model, but only time will tell."
Precisely. How does that "refute" what we've been talking about all this time?

"1. I do wonder what they’ll do about Windows Phone though, could Mango still ship with some kind of Jupiter support? Or will it be case of everything changing come WP8?"
Good question. I and many others are wondering the same thing. Some speculate Jupiter will spawn Apollo for smartphones. I would think so since that's the purpose for the 629 continuation; the ability to build a framework/application and have it passed on to a child framework/application of a different nature but inheriting all the capabilities of the parent.

?????

If anybody can see how the article's "explanation" says anything different than what I've been saying all along please let us all know.

 

 

 

 

 


Posted by Portuno Diamo at 11:24 AM EDT
Updated: Sunday, 4 September 2011 10:54 PM EDT
Post Comment | Permalink
Thursday, 22 October 2009

Mood:  a-ok
Topic: Microsoft and VCSY
For all new readers.
 
This is a sampling of a posting history to examine for Yahoo VCSY board:
 
19-Oct-09 06:51 pm to 22-Oct-09 10:23 am
http://search.messages.yahoo.com/search?.mbintl=finance&q=mirrorfuk&action=Search&r=Huiz75WdCYfD_KCA2Dc-&within=author&within=tm )
 
16-Sep-09 08:48 pm to 22-Sep-09 07:08 pm
http://search.messages.yahoo.com/search?.mbintl=finance&q=mirrorfuk&action=Search&r=Huiz75WdCYfD_KCA2Dc-&within=author&within=tm&off=181 )
 
28-Aug-09 03:52 pm to 3-Sep-09 12:30 pm
http://search.messages.yahoo.com/search?.mbintl=finance&q=mirrorfuk&action=Search&r=Huiz75WdCYfD_KCA2Dc-&within=author&within=tm&off=261 ) 
 
5-Aug-09 06:37 pm to 14-Aug-09 10:18 am 
http://search.messages.yahoo.com/search?.mbintl=finance&q=mirrorfuk&action=Search&r=Huiz75WdCYfD_KCA2Dc-&within=author&within=tm&off=361 )
 
18-May-09 01:11 pm to 19-May-09 11:45 pm 
http://search.messages.yahoo.com/search?.mbintl=finance&q=mirrorfuk&action=Search&r=Huiz75WdCYfD_KCA2Dc-&within=author&within=tm&off=781 ) 
 
2-Feb-09 08:54 pm to 7-Feb-09 03:45 pm
( http://search.messages.yahoo.com/search?.mbintl=finance&q=mirrorfuk&action=Search&r=Huiz75WdCYfD_KCA2Dc-&within=author&within=tm&off=1401 )

30-Dec-08 09:49 am to 2-Feb-09 06:56 pm
( http://search.messages.yahoo.com/search?.mbintl=finance&q=mirrorfuk&action=Search&r=Huiz75WdCYfD_KCA2Dc-&within=author&within=tm&off=1421 )

15-Dec-08 12:14 pm to 28-Dec-08 06:00 pm
( http://search.messages.yahoo.com/search?.mbintl=finance&q=mirrorfuk&action=Search&r=Huiz75WdCYfD_KCA2Dc-&within=author&within=tm&off=1441 )

7-Dec-08 11:47 am to 15-Dec-08 12:04 pm
http://search.messages.yahoo.com/search?.mbintl=finance&q=mirrorfuk&action=Search&r=Huiz75WdCYfD_KCA2Dc-&within=author&within=tm&off=1461 )

24-Nov-08 08:46 pm to 7-Dec-08 10:28 am
http://search.messages.yahoo.com/search?.mbintl=finance&q=mirrorfuk&action=Search&r=Huiz75WdCYfD_KCA2Dc-&within=author&within=tm&off=1481 )

21-Nov-08 07:33 pm to 24-Nov-08 07:13 pm
http://search.messages.yahoo.com/search?.mbintl=finance&q=mirrorfuk&action=Search&r=Huiz75WdCYfD_KCA2Dc-&within=author&within=tm&off=1501 )

