NewtOnICT

Internet TV - an already outdated technology

2012-01-19T05:49:00.000-08:00

Colour TV, stereo, flatscreens, HD, ambilight, 3D, Dolby 5.1,interactive and internet TV. Why is TV technology outdated even whenstill in concept stage?

Many years ago, in the late '90s, I was involved in theintroduction of interactive TV or iTV as a new way of living.Personalized TV settings, direct on-screen e-mail, interactiveplanning based on online TV guides, on demand pay TV. The idea hasjust now reached a form of adolescence but in the meantime internethas changed.

A few years ago my CD player proved to be somewhat of anarchaeology find. First of all it failed to play MP3 sound files.Music CDs created on my computer didn't work. It couldn't read DVDs.It couldn't be updated or upgraded. It was time for something new.

The new craze was the DVD player that could read all threeletter codes: MP3, AVI, MPG, JPG, WMA, PNG, WMV and many more. It wasavailable in a 2.0, a 2.1 and a 5.1 surround version. I took a 2.1system. It was named a micro home theatre system, which sounds fine.Impressive in one word.

Then a new version of AVI or MPG came out, two-layered DVDs andagain my system couldn't cope. Even though my bulky and heavy, 10year old, glass TV was able to receive all broadcasts, my accessorysystems couldn't handle new developments. And there was no way toupdate them, you were forced to buy new hardware.

Once our car started to die I decided I wanted a new, freeflatscreen TV to go with it¹.Not HD, not 3D, not 5.1, not even 2.1 and certainly no ambilight.Just a TV that could handle regular broadcasts. Not much bigger thanthe old one but a lot lighter, that is a relief. I didn't even choosedigital broadcast with my cable provider, no need for that so-calledimprovement - I seldom watch TV and had just decided to reduce thenumber of boxes in the room. So, it is functionally nothing more thana TV set.

The TV however has an HDMI connector which provided me with theoption to use it as a 2.0 stereo set. That would save me threespeaker boxes. All I had to do was to replace the old home cinema setwith a new one with HDMI. But how do you go about preventingfunctional loss due to the introduction of yet another newtechnology, multi-media formats, codecs? And, in fact, how do I getYoutube on the tube?

Because, the new craze which has been promised to us since ages is of course access to the internet from the TV. Which will conflictwith the SOPA²in the US by the way. But, anyway, TVs are not multi-purposecomputers, cannot be updated or upgraded and you have to live withthe internet functions chosen by the manufacturer. Reading your localnewspaper on-line is not included. And internet TVs are expensive. Whichcertainly is not what you wanted or expected.

But putting a full-blown computer in the living room is not thesame as a portable on the dinner table. So I looked around and foundthe concept of the mini-pc attractive. The BookPCsays “... refer to them as a Mini PC, a Small Computer, a Cube PC,a Micro Computer, a Small Form Factor Computer, a Mini Computer or aBook PCs ...” and Apple calls it a Mac Mini³.I might add Small Footprint Computer and ended up with a Dell InspironZino. But all are in fact small, soundless, inconspicuousfull-blown PCs, smaller than most cookie boxes. Nothing to show foror brag about, which is exactly the idea.

These mighty machines run Windows, Linux or an Apple OS so choiceenough. They all connect to your (home) network. Add wireless input;I went for a small form factor keyboard with a touch pad on-boardinstead of a mouse, charged by a small station next to the TV. Butanything will do.

Now you have internet TV: real full internet access, updates,upgrades, flexibility. You can run Youtube films full-screen or playflight simulators on an absurd big screen. It will play most DVDs andif someone really wants the functionality of a Home Theatre System,you can add some software like XBMC,a free and open media hub. If you really want 2.1 or 5.1 multimediayou can of course add boxes to the PC, instead of using the TVspeakers. And you have a TV as well.

So, the problem is in fact addressed by smart software not by dumbhardware. That is the future that you have in the house at littlecost, if any. Going for the best and cheapest solution? Install auser-friendly version of the Linux system, such as Ubuntu, on ahi-end micro PC. Or go life-style with Apple or familiar with Windows.

Is it all rosy and shiny? Well, no. Some non-cabled keyboards donot last long on a battery charge. If someone wants to go online,other family members might go for the sitcom. And some commercial films with copyprotection locks will not run. On Linux systems you will have toseparately install codecs available from the copyright owners, oftenfor free (not difficult but still).

Why is TV technology outdated even when in concept stage? It is myguess that the providers of television, the broadcasters and thecable companies, want to prevent you from having free access to thebiggest multimedia inventory in the world. They know they areexpected to move towards the internet but they crawl instead of run. Their business model will not hold.

Also the producers of screens have a vested interest in sellingboth TVs and PC screens, while anyone under 30 considers these to bethe same. Which they are. So, selling you a TV with a PC connectionmight prevent you from buying a separate PC screen.

Get the future now: connect a small pc to your tube and enjoyinternet TV as it is intended to be!

1Yes, that's how it is these days. Buy butter and you get a smartphone for free. Don't ask me why.

2The crazy Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA), also known as House Bill 3261, October 2011

3Do not confuse a Mac Mini with Apple TV. Price alone will show that Apple TV is but a shadow of the functionality of internet.

