Finally we're starting to see some real daylight on the web-platforming arena.

Chrome is a container. A smart container, to be sure, but a container nevertheless.

Built to look like a browser, Chrome will be able to deliver all sorts of operating system applications and work applications built on a new paradigm.

I find it odd Adobe says AIR is built from a design that is capable of running on mobile processors but they don't have plans to run AIR on mobile processors. ANd here's Google placing a box for Gears to run in right on cell phones. Hmmm. Interesting.

Well, SOMEbody needs to run some micro-servers on mobile platforms. And Chrome looks like a fine box to put those things in.

Where's Microsoft on this issue? Still asleep? Still smarting from having to be spanked to deliver web work? Wow.

Joe,

Great job, you nailed it.

MSFTs poor execution of WindowsMobile (and WinCE) is destined to be an even greater miscue than Vista's troubled and aimless development cycle. The bottom line consequences of their feckless WindowsMobile product will haunt MSFT for years to come.

Under previous anti-trust investigations MS fought tooth and nail being broken up (like AT&T). Perhaps that decision has really hurt them. Now they waste an awful lot of management resource on things like MS Business Solutions that completely under perform and turn natural allies into competitors and enemies. Perhaps they should split off or sell all these distraction businesses, and concentrate their resources and top smart people on their core platform business.

Excellent post, Joe.Its funny how MS is getting squeezed by closed (APPL) and open (GOOG) systems.

MSFT needs a strong, central leader to come in and focus the company before it atomizes into nothingness.

This is a notice to all commenters:

This afternoon I deleted some comments about VCSY, and I unpublished 22 comments believed to be from the Fake I-Man (based on the IP address). I have not removed comments from portuno as some commenters requested. I did remove links in some portuno comments pointing to blogs he wrote about VCSY.

There is no censorship at Microsoft Watch, but spam is deleted. The posts on VCSY are endless, and they should have stopped when the settlement was reached. Any future VCSY comments will be treated as spam and deleted. If they persist, the poster will be banned.

Douglas Taylor and Tom Berber asked for some respite from portuno. Again, I don't censor comments. If it were my choice--and it's not--there would be no anonymous commenting at Microsoft Watch. Douglas and Tom both identify themselves through links. Portuno does not. The weak often hide and from their secrecy attack those in the open.

Portuno is right when he says that I have his e-mail address. But that doesn't really identify who he is, although the information wasn't that hard for me to get. I strongly suggest that portuno clearly identify himself and his associations if he wants to attack the integrity of others.

As for the others, like Douglas and Tom, don't let portuno's insinuations and accusations bother you. He's looking for reaction, methinks. Why feed his need to bleed you?

I found the VCSY posts to be mildly assuming and somewhat annoying. I watched the banter with other commenters and portuno, who clearly sought reaction. Neither he nor either of the I-Mans is getting a reaction from me. I've stepped in because plenty enough time has passed since the VCSY settlement and enough regular commenters have requested action for me to do something. So I'm taking action and will step in again and again until all this nonsense stops.

I am posting this comment on the 10 most recent Microsoft Watch blog posts.

My thanks to all the regular commenters,

Joe

Portuno said:
Where's Microsoft on this issue? Still asleep? Still smarting from having to be spanked to deliver web work? Wow.
Portuno, Internet Explorer is a Container (spefically an OLE/COM container) since version 3 and a .NET container since 4.0 I think. Actually, Microsoft is the undisputable pioneer on containers.

As for chrome let's not exagurate things here... Information week quote
"Google Chrome's Shine Dimmed By Bugs.
Issues include laptops failing to sleep while Chrome runs, network errors related to proxies, lack of SSL client authentication support, and inability to remove Most Visited sites entries.

Nice analysis of the problems Joe. I believe however that you overestimate Microsoft's ability to react. In the mid 90's Microsoft had Gates kicking butt in a relatively small group of mostly A's with some B's. Today there is no Gates and the A's and B's are outnumbered by C's, especially in the management ranks. In trying to control so many markets they have added too many people.

If they want to maintain their lead in the OS their only chance is to spin off secondary product groups. Unfortunately that means management admits wasting billions which will never happen.

These days, Microsoft are largely material for comedy.

Good post Joe! You even resisted the urge to call it an OS, so thanks... Except that one time, but I just skipped past it :)

HTML and standard Javascript means that applications are automatically cross platform, cloud based and web 2.0 - thats 3 buzz words for no extra work! If Google and Mozilla can make web a viable alternative to fat client side applications by making them fast then I am all for it.

