Windows Licensing: The Price of Greed

Robert McLaws article Windows Licensing: The Price of Success has to be one of the best pieces of un intentional comedy writing I have read in a while. It gave me a good laugh. Here is the short short version. *ahem* Microsoft please don't be as greedy with Vista licensing as you are with XP licensing since it might cost $675 to upgrade a 3 computer home, assuming Windows Vista Home Premium at $225 per copy. I offer instead for your reference what Apple does. If you have upto a 5 Mac household, the same upgrade from OS X 10.3 Panther to OS X 10.4 Tiger is $199 with the Family Pack. That is only $39.80 per computer if you have 5 machines, $66.33 per machine for a 3 computer household. Apple does this, because like a lot of things, they has already figured out this problem. Peruse the Apple store for Tiger pricing. The single licenses upgrade, btw, is only $129. What's that? Apple releases OS X so much more frequently than Microsoft releases Windows (that is already a joke, do they actually release Windows?) that you end up paying more for OS X than Windows, so Windows is cheaper! You would have to buy the Family Pack for 4 releases in row to costs more than a single Windows upgrade cycle example above. I can't wait to run the scenarios when MS announces final retail pricing. There is no reason to believe Apple will be charging more for Leopard upgrades than for the Tiger cycle, whereas MS has already increased prices through additional editions Windows Vista Home Premium and Windows Vista Ultimate. Paul Thurrott has a good breakdown of the Vista editions. Choose wisely, and enjoy the ability to be upsold to an even more expensive edition of Windows Vista with Anytime Upgrade.

Leopard Preview Revisted: 64-bit and why it's a big deal

Apple released Xcode 2.4 today. This release fixes a number of things, and adds some features, all detailed in the Release Notes, ADC account required. The part that I want to call attention to is the new 64-bit support in Xcode 2.4, as detailed in the release notes:

Xcode 2.4 adds support for 64-bit Intel development, with support for creating four-architecture Universal applications (32 and 64 bit for both Intel and PowerPC).

Now the pieces of why 64-bit Leopard are a big deal fall into place, contrary to what some are saying about it. Here is a quote from the Leopard Preview site:

Leopard takes 64-bit computing to the next level, while maintaining full performance and compatibility for your existing 32-bit applications and drivers.

There will be just 1 version of Leopard, and it will be 64-bit with full 32-bit non-emulated support. It's now obvious that starting with Xcode 2.4, the Universal binary format has been extended to support 32-bit and 64-bit for both PPC and Intel inside the same file, quad univeral binearies! Users don't have to choose between 32-bit or 64-bit, either at the OS or application layers, it's all abstracted from them. The Mach-O object file format has been extended again to great utility. Read more about Mach-O and Fat Binaries on Wikipedia. The differences between MS and Apple on the transition to 64-bit couldn't be more stark, assuming Apple executes as it has with the Intel transition and ongoing PPC support. With MS, I have to "choose" between the compatibility of 32-bit vs. the possible improvement of a 64-bit version, with a lot of downside, as Paul Thurrott reported last year about XP x64, and again with Vista, based on Thurrott's advice for buying a Vista PC. This is a nice quote:

I do recommend x64-compatible chips, but those who upgrade to Vista in the next year or so will likely want to stick with the 32-bit Vista versions for the short term.

Paul's Vista Feature Focus: 64-bit has a Final Thoughts section that I could quote wholesale, it's all germane, but this is the saddest part:

...the x64 versions [of Vista] are also far less compatible than their predecessors, with both hardware devices and software, and these incompatibilities will ultimately make the x64 Vista versions less attractive to most users. Within the next few years, the majority of Windows users will almost certainly move to x64-based PCs. But I'm guessing that the 32-bit versions of Vista will dominate throughout this product's lifetime because of compatibility issues.

No one can say right now whether Apple will be able pull off inclusion of 64-bit as smoothly as they are suggesting until applications start getting compiled and testing using Xcode 2.4 (and later Xcode 3.0) on Tiger and Leopard, but Apple has certainly maneuvered themselves, and their developers, to provided 64-bit support to those users that need it with none of the problems that Windows 64-bit, either XP or Vista, are plagued with. You need only look at how smoothly PPC to Intel was delivered to make some good bets. 64-bit in Leopard is not just an important end-user feature for the Pro community, it's an amazing piece of engineering, and again demonstrates Apple's seemingly unique ability to take complex technical problems and simplify them. Hide all the hard engineering for the majority of users, but with OS X expose it for those that want it. Anyone saying that the 64-bit situation with XP or Vista is in anyway analogous to what is coming in Leopard has blinders on.