SME in the Deep-freeze: Small and Medium sized Enterprises left out in the Cold

2012-01-09T01:00:00.000-08:00

Every government hasthe obligation to take care spending public funds. For that reasonregional, national and even international rules have been set inplace. You're not allowed to exclude providers or suppliers nor topromote them without good cause. You are supposed not to gain from anassignment or order (read bribery). Unfair competitive advantages(specific product or brand requests) nor between company agreements(cartel) are allowed. The procurement must be transparent and allinformation must be publicly available. And anyone selected forproviding the goods or services must be a respectful and trustedsupplier. And, we're economic: spending should be minimal.

What to do, being acivil servant? You start searching for certainty and escape routes.Certainties you can build in by pre-selection: set up a scope ofdemands the provider or supplier has to comply with. Mark: in future!Look for turnover, number of employees, number of comparableassignments, price per unit, guarantees on competences anddeployment, partaking on future requests. Most of business (90%?) isexcluded beforehand because they cannot comply, ever. From the 10%that remain you select the top-10 (1%) or less which are allowed tocompete and deliver, year in year out and with exclusion of allothers for years to come. This is called a Master Agreement by whichgovernments pre-select possible suppliers.

What about exclusionof suppliers, no gain from an order, no unfair competitive advantagesor cartel agreements, transparency, respectful and trusted suppliers?And caring about spending? All small and medium-sized enterprises(SMEs) are excluded in advance by the defining demands. New entrantson the market or new and cheaper suppliers do not count. There is noreal competition and selected companies can set orders and pricingbetween themselves or share orders by combined offerings, closingtheir market share even further. Parties must act on procurementrequests and will offer for too high a price, but they are committedto making an offer, just because they have too many projects runningalready. For the outsider it looks like fair competition where thereis none.

Escape routes arebuilt in by requesting, in the technical or functional descriptions,the specifications of named brand products or suppliers. If thatseems too obvious to the keen observer in the market or media, youask for supplier- or brand-specific interoperability. A well-knownhoax has been the procurement of a new, government-wide desktopsolution. Here every supplier could deliver on the condition that itprovided interoperability with a named brand and product. So, anyonecan offer a car as long as it's BMW (or any other brand with similarcharacteristics). And all calls for openness, clarity andtransparency on the policy involved is frustrated by all means tocover any tracks.

How do we provide thatsmall and medium-sized enterprises, the biggest employer in WesternEurope, can simply do business with and for government? One example:almost all requests for the delivery of software go to US-basedmultinational companies, with one or two European exceptions. Aren'twe capable of developing software? Aren't we?

On Privacy, Data Protection and Anonymity

2011-12-11T10:35:00.001-08:00

The value of internet for theemancipation of peoples has reached a high water mark in 2011.Uprisings in North Africa have shown its value for the rest ofAfrica, the Middle and Far East. I was honoured by severalinvitations to join think tank discussions on enhancing and alsoappreciating the value that internet has. It brought me toconsiderations on the protection of people's privacy on-line. Privacy or anonymity?

Privacy

Privacy is a rather undefinablesubject. How people look onto privacy depends very much on theirculture and background. It does have a legal context in the US forexample. Sometimes, the US concept of 'the right to be let alone' isstated as the start of the legal concept but there are many, olderstarts as well, amongst others in British law. Its complexity makesit hard to handle.

In general talk, people considerprivacy as having the right to keep information about themselves outof reach or view from others. This includes life and limb but alsoproperty and facts. Even though others may know these people, theseacquaintances should ask permission to gather information.

Personal Data Protection

So privacy is not the same as personaldata protection. The Data Protection Acts that have been introducedin Europe and elsewhere restrict their legal district to ICT systems.These acts are often called Privacy Law but in fact they are not.This data protection concept is only about the collection (and anyother processing) of personal data – it is “informationalprivacy” and thus a subset of privacy in general. Data howeverbecomes only “information” once it is being used by the humanmind: meaningful data. It describes facts about an identifiableindividual. Only it that case do we speak of “personal” data.

Democracy

Now, back to the subject of theliberation of peoples. So we had a Networking Event on “Democracyand Digitisation” during the International Day of Democracymeeting, organised by the EuropeanPartnership for Democracy and others (Sept 2011). I had theprivilege to join the Waag Society'sconference on 'DigitalDemocracy 2020' (Nov 2011). And just now, (Dec 2011) we hadthe FreedomOnline conference, called together by FreePress Unlimited and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. I will notgo into details of these wonderful events, please do follow thelinks.

People fighting for liberty anddemocracy in their home countries, who were participating at theabove events, run severe risks from brutality, incarceration to deathpenalty. Many of them use modern internet-based technology to spreadthe word, discuss issues and organise their own events. Even so, asAhmed Maher (April 6 Movement, Egypt) said to me, “internet is onlya tool, handy but without it the revolution will have its wayanyway”. Still, internet is used intensively and helps to speed theprocess. But not without its own dangers.

