Cloud computing, “information on demand,” or “application service providers” — it doesn’t matter what name you use. The basic concept behind all these ideas is that networking should enable people to stop buying and installing applications locally on their PCs. In 2000-01, the “ASP” model intended to move most (if not all) applications to central providers, like Jamcracker and other startups. Data would live locally, while applications ran over the net. It succeeded…somewhat.

Then, a few years later, “on demand” computing became the new buzzword. This was the idea of moving not only applications, but also computing horsepower (i.e. CPU cycles and so forth) to the network. IBM and others got into this model, and are still pushing it today. Overall it’s a good idea. Why go buy a bunch of big iron (i.e. servers, computing systems, and storage) if you only need it now and then? It’s really just a newfangled way of doing what we called “timesharing” in decades past.

Then the “cloud” idea popped up. That moved not only applications and compute cycles, but also your data to the service provider’s systems. Under this model, you basically need only PCs with browsers and email (and maybe not even the latter) in house. The rest lives on virtual servers at your provider’s location. You use that horsepower as needed, and pay the bill at the end of the month.

However, Microsoft is behind the curve in terms of Cloud implementation…and it threatens their business model. So they’ve attempted to introduce some FUD to “warn” people about possible shortcomings of this new computing model. They’re trying to introduce some privacy concerns, which are definitely justified, in order to warn people away.

Of course, keeping the current “buy your software and you own it” model works just fine for the folks at Redmond. So they’re correct in saying that “privacy protections are essential to building the customer trust needed for cloud computing and the Internet to reach their full potential.” But behind that noble-sounding statement is the company’s worry that customers will rent, not buy, software and systems in the future.

Caveat emptor.

In the “interesting new application” department, I ran across an announcement about a new application developed by a research group at Northwestern University that helps manage your laptop’s power management subsystem. This is a very interesting development that leverages existing hardware in a new and different way. It’s rather like the earthquake-detection network based on the accelerometer built into many modern laptops.

The objective is to “shut off the display immediately when the user leaves the computer rather than using slow and error-prone mouse/keyboard activity timeouts.” We all know and, generally, hate these timeouts. They’re what cause your display to go blank at exactly the wrong time — usually while you’re on the phone, taking notes, or (worst of all) watching a movie. But these screen-blank systems are supposed to help save power while running in battery mode, so it’s not a good idea to set them to a long delay like 30 minutes.

The new application makes use of the laptop’s built-in microphone and speakers, and basically acts like sonar. The researchers “developed software that, when the user is not using the mouse or keyboard, plays a tone at a high frequency and records the tone’s echo. The computer then processes the tone and filters out everything except the frequency and looks for variance.” If the application “hears” the same tone for 10 seconds or more, it can be pretty sure no one’s in front of the machine. User movement, even slight hand or head movements, should produce variations in the tone that will prevent the software from turning off the display.

Even cooler, it “can detect movements from up to about eight feet away.” So you don’t have to be right in front of the system for the software to work properly.

That’s pretty clever.

If you’re interested, you can help test it out. The group is “currently looking for users to download the software and test it to see just how much power it saves.” Download the application from their website, set it up on your laptop, and let it do its thing. It’s supposed to record the amount of power it’s saved over time, transmitting it (with no personally identifying data) back to the researchers who developed it. Is this worthwhile? Try it out and see!

The keyboard and mouse are almost certainly the most recognized I/O (Input/Output) devices ever made for computers. Type on the keyboard, move the mouse (or “rodent” as we used to call them). What could be easier? This model is certainly a lot more intuitive than punch cards, entering instructions via individual switches, or old-style paper terminals. But they’re both fairly old technologies. The keyboard, of course, is derived from (even older) typewriters and teletypes. The mouse has been infesting desktops since at least the 1960s, and tablet-style pointing devices may be even older.

Manufacturers and researchers have been looking for better, even more intuitive I/O devices since the first keyboard rolled off the assembly line. The whole problem involves what’s known in psychological and design circles as “mapping,” or the way humans interpret and use tools. For instance, look at a standard round doorknob. Its very appearance suggests one should grab and turn it. Its function is mapped into our brains, so it’s fairly intuitive. Likewise with a mouse. Move it up and down, or left and right. The pointer on screen mimics that motion, so the movement is natural. Good brain mapping translates to good design.