Apple's Leopard Attacks Part 1: Microsoft Exchange Server

Update Roughly Drafted has started publishing articles on this very topic. Of course Roughly Drafted has a lot more history on the topic of groupware and email servers in general.
Apple Takes On Exchange Server
Apple's Open Calendar Server vs Microsoft Exchange
MacDailyNews has has picked up on Roughly Drafted's articles and I posted a comment on the article saying I originally talked about this back in August 06.

Original Post
Leopard Server was not demoed in the WWDC 06 Keynote in any capacity, but the preview site and subsequent reports (see the References section at the bottom), makes something very clear. Apple is about to attack Microsoft at it's linchpin server product, the one enterprises get shackled to first: Exchange Server.

Microsoft's Server Playbook
Microsoft Exchange Server (4.x-2003) is a Trojan Horse, it gets other MS server products in the enterprise. This plan become obvious once Exchange 2000 was released. In one of the most stunning instances I can remember of tying two software markets together, Active Directoy in Windows 2000 Server was required. Exchange 200x will not function without it. Why is this is insidious? Look at the cost for a medium sized company from the MS Exchange Server site and theWindows Server 2003 R2 pricing site:

Product	Number of Users	Cost
Microsoft Exchange Server Standard Edition	N/A	$699
Microsoft Exchange Server user CAL	50	$67
Microsoft Exchange Server device CAL	50	$67
Windows Server 2003 R2 Standard Edition	5	$999
Windows Server 2003, Client Access License 20-pack x 2	20	$799
	Total	$9,996

Organizations can acquire the licenses listed above at lower prices through volume licensing, but that is exactly the point. The list prices are so high (I haven't even added in hardware and possibly consulting costs), organizations feel like they are getting a bargain if they sign for volume licensing, they are getting a "deal". Once an organization signs on for volume licensing, they hardly ever switch away from MS, the opposite happens, they add more products (e.g. SharePoint Portal Server, SQL Server). The entire machine is too costly to replace, you have the Exchange Server admins, the experts just to understand all the licensing and audit them, the backup specialists, the AD specialists, I am sure I am missing someone. Volume licensing is the same reason MS with their partners have been pushing rental music (wrongly called subscriptions): they automatically get paid every day/month/year whether they deliver you something new or not. The revenue is guaranteed. Customer aquisition costs are high, if you can't cut that costs out of every sale, it's nearly like printing money. Make no mistake, figuring out the licensing and pricing if any organization thinks they might be interested in MS products is a full time job, there are so many possible permutations, and the wording so ambigious at times, you are never perfectly sure you have only the licenses you need and nothing more. Often you are penalized if you guess wrong, because features and capabilities are walled off from use unless you get the higher priced version, and there is no incremental upgrade costs if you aren't on volume licensing. Look again at the table above, MS is getting organizations that sign onto Exchange for 2 CALs per user, 1 for AD and 1 for Exchange, and for additional CALs if you use your SmartPhone/Blackberry/Outlook Web Access terminal to get your mail.

Apple Attacks
Before OS X, Apple did not have an OS capable of being a true server operating system (i.e. no preemtive multitasking). This point is important because gaining traction with a server OS takes years. It took MS 8 years before Windows NT, rechristened as Windows 2000, really took off (it helped that Windows 2000 was also the best version of the product at the time). But what was the appeal of Windows NT vs. Solaris/Digital Unix/AIX? NT used cheaper commodity (Intel) hardware, undercut the pricing models of the big Unix servers, met the needs of the bottom end of the market first (small and medium businesses), specialists were cheaper, and yes NT was easier to use in a lot of cases for people that grew up on Windows. Now look at the moves Apple is making with Xserve and Leopard Server. Apple has moved to Intel hardware. An Xserve with Leopard Server starts at $2499. That includes Mac OS X Leopard Server for UNLIMITED users (retail is $999 for the upgrade) and includes a number of servers built-in (Mail, Calendaring, Directory, DB, Teams) which MS charges seperate CALs (AD, Exchange) and seperate servers (Exchange, AD, SQL Server, SharePoint) for very low pricing. In Leopard Server, Apple looks to be targetting the bottom end of the server market first with the new Server Assistant and Server Preferences. No administrators required, just plug in your Xserve, run through the Server Assistant, and you are ready to use. You have to wonder how realistice "No administrators" is, but that is a huge chunk of cost if Apple can reduce the number of servers operators to near zero. What about backup? Imagine if Time Machine is built-into Leopard Server? Who needs to manage backup when its always running and the bits are just there if you go looking for them, as long as you have enough disk space. Notice I mentioned Server Assistant and System Preferences. If anyone can focus on a hard problem and come up with an easier way to convey the same ideas as others, it's Apple. Take a look at Time Machine for an example. If you have ever seen the MS Exchange Management Console? Be afraid, be very afraid. This is very telling, listed on the iCal Server preview page:

Networks with an existing directory service — such as Active Directory — can deploy Leopard Server for local hosting of all calendar and collaboration data while continuing to use the existing directory for user log-in and authentication.

