Wednesday, April 25, 2007

Reply to Challenges to SiteFlash patent

I saw the particular blog article mentioned below earlier today and didn't want to have to put out so much effort tonight (the old social calendar is strained by all the writing KWIM?) but when theSubtleCount put it out there on RagingBull I had to plink the cat, as it were, or we would be looking at stray kittens everywhere. SO I either deal with it here once or a hundred times tomorrow.

First, I would like to say this may all appear very esoteric and arcane to many and it is and the thought of defending such a patent in court might reduce some to their trembling knees, but, VCSY has operational products based on these patents and pending patent properties that may be demonstrated to a jury with only casual skill in software construction, maintenance and use.

I do think we have a law firm fully capable of demonstrating what I can only offer as a feeble attempt.

To Wit:

http://ragingbull.quote.com/mboard/boards.cgi?board=VCSY&read=183471
By: TheSubtleCount
25 Apr 2007, 07:58 PM EDT
Msg. 183471 of 183490

I HATE to post this, but we longs need to be aware of all the negatives out there. The opening sentence does show the positive aspects of VCSY's patent, should they go against others, however, I'm am somewhat depressed by this guy's take on our patent and it's viability.

Perhaps Portuno can take his assertions apart?

In the more than 7 years that I've been with VCSY, I've seen all these wonderful patents/software releases be introduced, only to have our stock tank after the initial excitement. I fervently hope that this won't be the case here. The one thing that gives me hope, in spite of what this "geekspeaker" posts, is that the law firm we got wouldn't have taken this on a contigency basis if they hadn't done their DD and seen the upside.

http://geekspeaker.spaces.live.com/Blog/cns!588D139CAFEFE462!693.entry

Geek Speaker: Vertical Computer Systems Inc. will sue more companies than Microsoft, but programs like Homesite will keep them from succeeding.


April 23
Vertical Computer Systems Inc. will sue more companies than Microsoft, but programs like Homesite will keep them from succeeding.

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HomeSite Our reader needs to tell us how these WYSIWYG editors done to handle HTML provides enough 'prior art' to allow Homesite or Dreamweaver or Expression to build applications on par with MSWord, Excell, Access... or any other application from any other house or field? Nope. Not gonna happen or it would have happened already. Oh, what am I saying, it did happen already. In 1999 with SiteFlash.]

In the two hours that I've spent going over this patent, I'd say if it's upheld, not only Microsoft, but Sun Microsystems, Adobe, and many more companies will be next on VSI's plate. Not only do they all employ almost identical system methods in their IDE's and frameworks, but they all have huge mounds of cash just laying around. The problem for Vertical Computer Systems Inc., is there were other programs that started doing this well before the patent was issued, like Allaire Corp.'s Homesite and (then) Macromedia's DreamWeaver and UltraDev. (Most likely Macromedia UltraDev was in development when this was filed)

[In the seven years I've been watching VCSY I haven't foudn any of the large houses other than IBM comign close to deploying this kind of stuff. Prior art has to do with the entire scope of a patent's work basis. First, each company mentioned has a patent on their own operating systems composed of elements from other patents and knowledge bases. This patent and supporting patented and pending patent claims offers the capability to facilitate ALL prior software art through a unique funnel yet to be fully defined - that's why you (or somebody did because I remember an item somewhere) will find additional claims amended in a second round examination of the patent for extended purposes. This software paradigm has only begun to extend.]

I have a few business method patents that I'm working on for a fortune 50 company which I believe, will change my industry significantly. The first of these patents is getting ready to have what's known as a "Provisional Patent" which is to say I have my invention created, and then I get my date of invention and have 12 months in which to finalize what's known as the final or the utility patent. The reason why I say this is to preface that I'm a bit used to reading this garbage patent language.

[And all that is fine if he's used to looking at it in the software architecture world as opposed to the development role. He's talking business method patents. Siteflash offers to provide business methods their own IDE and applications fully integrated with any other application frameworks of any type.]

The fun thing to look at when you argue or what's known as prosecute a patent, is that you can look for silly things like a spelling error or something stupid, and a judge will just throw it out. Having said that, I'm far from a patent attorney, believe me when I say it takes a special person.
Examination of the Patent 6,826,744

[I don't see any technical problems with the patent. Apparently the rest of the world has not either. It's been out there over two years almost three and most likely in use with IBM and Verizon and Adobe to name a few according to indications over that time.]

