![]() |
![]() | ![]() | ![]() | ![]() | ![]() | ![]() | ![]() |
| Welcome to Windows Vista Forums. Our forum is dedicated to helping you find solutions with any problems, errors or issues you are experiencing with Windows Vista. The Vista forum also covers news and updates and has an extensive Windows Vista tutorial section that covers a wide range of tips and tricks. |
| |||||||
![]() |
| |
| | #1 (permalink) |
| | Re: Google Chrome OS: Too little, too early "truthkid" <guest@xxxxxx-email.com> wrote in message news:ea78b032540d20675fdd8d01aa9bd689@xxxxxx-gateway.com... Quote: > > If you use proprietary plugins built for IE or pages built to be viewed > on IE I could understand what you're saying, but I'm a DoD employee and > have yet to hit a page that doesn't function with Chrome (that is pages > not requiring a CAC card, as I've yet to test this because I don't use a > CAC on my personal computer). I wonder what percentage of internet usage > at home is actually work and what is personal? If more is personal, then > Chrome's simplicity makes complete sense. > > > -- > truthkid either that page has been updated and/or Chrome is more forgiving. The advantage of Chrome, at least over IE6, is that it loads web pages a lot faster if they run javascript. I believe such speed enhancements have been added to IE8. The other advantage of Chrome would be that more people are using IE, so if someone writes a virus that targets just one specific browser, they're likely going after IE. |
My System Specs![]() |
| | #2 (permalink) |
| | Re: Google Chrome OS: Too little, too early "Saucy" <saucylemon@xxxxxx> wrote in message news:eClbEZnAKHA.1492@xxxxxx Quote: > What they are saying and what is real can be two entirely different > things. There is no cloud, -hello- . > > Saucy > > skeptical. 1) I believe a true "cloud" would not put your data on someone else's server. It would spread the data and backups of the data over many many servers and give you a local set of keys that tells you where to find your data, where the spread out pieces of data without the keys would be absolute gibberish. 2) Cloud computing is being touted as the next big thing. Everyone is taking it. MS is pushing cloud computing with their Office 2010 app. 3) Many companies put their sensitive data on someone else's server already and expect it will be secure. Ask anyone who has ever outsourced payroll. 4) Many big companies decide it's cheaper to store data on someone else's servers than to buy their own machines and pay their own staff to maintain them. Cost savings are all the rage especially in this economy. There used to be a Woolworth building in NYC. The company changed over the years and decided they only needed 1 floor of the building and it was cheaper to sell the building and lease that floor than to maintain the whole thing. |
My System Specs![]() |
| | #3 (permalink) |
| | Re: Google Chrome OS: Too little, too early > I don't know the details of the "cloud" technology so I'm also a bit Quote: > skeptical. been using a "cloud" as an Internet symbol since the very beginning? By and large, my view is that it's just an extension of Internet technologies for using new technologies on new products/services for existing or modified service business models. Of course, I could be wrong as always ![]() If one cares to search for the term - ASP (application service provider), one would know that similar services have existed for some time. ERP leader, SAP for example, started with a client/server architecture focusing on worldwide enterprise customers, and later on, also used an ASP model for smaller companies. Salesforce.com, on the other hand, started with an ASP model in mind for frontend sales applications, and now evolves to more comprehensive CRM (customer relationship management). Quote: > MS is pushing cloud computing with their Office 2010 app. models for some time, and notably, MSN (Premium) was one of their projects initially aiming at AOL, and later on, aiming at Google. Office 2010 would be one of their latest tries. In my humble opinion, one of their biggest challenges is that they have always been a product-oriented company focusing on software development, which would have a drastically different culture and management style than a service-oriented company. They, of course, can continue to hire top notch professionals to join their company, but it will be a long process for changing a company's embedded culture from a product-oriented to a service-oriented company. Quote: > 3) Many companies put their sensitive data on someone else's server > already and expect it will be secure. Ask anyone who has ever outsourced > payroll. > > 4) Many big companies decide it's cheaper to store data on someone else's > servers than to buy their own machines and pay their own staff to maintain > them. Cost savings are all the rage especially in this economy. There > used to be a Woolworth building in NYC. The company changed over the > years and decided they only needed 1 floor of the building and it was > cheaper to sell the building and lease that floor than to maintain the > whole thing. easy-to-understand management concept - Focus on what you do best, and let others do what they do best. Commonly shared consensus is to outsource non-strategic and non mission-critical operations to a "competent" and "trustful" 3rd party service provider. The interesting/tricky part of the concept is, each company has a different definition of what is a non-strategic or non mission-critical operation provided it also involves self-interests of different departments, so like almost all concepts, it's easy to understand but difficult to implement it right. Payroll is one area where many companies have outsourced the entire operation (including staff, operation, and data) to a competent 3rd party service provider such as a consulting/accounting firm. But when it comes to sensitive data, again, it depends on each company's own definition. Some will never want to put their product designs data on any other servers while others may see real-time production data may be the most critical ones. In any case, we should also note that having a 3rd party service provider to maintain physical assets and to perform routine maintenance work doesn't equate to storing data on a 3rd party's server or using on-demand applications. In the former case which usually is referred as collocation, assets are (mostly) owned by the company and it's to utilize the concept as you described for sharing facilities, network bandwidth, emergency infrastructures, and non-essential operators whiteout losing control of the assets including hardware, software, and data. It's not uncommon for the 3rd party service provider will not have the permission to access to data and/or applications. In the latter case, applications are actually hosted and provided by a 3rd party service provider and data can be stored either locally or on a remote server owned by a 3rd party service provider who has the permission to set every access right. This is where more concerns may be raised. But then again, it's up to each company to determine