Emails from the Edge, The Coming of Age of Vertical

Hello Morrice, Sunny day. You should be out on your yacht, old man.

I find nuggets as I dig that indicate the same pattern that we happen to be seeing in the industry giants is replicating like pinpoints in some fractal equation.

Wow. Perhaps software creation really IS only math and we've reached a nexus in industrial software design where all the competitors have reached the same conclusions and decided on their own feature sets and release dates all on their own accidental trainwrecks of "research" and development$... and it all looks perfectly balanced!

Amazingly big ball of bull$#!$ is what it is.

Sorry for the crass language. I'm an old man and I got the RA. Might be the hormones, though as I'm not particularly POd by anyone in particular.

Anywho.

The longer this story rolls, the bigger the margin gets. Do they think we're all stupid and were going to just sit here and take the MBA games? What the hell do I worry about whether Sun can keep their pants or not. Tim Bray's the one that called bull$#!@ on the game. We call bull$#!@ on the current game. It's just that the story is being told only to a bunch of techno-kid newbies you could kindergarten in a medium size convention hall. And none of them are old enough to buy stock, apparently. Either that or they're scrupulously observing a blackout of some form. Either that or the Laughing Place #2 visitor numbers are way off. Strange goings on.

So it most definitely is a small crowd reading this stuff. Not many have known or there is a larger mass we can't know of copy and emailed posts to family friends and fools. Why is the crowd no larger? Why is the stock at 2 cents?

Opinions range through: The smart money and big boys are ignorant of the true story behind the screen, or they know but they don't believe what they see and hear and pass, or they know and they want but they can't.

I believe the majority of the pile are those who do know and believe have done so in varying degrees of depth for years and are probably scraping up pennies (I know it's the image of common working people digging into next month's budget) to “get in the game”. (They should not worry or hurry and should DEFINITELY understand what VCSy does and how they do it and what you're looking at to the best of your little technologically challenged little brains. )

Almost anyone today who would buy VCSy would do so as they believe the validity of one or more of their patents. People who know money but do not understand technology will slide right past this one.

Suggestion: If any friends or family miss this initial anticipated rise on news (no need to act like a religious convert – people spook easily like monkeys in a meadow. Talk to them gently and patiently. They're only in the foothills of man's morph to machine. (They'll get there... if we have to hack limb from limb for mechanical prosthetics. Resistance is futile.) Hang in there while you got the fingers to decide.

As VCSy grows and begins extending their own capabilities, there will be plenty opportunities in the future and I believe anyone buying VCSy stock now or a month from now will be buying a slice of a future technology that will revolutionize the world. Like buying VHS while the Beta guys made fun of you. Like buying Polaroid when people liked going to the drugstore to drop off film. Like buying Microsoft because you saw them putting out what the average guy could use to compete with the bigger guys.). I think the nature of the VCSy negotiations with MSTF actually brings a calming sense of order on the mob. American IT capabilities have lost some shine in recent years with multiple botches and gotchas and notyets. It's time somebody stuck The Fear of God into their little tight suppositoriums.

Tell me the truth, guys, what “real” professional traders and investors would have stuck with VCSy past 2000-2001? Why would a sane person do that? The only possible reason is because they can see the indications and wonder why no-one else sees them. Either that or they know the business plan and believe they're making headway. But, how would you know?

MY biggest question in the whole riggermayroll is: When will the industrial technology journalists figure this out... and should we shut up? Are we giving the game away? Remember when we wrote about the VCSy allowance for 7076521 and Vista ended up being delayed? Not because of that? Name something else that could have started the ball rolling back then to end up in perfect stalemate starting positions for Microsoft and local group competition. I've been waiting for someone to challenge all this but the staff here is rather weak. They're given to uncharacteristically Taoist bouts of petulance and pouting and angry lashing and condescendence.