Governmental malware

Governments can have their own way withinternet. Not only is access to internet services blocked orfiltered. IP addresses will show the regimes in dictator-runcountries the whereabouts of bloggers and writers. Email can be read,copied and traced back to its origin. A privacy law or dataprotection act will not help.

Even here in Europe we see the dangerby the discovery of the Bundestrojaner, key-logger andcommunication spyware devised by the German Secret Service, againstthe formal decision of the Bundesverfassungsgericht (FederalConstitutional Court of Germany). The Bundestrojaner showsthat even encryption of email may not be enough: it copies your textwhile it is written, before encryption. (If it wasn't so shocking, it could be an exciting DiscoveryChannel feature film).

Anonymity

A certain amount of governmentaldistrust seems in place all over, reason to ask Eric Schmidt(Google), co-host at the Freedom Online conference, whether we shouldforego privacy and whether we should not aim for privacy on theinternet but for anonymity, to support and safeguard the democracy bloggers,writers and organisers. Unfortunately his answer was not what Ihad hoped for: “Google makes it possible to work anonymously withour services (and servers). We only collect your IP address”. Yes,thank you, that is the whole point.

What's the difference, you ask? Well,privacy (here understood as personal data protection) means thatinformation about you and your whereabouts can (and will) becollected and stored. And it can and will be used against you, eitherin your public life or in a court of law. You can create laws as muchas you like, but even the country that shouts 'freedom' the hardest,the US, collects data about you and you have no way or legal statusto protect yourself if you're not a US citizen. Privacy is guarding against the use of your data after or during the collection.

Anonymity on the other hand makes itpossible to collect all your data but impossible to trace it back toyou. Here you do not need laws; you need knowledge, awareness andsome technology. It is just possible. But you do need help fromcompanies like Facebook, Twitter, Google, Microsoft, Yahoo and thelike. And your government should support and promote the use ofanonymous technology.

Governments hate this. I remember thatback in the old days anon.penet.fi was taken down: a server thatanonymised the exchange of information between any two system. ThisFinnish server, run by Julf Helsingius, was shut down. Several governments were said to be involved. Freedom, what?

Save by using old hard- and software Blog 3. Greening hardware life-cycle

2011-12-02T09:51:00.001-08:00

Recycling IT hardware is a bad idea.Using and refurbishing old hardware with new software will save youconsiderably, as I pointed out in two previous blogs, BuyingIT second hand and Extendinghardware life-cycle. It might however also 'green' your ITactions, saving the environment! How? Read on.

Green IT is one of the new hypes.You're really supposed to do something, and add a paragraph on yourenvironmental efforts to your qualifications and business reports.Well, to be sure, you should make environmental issues a major factorin your life and business.

Many IT companies try to cater for yourworries by providing IT hardware that uses (much) less power,creating less heat and less CO₂. So, to help theenvironment you are supposed to exchange your hardware set-up, oftena lot earlier than foreseen. That is contrary to my concept ofextendingthe hardware life-cycle. Is it not?

I will forego repeating myself, readthe blog. But it might be interesting to consider the following.

Environmental savings and smartersoftware do combine very well, but in an unexpected way.

Buying new hardware means building newhardware. Building hardware means digging for ore with an emphasis onrare earth metals, building other machines to build chips, buildcables, build circuit boards, organising transport from ore site tomanufacturing site, from factory to factory and from factory to storeor storage. And then to your office site or shop. And then removingand scrapping the old but usable hardware. Getting rid of poisonousparts. I have not yet seen a scientifically sound calculation of theecological footprint for building one desktop computer, but I guessit is rather large.

The build-up of CO₂ in theatmosphere is certainly not the only environmental issue, it is notjust energy consumption. Wish that was true. Any manufacturing meansdestroying the planet, one way or the other. Replacing and scrappingany old hardware also has environmental impact.

Not replacing old hardware butre-using it intensely might be much more friendly to our children'sworld. And that means: start using smarter, smaller, cheapersoftware. Less unused functions. Reducing processor, memory, disk andnetwork load. Technically a computer's power will not lessen, onlythe software updates use up more and more power and space. Reduce thefinancial depreciation rate, from let's say three to six or tenyears. That lessens the environmental threat of scrapping by half ormore. Get smart!

Stop recycling your outdated hardware!Like old but good shoes, give your hardware a second life byinstalling new, smart and cheap open source software. Start today!

Printing tax money for free: the license

2011-11-20T04:10:00.001-08:00

Gifts to a charity are deductible from your business tax. Whoever prints a software license on paper can deduct the full software license list price as well. Read on and shiver ...

In many countries donations to charities and other good causes may be tax deductible. In the Netherlands such donations need to be made to so-called ANBI credited organisations (Algemeen Nut Beogende Instelling or Public Welfare Organisation). For financial gifts the calculus is simple: the value of the gift can be deducted from the tax (up to a maximum).

For gifts in kind (= non-financial) you may deduct the fair value: "the value in economic transactions" as defined by the tax office. This seems fair insofar as the fair value comes close to the production value or -cost. Think of a truck or TV or a washing machine or a PC.

But how do you value the production cost of software? (Not being the development cost). These costs come close to zero.

This leads to a most remarkable situation.

