João Saramago

By Joe Wilcox, Betanews

Earlier today, I posted “10 things Microsoft did right in 2009.” I originally planned to post the did-wrong list tomorrow. But in view of today’s news about Microsoft’s out-going chief financial officer, Chris Liddell, I changed the timetable. Liddell’s departure is one of the things Microsoft did wrong in 2009 (He will become CFO at GM).

The did-wrong list was way too much easier to compile than the did-right list. I could easily put 20 items here. The year 2009 was perhaps the most difficult for Microsoft since Bill Gates and Paul Allen founded the company nearly 35 years ago. Company executives can thank economic turmoil for the hardships. But Microsoft could have handled 2009 much better than it did. Hopefully, 2010 will be better.

I present the list of 10 things Microsoft did wrong in 2009 in no order of importance. They’re all important. Microsoft:

1. Let Chris Liddell get away. Liddell has proven to be an exceptionally adept Microsoft CFO. He managed Microsoft finances in better times and bad, doing a resounding good job overseeing difficult cost cutting as global economic crisis sapped software sales. Liddell has an excellent relationship with Wall Street analysts and — until January (see #4) — he offered continually conservative guidance to them. His departure is a huge loss at Microsoft’s highest executive level.

There is simply no excuse for Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer and his board of directors letting Liddell leave for General Motors. No incentive should have been enough to keep him, although given Liddell’s tight-fisted financial operations during the econolypse, as CFO he might not have allowed it. How ironic is that?

2. Offered no direct Windows XP to Windows 7 upgrade. Some Betanews readers will be surprised to read that this only marginally makes the list. From a customer relations and software sales perspective, the Windows XP upgrade path to 7 is a frak up. Windows XP users shouldn’t have to backup everything, do a clean installation and restore data from backup. For many enterprises, a fresh image would be business as usual. For consumers and small businesses, Microsoft has placed a huge deterrent to Windows 7 upgrades.

But like with Zune HD (see #7 in the did-right list), Microsoft backed away from the shackles of its longstanding practice of putting backwards compatibility before anything else. From that perspective, the Windows XP to Windows 7 upgrade is something Microsoft did right — and hopefully foreshadows more of it. Microsoft can’t support every customer running any old version of its software. Such practice keeps Windows from being the modern operating system it needs to be.

3. Laid off Don Dodge. Microsoft’s January announcement of 5,000-plus layoffs showed how quickly the economic crisis waylaid the company. Or did it? In a future post I will apply a magnifying glass to Microsoft layoffs, which appear to have been more about firing highly paid, tenured staff than making necessary cuts of employee fat. Microsoft’s ambassador to Silicon Valley, Don Dodge, was the most surprising of the layoffs — and yet from the perspective of lopping big salaries it was not. Microsoft lost three things with Dodge:

• Vital experience sussing out good startups
• Someone well respected in Silicon Valley
• An ally, who became a competitive enemy

In mid November, less than two weeks after being laid off by Microsoft, Dodge took a job with Google. How the frak did Microsoft executives not see that one coming?

4. Withheld financial guidance. Starting in January, Microsoft stopped giving financial guidance to Wall Street. It was simply a disastrous decision that established an even worse precedent. Sure, the guidance couldn’t be good (given sagging sales) and risked further run on the stock, as if the last quarter of 2008 wasn’t bad enough for Microsoft and nearly every other public company. But bad guidance would have been better than none. Successful public companies don’t just manage finances, they manage perceptions about their performance.

By withholding guidance, Microsoft let uncertainty and gossip determine perceptions about its sales and earnings performance. By comparison, Apple continued to release guidance and, combined with marketing and product launches and leaks, generated positive perceptions. These perceptions helped to lift Apple’s share price to new heights. Meanwhile, Microsoft shares remained in the doldrums, even while quarterly results remained relatively buoyant considering economic conditions. Microsoft lost opportunity to generate really positive perceptions on Wall Street during Windows 7′s late development and October launch.

5. Botched the mobile phone strategy. Earlier this month, I encouraged Microsoft not to hang up on its mobile phone strategy. But the company has fewer options by the day, as hardware manufacturers hang up on Windows Mobile and shift to Google’s Android. In October and mid-December posts, I observed how Google has put together a winning mobile strategy — in third quarter, according to Gartner, reaching 3.5 percent smartphone market share, up from zero a year earlier.