How can Apple offer all of this at such low pricing?
Create a disruptive union of open source and closed sourced development models. Apple has been on this path for years, using the parts of various open source project that best met its technical and licensing needs. Apple announced the most recent and obvious commitement they have ever made, Mac OS Forge, including there iCal Server that is going to be in Leopard. How is this cheaper? Open source has a near chronic inability to put the finishing touch on any project (exceptions exists, e.g. Firefox), but that's one of Apple's core strengths, meticulous attention to detail which distills a problem down to its essential parts, and bubbling that to the surface. Add to the fact that iCal Server has been open sourced.

Worms in the Apple
Will Apple have problems executing this plan? You bet. Enterprises are steadfast that they need multiple hardware sources to use with their monopoly software, with Apple you are stuck with the hardware and OS, but not that Apple is Intel, if OS X Server doesn't work out, you could always install Windows anyway. But that's not the rub, its that if Apple makes the hardware prices really undesirable, you can't move your software elsewhere. Another issue will be getting the data out of Exchange. MS and Lotus have both spent millions writing conversion tools, sometimes even for different versions of their own products. If Apple doesn't have a way of getting data out of Exchange, their market is only the companies that don't have a solution already, not very appetizing. Apple needs to start pounding he pavement to once Leopard Server is out the door to get people to convert if it wants to sell Xserves. But they really don't have to sell a lot, take a couple percent of the Collaboration Server market, and it would be tremendously disruptive. Finally, since the server is open source, you will get people that build iCal Server on Linux and deploy for free. But the geek's that do that aren't the market Apple is targeting, so I don't think this is a huge worry either.

Conclusion
Apple is being very aggresive, they want a piece of the enterprise. If this wasn't clear before, it certainly is now. Exciting times indeed.

References Some people have started to put this together, it's there in bits and pieces, so instead of linking it all above, here are my sources so far for this info: http://weblog.infoworld.com/enterprisemac/archives/2006/08/wwdc_2006_repor.html http://www.macworld.com/news/2006/08/08/caldav/index.php?lsrc=mwrss http://lists.apple.com/archives/darwin-dev/2006/Aug/msg00067.html http://www.apple.com/server/macosx/collaborationservices.html http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,2001617,00.asp?kc=EWRSS03119TX1K0000594

Is Steve Jobs Sick?

First MacDailyNews asked the question, and Paul Thurrott's Internet Nexus ponders the same after reading MacDailyNews. I didn't see the keynote, or half of it anyway (PowerBook battery died, PC audio isn't working), until this morning, but I didn't think Jobs looked sick. And their is a good explanation for the use of multiple people, other than the sick question. Apple is trying to show there are more people behind the curtain running the show than just Steve. It's meant to answer those that question if their is a CEO transition plan in place when Steve makes an exit, illness related or otherwise. I think this is part of the CEO interview process, see how other current execs play to the crowds. Steve can't be CEO or the only showman forever.

WWDC 2006 Keynote Over

They Stevenotes over and done, new Macs were introduced, and Leopard was previewed. If you weren't at the show, you can look at the features previewed here: Leopard Preview. I would say Apple showed the bare minimum necessary during the presentation. I am very excited about what I saw, especially Time Machine. MS has had Shadow Copies/Previous Versions for years. Could anything highlight the difference more between MS and Apple? MS names something so cryptically and makes it so hard to use, as a tab on the properties of a folder, that it's nearly an obscurity and not many people use it. Apple implements the same idea buts names it Time Machine, people can easily remember this, implement it for everything, and then the UI, its fantastic, gorgeous use of 3D while being actually helpful in finding what you are looking for. Look at the video here. That said, you know there is more in Leopard than what is shown either on the preview site or during the keynote. They didn't even show Safari for one, you know work is being done their, the comparison to Vista I think is telling. I don't think there is really any way Apple shows how MS has ripped off whole app layouts and OS look and feel and not be planning on a UI overhall. I may be wrong, but the whole "Top Secret" slide in the keynote wasn't there for no reason. The one thing really not demoed was Xcode 3.0, and the preview site makes me want it now. Objective-C 2.0 will have garbage collection: confirmed! Project snapshots - you save your code just like a video game! Xray looks killer. Spring 2007 can't get here soon enough.