Suppose I am a software producer. Nearly everybody uses my software, because everybody else does and that is Main Rule #1. My software licenses are expensive - too expensive in fact for non-profit and NGOs. That sector holds little market value for me: the amount of licenses I will sell there is limited. Some organisations resort to illegal copies but the perpetrators are not happy with this as well. They start to look at free, producer-unbound software (freeware and open source software).

I am not happy with that prospect because others might come to the same conclusion and that threatens my whole market (see Main Rule #1). Counting the cash I have little to loose in this market while there is a lot to gain in keeping my market share.

To calculate an example we take fifty public welfare organisations. Each one may order twenty software sets with a license. Such a license is 'the right to use', usually a note printed on a piece of paper. The fair value (recommended list price) for this license is, let's say, one thousand Euro (€ 1.000,=). This is not the cost for the software itself; that is copied onto a medium, a DVD for example. I sell these disks to the welfare organisation for, say, thirty Euro each. We call these "administrative costs".

Let's calculate the result of my charity:

Fifty times reproduction cost of a DVD - at about 30c/piece - makes about fifteen Euro. Each charity may then install the software, on up to twenty PCs.

On the income side we find:

fifty times thirty Euro administration cost, about fifteen-hundred Euro in all;
tax deduction for fifty Public Welfare Organisations, each twenty licenses, times one thousand Euro/license adds up to one-million Euro, which comes close to two hundred and fifty thousand Euro net tax savings (€ 250.000,=!);
public relations value: I give money to charity;
enforcement of Main Rule #1: even organisations that cannot afford my software still use it!

Count your luck: this is Free Money! Paid for by the taxpayer.

Maybe more important for me is the market protection; competitors have no chance! Providers of less expensive or free alternatives are out-competed, just because their software is free from the start and they do not have the tax deduction advantage. Which is why I also provide education institutes with (nearly) free licenses for my software.

A remedy? On the short term it would be proper if the tax office does not compute the economic value in relation to the list price but to the production costs. Unsold products do exist, but unsold licenses do not. It will probably save any country's tax office several million Euro per year.

It is a bizarre situation that companies give away nothing and get a tax advantage in return.

(The original concept was prepared together with Valentijn Sessink)

bicycle becomes buycycle

2011-09-24T04:52:00.000-07:00

Schools force parents tobuy named bicycle brands. In The Netherlands many schools allowonly specific brands on their property. Other bicycles are notallowed in the neighbourhood.

It is more and morecommon that schools allow only bicycles of the Gazavus brand ontheir real estate. Bicycles from other brands are not allowedentrance or even forcibly removed from the premises. Parents thatbring their children to schools sometimes get into fights with schoolstaff. When the children are old enough to get their own bike, theymust use a Gazavus or they cannot park their bike at school.

But the policy is notrestricted to primary education, the situation at high schools anduniversities being even worse. There students are forced to parktheir non-Gazavus bikes far away, intended to make them walk longerdistances than fellow students that own a Gazavus. Bike parking lotsare adjusted to the brand-specific design of the Gazavus bicycle (for free of course), sothat other brands do not fit the parking holders. And other bicycles parked loosely, not in a holder, can of course easily be removed by school's staff.

Gazavus started thisdevelopment by providing bicycles cheap or for free to school staff, but only ifthe brand-specific bicycle holder was included in the deal. Thisprevented parents and students from occupying holders when theyarrived with another brand of bicycle, giving staff more room. Onceit was obvious that other bicycles were warded off, the companystarted to offer bicycles to the parents as well, often at reducedprice if bought through school. Cycle shops in the neighbourhood wereawarded extra incentives for the promotion and sale of Gazavus bikes. Some schools were awarded financial incentives as well.

The Ministry of Transportstated, when asked for comment, that a school's policy was a matterof the Ministry of Education. The last Ministry said that schoolshave freedom to choose what they want, even if this means thatparents and students have to spend more money, just to be able topark their bike.

Since bicycles are also usedoff school premises, people start to ask for special Gazavusparking lots in towns and villages as well. And within familiespressure rises on family members to buy similar bikes, just becausethey want to share the same parking spaces. Schoolchildren andstudents are excluded from school events and outings if they useother brands.

And so the bicycle becomesa buycycle.

[Read Microsoft forGazavus, software (on computer, pad, mobile) for bicycle, network or connection for parking. For therest, the above story is unfortunately true]

How closed source IT gets access to Dutch parliament

2011-09-13T13:22:00.000-07:00

Dutch Senate (Eerste Kamer) MPs getiPads to use at work, contrary blandly to their commitment to startusing more open technology. Do they really understand the issue?

Ever since 2002 Dutch Parliament(Senate -Eerste Kamer- and House of Representatives -Tweede Kamer-)have held that openness in information technology (motion Vendrik 2002) is of primaryconcern for the Dutch government in its widest sense. While the useof open source software issupposed to be considered with every procurement, the use of openstandards is mandatory. Open Source Software or OSS uses intellectual property (IP) law and software licences in such a wayas to ensure to open and free use of the IP rights. To put it straight: youhave the right to use, change and distribute my ideas and software forfree (considering a few extra provisions that change as per licensemodel).

