Chrome, Microsoft and Linux 9 Jul 2009
Posted by InformationSpan in Consumerization, ITasITis, Impact of IT, Tech Watch, Technorati.add a comment
So Google’s Chrome OS is finally seeing the light of day, with the pitch that it’s a lightweight software base designed to get people up and active on the web easily. A few comments.
First: it’s new in the sense that Mac OS X was new; it’s built on Unix – Linux this time (ok I do know the difference) instead of BSD, but the principle is the same.
Second: maybe this explains why the Chrome browser hasn’t made it to the Mac market. Seems like the browser was just the pilot for this larger project, to carry the fight to Microsoft.
Third: interestingly, in my newspaper (The Guardian), the Chrome OS announcement makes it into the main news pages but the technology section, in the print edition, carries two other apparently unconnected articles. The combination is interesting. One is a long interview with Google’s Marissa Mayer about the future of search which, Mayer suggests, is tied up with real-time information (and that means Twitter). The other is a Victor Keegan Opinion column discussing why Asus dropped Linux as its netbook platform in favour of Windows and a string of non-free services. Keegan, though, hasn’t caught up on the Chrome OS announcement. It would be interesting to know what he thinks.
Oh, and hidden in the Mayer interview is the interesting snippet that Google has been conducting research on which shade of blue for a link is most likely to encourage a user to click through. More blue is better than more green, apparently. I must check my website!
Links:
• Introducing the Google Chrome OS, Official Google Blog, 7 Jul 2009
• Google targets Microsoft with new operating system, Guardian, 8 Jul 2009 (print edition 9th July) – it’s worth doing a search on the Guardian website for “Chrome OS” as there are several other articles
• Did Microsoft force Asus to axe Linux?, Victor Keegan, Guardian, 8 Jul 2009 (print edition 9th July)
Waves and MQs: an experienced analyst comments 3 Jul 2009
Posted by InformationSpan in ITasITis, Impact of IT, Insight services, Technorati.add a comment
Mike Rasmussen has blogged a critique of Forrester’s recent Wave on Global Risk and Compliance, in a piece which deserves an audience outside the GRC community.
Mike is the doyen of GRC analysts and, in his time at Forrester, authored two previous versions of this Wave. He’s quite explicitly not getting at the authors of the new update; it’s the process that’s at issue. And the comments are well worth reading if you use any Wave, Magic Quadrant, or similar tool to help your purchasing decisions. Especially if your management board won’t approve a purchase unless these tools “endorse” the choice.
Mike has two criticisms. One of them isn’t a surprise, but it’s worth a reminder. The picture presented in a point-of-time report is, almost by definition, out of date before it’s published. Vendors don’t stand still while a report’s being researched. Indeed, some vendors opt out of supporting an evaluation because they’re close to a new release and don’t want to be judged on the old one.
InformationSpan has a similar issue: if you download our free report on insight service coverage for BI, you’ll find that its assessment of Forrester’s coverage is significantly out of date. It was written last November, and they’ve put out a lot of new coverage this year.
But secondly, Mike comments that the assessment criteria for the GRC Wave haven’t been updated while the discipline of GRC has moved on substantially. Analysis needs to recognise this.
These are process questions. The first one reflects the length of the evaluation process; things go out of date while being evaluated, and vendors sometimes decline to commit the resources. Mike asks whether this can be streamlined.
But the second question reflects the fact that the process was designed for systems delivered into a relatively mature marketplace, where the underlying concepts being modelled in software (for example) aren’t changing greatly.
GRC in the enterprise isn’t primarily about tools: it’s about management discipline and process. Tools simply support the process; tool capabilities develop rapidly as the discipline itself develops. And there are other areas like this.
For example, there’s an emergent unified approach to change management, configuration control and release management (CCRM) – I attended a workshop about this recently. Or there’s architecture, needing new approaches to integrate the benefits of cloud services securely into the enterprise while the first wave of architecture repositories and other tools are still evolving. No doubt you can identify other examples.
This isn’t about the pace of change. It’s whether a process implicitly predicated on a stable environment can cope with changes which are about much more than new technical ways of doing essentially the same thing.
So what’s the way forward? More than Mike suggests, I think. The key must be to separate the market snapshot from the analysis report. A vendor’s vision or ability to deliver don’t change over the timescale of report writing – nor with the actual issue of a new release, though the market’s reaction to it may be significant. So here’s my suggestion.
First: let the analysts get behind the versions to give a well researched, more stable view of the vendors and their contributions in a particular sector. Detach this from the assessment of current releases: they are data for the assessment, in this understanding, but not the core of it. Gartner’s MarketScope, an alternative to their better known Magic Quadrant, targets this: their aim is to provide “an overall market rating that indicates the strength and potential for the market in general. This is particularly important in emerging markets, when … it is difficult to assess the long-term viability or evolution of offerings. In mature markets, MarketScopes provide insight about the ongoing value of products and services“.
And second: make the process continuous, rather than point-in-time. Then it can respond continually not just to new products but to new assessment criteria as the underlying paradigms change. If new tools were continually tested, and the results added to the database, a Wave or MQ could be dynamically delivered from the most current data. I don’t think anyone does this. Tell me if you know different!
