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, 22 March 2009
X Marks the Spot
Mood:  a-ok
Now Playing: "Stupid Goes to School" Imposter finds himself surrounded by experts (reality)
Topic: Calamity

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

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

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

 

WHAT'S WRONG WITH THIS PICTURE? 

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

 

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

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


Posted by Portuno Diamo at 3:13 PM EDT
Updated: Monday, 23 March 2009 1:18 PM EDT
Post Comment | Permalink
Thursday, 16 October 2008
The Lesson to be Learned.
Mood:  accident prone
Now Playing: Don't c:!###$ With Mother - Nature photog shoots self in lip (focus group)
Topic: Calamity

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

http://vcsy.com/press/releases.php?year=2000&month=03&day=07&num=00
Luiz Valdetaro, Vertical's Chief Technology Officer, stated, "The Emily Framework should allow Vertical to integrate its international portal linkage without the need for a centralized database."
http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/2008/pulpit_20081003_005496.html
"We’re entering the age of cloud computing, remember? And clouds, it turns out, don’t like databases, at least not as they have traditionally been used.
This fact came out in my EmTech panel and all the experts onstage with me nodded sagely as my mind reeled. No database?
No database."

Posted by Portuno Diamo at 4:09 AM EDT
Updated: Thursday, 16 October 2008 4:13 AM EDT
Post Comment | Permalink
Wednesday, 25 July 2007
The End Is Near
Mood:  hug me
Now Playing: 'This is a test - if this were not a test you would be SOL'
Topic: Calamity

If Microsoft is counting on exhibit_for_msft_response.pdf to prove "prior art", Microsoft shareholders should start getting shelac and brushes to use to decoupage their Microsoft shares once they lose the VCSY patent lawsuit.

UDATE

And IF I am allowed by the poorly acting site software I will endeavour to prove my contentions.

As it is, just logging in to this blog is a chore as the software is hanging up and not allowing free movement.

UPDATE

Apparently this blog site is no longer on-line. I shall retire to Laughing Place #3 and tell the story there that I have been denied the opportunity to tell here.


Posted by Portuno Diamo at 4:14 PM EDT
Updated: Wednesday, 25 July 2007 6:10 PM EDT
Post Comment | View Comments (2) | Permalink
Wednesday, 18 July 2007
So far what's going on.
Mood:  lazy
Now Playing: Wiki Waky Taffy - Jungle book creators put wrong jacket on romance novel.
Topic: Calamity

Uhhh... This is, like, really weird, ok? We was all just having a hoot on Raging Bull and choochoo's all like 'Bro, Vertical Computers switch CEO's' and we're all 'No way.' and he's all 'Way bro.' and he has this URL and what it says on the piece below. Check it out and see if you can figure out what this means.

Vertical Computer Systems Inc. Announces Appointment Of ChairmanWed Jul 18 17:30:00 EDT 2007
Reuters
Vertical Computer Systems Inc. announced that Timothy Philip Read joins the Board of the Company as Executive Chairman. The Company also announced that Roy Spencer steps down as Chief Executive Officer of the Company and becomes a Non Executive Director of the Company.
Stop.

Only one problem. That's not the CEO of VCSY. Richard Wade is the CEO. 

Now, that may not look like much to you, but to some it looks like VCSY has an announcement in the pipeline and some copy clerk and editor made a big time booboo.

We're waiting to see what the explanation will be.

It might mean we're rich but then again it might mean we're, like, out of chicken and pepsi.

Like, wow, man.

This update brought to you by The Hooka House the original hemp boutique south side of San Mateo and tell them Jerry sent ya.

UPDATE

The Reuters URL: http://stocks.us.reuters.com/stocks/keyDevelopments.asp?symbol=VCSY.OB&WTmodLOC=C3-News-8


Posted by Portuno Diamo at 11:30 PM EDT
Updated: Thursday, 19 July 2007 12:31 AM EDT
Post Comment | Permalink
Series 1 - post 1
Mood:  hug me
Now Playing: The Pie Eyed Piper - Townsfolk who loved to dance refuse to pay the band
Topic: Calamity

I decided to post a promised rackdown on a concept I've been waiting to show in the press. Now that it has (see this:  http://weblog.infoworld.com/yager/archives/2007/07/web_20_needs_ad.html  - again, thanks to POSCASH for understanding what this article is saying. POS is a fine example of our PHeaven BootUpTheButt Camp techno-novices who fundamentally leap-frog the existing technological world with a buzzword grasp that turns him into an information surgeon. [Tissue sample, lunch meat, if you slice the stuff thin and can look at it in an educated way, you end up with a happy customer instead a piece of dead meat]) I think a bit of education per patent examination will enlighten the reader's way a bit more.

I've dispensed with the comic book font for these Series posts (except for a friendly howdy or a sardonic "what the c:!$$$ are you people doing?") for clarity and reading ease and look forward to plotting out what VCSY technology means to the web world.

Thanks for your kind attention.

Series 1 - post 1. How to step over a stream.

Rule 0. Words that are in () are for your edification. (Don't go talking like that in a technological crowd because they will think you're a freak. It hurts feelings. Like asking for a boiled weinie in a Sushi restaurant.)

Rule 1. When it says ('reference:'), get your crackedass to a search engine and search the words after that reference.

Rule 2. Words that are in Rule 1 format but are not reference you can read at leisure. It will be better to read Rule 1 subjects first so you can have a background sufficient for appreciating Rule 2.