16-Nov-08 08:28 pm to 21-Nov-08 04:28 pm
http://search.messages.yahoo.com/search?.mbintl=finance&q=mirrorfuk&action=Search&r=Huiz75WdCYfD_KCA2Dc-&within=author&within=tm&off=1521 )
 
15-Nov-08 09:36 pm to 16-Nov-08 07:37 pm
http://search.messages.yahoo.com/search?.mbintl=finance&q=mirrorfuk&action=Search&r=Huiz75WdCYfD_KCA2Dc-&within=author&within=tm&off=1541 ) 
 
There's plenty there. You need to familiarize yourself with his tactics so you can identify this kind of person on the web in other areas you may be seeking information.
 
People like this are an embedded systemic functionary. Purpose? Misinformation.
 
Apparently showing the posting history of posters is something they don't condone and won't facilitate.
http://messages.finance.yahoo.com/Stocks_(A_to_Z)/Stocks_V/threadview?m=tm&bn=33693&tid=26483&mid=26483&tof=1&frt=1 
 
and if you think you can trust this person's motivations:
http://ragingbull.quote.com/mboard/boards.cgi?board=VCSY&read=256002
By: mrrrfk  
22 Oct 2009, 01:15 PM EDT 
Rating: post rating 1
Msg. 256002 of 256005 
Jump to msg. #  
Just to annoy everyone, I went long again. LOL. 

(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long; ST Rating- Strong Buy; LT Rating- Strong Sell)
 
He's been marginalized so he no longer cares he's transparent and irrelevant.
 
Notice how he's acting now.
http://ragingbull.quote.com/mboard/boards.cgi?board=VCSY&read=256019
By: mrrrfk  
22 Oct 2009, 02:59 PM EDT 
Rating: post rating 0
Msg. 256019 of 256020 
(Reply to 256016 by RaceRock
Jump to msg. #  
You longs should focus more on the Infinitek NAVPath/emPath Microsoft Dynamics angle. Not as exciting or grand in terms of immediate potential, but at least there's substance there. 

Infinitek is a reseller of Microsoft Dynamics NAV, a package of .Net based applications with the ability to plug in optional applications from Microsoft's "partners" of which Now Solutions is one. 

Evidence points to emPath/NAVPath being offered by Infinitek as an optional HRMS application that can be added to the package. 

If emPath is really that good, this kind of exposure could find a entrance to a huge market. I don't see an immediate increase in revenues from this, but it could be an area of ongoing growth. 

Then maybe, Now Solutions could blossom, maybe even sold off. Who knows?

(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long; ST Rating- Buy; LT Rating- Sell)
 
Additional feedback:
http://ragingbull.quote.com/mboard/boards.cgi?board=VCSY&read=256028 
 
Notice the response: 
http://ragingbull.quote.com/mboard/boards.cgi?board=VCSY&read=256033 
 
This attempt to mitigate his past comments and statements is what is glaring given the shareprice rise and volume. Something has changed in his future and it doesn't look like he'll be having as much fun. 
 
If you don't actively monitor and assess who posts what as you're trying to glean information from public message forums, you're going to get rolled by those who will lie straight to your face... like the person we're focused on in this posting history. 
 
http://messages.finance.yahoo.com/Stocks_(A_to_Z)/Stocks_V/threadview?m=tm&bn=33693&tid=26423&mid=26525&tof=1&frt=1 

Posted by Portuno Diamo at 12:17 PM EDT
Updated: Thursday, 22 October 2009 3:48 PM EDT
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
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
Post Comment | Permalink
Tuesday, 16 September 2008
Tweaking the Teats on the Old Bored Hog
Mood:  incredulous
Now Playing: Slappin' Granny - Newbies in the old folks home get rowdy (missed manners)
Topic: Microsoft and VCSY

How much ya wanna bet Windows 7 turns out to be Vista + Longhorn?