Technical Field of the Invention

This invention relates generally to systems and methods for generating software applications in an arbitrary object framework, and more specifically to systems and methods for generating web sites in an arbitrary object framework.

[And again the secret here is to focus on the word 'arbitrary'. Arbitrary means ANY. Not any syntax within a cluster of languages. Not any format within a range of handled formats. It means any code or object or application fragment or whole or framework or system for funtionality, any of the previous for form, any for content. And each extensible into the next compartment as needed. ]

System and methods for generating software applications, okay, think of an IDE like Visual Studio or Adobe Flash/Apollo for that matter. So a basic IDE that what? A IDE that is in an arbitary object framework. Arbitary is a patent lawyers favorite word because it seeks for the patent to be very broad, and cover as many aspects. By contrast you never use words like "Must be" or always. Always is probably the worst word to use in a patent. Okay, back to what I was saying.

[Yes it's an IDE but it may ALSO be a virtual computer operating system and an application and a framework... all at the same time. It's like you have a Visual Studio for assembling any language with any format with any content and you could make an application out of all that which would run on any computer or combination of computers. Wow. Where do I go to buy that at Microsoft? Anywhere? Do YOU know where? Our IP lawyers at VCSY would like to know.]

An IDE that's in an arbitary object framework. So some good examples of arbitrary object frameworks, Java VM, C, SWF Player, .net Framework. A frame work that could do everything and cook breakfast for you. But what else must it do in order to qualify as infringing? I will cut through the unnecessary language to arrive at what I see as important.

[No those are not good examples because those languages are arbitrary only within the bounds of the framework... SiteFlash extends the framework to envelope any coded functionality as a virtualized construct with likewise virtualized form and content. thus proprietary - we must examine the concept of 'arbitrary' as it relates to the scope (breadth of operation) signified by 'arbitrariness'. Keep your definitions pure and your words won't mislead you.]

Summary of the Invention

This method should separate form, content and function so that each area can be independently changed.

To me, that means he's talking about a WYSIWYG Editor. He doesn't say it, he probably has a vision that might be a little different. I'm still looking for what makes this novel.

[Taken in this context yes but I don't see how 'function' can be implanted in an editor product or the deliverable of the WSYWIG Editor to build an application other than you've written a script that must run through an interpretor.]

Let's list the companies who were already doing this much before the patent. (Source Wikipedia.org)
# Dreamweaver 1.0 (Released December 1997; Dreamweaver 1.2 followed in March 1998)
# Dreamweaver 2.0 (Released December 1998)
# Dreamweaver 3.0 (Released December 1999)
# Dreamweaver UltraDev 1.0 (Released June 2000) (released after patent issued, but was in development beforehand)
# Homesite 1.x (September 1996)
# Allaire Homesite 2.0 (??)
# Allaire Homesite 3.0 (November 1997)
# Allaire Homesite 4.0 (November 1998)
# 1995 Vermeer FrontPage 1.0
# 1995 Microsoft FrontPage 1.1
# 1997 Microsoft FrontPage 97 (version 2)
# 1997 Microsoft FrontPage Express 2.0 (free stripped-down version came with Internet Explorer 4.0, and could be found online from numerous "download" repositories[4][5]
# 1998 Microsoft FrontPage for Macintosh 1.0
# 1998 Microsoft FrontPage 98 (version 3)
# 1999 Microsoft FrontPage 2000 (version 4)

[pardon me... these were all producing a product that was the result of content/form (yes) and function? (no) So we have to examine the word 'function' as closely as we look at the word 'arbitrary'.]

I could probably go on, I would list Open source initiatives but the only people who are dumb enough to sue them is SCO.

More Language from the Patent Summary.

The present invention provides an important technical advantage in that content, form, and function are separated from each other in the generation of the software application. Therefore, changes in design or content do not require the intervention of a programmer. This advantage decreases the time needed to change various aspects of the software application. Consequently, cost is reduced and versatility is increased.

