Gregarius » BetaNews.Com » septembre 17, 2009

BetaNews.Com (7 non lus)

If Microsoft sold a lifestyle, would you buy it?

Publié: septembre 17, 2009, 11:03pm CEST par Joe Wilcox
By Joe Wilcox, Betanews

In the Northern Hemisphere, Autumn is typically a time of bright colors and falling leaves. Perhaps Microsoft has moved south of the equator to Spring, because the company is poised for brand rebirth -- a reawakening of key consumer brands.
Six brands -- Bing, Xbox, Windows Live, Windows Mobile, Windows 7 and Zune -- are coming to market as new versions and/or marketing campaigns. No single brand will revitalize Microsoft's overall consumer image. But combined, these brands could revive the company's consumer brand profile. I predict that they also are Microsoft's last stand. Failure now will resign Microsoft's brand image to large businesses.
There is a seventh brand, which is as important as the other six combined: Microsoft Store. But that is more a 2010 story, as the company only plans to open two retail locations, both in the United States, this year.
Key to the six (OK, seven) brands' success is marketing, which Microsoft has excelled at for much of 2009. Last year, I harshly criticized Microsoft advertising agency Crispin, Porter + Bogusky for its early handling of the "I'm a PC" campaign. In my December 2008 recommendations for 2009, I told Microsoft to "fire your ad agency." But the marketing came together in early 2009. "The Rookies" and "Laptop Hunters" -- launched in February and March, respectively -- are simply great advertising campaigns. Bing is even better. I was wrong about Crispin, Porter + Bogusky.
Good Marketing Demands Advertiser Commitment
To really succeed, good marketing requires cash, commitment, consistency and creativity for starters and also patience -- willingness to let a marketing campaign succeed. In 2006, Microsoft gave up too quickly on the Windows Vista "Wow" campaign, afterward pulling back nearly all Windows marketing for about 18 months. Meanwhile, Apple seized control of Windows messaging with its persistently jabbing "Get a Mac" commercials. Microsoft is on a marketing roll right now, but the company has to stick with it and extend it.
Good marketing:
- Tells a story -- and doing so is aspirational
- Promotes a lifestyle -- and with it a sense of belonging and community associated with the brand
- Shows people why their lives will be better -- how they will be happier -- for using products X, Y or Z
- Makes people feel good -- and by association brings up that good feeling whenever seeing the brand or product
Microsoft's current big consumer campaigns -- for Bing and Windows -- meet these criteria quite well. But there is a missing undercurrent that Microsoft must bring to the surface as it markets the consumer brands: Lifestyle. The company has got to better sell a Microsoft lifestyle, and it's perhaps no coincidence that the six brands are collectively foundation for such a thing.
Bing search page, Sept. 17, 2009.
The most successful brands sell a lifestyle. Among high-tech companies, Apple, Nokia and Research in Motion are exceptionally good at lifestyle marketing. In August I asked: "What is the Microsoft lifestyle?" I couldn't find it, and I had been looking hard for a long time. But as new Bing features, Zune 4.0 software and Zune HD come to market this week and Microsoft prepares Windows Mobile 6.5 and Windows 7 for October launches, hints of a larger lifestyle pitch are coalescing. The Microsoft lifestyle has been fragmented for too many years. Around these products, Windows Live and Xbox, a tighter Microsoft lifestyle could emerge.
But Microsoft has got to sell it, and that's a message CEO Steve Ballmer and his honchos must hear and act on. Laptop Hunters shows that Microsoft can do good brand marketing and seize the messaging away from a competitor (e.g., Apple). But Bing shows the real power of good marketing. The Bing TV commercials are clever and catchy -- and they frequently air on many primetime television shows. I record most TV programs to skip the ads, but I almost always stop for a Bing commercial. What about you?
Marketing matters. Two summers ago, number of searches at Ask.com increased by over 10 percent in a single month, according to ComScore. Not coincidentally, Ask.com was running an aggressive TV ad campaign. Fast forward to 2009. Microsoft launches the Bing brand with a massive marketing campaign, and the results show in consistently increasing search share. Yesterday, Nielsen Online said that Bing's US searches increased 22.1 percent month-on-month in August, bringing search share to 10.7 percent.
The Google Lesson
Now it's time for my bold assertion: Right now, Bing is Microsoft's most important consumer brand. It's Google that shows why and perhaps that Microsoft's search deal with Yahoo is smart after all.