Ready for the pop quiz, class? Let's build a little formula so we can evaluate the future:

Where: (Longhorn - (6826744+ 7076521)) = 0 and (Vista - Longhorn) = funk

Then: 6826744 + Vista = Windows(7)

Windows 7 hits Milestone 3
Posted by Mary Jo Foley @ 11:50 am
September 16th, 2008

Home Groups — the functionality formerly known in “Longhorn”/Vista as “Castle” — is part of the new Windows 7 build.

Windows 7 does not look or feel like a major departure from Windows Vista.

(more at URL)
------

If you're going to try to follow all this, you first need to nail some thumbtacks to the wall with some yarn, some dates and some events (maybe even some dates of your own from what you've seen and heard - wouldn't THAT be exciting, kids? Kind of like Harry HomeDetective.) and start tracking this stuff like a big game hunter.

Why? Because it is a big game. A BIG game.

http://ajaxamine.tripod.com/index.blog?topic_id=1089847

Either that or sit back in the Buick and let the dynaflow transmission do the work. Just listen to the radidio.

Patent 744 is all about enclosing the operating arena in a life-long ecology where all is affiliated and known. This method in and of itself is inherently more secure as anyone not affiliated simply can't get in without affiliation credentials. When something like the security system VCSY has rights to (Tecsec and ImmuneApp ) envelopes the ecology, you have a virtual cocooned community for living software.

You juniors have a whole lot to learn since you've been ignorant for so long. Do some serious study instead of shaking your head at VCSY's small size. Size is in the bite, not the bark.


Posted by Portuno Diamo at 10:07 PM EDT
Updated: Tuesday, 16 September 2008 11:16 PM EDT
Post Comment | Permalink
Wednesday, 10 September 2008
Dear Old Mom's in the Witless Protection Program
Mood:  hug me
Now Playing: Working Girl - Down and outter takes on new biz (rerun)
Topic: Microsoft and VCSY

Biztalk has long been a personal marker for me; Something I could always use to determine whether Microsoft was able to work around MLE.

http://clearstation.etrade.com/cgi-bin/bbs?post_id=1999468&usernm=Portuno_Diamo.

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

Biztalk was .Net's chauffer to bring Microsoft into corporations to build large interoperational frameworks. The XML Web Services concept has been a major effort within Microsoft for over six years.

http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/press/2002/Apr02/04-10UmbrellaPR.mspx

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

But Biztalk has long been considered a "failure" (note how few customers Microsoft Biztalk has even after such a long time:"over 7000 customers" http://www.microsoft.com/biztalk/en/us/default.aspx ) because it could not be interoperational across the board - across any platform on any network basis. Like I said, it's been a personal marker for me as it was the canary in the coal mine which would tell me immediately if Microsoft was able to develop something that would do what MLE/Emily (later to become patent 7076521) could do ... aka a "workaround".

http://ragingbull.quote.com/mboard/boards.cgi?board=VCSY&read=113876

All this time and Microsoft is only now able to speak of Biztalk with some form of nascent, budding pride.

Read about Microsoft's Biztalk future now after the settlement with VCSY.

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

http://www.microsoft-watch.com/content/server/more_biztalk_coming_in_2009.html

September 8, 2008 2:05 PM

by Joe Wilcox

More BizTalk Coming in 2009

News Brief. I had wondered why Microsoft planned BizTalk Server 2006 R3. The renamed BizTalk Server 2009 makes more sense.

 

Microsoft revealed the renaming today. A 2006 product would have been out of place shipped in 2008 or 2009.

The change moves BizTalk from a minor release to new full version. Microsoft released BizTalk Server 2006 R2 a year ago this week, on Sept. 10, 2007. The new version is expected to ship during the first half of 2009. A public CTP, or Community Technology Preview, is planned for later this year.

The new nomenclature is about more than just versions: It reflects how BizTalk is growing up. There have been plenty of Microsoft server software changes that a new BizTalk version should support.