[This is a key to siteflash - the individual 'prior arts' previously presented and used seperately in existing systems and application environments are here provided with integrated usefulness - 'prior art' prevents the public from appropriating the area served by the invention - it does not prevent integration of the art into a useful combination of facilities that provide a deliverable far beyond the purvue of the prior 'art'. The guy who invents a new wheel will restrict use to just the benefits of that wheel - but a car that brings that sort of capability without requiring those particular kinds of wheels is a new art built on the obvious results of prior art. But... if it really were all that obvious to the assembled experts when the new art is delivered, it will most likely not be obvious to anyone other than experts in the field when the assembled integration of all the indiviudal prior arts are integrated into the new invention. All IDE's can be used to assemble (abstracted language - there's a new thing!) their own languaged items but virtualization requires elemental virtualization these above mentioned applications can not provide. They provide virtualization within the bounds their own unique environments. Siteflash allows for virtualization of all boundaries.]

Wait a moment, perhaps he's just gunning for .net 3.0 and Silverlight and Expressions Studio (Not to mention Visual Studio 2007? But still I believe you could argue there are a million ways to do this, and even dreamweaver and especially Macromedia's Flash studio was doing it since the very first incarnation of Actionscript 1.0.

[first... duuuhhhh. He almost got it. The other thing is even the above mentioned 'products' are so far behind SiteFlash it is laughable to compare. FrontPage was the first thing brought up to fight this patent by Microsoft and it failed miserably. Then Microsoft had to get busy to build something comparable and here they are... almost.]

The present invention provides another technical advantage in that users are not required to use a proprietary language to encode. These arbitrary objects may include encapsulated legacy data, legacy systems and custom programming logic from essentially any source in which they may reside. Any language supported by the host system, or any language that can be interfaced to by the host system, can be used to generate an object within the application.

You could do this in Macromedia Dreamweaver 2.

[Really? You can build a computer operating system with Apollo Dreamweaver using any code from any source? That's amazing. Where is it? You know... the Adobe Dreamweaver that can do that... OH I REMEMBER... isn't that what Adobe Apollo does? Hmmmm.]

The present invention provides yet another technical advantage in that it can provide a single point of administrative authority that can reduce security risks. For instance, a large team of programmers can work on developing a large group of arbitrary objects within the object library. If one object has a security hole, an administrator can enter the object library and disable that arbitrary object.

[Meaning the original developer is able to be the manager of the application throughout the framework and thorughout the life-cycle. Prior art operating systems functioned as applications but were not able to be treated as an application before the supporting art around this patent facility was available. Thus the ecology of the SiteFlash system provides it with an extensible capability not capable of all the prior arts individually heretofore. I like heretofore. It means... nobody was able to describe it effectively or pull it off in reality until VCSY ran it through the patent office. No? Where's the flying cars? Show them to me from Microsoft or any of the other 'high tech' producers.]

The very first Domain Sever could give an admin the ability to do this very early on, much earlier than 1999.

[yes you could ... could you do that in the middle of an application and repair the application before it proceeds while the application is in use? With scripts you could. Could you do it in the middle of compiled code? Only in debug mode... and certainly at various points in the varied uses .]

Still another technical advantage of the present invention is that it enables syndication of the software application. As noted above, functionality is separate from form and content. Consequently, a user can easily introduce a new look for the application or syndicate the content and functionality of the application to another group without having to recode all of the objects needed to access content.

[Syndication of the applications with transmutation facilities readily provided to downstream (and upstream) users without disruption to the overall architecture or usefulness.]

Once again, we had this Flash 1, Dreamweaver 1, Homesite 1, I stayed away from frontpage like an Asian flu but I encouraged my mom to use it so I can't tell you how advanced it was at the time.

[Funny. Frontpage is the one item that was used to unsuccessfully fight this patent. Where were the others he mentions? I don't see anyone making applications out of dreamweaver or homesite using arbitrary code with extensible functional capabilities, do you? Adobe is doing something but Adobe may also be working with VCSY as far as we know specifically to counter Expression and .Net Framework.]

Another technical advantage of the present invention is that it allows for personalization and profiling. With personalization, the web presentation is tailored to the specific needs of the web user based on the user's past history. Profiling also enables tailoring a web site or presentation. Profiling is dependent on environmental variables such as browser type or IP address.

[Tailored in every aspect including integration with the users other applications and datastores... ANY=Arbitrary.]

Okay, now he is claiming a cookie is his invention. Horrible. Still, these technologies were deployed well before this application hit the desks of any clerk at the USPTO.

[He is claiming the application/operating system is capable of running on its own surface or surfaces (netowrking topology and oncology) with each user able to access and alter any of the features content/form/function/ as desired to thus morph the current application into an extended application without disrupting the base management and governance capabilities extended back to the developer of the original application... and all with an arbitrary use of code bases and operating requirements.]

