February 19th, 2009

Posted by Larry Dignan

There’s a looming showdown over Web video as content providers wrestle with the future as the television business model that has paid the bills for years becomes strained. 

In the last day or so, Hulu has been on a tear as it rips down its content from other sites (Techmeme). First up, Hulu pulled content from TV.com, which is run by CBS Interactive, the parent of ZDNet. I wrote off the skirmish between TV.com and Hulu as big media theatrics–these massive media companies are always pulling content down to prove some point. But then there was Hulu’s move to rip its video down from Boxee. 

For starters, Hulu has every right to make such a move. Hulu–a joint venture between NBC and Fox–didn’t have a formal relationship with Boxee. In an explanatory blog post, Hulu chief Jason Kilar spoke like a man caught in between two behemoths he can’t control. 

Later this week, Hulu’s content will no longer be available through Boxee. While we never had a formal relationship with Boxee, we are under no illusions about the likely Boxee user response from this move. This has weighed heavily on the Hulu team, and we know it will weigh even more so on Boxee users.

Our content providers requested that we turn off access to our content via the Boxee product, and we are respecting their wishes. While we stubbornly believe in this brave new world of media convergence — bumps and all — we are also steadfast in our belief that the best way to achieve our ambitious, never-ending mission of making media easier for users is to work hand in hand with content owners. Without their content, none of what Hulu does would be possible, including providing you content via Hulu.com and our many distribution partner websites.

The big question here is this: Why was the request made now? Peter Kafka asks if the cable companies were behind Hulu’s put-the-Web-video-back-in-the-bottle attempt. 

Jason O’Grady: Hulu’s fantastic suicide

The answer: You bet. 

Here’s the deal: Cable companies pay content providers like Viacom and Disney big money to carry channels. When the economy was better cable companies weren’t going to sweat Web video experiments. It’s a different story today. Here’s what cable companies are facing:

• High foreclosure rates;

  order cialis without prescription

• Consumers cutting back on premium video packages and looking toward services like Netflix for their entertainment needs;
• Intense competition from AT&T and Verizon;
• And questions about the value of cable video. 

The Wall Street Journal a few days ago chronicled how consumers are saving by ditching the cable service (they’re keeping the broadband service though). And Comcast’s fourth quarter results tell the tale. The cable giant actually saw a net subscriber decline. A lot of the cable problems are tied to the housing market–when you can’t afford to pay the mortgage chances are you’re not paying the cable bill either. Meanwhile, housing inventories are bloated and that also means a bunch of empty homes without cable service and customers that certainly won’t upgrade service. Here’s a look at Comcast’s customer metrics:

Comcast CFO Mike Angelakis acknowledged the troubles on the company’s earnings conference call:

The weak economy is impacting the consumer particularly on housing growth, vacancies and moves, providing us with fewer opportunities to sell new services.

Comcast operating chief Steve Burke expanded on that theme:

This earnings season everybody seems to be talking about the economy for obvious reasons. Instead of talking about the economy, what I’d like to do is be a bit more specific and talk about our marketplace. Our marketplace is affected by the economy and also by the ebb and flow of competition. In talking about our marketplace I’d like to highlight what we’re seeing, what we’re not seeing and also importantly what we’re doing about it.

In terms of what we’re seeing, first of all there’s more competition from the telephone companies, 10% of our footprint a year ago was over built, and today that number is more like 22%. Secondly, we’re seeing more price sensitivity particularly since the month of October. Third, its simply harder to make the phone ring with marketing and sales, customers appear to be defensive, they’re less likely to go out and subscribe or call up for upgrades or new services.

Hence our connects, the people coming into our business our connects are lower then we had planned. Finally, we’re seeing a very difficult ad sales environment that is currently showing no signs of improvement. Those are some of the things we’re seeing.

Burke then went on to list a few positives and noted Comcast can weather the storm–and it can.

But put yourself in the shoes of Mr. Cable mogul. You’re paying carriage fees to content companies that try to squeeze you for more money almost every year. Meanwhile, these content companies are showing video on the Web and kinda sorta monetizing it. Consumers are beginning to use Web video as a cable replacement. It’s only natural that cable companies would apply some pressure on content owners, which have to cave because Web video experiments aren’t paying the bills. 

In the context of dollars, the Hulu moves are perfectly logical. The rub: The Web video genie is out of the bottle and isn’t going back in. But in a rough economy there will be many more video skirmishes in the day ahead and users will be stuck in the crossfire. The television business model is complicated and has been under attack for years. The recession–or perhaps more accurately the decession–will push the content-cable-Web tug of war to the forefront.

February 19th, 2009

Posted by Mary Jo Foley

Microsoft has told select testers to expect this week a near-final Release Candidate (RC) test build of Windows Vista Service Pack 2 (SP2).