Standardsare however the basis for the storage, retrieval, exchange ofinformation over systems, distance and time. These are also technicalstandards (protocols) that are protected by IP laws. You see: this isabout law not technology! Open standardsare protocols that are free to use and that are designed and agreedupon in open organisations. An open standard is supposed to enable you todesign any software that can exchange information using the sameprotocol for free, but also it enables you to open up documents that werestored years ago. It protects YOUR intellectual property: your text,movies, music, pictures by keeping the storage technology open.

Manybig software companies are known for closing off their territory bystoring YOUR data in THEIR data standard. This is true for text, forgeo-data, for graphical data and for in fact every type ofinformation you'd care to store and retrieve. IBM did that, Microsoftdoes that but also Exact software, AutoCAD, SAP and many more. Itlocks you into their systems, intended never to let you go. That isnot illegal or false, it is a valid business model.

Supposetelephones still worked like that: you can only call people using thesame system. Or the gasoline in your car. Or electric grids. Maturebusiness systems agree on protocols describing certain standards thathelp both the producer and the consumer. Not so in the IT world.

Applehas set a new record. It created the iPad, a technology thetech-world has been waiting for for many years. Venturing intoterritory where no man has ever gone before. Even real 'open' addictswill kill to get their hands on an iPad. Apple thus, using a businessmodel that is antique. Apple is probably the most closed IT venturein the world, but in silence. This is not new: the iPod, the iPhonewere equally closed (the iPaq, using Microsoft Windows Mobile, wasnot Apple's but HP's). Music, movies, new gadget software can only bedownloaded from Apple controlled stores. Not Apple? Not on your iPad / -Phone / -Pod.

Nowthe Senate of The Netherlands has chosen to use a fully closed andcontrolled system, however brilliant. Not only that, they haveselected to use a supporting closed software system that they will not orcannot share with other people, like their own constituents. Howabout using and developing open source software as agreed, supportedby your OSOSS and NOiV programmes, and your Forum Standardisation? How about using openstandards for all data, as is mandatory, as is agreed like OpenDocument Format? Why is the system to read and create your documents closed to all but you, dear senators? Afraid?

Ichallenge the House of Representatives in The Netherlands to startstoring text in the ODF format (which Microsoft software can create,store and access). The National Archives and the Royal Library willbe happy. I wonder if the senators will be.

How Data Protection Commissioners fight a lost, former war on Google Streetview

2011-08-24T06:36:00.000-07:00

The privacy or data protection bodies in Europe and elsewhere are fighting Google for collecting WiFi router's addresses and names while taking Streetview pictures. They seem unable to see that Google does not need Streetview any more for this purpose.

In The Netherlands the commission is named the CBP or “College Bescherming Persoonsgegevens”. Because I am a former commissioner I will stick with my comment to the Dutch example, but it will be similar in other countries, and not just European

When it became known that Google collected the name (SSID) and address (IP & MAC) of WiFi access points while taking pictures for the Streetview function, all privacy hell broke loose. And maybe not quite rightly so. No-one was previously informed or aware that this information was being collected. On the other hand one could claim, as Google did, that a MAC address points at most to a house, not to a person and therefore would not be personal data. Google has long held that it was a mistake, not on purpose and sorry, sorry, sorry, we will not do so again. They don't need to as we will see.

Why would anyone want to know all WiFi information? To break into routers? Well no. But if you combine the information with a geo-position (from Streetview's GPS co-ordinates) you get a better and faster GPS location-fix next time. Also WiFi will work where there is no GPS signal (indoors, in small alleys and crowded towns). This is a form of enhanced GPS (E-GPS) which provides not just better accuracy but it is a lot cheaper than the commercial versions (called eGPS by CSR and Motorola).

So, if you need advanced GPS information and you have cars driving around towns anyway, why not collect geo-info + WiFi-info at the same time? That is smart thinking. So now the privacy commissioners have in fact forbidden this much enhanced form of information gathering. But have they thought about the future?

The future is not about cars driving around in cities. And the future is here and here to stay. The future is the crowd (not the cloud BTW).

Most people using mobile phones have their WiFi turned on most of the time. They also use their GPS, even though GPS and WiFi both consume energy. Now if you are using Google technology, such as Google+, Navigation, Latitude or Maps (available on most platforms), you will use both GPS and an internet connection. The internet connection will be either 3G or WiFi. Your phone will use both connections to get a better geo-fix and also send the combined GPS and WiFi information back to Google.

Now Google does not need a Streetview car anymore for the WiFi locations. The crowd is bringing the information to Google and the crowd also uses the information to get a faster and better geo-fix. So the crowd may be breaching privacy and data protection laws, but they do so for their own good.

Does the story end here? No, my friends and readers. The crowd also takes pictures and stores them (with geo-info) on the internet. As Microsoft has shown, combining many random photos from the crowd can give you a full picture (called Photosynth). Collect as many pictures as you can, with location data, smart combine these and you can park the Streetview cars forever. Streetview will always be up to date, much more so than today.

Privacy? The crowd is taking the pictures and posting these on the internet. Google “just uses the publicly available data” (photos, movies, sound, geo-fixes …). Smart.