A few other things that are talked about (I wont' make you read any more)

[You should at least read up a bit more on how operating system work then we could elevate the level of discussion here from a designer (what expression is supposed to address and facilitate) to a developer of useful applications rather than a 'push my button I will play you a movie' capability.]

Technologies like SourceSafe (anyone have a date on that sort of code sharing/backup/protection scheme?)

[You mean the ability to maintain all the governance integrity of the various distributed application and the applications morphs by users at any level? Sure... you want fries with that? SourceSafe does not do what it does with arbitrary code or objects do it?]

Technology to enable electronic store fronts to sell from a single source with a unique interface design. (are they gunning for EBay now too?)

[With a packaged operating system/application unit (that's right... the machine doesn't even need an existing operating system beyond a boot sequence and a net/internet connection) that is an integrator of all back office and front service provisions? and you're saying this is in Dreamweaver? Is it in Expression darling? NO. WhY? Because you have form and content in Expression and you have to go to .Net Framework to build the application then knit the two form/content and function into one application. Funny Microsoft chose to do things that way. What's preventing the two from coming together? They didn't know their developers would want the same capabilities as the expression designers had so MSFT relented. That may have been a crucial admission of prior knowledge... wouldn't THAT be a hoot if it were as simple to prove as that to a jury of knowledgeable techies?

Funny Microsoft chose to do things that way. What's preventing the two from coming together? They didn't know their developers would want the same capabilities as the expression designers had so MSFT relented. That may have been a crucial admission of prior knowledge... wouldn't THAT be a hoot if it were as simple to prove as that to a jury of knowledgeable techies?

Bull$#!@ Bull$#!@ Bull$#!@ from a low level software mechanic. 'Ohhhh yeahhh the Johnson rod dere you need to replace the johnson rod. That's twelve hundred bucks.]

Okay, I have to show a little more language:

[No $#!@? Ya think?] [sorry - had a spat with the domestician around here about who's job it is to empty the dishwasher. I will try to be more civil in the future.]

Personalization enables companies that want to take advantage of a customer profile to look at the customer's preferences or histories and deploy information to the web site specific to the customer.

[Granted on it's own this is doubleclick... but doubleclick can't feed your vista user base with specific applications tailored to the requirements in automation and interoperation of the userv(remember we are applying these 'novel' facilities over the entire range of tools and activities and capabilities necessary to construct an application as defined by the bounds of content/form/function. We're not sending magazines that open themselves and flip pages. The Siteflash patent allows for construction of such entities but with full blown computational and data processing and transacting capabilities ready for use and further developement.)]

(this was already being done before the patent, I cant' believe it was issued, it's so vague that the patent leave's itself open for interpretation and I can see companies like EBay already doing this, cookie technology, user profiles were customizable in AOL)

[yea... I gotta give you that unless what they are talking about here is a mechanized architecture to provide tailored applications... you know, applications that provide functional bases in one uniqure use envelope based on the historic and preferred configurations while doing this facility with thousands millions and billions. I want certain parts of Word in an application that has parts of Excel, Access, Dreamweaver aggregated into an interoperable whole... application. Now the world will have to start defining what an application is so they can have a place to run if they want to work across the internet as an operating system or application, If what I am saying is not true, why is Microsoft only now coming out with Framework when they've had three years at least to introduce that... good business? I think not. I don't think developers should be calling the shots in business, do you? That's exactly what it sounds like in Microsoft. Don't build more than you have to and keep the toys to yourself. Siteflash allows for don't accept more than you have to and keep ALL the toys.]

User Profile and Password Database can provide web sites or systems with a means to take advantage of customer profiles to look at customer preferences or history, and dynamically replace a website object with another object that contains content information matching the user profile or preferences.

[yeah I don't get that one all that much and I don't feel like digging the patent back out. Let's at least save something for Tomorrow.]

Sorry, was already being done by EBay, Amazon and a slew of other companies, this cant' possibly be scaring Microsoft or anyone else for that matter.