Microsoft order cialis professional released on February 19 the RC build of both Vista SP2 and Windows Server 2008 SP2 to testers with access to Microsoft Connect, according to Ars Technica. Microsoft will broaden the pool of folks with access to the RC within the next 48 hours, Ars said, and will make it available via Windows Update.

The build number for the RC is 6002.16670.090130, according to Ars. Microsoft delivered an escrow build of the Vista SP2 RC to testers in late January.

SP2 is primarily a collection of bug fixes and updates to Vista SP1. On the server side, SP2 adds built-in Hyper-V support to Windows Server 2008. (Microsoft considers the final release of Windows Server 2008 to already be SP1, if you were wondering where SP1 for server is/was.)

Microsoft isn’t saying much about the RC releases. Here’s the company’s official statement from a company spokesperson:

“Microsoft distributed notification of an update to Windows Vista and Windows Server 2008 SP2 testers in an effort to gain additional feedback. We continuously engage with our partners and testers on the development of service packs and we will track customer and partner feedback from the beta program before setting a final date for distribution. We will have more to share on Windows Vista and Windows Server 2008 SP2 soon and are targeting final delivery in Q2 2009.”

Unofficial word is the Softies are aiming to deliver the final SP2 for Vista and Windows Server 2008 in April. April also is the rumored delivery-date target for the public Release Candidate for Windows 7 and Windows Server 2008 R2 (Windows 7 Server).

Steven Musil CNET News.com

Published: 16 Feb 2009

File-swappers are expected to be keeping their eyes on a court in Sweden this week as a landmark copyright-infringement trial gets underway.

The four men behind the popular file-sharing site The Pirate Bay go on trial Monday in Stockholm, accused of helping millions of internet users illegally download protected movies, music, and computer games. The defendants — Fredrik Neij, Gottfrid Svartholm Warg, Peter Sunde Kolmisoppi and Carl Lundström — face up to two years in prison and a fine of 1.2 million kronor (£100,000) if convicted of being an accessory and conspiracy to break Swedish copyright law.

Two of the defendants insisted during a webcast news conference in Stockholm on Sunday that their site was legal and that the trial's outcome would have no impact on the site's ability to operate.

"What are they going to do about it? They have already failed to take down the site once. Let them fail again," Gottfrid Svartholm Warg said, according to highlights of the event printed by TorrentFreak. "It has its own life without us."

The Sweden-based BitTorrent indexing site has defiantly linked to counterfeit copies of films, TV shows, music videos and other content despite Hollywood's requests to remove them. While The Pirate Bay does not host any unauthorised content, the site is accused of facilitating illegal copying by directing its some 22 million users to protected movies and music.

A civil claim brought by a group of media giants is also being heard with the prosecution. The plaintiffs — Warner Bros Entertainment, MGM Pictures, Columbia Pictures Industries, 20th Century Fox Films, Sony BMG, Universal and EMI — seek 120 million kronor in compensation for lost revenues.

The Pirate Bay has already weathered several attempts by the governments of Sweden and the US to shut down the site, but this is likely to be the largest civil challenge the website has ever faced.

"It does not matter if they require several million or one billion. We are not rich and have no money to pay," said Peter Sunde, another defendant. "They won't get a cent."

John Kennedy, chairman of online prescription cialis the International Federation of the Phonographic Industry, said in a statement that the case was about protecting the interests of the artists.

"The criminal prosecution of The Pirate Bay is about protecting creators from those who violate their rights and deprive them of their deserved rewards," Kennedy said. "The Pirate Bay has hurt creators of many different kinds of works, from music to film, from books to TV programmes. It has been particularly harmful in distributing copyrighted works prior to their official release. This damages sales of music at the most important time of their lifecycle."

Prosecutors expect the trial to last 13 days.

This information is also available as a PDF download.

There are hundreds of tech certification programs and exams out there, some sponsored by software vendors, some by vendor-neutral organizations, and some by educational institutions. A number of them are easy to obtain — as evidenced by the many IT pros who list a three-line string of acronyms after their names. You pay your money and you take a multiple-choice test; if you pass, you’re in.

Others are excruciatingly difficult: Cost is high; eligibility to even take the exam is dependent on having years of experience, formal education, and/or sponsorship from others who already hold the title; and the exams are grueling, multi-day affairs that require hands-on performance of relevant tasks. Most are somewhere in between.

But which certifications really provide a measure of your knowledge and skills in a particular area? And which will really help you get a job or promotion? Here’s a look at 10 of the technical certifications that actually mean something in today’s IT job market.

#1: MCSE

The Microsoft Certified Systems Engineer (MCSE) certification suffered a bad reputation several years back when numerous people were memorizing the answers to exam questions from “brain dumps” posted by test-takers on the Internet and obtaining the certification without any real understanding of the technology.

