The ketnote started with a general overview of the thinking behind Windows 7. Specifically mentioned was the user backlash against Vista, and a general feeling that there wasn't much end user or OEM consultation prior to it's release, and it significant performance problems.
Windows 7 was tuned to reduce a lot of the performance bottlenecks and provide a faster user experience. For high end, multi-core CPU systems the scheduling algorithms have been updated to give better performance on those systems too.
Two new tools were specifically demonstrated.
Resource Monitor is a souped-up tool from Task Manager, which can also show more details about running processes, and show which files are open on the file system and how much readings and writing is happening. It can also show what directories are locked (this is searchable too), so you can find out why you can't delete or modify a file.
Memory usage graphic is also a bit more intuitive, showing clearly how much ram is in use for apps, standby caching and spare.
Likewise, Network usage is effectively the TCPView package from SysInternals with a graphical interface, but linked to the process list so you can see which processes have network sessions open, and to where, and what ports are exposed on the machine.
As a side note, Mark Russinovich's machine he was demonstrating did show "Google Updater" as a running program. Make of that what you will. "Apple Mobile Device" was also running, so presumably he's not using a Zune.
The second tool was Problem Steps Recorder, which is designed as a troubleshooting tool for remote helpdesks (ie. you spouse rings you up and says "It's not working!"). If the problem is reproducible, the user can run PSR and reproduce the problem. PSR will capture the screen on every click and keypress, and store the information in a ZIP file which can be e-mailed through to the helpdesk person.
EUT on Tour
Friday, June 19, 2009
Wednesday, April 22, 2009
ILM "2" by the Oxford Computer Group at Microsoft, London.
There are many notable players in the Identity Management Arena notably Sun, IBM, Novell, Oracle (now Sun) and.. well.. not really Microsoft. So I relished the opportunity to spend a day, at Microsoft's Customer Centre in London to hear and see everything there is about IDM.
Shame about the blunt and somewhat impolite staff running their venue but these people need jobs and Microsoft's "Customer" centre , 10 mins from the Houses of Parliament is as good a place to work as anywhere, I guess. Needless to say the coffee wasn't flowing (no mid morning break) and the slightly dry sandwiches were at best unimpressive which kind of set the tone although I didn't realise it at the time.
Anyway, enough of all that, it was the product and it's capabilities I went to see.
So imagine, to make a written point more graphic, a model preparing to hit the catwalk and show off a 'nearly ready' new outfit. The clothes designers have done their bit, they've designed, styled, restyled and redesigned the outfit. The model is ready, the catwalk awaits but neither the make-up artist nor the hair stylist have turned up and to make things even worse, the wrong model is wearing the outfit. The lights are wrong, the set design is wrong and the audience is... wrong. That's how I see Microsoft's latest and greatest Identity Management solution... it's VERY unfinished.
Several years ago MS acknowledged the need to connect directories, provision stuff, do ID management stuff and so on and acquired a product Zoomit VIA which became known as MMS 2.x which then became MIIS 2003 which then became ILM 2007, the abbreviations are irrelevant because ILM "2" isn't ILM! ILM stands for Identity Lifecycle Manager and (unfortunately in my view) the Marketing department has decided to include this future release with their security product set and therefore call it Forefront Identity Manager 2010. So FIM 2010 (two thousand and ten) it will be. Unofficial though the leaked name is [update: click here], like its predecessors it is largely irrelevant - but confusing all the same.
Microsoft's approach in this space has been slow and reminds me of the age when it took them 18 months to support their own new Client Operating Systems in SMS, (now SCCM). The difference here is that I know more and they appear cautious, very cautious... So what goodies do we get in the new product and why the slow delivery?
Forgotten Password - at last I cry, but my tears of joy soon fade and the cold, deflated drops of enthusiasm dry as my mind wonders to patchy, sceptical and meandering thoughts. I saw the first RC (Release Candidate) today and whilst I appreciate the extension of the much expected final product release from Q1 2009 to Q1 2010 at the earliest if I were a product manager owning this thing I'd be thinking long and hard about whether or not it's the right way to go.
So a good strategist needs to read between the lines, to see the outfit without the hair or the make-up or the model. So what is it that MS are offering in a new product that drives forward identity management in a way that others will follow, what ground breaking concepts are being introduced that CTO's will fight for and businesses will invest in? What functions and features will users love and enjoy, what processes and automation will reduce incidents whilst maximising user effectiveness? What one nugget of WOW! can I tell my team and peers about when I return, and what would I tell my industry colleagues with whom I mutually share best practice, insights and learning's.