[I have to break in here. I submit Microsoft is scared and the others are too ignorant of the issues to be scared. Why? Because whatever 'EBay, Amazon and a slew of other companies' are using most likely has Microsoft elements at their base. If Microsoft is 'what? me worried?' the rest of the indusrty will take that cue and laugh it off as so many developers of traditional programms have seen to do on slashdot. But the user world is hearing about all this stuff because IBM can do it and others like NOW Solutions can do what Microsoft and all the developers with Microsoft stuff can't seem to pull off. But, what if Microsoft has known the day of wreckin'ing was always being rolled forward? Their client's environments for creating web applications with arbitrary form/content/function may be at risk depending on the degree of integration in interconnection and interoperation and interaction. If you trace just just Microsoft (as they are the most likely source for XML tools and methods the larger businesses use) you will find Microsoft strictly curtailed their activities around XML and it all coincided with the granting of this patent. If Microsoft is not making every effort to act according to the results of their huge multi-billion dollar research and development into XML capabilities... why not? And why is Adobe Apollo such a large looking beast when compared against the capabilities of expression and .Net Framework? Why is SOA 'vendor bull***' when SOA is Microsoft's 'invention' and Microsoft has quietly left that field to IBM and Verizon to name only two? What's going on... or more pointedly, what's not going on in Microsoft OR Apple. Why the delays for XML being so "difficult" to do? Hmmm? Why is Microsoft so behind the curve in XML based development in spite of the desperation it faces in being isolated as the rest of the world migrates across the internet to each other arbitrary machines (as arbitrary as the developing system allows them to be that is)? Something isn't right and I don't think it can be explained by semantics or syntax. I make sense, don't I? Isn't that scary? It should be and you should try your best to prove me wrong. Read pilgrim. It will do your career some good.]

A word to innovators, don't just be that person who took something and changed this and called it your own. That's like me writing a techmeme.com and letting all of my users upload their own OPML files and then calling it my own invention. Try to think of something entirely new if you want to patent something, change the game, revolutionize, don't evolutionize, everyone is doing it already, you're review probably requires you to do it three times a quarter and we are all sick of hearing about litigation that scares people from doing the real innovation.

[A word to readers. Read a bit more beyond what you want the words to say. Siteflash is an operating systems. Well, that's been done before, but does it prevent anyone from patenting any operating system they build? Not if it is novel or useful in an area not covered by others. What if it's an operating system and application by which you can build other operating systems and applications that can build other operating systems and applications etcetera while maintaining (not just recording) the elemental development path from origin to all varied uses and transformations. This is an architecture machine capable of building other software architectures.]

[And THIS doesn't revolutionize the industry??? Well heck, I guess we'll have to wait for time to prove one of us wrong. I'm ALWAYS wrong. What XAML could mean is not only XAML for extensible animation markup language but for extensible automation markup language. But you folks won't find that out until you start working with Apollo. By which time you will be so far behind the advancing curve you'll always look like a buggywhip salesmen in those shoes.]

[Certainly elemental capabilities have been patented before but aggregation in a functional matrix of prior art with new usefulness and capability qualifies as new art... no? Siteflash is an operating system that can operate on any code operating any applications within its network reach ... and beyond as the siteflash entities mate up and stratify within verticals becoming larger applications and operating frameworks. This is what arbitrary development and deployment requires. The existing art in application development should be visible in the products companies like Microsoft, Sun Apple and many others do or are under development. Why have we not seen them if all those things have existed from 1999? Why is it not visible and available to the public? The offerings are quite limited against a reading of the SiteFlash patent on the whole. The writer's method is like saying an airplane is a car because it has wheels, and engine and seats. The Monos and BlueJ's of the world may come close but as long as the language is limited, the tools not integrated, the facilities not arbitrarily extendable and governable...no cigar. No cigar. And believe me, it's quite a nice cigar when you consider it. Worth multiple billions to the future of software development.]

Thanks for reading. Hope to see you soon. --GeekSpeaker

[Looking forward to a reply.]

[SiteFlash is an IDE/Application builder that can build IDEs/Applications for building IDEs/Applications (and on and on aintaining all or selected or learned prior knowledge) while running each of the generational distributed frameworks within an integrated code-complete:for-life-cycle-governance framework of horizontal utility with vertical extension. Damn that's a lot of words. And even that doesn't cover it because the text of the patent allows for more than an operating system in that the application a SiteFlash patent can build can be a virtual computer with no need to run on any other software base and yet actuate the desired capabilities represented by all those other proprietary operating system or application files. This patent allows users (the language is abstracted out of the hands of designers/developers into the hand of the user with one to many and many to one aggregation and interoperation of any form any content any functional code the individual can get his (their) hands on. It applies socialization trends and desires to application and business development, with further abstraction into vertical languages for vertical software aggregations for industry verticals... all without the hand of one developer or designer on one piece of traditional code or coding environment. It's the end of programmers and programming as the business (any business... arbitrary vertical to vertical transmutation of frameworks and assembled support operations) world needs to know it.]

