Interesting question:

It's pretty obvious that M$ is/has attempted (succeeded) to use it's monopoly to control and take advantage of markets.

Google seems to be running into trouble because of it's success, but has it been trying to use that to keep competition out? (We need to take some things into consideration, like the publishers (not authors) objecting on what google was going to do with the scanned book titles.

What's funny. If you actually do the search "Find me some evidence that back up claims, that google has monopoly in search engine business." on Bing, there is no mention. So maybe he just made a typo.

Wow. Some dude with an ID of "Dot.Com.CEO" is complaining about someone pwning MS's complaint? I think the GP post pretty much summarizes the complaint and it's validity.

But patent encumbered standards have become much more of an issue with software and the internet. H.264 and it's adoption is not about freedom, it's about DRM. That's why all of the companies above implement it (blu-ray, HD video recorders (Don't get me started on the story about patents and claims against your own videos....)). They are sucking at the teet of DRM.

It would be interesting to have followed the progress of H.264 thru it's process. How much outsider participation was allowed? I suspect that there are lots of back-room deals built into this standard.

I agree with GP, once as standards body approves of a standard that includes a history of one companies bugs it is dead, fin, kaput. Someone complained earlier about Google "Mudding the waters" with their release. But that ship already sailed since M$ was allowed to submit and ram thru approval of their "open" "standard". If they were so interested in a good standard, they would have stripped out all of their bugs/"features" to make a smaller subset standard. (Curious note: Has anyone other than M$ been able to produce code that is 100% compliant? Also, is M$ also 100% compliant with their newest releases?

Don't forget that Peter "Bright" is a M$ troll, read his posting history....

Ah, the ever expanding definition of "Cloud computer". FYI, the internet is not the cloud.

People will be using the "cloud" when these and other companies start hosting on the cloud rather than self-hosting.

And that won't happen until the cloud actually lives up to what it's advertised as. Google Apps is actually the closest. All of the others, like Amazon (You predefine your server, hard to dynamically grow (automatically)), are just the same of the likes of Rackspace... Virtual hosting.

What is missing from his blog is the the difference between respectful use of data and abuse.

I don't mind if a respectful company tracks my data and uses it in a non-abusive manner. But I don't want to see the same ad on 10 sites, or viagra adds, or whatever.

I think Amazon would be pissed because DDoS is their cost. They usually guarantee protection against that in the SLA.

Your first paragraph is what is crushing freedom and destroying America. Of course we have a moral obligation and should protect our interests.

If you truly believed what you said in the first paragraph you would never vote republican or any kind of conservative/libertarian. It is absolutely against your best interests to do that. You are merely shifting the costs of a small percentage of peolations (the super-rich) onto the rest of the population.

You *Assume* it's illegal to distribute this information. If it was illegal, the US would have gone to the courts, show it was illegal, and the filed for a proper take-down notice.

This was done because of pure and simple political pressure.

This whole story shouldn't be about what wiki leaks did, or who got the information. It should be about what these "diplomats" were doing and saying about each other in a non-civilized fashion. Transparency is the biggest fear of the corrupt, like light to vampires.

Quite simply, what they told us about the patriot act. If you have done nothing wrong, then you have nothing to fear.

It's interesting, after a quick read (Well how quick can you really go since M$ is determined to hide the relevant information.

Their cloud seems to be an ugly combination of Amazon VM cloud and Google App Engine. It looks like it is designed to charge as much as possible (IE you have to choose a VM size, and I suspect pay for it no matter how much you need it). All of the things that people complain about Google, they are there in M$ offering (Just look at how they want you to store data. #1, use Blob, #2, use their no-SQL implementation).

UGLY!

He disses Google for not counting outages until after 10 minutes. But then claims to have 99.9% (only one 9) up-time (excluding planned outages). That's 8.5 hours outage. I see on App Engine Business they offer the same 99.9% and I didn't see any 10 minute. Maybe on the non-commerical?

OMG! Everyone give this guy all your moderator points up. I started to read a book on python, returned it before the end of the 1st chapter because of that.

The other thing to understand, smaller code is not necessarily less complex. We need a reasonable middle ground language. Scala with out all the shrinking coding style?