Rule 3. Words in "" are 'sardonic'.

(Nobody expects you to understand any of what you read, but we expect you to read it. It's the least you can do for the work we've put out for no pay. It will enrich your understanding of the industry [as it can be best read from a 15,000 foot level while watching the activity of everybody involved down there at 3000.] Read wikipedia if you can find one on the word.

What you will have after that is a 'buzzword' that people use as a shorthand to explain a very large concept in a word or phrase. Other's will understand, to some degree, the background information need to fully describe that buzzword subject, application and discipline in that order.

Some understand a substantial amount.

Some are like you.

It doesn't matter AS LONG AS YOU KNOW HOW THE BUZZWORD SUBJECT WORKS. If you don't STFU and listen. You will learn over time and then you can be a useful part of the conversation. Thank you for your kind attention. Now, on with the show and tell.)

Begin A:
Short story (from here to Mom's house):
One thing you need to remember and watch in the days, weeks, months and years ahead is this: AJAX = 7,076,521

What does that mean? It means, when AJAX evolves into an ultimately useful item, it will have succeeded in duplicating the claims of patent 7,076,521

-----------
Long story (from zero to first stage cutoff):
So, what does that mean? It means the work MSFT did in XMLhttp to build a client on the browser ultimately evolved into something that would listen for a call from the server while it sat on the browser acting as a client.

The button or image or hyperlink you pressed could send a signal to the server saying, hey, whatever display object this item is connected so, send that the information related to this thing (button, etc).

The server would then do whatever work it took to find that information (data processed) and would then send JUST THAT data (information transported) to the item on the page (usually a text box - any changing text on a web page is most likely in a text box) which would usually display the information in context with the rest of the page (since the textbox is supposed to be a part of the formatted content on the page).

So those are the steps and here is what that accomplished:

In traditional webpage programming, without such a client you have to send the requested information embedded in an entire copy of the web page. That is the cause of the latency (that delay between the time you pushed the 'send' button and the number in the box you entered actually showed up as a new number - it's the time it takes for the button to send the request and the time the browser takes to process the source code into a webpage for display - even if the round trip between the client and the process could be refined to 'zero', the time it takes for the browser to read the source code and interpret that code into the webpage display you see, including the new information you pressed the button for.) that drives you mad and makes it impossible for the internet to act as a computer.

So, Microsoft and others came up with something called XMLrequest which allowed the guy or gal (you) to push the button (which sends a request for data to be displayed like the previous example button did, but, this time with only the text that the button asked for - not the entire webpage).

So the server sends back this one piece of data and it goes directly to the item on the page (text box, image anchor, Flash(tm of Adobe) - anything on the web page you could tag as an item for showing data in context as information).

The web page sits there and does nothing because it never received any source code to execute (the web browser is a little software computer built on top of a hardware computer like your desktop or cell phone etc. - where the hardware is 'real' the software computer is 'virtual' [exists only as data] and thus is called a 'virtual machine' or VM).

But the little textbox next to the button you pushed just changed.

It will change as fast as it takes for the round trip from the client agent (the XMLrequest) to the server and back. Thus, the interaction has less latency (see there, now you're talking like a communications guru) and a more realtime 'look and feel'. Plus, this frees up the connection between your webpage and server by not having to send the webpage chunks again.

So, something like XMLhttp (which later morphed into 'XMLhttpRequest') by Microsoft is good to have as you can see.

It updates the information on a webpage with less latency (faster).

Good all around and nice to have. Essential to web application building.

Now, I want you to look at the eventual 'obvious' destination such an effort will take you. Like I said, you don't have to understand it, as long as you read it. The brain has a marvelous capability of allowing information to seep past the shallow associations we have in our brain's model of the day. In a few days it gets to becoming more clear and you have no idea where that information came from.

One of the Biblical guys said no man may receive (get to know) anything except it be from God ("the 'force'" imprints us with a pattern of logic and we think the thoughts) thus invention is a divine thing and most likely protected by the divinity doing the invention (programming).

(reference: DHTML, XML, XMLrequestHttp)

Glossary:
agent (a consumer of services that does other things)


United States Patent  7,076,521
Davison  July 11, 2006 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Web-based collaborative data collection system


Abstract
The present invention is directed to a system for gathering data from a web-based server, transmitting the data to a web-based client, and storing the data on the web-based client. The web-based server translates data from a data supplier's proprietary data model into a data consumer's proprietary data model using a data mapping function. The web-based server also converts data from a structured data format to a markup language format. The web-based client periodically polls one or more data servers for data. The web-based client receives data in a markup language format and translates it into a structured data format, then stores it in a database. The web-based client and the web-based server can collaborate with each other to streamline the data conversion and translation process.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inventors:  Davison; Jeff (Rockledge, FL) 
Assignee: Vertical Computer Systems, Inc. (Los Angeles, CA)
 
Appl. No.:  09/882,494
Filed:  June 15, 2001


Posted by Portuno Diamo at 1:12 PM EDT
Updated: Wednesday, 18 July 2007 1:15 PM EDT
Post Comment | Permalink
Monday, 16 July 2007
Rock and Roll Cooty Goo
Mood:  incredulous
Now Playing: Knock About the Block - Auto damage & auto repair (instructional)
Topic: Calamity

For those of you who don't get out much, here's a little slice of Raging Bull for your edification. It's not often you get service like this. It's like being there without having to go there.

