Practical Technology

for practical people.

October 25, 2010
by sjvn01
0 comments

Ubuntu changes its desktop from GNOME to Unity

ORLANDO, FLA. — Mark Shuttleworth, founder of Ubuntu and the company behind it, Canonical, surprised the hundreds of Ubuntu programmers at the Ubuntu Developers Summit when he announced that the next release of the popular Linux operating system, Ubuntu 11.04, would use Unity as the default desktop interface because "users want Unity as their primary desktop."

Unity is Ubuntu’s new netbook interface that, while based on GNOME, is its own take on what an interface should look and act like. To make it work on the desktop instead of on the netbook, where one foreground activity at a time is the rule, Shuttleworth admitted that Ubuntu had "A lot of work to do around windows management." That said, "We are committing to the biggest change on the desktop. Unity will become the default, when we’re sure that it will work."

Shuttleworth hopes — expects, really — that this switchover will be completed by the next release. "Lots of people are already committed to Unity — the community, desktop users, developers, and platform and hardware vendors." In particular, he noted, original equipment manufacturers (OEMs) favor Unity. They’re happy to ship it.

In an interview after the presentation, Shuttleworth added that Dell, which he said had sold several million Ubuntu desktops, laptops, and netbooks, supports the project. In addition, Canonical has overarching deals in place with Lenovo and Acer. These arrangements may lead to these major PC OEMs releasing Ubuntu desktops as well.

One reason Shuttleworth cited for this switch is that that using one interface for both netbooks and desktops will improve quality assurance and make it easier for OEMs to integrate and support Ubuntu across their PC platforms. In short, "There will be no fault-line for OEMs between desktops."

For users, the new Ubuntu Unity will default to either a single window for a single foreground application on netbooks, or to multiple windows for a multi-foreground interface on a desktop or laptop. Of course, users can choose whichever of these environments they wish, or use the GNOME desktop or the closest thing GNOME has to Unity, the GNOME Shell.

During the announcement, Shuttleworth said that this "is a significant, risky step. It will throw people’s confidence. I will preempt one important question: Unity is a shell for GNOME, even if it isn’t GNOME Shell. We’re committed to the principles and values of GNOME." Afterwards, Shuttleworth told me he would be speaking to Stormy Peters, executive director of GNOME, to further explain Ubuntu’s position directly to the GNOME community.

Shuttleworth also said that touch, which was introduced to Ubuntu in the most recent version as Utouch, will be integrated into Unity and applications. "I think in the near future all laptops will have sophisticated multi-touch hardware. All the hardware vendors that are working on touch are talking to Ubuntu."

Not everyone is happy about Ubuntu’s desktop shift. Some see this move as creating yet another division in Linux circles. Shuttleworth admitted that "There is a group that will take offense," but he thinks if Linux users and developers focus more on what they have in common rather than their differences, this move will be good for Linux, GNOME and Ubuntu.

A version of this story first appeared in ComputerWorld.>

October 22, 2010
by sjvn01
0 comments

The Internet belongs to Netflix

If I were to ask most people what single kind of program they thought used up the most Internet bandwidth, most of them would say, “Web browsing.” Wrong. According to research by Sandvine, a broadband solution provider and analysis firm, the Web takes up only 24.3%. Someone who pays attention to the net might guess peer-to-peer (P2P) file sharing such as BitTorrent. Nope. P2P has actually declined in recent years. In 2010, it only takes up 13.2%. The winner, by a wide margin, is Real-Time Entertainment, aka video and music-streaming, which accounts for 45.7% of data. Number one with a bullet in this category is Netflix.

Netflix!? Yes, Netflix. To be exact, according to Sandvine, “20.6% of all peak period bytes downloaded on fixed access networks in North America are Netflix.” That’s one in five bytes devoted to streaming Star Trek or The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo. Who knew?

You may think of Netflix as that mail-order DVD business, but the company’s growth as an Internet video-on-demand (VoD) service has been explosive. Now, if only the Internet can keep up with the demand.

More >

October 21, 2010
by sjvn01
0 comments

Practice Safe DNS

Misery is when you head to one of your usual Web site hangouts and find yourself somewhere nasty instead because of Domain Name System (DNS) poisoning. DNS cache poisoning doesn’t happen often, but when it does happen, it can make large parts of the Internet unusable. The answer to this potential poison problem? Domain Name System Security Extensions (DNSSEC).

DNS poisoning works like this. The DNS is the master address list for the Internet. With it, instead of writing out an IPv4 address like “http://209.85.135.99/,” one of Google’s many addresses, you can simply type in “http://www.google.com” and you’ll be you on your way. But, how can your browser be sure that “209.85.135.99? is a correct address for Google? By itself, it can’t. It relies on DNS and, here’s the kicker, with plain Jane DNS, the system doesn’t have any built-in way to make sure that the information it’s feeding your browser is the real deal.

DNSSEC attempts to prevent DNS cache poisoning attacks by requiring Web sites to verify their domain names and corresponding IP addresses with DNS servers. To make sure this information isn’t compromised DNSSEC uses digital signatures and public-key encryption for this information exchange. That, in turn, makes it much harder for a cracker to effectively attack a DNS server since for an attack to work it needs to compromise the DNS information for popular Web sites.

More >

October 20, 2010
by sjvn01
0 comments

London Stock Exchange moves to Linux

Two years ago, the London Stock Exchange (LSE) with its TradElec Windows-based C# and .NET programs crashed and took out the Exchange for almost 7-hours. That’s an eternity in stock market terms. Months later, the LSE’s CEO was history, and the LSE announced that it was dumping TradElec. Last year, the LSE announced that it was going to move to Linux. Now, the LSE is just about ready to switch over to Linux. Not only does it work, the new Linux-powered LSE runs faster than any other stock exchange on the planet.