Google is a marketing amorphism. Until recently, Google did little to directly market its products. Yet Google has strong consumer brand awareness and offers a clearly definable lifestyle around Apps, search and other products or services. Like Windows, Google search is something most people use everyday. But people are aware they use Google, because they must actively open a search page where there is the colorful name logo.
People can easily forget they use Windows; there is no strong brand identification, and operating systems function too much as utilities. From a branding perspective, the best thing Microsoft has done for the operating system in years (other than advertising) is to replace the "Start" button with the Windows logo.
Ballmer has obsessed about Google as a competitor to a fault. Microsoft has focused too much chasing Google when improving its own products and their marketing mattered more. For that reason, I initially dismissed the Microsoft-Yahoo search deal. But in retrospect, the deal makes sense for a different reason: Branding and lifestyle marketing. The more people that use Bing everyday, the better for Microsoft's core brand -- at the least. Bing marketing and the Yahoo deal are sure to increase the number of people who touch a Microsoft brand every day. Sorry, Steve Ballmer, Windows Live isn't touch enough.
Microsoft can't be sure consumers will upgrade to Windows 7, certainly not when. According to analysts, most people still use Windows XP -- not Vista. But Microsoft can assure that people use Bing, if the marketing and Yahoo deal are there. Already, Bing is gaining share. Search is a utility most people use most every day, so the brand can only gain from this exposure. From Bing and its associated and Windows Live services, Microsoft can push a lifestyle around communications, convenience, mobility and value, among other attributes.
Four Digital Lifestyle Hubs
While Bing's importance won't diminish, other Microsoft brands will grow to overshadow it, principally Windows 7 during holiday 2008. Windows is Microsoft's most important lifestyle hub, not just for consumers but businesses. Now that the Windows Live team has joined with the broader Windows group, I expect product/service synergies and lifestyle opportunities to increase. Microsoft will have to punch it home with creative, consistent and committed marketing.
Windows Mobile train wreck confines Microsoft mobile strategy to Zune HD.
In an ideal scenario the six brands would connect the Microsoft lifestyle around four hubs: Bing/Windows Live, Windows 7/Windows Live, Windows Mobile/Bing/Windows Live and Xbox/Xbox Live and Zune/Zune Marketplace. But Microsoft's mobile strategy is a train wreck. Windows Mobile 6.5 isn't what Microsoft needs to hold back upstarts Apple and Google or the revitalizing Nokia. However, Microsoft deserves huge praise for coordinating a single mobile OS launch across multiple wireless carriers, as it plans in October for Windows Mobile 6.5. It's an amazing feat and something that should scare Apple and Google executives witless. If Microsoft can do this with a weak Windows Mobile OS release, what could the company do with a strong product?
Microsoft's mobile story -- the one that matters -- is confined to Zune HD. There Microsoft will confront strong comparisons to Apple and iPod touch and criticism for a weak smartphone OS strategy (It's already started, search the blogosphere). But Zune HD isn't an iPod touch wannabe. It's something more and something different. The device is a portable media player first above all else and perhaps the last in the category. Convergence that includes telephony is the future -- and, I hope, a Zune phone. Any PMP shouuld only be a placeholder for something to come.
Fortunately, Microsoft has a strong lifestyle message around Zune 4.0 software and the Zune HD. It's about consuming high-quality digital content on the go, and that lifestyle extends to Windows through Media Center and eventually to Xbox. Around Zune and Xbox, Microsoft is pushing an entertainment lifestyle. By the way, so is Apple with iPod touch, iTunes and portable gaming. I'm waiting for Microsoft to extend Xbox gaming to Zune. Some unsolicited advice for Microsoft: The Xbox Live team and not the Windows Mobile group should control the Zune applications store.
In a future post, I will explore how the four lifestyle hubs fit together today and should fit better in the future. For now, I'll close by giving Steve Ballmer and his honchos some advice: Advertise, advertise, advertise. If you don't control the lifestyle messaging, some competitor will. Must I say Apple?
Copyright Betanews, Inc. 2009
Office Web Apps to be offered free to all Windows Live users