 

 Post new message  | Refresh list

 Msg. # 

Subject

Posted by   

Date   

190567

admist = admits. sorry. pesky typos mean somethin

yo-eleven  

16 Jul 2007 2:21 AM EDT

190566

Besides, neepaddie, don't you want Microsoft get

yo-eleven  

16 Jul 2007 2:20 AM EDT

190565

irule: Where did you go? Come out to play, pretty

RapidRobert2  

16 Jul 2007 2:17 AM EDT

190564

Another basher doing the 'FRANTIC PANIC' DANCE of

RapidRobert2  

16 Jul 2007 2:17 AM EDT

190563

last = lost. sorry. damn typos. eom

yo-eleven  

16 Jul 2007 2:14 AM EDT

190562

OH! irule, techlaw, lawtech, teklaw..or whatever

RapidRobert2  

16 Jul 2007 2:13 AM EDT

190561

OH! irule, techlaw, lawtech, teklaw..or whatever

RapidRobert2  

16 Jul 2007 2:13 AM EDT

190560

neepadder - Wade's a genius for having secured th

yo-eleven  

16 Jul 2007 2:12 AM EDT

190559

Because 'some' lawyer only got a 'few thousand' b

RapidRobert2  

16 Jul 2007 2:08 AM EDT

190558

A wantabe lawyer who will never make the bar sugg

RapidRobert2  

16 Jul 2007 2:06 AM EDT

190557

niche - did you know that's exactly the same lang

yo-eleven  

16 Jul 2007 2:03 AM EDT

190556

irule - If they are basing their position on comm

yo-eleven  

16 Jul 2007 1:56 AM EDT

190555

Yo...

nicheslapper  

16 Jul 2007 1:50 AM EDT

190554

irule - why would it be impossible for MSFT and V

yo-eleven  

16 Jul 2007 1:32 AM EDT

190553

Will one of you learned pumpers...

irule  

16 Jul 2007 1:26 AM EDT

190552

Load..

nicheslapper  

16 Jul 2007 1:20 AM EDT


Posted by Portuno Diamo at 2:42 AM EDT
Updated: Monday, 16 July 2007 3:17 AM EDT
Post Comment | Permalink
Saturday, 26 May 2007
When you hear the whistle blow, open your eyes.
Mood:  accident prone
Now Playing: 'Run Aground' Ship's engineer climbs to top deck to find all hands have abandoned ship without him. (Mystery / Educational)
Topic: Calamity

SOME people say they know a lot more than the rest of us. Always beware of anyone who says "It's always been like this. It will always be like this." Those are the kind of people who will steer you right into one of those moveable icebergs.

Where X86 Architecture Hits the Wall

Where X86 Architecture Hits the Wall

April 17, 2007 11:50AM 

X86 chipmakers face a challenge that IBM and Sun do not -- namely, zero control over software and hardware. An x86 CPU and its surrounding architecture must be ready to run system software coded for the least capable platform and every peripheral on the market.

...the weaknesses of the x86 approach to superscalar operation are starting to show. Professional workstation and server buyers who look to x86 systems to replace RISC machines have high expectations that include true parallel operation. In science and technology, creative professions and software development, to name a few, high-end client systems should be able to parallelize their way through heavy-lifting tasks while leaving enough power for real-time foreground interaction.

Likewise, buyers at the high end expect to be able to mix compute-intensive and I/O-intensive server applications, along with multiple virtual machines without sacrificing smooth and balanced operation of all tasks. When these buyers double the number of server CPUs, they expect a server's total performance to rise on a near-linear scale.

If RISC users came to PCs with those expectations, they'd walk away disappointed. While modern x86 server and workstation CPUs are outfitted for parallelization at the core level, PCs' intra-CPU communication, processor support components, memory, peripherals, the host operating system, the VMM (virtual machine monitor), the guest operating system, device drivers, and applications spin a web of interdependencies that, at times, requires that execution or I/O follow a specific path, even if sticking to that path calls for cyclically standing still. The result: You buy more high-end x86 systems than you should have to.

More at URL

What most people do not understand (particularly people who work in an industry [they are easily blinded by career attachment to old ways]) is that what used to be is no more. What will be is not yet readily visible and, as with all disrupted technologies, the adoption spikes catch manufacturers, vendors and users off guard.

Large corporations with preset agendae and large user masses with preset expectations get swept aside if they are not able to adapt rapidly to change.

With Microsoft, the entire software industry is changing around them while they maintain a stoic "wait and see" profile. That sort of management inertia is a common element in the failed business models of the past. The model worked right up to the tipping point in the disruptive wave. After that point, they can't unload product or assets fast enough to prevent the entire mass from rapidly becoming obsolete and worthless.

UPDATE

For more detailing and one of those cutsie air fresheners to hang off your mirror go here: 

http://vcsy.blogspot.com/2007/05/emails-from-edge-tales-from-crypto.html 

References for Your Edification:

RISC compared with CISC = http://cse.stanford.edu/class/sophomore-college/projects-00/risc/risccisc/

RISC: Reduced Instruction Set Computer

CISC: Complex Instruction Set Computer  

From above URL:

"The Overall RISC Advantage
Today, the Intel x86 is arguable the only chip which retains CISC architecture. This is primarily due to advancements in other areas of computer technology. The price of RAM has decreased dramatically. In 1977, 1MB of DRAM cost about $5,000. By 1994, the same amount of memory cost only $6 (when adjusted for inflation). Compiler technology has also become more sophisticated, so that the RISC use of RAM and emphasis on software has become ideal.