For deeper info on WiFi, Street View, MAC adress, SSID and privacy, search Wikipedia.

Mobile internet and why it shook the C in ICT

2011-08-16T01:18:00.000-07:00

In The Netherlands the communications incumbent KPN (Telecom) and its multinational followers like Vodafone and T-Mobile have found a new cash-cow, they think. Mobile internet. Well, think again friends, because it may be your demise.

Here we have a rather strange business model. The C¹-companies have lured customers by providing mobile phones “for free”. And of course they battled on their hourly, seconds, kilobyte rates. They also paid an unhealthy amount of money for ether space, but that is just their own error.

To attract new customers, of the mobile internet type, they – the telco's – introduced low cost internet access, “buy now, pay as you go” smart phones and the like. But alas, short oversight: new internet applications on these mobile units, the famous 'apps', started to rule the old telephone business model. So internet access didn't just ADD new income but also COST them old income, like text messages (MSN, Whatsapp) and telephone voice calls (VoIP, Skype).

It is rather amazing that they didn't see this comin'. Every internet user is familiar with Skype, MSN IM, Pidgin and the like. Why would any intelligent board member of KPN think that the old POTS² would hold in a new world? If paying for POTS is far more expensive than using internet for free? So the Board goes for the shareholder instead of their own client! With dire consequences.

Their users, their clients, must pay additional fees for using protocols that are a threat to the POTS business model. Just to save a technology that's just old, plain old. This is like having to pay extra if you drive a new (green eco-friendly) car because there are still diesel or petrol driven engines around. Let us get a few facts straight.

Argument “The increased internet usage is costing a lot more”. Well, all mobile internet uses a lot less radio space than POTS does. The bandwidth for MSN or Whatsapp is not worth mentioning.
Argument “The increased internet usage is costing a lot more”. If they mean: more users it also means much more income, so one is compensated by the other.
Argument “They are all downloading movies constantly”. Well, most never do, some do a few short clips streaming from YouTube, which is a master in reducing load. Besides, even if the telco provides a flat rate internet access, there is always the maximum 'fair use policy' as part of the contract.
Argument “They are all downloading movies constantly”. If you want to watch streaming video on a mobile, you will search always for WiFi hotspot because you will get uninterrupted and fast access, something 3G mobile will not handle.
Most people will have their WiFi access always on, so the device will search a local access point (WiFi AP) which doesn't interfere with telco's bandwidth, but it provides them with income without cost.

How to go forward instead of stepping on the breaks?

For the telco the next free advice: search out a consultant used to think for your stakeholder (=client) instead of your shareholder. One who is very much familiar with the social effects of new technology. Go from ICT to IcT to IPT.

For the stakeholder, the mobile internet user, the following advice (of course it's free): if your telco start charging more for internet access or, much worse, charges different rates for different apps in use, go for a pure telephone subscription – no internet! Get internet from WiFi AP's only, at home, the office, a shop, bar or restaurant. Faster, more reliable, and free!

Also support the claim for net neutrality with your politicians and policy makers. Net neutrality means that internet access providers are forbidden to charge different rates for internet access, based on the TYPE of usage. Only the AMOUNT should be fairly chargeable.

1C = Communications, which makes a C-company a Telco.

2Plain Old Telephone System

Save by using old hard- and software Blog 2. Extending hardware life-cycle

2011-08-07T14:59:00.000-07:00

The world is changing so fast and technology even faster, you just need new hardware to keep up. Look at how smart modern kids are! Well, have I got news for you.
Any biologist can tell you that people, humans in general, aren't any smarter than 1.000 or even 10.000 years ago. The way in which we transfer (store, multiply and distribute) information is much more efficient, but that is cultural change, not the fabric we are made of.

Even though our machine, computers in particular, is much more advanced than just a few years ago, we do not think, draw or type any faster. A blog like this one will take several hours or days to write, just as in the days of the CP/M or Ms-dos computers. That's 30 years ago! Now consider this.

A personal digital assistant or PDA of, let us say, five years ago had the processing power of an IBM XT (1983). The fastest mobile devices of today rival the low-end netbook or tablet. Not in screen resolution, but they are not designed for that. And they start reaching the price of the IBM XT keyboard! But can it do more? Well, that depends very much on your usage.

In the old days, up to 2000, most people with computers (hardware) used the word processor (software). Its primary speed and complexity is limited by how fast you type. Nowadays most, even the professional, users do not use a word processor but work directly in an email system (or a blog or a social network system ...). Here also the speed of typing is the limit. Why then would you need a faster system? Word processing is mostly about creating chapters, correcting spelling mistakes and rewriting.

Newer versions or updates of your software are either superfluous because they add nothing you missed before, or they correct mistakes that shouldn't have been there in the first place. But both do bloat your application like a floating dead cow. That and that only makes the software slower and slower, bigger and bigger. And that slows down the whole system. Up to a point that it is unworkable. So you decide to buy new hardware to speed up the software.

Unfortunately the software is not the old one but also new. That is bigger but not better, superfluous because they add nothing you missed before, or they correct mistakes that shouldn't have been there in the first place. It is not the hardware that slows down but the software. The solution should be to exchange the software for something faster, not the hardware.