Meanwhile, Microsoft has got simply nothing to offer. Windows Mobile 6.5, which launched in October, lags behind Android and iPhone OS in critical areas of innovation. Meanwhile, Windows Mobile 7.0 is MIA, with rumors running about delays into late 2010 or early 2011. Microsoft’s mobile browser is oh-so early century, and the company is rapidly losing developers to Apple and Google. With sophisticated handsets and smartphones poised to be, with cloud services, the next-generation computing platform, Microsoft’s disastrous, run-aground mobile strategy is just short of corporate malfeasance against shareholders.

6. Chased Google in search — again. Microsoft should just give up its pursuit of Google in Web search from PCs. Google’s search share lead is insurmountable. Microsoft’s only real hope is mobile, which will be the future of search, but the company’s mobile strategy is hosed (as explained in #5). Microsoft frittered away 2008 chasing Yahoo, only to bag a Yahoo search deal in July of this year.

I called the agreement “Google’s Christmas-in-July present.” As I predicted then, and as recent ComScore numbers show, Microsoft can only take search share from Yahoo; when the deal is complete and implemented, Microsoft will cannibalize Yahoo share rather than combine with it. Microsoft’s Google search obsession distracts the company from what’s important: Mobile and the cloud, which will be the next-generation computing platform.

7. Retrenched into enterprise. Microsoft responded to the economic crisis by doing exactly what Ballmer recommended against. In January, during his Consumer Electronics Show 2009 keynote, Microsoft’s CEO extolled the importance of investing during hard times — that historically successful companies reaped from research and development and other investments sowed during recessions. But Microsoft did something else: Retreat to the enterprise. Microsoft also killed vital incubation projects (see #9).

Nearly as bad (reiterating #6), Google continued to set the development agenda, with Microsoft again chasing the search giant’s every cloud software or service. Aside from some modest Bing features and user interface changes, Microsoft failed to leap ahead of its rival.

8. Allowed netbooks to grow unchecked. Netbooks are a plague, sucking the margins out of the PC industry and from Microsoft. The company should have used every means imaginable to discourage these pesky, cheap underpowered portables. But somewhere inside the hallowed halls of Microsoft’s corporate campus, someone freaked about all those early netbooks running Linux, resulting in the disastrous 2008 decision to license Windows XP Home for the little buggers. If Linux on netbooks is so bad an experience, as Microsoft product managers claim, sales collapse should have been the future without Windows licensing.

Instead, Microsoft encouraged netbooks’ continued sales surge by licensing Windows 7 Starter Edition for them, all the while pushing costlier, thin-and-light laptops as the better alternative. Cheap rules the day. Gartner predicted that netbooks — and not Windows 7 — would lift sagging 2009 PC sales.

9. Killed incubation projects. Microsoft didn’t just wield the cost-cutting axe against valuable employees, it whacked vital incubation projects. The nastiness started in earnest with April’s gutting of Live Labs. As I blogged then: “Stupid, stupid, stupid, stupid. Did I not say stupid?” Microsoft continued jettisoning projects all year, again, contradicting Ballmer’s January assertion “that companies and industries that continue to pursue innovation during tough economic times will achieve a significant competitive advantage positioning themselves for growth far more effectively than companies that hold back. That’s why Microsoft continues to focus on R&D.”

Oh, yeah? How is killing incubation projects investing in R&D? Some of Microsoft’s best product development over the last three years came from incubation groups that acted more like internal startups. Who’s running this company, if the CEO says one thing and underlings do something else — or, worse, he is the contradiction?

10. Licensed ActiveSync to Google. Synchronization is the killer application for the connected world. So why in hell would Microsoft license its synchronization protocols to competitor Google? Perhaps someone at Microsoft saw advantage for Exchange Server. That’s one way Google used ActiveSync, but not where the company got the real bang.

Immediately, Google used ActiveSync for e-mail, calendar and contact synchronization from its cloud services to iPhone and Windows Mobile handsets. Google also used the technology to provide Exchange Server sync with Google Apps, so that businesses could use the hosted service instead of Outlook. Sync is quickly defining Google’s mobile handset and mobile cloud strategies, and Microsoft helped move it along faster. How dumb is that?

