‘Open’ does not mean what you think it means

• Google gives early, priority access to select partners. ¹ This is hardly ‘open’ nature.
• Google buys partners. This not only is merely to get access to patents to use as defense in litigation, it also is hardly fair to other device manufacturers.
• Google takes an average of 100 days to open source Android code. ² The point of the ‘open’ principle is to allow everyone to contribute to the same set of code.
• Android is encumbered by patent lawsuits. More than half of Android OEMs have signed patent license agreements with Microsoft ³, and Samsung has well-publicized patent lawsuits from Apple. Google steals hard work and ideas from other companies, makes it ‘open’ (not free), and considers themselves justified. If you don’t like the patent rules, work to change the system, don’t abuse it. Play by the rules while working to change them.
• Slavish copying of the iPhone by Android manufacturers. See here ⁴ and here. ⁵
• Carriers block versions of Android if they choose ⁶. This is one of the flaws (features depending how you look at it) of the Android model. Every carrier can customize and distribute Android as they see fit. Unfortunately, this also means that they can choose to not distribute entire versions of their customers if they so choose.
• The idealisms of ‘open’ and ‘free’ are not enough to win. Linux zealots have been claiming for as long as I can remember that ‘this is the year of Linux’, that Open Source will triumph. Yet, the desktop market share of Linux has never gone much above 1% market share ⁷. Idealism is not enough. Just like communism, Open Source promises much in its ideology, but there are many practical matters in life that hinder reaching ideal. Only the billions of dollars thrown at Android by Google have given it any headway whatsoever.
• Developers live by the profit generated from their code. They will go where the money is. iOS generates 4 times as much return for developers as Android ⁸, so this leads to more investment in the platform, and better apps for the platform.

‘Open’ does not mean safer

• Android has seen a rise of malware (37% increase last quarter, 1000 detected infections, doubled over the past year). ⁹ Almost all new mobile malware targets Android. Just because software might be ‘open’, does not mean that exploits are patched and gone.
• CarrierIQ. Precisely because the Android distribution model allows carriers to install their own customizations/bloatware on devices before distributing, nefarious apps like CarrierIQ can be installed and customized to scrape all your data, including text messages and email. So the average customer gets a device that they believe is safer because it’s ‘open’, but the carrier may have already exploited that ‘open’ nature and implemented spyware.
• Viruses are prevalent on Android. Because apps are not vetted, it is free range for coders/hackers to distribute malicious apps. There was a 400% increase in malware Year Over Year in May 2011, and in 2H 2011, another 472% increase.¹⁰
• I’ve heard arguments that Android has permissions that can be set on a per-app basis, and that this makes the device secure. This model of security however, has been broken, using the very model designed to protect it.¹¹ It does not make your device secure.
• Another excuse I hear frequently is that the user should make sure that they are installing legitimate apps. No, just no. Respecting a user means taking all that background gunk out of the picture and giving them peace of mind. They should not have to worry about whether the app is safe or not… that is up to the distributor. Users in general are not inclined toward technology, and just want something that works. You don’t ask to see your bus driver’s license every time you get on the bus because you trust the transit commission. Why should a user have to worry about whether the app they’re installing is safe if coming from a primary distributor?
• I also hear the excuse that a user may need to sacrifice security for choice. Again, no. Microsoft and Apple have managed to bring the best of both worlds in a closed model, so this is merely an excuse for selling Android’s ‘open’ness with its security flaws.
• I also hear that if users want security, they should only stick with ‘trustworthy’ sources. This violates the entire principle of ‘open’! A user should not have to go to ‘trustworthy’ sources at the expense of ‘open’, if you are selling to them on the principle of ‘open’!
• A misconception I often hear is that viruses infect iOS and WP7, proven by the jailbreak toolkits. No. Exploits are not viruses, and viruses are not exploits. An exploit is a vulnerability, a virus is something malicious that takes advantage of the vulnerability. Android is the only major smartphone platform invaded by viruses, thanks to its ‘open’ model.
• Carriers distribute updates infrequently. Typically, after 6 months, carriers/OEMs of Android phones no longer distribute updates.¹² This means all those security vulnerabilities that have been discovered, are no longer patched. New security enhancements and features in new phones are not available on the old phones. This is because there is too much cost and no incentive to either the carrier or the OEM in the ‘open’ model to distribute updates to their users. Compare this to the iOS and WP7 platforms, where updates are mandatory on WP7, and updates are still being distributed for the latest OS to even 2.5 year old iPhone models.