 

More Update 

Intel: Software needs to heed Moore's Law
http://news.zdnet.com/2100-3513_22-6186765.html
 

By Ina Fried, CNET News.com
Published on ZDNet News: May 25, 2007, 12:39 PM PT

SAN FRANCISCO--After years of delivering faster and faster chips that can easily boost the performance of most desktop software, Intel says the free ride is over.

Already, chipmakers like Intel and Advanced Micro Devices are delivering processors that have multiple brains, or cores, rather than single brains that run ever faster. The challenge is that [1] most of today's software isn't built to handle that kind of advance.

"The software has to also start following Moore's law," Intel fellow Shekhar Borkar said, referring to the notion that chips offer roughly double the performance every 18 months to two years. "Software has to double the amount of parallelism that it can support every two years."

Things are better on the server side, where machines are handling multiple simultaneous workloads. [2] Desktop applications can learn some from the way supercomputers and servers have handled things, but another principle, Amdahl's Law, holds that there is only so much parallelism that programs can incorporate before they hit some inherently serial task.

Speaking to a small group of reporters on Friday, Borkar said that there are other options. [3] Applications can handle multiple distinct tasks, and systems can run multiple applications. Programs and systems can also both speculate on what tasks a user might want and use processor performance that way. But what won't work is for the industry to just keep going with business as usual. 

[4]  Microsoft has recently been sounding a similar warning. At last week's Windows Hardware Engineering Conference in Los Angeles, Chief Research and Strategy Officer Craig Mundie tried to spur the industry to start addressing the issue.

[5] "We do now face the challenge of figuring out how to move, I'll say, the whole programming ecosystem of personal computing up to a new level where they can reliably construct large-scale applications that are distributed, highly concurrent, and able to utilize all this computing power," Mundie said in an interview there. "That is probably the single most disruptive thing that we will have done in the last 20 or 30 years."

Earlier this week, Microsoft's Ty Carlson said that [6] the next version of Windows will have to be "fundamentally different" to handle the amount of processing cores that will become standard on PCs. Vista, he said, is designed to handle multiple threads, but not the 16 or more that chips will soon be able to handle. [7] And the applications world is even further behind.

[8] "In 10 to 15 years' time we're going to have incredible computing power," Carlson said. "The challenge will be bringing that ecosystem up that knows how to write programs."

But Intel's Borkar said that [9] Microsoft and other large software makers have known this shift is coming and have not moved fast enough.

[10] "They talk; they talk a lot, but they are not doing much about it," he said in an interview following his discussion. [11]"It's a big company (Microsoft) and so there is inertia."

He said that [12] companies need to quickly adjust to the fact they are not going to get the same kind of performance improvements they are used to without retooling the way they do things.

"This is a physical limit," he said, referring to the fact that core chip speed is not increasing.

Despite the concern, Borkar said he is confident that the industry can rise to the challenge. Competition, for one, will spur innovation

[13] "For every software (company) that doesn't buy this, there is another that will look at it as an opportunity," Borkar said.

[14] He pointed to some areas where software has seen progress, such as in gaming. He also identified other areas that might be fruitful. [15] In particular, specific tasks could have their own optimized languages. Networking tasks, for example, could be handled by specific optimized networking code.

Intel has also been releasing more of its own software tools aimed at harnessing multicore performance. Another of [16] Intel's efforts is to work with universities to change the way programming is taught to focus more on parallelism; that way the next generation of developers will have such techniques in the forefront of their minds.

[17] "You start with the universities," Borkar said. "Us old dogs, you cannot teach us new tricks."

 

My take:

[1] Was Microsoft promising to Intel things Microsoft can not now deliver? Look at Intel articles over the past year. The plans Intel made as detailed back in June 2006 when they sold off their cell phone division were probably based on hopes Vista would be a barnburner. As it is, Vista promises to be the horse (or the bull) locked in the barn afire.

[2] Notice the complaint about parallelism. In other words, Intel is saying 'Hey, we can build the architectures, but, if the software producer (Microsoft is no doubt inferred ) doesn't provide the kind of virtualization and command/data pipeline management needed to make use of the architecture, don't blame us.' Longhorn and the associated XML/Web-based operating capabilities were intended to allow a processing platform to reach out to the inter-connected outside (via intranet or internet) for interoperable resources (other processor sets able to handle parts of the workload- here is where interoperation is no longer a 'play nice' file content but is a 'play along' operational block on the clock [aka deterministic interoperation]). With the cutting of things like WinFS and the elemental technologies that enable applications like WinFS to operate from Longhorn/Vista, the processor is doomed to remain alone... unable to reach out beyond its own proprietary buss structure for help.

[3] The 'Business as usual' comment can arguably be pinned on Microsoft's various rewrites of their operating system from 2004 when advanced capabilities (those that would have allowed x86 processors to reach outside their local processing structure to outside processing capabilities in a virtualized form) were cut from Longhorn (aka Vista) and Microsoft returned to the traditional programming and operating systems they had before their vaunted XML/dynamic languages efforts which apparently failed or were failed. I don't think Intel can be blamed for not knowing how to architect chips. Chip design, engineering and manufacturing per se is not the problem, I think. Management CAN be blamed for taking the word of a software company that's already demonstrated they can't deliver on their promises or projects. That alone will ultimately prove to be the lead weight around the neck of chip maker's swimming upstream efforts.