Publié: septembre 17, 2009, 8:55pm CEST par Scott M. Fulton, III

By Scott M. Fulton, III, Betanews

This afternoon, a Microsoft spokesperson told Betanews that the company is now beginning the process of notifying selected participants that they have been accepted for inclusion in the company's Technical Preview program for Office Web Apps. But in another huge example of burying the lead, a blog post that went live minutes ago from Windows Live General Manager Brian Hall states that the complete Web Apps suite, once officially released, will be "available" to all Windows Live users.
As the spokesperson confirmed to Betanews, Hall's implication is accurate: Everyday users of Windows Live services (which are already free) and who have SkyDrive storage on those services (the first 25 GB of which are free) will have the entire suite available for use from any modern Web browser. A video released today showed Excel Web App (that's the formal name for it now) running on a Mozilla Firefox 3.5 browser, and on a Windows 7 platform. We're still awaiting word on non-Windows browsers.
There will be no cost, the spokesperson told us this afternoon, for users of Windows Live SkyDrive. When the Web Apps suite is released, all of them will notice the addition of a Documents tab, from which they'll be able to launch Office documents. Word, Excel, and PowerPoint will be the first three in the suite, although Microsoft confirmed today that an online version of OneNote will be next.
Here's the specific quote from Hall: "Over time, as the final version is released, the Office Web Apps will become available to all 500 million+ users of Hotmail, Messenger, and other Windows Live services."
So how will Microsoft make money from this? Businesses will be able to subscribe to a version that the company spokesperson described as providing "more security and control." Unlike Windows Live, this version will be hosted directly through Microsoft Online Services, where it's presumed availability and uptime are guaranteed along with safety and stability.
For business users -- especially those that are already hosting SharePoint sites -- there will be the ability to host Office Web Apps on their own sites, for their own users, potentially as an alternative to deploying the physical software on users' computers directly.
"All Office volume Licensing customers will have access to the Office Web Apps that they can run themselves on premises," the spokesperson told Betanews. "This competitive differentiator is an example of the choice we are offering our customers. More than 90 million Office annuity customers will have access to Office Web Apps at launch."
3:15 pm EDT September 17, 2009 · Betanews received some clarifications from Microsoft later in the day. First of all, additional storage space beyond the first 25 GB will not be available through Windows Live SkyDrive. That might have been a good extra source of revenue for the company for Office Web Apps users, but for now, the spokesperson told us Microsoft is merely considering leasing extra space in the future.
Businesses that are looking for more useful storage options, the spokesperson suggested, may consider investing in SharePoint Online. There, multiple subscribing users are entered into a collective "pool," the size of which is 250 MB per user.
The spokesperson also confirmed information about platforms: The current build of Office Web Apps for the technical preview has been confirmed to run on Internet Explorer versions 7 and 8 (for Windows); Firefox 3.5 on Windows, Mac, and Linux; and Safari 4 for Mac (not for Windows). Google Chrome was not listed as a supported platform, perhaps for obvious reasons.
That doesn't mean users can't give it a shot, we're told: "If customers prefer to use another browser they should still give the Web Apps a try. While we cannot officially support all browsers, customers will not be blocked from using them. It is a goal of the Web Apps to have broad compatibility and reach," the spokesperson said.
The first public demonstrations of Office Web Apps reveals a few more items than we saw demonstrated last year at PDC, though not many. Most notably, we see the full set of ribbon controls for PowerPoint Web App, which was not ready for prime time last October. We also see evidence that some of the incomplete Excel functions such as conditional cell formatting have been worked out, along with evidence that the "BackStage" -- the replacement for the Office button in Office 2007 -- now has a functional counterpart. An abbreviated menu bar (or rather, a category bar for items collected together by the ribbon) now contains a brightly-colored "File" category, which both resembles the BackStage control and also represents the old-style menu bar functionality from Office 2003 and earlier.
Copyright Betanews, Inc. 2009
Why are Skype's founders suing eBay again?

