(AU) ZDNet Australia

Microsoft published a "brief" history of the Windows interface in a blog post that offered some flashes of candour about Vista and Windows 95, and argued that the tablet as we know it today is one device too many. Redmond also said that it is dropping Aero Glass.

Windows 8
(Credit: Microsoft)

First and foremost, Microsoft said it has "moved beyond" Aero Glass on the Windows 8 desktop, in Friday's Building Windows 8 post.

"We spent a lot of energy carefully considering how substantially to update the appearance of the desktop in Windows 8 ...Our primary goal was to bring visual harmony to Windows, while still preserving much of the familiar feel of the Windows 7 desktop, and not sacrificing the compatibility of existing apps," wrote Jensen Harris, director of program management for the User Experience team at Microsoft.

"In the end, we decided to bring the desktop closer to the Metro aesthetic ...We have moved beyond Aero Glass - flattening surfaces, removing reflections and scaling back distracting gradients."

Harris also laid out "a brief history of the Windows user interface" that is anything but brief (true to the blog's prolix style). He then took a tour of the interface from Windows 1 to Windows 8.

Some highlights of "Creating the Windows 8 user experience":

• Windows 1 and the "dubious value" of the mouse: Windows 1, released in 1985, was a "rough graphical shell around DOS, primarily to be used with the keyboard," Harris wrote. And the mouse was doomed to fail from the beginning, according to pundits at the time: "Mice are nice ideas, but of dubious value for business users" (George Vinall, PC Week, 24 April 1984); and "There is no evidence that people want to use these things" (John C Dvorak, San Francisco Examiner, 19 February 1984)

• Windows 3 and 3.1 and File Manager: "This upgrade bet big for the first time on most users having a mouse," he wrote. And Alt+Tab came into vogue then. "Because getting to ... minimised apps often required moving a bunch of windows out of the way first, the Alt+Tab keyboard shortcut became a very popular way to switch between running programs"

• Windows 95 and the nonstarter "Start" button: that Start button didn't live up to its initial billing. "The Start button was so undiscoverable that, despite having the word Start right on it ... text had to be added to the taskbar after early test releases, so that people could figure out how to get started using the programs on their PC." And an interesting sidebar about the IBM Simon mobile phone: "The first ever mobile phone with PDA capabilities, the IBM Simon, was introduced around this time. It weighed almost 1.5 pounds, ran DOS and the only app ever designed for it sold only two copies"

• Windows XP was a "garish" experience for some: "Although Windows XP eventually became a major success, some people at the time were frustrated with the changes to the user interface. They found the Windows XP experience to be garish, and users inquired about how to 'downgrade' to previous versions," Harris wrote

• Windows Vista now looks "cheesy": this was Microsoft's most panned OS. Harris had relatively little to say beyond describing the Aero as having the "appearance of highly rendered glass, light sources, reflections and other graphically complex textures." But he did add this: "This style of simulating faux-realistic materials ... looks dated and cheesy now, but, at the time, it was very much en vogue"

• Windows 8 means not having to carry around a tablet: converge the tablet and laptop, and, presto, you don't necessarily need a tablet. "Windows 8 imagines the convergence of two kinds of devices: a laptop and a tablet. Instead of carrying around three devices (a phone, a tablet and a laptop), you carry around just a phone and a Windows PC," Harris wrote. Of course, this attempts to refute Apple's argument that convergence doesn't always work. "Anything can be forced to converge, but the problem is that products are about trade-offs, and you begin to make trade-offs to the point where what you have left doesn't please anyone," CEO Tim Cook said last month.

Harris also touched on Windows RT, the version of Windows that will run on ARM processors from Nvidia, Qualcomm and Texas Instruments.

Harris argued that the tendency for phones and tablets to "show only one app on the screen at a time" is strictly done to "manage the background activity on the device, so that only apps you are actively using can drain the battery".

"We did feel like only offering 'one at a time' in the Metro-style experience was a bit of a constraint, and not totally true to the Windows history of multitasking. So we evolved Snap for Windows 8. This feature lets you run any two WinRT-based apps side by side, so that you can watch a video while you browse the web."