Copyright Betanews, Inc. 2009

Link to the original site

Barence writes “Microsoft has issued a statement urging people to upgrade their browser to IE8, after the zero-day exploit that was used to attack companies such as Google went public. According to Microsoft’s security advisory: ‘the vulnerability exists as an invalid pointer reference within Internet Explorer. It is possible under certain conditions for the invalid pointer to be accessed after an object is deleted. In a specially-crafted attack, in attempting to access a freed object, Internet Explorer can be caused to allow remote code execution.’ But, although IE6 has been the source of the attacks until now, Microsoft’s advisory admits that both IE7 and IE8 are vulnerable to the same flaw, even on Windows 7.”

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

Link to the original site

Grotendo writes “Microsoft plans to release an emergency patch for Internet Explorer very soon to counter targeted attacks and the publication of exploit code for a ‘browse and you’re owned’ vulnerability in its flagship Web browser. The out-of-band update will be released once the company is satisfied that it has been properly tested against all affected versions of Windows. This could happen as early as this weekend.” Microsoft has downplayed the seriousness of the IE zero-day, and insisted that it affects only IE6 even as security researchers close in on exploits for IE7 and IE8. Microsoft has had no comment about the firestorm that Google unleashed by directly accusing the Chinese of cyber espionage. ShadowServer has up a sobering post on the massive extent of the problem of “groups that can be referred to as the Advanced Persistent Threat.”

Link to the original site

By Joe Wilcox, Betanews

Why don’t you clam up and do something already?

On Sunday, I asked question “Should you dump Internet Explorer, NOW?” and quickly offered yes as the answer for all versions of the browser. Reaction to the post surprised me. As I write, there are more than 155 comments. Clearly, IE is a sensitive topic with readers — and also with Microsoft, which has once again taken a “security by PR” approach to the problem rather than to offer a real solution.

I first started talking about Microsoft’s “security by PR” strategy more than five years ago. Rather than manage the problem — a current zero-day threat affecting Internet Explorer 6, 7 and 8 — Microsoft is trying to manage the reaction. That simply is the wrong approach to quality customer service or instilling users with confidence about using the Web browser.

Quick recap: On January 12, Google disclosed security breaches, affecting more than 20 companies, that were traced back to China. Two days later, McAfee pegged a previously publicly unknown Internet Explorer exploit as one of the mechanisms used in the attacks, which the security software firm dubbed “Operation Aurora.” On January 15, McAfee and Microsoft reported that code for the zero-day exploit was in the wild, potentially putting millions of Windows PCs at risk. Meanwhile, the French and German governments recommended that their citizens switch — at least temporarily — to another browser.

Microsoft’s security by PR reaction to the exploit is the problem. Quickly summarized before I more throughly explain:

• Microsoft used the Aurora exploit as a marketing tactic, recommending that customers switch from IE6 and Windows XP; what timing with IE8 and Windows 7 as newer available products.
• Early, cleverly-word blogs or statements made it seem like only IE6 is vulnerable to the Aurora exploit, when newer Microsoft browsers are exploitable, too.
• Microsoft tried to diminish the risk by asserting that the Aurora exploit had only affected businesses, which is absurd considering how much more they have to lose than consumers.
• Over the U.S. holiday weekend, Microsoft posted new blogs and videos that offered “duck and cover” fixes. Meanwhile some executives defended IE by blaming other Web browsers.

Security by PR

Marketing Tactic. In a January 15 post warning about Aurora becoming a real zero-day exploit, Microsoft “recommend users of IE6 on Windows XP upgrade to a new version of Internet Explorer and/or enable DEP [Data Execution Protection]. Users of other platforms are at reduced risk. We also recommend users of Windows XP upgrade to newer versions of Windows.” The post also recommended that IE users disable JavaScript.

In comments to my “Dump IE?” post, AnthonySPT defended Microsoft: “How many more years should Microsoft support IE6, when they have released several new replacement versions?” That’s a good question. According to Net Applications, IE6 usage share was 20.99 percent in December — or about the same as IE8 (20.88 percent).

Commenter bourgeoisdude responded: “As they will support Windows XP through 2014 (extended support), and XP came with IE6 installed, they will have to support it that long, unfortunately. Yeah, it sucks.”

I, too, find it strange that so many businesses continue using IE6. Based on my conservations with IT staff at companies doing so, legacy dependency, most often some ActiveX controls, is usually the reason. How’s that for irony, given how much ActiveX has been an attack vector for IE exploits and how much Microsoft tried to diminish the plug-in architecture’s usage in versions 7 and 8. Microsoft and its customers still pay for past security sins.