[4] I'll bet they have. They either can pin the blame on somebody else preventing them from developing the kind of software resources that can virualize, arbitrate and manage processing chip resources or  they will have to take the blame for strangling Intel's future.

[5] Well, we who've been watching what VCSY has been claiming their patents can do (they claim such by describing the architectural structures in their patents) and any nitwit with an eye for architectural processes can see what kind of  "...large-scale applications that are distributed, highly concurrent, and able to utilize all this computing power" may be theorized (and one would then reasonably say deployed) by the VCSY intellectual properties in conjunction with other virtual arbitrated managed and governed technologies such as IBM is able to field.

[6] Good, because Mister Gates and Mister Ballmer have aleady said the next operating system they make will be different... promise. Uhhh... Mister Microsoft, I hate to break it to you but wasn't WinFS/Longhorn/Yukon supposed to be the basis for just that software revolution? Are you telling Intel to just hang on you'll be there eventually? Should they mothball their processing facilities while your campus roller blades around to some sort of viable option beyond Vista and the Windows XP ME 2 aka Vista/Longhorn? Not trying to be ugly but this is getting to be a political and marketing farce and Microsoft appears to be counting on the rest of the technological and investing public to simply not see what VCSY has. No wonder shutting down discussion about VCSY would be such an important goal to certain people possibly representing some of these companies on boards such as RagingBull where most of this speculative information (based on easily googled fact) can be found?

[7] Well, now, just who is to blame for that when Microsoft is late fielding development tools for dynamic virtualized and arbitrated applications? Hmmm?

[8] In 10 to 15 years, Mister Carlson, Intel will be a gaming chip manufacturer and the business world will be running on IBM power architectures and cell processors. The x86 line will be a distant expensive memory if things continue at this rate.

[9] Well well well... after how many paragraphs we FINALLY get up enough nerve to name names and point he finger? Well done, Intel. You've finally bought a clue. How much will it have cost by the time you figure out the secret phrase?

[10] Talk and no action is not cheap. Not cheap at all, is it?

[11] Microsoft certainly doesn't seem to have much inertia when they want to get into advertising to find some way out of the business application quandary they seem to have gotten their Office and Operating System lines into. Money in the right management hands tends to have a fascinating lubricative effect. In the hands of incompetent and intransigent management, money empowers inertia.

[12] Retool? Microsoft has had virtulization and arbitration technology on their shelves since 2004 and beyond. What retooling are we talking about here? Change the engineering teams or change management? Let's have some avocados here, folks, so we can go about making guacamole'.

[13] I believe you are correct, sir.

[14] Your homework, dears, is to figure out for yourself what the nice man is saying here to the world at large. I have said for some time I believe Microsoft is burying the technology they should have fielded in Vista in XBox where it can't be dug out easily (they think).

[15] A core element in VCSY technology is the Very High Level Language Emily which is specifically targeted precisely at providing higher level languages for specific verticals and the term 'verticals' may mean work-tasks at very granular levels just as it may mean 'verticals' in industry disciplines and businesses.

[16] Just what would you teach in those universities? How to program like Jeff Davison and Aubrey McAuley and Luis Valdetaro? Would you mind giving them a bit of credit in your textbooks? Hmmm?

[17] That's right, Mister Borkar. In humane societies, old dogs who are put in a position where they can no longer look after themselves are put up for adoption by someone else or euthanized. Which will it be for Intel's management and staff if they can't convince these mean nasty software companies to step up to their responsibilities and make or buy some healthy dogfood for a change?

As Amdahl's Law points out, all the preprocessing and parallel plumbing in the world won't help you when the software you're running can't arbitrate virtualized operations within a serial stream and can't distribute virtualized and arbitrated functions. 

What do you think, children? Am I being too harsh on Intel? Not any more harsh than analysts will be once the story gets out. We currently have less than 700 people reading this bilge I put out. What will happen when the number is in the thousands and these reader take these writings to experts and those experts agree? What do you think will happen? Better to take care of your own problems than to preach to someone else's family how they should take care of their wayward relatives.

Perhaps the dawning is happening at Intel and it's over a year after Microsoft themselves recognized the problems they would have once long-delayed Longhorn would start using the architectures for real (not just in mock ups and simulations).

PS - Speaking of putting "credit" where credit is due, I would like to take this opportunity to acknowledge I probably never would have taken Intel to task for mismanaging expectations and realities in the software they have grown so dependent on were it not for the writings of a poster on Raging Bull VCSY who happens to have worked for Intel at "times in the past". I don't know if that past is "years" ago, "months" ago or mere "days" as someone like a consultant can work for somebody one day and "not" the next. Makes no matter to me. Where ever he may have gained his knowledge, we all owe him a debt of gratitude for opening this doorway on our view of the software/hardware dependencies that govern these two huge industries.

yers truly - portuno 


Posted by Portuno Diamo at 10:28 PM EDT
Updated: Sunday, 27 May 2007 1:25 AM EDT
Post Comment | View Comments (2) | Permalink
Friday, 25 May 2007
When a bag of chips ain't all that.
Mood:  quizzical
Now Playing: 'Riding the Rails' Hobos find the inside of the boxcars more comfortable than clinging to the underside. (Travel/Culture)
Topic: Calamity

We've never really talked about hardware in all this discussion about VCSY software. VCSY has only one hardware patent we know of and that's the Cruz fiber optic patent for transmitting moving images through a single fiber. This will provide an untold capability to speed information transport once fleshed out in computers and chips.