Via CNET

Investors have been quick to pounce on Facebook's first day on the markets - but its slow start is probably good news for a web-based business.

Just like Facebook, on its first day on the Nasdaq in August 2004, Google struggled to stay ahead of its listing price. A week later, it was up 8 per cent. After just three months, investors found themselves richer to the tune of nearly 50 per cent. Conversely, Yahoo and LinkedIn had a promising first week but saw their share prices slump within a few months.

It seems that the scrutiny of a public listing makes people quickly realise the true underlying value of a business. Pre-IPO hype can drive a frenzy of speculative fervour that soon disappears when the cash is in the bank, and the promised returns are failing to materialise.

Australians know this better than most. There's a long list of companies promising the world, but delisting soon after: Eisa, Spike, Davnet, Winepros, Harvest Road, Travelshop, Chaos - the list goes on. We're left with a couple of significant listed online properties: realestate.com.au (REA Group) and Webjet, both launching with little fanfare and modest wins for early investors.

(Credit: Phil Dobbie/ZDNet Australia)

Facebook is too big to compare with modest Aussie start-ups, but the demands of short-term performance can threaten the stability of any listed business.

For Facebook, that means trying to find a business model that will deliver real returns quickly. As we highlighted in February, Facebook's $100 billion market cap is half that of Google's, with one tenth of the revenue. Chinese search engine Baidu made seven times more than Facebook's $1 billion profit last year, yet it's worth half as much. At the moment, Facebook's $100 billion market capitalisation doesn't make a lot of sense.

Back in 2004, Google's Larry Page and Sergey Brin wrote to investors ahead of the company's listing. They told investors to think long term, and not to expect short-term forecasts. Rather, investors should be satisfied that they were involved with a company that would "make the world a better place".

The world must indeed seem a better place for those who invested in Google back then. Now, will the same be true for those who take the leap with Facebook?

In the wake of the IPO of social-networking giant Facebook, Microsoft has quietly launched So.cl, its own foray into social networking.

Microsoft launches So.cl
(Credit: Screenshot by Steven Musil/CNET)

However, So.cl isn't designed to be a Facebook-challenger. The project, the details of which were leaked last year, is designed to give students the ability to network with their peers and share information.

"So.cl (pronounced 'social') combines search and social networking for the purpose of learning; and is the latest experiment from FUSE Labs," Microsoft said in a description of the app. Users log in to the network with their Facebook or Windows Live accounts. Once logged in, users are presented with a variety of suggested topics of interest.

Much like Facebook's share or recommend buttons, So.cl has a "bookmarklet" feature that adds a "Share on So.cl" button to users' bookmarks toolbars, allowing them to share interesting websites with other So.cl users. In addition to sharing, commenting, and tagging other users' posts, they can also "riff" on the post - a feature that Microsoft described as "a new way to interact and improvise with content".

Another feature in So.cl is the ability to create "video parties", which allow users to search for and assemble videos that they can share with other users.

Microsoft referred to the network as "an experiment in open search", meaning searches will be viewable to other So.cl users and third parties. Microsoft also said that it won't automatically post users' So.cl activity, unless they opt in. Likewise, Facebook friends won't be contacted, unless users invite them.

Microsoft initially made the network, which it described as an "experimental research project" in an earlier blog post, as a service available to information and design schools at the University of Washington, Washington; Syracuse University, New York; and New York University, New York.

Via CNET

Rather than 12 Angry Men, proceedings are starting to play out more like And Then There Were None in the Oracle versus Google case.

That's because the jury lost another member on Friday morning, bringing the total count to five men and five women. The trial originally started with 12 people in April; five men and seven women.

The juror who was dismissed on Friday complained the day before that she had come down with a cold. Although she was originally instructed to try to show up at the US District Court of Northern California on Friday morning after the jury was sent home early on Thursday afternoon, she called the court after on Thursday night to inform the court that she wasn't going to make it on Friday.

As he warned, Judge William Alsup dismissed her from jury duty immediately on Friday morning, telling the jury that it would be an inconvenience to the remaining 10 of them if proceedings were delayed any further. Thus, the jury continued to deliberate on Friday.