‘Open’ does not mean better

• As we saw above, ‘open’ systems will always lag behind ‘closed’ systems in areas of design and UI/UX, thanks to the very nature of those developing ‘open’ systems.
• ‘Open’ systems will generally be significantly weaker in security, thanks to the principle of allowing anyone to distribute whatever they want. There is no real safeguard to prevent coders with malicious intent from distributing their wares to unsuspecting users.
• As MG Siegler points out¹³, comparing an iOS device to an Android device is a bit like comparing a Mercedes to a Honda. Those who appreciate design and experience will get much more out of the Mercedes, but have difficulty telling someone who only appreciates functionality why.
• Android has poor integration with enterprise services. No native IPsec VPN, and varying Exchange compatibility between OS versions. Thanks to the carriers who choose not to ensure updates to their devices, the support effort required to support Android on an enterprise deployment becomes astronomically larger in comparison to properly governed systems in a closed model.
• There is no official support desk for Android. This is a huge barrier for many enterprises. Sure, there are many forums with coders and hackers to come up with fixes, but how many of them have experience in an enterprise setting, and would be able to resolve issues involving infrastructure beyond the device itself?
• ‘First’ is irrelevant. Arguing that one OS or piece of UI was developed before a competitor is irrelevant when it comes to which is better. Stop sidetracking!
• In general, Android apps are not as polished as iOS or WP7 apps, thanks to reasons I outlined previously. Low-quality apps from more sources is not ‘better choice’ than high-quality apps from a single source.
• ‘More Choice’ does not necessarily attract a customer. Simple is often better, and when you look at the lineup of iOS phones (4 phones) vs the hundreds of phones from other vendors, a user will often pick from a simple, easy to understand lineup. A very interesting study on this here.¹⁴
• Feature phones do not equal smartphones. By stripping down Android as a base OS for cheap/free phones that provide basic phone service with a few extra features increases market share. However, this increased marketshare does not make Android a better smartphone OS, as it’s no longer a smartphone. It merely speaks to the flexibility that Android can function.
• Being able to install Flash because it’s ‘open’ does not make it better. Mobile Flash has proven to be a battery and performance killer on every platform. Installing a now-deprecated¹⁵ battery and performance killer does not make the platform better.
• ‘Open’ software does not mean able to change your battery. This is something that is at the discretion of the manufacturer. Some will choose to make it user-serviceable, others will not. The only thing that really matters in this scenario is the cost and downtime to fix it.
• ‘Open’ does not mean better quality of code. Firefox for example, is incredibly bloated on the Mac OS, and runs poorly. It also has hit the 32bit limitation for compiling.¹⁶ Open does not mean better code or coding practices.

extension-dll-exception

Cause

Figured out that the error is happening due to .Net Framework 4 being installed, and FIM attempting to use .Net 4 instead of .Net Framework 2. This is a new issue that occurred in the June 2011 CU for Sharepoint 2010, and unbeknownst to us, the June CU was re-released to fix it. We were still utilizing the original June CU.

Resolution

This issue can be fixed by either installing the latest version of June CU, or by following the steps below.