WWDC Eve == Christmas Eve

Anyone that follows Apple, and probably most in the tech world, know that the World Wide Developer Conference (WWDC) starts tomorrow, and Steve Job's Keynote starts at 1 PM Eastern Time. Take a look at the rumors at MacSurfer, the buzz is palpable. I am not going to engage in the rampant speculation going on, you can see a large collection of it on MacSurfer, but it really is just like Christmas Eve. I had seriously considered going on my own dime to the WWDC this year, would have been my first time, to see the keynote and soak in all the developer knowledge because of the Leopard showing, but the expense was just to great if I wanted to have any coin left over to buy whatever wonders Jobs unveils tomorrow. It doesn't help when someone like Robert Scoble, who has an in-law that works at Apple, pours gasoline on the fire with this in a post on Vista not being ready:

Huh? I believe Vista DOES make our computing lives easier. The desktop search features are a huge advance. The multimedia capabilities are WORLDS ahead of anything else I’ve used. And the Tablet PC, Speech Recognition, and Media Center stuff that’s in there is WORLDS ahead of Apple. Although watch Apple in a week. Hint hint.

I just wish Apple was streaming the event live, realistically I won't know anything until 2-3 PM EST, oh the agony...

Windows Server 2003 Server Service Optimization

I have been looking at a lot of Windows Server 2003 configurations lately to audit the dev, test, uat, and prod environments for my company. One of the things that seems like a holdover from the NT4 days is tuning the Server service. You get to this configuration in W2K3 from Start-Control Panel-Network Connections-Properties on Local Area Connection. Then select File and Printer Sharing for Microsoft Networks and click the Properties button. I could put some screenshots together, but I am being lazy :) Anyway, you get 4 choices for Optimization:

• Minimize memory used
• Balance
• Maximize data throughput for file sharing - the Default
• Maximize data throughput for network applications

There is also a checkbox to Make browser broadcasts to LAN manager 2.x clients, I have never used this box. Tuning this service used to be one of the first things you did in NT4 when not using the box as a file server, but more and more, I see it being left in its default configuration (noted above). I think people expect that you shouldn't have to do this anymore, after all, you did you the Manage Your Server wizard to configure your server roles right? Unfortunately, you still have to change this one by hand, and for Exchange, SQL Server, and IIS you want to choose Maximize data throughput for network applications. Click on this link to see Microsoft's description of how the kernel is tuned based on this setting, but the short version is anything but the default does the same thing, makes the file system cache a fixed 8 MB (instead of being capable of expanding to physical memory limits) and makes the memory manager more aggressive about moving memory pages out of physical memory, which is better for apps that manage their own memory caches.

Review Update: Microsoft Xbox 360, now a typical MS product

Back on June 21, 2006, I wrote that the Xbox 360 was Microsoft's Best Product Ever. Well I have had the 360 for nearly 4 months now, and I have run into a few issues that have taken the shine off my previous glowing review.

• The Universal Media Remote died. I bought this seperately, but its part of the MS accesories story, and in < 3 months, it just wouldn't work anymore. I don't remember doing anything to harm it, but it died. To MSes credit though, they did ship me a new one very quickly, but I am concerned about the longevity of this system because...
• The 360 crashed on boot with a System Error. This would appear to be the 360's BSOD (in this case a Black Screen of Death). It happened on a cold boot after being off all night long, so I an concerned this points to a coming hardware failure
• Games sometimes just lockup.I have seen this in both Project Gotham Racing 3 (PGR3) and Ghost Recon: Advance Warfighter (GRAW). Game is playing fine, then all of a sudden the screen freezes and the 360 is unresponsive, but music keeps playing. Very Odd
• The 360 runs VERY hot. I am not talking about the fan noise, that is immediately obvious, I mean the temperature of my 15x10 room changes from acceptable, as is the rest of my house, to unacceptable if I play the Xbox 360 for more than an hour. I have had to bring a fan into the room just so there is enough airflow. And no, the game lockups happen at all times, so its not purely a hear issue.
• Achievements aren't well documented in many games. I am growing increasingly frustrated by the need to google forums and other sites for an actual explanation on how to obtain some achievements. There are a lot of achievements, particularly in PGR3 and GRAW, that require getting compound objectives. If you can't get it done in one sitting, you have no way of knowing most of the time what criteria you have satisfied vs. what you don't. Also, the wording on achievements is sometimes intentionally cryptic, that's my observation, to make it harder to achieve. That's not cool, I don't want a mini-game built-in to the achievement system, I just want to clearly know what in a game I can get points for, and what my status is in getting those points
• Downloadable Content Pricing. The GRAW - Chapter 2 was very expensive for a game I already paid $60 for. I bought it to get another set of Co-op missions since me and a friend have really enjoyed the Co-op missions. Have I got my money's worth? Tough to say, but what's infuriating is that there were no more achievements for the additional Co-op missions for my I think $12.
• Unable to download content error message. I am a demo and trailer downloaded whore from Xbox Live Marketplace, until 2 days ago that is. I tried to download the Madden 2007 trailer and some other stuff and I kept getting told unable to download content. Reason why, I was out of Hard Drive space!!! Common MS, this should be an easy thing to tell the user, Unable to download content because the hard drive is full, I shouldn't have to troubleshoot the downloading of content. You have got to be kidding me.