Publié: septembre 17, 2009, 8:45pm CEST par Tim Conneally

By Tim Conneally, Betanews

Yesterday, Skype's founders sued eBay for copyright infringement, claiming that eBay has been using Skype's underlying technology without permission since March, when eBay's license to use that technology ended.
The auction service eBay bought popular VoIP and instant messaging software company Skype in 2005 for a total of $3.1 billion, but allegedly did not buy the software's core P2P technology, which is owned by Joltid, a separate company run by Skype founders Niklas Zennstrom and Janus Friis.
As a Securities and Exchange Commission quarterly report stated today, "Joltid has alleged that Skype should not possess, use or modify certain software source code and that, by doing so, and by disclosing such code in certain US patent cases pursuant to orders from US courts, Skype has breached the license agreement."
Earlier this year, eBay announced its intentions to spin off Skype, after which, Zennstrom and Friis filed copyright infringement suit against eBay in London. They reportedly even tried to accumulate enough private capital to make a bid to buy back Skype, but that fell through, By the first of September, eBay had found investors willing to pay $1.9 billion for a controlling stake in Skype.
Yesterday's suit pulls those investors into the claim, with the intention of stopping the deal and recovering damages estimated at an astonishing $75 million per day that eBay has run Skype without license.
Because of Zennstrom's and Friis' fight for Joltid's intellectual property, the pair has earned a reputation for suing everyone who attempts to lay their hands on Skype.
In August, LawPundit blogger Andis Kaulins wrote, "In the case of Joltid we have here -- in our opinion -- another typical IP instance of overly greedy intellectual property rights holders who are prepared to try to hold a good share of the world's communication population (480 million registered Skype users) for ransom simply because of their own petty personal selfish interests. We have little patience with such philosophies. IP rights holders in general must be told time and again in strong and stern judicial language that intellectual property rights do not somehow bestow world imperial rights upon them."
EBay spokesman John Pluhowski told The New York Times yesterday, "[Joltid's claims] are without merit and are founded on fundamental legal and factual errors...We remain on track to close the transaction in the fourth quarter of 2009."
Copyright Betanews, Inc. 2009
Zune dreams: Microsoft's refusal to say die