This followed the departure of another female juror on Tuesday morning ahead of closing arguments, after she called in to say that she couldn't make it, due to car trouble.

Incidentally, the judge told the jury a few weeks ago that the trial can still carry on if it loses a few jurors. Alsup never offered an exact number, but he said that it is possible to continue proceedings even if the total count drops by one or two. On Thursday, he specified that the jury count could be as low as six for the trial to continue without disruption.

At the same time, based on the questions from the jury thus far, it looks like they could be at an impasse yet again over US Patent 6,061,520, which is addressed two of the three questions on the special verdict form for the patent phase of the case.

Twice, the jury has requested to hear transcripts of court testimony read back to them - specifically from Oracle's expert witness John Mitchell and Google's expert witness Terence Parr. Excerpts from both readings focused on the terminology and differences of simulated execution and pattern matching.

In closing arguments, Van Nest said, on the 6,061,520 patent, that every expert witness who acknowledged every step of the method must be present, including simulation of the bytecode. He also explained that Android doesn't implement simulated execution like Oracle argues, but, rather, pattern matching.

Parr said that the dx tool in Android doesn't use simulated execution for the purpose of identifying static initialisation of an array. Mitchell said that simulated execution includes pattern matching.

Finally, also pointing towards potential problems in the deliberation room, one juror submitted a note on Friday afternoon, asking why the verdict vote has to be unanimous.

The judge responded soundly, "It's the law. That's why it has to be unanimous. Congress said it has to be unanimous."

Before the jury re-entered to hear the answer and reading of Parr's testimony, Alsup added that he has "been privileged to preside over more than 100 trials," with the vast majority of them being jury trials. He said that only in a couple instances did he have juries that could not come to unanimous decisions.

Oracle v. Google: special verdict form for patent phase

Via ZDNet US

Design problems with Nasdaq's technology interfered with Facebook's initial public offering (IPO), the stock exchange's chief executive has acknowledged.

(Credit: Sarah Tew/CNET)

Tests conducted ahead of Friday's highly anticipated offering failed to detect problems with order cancellation, Robert Greifeld told reporters in an interview reported by The Wall Street Journal. He said that Nasdaq was "humbly embarrassed" by the problems.

"This was not our finest hour," he said, adding that Nasdaq's board met on Saturday to discuss the matter.

However, he maintained that nothing in the exchange's data indicated that the glitch was responsible for the plunge in share price that the stock experienced. Not long after the stock began trading on Friday at US$42.05, shares tumbled to their US$38 offering price.

"It would lead a reasonable person to conclude that it didn't have an impact on the stock price," he said, according to a New York Times account of the interview.

Greifeld's comments were the first public admission by the exchange that technical glitches may have contributed to confusion among traders after the IPO's opening was delayed by 30 minutes on Friday. Traders complained that they were not able to confirm changes or cancellations made to Facebook orders starting as early as 4.30am PT. Later in the morning, some traders said that they had not received confirmation from Nasdaq that their transactions had actually been completed.

Angry traders and investors are demanding that the exchange compensate them for any losses incurred as a result of the glitch, according to a Fox Business report. Those demands could add up to US$100 million, but Greifeld said that the exchange will not cover the losses.

Facebook shares finished the day at US$38.27 - up just 27 cents, or 0.71 per cent, over their US$38 opening.

Bloomberg reported on Friday that the SEC will review Nasdaq's performance in regards to trading Facebook shares. However, the news service noted that the commission "routinely" conducts such reviews.

A snafu with another Nasdaq IPO in March caused Apple shares to briefly plunge more than 9 per cent when shares in BATS Global Markets, a stock-exchange rival to both the NYSE and the Nasdaq, were halted due to "clearly erroneous" trades. BATS issued its own alert, reporting "system issues in symbols range A through BF" - a range that included Apple (AAPL).

Via CNET

Pakistan blocked the social-networking website Twitter over the weekend, because it refused to remove tweets considered to be anti-Islamic.

The tweets were promoting a competition on Facebook to post images of Islam's Prophet Mohammed, said Mohammad Yaseen, chairman of the Pakistan Telecommunication Authority.