My eWEEK colleage Darryl Taft has the skinny on BizTalk Server 2009. But in brief, the new software will support:

Oslo modeling platform

Windows Server 2008

Hyper-V Server 2008

.NET Framework 3.5 Service Pack 1

SQL Server 2008

Visual Studio SP1

Team Foundation Server

Microsoft claims there are 8,200 BizTalk customers today.

Please read Darryl's story for full details. Microsoft also has posted a Q&A on its PressPass site.

Darryll's story: http://www.eweek.com/c/a/Enterprise-Applications/Microsoft-Announces-BizTalk-Server-2009/

Microsoft's Q&A: http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/features/2008/sep08/09-05BizTalk.mspx

Biztalk was a precursor to Sharepoint.

Biztalk history:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_BizTalk_Server

NOTE: "Architecture

The BizTalk Server runtime is built on a publish/subscribe architecture, sometimes called "content-based publish/subscribe". Messages are published into the system, and then received by one or more active subscribers."

Hmmm. Messaging affiliation. Sound like anything we know? Biztalk has always been a good idea poorly done. It's never been able to scale well and has always been kind of a "wanna be" in Microsoft products. As Hoe Wilcox (woops, typo!) notes Biztalk has 8200 Biztalk customers today. All that's about to change.

It's no longer IF VCSY technology is being used to advance Microsoft products beyond their crippled state to walk again. No miracle. No mystery. The only mystery is WHEN will VCSY release news about what's going on.

From the Wikipedia article:

"Adapters

BizTalk uses adapters for communications with different protocols, and specific software products such as Sharepoint. Some of the adapters that were included in Server 2006 product included the Base EDI (Covast), File, HTTP, FTP, SMTP, POP3, SOAP, SQL, MSMQT, Web Services Enhancements (WSE) 2.0, and the Windows SharePoint Service (WSS) adapters. Some are available through third parties."

"Adapters" are a Microsoft euphemism for middleware packages. Middleware connects data resources of one type with data resources of another type so the processing parts on either side may interoperate with each other. 521 is dynamic middleware which provides not only the ability to interconnect different data resources, it provides a pliable and granular processing method BETWEEN the disparate data resources... placing processing power precisely where it need be used.

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

Here's a Biztalk discussion forum: http://www.biztalkgurus.com/

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

http://www.networkworld.com/news/2008/090808-microsoft-biztalk.html?fsrc=netflash-rss

Microsoft BizTalk gets surprise reprieve, new road map

Host of new features coming early next year in version upgrade

By John Fontana , Network World , 09/08/2008

Microsoft Friday reversed course on the fate of BizTalk Server, renaming the next version and setting a road map that calls for a major releases of the middleware every two years.

The decision to continue developing the Microsoft middleware came as a surprise to some, as BizTalk was to be a launching pad for Microsoft's forthcoming "Oslo" technologies that include messaging (Windows Communications Foundation), workflow (Windows Workflow Foundation) and modeling tools.

"It is pretty surprising and I have not seen this big a reversal from Microsoft in a while," says Rob Helm, an analyst with independent analyst firm Directions on Microsoft. "They might be reluctant to yank what is now a fairly successful product for an unproven technology platform."

Microsoft says what was supposed to be BizTalk Server 2006 R3 will now be called BizTalk Server 2009. The full release is slated to ship in the first half of next year. In addition, the company says it will provide details on another new version, code-named BizTalk 7, in the early part of next year.

 

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

Ahhhh... so now we get another hint at what "7" means to Microsoft.

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

http://star-techcentral.com/tech/story.asp?file=/2008/8/13/corpit/20080813111019&sec=corpit

Wednesday August 13, 2008

Booster for cloud computing

KUALA LUMPUR: Microsoft has developed the building blocks that software developers will need when writing cloud computing applications.

Currently in its beta stage, the product will only be detailed at the upcoming Microsoft Professional Developers Conference on Oct 27 in Los Angeles, an annual event organised by the software giant.