Given all this, one of the holy grails of computing design is the touchscreen monitor. If it works properly, it eliminates the need for the mouse. It also provides direct mapping. Touch the screen in the right place and an event occurs.

This is probably why HP has been developing what are arguably the best touchscreens on the market. A new one, the model 600-1055, has just shown up on the market. It looks pretty good overall, and has full integration with the soon-to-be-released Windows 7 OS.

Probably the only real reason touchscreens haven’t taken over the market is cost. They’re far more expensive than regular monitors, and have had reliability problems in the past. At $1600 (street) the new HP continues the cost trend, but reviews indicate it’s way better than earlier models. This may be just the boost the touch paradigm needs. But I’m not sure I’d give up my desktop mouse, since I don’t like the idea of reaching for the screen. It’d be less of an annoyance on a laptop!

I don’t know about you, but I have way too many accounts that I deal with on a regular basis. Email, IM, blogs, and others are scattered all over the ‘Net, and I have to manage passwords for them all. Wouldn’t it be nice if there was a one-stop shopping option for all those services?

As it turns out, Google is developing one. It’s called Google Wave, and is being put together by the same sibling team that brought us Google Maps. The problem is that it’s still in development (as are many Google applications) and is, at present, available by invitation only. 100,000 lucky (?) users will be invited to participate in a beta test, but everyone else is excluded for the time being.

From the description currently available, the service sounds pretty cool. Instead of offering discrete mail, news, IM, and other services, Wave puts them all in one account. “Many of the functions of Google Wave already exist, but require logging into separate applications- email, instant messaging, office productivity, blogging, etc. Google Wave will provide you with one platform that ties all of these separate applications together.”

The approach also tries to cut down on what could loosely be termed “latency” (a term also used in networking to describe the delay between transmission and receipt of a data packet) of messages. If you send an email, you have to wait for the recipient to reply. This can take time. IM is better since it offers instant gratification, but Wave takes it a step further. Its “participants can comment inline and the statements are accompanied by the user’s avatar and a timestamp allowing you to easily identify who said what, when.” This includes commenting on documents that are in production (i.e. being edited). So users “can see text appear in the wave as it is being typed- even as they typo and backspace to correct the text.”

That’s pretty cool. It could also help cut down on edit/proofread/revise/repeat cycles in business or educational settings.

Software upgrades often carry a cost in terms of hardware requirements. We all know that machines capable of running, for example, Windows 2000 or even 98 would bog down over XP or (gulp!) Vista. Feature additions require more CPU, memory, or disk space. Newer games often require high end video cards. Staying “appropriately ahead” (a new term…you saw it here first) of hardware requirements is a constant battle in the IT marketplace.

When someone asks my advice before buying a new machine, I tell them to buy ahead of the curve if possible. If the current Windows or MacOS version requires 1GB, buy 2GB. If you think you need 250GB of disk space, try to buy twice that. This is also known as “future-proofing” your purchase. It helps, but doesn’t guarantee, you’ll be able to use that machine successfully for more than a few years.

Now for the good news: it appears Windows 7 will be able to run on most desktop machines sold since roughly 2006…presuming they’re not low-end boxes with minimal RAM and processors faster than 1GHZ. Initial tests show that machines with a processor over this speed, plus at least 1GB of RAM and a paltry 16GB of disk can run the soon-to-be-released new Windows version. That should make people pretty happy.

The other good news is that, even if you have a machine with only 512MB (and there are few of those around, I suspect) you should be able to upgrade your existing system for short money. I just put 2GB of RAM into a 1-year old laptop….for $40. That’s pocket change.

This said, “able to run” doesn’t mean it’ll necessarily be a pleasant experience. A lot depends on the software you’re using on top of the OS. If you use only email and a browser, you’ll probably be perfectly happy with your system’s performance. But if you habitually use lots of memory-intensive applications, or run tasks that tax the CPU, you might need to upgrade. Or get used to waiting.

Whether you’re aware of it or not, most of your PC’s capacity is most likely totally untapped. Unless you render complex graphics (a task more often handled by the video card these days) or run heavy duty computational tasks, your PC’s CPU is very likely at least 50% idle…possibly even 75%. And when you’re not typing or running applications, it’s closer to 99%.