Grasshopper not fit for garden. Fit for farm. Require learning. Read on.
http://www.informationweek.com/story/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=199903281

Apple Says No Sun File System For Leopard
Despite claims by Sun's CEO, the 128-bit ZFS that appears in (Sun) Solaris (Solaris is a UNIX platform - it may run Linux but why? can't you afford a real operating system?) will not (NOT the person say) be spotted in Mac OS X. (do tell.)
By Antone Gonsalves
InformationWeek

Jun 11, 2007 11:38 PM


Update, June 12, 5 pm: This article is based on reporting the statements of an Apple representative who subsequently said he had misspoken about ZFS's role in Leopard. A second article reporting the complete, corrected details about ZFS can be found here: http://www.informationweek.com/news/showArticle.jhtml;?articleID=199903525

From the first article:
"Croll declined to comment on statements made last week by Sun Chief Executive Jonathan Schwartz, who said the use of ZFS would be announced at the Apple Worldwide Developers Conference in San Francisco. Upon further questioning, Croll would only confirm that Apple had never said ZFS would be a part of Leopard."

From the second article URL:
"Apple has included a read-only version ZFS in Leopard as a future file system option for high-end storage systems."

You know how much I'm freaked on the WinFS Windows File System and the fact it was taken out of Longhorn some time ago and what I've said about the architecture requiring an architectural structure like the Enabler Agent which was patent July 2006 (right about the time when all these big industry players got the summer-tater bad salad hiccups). You may also know from reading past posts I believe WinFS could not be achieved without violating patent 7076521 (allowance issued March 29, 2006) owned by VCSy.

I think what we are seeing here is a rare sight. I'm reminded of the way bucks get their antlers tangled together when they fight... in some cases to such point as they are unable to untangle themselves. Antlers and skull of a long dead enemy are sometimes seen on live deer.

I think what we have here is something similar.

Microsoft had a great Operating System called Longhorn. Now, one of the central "secrets" in the Longhorn OS was something called WinFS which was an XML layer enabled between the proprietary data contained in the proprietary Windows NTFS and XML consumers.

I find it hard to believe a litigation/negotiation plan by the same guys who came up with the VCSy business plan would get sloppy and let the targets wander around the field while VCSy focused on only the largest of the target group. I believe VCSy is holding Sun and Apple and Microsoft in a tight arrangement allowing Apple to use a read-only "open-source" XML file-system system in the person of ZFS by Sun (which is apparently going to use a read-write version of Sun ZFS creation).

Could Sun be holding Apple back? There will be nuances within this time and feature framework that appears to be on hold or in a quiescent state right now waiting for the REAL unveiling October when Microsoft and Apple will be free... errr....able to produce their products for sale.

My view: This is going to be a shoot out between competitors based on a same starting line handicapped by VCSy's choosing. Microsoft will introduce Windows Home Server (aka Longhorn) apparently with WinFS in whatever name it might happen to go by in October and Apple will provide ONLY a read-only version of such an advanced File System.

So, any applications able to talk in XML will be able to read the file system parameters of both the Microsoft Vista Windows File System and the Apple Mac OS 10.0 File System, but, those applications will NOT be allowed to write back to that file systems on the Apple machine?

That sucks. I wonder why? Is Microsoft being rewarded for coming to the table early and Apple had to be convinced? Is Microsoft asserting unknown patents derived from their WinFS development against ZFS starting with Apple's version. It gives Sun and the open-source community plenty of time to consider the implications before Microsoft actually announces such.

I wonder if MSFT will announce the lawsuits after they announce the VCSy settlements?

Then MSFT will rule over Apple where Leopard was expected to be beyond Vista (SOMEbody is ushering Microsoft from the back of the line to the front of the line with these timed stages of technology maturing being enforced. I say "enforced" and I do wonder if any of you out there think that the current alignment of these 'stars of the industrial heavens' who chart their own course and move as the American Way gives them freedom has come to be by accident. If so, could you please drop us an anonymous comment outlining your assertions?). They will be in direct competition with Sun. Sun will have to address the enablement issues with VCSy patent 7076521. And they will be going after the small Linux distro crowd (Ubuntu first up I bet, better buy you some shorts cause the panty raid is going to strip you of your wardrobe.) for 6826744 and 7076521.

What does WinFS fully functional in read/write mode allow for? Suppose your machine could get in touch with the Microsoft Technical Security Notifications themselves and do its own diagnostics, repairs, user notifications, versioning... the works, and you never even have to know about it.

Yeah, that's what I said "Microsoft Technical Security Notifications". No no no not the "Microsoft Security Bulletin Summary " They did away with that on June 7, 2007. The new version "Microsoft Technical Security Notifications" can be subscribed to and you get Notifications you got problems maybe. One day (If what Microsoft has in Longhorn turns out to be a REAL WinFS enabled by VCSy IP) they could step up in stages to a fully interactive management system in Redmond data centers stepping geographically distributed Longhorn machines through their exercises keeping their file systems healthy.