At Tech.Ed SEA 2008 here on Tuesday, Microsoft senior technical evangelist Nigel Watling said Microsoft has spent a year developing the product, tentatively named BizTalk Services.

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

So now the marker is become a foundation stone.

Congratulations, Microsoft. You finally figured out what you needed to build a next generation framework. It certainly took you long enough.


Posted by Portuno Diamo at 10:03 AM EDT
Updated: Wednesday, 10 September 2008 11:03 AM EDT
Post Comment | Permalink
Saturday, 30 August 2008
This is why we have blogs
Mood:  bright
Now Playing: Dancing With The Elephant - So you REALLY think you can dance? (politics at the zoo)
Topic: Microsoft and VCSY

Just putting this here so you can find information others want to bury:

And here's the conversation on one order:

223697
http://ragingbull.quote.com/mboard/boards.cgi?board=VCSY&read=223697&submit=Go&endat=223879&numposts=60

223837
http://ragingbull.quote.com/mboard/boards.cgi?board=VCSY&read=223837&submit=Go

223839
http://ragingbull.quote.com/mboard/boards.cgi?board=VCSY&read=223839+&submit=Go

223862
http://ragingbull.quote.com/mboard/boards.cgi?board=VCSY&read=223862&submit=Go

223850
http://ragingbull.quote.com/mboard/boards.cgi?board=VCSY&read=223850&submit=Go

or you can read it in the reverse order. Ain't computers wonderful?

http://ragingbull.quote.com/mboard/boards.cgi?board=VCSY&read=223850&submit=Go

By: BIFT1
30 Aug 2008, 01:15 PM EDT
Msg. 223850
 

How is this for the closing the deal. VSCY had their number and MSFT had theirs'. Deadlock...in comes the Sharepoint Motion along with Amber Hatfield Rovner and within 6 weeks an agreement was reached.

http://ragingbull.quote.com/mboard/boards.cgi?board=VCSY&read=223862&submit=Go

By: BIFT1
30 Aug 2008, 01:27 PM EDT
Msg. 223862
  

Also from Amber Hatfield Rovner's firm.

http://www.weil.com/practiceareas/detail.aspx?service=2536

Technology & IP Transactions

Acquired a tradition of excellence in complex licensing and technology transactions

Broad expertise includes a wide variety of transactions ranging from outsourcing, joint ventures, technology development and licensing, strategic alliances, professional services agreements and e-commerce agreements to intellectual property audits and due diligence

Represent clients in all stages of development, from start-ups to established companies, in technology fields as diverse as pharmaceuticals, software, hardware, semiconductors, and consumer electronics

 

http://ragingbull.quote.com/mboard/boards.cgi?board=VCSY&read=223839+&submit=Go

By: BIFT1
30 Aug 2008, 01:00 PM EDT
Msg. 223839
 

Why Amber Hatfield Rovner came on board for MSFT. (used by MSFT in the past)

To work the settlement agreement?

http://www.weil.com/practiceareas/detail.aspx?service=2542

Alternative Dispute Resolution
Partners and counsel ranked among the leaders in dispute resolution and international arbitration —Chambers Global

Involved in helping to resolve more than 200 major international disputes, including scores of arbitrations dealing with the laws of dozens of different nations

Vast experience in dealing with all the major ADR organizations, including American Arbitration Association and JAMS, among others

With alternative dispute resolution providing a faster, more cost-effective and confidential alternative to traditional litigation forums, it is not surprising that major corporations today often look to resolve their disputes outside of the courthouse, employing a variety of alternative dispute resolution strategies. From leading companies to government agencies, global organizations look to Weil Gotshal for counseling on a wide range of ADR issues. We have been engaged in disputes in virtually all major commercial and financial sectors and have appeared for major corporations and multinationals, governments and international non-governmental organizations.