1. Open

   C:\Program Files\Microsoft Office Servers\14.0\Synchronization Service\Bin\miiserver.exe.config

   for editing.
2. Locate the below section:
   
   

   <startup useLegacyV2RuntimeActivationPolicy="true">
     <supportedRuntime version="v4.0.30319"></supportedRuntime>
     <supportedRuntime version="v2.0.50727"></supportedRuntime>
   </startup>

3. Delete or comment out the reference for the .NET v4 version. Like this:
   
   

   <startup useLegacyV2RuntimeActivationPolicy="true">
     <!-- <supportedRuntime version="v4.0.30319"></supportedRuntime> -–>
     <supportedRuntime version="v2.0.50727"></supportedRuntime>
   </startup>

   or
   
   

   <startup useLegacyV2RuntimeActivationPolicy="true">
       <supportedRuntime version="v2.0.50727"></supportedRuntime> 
   </startup>

4. Restart the two FIM services in the services console.
5. Run the sync again.

Earlier this year my music collection started to seem a little stale, and I started to wish for more variety, more music I have not listened to. This lead me to consider a VPN, which would essentially tunnel my Internet connection to a server in the US, allowing me to access Pandora and other sites such as Hulu ⁴. I considered paying for a subscription to a VPN, but was having difficulty finding one that was reasonably priced and would tunnel my connection properly (all my data needs to flow through the US IP, not just a HTTP proxy). The other requirement was that the VPN be accessible via my iPad and iPhone as well as my desktop computers (Windows and Mac), and the only type of VPN connection that seemed to adequately satisfy my needs was an L2TP/IPSec VPN.

Since I couldn’t find a VPN service that seemed to satisfy my needs, I decided to create my own, which means I need root access to a server. I also plan to tunnel a lot of data, considering I will primarily be using it for media streaming. I also didn’t want to pay Windows Server licensing fees, so decided to take the route of Ubuntu Server. OpenVPN does not do native L2TP/IPSec, so was out of the question considering my iPad/iPhone requirement. This left StrongSwan and FreeSwan as the potential VPN platforms.

I started looking at LowEndBox ⁵ for cheap Virtual Private Servers (VPS) that came with copious amounts of data. I don’t need much processing power… just a lot of bandwidth. Initially I thought I found a great service for $5/mo… an OpenVZ based VPS with unlimited data. I purchased a couple months worth, and began setting up an Ubuntu 10.10 server, using the guide at ByBacon.com ⁶.

It was then that I hit a major stumbling block. Every time that I attempted to initiate a connection with the VPS from any one of my clients, the server would fail to respond. Checking the server logs, I didn’t see any record of either PPP connections or IPSec initiations. Obviously there was an issue with the NIC interface.

On investigation, I found that OpenVZ creates virtual, emulated ethernet devices, using the name VENET, with no MAC address. IPSec VPN service I was attempting to use requires root-level access to the device itself, as well as an accessible MAC address. Now, this can be accomplished using a TUN/TAP device… but requires some not-so-simple changes by the OpenVZ administrator. I put in a ticket to have one created, but unfortunately the service I’d paid for happens to not support creating these devices for clients.

So… I needed to find a different service… either Xen-based or VMware-based. Eventually I found a service from ENScloud ⁷ that seems to work well, and provide me with copious amounts of bandwidth. It took about a week for them to provision my server and IP, but after the initial hiccup everything seems to function well (their support guy Brandon was more than helpful after I put in a ticket requesting update). I’ve been listening to Pandora a lot since the VPN was created.

I eventually plan to rent out access to my VPN to family and friends, as I want to recoup my costs, so I figure that if I can rent out access for $5/yr if I get 12-15 people interested. I’ve managed to get it working easily under Windows (certificate-based), Mac, iPad, and iPhone, so no matter what platform family and friends are using, it will be accessible to them. I would eventually like to get a WebDAV service running as part of the service, so those with iWork for iOS can use it for cloud document storage.

I’d like to start with one of the changes to application state management. Starting in OS X 10.7, developers will have API’s similar to iOS, and possibly requirements as well, to auto-save their application state. This means that when a user exits an application, and relaunch, it will re-open right where they left off. In addition, a few keen-eyed observers have noticed a lack of running application indicators in 10.7′s dock. This indicates to me that the dock will become similar to iOS’s dock, merely a launch area for frequently used applications, and not a means of managing open applications. This, combined with auto-state saving for applications, and an emphasis on full-screen application view, also indicates to me that the operating system will also handle memory and process management the way iOS does. Developers should no longer expect to leave their applications running at all times.