Not only that, you’re probably using only a small percentage of the memory and other resources available on your machine. So why not contribute them to a good cause?

I’ve mentioned it before, but numerous “distributed computation” projects would love to use all those spare cycles for good causes. If you’re skeptical, check out a list of top projects you can donate cycles to by downloading a client such as BOINC (a distributed processing application from the University of Berkeley). Depending on what type of project you find worthwhile, you can help climate change research, earthquake prediction, cancer prevention, or even LHC (Large Hadron Collider) physics/chemistry modeling.

If you get a copy of the legitimate BOINC client (as always be careful where you obtain any application) you can register and connect to these, or a dozen other projects. You won’t notice the processor time and memory use as long as your system and the application are configured correctly. The client is aware of other activity on your PC, and only does work when the system is relatively idle.

I started using the BOINC client years ago, when it was originated by the SETI@Home project. I and a number of friends helped search for signals from outer space, which was a fun way to use spare cycles. It was even better, since I had a lab filled with mostly-idle systems and racked up a huge number of processing hours. Today’s projects are at least as interesting, and even more relevant.

Go donate some spare processing time. It’s a lot better use of your PC’s idle time. And who knows what your home PC, or even one at work, might discover.

Unless you’re Bill Gates or Warren Buffett, you’re probably not able to buy everything you need (or want). Everyone’s on a budget, especially in these days of down markets and layoffs. Thus, you may be tempted to use one of the free antivirus packages that can be found on the Internet instead of buying a full-blown suite. The good news is that yes, some of them (but not all!) are legitimate and won’t infect your machine with malware. The bad news is that they’re not nearly as full-featured as commercial applications, and they can be a lot more annoying.

First off, rule one: don’t just blindly download any package you run across on a website. If you don’t know that already, please unplug your machine from the ‘Net now and put it in the trash can. You need to make sure that (a) the package itself is legitimate, and (b) that you’re downloading it from a valid site. Many hackers today copy “download it now” buttons from legitimate websites, put these on their own sites, and link them to viruses or botnet installers. Why? Because they know they’ll catch at least a few people in this kind of trap.

Rule two: read Rule One again.

Now, it just so happens that PC World just ran an article discussing the relative merits of various free antivirus packages. The systems listed in their article are all legitimate, well-respected, and won’t plant viruses on your machine (presuming you get them from the actual vendor).

These packages all work, and will definitely help protect your machine from viruses and other threats. However, read the caveats. They’re not as full-featured as commercial suites, don’t come with any sort of software support, and many include annoying pop-up Nagware ads begging you to buy a real license.

Installing one of these packages is definitely better than having no protection at all…which is, sadly, still the norm as far as I can tell. If you’re unable to spend the money for a full-blown protection suite, at least grab one of these free alternatives. And make sure to keep it updated, otherwise it’s just taking up space on your hard drive.

Probably everyone who subscribes to Windows Update noticed a large number of “critical security fix” patches in the most recent Patch Tuesday release. The total I noted was around ten, with a few dedicated to the Malicious Software Removal Tool and other unrelated areas. These patches addressed 19 vulnerabilities, of which a whopping fifteen were deemed “critical.”

Some of the fixes were indeed pretty serious, and are already being exploited by those folks who’d love to hijack your machine as the latest member in their worldwide botnet. According to one commentator, “Many people are going to be looking at the WINS (039) anonymous remote code execution attack as a potential worm vector, but they shouldn’t minimize the IIS denial of service attack or Bulletin 038. These vulnerabilities mean that anyone could become infected simply by opening a movie file. Who doesn’t use the Internet these days to watch videos?”

These patches are pretty much no-brainers for home users. If you’re running Windows, you should keep it patched. In my experience, you’re unlikely to download an update that will result in a negative impact on your daily activities. If one does, you can always back it out later.

IT pros, however, are in a difficult place. Most corporations and other entities require pre-testing of new patches prior to release to the general user population. This means corporate systems folk will be beavering away, testing each update to make sure it won’t break some application and cause some sort of company-wide outage. With 19 fixes in this latest bundle, many companies will be burning the midnight oil for some time to come. Hopefully the people who have to run the tests will get comp time, or something of reasonable value (i.e. not just a back-slap and an “attaboy”).