[I am far from being arrogant here. I am humbled by the facility available to an arbitrary language base due to the elegant simplicity of only a handful of symbolic primitives (At its root XML is only a base for data expression... you have to have participated in the extension of XML functionality to functional operations before you can say you are able to do ANYTHING with XML.) It may appear obvious at this point in time ... but being able to produce beyond what SHOULD be obvious trumps all the obvious do-nothings and do-nots in the world for all history. Anyone familiar with FORTH should easily understand the implications for 'virtual computer' realization when you consider each vocabulary element available with full development facilities from the exact origin of the code fragment defining that word... in any language, to be functionally integrated with any content and any form from any resource. Now imagine URLs in your stacks and VIOLA! GIMME A BEER! you have operating systems and applications that use the operational world of networked computer hardwares of any type to accomplish the design development objectives in increasingly higher automated abstraction frameworks. Try expressing or experiencing that.]

[Where experience and expression happen today and the world is agog, with SiteFlash that agogism was available long long ago. If you don't like it take it up with Aubrey McAuley, the inventor. Before you do that, though, perhaps you should look up a bio or two before you dismiss new art smothering old art straight away. Experience and expression are elemental infant steps toward automation as an art. This patent takes expression and experience (design and development) to impression and interpretation (user purposed constructs)]

[HOW CAN IT DO THAT? Because this patent takes advantage of other patented and pending patent products that provide granular elemental transactional governance in distributed agent micro-operating systems (aka the Agent Patent via Footnote 1) built upon a foundational micro-kernel based markup language in the pending patent application for MLE (Markup Language Executive) aka Emily (See Footnote 2 This is what all the Microsoft central core braintrust is trying to come up with when it says they are trying to build a micro-kernel driven dynamic language.). Emily is a dynamic language with its own micro-kernel for execution of the language at any place or requirement in any systems. Resulting in Virtualization of the software environment, the XML Agent is the entity that gets deployed and it may assume any kind of function with compartmentalized functions applied. A tailored CPU of sorts for any interaction or tool requirement, if you will. Virtualization of facility resulting from the nature of the enabling facility of the agent functions to be incorporated into legacy and new environment, frameworks, operating systems, applications. What these two items (1 and 2) provide is 1. micro-kernel operating system for micro-virtual-computer construction facility and 2. An environment for fabricating frameworks using these items 1 in arbitrary definition and deployment.]

[First they ignore you. Then they laugh at you. Then they fight with you. Then you win. Mahatma]

[Sometimes I feel like a motherless child. John and Janis]

If I missed a spot, let me know. I have a big mop and a big bucket.

pd

Footnote:
1.
Source: Vertical Computer Systems, Inc.
The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Issues Vertical Computer Systems a Patent Covering Various Aspects of The XML Enabler Agent

FORT WORTH, Texas, July 13, 2006 (PRIMEZONE) -- Vertical Computer Systems, Inc. (OTCBB:VCSY) announced today that the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) has issued a patent to VCSY for a "Web-based collaborative data collection system." The patent number is 7,076,521 and the patent was issued for 41 patent claims.

google XML Enabler

2.

google Emily + VCSY
google MLE + VCSY

20 comments:

Anonymous said...

long in the tooth this tiger? Does this history relate to the dispute being discussed and if so is it not at the heart of current efforts in the MS development community.

2004--Monad and its "dadddy" -see section 5 of the video --on programmers-- stating that Monad is progressive evolution of .net and how it works with objects.

http://msdn.microsoft.com/theshow/episode.aspx?xml=theshow/en/Episode043/manifest.xml

2005---Microsoft cant decide if monad is in or out of Longhorn---Many want it in but Microsoft eventually says no---a later OS not Longhorn

2005 commentary---prior to it being pulled from Longhorn.

http://www.informit.com/guides/content.asp?g=windowsserver&seqNum=187&rl=1


Monad becomes Microsoft command shell, MSH, and now Powershell

http://www.informit.com/guides/content.asp?g=windowsserver&seqNum=187&rl=1

Gaining popularity--but still not to be in Longhorn---

http://www.microsoft.com/technet/scriptcenter/hubs/msh.mspx

This is a big deal and may shake the MS tree by the roots---if Powershell AKA Monad and its .net foundation is founded on, or borrows from, patented property.