Obviously, if application state management changes to an iOS style system, then we should expect drastic performance increases on the Mac computing platform. If an iPad or iPhone can perform the way they do with the A4 processor and limited RAM, imagine what a desktop can do with copious amounts of RAM and processor power.

Another item I found very interesting was the introduction of the Mac App Store. While a logical next step for Apple, it caught me by surprise. I think this is a particularly noteworthy evolution of the Mac platform for both developers and end-users. To my eyes, the Mac App Store brings:

• Exposure for end users to indie software. Many new users to the Mac platform miss out on a lot of the capabilities of their Mac, simply because they are unaware of third-party hole-in-the-wall websites for software. Now they will see new and nifty applications highlighted for them, as well as Genius results for software they might also like.
• Exposure for developers. No longer a little site in a corner of the web, with their software going un-noticed. Now a proper repository, with great exposure, and millions of eyeballs viewing.
• Easy software maintenance for end users. Once a user has purchased software, updates will become something routine, a habit formed when they visit the App Store. Developers will have much less likelihood of having to troubleshoot out-of-date software. Not only easy maintenance of updates, but also easy maintenance of licenses. No longer a requirement to store different license files or keys in some central backup location or email.
• Easy software distribution for developers. Developers no longer have to worry about creating proprietary licensing or activation mechanisms. They no longer have to worry about creating a website to host their software. They no longer have to be concerned about creating proprietary updating mechanisms. All can be done through the App Store.
• Easy in-app upgrades. A new mechanism for developers to add extra content into their applications. Enough said.

The Mac App Store is a noteworthy addition to the Mac platform. I completely understand Apple’s decision to push it out within the next 90 days.

Another item of note is the coming of Push Notifications in the FaceTime beta. I suspect we’ll see this fully implemented in OS X 10.7. I suspect this will give rise to a new class of desktop applications and services.

These are the things I think particularly noteworthy in Apple’s next OS. Snow Leopard was a performance upgrade. OS X Lion looks like it will be an upgrade that brings huge advances in refinement to the desktop computing experience.

Regarding Foxconn Suicides:
Steve: It’s a factory — but my gosh, they have restaurants and movie theaters… but it’s a factory. But they’ve had some suicides and attempted suicides — and they have 400,000 people there. The rate is under what the US rate is, but it’s still troubling.
Steve: We had this in my hometown of Palo Alto, copy cat suicides.

Regarding Search:
Walt: So last year we had a company called Siri, a search company…
Steve: They’re not a search company. They’re an AI company. We have no plans to go into the search business. We don’t care about it — other people do it well.

Regarding Press:
Steve: Well I think the foundation of a free society is a free press. And we’ve seen what’s happening to papers in the US right now. I think they’re really important. I don’t want to see us descend into a nation of bloggers. I think we need editors now more than ever.
Steve: I can tell you as one of the largest sellers of content on the internet to date — price it aggressively and go for volume. That has worked for us. I’m trying to get the press to do the same thing. They need to do it differently than they do it for print.
Steve: I think people are willing to pay for content. I believe it for music and video, and I believe it for the media.

Regarding Interaction with Computing Devices:
Steve: People laugh at me when I say it’s magical… but something has been stripped away and removed between you and the computer…

Regarding Pulitzer-winning Cartoon Censorship:
Steve: Yes… and political cartoons got caught in that. We didn’t think of that. So this guy submits his app and he gets rejected. We didn’t see that coming. So we changed the rule, but this guy never resubmitted… then he wins a Pulitzer Prize, and he says we rejected him. So, we are guilty of making mistakes. We’re doing the best we can, we’re learning as fast as we can — but we thought this rule made sense.
Steve: We’re doing the best we can, we’re fixing mistakes. But what happens is — people lie. And then they run to the press and tell people about this oppression, and they get their 15 minutes of fame. We don’t run to the press and say “this guy is a son of a bitch liar!” — we don’t do that.
Steve: 95% (of app submissions) are approved within 7 days…

