Gmail with Colored Labels and Folders

Today, Gmail announce the next evolution of labels: the colored label. Until now the label has been a little inconspicuous creature, subtly suggesting categorical associations in its simple green coat.Oh, we've seen the colored label here and there, its precursors surfacing in various experiments and Greasemonkey scripts; but the label has never before been so brazen, so bold. How will it use its new colors? Will it disguise itself with the chameleon's camouflage or clamor for attention with the monarch butterfly's vivid contrast?

Read More

{via Gmailblog}

Zoho Office Goes Completely Offline with Google Gears

Amajor downside with online Office programs (like Google Docs) is that they require an Internet connection – that means if you are on an airplane, a cab or some remote village that has no Internet, you may not be able to create/ edit or print your documents, spreadsheets and presentations that are stored online.

If this “always on” factor forcing you to stay away from any of these online office suites, some good news - the very impressive online word processor in Zoho Office suite is now available for both online and offline use through Google Gears.

To use Zoho Writer in offline mode, just install Google Gears and restart your web browser. Then login to your Zoho account and click the link at the top that says “Go Offline.”

Google Gears browser extension is available for both Internet Explorer and Firefox.

This will download all the recent documents from your Zoho online account to the hard drive. Now when you unplug the Internet cable and go offline, you will still be able to edit and save your documents inside the web browser just like you could do in online mode.

And the next time you connect to the Internet, all the changes made to documents locally will automatically be synchronized with the online copy so there are no discrepancies and you always have one version to work with.

The offline mode in Zoho Office will also prove useful in places where Wi-Fi is expensive like in the hotel rooms or the airport lounge – just connect to the internet, download the documents locally and then go offline to make those last-minute edits.

The offline feature is currently only available for Zoho Office but one can safely assume that the Google Docs team is also working on adding a similar feature to their product.

[via labnol.org]

Longhorn arriverà nel 2008, e non sarà solo

Denver (USA) - Tra meno di un anno Microsoft si prepara a ripetere quanto fatto lo scorso novembre, quando ha introdotto contemporaneamente sul mercato corporate tre prodotti di punta come Windows Vista, Office 2007 e Exchange 2007. La prossima "ondata di lanci", come la chiama BigM, è stata fissata per il 27 febbraio 2008, data in cui faranno il loro debutto ufficiale Windows Server 2008 (nome in codice Longhorn), Visual Studio 2008 (Orcas) e SQL Server 2008 (Katmai).

L'annuncio è stato dato in occasione della Worldwide Partner Conference, dove Microsoft ha chiarito la propria visione sul futuro del software tradizionale e dei web service: due realtà che, secondo il colosso di Redmond, sono destinate a convivere ancora per molti anni.

Il fatto che il lancio di Windows Server 2008 avverrà a fine febbraio potrebbe spiazzare molti: negli ultimi mesi sembrava ormai certo certo che il nuovo sistema operativo di Microsoft sarebbe stato rilasciato verso la fine di quest'anno. In realtà una cosa non esclude l'altra: similmente a quanto fatto con Windows Vista, Microsoft conta di rendere disponibile la Release to Manufacturing di Windows Server 2008 già nel corso di questo autunno, e di presentare ufficialmente il prodotto sul mercato qualche mese più tardi. In quest'occasione verranno organizzati oltre un centinaio di eventi in tutto il mondo. A quanto pare Microsoft ha ormai preso l'abitudine di distinguere il rilascio del sistema operativo a partner e grandi aziende dal lancio del prodotto sul mercato di massa: due momenti a cui l'azienda vuole evidentemente dedicare risorse e campagne più mirate.

Windows Server 2008 potrebbe rivestire un ruolo molto importante anche nel trainare le vendite del fratellino Vista: secondo alcuni analisti sono numerose le aziende che hanno deciso di affrontare la migrazione a Windows Vista in contemporanea a quella di Windows Server 2008. La cosa ha senso non solo dal punto di vista logistico, ma anche da quello tecnico: i due sistemi operativi sono pensati per operare in stretta simbiosi.

Alla conferenza di Denver Steve Ballmer, CEO di Microsoft, ha affermato che Windows Server 2008, Visual Studio 2008 e SQL Server 2008 rappresenteranno la piattaforma su cui costruire i web service di prossima generazione. "Tutti nell'industria stanno riconsiderando la relazione tra software e servizi", ha dichiarato Ballmer. "Noi crediamo che il futuro sia nel software più i servizi, una combinazione che fornisce ai clienti più opzioni e fornisce ai partner le migliori opportunità".

Microsoft dunque non crede nella visione di quei produttori che vedono nel Web 2.0 le potenzialità per spazzare via il software tradizionale. Kevin Turner, COO di Microsoft, ha assicurato che Windows Vista e Office 2007 non saranno gli ultimi prodotti del loro genere: le prossime versioni, Windows Seven e Office 14, saranno ancora software complessi e sostanzialmente monolitici, e tuttavia sempre più integrati con i servizi della piattaforma Windows Live.

http://punto-informatico.it/

Microsoft still dominating the market, commissioner says

European Competition Commissioner Neelie Kroes believes Microsoft is still benefiting from abusing its dominant position in workgroup servers.