Many Muslims regard depictions of the prophet, even favourable ones, as being blasphemous.

The government restored access to Twitter before midnight on Sunday, about eight hours after it initially blocked access.

It is unclear whether the government reversed its decision because of action by Twitter, or because of public criticism that it received for its censorship.

Yaseen said on Sunday afternoon that Pakistan's Ministry of Information Technology had ordered the telecommunications authority to block Twitter because the company refused to remove the offending tweets.

In contrast, Facebook agreed to address Pakistan's concerns about the competition, he said.

Officials from Twitter and Facebook were not immediately available for comment.

A top court in Pakistan ordered a ban on Facebook in 2010 amid anger over a similar competition. The ban was lifted about two weeks later, after Facebook blocked the particular page in Pakistan.

The Pakistani government said at the time that it would continue to monitor other major websites for anti-Islamic links and content.

Even when Twitter was blocked on Sunday, many people based in Pakistan continued to use the website by employing programs that disguise the user's location.

There was widespread criticism of the government's action by those on Twitter, who tend to be more liberal than average Pakistanis.

"Another cheap moral stunt by Pakistan," tweeted liberal Pakistani columnist Nadeem Paracha.

The differing missions of the US National Security Agency (NSA) and the FBI have led to a split over telecommunications intercept policies - which Americans call "wiretaps" - according to computer scientist Susan Landau.

The FBI's focus is on law enforcement. Since 1994, the agency has had a direct say in the design of communications networks, courtesy of the US Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act (CALEA), so that its ability to conduct intercepts isn't compromised by new developments, such as voice over internet protocol (VoIP) communications, and other peer-to-peer technologies.

Law-enforcement agencies in the US and elsewhere are demanding the ability to intercept communications in their fight against terrorism, espionage and serious international crimes. The impact of American actions is felt far beyond its shores, because the majority of the world's internet communications still traverses the US.

But as Landau, a visiting scholar in the Computer Science Department at Harvard University, told the AusCERT information security conference last week, wiretaps help solve just six US kidnapping cases per year, and, according to a June 2006 Department of Justice whitepaper on counterterrorism, only 441 defendants have ever been charged with terror- or terrorism-related activities with an international "nexus".

Landau said that natural disasters pose far greatest risks to the nation.

The FBI estimated that the cost to the US of nation-state espionage is US$200 billion annually, she said, and Kaspersky Lab chief Eugene Kaspersky told the conference that criminal malware costs more than US$100 billion globally.

But in 2005, Hurricane Katrina alone was responsible for 1836 deaths and an estimated US$81 billion in property damage - and the US has been relatively lucky. The Haiti earthquake of 2010 killed 230,000 people. The Indian Ocean tsunami of 2004 killed 283,000.

"We face serious natural disaster risks...what do you need during those times? You need emergency responders to be able to communicate," she said. Availability and interoperability are key.

Landau said that while researching her book Surveillance or Security? The Risks Posed by New Wiretapping Technologies, the NSA told her that the answer is for secure, interoperable land mobile radio to be available cheaply through consumer electronics stores. Mobile or landline phones might go down in an emergency, she said. Satellite communication could be blocked by tall buildings or bad weather.

"To get [the balance] right, you want to have secure communications when you have a disaster, whether natural or otherwise, and the natural ones happen much more often," Landau said. Only after that should we consider ensuring the security of personal and business communication, and then the potential for intercepts.

"You build wiretapping capability into a communications system, it stays a really long time. You try to deal with an emergency threat [such as terrorism] now by building a wiretapping capability into your system now, you might take care of your threat now, but five years, 10 years, 20 years down the road, you've still got that wiretapping capability, and somebody else can break into it," she said.

"The NSA and FBI have split on this, because they have different viewpoints," she said, with the NSA looking at the broader picture of national security, rather than just law enforcement.

Landau recommends against focusing on the blunt instrument of privacy-invasive communications intercepts, which she says could easily be turned against citizens. Law-enforcement agencies should instead use transactional information, such as mobile phone location data, the vulnerability of end hosts and other "clever" solutions.