Regarding Gizmodo:
Steve: Well a guy… who can say if he’s a journalist.
Steve: The person who took the phone plugged it into his roommates computer. And this guy was trying to destroy evidence… and his roommate called the police. So this is a story that’s amazing — it’s got theft, it’s got buying stolen property, it’s got extortion, I’m sure there’s some sex in there (huge laughs)… the whole thing is very colorful. The DA is looking into it, and to my knowledge they have someone making sure they only see stuff that relates to this case. I don’t know how it will end up.
Steve: You know, when this whole thing with Gizmodo happened, I got advice from people who said ‘you gotta just let it slide, you shouldn’t go after a journalist just because they bought stolen property and tried to extort you.’ And I thought deeply about this, and I concluded the worst thing that could happen is if we change our core values and let it slide. I can’t do that. I’d rather quit.

Regarding TOS Change for Analytics:
Q: You changed your TOS on analytics — do you want to own that for developer’s data?
A: Well we learned this really interesting thing. Some company called Flurry had data on devices that we were using on our campus — new devices. They were getting this info by getting developers to put software in their apps that sent info back to this company! So we went through the roof. It’s violating our privacy policies, and it’s pissing us off! So we said we’re only going to allow analytics that don’t give our device info — only for the purpose of advertising. But you can’t get info off of our devices and turn around and sell it. That you can’t do… is that clear?
Q: It is, but there is vital info there that could make apps better…
A: That’s true… but there’s no excuse for them not asking customers if it’s okay to send that data. We’re willing to talk to some of these people when we calm down… but it’s not today.

Regarding DRM-ed Content:
Q: I bought the movie Up on DVD, it had a digital download. I put it on my iPad. I hooked up my VGA adapter and tried to play it… but I couldn’t because of HDCP. Can you tell me how you’re helping with this?
A: We didn’t invent this stuff…
Q: But you did deploy it…
A: Well the content creators are trying to protect this stuff, and they’re grabbing at straws. Sometimes they grab the right ones, and sometimes they don’t. If we want access to this stuff, we have to play by some of their rules. I feel your pain.

Regarding TV:
Q: Hi, I’m from Hillcrest Labs… do you think it’s time to throw out the interface for TV? When will Apple do something there?
A: The problem with innovation in the TV industry is the go to market strategy. The TV industry has a subsidized model that gives everyone a set top box for free. So no one wants to buy a box. Ask TiVo, ask Roku, ask us… ask Google in a few months. So all you can do is ADD a box to the TV. You just end up with a table full of remotes, a cluster of boxes… and that’s what we have today. The only way that’s going to change is if you tear up the set top box, give it a new UI, and get it in front of consumers in a way they’re going to want it. The TV is going to lose in our eyes until there is a better go to market strategy… otherwise you’re just making another TiVo.
Q: In the phone area you were able to partner with a carrier… would you do that with TV?
A: Well then there’s a problem, providers are local… it’s a Tower of Babel problem…

I don’t trust Facebook. Never have, and never will. Unfortunately, with their actions they’ve lowered my trust from minimal levels to less than zero.

Unfortunately, they’ve got me by the cajones. Their client base includes my connections. I have to decide whether my distrust of Facebook is great enough to sever my easy access of up to date information from those close to me. How important is that data to me?

Fortunately the Spirit jailbreak² tool was released just after the launch of the 3G iPad this past weekend. The Spirit jailbreak uses a common exploit to the iPad and iPhone to jailbreak, and consequently, I was able to jailbreak my iPhone 3GS running the latest firmware/baseband. I installed MyWi³ a tethering application that goes beyond Apple’s Bluetooth/USB tethering to provide tethering via WiFi, similar to the Verizon MiFi. I set up a WiFi network and password protected it. Thanks to the iPad’s network memory feature, every time I launch MyWi, it starts the protected network, and the iPad automatically connects. Smooth and seamless.