Or have I missed the point (here and of the lawsuit) entirely?

Anonymous said...

http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2003/technologies/management/powershell/faq.mspx

portuno said...

Very interesting, invisible man.

The value of a scripting language is you can make very powerful and flexible syntax for dynamic development. With machines doing the development, a scripting language provides a very powerful way to supervise, guide and intervene in the construction/deployment/update cycles.

What makes this kind of thing possible is two layers of abstraction (the first; the machine works autonomously and the second; allows a human regime to access the lower abstractions through higher level syntax and function) mated to the server hardware's installed operating system (should you actually NEED one of those archaic software thingies and we do know they do be do). You do that by providing your big fancy G driven interface (aka Vista or Leopard) with a T interface namely w-o-r-d-s that tell the machine what to do via a command line.

Machines don't need graphics... they need instructions. Text is more flexible, more compact, more direct and thus more powerful than graphics. AND XML is text. Graphics only carry XML tags and various metadata which is the real information interface to the machine. (A graphic is an abstraction of machine commands into a piece of art. The problem is the art's done and you the user don't have much say about what else you might want to do.

With text, the text base may be abstracted (just as with graphical abstraction) from complex to more simple and more powerful. And it may be abstracted up to the highest level which is human dialect and jargon. This is what Emily provides and can be applied to any environment.

Powershell is a text driven regime around the whole (or is there a hole?) of the Longhorn server. Why? Because, as we understand, it the Longhorn server will reside as a little round box in the family closet and will have no interface beyond connection to Vista (and future Microsoft applications) and a necessary set of commands.
Thus... a 'PowerShell' (with what I would bet would be a stripped down version not quite ready for prime time given the sensitivity of enabling proprietary/arbitrary transactioning) allows humans and machines within an XML enabled framework to manage and maneuver the server content and purpose as needed.

I would say Vista will mate through a .Net structure to talk to Powershell to do what magic needs to be done per the Vista user's wishes or per the autonomous scheduling and management features in Vista talking to Powershell.

Just a guess as that would be the most elegantly simple solution. Now... their problem, if we are reading them properly... is that they can mate up Longhorn with Vista over .Net via the family network, but the main question is; how will they interoperate over the internet?

Simple commands and command line syntax are easy transfers for XML over http. Why they wish to do it in brittle dotNet is a good quesion... unless the Framework does what SiteFlash does and facilitates the virtualization of .net structures and communications for XML enablement and transport.

Just a fig. Will others blow the figleaf off the Longhorn server's plans for... how shall I say it?... internet intercourse?

Anonymous said...

what???

"...Q: Speaking of RUNSPACE, there is an example out on the net of a remote runspace - essentially it is a PowerShell host that runs on a remote machine, and it is possible to issue commands to that remote runspace. Any comment on that? Any plans to productize?
A: This is essentially our approach to Remoting

http://www.microsoft.com/technet/community/chats/trans/windowsnet/06_1204_tn_winlong.mspx

Anonymous said...

For the record
http://blogs.zdnet.com/microsoft/?p=352

Also----some .net monad musings
June 6
"...Now you can arbitrarily host any directory as a web site accessible only from the local machine...."
http://mark.michaelis.net/Blog/default.aspx?month=2005-06

portuno said...

Apparently SOMEBODY stepped on old geekorama's toes:

26 April 2007 5:31 PM EDT
My commentary on VCSI vs. Microsoft Lawsuit leads to personal attacks.

I am being called names by presumably people with an interest in this VCSI company for posting what I felt was an honest and candid review of their patent against prior art. They better get used to this because it's what's going to happen to patents in the future if the USPTO has its way. I don't mind being called a Microsoft Shill, or other names I won't mention. The point of this blog is to hopefully have a sensible conversation about technology. I love technology, I sit in front of a computer at least 90 percent of the time I am awake unless my fiance is home. :)

About these VCSI folks, I have no problem with you. If your core mission is to provide software to enable business and improve lives, may you live long happy lives and maybe someday I'll write about your company. I just figured out they own a product called Siteflash. I think that name creates confusion with Adobe's Flash but that's just my own thoughts. more...

I've posted the entire article on tripod circa 26 April 2007 5:30 PM EDT @ Laughing Place #2

portuno said...