It’s a step beyond what Mike’s asking for: not to streamline the process, but to change it.
So read Mike’s comments, and apply them to your own specialism. Understand the strengths and weaknesses of Waves and MQs as they currently exist. Comment back to me here – does anyone know of an assessment tool which is already dynamic in this way? And always remember, when you’re using any of these analyst tools, that they provide insight - not ready-made decisions!
Links:
• The Forrester GRC ?Ripple? … , Corporate Integrity (Mike Rasmussen), 2 July 2009
• Coverage report: Business Intelligence, InformationSpan, Nov 2008 (free download from this page)
• The Forrester Wave
• Magic Quadrants and MarketScopes: How Gartner Evaluates Vendors Within a Market, Gartner, Jan 2008 (this document appears to be openly available)
Infrastructure: the new venture area 27 May 2009
Posted by InformationSpan in Impact of IT, Tech Watch, Technorati.add a comment
For technology watchers, looking for upcoming trends, it’s always of interest to see where the venture capital sector is investing. Of course, not every business that attracts VC investment succeeds. But it’s an indicator of where attention is focussed.
MIT’s Technology Review carries an article which reviews this area of IT. With a report from the recent Venture Summit East conference (that’s East as in US East Coast – in Boston), it provides three useful insights.
First – start-ups are beginning to recover from the downturn. It’s been a dry six months for public offerings but a few are starting to come through again.
Second – what the angels are investing in now is new technologies that can assist the oldest of commercial imperatives: saving money. In particular, reducing the cost of infrastructure. The article cites two, perhaps surprising, examples.
Virtualisation is today’s hotspot; but opportunities exist to update the “outdated” technology behind it. And there’s still a need to reduce the cost of storing and managing data which is an order of magnitude (or more) greater than the cost of acquiring it.
And third – that while VC priorities are still informative, the emergence of so much cheap and scaleable cloud infrastructure means that some startups with really viable ideas don’t need venture funding. In fact, they may be damaged by it with a push to go too far too soon. Technology watchers, take note!
• What VCs Are Investing In, Technology Review, 26 May 2009
Information Commissioner reviews EU data directive 27 May 2009
Posted by InformationSpan in Impact of IT, Managing IT, Tech Watch, Technorati.add a comment
Britain’s Information Commissioner, Richard Thomas, leaves his post shortly after almost seven years. Computing reports on one of his final high-profile actions: the publication of a report he commissioned a year ago which reviews the action of the European data directive. The Press Release from the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) refers to “growing fears that the current European Directive is out-dated and too bureaucratic”.
European legislation on data protection and privacy led the world, and in many ways still does. Its implementation into in-country legislation varies from wholehearted to grudging. But it’s established in public awareness and, in particular, in the information professions the need to respect information about individuals and handle data appropriately. None the less, both business and technology have moved on and Richard Thomas believes that regulation needs to catch up.
For example: the directive’s restrictions on cross-border flows of information didn’t push the US to implement full data protection legislation; but it did result in the creation of “safe harbor” provisions. But a work-around is common: notifying data subjects that the data they are providing may be transferred to non-EU countries. If they don’t agree, they can’t get access to whatever service they are trying to sign up for.
The report’s overall conclusion is that the Directive, as it stands, “will not suffice in the long term”. The principles remain good; but implementation needs to be what the authors call “harms-based” – that is, based on an understanding of the damage that can be done – in order to respond to the challenges of globalisation. The authors don’t call for the Directive to be scrapped, but they believe some of the concepts need to be re-thought and better consensus achieved in some areas.
So the report proposes, among other things, that global enterprises should shoulder global responsibility for the data they hold rather than having to work through “outdated” geo-politically based restrictions. The ICO’s Press Release speaks of “stronger focus on the accountability of all organisations for safeguarding the information they handle”, “improved arrangements … for the export of personal data outside the European area”, and “a more strategic approach to enforcement”. There are about four pages of recommendations in the full report, well worth reviewing if it’s in your area.
Thomas believes that “Data protection is too important to be left to data protection specialists talking to each other”. The report isn’t a blueprint for a new directive but is intended to stimulate debate. Let’s see where it goes.
Links:
• Data protection needs new approach, Computing, 21 May 2009
• Making European data protection law fit for the 21st century, ICO Press Release, 12 May 2009 (PDF document, with links to both the full report and an ICO summary)
• European data directive 1995 (Directive 95/46/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 October 1995 on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data)
• For Richard Thomas’s bio see the ICO management Board page
Gartner creates Business Continuity blog 8 May 2009
Posted by InformationSpan in Insight services, Tech Watch.Tags: Business Continuity, Gartner, Swine Flu
add a comment
Gartner recently added a new Business Continuity blog, categorised as Gartner Special Research. It contains advisories relating to the Swine Flu outbreak, which is a more serious issue in the US than it is yet in Europe. Like their other blogs, it’s on open access.