But, what of VCSY software patent effect on hardware, particularly computer infrastructure and processing chips?

The power of VCSY taught virtualization and arbitration leading to an effective SaaS platform alone offers a rapidly shifting landscape for chipmakers of any kind as it portends the demise of the Desktop PC domination over business and perhaps consumer hardware at the point of use at a period of large scale obsolescence and upgrade.

The currently recognized SaaS (Software as a Service) and CaaS (Computation as a Service) concepts teach mainframes and large manageable server banks will increasingly be the norm and the families of of existing and new desktop PCs will give way to an increasingly smaller footprint in processing power required, electrical power needs and cost per unit user.

The desktop phenomena took off with the introduction of the IBM Compatible concept a couple decades ago and has steadily increased with no apparent end in sight. Chip makers depended on this incremental growth in processor speed and power demands to forecast their manufacturing expenditures over the coming years. IBM appears poised to reset the technology, bringing the power back from the desktop to the mainframe and server banks, Where Microsoft skunked IBM by foreseeing the dominance of the operating system on individually distributed computers, IBM appears intent on calling the shots this time.

While the traditional chip building industry continued to see the desktop power curve as a road to riches, IBM has concentrated their chip making expertise in processors better able to serve many users on a chip. Along with serving many with fewer hardware units, the IBM strategy appears to have added the ability for software to also control the chip ecology, offering the ability to virtualize the hardware for repurposing on demand and providing a means of controlling the chip infrastructure with software.  This is a fundamental component to IBM's POWER strategy for more efficient and more 'green' computing as scales become more massive.

As IBM learned a long time ago, errors in prediction come back to haunt the unfortunate with a vengeance.

Unlike software manufacturers who can do most of their product building with few physical assets beyond development software and the computers needed to carry out software construction and testing, chip manufacture requires huge outlays in expensive equipment and trained staff in order to produce their products.

Software manufacture is not a very predictable science as is indicated by the many build/rebuild set/reset phases some software houses go through. Take Vista's shipping 'schedules' for instance. Originally slated for shipment in 2004, the delays in bringing out a useful build on Vista challenged the computer chip industry to continually revise their projected schedules to produce articles capable of running the more massive operating system while trying to predict and balance the demands of the hardware production lines which would produce the required desktops and server frames.

Chip manufacture is a science with a bit of mental artistry thrown into the architectural phases of concept and mask cutting. But, after the masks are cut, chip manufacture is predominantly an assembly line production under somewhat predictable guidelines. Things move along at a predictable rate unless outside uncontrolled influences impact that process.

Scheduling those chip shipments to coordinate with new motherboard designs, for instance, is a monumental task often upset by the smallest unforeseen hiccups.

Cause those chips to be somehow tied to the introduction of a new technological paradigm and the artistry in one industry can bring chaos and loss to the assembly line sciences.

Unfortunately for chip manufacturers, software is the most difficult commodity for which to predict shipping cycles. That would not be such a terrible thing if the software is not evolutionary requiring a new set of processing capabilities. But, when a processing chip line is predicted and put in place to accommodate the increased sophistication of software packages such as a 'next generation' operating system, and said OS doesn't make it out the door... the impact is massive on the chip supplier.

In an arena such as x86 processor chips where there are multiple manufacturers (dominant in the industry are Intel and AMD) the competition also shaves the predictables down to who can deliver first with the most and therefore increases the consequential detriments deriving from any product problems from upstream and downstream.

With all that in mind, Vista must have been a real bear for chip makers like Intel and AMD to plan on. As Vista is best used on a 64 bit processor, new fabrication techniques and manufacturing capabilities had to be in place early to produce such products at the same time as the requisite operating system product was to be delivered. Delays in the software manufacturing process may well have been a 'so what?' affair as their was little capital and asset loss... but chip manufacturers were faced with delaying installation on machinery and fabrication suites or mothballing the assets until such units were needed. We will likely never know as most errors are buried in the large manufacturing infrastructures.

In the case of planning for Vista, the original shipment schedules of 2004 slipping into 2005, 2006 and 2007 meant the chip manufacturers had to juggle an increasingly unpredictable schedule with increasing unrecoverable costs to the bottom line.

Even then, when Vista was finally ready to ship, the production pace set by expectations was subject to the whims of buyers who would or would not buy the operating system and the prerequisite hardware necessary to wring out the maximum use of the software product.

Vista has likely been a huge disappointment and a source of consternation and befuddlement for chip suppliers who once foresaw a golden age where every desktop would be replaced to take advantage of incredible OS capabilities... only to find the product was not really ready for prime time (the capabilities of Vista won't be fully realized until the remaining pieces like Longhorn are shipped) and the community of users really didn't need more powerful machines because they didn't need what Vista provided.

As backup for these thoughts, here are a few blurbs from a timely article by Joe Wilcox. The post doesn't tell us anything new. It simply tells us what folks have been saying ever since Vista was released will actually be the new reality for those counting on selling their wares to a hardware hungry crowd who are about to go on a crash diet in their upgrade cycles.

http://www.microsoft-watch.com/content/vista/some_enterprises_will_delay_new_pcs_for_vista.html

May 23, 2007 6:09 PM

Some Enterprises Will Delay New PCs for Vista

By Joe Wilcox

 

excerpts:

Enterprises already planning new PC deployments, as part of regular cyclical upgrades, are likely to delay them for 12 months or more because of Windows Vista.

