Skip to content

Posts from the ‘Microsoft’ Category

Siemens vs. Microsoft on IPTV

Over at ITVT, there is a two part interview with representatives from Siemens and Microsoft debating their varying approaches to IPTV technologies and the market. Of course, I am biased as my team and I make many of the decisions about the Siemens approach to the market as well as many of the technology choices in our solution.

It will be very interesting to hear the Microsoft marketing machine as they respond to our perspective as captured in part one.   The Microsoft marketing machine has typically done a very good job in “responding” to critical reviews of their IPTV solution.

For those of you who don’t understand the approach Microsoft has taken in IPTV, it is classic Microsoft..  Take the best ideas from the market leaders (embrace), and modify the established approach to enhance your competitive position (extend).

For IPTV,  Microsoft used several plays from this well worn playbook. For example, Microsoft embraced much of the established ideas in IPTV, but they created a new feature they call “instant channel change” (ICC).  Before Microsoft came into the market, no one knew they needed  ”instant” channel change, but Microsoft’s marketing team has convinced many telco executives that they must have ICC.  In my view, this is not exactly the kind of disruptive feature a telco needs to convince a customer to leave cable or satellite and move to IPTV.

What Microsoft does not tell customers, is that to achieve a nearly instant channel change,  it requires a completely proprietary broadcast architecture, deviating from accepted IPTV architectures, with extensive and costly use of unicast, and a complete dependency on Microsoft technologies (codec, DRM, streaming servers etc.).  Complete technology lock in and reliance on Microsoft.  Who really benefits from instant channel change, well Microsoft, of course.  As we and others began to question the market value of such a feature, the market finally took a critical look at Microsoft’s approach.

In the end, the technological complexity (think cost, $$$) required by the Microsoft approach and the fact that it relies on Microsoft server software (which everyone knows is not even close to carrier grade), can not be justified by the business case.  Will instant channel change come to a TV near you, possibly, but a number of vendors have shown a way to achieve the same result by using a standards based approach–with no Microsoft lock in.

Instant channel change is just one example, but Microsoft has been very quiet about most of their competitive differentiators as of late.  Why?  Well, they are under the gun to get AT&T working beyond trial subscribers.

Of course the Microsoft marketing machine would have us all believe they have “launched”, well that is a matter of perspective.  My belief is that AT&T cannot deploy anywhere, anytime to any subscriber nor can they market the service at full speed because Microsoft is still working through service debilitating bugs and cannot show the scalability that AT&T needs to go full speed ahead.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Windows DRM is the ‘longest suicide note in history’

University of Auckland medical imaging researcher, Peter Gutmann has written an excellent article on the impacts of Windows Vista DRM on the end user, YOU. A great read.

Original article can be found at:

http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~pgut001/pubs/vista_cost.txt

This has ignited a debate again over DRM and its usage in not only the PC space, but is also relevant to other devices–such as STBs, mobile phones etc.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/12/28/vista_drm_analysis/

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/12/27/windows_drm_monstered/

http://it.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/12/25/2034238

http://www.miraesoft.com/

Executive Summary

Windows Vista includes an extensive reworking of core OS elements in order to provide content protection for so-called “premium content”, typically HD data from Blu-Ray and HD-DVD sources. Providing this protection incurs considerable costs in terms of system performance, system stability, technical support overhead, and hardware and software cost. These issues affect not only users of Vista but the entire PC industry, since the effects of the protection measures extend to cover all hardware and software that will ever come into contact with Vista, even if it’s not used directly with Vista (for example hardware in a Macintosh computer or on a Linux server). This document analyses the cost involved in Vista’s content protection, and the collateral damage that this incurs throughout the computer industry.

Ford US cars to get bluetooth, Microsoft operating system

DETROIT (MarketWatch) — Ford Motor Co. (F) will unveil next month a hands-free Bluetooth wireless system and in-vehicle operating system developed by Microsoft Corp. (MSFT) as an option for its entire Ford brand lineup. I say it is just one more reason not to buy a Ford.

read more

Review: Windows Vista

For the New York Times, David Pogue reviews Windows Vista, trying to prove in his video that “Microsoft did not steal ideas from Mac OS X.” [Dec 15, 2006]

How to run Windows and Mac apps side-by-side with Parallels

The Parallels beta includes a new feature, called Coherence, that hides the Windows desktop and allows you to run Windows apps in their own windows on your Mac desktop. The result is that you can intermingle all your Mac and Windows apps on the same desktop. I know what you’re thinking: Disgusting! Unnatural!

read more

Video: A very young Bill Gates Praising the Apple Macintosh

YouTube Preview Image