The only problem I’ve had with this setup is the bandwidth usage. In 40 minutes I used up 33Mb down and 6.5 up. This was just doing basic web browsing, email, and a speed test. I don’t know how tenable this usage is on my 6GB/mo plan.

Here’s a screenshot of my bandwidth up and down in Toronto on Rogers 3G network.

The reason I suggest that IT pros study design principles is so that they learn to appreciate the ‘user-level’ features for what they are, not dismissing them as merely useless pieces of eye-candy. When a tech can look at an object or interface, and not allow their ‘function over form’ mentality to get the better of them, they can better relate to how the user will experience the interface. When the tech appreciates on some level what the user appreciates, understanding between the two parties can grow.

Hand-in-hand with the previous point, IT pros should also study user interface experience. By beginning to understand how to implement or at least structure a good user experience, the eyes are opened to a new perspective on how the world functions. Studying and ingraining good UX principles in the core of the tech’s mentality will drastically shift how they approach their users, and how they approach the potential technologies to be implemented.

Now, you may ask why I’m suggesting the actual techs learn these things instead of just ensuring that the head folks know and understand these things. I’m a firm believer in the ancient Greek holistic approach to education. However, beyond that, I think that while the head of the body is responsible for the rest of a person’s functionality, when the whole body is trained and tuned to the same level, the performance level of the particular body jumps exponentially. Consequently, new and previously unattainable heights can be reached.

If you’re interested in some design oriented websites, check out these for examples (mostly centered around web design):

Smashing Magazine: http://www.smashingmagazine.com
Noupe: http://www.noupe.com
Net-Tuts: http://net.tutsplus.com

I refused to write a review on the iPad in the first week. In my mind, the iPad is a paradigm shifting technology. Until I’d used the iPad for a few weeks, I did not feel I could provide the perspective I feel is important to my readers. Reviewing a new device is like a relationship. All fuzzy feelings for the first little while, then reality hits. I wanted to write a review that was not affected by initial emotions or excitement.

So, without further ado, let me tell you my experience with the iPad.

Battery life. This thing is phenomenal. I have never had another electronic device that did not make me nervous toward the end of a day of use. Even my iPhone 3GS does not provide me with the same sense of security that the device will not die by the end of a day of use. I can even charge the iPad Friday morning, take it up north (always careful with how I use it when away from a charger), and still have 40% battery left. I completely trust the iPad to be charged when I need it.

Convenience. Portability. The iPad has changed the frequency with which I take my computer with me. I rarely take my MacBook Pro from home anymore. I take the iPad everywhere. It’s like carrying a notebook with me, weight-wise. I pick it up off the desk and carry it in my hand. I don’t need a backpack to take my computer with me. This has changed my perspective on using my personal commuting device. It has become a permanent companion, rather than a tool to be utilized when needed. Similar to my iPhone.

I have begun to reevaluate my need for the MacBook Pro. All my data is stored on my Ubuntu mediaserver (hosted on VMware ESXi along with my Windows VM’s). I now utilize the iMac for managing my virtual servers and ESXi. I have Air Video Server installed for streaming movies from the media server to the iPad, and FileBrowser installed for browsing the network files from the iPad. The only real need that I have for the laptop is for import of my photos from my Nikon D40. I’ve begun to question whether I really need the laptop solely for immediate import of my photos. My Aperture 3 library is synced across my backup server, iMac, and laptop. I’ve begun to think that as long as I can wait to import my photos from a weekend out of the city till I get back home, I have no justifiable need for my laptop. I will be continuing to evaluate this over the next month or so, but I’m afraid that the laptop will be going. Never thought I’d say this.

I can extoll the various features of the iPad. However, I feel enough other reviews have done that. This piece is about how the iPad has changed the way I’m using technology. The next posts that I write will likely be shaped from an iPad user’s experience.