Whatever...

Judgement Day for MS OS – will Windows be terminated?

By Jonathan Mathias

Well, the answer is no, but Windows XP, which you are most likely using as you read this, more or less will be.  Yes, Microsoft, like some ruthless mother hen, has decided that 30 June is the day when all new chicks must migrate to Vista. 

Having gone through the transition from XP to Vista at Johnson King, I can say that, though the road was unsurprisingly bumpy, we got there in the end and it’s not that bad. 

Although I miss the simplicity of XP, I’ve become quite accustomed to the face of Vista – much of the apparently pointless superficial gloss actually does make for a more pleasant user experience, even though it’s a pain having to make allowances for the fact that the grand majority of people won’t be able to open the spanking new Word document you’ve just sent them. 

But with the Vista kerfuffle barely subsided, we’re hearing more rumblings from Microsoft about the imaginatively titled ‘Windows 7’ – anyone would be forgiven for thinking that Vista wasn’t quite ready when it came out.  Of course this is nothing new for Microsoft, as the same thing happened with Windows98. 

But perhaps a bigger question is will people keep buying Windows when Linux is free? 

Though it’s not always been plain sailing, it’s relatively easy to get programs and devices working with Windows.  However, while open source software has historically not been for the faint of heart, that’s starting to change. There are now open source operating systems and applications that are equally as well documented as their commercial alternatives, and the bugbear of compatibility is being tackled head-on.

Almost a hundred years ago, Henry Ford supposedly said, “a customer can have a car in any colour, as long as it’s black”.  Back then, a Model T was pretty much your only option, but as we all know, things change.  Windows may have only just turned twenty, but I wonder if it’s time we started to see some big changes on the desktop?

Peers go Web 2.0 – Lords help us!

By Tom Kirkham

When I saw the headline ‘House of Lords reaching out to young with YouTube', images of Peers breakdancing, knocking back absinthe and playing air guitar to Sweet Child O’ Mine flashed through my mind.
 
Imagine my disappointment then on finding that it was actually about our second chamber’s decision to embrace ‘the internet’ in a bid to shake off apparently outdated stereotypes and provide engaging, thought provoking content for the youth of today.
 
The news seems to typify the now commonplace notion that if your organisation feels out of touch with the younger generation, starting a blog or posting an online video is a sure-fire way to win them back.  It implies that, in an era of increasing political disaffection in the UK, the Lords' lack of youth appeal is nothing to do with the fact that it’s an archaic, unelected body composed mainly of slumbering landed gentry. On the contrary, it's because it isn't on YouTube!
 
I don't wish to slate the actual videos that Parliament has made available - when I typed 'House Of Lords' into YouTube I found the ensuing content both compelling and hilarious.  But I do think the prevailing attitude that, invariably, youth = Web 2.0, is pretty patronising, and serves only to reinforce the fact that yes, these organisations are completely out of touch!
 
Generally speaking, there’s already a massive gulf between the way young people are perceived, and the way they actually are.  Simply using online communications channels to rehash the same tired messages is… well, a phrase involving an old dog and new tricks springs to mind.
 
So I don’t really see the House Of Lords’ move into the world of social media making all that much difference.  After all, surely the young people of today are far too preoccupied with roaming the streets in gangs and stabbing one another to read about the lobbying capabilities of our honourable Peers?

Misleading broadband claims reveal ISPs’ contempt for their customers

By Shazia Mowlabaccus

As broadband speeds rise, ISP deals offering up to 16Mbps continue to tempt large numbers of customers.  However, the reality is that speeds actually delivered to homes often massively differ to those advertised, with many not even reaching half of that offered.  The average download speed in the UK is 3.2Mbps, with the fastest city for broadband downloads being Edinburgh with 4.41 Mbps, still a far cry from 16 Mbps. 

Other types of products in other sectors could never get away with differing so widely from what is advertised, and consumers rightly would not stand for it.  So why do ISPs think they can get away with this? 

One reason is that the majority of consumers aren’t particularly tech-savvy and often don’t realise they aren’t receiving the performance they’re paying for.  Many ISPs rely on the fact that customers find their services too difficult to understand and consequently don’t bother trying.  By taking advantage of this, ISPs reveal the contemptuous attitude they have towards their customers. 

This has led Ofcom to publish a ‘broadband speed code’, which will require ISPs to give more accurate information about the real speed of their broadband services when selling directly.  But at the moment, this still remains voluntary.  However, those who do not sign up risk losing customer trust even further.

The problem is that this code still doesn’t cover the advertising or labeling of broadband services, and hence allows ISPs to continue to mislead consumers.  Ofcom needs to also enforce regulations on how these services are advertised, while consumers need to stand up to ISPs trying to intimidate them with technical jargon.  It’s really not as difficult to understand as many think, and making an effort to understand the reality of broadband services is key to not getting fobbed off with poor and mis-sold services.         

Freedom of choice or freedom from choice?

By Joe Banks

Art rocker and digital entrepreneur type bloke Peter Gabriel launched a new service this week called The Filter.  As the name suggests, it aims to help people sort through the relentless blizzard of chaff that constitutes the modern entertainment industry and come up with stuff they like based on their personal tastes etc.

This of course all sounds mighty familiar – for example, Amazon has its recommendations function based on what you’ve either bought or browsed in the past.  However, the problem is that these services produce suggestions that are often less than helpful, and are in fact usually just naked exercises in trying to get you to buy more of the same rather than expand your horizons.

However, The Filter’s aspirations are a bit loftier than Amazon’s.  In fact, what really makes this announcement interesting is Gabriel’s talking up of the ‘life jockey’ concept.  In other words, something that will take the strain out of actually discovering new stuff for ourselves.

Now, I don’t know about you, but my initial reaction to this was ‘not likely’. For me, one of the great joys of music, film, books etc is the actual process of finding things I like, particularly those instances when you make an unexpected connection between different items or get into something you’ve previously dismissed. The last thing I want is some clever clogs artificial agent telling me what’s hot in my personal world this week.

But then Gabriel quoted Sun Micro guru Bill Joy, who basically said that ‘the first wave is freedom of choice and the second wave is freedom from choice’. 

Goodness me, that sounds jolly sinister... but you can see the logic.  If we’ve come to a point where we’re so overloaded with entertainment options that we no longer feel we’re able to make an informed decision about what to watch or listen to, then perhaps having this choice made for us makes sense? 

However, I can’t help thinking that this just another example of allowing our intellectual and judgemental faculties to wither just because what we’re presented with isn’t that easy. 

After all, isn’t it true that you tend to get the most out of something when you put a bit of effort into it in the first place?  Or am I just showing my age?