Publié: septembre 17, 2009, 7:42pm CEST par Carmi Levy
By Carmi Levy, Betanews

A boxing match can be a fascinating thing to watch, especially when it's between deliberately mismatched fighters who probably have no business being in the ring at the same time. But since these things are more about business than fighting, anyway, audiences are often treated to cruel spectacles of an overwhelmingly powerful athlete beating an out-of-his-league opponent to a bloody pulp.
If the poor shlub doesn't collapse in a heap or put his gloves down and head for the corner, you can always count on the ref to step in and stop the carnage. But only after the members of the audience have been satisfied that they saw what they came to see.
The real world, sadly, doesn't work that way. There's no ref to stop the battle before it spins out of control. And quitting is usually the only viable option once a company realizes it's in over its head.
Fighting on
Microsoft hasn't gotten that memo. Three years after releasing its first Zune media player to what may be charitably described as lukewarm reviews, it's still hacking away at a platform that's barely managed to stay on consumers' radar. Or anyone else's. Its latest attempt, the Zune HD, is clearly the company's best release yet, with flashes of innovation that illustrate how deep the creative spirit continues to run at Microsoft. Too-sexy-for-my-shirt sleekness, OLED touchscreen, HD Radio and 720p hi-def external output via an available dock illustrate how much the game has changed since the early days when these things only played MP3s.
If only great design were enough to keep a decent media player going. Unfortunately for Microsoft, it isn't. While Apple's shipped 220 million iPods since 2001, Microsoft's barely topped 3 million in a shade less than three years. The first two hardware generations were credible me-too designs, but didn't offer anything unique enough to break iPod users out of their habit.
Beyond value-for-money or feature set considerations, however, consumers just don't covet Zunes like they covet iPods. Beyond Apple's consistent sense of industrial design that allows it to charge a premium for simplicity, its content and application ecosystem seals the deal. When you buy an iPod, you automatically become married -- for better or for worse -- to iTunes. Whether you love it or hate it, you've got to admit it at least means something to the iPod owner. The Zune? You get the Zune Marketplace that currently has seven free applications available for download. Microsoft's promising more, but its refusal to open the ecosystem to developers means it won't be challenging Apple's 75,000-title (and growing) App Store anytime soon.
Microsoft's Zune Pass, a $14.99 monthly subscription that gives Zuners unlimited (well, unlimited as long as they keep paying) access to six million songs in the Zune Marketplace library, is an creatively cost-effective way to keep buyers entertained. But like so many great ideas that fail to light the world on fire, it may be just a little too advanced for consumers who are still more comfortable buying and downloading songs online or ripping them from CDs.
We need competition
All of this means Microsoft's latest stab at Zune will likely end up where its previous attempts ended up: Nowhere. Which is unfortunate, because the media player market needs credible alternatives to keep the Apples of the world honest and to maintain the pace of innovation in this fast-evolving market. Apple is a better company because Microsoft insists on nipping at its media player heels. Without competition, leaders risk becoming complacent. And while Apple hasn't exhibited any outward signs of easing off the gas pedal, the continued presence of alternatives that can keep it from growing its near-74% media player market share can only be good for consumers.
Still, if Microsoft hopes to be more than an afterthought, it needs to abandon its careful, evolutionary strategy and swing for the fences. A more radical approach might include some of the following:
- Combine the Zune and Windows Mobile units into one. Forked development divides resources and increases time to market. Consolidating the two would drive Microsoft's agility in developing compelling mobile platforms and distributing them, quickly, on whatever platform makes the most sense. Apple's mobile platform covers both its iPod media players and its iPhone smartphones, so there's no reason why Microsoft can't follow suit.
- Extend the Xbox. The consolidated mobile entity outlined above should also find a way to incorporate core competencies from the Xbox unit. Mobility's future is games, after all, and where better to gain that expertise?