"Corporations were likely to delay the upgrade cycle a year or more," Lao said of In-Stat's finding. "If planning to buy 1,000 machines, I'm still going to buy them, just a little later."

...the findings are good for Microsoft, which is assured of Vista deployments on most new PCs in the current upgrade cycle. The situation could be less rosy for some portions of Microsoft's channel.

Microsoft missed a major corporate upgrade cycle starting in mid 2004 and ending about two years later. This larger number of businesses is unlikely to upgrade to Windows Vista right away.

The In-Stat survey supports my earlier contention that Vista shipped too late. Microsoft needed to get the operating system into the market no later than holiday 2005 to catch the curl.

Consistent with other studies, consumers aren't rushing out to buy new PCs because of Vista.

"The average consumer is looking at a second, third or fourth PC purchase," Lao said. Referring to the survey results, he added: "The motivating factor was 'I need another PC for my kid to use,' not Vista."

Related Posts:

More at URL

End Article

The evolving consensus appears to say PC sales are normal, meaning any anticipated and planned for increase in business has not materialized. Chip makers in particular are not seeing the inrush expected to justify the money needed to tool up to a new set of processing capabilities.

On top of this sag in expectations versus reality in PC sales, the industry is facing the looming specter of thin client erosion of the desktop market over the period of this coming delay induced wait. Corporations holding out for a more power desktop over the coming months and years will be offered an increasingly viable alternative in less expensive thin desktops with all the processing power and hassles at the other end of the network connection... not at the desktop.

As always the lingering question regarding a performance by Microsoft that put software OEMs, chip makers, hardware builders and IT services in an increasingly uncomfortable position from 2004 onward: Why couldn't they ship something, anything, sooner? Why was Longhorn emasculated so? Why was WinFS demonstrated so enthusiastically up to 2004 only to have planners remove the one component that would have allowed Vista to be used in the current server farm automation scenario even without all the other capabilities and items.

WinFS offered the opportunity to provide the operating system parameters outside the OS for consumption by management personnel and systems and thus provide significant cost saving opportunities for hardware control before that subject was so thoroughly dominated by recent announcements by IBM?

As the evolving SaaS/CaaS scenario unfolds and matures, cutting WinFS may come to be viewed in hindsight as having been the most significant blunder by Microsoft management because it cut Vista's first and most significant deliverable to OEMs at a time when competitors were planning and executing for just such uses.

WinFS could have arguably changed the face of the server farm landscape by providing management systems with ways to increase OS utilization and performance via external systems.

As it stands now, such capabilities will not be available on Microsoft machines for the foreseeable future and the chip makers and OEMs will still be depending on Microsoft making good on shipping what is obviously a very difficult execution for Microsoft.

We shall see.

 


Posted by Portuno Diamo at 2:11 AM EDT
Updated: Monday, 28 May 2007 12:52 PM EDT
Post Comment | Permalink
Monday, 21 May 2007
Yep. I lied. So sue me. THIS is a post.
Mood:  caffeinated
Now Playing: 'Amorised Depreciation' Mores and civility go out the window with the beginning of a new school year. (Animal House/Pets)
Topic: Calamity

I see indications, given new blood coming in from Microsoft's web-oriented past (circa 1999 for Web-applications experience and circa 2004 for distributed transactional platform experience) and restructuring their server taskforces to line up under the Office side of the room. I suspect they have something that will allow them to proceed immediately to integrating their office application stack(s) like they should have been doing back in 2004 and 1999.

What the HELL have they been doing over there spending all that R&D to bring these guys and do what? Where's Oz? Where's the magic clipboard? 

Appears to me a once timid toward web-stuff Microsoft has been morphed in some fashion into a confident Microsoft willing to put reputation and honor on the line as evidenced calling back prior employees to save the precious pork belly, as it were, of Mom.

I would say the signs say Microsoft is beginning to say it's moving toward the only thing that would make sense for them to do in this day and time of SaaS maturation.

If they don't get their office products into an integrated engine for productivity and make such productivity package available over the web, the webified versions of office products will have sufficient appeal and capability and integration to wash out any more purchases of that venerable and historic era in business software: the office suite.

Now it will be trailers and coffeeshops - anywhere to where you can run a Verizon single fiber. Multi-100GigaBitsPerSecond for the little guy and the bigger guys get 400GigaBitsPerSecond on a single fiber, mon frer'. Chevrolet coupe'. Instantaneous real time automation for office and vertical industry workflow and activity.

Add convergence to that with image and soung recognition and processing, and we're looking at an explosion in business doability where 100k workers skilled in a boring yob can apply themselves to those users who can't quite get the hang at building and using web applications... this will be the beginning of the end of "programmers" as we know it.

Actually the end began back in February 2001 when VCSY introduced an almost unseen product a couple weeks before Microsoft released Hailstorm. That journey has brought us to this week when Microsoft will address the Open Source audience and will either make sounds like a pack animal welcoming social intercourse and butt smelling for transparency... as opposed to a wounded bovine leaking blood, guts and brains from a run through the rocks by a pack of angry customers. They can be worse that hyenae.

But, now, the wolves smell the blood and they're closing in... while Gates is in his cloister counting the millions he sold last month for whatever philantrobic endeavour he might alight upon. Good riddance to bad attitude. 