Say you have a five year old computer (dinosaur-age). Too slow to work with but furthermore healthy. Wouldn't it be nice if you could revive the old bastard by just replacing the software? A faster office suite, a new operating system, a different browser?

Well, it works. I did just that with two of my laptops, after I got enraged by the stupid increase of software size, sheer volume. Both systems, over five years old, have been given a hardware upgrade which did not help: extending the size of the internal memory (to 2 GB). But it did help the next step: replacing the operating system and everything connected to it: word processor, browser, mail, photo application, music and video system and so on.

And all of it legally for free, downloads from the internet. Installation took little time, no registration, a non-IT person can do it. Really. It also recognized all my devices (GPS, Bluetooth, WiFi, printer, scanner, camera's, network). Right now I am blogging on one of these with my telephone as my internet connection (dongle or tether). I am smart nor fast, neither is my laptop.

It just does not have to be the latest and the fastest.

Save by using old hard- and software Blog 1. Buying IT second hand

2011-07-21T14:50:00.000-07:00

Organisations confronted with less financial room might choose to save money on IT by using old or second hand hard- and software. It seems an obvious choice, like a second hand truck. There are however some additional software glitches to take into account.

In those parts of the economy where information is not the primary process, such as education, in health care, social security, NGOs and other organisations working on volunteers, licensing may be a rather large blockade to renewing the technology. That is also true for SOHOs¹ and SMEs², where maintenance is a matter for a knowledgeable employee, an acquaintance or a well-willing family member, and license costs are thus much higher than the service costs.

Refurbishing hardware

If you assume that typing on an old machine is just as fast as on a brand new one, you are right. A solution could be using old, used or even obsolete hard- and software.

One of the largest software companies has found a solution ('Microsoft and the Secondary PC Market' (March 2008 PDF)). The company describes why the refurbishing companies work for a good cause and helps them by providing marketing arguments why 'refurbished' IT components should be re-used, maybe after a small upgrade: “Microsoft believes that getting maximum use out of existing computers—through programs that support donation, refurbishment and resale of used PCs—is key to serving the goals of digital inclusion and environmental stewardship”.

In fact it is a type of green IT re-use, a subject I will get into in a later blog posting. But Microsoft erases misconceptions on second-hand and obsolete computers like these: 'A robust secondary PC market will hurt sales of new computer hardware and software', 'Secondary PCs are substandard goods' and 'The secondary PC market can't be trusted'. Mark that in the first quote Microsoft talks about software sales. And for the rest: selling second-hand hardware is OK.

For hardware this is rather simple: any unit is unique, so there can be only be one owner. Since there is one hardware owner, he/she will have to part with it when sold. Since most machines are, when new, sold including software (operating system and applications) this software will be included second hand as well. A new system will replace the old one and also include new software. Software does not suffer wear and tear and does not need to be refurbished, of course.

Refurbishing hardware including software

Not so in the software industry. That part of the software industry that is not based on service but on licensing software, feels the second hand re-use of their software threatens their market, even though the organisations involved will never pay for a full license. This leads to some rather bizarre methods to regain market share.

Microsoft writes (see link above) '... if the machine has been improperly refurbished or is running counterfeit software that lacks support and might be unsafe to run. Many organizations that donate PCs for reuse don't include the original software CDs and documentation needed for re-installation after the data is wiped from the machine, so the machines are effectively useless. Microsoft is helping to ensure that people in underserved communities can use these 'naked computers' by offering special pricing on Microsoft operating system and productivity software.' So, old or second-hand hardware is OK but only with new (Microsoft) software.

Mark! Software that does not cost the software company a penny – the users here will never choose for this brand if they have to pay full value. Besides, because the hardware is old the software often has be older versions as well. And the user, the license-taker, cannot do anything else with the solution. They're not even allowed to sell their old hardware!

Alternative solutions

Microsoft, like other large license sellers, has a strategy devoted: 'Secondary PCs also account for a significant portion of the computers used in education and community technology access programs that help young people and adults develop the skills necessary to participate in the information economy. In Canada, for example, the Microsoft-supported Computers for Schools partnership donates about 100,000 PCs a year to Canadian schools.' Young (Microsoft) taught, old (Microsoft) user? World-wide children educated never to know that there are other options or brands.

Other models to make people acquainted with the product are other so-called social models, carefully described in Microsoft’s April 2008 'A vision for affordable computing. Breaking through the affordability conundrum' (PDF). Described business models include rent, internet cafe, multi-user use of single PCs, super-cheap software and others.

There are two major forces at work here: price and simplicity. Price: “believe me - I give you a major discount, so cheap you do not have to steal my software elsewhere”. An offer you cannot refuse. And on simplicity: “I provide you with an operating system, a browser, an office suite, email, graphics suite, multimedia and more”. Both claims are not Microsoft-only but nobody knows that...

Consumers should KNOW that there are other, cheaper and often better solutions. Both in the realm of free software and of open source software. That they can keep using their familiar Windows, even with other software. Refurbishers could start by providing a user-friendly Linux distribution with their old PCs. Hardware vendors could start by providing a user-friendly Linux distribution with their new PCs. Educators by making children acquainted with other software than the stuff they get at home and (later) office. Give them a choice.