- Collapse all online stores into one. The fact that Microsoft has three such stores only serves to confuse consumers. The Zune Marketplace, Windows Marketplace and Xbox Live would be far livelier under one, consistently branded umbrella.
- Open the development ecosystem. Apple's strength is largely based on a vibrant application market that encourages third parties to add value to the basic platform. Microsoft needs to motivate the same kind of thinking for its Zune platform. Although every other mobile platform vendor is already diving into these waters, innovations like more advantageous pricing models, transparent approval processes, and targeted marketing assistance could differentiate a Microsoft-branded application marketplace.
- Buy Palm. The Zune HD may be pretty, but it'll never be as buzzworthy as Microsoft needs to bust out of niche status. For all its troubles, Palm still commands tremendous respect in the industry, is still staffed by some great engineering talent and can still generate headlines that transcend its now-miniscule market size. Such an acquisition would be just disruptive enough to shake Microsoft out of its mobile conservatism. At the same time, it would convince the rest of the world that the Redmond-based company means business, and isn't content to simply release another disjointed and derivative product.
I'm impressed that Microsoft has stuck it out this long. But I fear it'll keep getting bloodied if it keeps stepping into the ring without a secret, breakout weapon (steroids, perhaps?) that might give it a fighting chance of survival. It's been on the ropes for so long that nothing short of a completely new way of approaching the fight will improve its prospects.
Carmi Levy is a Canadian-based independent technology analyst and journalist still trying to live down his past life leading help desks and managing projects for large financial services organizations. He comments extensively in a wide range of media, and works closely with clients to help them leverage technology and social media tools and processes to drive their business.
Copyright Betanews, Inc. 2009
An OLPC operating system for grown-ups

Publié: septembre 17, 2009, 6:27pm CEST par Tim Conneally

By Tim Conneally, Betanews

The One Laptop Per Child project is certainly divisive. The press has largely presented the project as one of big promises and few results. But the project's signature laptop -- the sturdily built, low-cost, resource-constrained XO-1 -- has never failed to capture the imagination of techies.
Apple co-founder Steve Wozniak, for example, said last year that he is a huge fan of OLPC, and that its CEO Nicholas Negroponte deserved a Nobel Prize. He said he even intended to switch over to full-time use of the XO-1, but "didn't make it that far."
Similarly, husband and wife founders of free/open source software publishing house On-Disk.com Todd and Karlie Robinson intended to put their XO-1s to more practical use, but found the Sugar OS and its related apps too child-oriented, and the Fedora 10 live boot OS too slow for the device.
"I decided it was just time to have a real, viable, operating system alternative for these nifty little machines," Todd Robinson said this week. "This thought was powered, in part, by my growing frustration watching the Fedora-olpc developer mailing list, and waiting for the promised Fedora 11 release for the XO...a release which appears may never come."
"This isn't really the fault of the Fedora developers who are simply placing the priority where it should be, upon having the new OS ready for the next XO-1.5 hardware version," Robinson continued. "So I had two choices: delegate the XOs we currently have to simply being used for demonstrations, or build something that would satisfy our needs and enable us to actually use our XOs in a meaningful way...obviously I chose the second option."
So he came up with a new live boot Linux OS for adults to run on their unlocked XO-1s called Xtra Ordinary 2009. Built on top of the OLPC base system and Debian 5.0.2, Xtra Ordinary is designed to give the XO the feel of a netbook. Unlike the XO's built-in Sugar OS, Xtra Ordinary is equipped with communications software appropriate for "power use," support for different screen resolutions, a wireless connection manager, and USB Bluetooth support.
In addition to the Synaptic package manager, which lets users browse and install their own battery of applications, Xtra Ordinary comes equipped with Skype, Ekiga, Pidgin, Iceweasel (unbranded Firefox browser) and Icedove (unbranded Thunderbird e-mail client), OpenOffice.org 3.1.0, AbiWord, PDF Viewer, GIMP graphics editor, Pontamus music player, and more.
On-Disk.com is selling 4 GB, 8 GB, and 16 GB SD cards loaded with Xtra Ordinary for between $41-$85.
Copyright Betanews, Inc. 2009
Speed tests: Google curbed Chrome 3 speed prior to stable release