----------------
This is the advance notification system:
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/bulletin/ms07-jun.mspx
Microsoft Security Bulletin Summary for June 2007
Published: June 12, 2007
Version: 1.0

With the release of the bulletins for June 2007, this bulletin summary replaces the bulletin advance notification originally issued June 7, 2007. For more information about the bulletin advance notification service, see Microsoft Security Bulletin Advance Notification.

To receive automatic notifications whenever Microsoft Security Bulletins are issued, subscribe to Microsoft Technical Security Notifications.

Microsoft is hosting a webcast to address customer questions on these bulletins on Wednesday, June 13, 2007, at 11:00 AM Pacific Time (US & Canada).
----------------
OR Microsoft could fight the patents and run their developments at risk they would lose the court fight at some point threatening all the work they are doing even today. And they would also be running against unleashed competitors who have demonstrated they weren't exactly sitting on their thumbs the past five years themselves. VCSy needs only one amongst this crowd to say "I'll buy the license" and VCSy can have that outfit up and running within very short order (I say that knowing the architecture VCSy and the licensee will be working, or I should say what the architecture will be working on them. Organization, redundancy identification and arbitration... the works come from the base claims of these IPs. There's plenty more to patent or we could settle all this globally and just throw the patents to the winds and hope our bread will return). The impact on Microsoft would be vicious as they will have a difficult enough time rolling out against the Linux developers who will assume the same "challenge the patents" tilt into the windmills and wreak havoc to all the chances Microsoft has to confront openoffice and open web-applications.

I think there's a better idea. Consolidate the Linux distro community into partnered open-source appendages mated with the proprietary market base to build web-applications for Linux AND Vista/LongHorn. I believe that's what VCSy and Microsoft negotiators will have in mind when the settlement is crafted. It works to VCSy's advantage to make each licensee uniquely competitive within a particular platform intended to be applied to VCSy vertical target industries. Sell to the buyers and vendors alike.

On the other hand; If Microsoft chooses not to negotiate, I would personally go to work for VCSy selling licenses to every Linux distro I could find anywhere. 'Better get my mucklucks on. Gotta trudge up to Newfinnland to sell some of them licenses. Better bring some extra screws and extra batteries for the screwdriver to 'attach' the license plates on their bumpers, too.'

I personally don't believe Microsoft would press too heavily on a re-examination of the patents as they're entire plan for not only recouping their payout to VCSy but developing their goldmine in open-source and other IP payments (facilitating the consolidation by absorption to absolve debt) for their super WinFS technology platform (Yes, Virginia. It's THAT important.) would hinge on the validity of VCSy's patents which will be licensed to MSFT.

Devilishly clever, what not?

Now, If MSFT will fight the patents and VCSy can throw all of them open to open-source, live off whatever meager earnings they can make working with IBM, Sun, Apple, Yahoo, Google and others teaching them how to do what Davison, McAuley, Valdetaro, Cruz and Wade et al can do and Microsoft will be a smoking charcoal brickette inside two years, I would say Microsoft would be in the middle of the nightmare scenario.

I do believe Microsoft will settle with VCSy and I do believe Wade will get what he actually wants, even if it looks like he lost. Such is the profile he must keep to convince the courts he was damaged by the Chinadotcom/Ross assault.

Now, let me point out, I do not believe VCSy to be the only victor in this patent scuffle with the giants (and the patent scuffle to come with the mice). The following indicates patents on network software that folds very neatly into the claims made by the Agent patent and the two together give each man woman child and object on earth their own separate internet connection to any number of automated network helpers. These are the Charles Northrup patents: http://www.geek.com/news/geeknews/2001oct/gee20011030008583.htm

It looks like the kind of patent Davison probably would have written had be been born a few years before.

Sorry for the ramble, Mo. You know I get like this sometimes. Fingers gotta dance.

(And, Yes, Virginia. Somebody did kill Santa Claus... AND the Easter Bunny. We got the whole bag and basket. heh heh heh )

reference: http://ajaxamine.tripod.com/index.blog?entry_id=1698349