Blaming IE6. Microsoft could possibly justify blame IE6 if that browser only was vulnerable. The wording of blog posts, different versions of security advisory 979352 and videos about the exploit sure seem to lay all the blame on IE6. From a January 14 blog post: ”Microsoft has not seen widespread customer impact, rather only targeted and limited attacks exploiting IE 6 at this time.” Restated in yet another Microsoft security blog post, yesterday: “As we’ve previously reported, attacks remain targeted to a very limited number of corporations and are only effective against Internet Explorer 6.”

But the 979352 security bulletin lists in section “affected software” IE7 and IE8 running on Windows XP, Vista, 7, Windows Server 2003 and 2008. Meanwhile, over the weekend, security researchers reported the Aurora exploit running in IE7 on Windows Vista. Microsoft’s response: Hunker down behind IE8. From yesterday’s blog post:

We have not seen successful attacks on Internet Explorer 8. We continue to recommend customers upgrade to Internet Explorer 8 to benefit from the improved security protection it offers. Additionally at this time, we have not seen any successful attacks against Internet Explorer 7. However, earlier today, we were made aware of reports that researchers have developed Proof-of-Concept (PoC) code that exploits this vulnerability on Internet Explorer 7 on Windows XP and Windows Vista. We are actively investigating, but cannot confirm, these claims.

Only businesses affected. In one of the two videos accompanying the aforementioned blog post from yesterday, Jerry Bryant, Microsoft’s senior security communications manager, says: “These attacks are not widespread. We have not seen any focused on consumers. In fact, it’s only been a very limited number of corporations that have been targeted.”

He downplays the Aurora exploit’s severity by saying only a small number of corporations are affected. At first glance, this seemingly smart PR spin is anything but. The majority of Microsoft customers are businesses, which have much more to lose if exploited than consumers. If, for example, criminals steal 1 million social security numbers from a single company, the damage is more far-reaching than exploitation of  even a few thousand consumer PCs. How would Microsoft executives react if someone stole the source code to Windows 7 or the designs for Natal?

Duck and cover. Besides emphasizing IE6 blame and diminishing IE7 and IE8 risk, Microsoft retreated to its security technology of greatest strength: DEP. The company was right to tell IE7 users to turn on DEP, which is on by default in IE8 (In most, but not all, circumstances). In comments to my earlier post, there has been fierce debate about the effectiveness of DEP, as a security deterrent.

Yesterday, security researcher Dai Zovi generated buzz with tweet: “And now my Aurora exploit works on IE7 on Vista as well as IE6, IE7 on XP. Remember kids, DEP is useless if the app doesn’t opt in.” In a very good blog explaining the effectiveness and limitations of DEP, Larry Seltzer writes about the tweet: “Dai Zovi is not a black hat and hasn’t released his exploit, so don’t expect this work to end up hacking innocents any time soon. But this does prove that the IE7 port isn’t all that hard. The bad guy versions may be done already.”

According to Net Applications, IE 7 usage share is only 15.53 percent, even less than Internet Explorer 6. The question: What about IE8? According to a Security Dark Reading post by Kelly Jackson Higgins early this afternoon: “Chaouki Bekrar, CETO of VUPEN Security, says his team was able to bypass DEP on IE8 and execute arbitrary code.”

I will praise Microsoft for telling customers to turn on DEP, but the larger PR maneuverings diminish the guidance. Microsoft should have stepped up sooner with promise to fix the problem. By the way, whether or not that fix is made available for IE8 and Windows 7 will demonstrate whether there was more risk than Microsoft’s talk.

Microsoft finally responds

While I was writing this post, Microsoft acknowledged in another blog post that an out-of-band security patch would be coming for the Aurora exploit.

But the reasons are bad and themselves reveal how much Microsoft is stepping up because of public relations. George Stathakopoulos, GM of Microsoft Trustworthy Computing Security, writes: “Given the significant level of attention this issue has generated, confusion about what customers can do to protect themselves and the escalating threat environment Microsoft will release a security update out-of-band for this vulnerability.”

Translation:

• “The significant level of attention this issue has generated” (Microsoft is trying to fix a huge public relations problem).
• “Confusion about what customers can do to protect themselves” (Microsoft cannot control the PR information).
• “The escalating threat environment” (Microsoft has stopped denying — at least to itself — that there is a real problem that will get worse).

Microsoft also didn’t give a timeframe for releasing the fix, but presumably it would come before the next Security Tuesday in February.