Publié: septembre 17, 2009, 5:40pm CEST par Scott M. Fulton, III

By Scott M. Fulton, III, Betanews

Two days ago, Google signed off on a stable version of series 3 of its Chrome Web browsers; and since that time, users everywhere are noticing two not-so-subtle changes: First, the New Tab panel has a different (and, we feel, better) layout. Second, it's noticeably faster.
Google promised speed increases of about 30% (often quoted as "one-third") for users who'll find themselves bumped up to Chrome 3 (Google's browser diligently updates itself). Last month, Betanews tested that claim, and projected speed increases of more like 24.5% -- still in Google's ballpark, just along the edge. But since that time, we noticed the company had made dramatic strides, with both beta and dev channel (Chrome 4) builds posting record speed numbers in our tests, for gains that could possibly break the 40% barrier.
But was Google able to deliver those numbers to stable, non-testing customers? We've been thoroughly testing our own tests in recent days, in response to an overwhelming number of mostly positive comments from readers that diligently point out that even "real-world" benchmarks tend to be error prone. So we have a project that's "under construction" at the moment, with regard to nailing down numbers that folks can trust, and that represents the actual speed differences that users experience as opposed to the artificial speed differences imposed by many tests under unrealistic circumstances.
While we've been hard at work on this, we have some early numbers for Google's speed increases. And the answer to that big question is actually a surprising no: On our physical test platform, version 3.0.195.21 -- the first officially stable release of Chrome 3 -- ended up 6.5% slower than the record numbers for Chrome 3's last beta version.
On our Windows XP SP3-based physical test platform (it's XP that Google appears to be targeting for its Chrome OS netbook-oriented project), the first stable Chrome 3 posted an index score of 18.68, which is near the results we were seeing when Google first made its 30% speed boost claim. We estimate that the new Chrome 3 will be 24.1% faster overall on Windows XP than the final stable Chrome 2. By comparison, the current stable Firefox 3.5.3 posted an index score of 9.97 on XP SP3, and the latest nightly developers' distribution of Firefox 3.6 Alpha 2 posted a record score for Mozilla of 11.53.
For those of you not familiar with our index scoring system, it's based on a scale where 1.0 is the assessed performance of the slowest browser in current use on the slowest updated platform it can be used on: Microsoft Internet Explorer 7 (not the most recent IE8, which is faster) on Windows Vista SP2, on the same physical hardware. We chose a slow browser on purpose as something against which all our faster browsers may be triangulated.
A word about Betanews' Windows Web browser test suite
Where we had been seeing speed gains for Chrome were in three key departments: 1) page load time, where Google was already a major contender (but where Opera still has advantages); 2) JavaScript control flow, which involves the handling of heavily nested functions; 3) handling of arrays in memory. But now, not only have all those gains been scaled back to pre-August levels, but our early tests suggest that the latest Chrome 4 developers' builds have seen the same deceleration. On XP SP3, Chrome 4 has slowed down from a record 20.09 on our index on August 25, to 18.39 now -- actually a few points slower than the stable Chrome 3.
What do a few tenths of a point matter? Google's own JavaScript speed test suite, built around its V8 kernel, would suggest it matters a heck of a lot -- it generates heavy workloads based on the assessed capabilities of the browser on its test platform. But then it tends to magnify the differences as workloads get larger, which is one reason the V8 suite isn't part of ours. However, as features such as dynamic graphics rendering and complex DHTML become more and more a feature of real-world Web usage (and as browsers like Firefox and Chrome get more capable, this will happen sooner rather than later), those elements which make a few tenths of a point of difference on our current scale will actually become more magnified in the real world, as the V8 suite suggests. You'll be playing a 3D game through a pair of browsers, and you'll notice one renders more crisply and cleanly than the other, and this will be why.
Right now, Chrome's nearest competitor in the speed department is Apple's Safari 4, which posted a 16.57 on our index in Windows XP SP3. A recent look at its developers' work on the underlying WebKit rendering engine suggests a future version of Safari could very well blast Chrome off the center of the podium, assuming Apple's team sufficiently blends the rendering speed gains we're seeing with other important features such as control flow and memory conservation.
Yes, yes, we're working on new charts now.
Copyright Betanews, Inc. 2009
Why I chose Windows 7 over Snow Leopard (and you should, too)