Well, in this case, absolutely nothing.
It's a sad fact that FIM2010 is narrow in functional capability, does far less than the competition and in an enterprise, will require constant and consistent investment to maintain. YES, they do offer "codeless" policies where a web gui lets you do the basics (although its very laborious), yes, you can do forgotten password albeit with a complex process to manage languages and no option of user defined questions and yes, it will talk to SAP and - at least - some of your connected systems. The very basic foundations are there but without a dark room, lots of sandals and some hairy coders it's never going to do what I want for Mars. (no offence meant to the developer community!)
It is a simple tool, for simple organisations - that is organisations with simple needs - and for those, if it's cheap (read cheap as "Free" or "Almost Free") yeah, it'll do 80% OK. For Universities and public sector organisations functional breadth or depth is not key and where living with the knowledge that we could do more if we had the money this product will be good enough I'm sure, but given the widely accepted view that identity lies at the heart of every system nowadays I expected more from Microsoft.
Oxford Computer Group were good hosts, Microsoft were silent during the briefing but the material - and the (3 or so) other customers that were there had some interesting points, but nothing for me that couldn't be done in an hour, on webex. There was way too much technical detail and for a technologist that's hard for me to say, but if you have to start messing around in SQL databases and digging deep into batch processes to show off ILM I was either at the wrong "Introduction" to ILM"2" or there is something seriously amiss.
If you'd like the hardcore details of what I learned, let me know and I'll gladly bore you with my endless notes and scribbles. Take away from this the fact that Microsoft are great at some things - I'm the worlds biggest advocate of MS Office - but at others they just arn't even close. Next step for us is to get a view of the FIM roadmap, from Microsoft and in detail. We'll stay up to date with the product and confirm that we are NOT (as my Vision presumes) a 'simple' organisation, because if we are, this might just about do (as long as someone else implements it!), but it's a very long way down the catwalk before we show off our new identity if it's to have a Microsoft badge on it.
ILM"2" Workshop by the Oxford Computer Group in conjunction with Microsoft and Gemalto
21st April 2009 at Cardinal Place, London.
Presentor Good - I think he did what he was there to do
Content Poor - Too technical for me, or even you - unless you are an SQL Programmer
Relavance Good - Based on the agenda, Poor - based on what actually happened
Materials Poor - Poor handouts, narrow customer mix, presenter used someone else's slides
Venue Poor - Unhelpful and moody staff, no coffee.
Overall Good - Why? Because I saw what I think (hope) is the worst of the product, not the best.
Doug.
Shame about the blunt and somewhat impolite staff running their venue but these people need jobs and Microsoft's "Customer" centre , 10 mins from the Houses of Parliament is as good a place to work as anywhere, I guess. Needless to say the coffee wasn't flowing (no mid morning break) and the slightly dry sandwiches were at best unimpressive which kind of set the tone although I didn't realise it at the time.
Anyway, enough of all that, it was the product and it's capabilities I went to see.
So imagine, to make a written point more graphic, a model preparing to hit the catwalk and show off a 'nearly ready' new outfit. The clothes designers have done their bit, they've designed, styled, restyled and redesigned the outfit. The model is ready, the catwalk awaits but neither the make-up artist nor the hair stylist have turned up and to make things even worse, the wrong model is wearing the outfit. The lights are wrong, the set design is wrong and the audience is... wrong. That's how I see Microsoft's latest and greatest Identity Management solution... it's VERY unfinished.
Several years ago MS acknowledged the need to connect directories, provision stuff, do ID management stuff and so on and acquired a product Zoomit VIA which became known as MMS 2.x which then became MIIS 2003 which then became ILM 2007, the abbreviations are irrelevant because ILM "2" isn't ILM! ILM stands for Identity Lifecycle Manager and (unfortunately in my view) the Marketing department has decided to include this future release with their security product set and therefore call it Forefront Identity Manager 2010. So FIM 2010 (two thousand and ten) it will be. Unofficial though the leaked name is [update: click here], like its predecessors it is largely irrelevant - but confusing all the same.
Microsoft's approach in this space has been slow and reminds me of the age when it took them 18 months to support their own new Client Operating Systems in SMS, (now SCCM). The difference here is that I know more and they appear cautious, very cautious... So what goodies do we get in the new product and why the slow delivery?