I’m not surprised. If you want real speed and stability, you want to run Linux. The LSE has moved to Linux for the same reason the vast majority of supercomputers run Linux — it’s faster and better.

The LSE’s new system, Millennium Exchange, is based around Linux. It also uses Solaris and Oracle databases. Besides TradElec’s failures, the LSE also wanted to catch up with its rivals, as in today’s stock exchanges, transaction speeds are everything. Even when TradElec worked, LSE trades could barely make it under two milliseconds. That’s turtle-like speed compared to the hare’s, such as Chi-X Europe, with its sub-0.4 millisecond speeds, or the Tokyo Stock Exchange and NYSE Euronext (NYX), which achieve their speed with Red Hat Enterprise Linux.

With its new Linux system, the LSE claims it can deliver world-record transactions with down to 126-microsecond trading times. This is "twice as fast" as its closest rivals. We’ll soon seen if it can keep up its pace in the real world when Millennium Exchange goes from trial mode to production on November 1st. I expect the system may not be that fast on average, but I do expect most transactions to take about 200-microseconds.

But it’s not just about speed. In an interview with the UK publication IT Pro, LSE spokesman Alistair Fairbrother said that the LSE buying MillenniumIT, the company behind Millennium Exchange, "not only gives [us] a new high performance trading platform … that we will be migrating onto, but it also gives us control over future development releases." In addition, the move to an in-house Linux platform would save the LSE 10 pounds million per year from 2011 and 2012.

While Fairbrother played nice with Microsoft, saying that it wasn’t that the LSE was moving away from Windows to Linux, that’s actually exactly what the LSE has done. The LSE had made the move, not because they love Linux and open-source software for some abstract reason, but because it makes good dollars and cents sense. It’s cheaper, faster, and the LSE, not some outsider, gets to call the shots of its development.

I’m reminded that, from people on the street using smartphones running Android to Web users doing searches on Google to stock traders wanting nothing more than the fastest possible trades that we’re all becoming Linux users. It hasn’t happened the way we thought it might — with Linux desktops booting out Windows PCs — but it happening none-the-less.

A version of this story first appeared in ComputerWorld.

October 20, 2010
by sjvn01
0 comments

Fixing Windows 7 IPv6 Headaches

The Internet’s IPv4 dashboard gas gauge is blinking empty at only 5% left in the tank, isn’t it nice that Windows 7 supports IPv6? Well, sort of, supports it.

Actually, Windows 7 does a decent job of supporting IPv6. It certainly does much better than the ones that came before, but it still has some quirks.

The one that springs to my mind first is that Windows Server 2008 and Windows 7 both still use random interface identifiers when creating its IPv6 addresses. While Windows 7 is now certified as being IPv6 Ready, it’s not quite on target by default.

More >

October 19, 2010
by sjvn01
0 comments

Oracle kicks LibreOffice supporters out of OpenOffice

Well, that didn’t take long. When The Document Foundation (TDF) created LibreOffice from OpenOffice’s code, they let the door open for Oracle, OpenOffice’s main stake-owner, to join them. Oracle’s reply was to tell anyone involved with LibreOffice to get the heck out of OpenOffice.

This isn’t too much of a surprise. Oracle made it clear that wouldn’t be joining with The Document Foundation in working on LibreOffice.

What I did find surprising is that Oracle turned a fork into a fight. In a regularly scheduled OpenOffice.org community council meeting on Oct. 14, council chair and Oracle employee Louis Suárez-Potts wrote, "I would like to propose that the TDF members of the CC consider the points those of us who have not joined TDF have made about conflict of interest and confusion … I would further ask them to resign their offices, so as to remove the apparent conflict of interest their current representational roles produce."

These OpenOffice.org council members, who are also TDF leaders, include Charles H. Schulz, a major OpenOffice.org contributor for almost ten years; Christoph Noack, co-leader of the OpenOffice User Experience Project; and Cor Nouws, a well-known OpenOffice developer with more than six years of experience in the project. In short, these aren’t just leaders — they’re important OpenOffice developers.

They haven’t declared yet what they’ll do to this de facto ultimatum. It seems to me though that they have little choice but to leave. Certainly Oracle wants them out as soon as possible. Suárez-Potts wrote that he wanted a "final decision on your part" as soon as possible. "It is of [the] utmost importance that we do not confuse users and contributors as to what is what, as to the identity of OpenOffice.org — or of your organization."

I can understand how Oracle wants to quickly define this matter as Oracle vs. everyone involved with LibreOffice. But it’s a really dumb move.

The Document Foundation wasn’t so much about setting up a rival to OpenOffice as it was about giving an important but stagnant open-source program a kick in the pants. OpenOffice was and is good, but it’s not been getting significantly better in years. TDF wanted to change that.

Oracle thinks it’s more important to fight with some of the people who could have been its strongest supporters than try to work with them. Dumb! Cutting off your nose to spite your face is always a mistake.

Of course, this is all a piece of Oracle’s "my way or the highway" approach to all the open-source programs it inherited from Sun. Oracle may support open source in general, but it’s doing a lousy job of doing what’s best for the its own open-source programs.

This is going to come back to haunt Oracle. I fully expect for LibreOffice to replace OpenOffice as the number one open-source office suite and chief rival to Microsoft Office within the next twelve months.

A version of this story first appeared in ComputerWorld.