Microsoft responded by replacing the knowledge-based multiple-choice questions with a variety of performance-related scenario questions that make it much more difficult to cheat. The difficulty level of the questions was escalated, and the number of exams required to obtain the certification was increased to seven.

The MCSE has consequently regained respect in many corners of the IT community and is a useful certification for demonstrating your expertise in Microsoft server products.

#2: MCA

In addition to making the MCSE exams more difficult, Microsoft has created many new certifications. The Microsoft Certified Architect (MCA) is the premiere Microsoft certification, designed to identify top experts in the industry. To obtain the MCA, you must have at least three years of advanced IT architecture experience, and you have to pass a rigorous review board conducted by a panel of experts.

There are a number of MCA programs. The infrastructure and solutions MCA certifications cover broad architecture skills, but there are also more technology-specific programs for messaging and database skills. There are currently fewer than 100 MCAs in the world, making this an elite certification.

#3: CCIE

The Cisco Certified Internetwork Expert (CCIE) is widely recognized as one of the most difficult to obtain (and expensive) IT certifications. Like the MCSE/MCA, it’s a vendor-sponsored certification, focusing on Cisco’s products.

The online cialis CCIE requires that you pass both a written exam and a hands-on lab. To sit for the written exam, you must pay $300 and choose from one of several tracks: Routing and Switching, Security, Storage Networking, Voice, and Service Provider.

You must pass the written exam before you’re eligible to take the lab exam. This is an eight-hour hands-on test of your ability to configure and troubleshoot Cisco networking equipment and software. The lab exams cost $1,250 each. This does not, of course, include travel expenses that may be necessary since the labs are conducted only in certain locations.

As if all that weren’t enough, you don’t get to rest on your laurels after obtaining the certification. CCIEs must recertify every two years or the certification is suspended.

#4: CCSP

Another Cisco exam that’s popular with employers in today’s security-conscious business world is the Cisco Certified Security Professional (CCSP). It focuses on skills related to securing networks that run Cisco routers and other equipment.

You’re required to pass five written exams and must recertify every three years by passing one current exam. Before you can take the CCSP exams, you must meet the prerequisites by obtaining one of Cisco’s lower-level certifications, either the Cisco Certified Network Associate (CCNA) or the Cisco Certified Internetwork Specialist (CCIP).

#5: CISSP

Security certifications confer some of the highest-paying jobs in IT today, and one of the most well-respected non-vendor specific security certifications is the Certified Information Systems Security Professional (CISSP). The organization that grants the CISSP is the (ISC)², which was founded in 1989 and has issued certifications to more than 50,000 IT professionals.

Exam candidates must have at least four years of direct full-time work experience as a security professional. One year of experience can be waived if you have a four-year or graduate degree in information security from an approved institution. Another unique feature of the CISSP is that you must subscribe to the (ISC)² code of ethics to take the exam.

Exam fees vary based on geographic region. In the United States, standard registration is $599 ($499 for early registration). You must recertify every three years by obtaining at least 120 hours of continuing professional education, and you must pay a yearly fee of $85 to maintain the certification. The exam is a six-hour test consisting of 250 multiple-choice questions.

#6: SSCP

For those who can’t meet the rigorous experience requirements to sit for the CISSP, the (ISC)² also offers the Systems Security Certified Practitioner (SSCP) certification. SSCP candidates need have only one year of direct full-time security work experience. The exam consists of 125 multiple-choice questions, and you have three hours to complete it.

Those who pass the written exam must be endorsed by someone who holds a current (ISC)² certification and will attest to the candidate’s professional experience or by an officer of the corporation or organization that employs you (owner, CEO, managing partner, CIO, etc.). As with the CISSP, you must recertify every three years by submitting proof of continuing education credits and paying an annual maintenance fee.

#7: GSE

Another popular and well-regarded security certification is the GIAC Security Expert (GSE), offered by the SANS Software Security Institute. Before you can attempt the GSE, you must complete three lower-level certifications: GIAC Security Essentials Certification (GSEC), GIAC Certified Intrusion Analyst (GCIA), and GIAC Certified Incident Handler (GCIH).

The lower-level certifications require passing multiple-choice exams, and at least two of the three certifications must be at the “Gold” level, which requires that in addition to the written exam, you submit a technical report that’s approved to be published in the SANS Reading Room. A personal interview is also part of the GSE qualification process.

Pricing depends on whether you take the exam as part of SANS self-study or conference training programs or challenge the exam. Without the training, each lower-level exam costs $899.

#8: RHCE/RHCA

Many companies are looking to save money by switching to Linux-based servers, but they need personnel who are trained to design, deploy, and administer Linux networks. There are a number of Linux certifications out there, but the Red Hat Certified Engineer (RHCE) certification has been around since 1999 and is well respected in the industry.