Forgotten Password - at last I cry, but my tears of joy soon fade and the cold, deflated drops of enthusiasm dry as my mind wonders to patchy, sceptical and meandering thoughts. I saw the first RC (Release Candidate) today and whilst I appreciate the extension of the much expected final product release from Q1 2009 to Q1 2010 at the earliest if I were a product manager owning this thing I'd be thinking long and hard about whether or not it's the right way to go.
So a good strategist needs to read between the lines, to see the outfit without the hair or the make-up or the model. So what is it that MS are offering in a new product that drives forward identity management in a way that others will follow, what ground breaking concepts are being introduced that CTO's will fight for and businesses will invest in? What functions and features will users love and enjoy, what processes and automation will reduce incidents whilst maximising user effectiveness? What one nugget of WOW! can I tell my team and peers about when I return, and what would I tell my industry colleagues with whom I mutually share best practice, insights and learning's.
Well, in this case, absolutely nothing.
It's a sad fact that FIM2010 is narrow in functional capability, does far less than the competition and in an enterprise, will require constant and consistent investment to maintain. YES, they do offer "codeless" policies where a web gui lets you do the basics (although its very laborious), yes, you can do forgotten password albeit with a complex process to manage languages and no option of user defined questions and yes, it will talk to SAP and - at least - some of your connected systems. The very basic foundations are there but without a dark room, lots of sandals and some hairy coders it's never going to do what I want for Mars. (no offence meant to the developer community!)
It is a simple tool, for simple organisations - that is organisations with simple needs - and for those, if it's cheap (read cheap as "Free" or "Almost Free") yeah, it'll do 80% OK. For Universities and public sector organisations functional breadth or depth is not key and where living with the knowledge that we could do more if we had the money this product will be good enough I'm sure, but given the widely accepted view that identity lies at the heart of every system nowadays I expected more from Microsoft.
Oxford Computer Group were good hosts, Microsoft were silent during the briefing but the material - and the (3 or so) other customers that were there had some interesting points, but nothing for me that couldn't be done in an hour, on webex. There was way too much technical detail and for a technologist that's hard for me to say, but if you have to start messing around in SQL databases and digging deep into batch processes to show off ILM I was either at the wrong "Introduction" to ILM"2" or there is something seriously amiss.
If you'd like the hardcore details of what I learned, let me know and I'll gladly bore you with my endless notes and scribbles. Take away from this the fact that Microsoft are great at some things - I'm the worlds biggest advocate of MS Office - but at others they just arn't even close. Next step for us is to get a view of the FIM roadmap, from Microsoft and in detail. We'll stay up to date with the product and confirm that we are NOT (as my Vision presumes) a 'simple' organisation, because if we are, this might just about do (as long as someone else implements it!), but it's a very long way down the catwalk before we show off our new identity if it's to have a Microsoft badge on it.
ILM"2" Workshop by the Oxford Computer Group in conjunction with Microsoft and Gemalto
21st April 2009 at Cardinal Place, London.
Presentor Good - I think he did what he was there to do
Content Poor - Too technical for me, or even you - unless you are an SQL Programmer
Relavance Good - Based on the agenda, Poor - based on what actually happened
Materials Poor - Poor handouts, narrow customer mix, presenter used someone else's slides
Venue Poor - Unhelpful and moody staff, no coffee.
Overall Good - Why? Because I saw what I think (hope) is the worst of the product, not the best.
Doug.
More Reading:
Tuesday, January 27, 2009
So... IBM or not IBM ?
I have just read through all the posts on the blog and overall, except for a few negative or doubtful comments here and there, most of the bloggers and commentators seem rather impressed with what IBM has to offer.
We are already an IBM shop, albeit an old rusty crumbly shack of a shop. Like it or not, Lotus Notes works for us and our much hated Notes databases are a pillar for many of our units. We are very heavily dependent on Sametime and many teams, specially in Mars IS, would not be able to function without it. Imagine trying to run an Atlas upgrade without Sametime.
Now with the emergence of Enterprise 2.0, we are investing a lot of effort into leveraging other types of collaboration software to help the business work better together. Social software, blogs, wikis, forums, you name it and we want it. And we want it not only for "traditional" Mars, but also for all the organisations that Mars has and will be acquiring. The tools are out there, the question is then, who do we get them from.