what are sensitive data and what are strategic vs. non-strategic operations, and that is what management competency is all about ![]() What motivated me to write this unusual lengthy post was not about computing technologies but the following friendly reminder for IT professionals working at a corporate/business environment. You really need to put your company's interests ahead of any application/service provider's, so you would only introduce/implement technologies that will produce tangible benefits for your company including its customers, suppliers, and staffs. This is the ONLY way for you to be seen as a "strategic" part of the operation. Since the beginning of the 90's, more and more companies across the world have seen their operations have been "hijacked" by internal IT departments/staffs who put the interests of their personal preferences or of the application providers far more than the company's. Consequently, companies were unable to initiate projects that they wished to and/or couldn't switch to other products/technologies because of the "religious beliefs" of the internal departments/staffs. The "ransom" (a term used by many management executives) paid by companies for unable to switch to or use needed technologies far outweighed the benefits of having internal IT staffs. That is one essential business driver for motivating companies to use a (domestic or international) outsource partner so that they could regain the freedom of using IT as nothing but a business tool. It's not just about IT but also applies to other functional departments, but since this is a tech/MS newsgroup, so I decided to share with some of you just in case you wonder why IT outsourcing has been a trend. Labor cost, contrary to popular belief, is just part of cost equation and not the most important part. Unlike some in this newsgroup, you don't make a living by products provided by an application/service/technology provider, you got it from the company who employs you, and separate your hobbies/preferences/beliefs from your professional. My two cents. "Eric" <someone@xxxxxx> wrote in message news:ubklO3jBKHA.1336@xxxxxx Quote: > > "Saucy" <saucylemon@xxxxxx> wrote in message > news:eClbEZnAKHA.1492@xxxxxx Quote: >> What they are saying and what is real can be two entirely different >> things. There is no cloud, -hello- . >> >> Saucy >> >> > skeptical. > > 1) I believe a true "cloud" would not put your data on someone else's > server. It would spread the data and backups of the data over many many > servers and give you a local set of keys that tells you where to find your > data, where the spread out pieces of data without the keys would be > absolute gibberish. > > 2) Cloud computing is being touted as the next big thing. Everyone is > taking it. MS is pushing cloud computing with their Office 2010 app. > > 3) Many companies put their sensitive data on someone else's server > already and expect it will be secure. Ask anyone who has ever outsourced > payroll. > > 4) Many big companies decide it's cheaper to store data on someone else's > servers than to buy their own machines and pay their own staff to maintain > them. Cost savings are all the rage especially in this economy. There > used to be a Woolworth building in NYC. The company changed over the > years and decided they only needed 1 floor of the building and it was > cheaper to sell the building and lease that floor than to maintain the > whole thing. > |
My System Specs![]() |
| | #4 (permalink) |
| | Re: Google Chrome OS: Too little, too early On Thu, 16 Jul 2009 22:12:40 -0700, "xfile" <coucou@xxxxxx> wrote: Quote: >Like you, I am a bit of confused about the term - cloud, provided we have >been using a "cloud" as an Internet symbol since the very beginning? By and >large, my view is that it's just an extension of Internet technologies for >using new technologies on new products/services for existing or modified >service business models. Of course, I could be wrong as always ![]() technologies, when some folks decided that it needed a name. Once it has a name, they can do seminars and magazine articles on it. Companies can offer it as a solution or note that they are compatible with it. This is in a sense, an enhancement of (true) marketing. Instead of looking for a niche to fill, they create the niche through massive advertising and promotion. Then they follow the standard business model to supply the market. MS, with some of the deepest advertising pockets is behind it for several reasons. First, it's creating more demand. Second, it is heading in exactly the direction they want to go: leased/rented software that isn't installed on your machine. Note that MS will be "giving away" a trimmed version of MS-Office in the near future to be used across the 'net. That's not out of the goodness of their heart, it's to get people used to using software across the network. People who pay will get additional features. And so it begins. |
My System Specs![]() |
| | #5 (permalink) |
| | Re: Google Chrome OS: Too little, too early xfile wrote: Quote: Quote: >> I don't know the details of the "cloud" technology so I'm also a bit >> skeptical. > Like you, I am a bit of confused about the term - cloud, provided we > have been using a "cloud" as an Internet symbol since the very > beginning? By and large, my view is that it's just an extension of > Internet technologies for using new technologies on new > products/services for existing or modified service business models. Of > course, I could be wrong as always ![]() > consumer/client, using Service Oriented Architecture as the infrastructure used by the Cloud provider. Cloud technology as far a Chrome is concerned may do something in the home consumer sector. Many companies already provide Cloud technology to its internal(Intranet) and ex-internal(Internet) users via Web portals, and they are not going to go to some 3rd party service provider that's offering some kind of Cloud service. Just the other day, NexisLexis had someone that worked for the company steal thousands of records that were to be sold on the black-market to hackers and identity thieves. He was caught. There is going to be no company that is concerned about its day-2-day business activities and its records is going to turn it over to be done by some 3rd party Cloud provider. Yeah, payroll is being out sourced by a whole lot of companies, but you can bet that an eye is being kept on what is happening by the company that uses such a service. There could be some other things like Point-of-Sales etc, etc. A Cloud service bureau is not going to materialize as some major players on the Internet. That was already tired by data centers in the 70's and 80's, and it didn't last. |
My System Specs![]() |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| |
Similar Threads | ||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| Google Chrome SHUTS DOWN abruptly!!!! | Browsers & Mail | |||
| Google Chrome OS Forum | Chillout Room | |||
| How secure is Google Chrome? | System Security | |||
| Google turns Chrome to gold | Browsers & Mail | |||
| Google Launch Browser - Chrome | Vista News | |||