Publié: septembre 17, 2009, 12:09am CEST par Joe Wilcox

By Joe Wilcox, Betanews

Last week, I returned to using Windows 7 after spending the summer on a 13-inch MacBook Pro. Apple almost had me there for awhile, but I'm back where I belong and satisfied with the switch. Given that Apple released Snow Leopard a couple of weeks ago, Windows 7 officially launches October 22nd and there is plenty of geek debate about which OS is better, it's appropriate time to tell the story about how I went -- in the words of J.R.R. Tolkien -- "there and back again."
First, some background. I am a longtime Mac and Windows user. I have used Windows pretty much since its release in the early 1990s and Macs since December 1998, when I carted a Bondi Blue iMac out of a CompUSA. Based on my reading comments, many Betanews readers are religious about their platform choices; I am not. Mac OS and Windows are just tools to me. I don't dogmatically defend either platform. I'm neither Mac or Windows fanboy. My work requires using both operating systems, and for convenience one usually is primary. That said, I've flopped between platforms for more than a decade.
In April, I posted at my old work blog: "How I Came to Get a PC and Not a Mac." There I explained how in January 2009, I forsook the Mac for the PC, mainly because of Windows 7. If someone asked me in November 2008 about buying a Windows PC, I would have laughed. It just wasn't happening. But Windows 7 won me over, in beta and later release candidate.
Still, post switch, I struggled with a key product category: Digital media creation software suite. In a June blog post, I asked: "Why is there no iLife equivalent for Windows?" Windows Live Essentials isn't it, although Microsoft's digital media suite is lots closer since the final release of Windows Live Movie Maker. Ahead of Comic-Con 2009, where I planned video interviews and needed easy and efficient software to process them, I moved back into the Apple camp. My main machine became the then new 13-inch MacBook Pro. I also planned to test out the MacBook Pro's new battery and later Snow Leopard.
The Mac portable's battery life hugely satisfied (consistently 6 hours) but not Snow Leopard. I find Snow Leopard to be hugely disappointing, shockingly so. Apple promised no major, new features, so I didn't expect much -- and the $29 price ($100 less than Leopard) further lowered expectations. But, after using Snow Leopard, I think $29 is asking too much for what Microsoft would call a Service Pack and give away for free.
From an architectural perspective, however, Snow Leopard is Apple's most important Mac OS X release since the dot-oh release in March 2001. I call Snow Leopard a fix-the-plumbing release, in preparation for moving the Mac install base forward to 64-bit. Performance tweaks are everywhere, and you can feel them in subtle but distinct ways. I predict that Mac OS X 10.7 will be a big release, jumping off Snow Leopard's architectural remodeling. But for now, Snow Leopard offers few benefits where users can see them.
The Mac OS X user interface, once trendsetting, is now a tired motif overdue for overhaul. Worse, Apple hints at what the UI could and should be in a few places, with QuickTime being the most visible example. The QuickTime UI is refreshing and new -- delightful. Something similar should skin much of Snow Leopard. Worse still, QuickTime's more modern UI is jarring reminder when switching back to the Snow Leopard Finder about how old most of the rest of Mac OS X feels.
By comparison, Windows 7 feels surprisingly fresh. Microsoft is finally doing good user interface design. Around 2006, which coincidentally -- or not -- is about when Bill Buxton joined Microsoft Research as principal researcher, the company started making huge strides in UI and UX (user experience) design. Buxton is a well-know UX designer who professes mantra:
Ultimately, we are deluding ourselves if we think that the products that we design are the 'things' that we sell, rather than the individual, social and cultural experience that they engender, and the value and impact that they have. Design that ignores this is not worthy of the name.
I find myself to be way more productive using Windows 7 than any Mac OS X version, and that's surprising to me. For years, the greater productivity claim belonged to Mac OS X. Consistently, I get about 30 percent to 40 percent more work done using Windows 7 than either Leopard or Snow Leopard. Windows Vista doesn't rate. The combined usability flaws -- everything from slow resume from sleep to nagging pop-ups to UI pauses or hangs -- are too much for me to use Windows Vista any longer.
More importantly, I have loads more fun using Windows 7 than Mac OS X. I haven't had this much fun using a Microsoft operating system since Windows 95. After more than three months running Mac OS X, I really missed Windows 7. By comparison, for the six months I primarily used Windows 7 test builds, I only missed Mac OS X for iLife.
There still is no iLife for Windows, but I decided to do without. Perhaps if Snow Leopard was more or Windows 7 much less, I would be using a Mac laptop today. I did briefly use Apple's Boot Camp to install and run Windows 7 gold code on the MacBook Pro (Hey, the Windows Experience Index was 5.2 -- not bad). But I wanted something more from a lightweight portable that Apple doesn't offer, which I explain in a couple paragraphs. The MacBook Pro is gone now and replaced with a Sony VAIO.
I find the Sony VAIO, model Z720D/B, to be much better value than the 13-inch MacBook Pro. Sony sells the VAIO for $1,849.99, but some dealers charge less. I got mine from PC Nation for $1,499.98 -- or about $100 less than the 13-inch MacBook Pro sold direct from Apple ($75 less from some dealers). A friend bought the MacBook and digital camera, which more than covered cost of the VAIO.
Sony config: 2.53GHz Intel Core 2 Duo processor (1066MHz front-side bus), 13.1-inch LED backlit display with 1600-by-900 resolution, (dedicated) 256MB nVidia GeForce 9300M GS graphics (DDR3) and Mobile Intel Graphics Media Accelerator 4500MHD, 4GB of DDR3 memory, 320GB SATA hard drive (7,200 rpm), dual-layer DVD burner, Bluetooth 2.1 + EDR, 10/100/1000 Ethernet, fingerprint reader, 802.11a/b/g/n wireless, two USB ports, FireWire 400 port, HDMI port, Verizon EVDO modem and Windows Vista Business 64-bit.
MacBook config: 2.53GHz Intel Core 2 Duo processor (1066MHz front-side bus), 13.3-inch LED-backlit display with 1280-by-800 resolution, 4GB DDR3 memory, (shared) 256MB nVidia GeForce 9400M (DDR3) graphics, 250GB SATA hard drive (5,400 rpm), dual-layer DVD burner, 802.11n wireless, backlit keyboard, Bluetooth 2.1 + EDR, 10/100/1000 Ethernet, two USB ports, FireWire 800 port, one Mini DisplayPort and Mac OS X 10.5.
While the computers are fairly close in terms of base hardware, I find the VAIO's higher screen resolution to be a highly appealing feature, and the major reason for my replacing the MacBook rather than installing Windows 7 via Boot Camp.
Since there has been so much unnecessary noise about 20-hour Windows 7 upgrades -- which Scott Fulton appropriately addressed yesterday -- I would briefly like to share my own expierence. After unboxing the Z720 and booting it up, I immediately made restore discs. After which, I removed unwanted software, such as Google Toolbar and Symantec anti-malware. I then installed Microsoft Security Essentials beta and Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit gold code. The upgrade took about 45 minutes. The Windows installer warned of compatibility problems with four Sony utilities, but they all work just fine.
Windows 7 performance is excellent, and resume-from-sleep time is about as fast as Snow Leopard. I've no complaints and lots of satisfaction for the switch. For anyone holding back because of Vista, Windows 7 is for you. For anyone considering switching to a Mac, wait to see what new designs PC manufacturers release with Windows 7. You might be surprised just how cool they can be.
Gulp, here it comes. I'm a PC, and why aren't you?
Copyright Betanews, Inc. 2009