The exam is performance-based. You’re required to perform actual network installation, configuration, troubleshooting, and administration tasks on a live system. You have a full day (9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.) to complete it. The cost is $749.

The Red Hat Certified Architect (RHCA) is an advanced certification that requires completion of five endorsement exams, each of which costs $749 and range from two to eight hours. Like the RHCE exam, they are hands-on skills tests. You must have the RHCE certification to take the RHCA exams.

#9: ITIL

For those who aspire to management positions in IT services, the Information Technology Infrastructure Library (ITIL) certifications provide demonstration of knowledge and skills involved in that discipline. There are three certification levels: Foundation, Practitioner, and Manager.

The Manager level certification requires completion of a rigorous two-week training program, and you must have the Foundation certification and five years of IT management experience. Then, you must pass two three-hour exams consisting of essay questions.

#10: Certifications for special situations

Many specialist exams are available in IT subcategories that can be helpful to those who want to specialize in those areas. Some of these include:

In addition, for those who have little or no experience in IT, entry-level certifications such as those offered by CompTIA may help you get a foot in the door as you start your IT career.

February 18th, 2009

Posted by Mary Jo Foley

Internet Explorer 8 [IE 8] is nearing the finish line, with a March release to manufacturing looking like a distinct possibility. But is IE 8 — or, more accurately — Web site developers and owners — really ready?

I have been testing IE 8 since the code became available publicly. And one thing that hasn’t changed much over the past several months is the fact that many Web sites still aren’t compatible with IE 8.

I’m not blaming the site owners here. Microsoft officials have known all along that even though the IE team is doing the “right” thing by finally making IE more standards-compliant, they are risking “breaking the Web” because the vast majority of Web sites still are written to work correctly with previous, non-standards-compliant versions of IE.

Microsoft has tried to mitigate the effects of moving to a default standards-based view in a few ways. IE 8 comes with a “Compatibility View” button that will non prescription cialis “fix” a seemingly broken site if a user knows to press it. Microsoft went a step beyond this with IE 8 Release Candidate 1, issued in January, by adding a downloadable list of sites that would automatically trigger IE 8 to move directly to compatibility mode, rather than standards mode.

(Here is the list of the 2,400 sites that are on Version 1.0 of Microsoft’s Compatibility View list.)

The Compatibility View list includes some major sites — Apple.com, CNN.com, eBay, Facebook, Google.com, NYTimes.com — even Microsoft.com (!) — and lots, lots more. Users also have the option of adding IE-8-incompatible sites they visit that didn’t make it onto the list that will be appended to the schema list they download.

The Compatibility List has made my IE 8 browsing a lot more stable. When I go to the NYTimes.com site now, it just works. The Compatibility View button (the icon for which looks like a broken Web page and is typically located directly to the right of the URL address bar) doesn’t appear at all (as is the case for all sites on the Compatibility List).

That said, there are a lot of sites I visit that aren’t on the list. And more often than not, they fail to render correctly with IE 8. Sometimes I remember that I should try hitting the Compatibility View button to see if there are boxes and buttons and text there that I can’t see because I am using IE 8. Other times, when I am visiting a site with which I’m unfamiliar, I don’t realize what I’m missing.

I’m at the point now — if a site looks weird, is slow or just doesn’t seem to be working right — I simply assume it is IE 8’s fault. Sometimes I’m right (as I discover when I open the same site in Firefox or Chrome and it looks and works fine). Other times, I’m not — a site just might be down or broken. The bottom line is I’ve come to expect a rocky browsing experience when using IE 8.

I doubt the compatibility experience is going to change much, if at all, between now and the time IE 8 is released. For months, Microsoft has been banging the drum for site owners to update their code — either by adding compatibility tags or redoing sites to take into account the changes in IE 8. Many site admins and developers have said they weren’t willing to take on that task until Microsoft delivered a near-final test release — at least a Release Candidate.

Some critics have said they think Microsoft is doing a disservice to developers by offering compatibility work-arounds. They say Microsoft created its own problems by delivering previous IE releases that flouted standards — which is true. And now Microsoft should bite the bullet and just go the 100-percent-standards route, they reason. That might be a better course in the long run for Web developers tired of having to do separate versions of sites and apps for standards-based browsers and for IE, but it punishes Web users in the interim.

What’s going to happen when IE 8 goes final and non-techie users have it pushed to them or get new PCs with IE 8 preloaded? I wouldn’t be surprised to see further losses in IE market share, as frustrated users find only some of their favorite Web sites displaying correctly but don’t really understand why. Perhaps Opera and its chums won’t need the antitrust courts to get a leg up on Microsoft, after all….