Do we go start from scratch and invest in an all Microsoft environment? Sounds like a lot of work & a lot of money. However future acquisitions of Mars are likely to be in the SME area and stats show that the majority of the organisations in this space (bingo!) are on a Microsoft platform rather than an IBM one. If we were to move to Microsoft, integration or even absorption of new acquisitions would become easier and much cheaper.
Do we do Best of Breed and invest in industry-strength integration to force these different best bits into continued seamless co-existence? Hmmm. Is there a need for Best of Breed in Mars ?
Or do we stick with IBM and tap into this fully integrated seamless solution we could just naturally expand into from our current Lotus base? IBM's offerings presentation slide is almost an exact copy of the Mars requirements presentation slide that has been circulating over the past year. Donald? ;-) IBM has everything we think we need. Sticking with IBM would allow us to then focus our attention on the more difficult task which is to bring about that culture shift that will encourage our users to use these tools that we are rolling out.
To be fair though, one argument I keep hearing in favour of IBM is that traditional Mars is 2 times bigger than non-traditional Mars and therefore moving away from the traditional IBM environment in Mars will cause more user disruption than the other option. This is not strictly true : regardless of which direction we move to, we will be upgrading part of our user base and migrating the rest. Either way, the whole user base will be hit with a round of training and some inevitable disruption while they get used to their new IW.
What it all boils down to is cost vs. benefits for each of the scenarios that are open to Mars in this area. An objective and fair evaluation of what Mars would need to invest with each vendor to achieve the 1-Mars vision should help us make the right decision for Mars. This work is currently underway ... watch the space.
Still, I agree with Gartner that the whole debate about IBM/Microsoft sort of misses the point. The time is to assess the viability of checking out the cloud. But this is another blog entry for another time!
We are already an IBM shop, albeit an old rusty crumbly shack of a shop. Like it or not, Lotus Notes works for us and our much hated Notes databases are a pillar for many of our units. We are very heavily dependent on Sametime and many teams, specially in Mars IS, would not be able to function without it. Imagine trying to run an Atlas upgrade without Sametime.
Now with the emergence of Enterprise 2.0, we are investing a lot of effort into leveraging other types of collaboration software to help the business work better together. Social software, blogs, wikis, forums, you name it and we want it. And we want it not only for "traditional" Mars, but also for all the organisations that Mars has and will be acquiring. The tools are out there, the question is then, who do we get them from.
Do we go start from scratch and invest in an all Microsoft environment? Sounds like a lot of work & a lot of money. However future acquisitions of Mars are likely to be in the SME area and stats show that the majority of the organisations in this space (bingo!) are on a Microsoft platform rather than an IBM one. If we were to move to Microsoft, integration or even absorption of new acquisitions would become easier and much cheaper.
Do we do Best of Breed and invest in industry-strength integration to force these different best bits into continued seamless co-existence? Hmmm. Is there a need for Best of Breed in Mars ?
Or do we stick with IBM and tap into this fully integrated seamless solution we could just naturally expand into from our current Lotus base? IBM's offerings presentation slide is almost an exact copy of the Mars requirements presentation slide that has been circulating over the past year. Donald? ;-) IBM has everything we think we need. Sticking with IBM would allow us to then focus our attention on the more difficult task which is to bring about that culture shift that will encourage our users to use these tools that we are rolling out.
To be fair though, one argument I keep hearing in favour of IBM is that traditional Mars is 2 times bigger than non-traditional Mars and therefore moving away from the traditional IBM environment in Mars will cause more user disruption than the other option. This is not strictly true : regardless of which direction we move to, we will be upgrading part of our user base and migrating the rest. Either way, the whole user base will be hit with a round of training and some inevitable disruption while they get used to their new IW.
What it all boils down to is cost vs. benefits for each of the scenarios that are open to Mars in this area. An objective and fair evaluation of what Mars would need to invest with each vendor to achieve the 1-Mars vision should help us make the right decision for Mars. This work is currently underway ... watch the space.
Still, I agree with Gartner that the whole debate about IBM/Microsoft sort of misses the point. The time is to assess the viability of checking out the cloud. But this is another blog entry for another time!
Monday, January 26, 2009
It wasn't ALL hard work
(The EUT Development team, locked away in a back room, worked tirelessly to plan out the future strategy) Karoona: "Honestly, I haven't had very much to drunk."
