|
Top 10 Overhyped Stories for 2005
|
|
|
|
|
<-- Previous Page.
5. Grid/Utility Computing
Ah, yes! The grandure and allure of becoming a utility company. You get to be a monopoly and no one can do a damn thing about it.
The IBMs, Suns and the HPs of this world simply love the idea. I mean what could be better -
just tell me how much you need it and I'll provide it for you. Clean as a whistle. HP even came up with a metric to measure your computer usage: computon - how cute.
Sun is calling theirs "Sun Power Unit". They can just see it - a monthly bill, just like electricity where you pay for your megahertz.
And just to think that the only barrier that stands in their way is common sense. Yeah, that's a go.
Another hot spot word is Grid Computing, which in its commercial application is similar to Utility Computing (in academic application, it's a whole other deal).
There is only one problem - grid computing solves problems that lend themselves to parallel processing.
Most problems are solved in a sequential manner.
Besides most corporate applications require so much setup (databases, application servers, file servers, app farms, web farms, dairy farms, etc…) that for most
companies this will be a non-starter.
4. Fuel Cells
I've been hearing about fuel cells and how this is the year of the fuel cell and about fuel cell startups
for as long as I can remember. The supposed advantages are clear: it's a clean technology.
Longer lasting technology. For instance, theoretically a laptop with a fuel cell battery can run
for a year without recharging. So all these pieces of technology have been almost here for more
than a decade now. Almost but never here. So why won't it get here? #1 is economics.
Currently fuel cells are too expensive. You could get a fuel cell UPS today, but it'll be much
more costly than a regular UPS. Another point of the hype is how it's going to be a clean technology.
Not necessarily. When the hydrogen is obtained from fossil fuels, there are still considerable carbon emissions.
Still, it's better than what the combustion engine does today. Anyway, I am hoping that 2006 will really be
the year of the fuel cell.
3. The Google/Sun event.
Even though it was a simple press-conference, Sun, a company bankrupt of ideas and purpose, pimped it like its best prostitute
was getting a face list. The date of the press conference was announced well in advance, but the topic wasn't and
the pundits went into overdrive. What could it be? The more clueless "experts" were saying that Google would provide
the OpenOffice interface via the web. Fortunately, Google is made up of techies, not morons. Other pundits were claiming that Google would
distribute OpenOffice via its web site. And this is better than just getting it from the OpenOffice site how?
I don't know either. The actual truth was more whimper than bang. Basically Sun would distribute the Google Toolbar
with its Java Runtime. Now that's a fun piece of information - let's distribute a product having absolute zero to do
with the Java Runtime. Never mind that the Google Toolbar isn't even written in Java. This, of course, was a
press conference just for the sake of media whoring. So basically speaking, given enough money, Sun will distribute
pretty much anything with JRE. Today the Google Toolbar, tomorrow the spyware toolbar. Lovely. Another argument
for open sourcing Java. In addition, the decision was billed as an engineer at Sun reaching out to a former
co-worker at Google. I call bs on that. No engineer in his/her right mind would propose something so useless.
2. Web 2.0 aka the Coming AJAX Revolution.
This is simply awesome. Bring it on. Web 2.0. Yeah. Will build desktop style apps in the browser, like it's 1999.
Yep, the stench of the dot com bubble is rising up again. Everyone points to Google Maps and Gmail.
Let's start with the former. While undoubtedly nice, a great technological feat, huge improvement over MapQuest,
Expedia and every other mapping solution on the web, I still prefer Streets & Trips 2005. Why?
Because 5 minutes after the novelty of dragging maps around the browser wore off, I still needed to know how
to get from point A to point B. And a desktop application is just better and faster at it. I much prefer
a web enabled application such as Google Earth (which is awesome). It combines the availability of 100 GB of
information with usability of a desktop application. Let's now examine Gmail. When I first got my invite,
I was stunned by its simplicity, speed and functionality. However, once again, as the novelty wears off,
I don't think I'll find anyone in their right mind who will claim that it's more useful than Mozilla Thunderbird.
Look at the advantages of a Thunderbird: web-enabled, the mail is local, the rss and newsgroups are optionally offline,
so you can use the app even when there is no Wi-Fi in sight. In contrast, none of the Web 2.0 apps will work
without a connection to the net.
Now let's look at Ajax. The first time around it was called XMLHTTP request. On the other hand, Ajax sounds sexier.
Ajax first made its appearance in Internet Explorer 4.0, of all places, in 1998.
I first heard of it in 2000 when AltaVista was using it. Then finally, Mozilla/Firefox implemented what was
once a proprietary Microsoft technology sometimes in 2003/2004, making, what was to become, Ajax cross platform, cross browser.
Finally, someone came up with the term Ajax (which I initially thought referred to a Dutch soccer team),
thus ushering the era of Web 2.0. Basically, Ajax allows the web page to fetch some piece of the information
from the server, sparing it from having to make a full round trip. While this ability is nice and could be
done previously via the use of IFRAME (with some work, of course), a new programming paradigm it does not make. So all the hype
you hear about word processing/spreadsheets/etc… on the web will remain just that - a steaming pile of hype.
It seems that all that was needed for the success of Ajax was a new name. Ajax, on its own, is a great
technology and will become a part of a developer's arsenal - but not much more than that.
1. Linux will make gains on the desktop or "This is the year of Linux"
The SAT exams should include this question:
"Duke Nukem Forever" is to vaporware like
"This is the year of Linux on the desktop" is to ________
The answer, of course, is hype. So why doesn't Linux catch on, given that it's free, etc…?
Let's start with the basics, to displace something entrenched, you must be much better, not just incrementally better.
Linux is not better than XP by any stretch of imagination. So the only thing that it's got going for it
in the battle for the marketplace is the fact that it is free as in beer (regular computer users don't care,
much less understand, about free software, open source, whatever…). However, the problem is that to a
regular computer user who buys a Linux PC, the OS isn't free (just like Windows). Somewhere along the
line some middleman, be it an integration house, red hat or whoever, charges for it (for support, packaging, etc…).
Thus the appeal of the free OS is somewhat diminished. Many Linux proponents were hoping that the movement of
corporate applications toward the web server would make the client OS irrelevant. I am afraid, that didn't happen:
all the apps that were gonna move to the web server already did so with virtually no effect on the client OS market.
What's more, some enterprises are starting to move their applications back to the client with the ClickOnce technologies
that allows the application to be deployed as simply as a web app, yet retain the functionality of desktop app,
similar to Google Earth. Which, of course, locks you back into Windows.
<-- Previous Page.