In other words: any money put into software licenses might be a waste of money. And in a period of financial shortages, that counts.

I will get back on this issue in newer posts.

----

1Small Office / Home Office – single workers and freelance employees.

2Small and Medium-sized Enterprise – companies with up to ~200 employees.

To EPD or is it me?

2011-03-07T14:34:00.000-08:00

The sorry story of how a well meant government project in The Netherlands goes awry. Just this month a letter from the national government, ministry of Public Health, Well-being and Sport (Ministerie van VWS) came with the mail.
In fact it were several letters, for members of my household.

Each one read (translated in short): “Your personal health records have been uploaded to the Electronic Patient Dossier (EPD) by your pharmacy XYZ because they (they, not we!) take part in the national infrastructure (read here database) for information exchange in the care sector”. This national database, the EPD, has cost an enormous amount (over 100M€ up to 2011), is not tested to its limits and is designed to host all medical information of everyone, from dentist to psychologist. The national data protection commissioners express formal doubts on its security and validity in view of the European data protection guidelines. Can you guess what health insurance companies are willing to pay for that wealth of information?

In short: I do not understand why the government sends me this letter. I would expect my pharmacy to inform me or ask my permission, at least, before uploading my personal medical information to any database. Well, in fact I do understand now. My general practitioner, like many medical professionals, has great doubts and suggests his patients to object to uploading any medical information.

The letter also notes that you may raise objections to this central storage of everything you want to keep secret from prying eyes. It does not do so directly but refers to the accompanying folder that expresses unconditional certainty that this will save your life. After reading all that is supposed to be good for you, you will find a web address where you may object.

To secure your interactions with governmental websites, a national identity structure has been built and used for several years now. This system, called DigiD, ensures that you can identify yourself to any government webservice. It is trusted on many transactional levels – and that is important for the rest of this story.

So, having every reason to doubt the intentions and the security of large government projects, you decide to raise objections to the central storage of your medical files. You use your DigiD to identify yourself to the website of the EPD and proceed to object. Many times the system tries to lure you into saying to yourself “I will not object; this can only be good”. All arguments are thrown at you not to object to the storage. Ah, why? Why indeed?

After a short period you do receive an email from the EPD system, stating in short: “we did receive your objections in good and proper order and we will take four (!) weeks to send you further information”. What? Further information? For what? You know that I object. And why not within 0.001 second? Why after four whole weeks? What do you do in the meantime? Copy my medical info, just to make sure?

Snail mail is the next step. After a full week you will receive a letter by mail, statingWell, since you have provided us with your formal digital credentials and ID, and you object to having your medical information stored in our national central database, we want you again to object, again, in writing, again, on paper, again, by snail mail. This agreement is printed on the backside of the letter so we hope you will not see it. Why oh why?

My wife made a very good point: any objection thus entails several printed letters, plus a set of envelopes which all cost paper (=trees) and transport (=oil). This is time and money (government time and thus our money!). Why oh why?

And you did use an identity structure, DigiD, set up by government (tax office, census office, …) to ensure proper identification. Why then a, even less secure, paper trail as well? Why does government go through all this trouble? Why oh why?

Well, it is just a guess of course. We use a national system of medical insurance, so if we can give the insurers insight in your medical records, we might save a dime here and there. The major problem is that there is no way back. Once the system is set up, you are suspect if your data is not readily available.

Major political figures show up on the Board of the health insurance trade, such as Hans Wiegel and Roger van Boxtel. They all promote the use of the EPD and Roger even pays practitioners in the field to store data in the database. Now why's that? I wonder if their medical data is available in the EPD infrastructure. Prove it.....

UPDATE - The Dutch Senate (Eerste Kamer) of the Dutch Parliament (the States General) has rejected the proposed law on the EPD. It has an extensive set of public files on the subject.

So, there's my blog ... and now what?

2010-10-20T15:07:00.000-07:00

OK, so I created a blog @ blogger. Now what? What do I put here? Who cares; who will read this? And then what? Will it make any difference and what do I care?

You know, I have very deep thoughts, I really do. Often late at night, when the family has gone to their respective bedrooms, my mind rumbles and tumbles on mighty philosophical questions. For example - why English? Is it because I feel I will of course attract an international crowd of followers? Or is it the lingua franca, the common language, of the internet? Oh, now some practical questions pop up.

Should I devote this blog to any specific subject? It could have been named 'on the choice of two wheels for the bicycle' or 'on dinosaurs and birds'. Or 'on dinosaurs and thus birds'. Get the thoughts I'm wrestling with? Stick to the subject? Must it be about hobby's or about professions? Or would my brain be the more obvious starter point? So pick and choose whatever I muse about.

Well, I'll just close for now. The kids have left the house for the night and my wife watches TV downstairs. Oh well, there are more machines in the house and I can add to the blog from there, if I can remember my logon. We got into a rather serious relationship discussion, something we should have done times ago. Very good and I'm very glad we did. The dishwasher is already clock-started and TV shows a documentary on japanese gigolo's. Very non-sense, poor people.