Wrapping up, two clarifications are in order. I am not asserting in this post that Internet Explorer is any more or less secure than any other browser. My purpose here is only to assess Microsoft’s mishandling the messaging by making security by PR the priority. Additionally, my January 17 “Dump IE?” post was written to stir up discussion about the exploit, particularly assertions by Microsoft and some bloggers that Internet Explorer users upgrade from IE6. I took the more extreme position to generate debate, because I see it as a highly effective tool for resolving problems. Likewise, this post is intended to stir up debate about IE security and how Microsoft publicly handles it.

Copyright Betanews, Inc. 2010

Link to the original site

duguk writes “Microsoft has confirmed that it is investigating a problem described as the ‘black screen of death,’ which affects Windows 7 — and reports suggest it affects Vista and XP, too. The firm said it was looking into reports that suggest its latest security update, released on Tuesday 25 November, caused the problem. The error means that users of Windows 7 and earlier operating systems see a totally black screen after logging on to the system.” Update: 12/01 22:35 GMT by KD : Microsoft now says that its November Windows updates are not causing the BlackSOD: “The company has found those reports to be inaccurate and our comprehensive investigation has shown that none of the recently released updates are related to the behavior described in the reports.”

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

Link to the original site

Jan writes “Microsoft has open sourced the Windows 7 USB/DVD Download Tool by releasing it under the GPLv2 license. The code is now available on CodePlex, Microsoft’s Open Source software project hosting repository, over at wudt.codeplex.com. The actual installer for the tool is now again available for download at the Microsoft Store (2.59MB). (Microsoft previously took responsiblity for the violation.)”

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

Link to the original site

By Joe Wilcox, Betanews

End of year is typically time for company retrospectives, but 2009 is also end of decade. For Microsoft, the slow economy and push into Web services bookends the decade 2000-2009. Microsoft parallels between the new century’s first year and the decade’s last year are surprising. I’ve put together a list of 10 things, presented here in no particular order of importance.

1. Microsoft struggled through recession. In December 2000, Microsoft issued an unexpected profit warning for its fiscal 2001 second quarter. In January 2009, Microsoft released disappointing 2010 second quarter results, announcing intent to lay off 5,000 employees. Recessions marked the beginning and end of the decade, hitting Microsoft sales hard.

2. Major new Windows versions launched. In February 2000, Microsoft released Windows 2000, mainly for the business market. Windows 2000 promised to fix many of the applications and device driver incompatibilities and performance problems associated with predecessor Windows NT. In October 2009, Microsoft launched Windows 7, promising better device driver support and improved performance than predecessor Windows Vista.

3. Internet Explorer bundling with Windows. In April 2000, U.S. District Judge Thomas Penfield Jackson found that Microsoft had violated 1898 Sherman Act by, among other things, integrating Internet Explorer into Windows. In January 2009, the European Union issued Statement of Objections that later solidified into a formal ruling against Microsoft’s integrating Internet Explorer into Windows.

4. Office on the cheap. In November 2000, Microsoft announced that Office 10 (aka Office XP) would be available by subscription. Microsoft later scraped the subscription plan several times (anyone remember Equipt?) but not the concept. In summer 2009, Microsoft began testing Office Web, a hosted version of the productivity suite for the low subscription price of free.

5. Web services vision to delivery. In June 2000, Microsoft unveiled .NET, which replaced what had been called Next Generation Windows Services. In November 2009, Microsoft announced that its next-generation Azure Web services platform was in production among some businesses, in preparation for Jan. 1, 2010 official launch.

6. Ebook publishers unite. In March 2000, 30 publishers supported launch of Microsoft Reader format for ebooks. In December 2009, Condé Nast, Hearst, Meredith, News Corporation and Time announced plans to “develop open standards for a new digital storefront,” supporting many portable devices (What? No Microsoft?).

Related: In August 2000, Barnes & Noble started selling ebooks in Microsoft Reader format. In December 2009, Barnes & Noble started selling the Nook ebook reader, based on software from Microsoft rival Google.

7. MSN butterfly takes wing. In February 2000, Microsoft introduced a new MSN logo, the four-color butterfly. In October 2009, Microsoft updated the butterfly logo.

8. Tablet PC keeps on trying. In November 2000, at Comdex, Microsoft Chairman Bill Gates unveiled Tablet PC, a concept that never really caught on. In October 2009, Windows 7 launched with touchscreen support, extending and finally fulfilling the original Tablet PC concept.