Moreover, the globalization of business has resulted in corporations increasingly deploying their assets and conducting their affairs in many different jurisdictions simultaneously, thereby exposing themselves to the laws and regulatory practices of unfamiliar countries, often with little choice as to how disputes, differences and claims might be resolved. In this environment, it is critically important that businesses with multinational exposures have available to them sophisticated and experienced lawyers to counsel, assist and, where necessary, intervene to resolve disputes. As one of the largest and most diversified law firms in the world, Weil Gotshal can provide such assistance through a truly impressive and international reach.

Our litigators have been involved in more than 200 international disputes, including scores of international arbitrations, dealing with the laws of dozens of different nations including Japan, Israel, Belgium, Poland, and the UK, as well as supranational laws such as UNIDROIT and the International Sale of Goods (CISG), and various bilateral and multilateral treaties, such as NAFTA.

Our attorneys have appeared before some of the major arbitral and trade institutions of the world, including the ICC, AAA, LCIA, WIPO, WTO, the US-Iranian Claims Tribunal, the International Arbitral Center of the Austrian Federal Economic Chamber, the Court of Arbitration of the Hungarian Chamber of Commerce, the Court of International Trade, the Netherlands Arbitration Institute and the Stockholm Chamber of Commerce. We have also advised and assisted in the enforcement of arbitral awards and judgments obtained in other jurisdictions and are experienced in obtaining evidence for use in foreign proceedings.

In addition, our litigators provide valuable strategic risk management advice during the course of our clients' business negotiations and transactions, so as to minimize both the risk and possible impact of any future litigation. This approach has earned high praise from clients and peers, with many Weil Gotshal partners and counsel ranked as leaders in international arbitration and dispute resolution according to Chambers Global.

As a further testament to the quality of our litigators, both past and present Weil Gotshal lawyers have served as judges and arbitrators, as well as being leading academics in their chosen fields. Overall, clients rely on Weil Gotshal's experience in ADR to achieve the best possible solution that meets their business objectives


http://ragingbull.quote.com/mboard/boards.cgi?board=VCSY&read=223837&submit=Go

By: BIFT1
30 Aug 2008, 12:54 PM EDT
Msg. 223837
 

I wonder how much VSCY was seeking?

http://www.weil.com/news/newsdetail.aspx?news=31231

(November 16, 2007, Weil Gotshal Press Release)


November 16, 2007, New York - Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP obtained a major patent victory for Microsoft yesterday in the Eastern District of Texas (Beaumont). Computer Acceleration Corp. (CAC), a subsidiary of well-known patent assertion company Acacia Research, claimed over $750M in damages, alleging that Microsoft's Windows XP infringed its patent.

After a two-week trial, the jury deliberated for two hours before delivering a complete verdict for Microsoft, finding no infringement and invalidating the patent at issue.

"The trial demonstrates that Microsoft will litigate cases to verdict, despite large damages claims against our flagship products," stated Isabella Fu, Microsoft's in-house counsel. "Microsoft values and respects intellectual property , but we will continue to fight suits that have no merit."

"This verdict is particularly significant and satisfying," commented Matt Powers, Weil Gotshal's first chair at the trial. "Even though technology companies are frequently sued for patent infringement in the Eastern District of Texas, this marks the first time a major defendant has taken a patent assertion company case to the jury and earned a total win."

The team included Microsoft in-house counsel Isabella Fu as well as Weil Gotshal partners Matt Powers, David Healey, Kevin Kudlac and Doug Lumish, counsel Amber Rovner, and associates Steve Carlson, John Halbleib, Ben Elacqua, Joseph Lee and Todd Patterson.

About Weil, Gotshal & Manges

Weil, Gotshal & Manges is an international law firm of over 1,200 lawyers, including approximately 300 partners. Weil Gotshal is headquartered in New York, with offices in Austin, Boston, Budapest, Dallas, Frankfurt, Hong Kong, Houston, London, Miami, Munich, Paris, Prague, Providence, Shanghai, Silicon Valley, Warsaw, Washington, DC and Wilmington.

http://ragingbull.quote.com/mboard/boards.cgi?board=VCSY&read=223697&submit=Go&endat=223879&numposts=60

By: morrie33
29 Aug 2008, 02:07 AM EDT
Msg. 223697
 

"Too good to be true."