----------------------
Dai: "It was amazing. Truly a touching moment that I don't think I'll never forget."
Mike: "What was?"
Dai: "The presidential inauguration"
Mike: "Oh.... I thought you meant SameTime."
----------------------
Greg: "Do we turn left or right here?"
Karoona: "Hmmm... I'm not sure. We might have to phone Dai"
Greg: "We're at the end of the driveway... How can we be lost already???"
Friday, January 23, 2009
How Fascinating!
The last day of Lotusphere dawned, and I for one spent most of my time comparing notes with other CPG customers and also browbeating the developers on my pet Lotus Notes peeves...So a fairly quiet day with not too much to report ... until the closing session by Benjamin Zander about leadership, which I thought was fantastic.
Rather than blather on about it here, I found two of his earlier sessions online that formed part of the hour long session. I highly recommend them! Go here (20 mins) and here (15 mins) to watch - they will help you understand "how fascinating!" and why we all keep saying it!
Rather than blather on about it here, I found two of his earlier sessions online that formed part of the hour long session. I highly recommend them! Go here (20 mins) and here (15 mins) to watch - they will help you understand "how fascinating!" and why we all keep saying it!
That's all from me on Lotusphere 2009. Many thanks to my co-bloggers for their excellent posts - I feel like I've been to all the sessions this year (yes, my head hurts!) I hope you enjoyed our coverage too!
Thursday, January 22, 2009
What were they thinking? When UX Design collides with Reality
This was an overall good insight into IBM's usability practices. We're told that in LS2008 IBM promised to deliver that Notes 8 would deliver a "world-class user experience" and dedicated a big team of user researchers, usability specialists, visual designers & interaction designers to the design of Notes 8 - and QuickR, Connections, Sametime 8, etc. etc. This team focuses on gathering feedback from various sources (forum, bleedyellow.com, GCPC, developers, customers, ...), prioritise and input that feedback into development.
What makes IBM's approach to usability interesting is the set of personas they have created to represent certain types of users. Meet Samantha, Mary, etc. each of whom have a very detailed profile and are taken really seriously by the IBM community. This I thought would be an approach that would work quite well for EUE, coupled with the user segmentation work that Paul Wickham's been doing - we could have our own Brad, Tom, Keanu etc ;)
Anyhow, the IBM Usability team is now focused on bringing consistency for Samantha and co. in the new technologies. We can already see elements of this in Quickr & Connections. The new Notes client and iNotes, as I believe Brian has already blogged previously, are very similar. This consistency in look-and-feel enhances seamlessness of usage for the end user, who can slide from Connections into QuickR for example without even noticing that he has done so. Very slick.
As a side note, it was good to see IBM's initiatives on gathering end user feedback and acting on it. If we do upgrade to Notes 8, we'll make sure we add to the cause!
What makes IBM's approach to usability interesting is the set of personas they have created to represent certain types of users. Meet Samantha, Mary, etc. each of whom have a very detailed profile and are taken really seriously by the IBM community. This I thought would be an approach that would work quite well for EUE, coupled with the user segmentation work that Paul Wickham's been doing - we could have our own Brad, Tom, Keanu etc ;)
Anyhow, the IBM Usability team is now focused on bringing consistency for Samantha and co. in the new technologies. We can already see elements of this in Quickr & Connections. The new Notes client and iNotes, as I believe Brian has already blogged previously, are very similar. This consistency in look-and-feel enhances seamlessness of usage for the end user, who can slide from Connections into QuickR for example without even noticing that he has done so. Very slick.
As a side note, it was good to see IBM's initiatives on gathering end user feedback and acting on it. If we do upgrade to Notes 8, we'll make sure we add to the cause!
Project Liberate :-S
Using the open office source code and the eclipse framework Lotus has created Symphony; which for basic text editing / presentations / spreadsheets works great. It’s completely free too, who can complain? The majority of Microsoft Office functionality lays unused so in this context it seems ridiculous to pay for that privilege.
By the end of the year it will be compatible with the latest version of office, and by 2010 will be aimed at more than just basic users with macros and other functionality being introduced.
The other side to this story is Project Liberate: “An IBM complementary Consulting Engagement to help customers understand alternatives when negotiating a Microsoft Enterprise Agreement”. A bold move when IBM openly admits Symphony is an inferior office product, but this is a long term strategy and at least they are contributing the developments back into the openoffice.org community.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