I wonder how many other people were really excited about the X360 but are not starting to run into problems that cause their experience to be less than stellar?

Regarding Brian Krebs’s Reporting on the Supposed MacBook Wi-Fi Exploit

I was going to blog this myself, but Daring Fireball has already done the job and it's a good read. To sum up, the reporting on this issue is so poor it's no wonder people are not reading newspapers anymore, you get better, more accurate, and completely information online than nearly anything tech related from the dead tree set.

Review: Nintendo DS Lite + Games

I posted a whole bunch about my experiences with the Sony PSP, which were not good. Well that device has finally been auctioned (thats almost like a divorce) and been replaced with the Nintendo DS Lite. If I had to sum up my experience with the PSP in one word, it would be disappointment. Doing the same with the DS Lite, I would say joy. What is the big deal about the hardware? The DS Lite is designed to play handheld games, and it is fantastic at that. The console form factor is fantastic, it doesn't weigh much, screens are very bright, the stylus is big and heavy enough to be good to use, sound is great with headphones, and button placement is ideal. There are near zero load times! For anyone that has been playing optical disc based consoles for years, it is startling to use a cartridge system again, and honestly very satisfying. I can't stress how great it is to not have to wait on the stupid system when you have just a few minutes to get some playing down. Its so fast it makes me get very angry at my Xbox 360 for excessive load times (Project Gotham Racing 3 you are on notice). This is not to imply that the DS can compete on graphical firepower with the PSP, it can't, but you don't care at all because of the games. With the innovative touch based control scheme in a lot of games, I finally feel like there is innovation in games again instead of retreading everything. But wait, the hardware may be slick, but without software (*cough* PSP) who cares? This is where the DS really shines. The game library is innovative and it there are great titles. Here are the titles I have already bought in 2 months (release June 11, 2006) with the DS:

• Advance Wars: Dual Strike
• New Super Marios Bros
• Brain Age: Train Your Brain In Just Minutes A Day
• Tetris DS

These games are all great, with Advance Wars and New Super Mario Bros requiring special mention. Nothing on the PSP that I played was as good as any of the DS titles I already have, and Advance Wars and New Super Mario Bros are some of the most fun games I have ever played. Brain Age, Tetris DS, and New Super Mario Bros all got my wife to play, and she hasn't picked up a controller ages. I also got a chance to play Metroid Prime Hunters, Ridge Racer DS (same as the PSP version, only lower rez polys), and Super Mario 64. Metroid Prime Hunters is a lot of fun once you learn the touch screen based control scheme, but once you do, you will cringe at the thought of the PSPs one analog stick in SOCOM anew. There is also a number of games the came out for the DS before I bought one, and Game Boy Advance games (which the DS also plays) that I want to get, here is a sampling:

• Castlevanie: Dawn of Sorrow
• Trauma Center
• Phoenix Wright: Attorney at Law
• Animal Crossing: Wild World

This doesn't even take care of all the new games coming out this fall and winter, like StarFox and Final Fantasy III. Why didn't you just get the DS when it first came out? The DS Lite is not to be confused with the original DS, which people are referring to as the DS Phat. Check this Wikipedia entry about the DS Lite. I tried a friend's DS Phat when I told her about how much the PSP sucked, and I wasn't impressed with the DS Phat because it was even bigger than the PSP and the screen brightness was awful. I primarily use any handheld system on the train to/from NYC, and their is a lot of sunlight, I need bright screens. Anything wrong with it? I have not a single complaint about the DS Lite, but there have been rumblings of a Cracking hinge problem. I don't have this problem with my DS Lite, and I suspect that its the Internet's propensity to act as a megaphone for those with issues. I certainly don't baby my DS Lite, I toss it in the backpack with both my laptops and other junk, no cracking for me. Conclusion If you like playing innovative, fun games and not just ports from the PS2 (*cough* PSP) on a handheld, the the DS Lite is for you. It doesn't have the best 3D graphics, but the games sure are fun.