Imagine you're a virtual archaeologist of the future reviewing last week's change logs for the Wikipedia entry for Paul Revere....
Cloud computing is all the rage today, with everyone from the U.S. Federal government to Apple herding us into a brave new world of remotely hosted data and services. As usual, we're rushing down a road before thinking about where it may lead.
Oh my goodness. It's happening again. Will there be anywhere to hide this time, or are we already trapped — tied like poor little Pauline to the railroad tracks as the engine of another high tech bubble barrels down upon us.
At intervals, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and Department of Justice (DoJ) have undertaken public initiatives intended to support the standards development process from the antitrust perspective. Well, they're at it again.
It's 2011. Do you know where your Semantic Web is? Hmm. Good question. After so many years, one might wonder whether you should still care whether the Semantic Web ever makes it. Well, you should. Why? Because the more the Web is capable of doing, the more we can get out of it. And given how much we now rely on the Internet and the Web, we can't afford to allow either to be less than they are capable of being.
It’s very rare for me to write a blog entry directed solely at what someone else has written, but there’s an exception to every rule. This one is directed at a posting by Alex Brown (of ODF/OOXML fame), entitled UK Open Standards *Sigh*.
It’s difficult to know where to begin in saying “goodbye” to Groklaw. What PJ and her many cohorts accomplished there has been unique in my experience. In many ways, Groklaw exemplified the transformational power that the Internet has brought to law, society, technology, and the advancement of all things open.
This morning brings news of what may become another new and important consortium – the Open Network Foundation (ONF). This time the goal is to adapt network architecture to streamline its interoperation with cloud computing. And while the news is intriguing, the way in which it has been broken is a bit odd, on which more below.
This week a new consortium was launched that may signal who will finally own the last great, unclaimed consumer computing platform – the automobile.
According to the Business Software Alliance, the UK government's new royalty-free standards policy will "inadvertently reduce choice, hinder innovation and increase the costs of e-government." 'Zat so?
The U.K. has become the latest country to conclude that for information and communications technology (ICT) procurement purposes, “open standards” means “royalty free standards.”
For some time now, I have been meaning to write a series of blog posts setting forth my views on best practices in forming and governing open source foundations.
Recently, the future of the SUSE Linux Project (as compared to the Novell commercial Linux distribution based on the work of that project) has become rather murky, as reported by Pamela Jones, at Groklaw. Apparently, Novell is facilitating some sort of spin out of the Project, which is good but peculiar news.
Technology conquers all, right? Except football (American, that is). The pace of technology is wondrous indeed. No corner of our lives seems safe from digital invasion, from picture frames to pasta makers. For years now, we have been threatened with Internet-enabled refrigerators, and perhaps 2011 will see it so.
Last Thursday the European Commission took a major step forward on the “openness” scale. The occasion was the release of a new version of the European Interoperability Framework (EIF) which definitively endorsed the use of open source friendly standards when providing “public services” within the EU. Too bad they didn't stop there.
Last week NIST published a Request for Information that went entirely unnoticed in the press. It's goal is to assess the “Effectiveness of Federal Agency Participation in Standardization in Select Technology Sectors,” and it shouldn't be ignored.
A variety of constituencies from the West have taken it upon themselves to reach out to China to "educate" the Chinese about the existing global standards development infrastructure, and to urge them to take part in that infrastructure in the same way as do other countries.
Ever since the proposed acquisition of Novell by Attachmate Corporation there has been much curiosity, but almost no information, relating to the other major piece of the deal: the acquisition of 882 patents by a consortium led by Microsoft for $450 million.
Two days have now passed since Novell announced the high-level terms of its proposed sale, and so far the press has not been able to prize any additional details out of the parties involved. But if you know how to read between the lines, there's a lot more information there for the taking.
I know, I know, you've always wanted to know, but have been too shy to ask. In this article, I review the situations where a new consortium should and — as importantly — should not, be formed. I also provide a decision tree for determining what activities a new consortium should undertake to increase the likelihood of its success, a description of the infrastructural elements needed to support these activities, and an indication of the stage of an organization's maturity at which the addition of each activity becomes advisable.