From the previous post:

"I don't like seeing things like this. (not sure what to make of it though, Dave)"

Damn! I don't like that either. It reminds me of something legofeel/mirror would do. He's bragged about his ability so it's him or one of his cohorts trying to sully the reputation of an already admittedly sulky mindset under siege and embattled for years by possible operatives of Microsoft.

For one thing most of us don't know who Dave Winer is (he's irrelevant to our discussion) so why would they mark him on there? Doesn't convey a cohesive message from a VCSY long that's all.

If it was a ProgrammersHeaven treeforter driven mad from being cast out of dotNet based PH that did this, I would say we should boil him in Zatarains.

But I can't see one of our guys (maybe gals? KB was that you sweety? Hand over the hacking pliers.) sending something like this. It's not VCSY long style. It IS, however VCSY short style darn tootin'... spittoee

Otherwise... welcome to the messy world of contact opinion. Stick to the technical work and we will all be happier.

PS - I would have left you a comment myself geeker, but no way would I subscribe to a Live ID LOL. We find you don't work for Microsoft, but you are putting in the time in hopes of being recruited.

Not a problem but please don't squeal 'I'm not a shill for Microsoft' when you have to say you're waiting in the wings anxiously.

I have a suggestion, serious too. Start reading what you can about extensible dynamic operating systems, dynamic IDEs and dynamic applications and you will be 10 light years ahead of the COM/DCOM muck-mucks working in oncoming perpetual obscurity.

Anonymous said...

Curious that his own patents become "gibbly gabbly" when prepared for submission but he can break down the SiteFlash patent in one sitting like it was a letter from mama.

Gibbly Gabbly---I might consider making that my username.---has a certain self-depricating integrity to it. Anyway, unfortunate that feelings were hurt, and I hope that he has a good day.

sincerely
Gibbly Gabbly

buy wow gold said...

When the Wow Gold wolf finally found the wow gold cheap hole in the chimney he crawled cheap wow gold down and KERSPLASH right into that kettle of water and that was cheapest wow gold the end of his troubles with the big bad wolf.
game4power.
The next day the Buy Wow Goldlittle pig invited hisbuy gold wow mother over . She said "You see it is just as mttgamingI told you. The way to get along in the world is to do world of warcraft gold things as well as you can." Fortunately for that little pig, he buy cheap wow gold learned that lesson. And he just agamegold lived happily ever after!.

ebay software said...

I have visited your blog and it's really very good and useful too. Thanks for the information.
ebay software

Anonymous said...

At all is not present.

Anonymous said...

I would like to exchange links with your site vcsy.blogspot.com
Is this possible?

Anonymous said...

[url=http://www.pi7.ru/zdorove/1538-rossiyane-stali-menshe-pit-i-kurit.html ]Почему меня никто не любит?? [/url]
Я не имею ввиду, что сам не стоит, а когда придерживаешь подмышки, он таже не пытается стоять, ноги согнуты и все, как ватные)) У моей подруги сыну 5 мес., а он уже твердо стоит, буквально без поддержки. Я переживаю, нормально ли все у нас)) Во сколько ваш малыш начал опираться на ноги?

Anonymous said...

What Drugs Elevate Prolactin
generic acomplia
It is a medication that is supported by many doctors because it was the first CB1 inhibitor medication that was approved for use anywhere in the world.
[url=http://www.element5makeup.com/]buy rimonabant[/url]
Acomplia is an anorectic antiobesity drug.
http://www.element5makeup.com/ - acomplia sale

Anonymous said...

Really am grateful what you're creating here!

Anonymous said...

Lufenuron Drug Interactions [url=http://thekaraokestore.net/]buy nexium[/url] Perhaps you have been lucky enough to have never experienced the pain of acid reflux and you have not felt the feeling of acid rising up and into your throat. http://thekaraokestore.net/ - buy esomeprazole

Anonymous said...

Путешествовал в Интернете и попал сюда. Какое замечательное изобретение человечества. При помощи сети общаешься, изучаешь, читаешь… Вот и с вами познакомился.

Anonymous said...

Ага, теперь понятно…А то я сразу не очень то и не понял где тут связь с самим заголовком…

Anonymous said...

Здравствуйте! Как вы относитесь к молодым композиторам?

Anonymous said...

Спасибо за статью! Надеюсь, автор не против, если я использую это для своей курсовой.