It will be interesting to see if IE keeps up with HTML5 or lets the others go ahead and they stick with silverlight being the solution to everything.

Posted from Google Chrome. Microsoft Watch is the first site that I've visited after trying Chrome.

I've always wondered how companies like Microsoft get away with the things they do. Now I know.

Those of you who read "opinions" and "comments" with the thought you might actually be reading sincere, honest and unbiased words might as well read Dear Abby. You'll actually be learning something useful.

Those of you who complain about smoke and mirrors should realize a company can't blow smoke and arrange mirrors all by themselves. They need help from folks well placed and supported.

It's enough. You know what I've said. It's enough to sit back and watch every last one of you simmer in your own juices. It's enough to watch all of you fail the tests of fairness and honesty and think yourselves correct.

So be it.

You can have it, Joe.

To those of us who breath fresh air, it stinks.

portuno wrote: "You can have it, Joe."

I can have what, portuno? I didn't ban you or delete your comments, maybe as some other people would have liked. But the VCSY stuff has gotten to be too much. The VCSY comments interfere with real dialogue.

I think it's good that you challenge some of the other commenters. As for identifying yourself, I asked that if you're going to accuse others of shilling for somebody else.

Your comments contribute much to the blog. Everyone loses out if they stop. I hope you're not leaving us, portuno.

Joe

Joe Willcox says to portuno;
"I think it's good that you challenge some of the other commenters. As for identifying yourself, I asked that if you're going to accuse others of shilling for somebody else."
----------------------------------------------------
Joe, many of the folks here that do comment, (as you know) do work for Microsoft or have a vested interest somehow with that company or its software. Its not illegal to shill, but morally, that's not so clear, is it? And please do not think that I mean Douglas and Tom, who I do not believe in any way shape or form are shills, just they are what they say they are. There are folks that clearly work for MS that write in here. If they identify themselves first, I never label them a MS shill. I respect honesty, when they do this, although, I reserve the right to disagree with their viewpoints.

Its the others, that try to hide the fact that they have some kind of vested interest with promoting MS products that I have a problem with. And it easy to find out who most of them are if they use a link, like Andre.

As for me, I am who I say I am. A lowly technician, who repairs, cleans malware, mostly, on Windows computers. I do not have a web site, my work comes from word of mouth referrals mostly. Neither do I have the time to setup a website either. So if it seems that I attack people as "M$ Shills," without identifying myself, that's why. Also remember what a MS Shill does and why they post that link in their name. Its easy to detect the shill, because their site reads just like a "just the facts" Microsoft web site. The link is put in the Shill's name, to try to promote the product, the the Shill is being paid by. (MS) And if you believe people like Andre, are just fanboi's, then I got a bridge to sell you. Also, I usually have some supporting evidence when I label someone a MS $hill.

I do not have any vested interests in promoting Linux, other than to see people not have all the malware and stability problems of the Windows Operating Systems. I do not have any vested interest in promoting Apple, either. In fact, at this time, I think Mac is too expensive for the average user. That point is of course open for debate, once you factor in how many people crash windows about once a year, because of the malware or general instability. That has to cost something.

As far as portuno, I hope he does stay. Once in awhile, when he was off his favorite topic, he had some very interesting things to write.

Also, I know you try hard to be fair Joe and your comments where not directed at me. At least I hope so.

Defending Portuno (the devil?)
If any person needed once to be backed up in the forum, that was Chips. He, when he defended his ideas (and in some cases, the blogger as well) was attacked, insulted and mistreated by a group of individuals. They did not attack his ideas, but rather committed ad-hominem. Then it’s proved that some of these individuals had economic benefit links to Ms. Thing which they never declared. But he did not ask or received any back up from you, Joe. And that was the right thing. If you had defended him, you’d have to change/put rules and maybe even a moderator.

I agree with you Joe about VCSY. But not in the way that you have supported some people (excuse me Tom) in this forum. Because, being fair (and leaving VCSY aside), there was mutual aggression (
in a given period of time). Despite the fact that generally I’m not with Portuno ideas, I consider his opinion to be valuable to this forum.

Portuno:
Joe has not banned you, as long as you don’t go OTT over VCSY. Thus, I wait and hope that, with the corresponding moderation, you keep giving ideas in this forum.