9. Mobile devices rule the day. Handheld PDAs, many running Palm or Windows CE operating systems, were the hot geek gadgets in 2000, as seen at PC Expo and Comdex trade shows (Anyone remember the first Compaq iPaq?). In 2009, smartphones were so popular that unit sales exceeded laptop sales, according to Gartner. But for smartphones, Microsoft’s mobile OS stood behind Apple and Google products for mindshare and geek enthusiasm.

10. The Ballmer Era. In January 2000, Steve Ballmer replaced Gates as Microsoft CEO. Gates stayed as Chairman, a position he still holds. In 2009, Ballmer…. I simply can’t complete this one, because people’s emotions seem to run so high about him. That’s your role, to offer appropriate Ballmer parallel from 2000 to 2009 — or to add others that I might have missed. Comments are open for your Ballmer insight.

Copyright Betanews, Inc. 2009

Link to the original site

“Microsoft, which has been pursuing concurrent improvements for its Visual Basic and C# programming languages, plans to open up compilers for the languages and add capabilities for asynchronous programming and immutability. Discussed at the Microsoft Professional Developers Conference in Los Angeles, the blueprint for the two languages will feature compilers as services and accommodations for multicore processors, said Luca Bolognese, program manager for the languages group at Microsoft.”

Link to the original site

Ora aqui está um documento importante, leitura obrigatória para gestores de equipas de desenvolvimento e, claro, para todos os programadores que procurem melhorar a qualidade das suas aplicações. Qualidade, sim, porque as características dos controlos de segurança, o reforço dos testes inseridos no código e, naturalmente, as vulnerabilidades dos programas são, na sua essência, questões de qualidade.

O documento que descreve a metodologia Microsoft para endereçar, ao nível do processo de desenvolvimento, os desafios da segurança aplicacional, intitula-se, simplesmente, Microsoft Security Development Lifecycle. Retirei este excerto da introdução porque, na minha opinião, tem um ou dois aspectos importantes que queria sublinhar. Diz assim:

Todos os programadores têm que endereçar as ameaças à segurança. Os utilizadores, hoje, exigem software seguro e de confiança, e os programadores que endereçarem eficazmente as ameaças, mais do que os outros, podem ganhar uma vantagem competitiva no mercado. Para além disso, um sentimento crescente de responsabilidade social, obriga os programadores a criar aplicações que requeiram um menor número de actualizações (patches) e menor gestão de segurança.

A privacidade também exige atenção. Ignorar as preocupações de privacidade dos utilizadores pode conduzir à paragem das implementações, a litígios, a exposição negativa nos media, e a falta de confiança. Os programadores que protegem a privacidade ganham a lealdade dos utilizadores e distinguem-se dos concorrentes.

Este documento descreve as alterações, obrigatórias ou recomendadas, ao processo e ferramentas de desenvolvimento aplicacional. Estas alterações devem ser integradas nos processos de desenvolvimento existentes, para facilitarem as melhores práticas, e alcançarem melhorias na segurança e na privacidade que sejam mensuráveis.

Muito bem. Quero realçar o seguinte: tal como esperamos — aliás, tal como exigimos — aos fabricantes dos mais variados bens de consumo, uma responsabilização pela qualidade e segurança dos produtos que põem no mercado, também devemos exigir que os mesmos requisitos sejam satisfeitos pelos produtores de software.

Mais, independentemente das exigências dos consumidores (ou utilizadores, clientes, como preferirem), parece-me fundamental promover uma cultura de responsabilidade social que possa transportar, para a esfera do desenvolvimento aplicacional, um conjunto de valores que visem, por um lado, garantir a protecção dos sistemas de informação, e, por outro lado, garantir a privacidade individual e das organizações.

Esta tomada de consciência pode dar origem, numa primeira instância, a iniciativas por parte dos gestores dos processos de desenvolvimento. Mas não termina aí: é essencial incorporar, na cultura dos próprios programadores, este sentido de responsabilidade para garantir uma melhoria significativa nos produtos acabados.

E pronto. Convencidos? Espero que sim; esforcei-me à brava! : ) Vão lá buscar o documento e dêem-lhe a leitura necessária. Onde? Por aqui: www.microsoft.com/downloads/…

The November CTP is “feature complete,” but developers will still have to wait for the PowerPivot-enabled business intelligence with Excel and SharePoint.

Link to the original site