You won’t find it in their list of titled (topic-focussed) blogs, which followers here will know remains somewhat disorganised. Instead, and illogically, it’s been included in the Blog Network as if it were an individual analyst’s blog.
InformationSpan sorts these things out. There’s one new Gartner analyst on stream as well. Visit informationspan.com and click the link to our index of analyst blogs.
Michael Dell at the BCS 30 Apr 2009
Posted by InformationSpan in Impact of IT, Managing IT, Tech Watch.Tags: BCS, cloud, Dell, virtualisation, Web Services
add a comment
The British Computer Society’s Elite group gathered in London yesterday for a Q&A session with Michael Dell.
For the techies among us, Mr Dell described how a couple of years ago he saw the rise of Web Service as challenging their existing enterprise server business. The response: to change technical and commercial direction.
There was an enterprise trend to virtualisation and an emerging market for massively scaleable “cloud” services: and these pull the market in opposite directions. Virtualisation is about mapping multiple servers onto single hardware. Cloud providers, and customers such as China’s Tencent QQ instant messaging service (which has 650 million subscribers), develop infrastructure using large numbers of straightforward devices. The key principles in this environment are strict adherence to a common environment, and a collapse of the complex layered architectures which have grown up in conventional data centres. At the same time, virtualisation of both compute resources and storage creates an enabling opportunity for enterprise users, through development of “private clouds”.
Moreover: SaaS and other trends encourage the enterprise customer to procure solutions, rather than systems; and, in response, Dell is no longer simply a hardware supplier.
What emerges is a picture of an entrepreneur, and a company, unlikely to get stuck in any one business model when the world is moving on. Perhaps that was the biggest take-away from his introductory remarks.
The larger part of the meeting was given over to Q&A. Some of the topics were:
- Green IT: Dell is now itself a carbon-neutral company, but intends to make a far larger contribution through energy efficiency of its products. The latest Dell noteboook, for example, uses $7 of electricity per year; not long ago that would have been $100.
- Solid state devices: in response to my own question, Michael Dell outlined how SSD is encroaching fast where its two advantages of lightness and fast response are valuable: high performance PCs and servers. More interesting though was his account of how Dell has influenced the storage vendors to think of themselves as knowing about fast and efficient read/write operations on any device, and to see firmware (e.g. for massively reliable servers) as their primary expertise rather than hardware
- Dell and Microsoft: Dell see their products as being customer driven, with both Red Hat Linux and VMWare being important platform partners
Asked where he would invest a thousand dollars if (heaven forbid!) Dell collapsed and that was all he had left, the answer was Shanghai. Dell has seen growth pick up again in their business in China and in Asia more generally. This should be a good sign.
Links:
• BCS Elite
• Dell Computers (UK) and Michael Dell
• TenCent (US English page)
Gartner’s titled blogs: Gartner responds to InformationSpan comment 23 Apr 2009
Posted by InformationSpan in Insight services, Technorati, Uncategorized.add a comment
Following through on the previous post, and the update to InformationSpan’s blog index, I was pleased to note also that Gartner have updated their own index to their titled blogs. I couldn’t assert that my observations were the only reason, but I certainly passed comments to Gartner after I last reviewed their coverage. I only wish they’re read them all!
They’ve made the most important change: the omission of Jackie Fenn and Mark Raskino’s Mastering the Hype Cycle has been repaired. But there are still active blogs listed under Archived, including their Office of the Ombudsman blog which you’d think would be important. In fact, the only two items now under Active are Mastering the Hype Cycle and a link to the analysts’ personal blogs.
And beware: some of the blogs are still not listed by the titles that they carry on their own front pages. Mastering the Hype Cycle is a case in point; it’s referenced as Hype Cycle Book.
We shall also keep an eye on High Performance Workplace. This blog last posted in February 2007, and is correctly included under Archived, but there’s a recent (March 2009) test message on it which probably should not have escaped. Maybe it’s going to be revived.
It would be really nice if Gartner could get this right. In the meantime, go to InformationSpan for an index which does what it says on the tin! There’s a link in the panel on this blog page.
More Gartner Blogs and some under-the-cover changes 23 Apr 2009
Posted by InformationSpan in Insight services, Managing IT, Technorati.Tags: Analyst blogs, blog index, Gartner
1 comment so far
Another ten Gartner analysts have joined the Gartner Blog Network and I’ve updated my blog index to include them. For the first time, a couple of the new names are also new analysts, and these are indicated in the index.
There are a couple of other changes on the Gartner side too. Their Investment Services and Banking vertical coverage has been amalgamated, so the sole blogger in this area, Kristin Moyer, now appears under “Banking & Investment Services”.
And one of the new analysts, Richard Fouts, is working within Gartner’s business management service Gartner for Business Leaders. Gartner describe this as “reinvigorated” rather than “new”: it provides “business strategy and marketing insight for technology and service provider organizations” covering analyst relations, sales, product management & marketing, and market & competitive intelligence. I’m going to need to revamp the approach a little to ensure these additional areas get reflected in the topic index; at the moment, they don’t.
Click through to the blog index, and take it from there.