Kroes told the European Parliament that Microsoft was continuing to gain market share despite being found guilty by the European Court three years ago.

Kroes said: "Microsoft is constantly gaining market share and that is what is worrying me in the work group server operating market. As a consequence of your abusive behaviour you are getting positive results for the company - that's not acceptable in my opinion," according to Reuters.
As part of the original verdict, Microsoft was ordered to sell a version of Windows without a bundled media player and open up access to its protocols.
Microsoft appealed the case in the Court of First Instance last year and is still waiting for a verdict. In court it insisted that it had done more than enough to open up access to the protocols needed by rivals to make products which interact effectively with its servers.

Kroes has taken a firm line with the software giant - earlier this month she said Microsoft was charging too much for access to its protocols which are not innovative enough to justify the high price.

c the register.com

The Torvalds Transcript: Why I 'Absolutely Love' GPL Version 2

On March 6,
Linus Torvalds responded to e-mail questions on GPL version 3 sent by InformationWeek editor at large Charles Babcock.
InformationWeek: Can you comment on why you oppose moving the
Linux kernel from GPL 2.0 to GPL 3.0?

Torvalds: First off, I don't even know what the GPLv3 will look like. I would be totally crazy to accept a license for my code sight unseen. I think people who just say "version 2 or any later version" on their code probably don't care about the license of their code enough. Before I say that "yes, you can use my code under license X," I'd better know *what* that license is.

So that's an issue totally independent of any particular GPLv3 details. The reason Linux has that "GPLv2 only" language is exactly that I simply don't want to be at the mercy of somebody else when it comes to something as important as the license I choose for my code.

So I can't even imagine why anybody would ever expect me to do anything but "v2 only." It's just stupid to do anything else.

Now, totally independently of that, I'm doubly happy that I long, long since made that decision because at least the drafts of the GPLv3 have been much worse than the GPLv2 is. They've had glaring technical problems (license proliferation with not just one single GPLv3, but "GPLv3 with various additional rights and various additional restrictions"), and while I certainly hope that the final GPLv3 won't have those obvious problems, I've been singularly unimpressed with the drafts.

Finally, the real basic issue is that I think the Free Software Foundation simply doesn't have goals that I can personally sign up to. For example, the FSF considers proprietary software to be something evil and immoral.
Me, I just don't care about proprietary software. It's not "evil" or "immoral," it just doesn't matter. I think that Open Source can do better, and I'm willing to put my money where my mouth is by working on Open Source, but it's not a crusade -- it's just a superior way of working together and generating code.

It's superior because it's a lot more fun and because it makes cooperation much easier (no silly NDA's or artificial barriers to innovation like in a proprietary setting), and I think Open Source is the right thing to do the same way I believe science is better than alchemy. Like science, Open Source allows people to build on a solid base of previous knowledge, without some silly hiding.

But I don't think you need to think that alchemy is "evil." It's just pointless because you can obviously never do as well in a closed environment as you can with open scientific methods.

So the FSF and I really don't agree on some very fundamental things. I absolutely love the GPLv2 -- because it embodies that "develop in the open" model. So with the GPLv2, we had a thing where everybody could come around it, and share in that model.

But the FSF seems to want to change the model, and the GPLv3 drafts have not been about developing code in the open, they've been about what you can do with that code. To go back to the science example, it's like saying that not only should the science be peer-reviewed and open, but you also add the requirement that you cannot use it to build a bomb.

And that's just stupid and not a direction I want to follow in. I don't want to limit what people can do with my code. I just want their improvements back. But if they do something stupid with it, that's their choice.

Now, I certainly hope that the final GPLv3 will simply not have those kinds of restrictions, so I'm not totally against it. But to re-iterate:

-- I'm against "blind trust." I will not sign on to a GPLv3 until I see what I'm signing up for.

Red Hat and Intel channels beat as one

Red Hat is fast-tracking reseller accreditation to anyone with an Intel Premier or Associate badge.

It's free of charge too and it means that system builders don't have to spend months to qualify for Red Hat approval. This is a long-tail, be-nice-to-the-little-guys initiative, supporting white-box builders who slap RHEL (Red Hat Enterprise Linux) onto standard-config Intel servers. Before today, Red Hat would request a fee from any builder who wanted certifying, but that comes across as a little short-sighted in days like these, when competitors seem to be fighting to star in Kill Red Hat first.

No channel program is complete without a name: this one is called the Global Channel Acceleration Program, and it requires free enrollment in the Intel Enterprise Server Acceleration Alliance (ESAA) and Red Hat Ready program.

More info here. ®

Bootnote

As is so often the case with these types of things, the hosting company for the marketing material does the vendors involved few favors. According to the ever-helpful Netcraft, RedHatonIntel.com runs on FreeBSD.

by register.com