Four of the most critical issues are “server-side exploits – IIS 7.0, Workstation, MSMQ and Wins.” That’ll make the testing process even more critical, since a patch-induced failure in any of these areas may take down critical servers, which are a whole lot more important than most desktop machines.

Finding good, powerful, and above all inexpensive software isn’t easy. Sure, you can spend $400 or more on a copy of Microsoft Office, but why go to that expense if you’re only concerned with basic word processing and a few spreadsheets? Instead, pick up Open Office for free and it’ll probably handle 99% of the Word functionality you’re likely to use.

Likewise, paying Macromedia $300 or more for Dreamweaver (or spending an equivalent amount of cash for another commercial HTML editor/layout tool) is fine if you’re in business and need a Cadillac — or, for the money, Porsche — solution. But many people who write HTML may not need anything that full-featured. It turns out there’s a highly rated and much less expensive option on the marketplace. It’s called NoteTab and it costs only $39…if you need all the available features. Otherwise, it’s free.

For HTML folks, it has a rich feature set. It’ll let you “build document templates, add bookmarks, convert text to HTML on-the-fly, and take charge of your code. Use a simple, power-packed scripting language to create anything from a text macro to a mini-application.”

That’s just the free, or “light” version. If you decide to pony up some cash for the more full-featured Pro or Standard editions, you get “additional features including a thesaurus, multilingual spell checker, text-outline file editing, customizable keyboard shortcuts, and the creation of toolbar buttons to execute custom scripts and wizards.” So not only will NoteTab handle your HTML markup, it’ll also spell-check your documents and help with grammatical mistakes.

This isn’t just a Johnny-come-lately utility, either. It’s been around since 1998 (which is surprising since I’d never encountered it before) and has received numerous awards. The developer is even giving out a free “economic downturn” upgrade to version 5 customers by allowing them a free migration to version 6.

This is a nice, lightweight application that does just about anything most HTML writers would need. As a plus, I bet it generates W3C-compliant code–unlike most Microsoft tools to date. Try it out for free, and pay the upgrade fee if you like it. Take all the money you save over a copy of Dreamweaver, and treat yourself (and your significant other, of course) to a night on the town. Or two.

In a stunningly fast counter-punch to Google’s recent announcement of its free Chrome OS for Netbook and other PCs, Microsoft has decided to offer free access to its popular Office suite to online users. Yes, that means Redmond is now competing with Google Docs and freeware suites like Open Office. This is a very interesting turn of events.

For years, Microsoft has insisted that everyone pay for its wares. In fact, it’s gone to great lengths to make sure as few users as possible fall through the cracks. Witness its long running and frequently intrusive programs, like “Windows Genuine Advantage” and insistence on online registration of license keys. Now, suddenly, they’re offering a free version of Office. What’s going on here?

The answer is fairly obvious. First, Google and others are chipping away at Redmond’s dominance in the Office suite arena. One of the main reasons is price: many users are infrequent users of Office programs, and don’t want to (or can’t) fork over $300 or more to buy a full copy. Others think — rightly in some respects — that MS Office is filled with useless features they don’t need, and would rather use something more lightweight.

Second, Google’s new Chrome OS is a direct challenge to Windows hegemony over the market. Redmond is hitting back by invading Google’s turf, just as Google has invaded its turf by diving into the OS market.

Third, I suspect Redmond has finally learned a valuable lesson: get users hooked by giving them a free application, albeit one with limited functionality. Then offer an “upgrade” that’ll give them more features…at a price. Drug dealers have been giving potential marks a free taste for decades. So have software vendors. Now Redmond is joining the club.

This is a risky bet for Microsoft. As the LA Times reported, “by giving away versions of its Office software, Microsoft risks cannibalizing one of its most profitable products. The company’s business software division, which includes Office, made $9.3 billion in profit from $14.3 billion in sales during the first three quarters of its 2009 fiscal year.” This could be a very clever marketing strategy, or it could be another case of Microsoft pointing a gun at its foot and pulling the trigger. We’ll just have to see what happens.