Repurposing an entire industry is what IBM is in the process of. Big dealing with humanity's future they are. Wise counsel of large minds in maelstrom it is. Watch for the weasels as they are the rats in the cornbins of history.

Good luck world. Brother Rasta Mafoozle, Pastor of the Rasta Moofo Wanga Pangy Nook Nook Pasteurization Church of the Almighty Pissed & Bar and Grill wishes you 'Good luck with all that.'. We got Jax and Blue Ribbon and some Al Green on the Juke box and a cabin cruiser in the brine and monkey man making fire is one thing. Making a steam engine is entirely a different time. God knows who made the fire so he ain't impressed.

Sit back, relax, listen to the sax in the wax and I'll be right back after a few words of wisdom along the graveled way... 

click

... but the lawyers could just be walking toward the door knowing they'll end up signing a settlement before they have to leave. They know they can call back the scarecrows and keep the crop growing a bit longer before they have to prove they got the goods and the goose.

If MSFT management and IP lawyers blow this, their plans for the next five years could be nothing but a question... and MSFT glory and money nothing but a painful fading memory for millions... of people... not just dollars. Millions times money. Tune in next time for 'Muckmuck's Travail' brought to you by 'Shake Chicken No Get Egg Make Bacon' the other alternative in throwback breakfast. 'No make eggos. Make pork.'...

click

...so shut up and let me think dammit. Where'd you put The Gun?

Duuhhh I put it in the cooler, Boss like you said.

You idiot. I said we need to hire a tooler... we're under The Gun... Under the guy they call 'The Gun'. You was supposed to put the guy in cubicle tree. Jeez am I ever going to get my money back on that education? You're a career criminal, steal some batteries and a hearing aid for crying out loud...

click

...and watch Mister Frickaseed say it real fast now... ready?

crispy critter
kitty litter
firecracker poo
you have no idea just what we'll do for you
if you gather round here we'll let you sniff the gloo
firecracker
tally wacker
sis is in the doo

click

Maw. Where's my wood leg?


Posted by Portuno Diamo at 3:46 AM EDT
Updated: Monday, 21 May 2007 4:01 AM EDT
Post Comment | Permalink
Whisper whithers whether wanton, worried or wise.
Mood:  irritated
Now Playing: 'An Apology' Awkward silence broken by clumsy goose. (Fables)
Topic: Calamity

This is not a post. This here came from Robert Crinkly's blog here: http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/2007/pulpit_20070511_002058.html  what enfurinated a army of hostile checkeekers. This years turkey is going to look like the underside of a schoolmarm's desk, pilgrim. No gummy lumps but they's probably teeth.

And like I said this is not technically a post even though it will tally up on the calendar to the left (your left, my left). This is much like one of those tags on the mattress you go to Folsom for tearing them off. Had me a uncle did twenty two years for a truckload of them tags. But they wasn't tore off so I don't exactly know what he went in the can for. It's all a conspiracy anyways. The little guy gets a kick in the pants and a how'd ya like that? for conversation.

Anywho... packing up a few more boxes of what-knots to bring over to Morrie's for safe keeping for a while. I'm going to miss packing poo into that little calendar doohicky to the left.

If I had been packing to the right, I would probably understand why this stupid tag was on a mattress in the first place.

05/10/2007 03:57 PM
From: ITD COMM/Somers/IBM
Subject: Rumors of massive layoffs

Patrick Kerin General Manager Global Technology Services - Americas

Joanne Collins-Smee General Manager Integrated Technology Delivery - Americas

Patt Cronin General Manager, Productivity Initiatives Integrated Technology Delivery

We have received many inquiries regarding the subject. If IBM responded to every rumor, we would get distracted from the important work of delivering value to our clients.

However, a recent external blog report suggesting that IBM is planning a massive layoff is causing unneeded activity. If this blog is generating concern in your unit, please feel free to use this information to assure your teams and business leaders that the blog is inaccurate, and relies on gross exaggerations.

The blog suggested we would be letting go more IBMers than we currently employ in the U.S. The facts are that our regular U.S. population is just under 130,000 IBMers -- a number that has remained relatively stable in recent years, as we have divested and acquired businesses and continued to invest through new hiring.

We said when we released 1Q results we would be putting in place a series of actions to address cost issues in our U.S. strategic outsourcing business. We have undertaken efforts toward that, and recently implemented a focused resource reduction in the U.S. While any such reduction is difficult for those employees affected, these actions are well within the scope of our ongoing workforce rebalancing efforts.

The blog also completely misinterpreted our efforts around Lean. To fully understand Lean, you have to view it in a strategic context -- a key part of what we're doing to reinvent service delivery to provide more value to clients and make IBM more competitive. We are using Lean, which is a commonly used methodology to conduct process design and development, to make informed decisions about how to improve and streamline processes. We are going about that in a disciplined and rigorous way, and the intent, as it has always been, is to improve our speed, quality and responsiveness to clients.

 http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/2007/pulpit_20070511_002058.html

all rights reserved  all pokes pickled all wanton sensationalism distributed under social contract IDDUDDUDDDDiddle

see trademarking department for concise packaging

no deposit no return 


Posted by Portuno Diamo at 2:56 AM EDT
Updated: Monday, 21 May 2007 3:43 AM EDT
Post Comment | Permalink

Newer | Latest | Older