MSFT all along claimed "prior art." LONGS said for months that MSFT had no case.

Sharepoint was added to the infringement.

MSFT asked for a two week extension of the Markman hearing.

MSFT settled on the day of the Markman hearing. 15 months after the case was filed.

If MSFT believed their "prior art" case, why wouldn't they go through with the Markman hearing? Maybe because they were risking having the judge place an Injunction on .Net and Sharepoint. That's $7 billion dollars in annual sales for .Net and Sharepoint. That's a lot of customers that MSFT would have to "do some 'plainin' too" as Ricky Ricardo would say...

And VCSY, a little penny stock company, got the multi-billion dollar MSFT to settle. MSFT could've taken their chances with the Markman hearing. If no injunction, MSFT could've pushed this to court. But they didn't. They settled.

And lo and behold, days after settlement, MSFT and .Net start putting out PRs about their new "internet" prowess and power. No, that wasn't coincidental at all. Things that .Net and Sharepoint could not do the week before July 25th, snap, voila, magic, abrakadabra, now .Net and Sharepoint can accomplish. And users and developers are saying, "wow, Sharepoint's sure improved..."

But yes, this is "all too good to be true."

Niro, famed patent infringement lawyer, spent two years on a case on contingency and got $3 million dollars since some here say VCSY only got $10 million. And gee, VCSY which HAD a strong case, they just crumbled on the day of the MARKMAN HEARING which they probably would've heard "THE PATENT IS VALID." And then what, MSFT would've had an injunction placed on it...VCSY could've waited a few days and how many hundreds of millions or billions would've MSFT been FORCED to pay to VCSY to get that injunction lifted off its thousands and thousands of partners of .Net and Sharepoint...

But no, VCSY crumbled and settled for peanuts. That's what the bashers want you to believe. It's "too good to be true."

VCSY had MSFT by the nuts. The MARKMAN hearing would've been a huge turning point in the case. VCSY would've heard "THE PATENT IS VALID" and they would've had hundreds and hundreds of millions. But, WADE who has waited 8.5 years couldn't wait 2 more days, so he said, "Just give me that $10 million..."

Sure. Believe that if you want.

The LONGS know this wasn't too good to be true. There are facts. The facts point us to the conclusion that this was VERY GOOD for VCSY. And gee, looks like MSFT got some good things from the deal too. That's called a compromise. A partnership. It was very good. It is very good.

(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)

http://ragingbull.quote.com/mboard/boards.cgi?board=VCSY&read=223967
By: morrie33
31 Aug 2008, 12:28 AM EDT
Msg. 223967
 
pussim, it's curious that BIFT posted valuable info about MSFT's  past court cases in East Texas where MSFT said, "We will push patent infringement cases to the end of the Court process when we know we are right..." and MSFT won that case in the same court of VCSY's case. Yet instead of pushing the VCSY case, MSFT settles in 15 months with VCSY. Hmmmm. And why did they bring in a negotiator to settle with VCSY on the day of the Markman hearing? Hmmmm.

As I said I find it interesting that BIFT digs up very good news for LONGS and all of a sudden it's on the second page because people are posting about politics. Is it coincidental? Maybe. Or do people want all the good D&D buried?

Again, maybe it's coincidental. But, I was excited to read BIFT's finds. And when I left the computer for an hour, nobody had commented on them and instead they were buried on the 2nd page by off topic posts.

(Voluntary Disclosure: Position- Long)


Posted by Portuno Diamo at 3:27 PM EDT
Updated: Sunday, 31 August 2008 1:22 AM EDT
Post Comment | Permalink

Newer | Latest | Older