"corresponding moderation": about VCSY.

Joe, lets get one thing straight. Port doesn't attack the integrity of others. He attacks the integrity in what they say. He asks simply for supporting evidence in links etc. Most here choose to post bias, false, or slanderous information about most subjects as well as against VCSY. For a man who is as intuitive and who's information has proven true, yes true Joe, over the years. He has a right to keep his identity to himself. But that isn't the issue at hand. It is the information others call legitimate and objective.

I was forgetting:

Question to Joe:
Joe: Will you change/put rules and a moderator?, because it's probably this matter will get out of yours hands.

And Joe; "there would be no anonymous commenting at Microsoft Watch".
Excellent idea.

At the bottom of this post is an example of the sort of thing people who are being paid to attack others do. The masterpiece is from a Yahoo poster who calls himself "Al". In fact, Al speaks in first person about himself. Some may think it gives Al an air of sophistication, but, actually, the first person tactic allows Al to post as a variety of people and pretend he's talking about third person Al when he forget's who he's logged in as when he pushes the submit button.

Al's personality is far from sophisticated. He's one of the most abusive posters I've seen in more than eight years of posting.

"Al considers you a dumbshit. Al knows more than you do."

In effect, Al is an insufferable tech phony and more akin to a hedge fund publicist. It shows.

Why do I point out Al? Because Al posts on your site now. Why? Because I posted there. He chases, harangues, and daily imposes his twisted views which are outrageously abusive. Why? It's what he does for a living.

My problem with people who get paid to post in comment forums is the readers are caught unaware and are manipulated by carefully planned (or, in the case of Al, desperately freaked out) campaigns designed to force the employer's philosophy on the reader.

THAT is what I attack... especially when I am attacked first - a hallmark indication the poster has no defense and needs to bury the information.

The tactic is to prejudice the readers' attitude toward the information... that's all it takes and the reader thinks the information is useless. Bigotry and prejudice are very easy attitudes to spread, especially when it serves the psychological frailties of those who have no defense.

If someone can defend their philosophies, I would love to engage their ideas. But, when somebody starts dancing and dodging and calling on others to "BAN" someone, the red flag goes up and the self-serving poster gets the strip down treatment. I like to strip phonies down. The world is full of them, so, I won't run out of entertainment, will I?

Your site doesn't need my ideas. Those ideas are going to impose themselves on your clientele and your readers from now on no matter who says what.

Whether your commentors can show they understand the issues and forthrightly confront those issues remains to be seen.

The subject of web-platforming is something Microsoft has wanted to bury for years. Now, as though they've awakened from a long coma, they are rushing to appear "current" in the web world... something they have not been able to demonstrate until the month of August 2008.

Gee. Such an odd time to awaken, no?

So, here's Al's post. Just wanted you to see how he interpreted your comments toward me. This is why I dislike phonies so much; they lie and they do everything they can to convince the readers of their twisted intent.

Pure and simple. They lie. And that makes them liars. Should we suffer liars? Should we encourage their efforts? I'll stay off your board from now on and we'll see how your readers respond about the subject.

Thanks for the use of the space.

To wit, "Al's" post:

5-Sep-08 06:13 am
the_original_al_coholic_2008

"I strongly suggest that portuno clearly identify himself and his associations if he wants to attack the integrity of others."

from the Microsoft-watch website. Seems Joe Wilcox knows who poortuna is. wonder what "associations" these would be? perhaps the SEC would be interested in what Joe knows if indeed what you guys speculated happens to be factual.

Seems to ol' honest Al, that if poortuna were just some guy following/invested in vcsy.ob & with an interest in technology, there'd be no need for the suggestion to reveal an "association."

the plot thickens as it were.

------

No, Al. What's thickening is soup; the soup you're being boiled in. The future is delicious... for us. Not for you and your employer.

"Mobile devices, particularly cell phones, will be the next dominant platform. The PC's role will reverse, becoming adjunct to the cell phone. "

I know this is the current favourite theory, but I have a lot of trouble imagining a time when PCs will play second-fiddle to mobile devices for computing functions that are work-related as opposed to music/video, gaming or communicating. If a mobile device ever gave us the screen real estate and input options we need for graphics work, desktop publishing, spread-sheeting etc, we'd already have a name for it: Laptop.

Mobile devices may be ascendent in the roles they can play, but there's a practical limit too.