This post indicates there will be a release of WMDC for Windows Vista RC1 next week (the week of Oct. 2, 2006). The prior link I had referenced also indicates the same thing in the comments. So there you have it - hopefully that fancy new phone you have will once again be more than simply a phone.

\bb

Do you have a nice Windows Smartphone such as the Q or a PDA? Do you use ActiveSync to work with your contacts, favorites, install software etc.? Are you a software developer that uses ActiveSync to get your builds on the device? You are out of luck with Windows Vista RC1.

The Windows Mobile Device Center is not part of RC1 and will be released as an update. You are warned, while RC1 is labeled a release candidate, this major feature is not available. ActiveSync is not compatible as the WMDC has replaced it. That means you are able to do nothing more than copy over some files (such as pictures and music) unless you use Exchange. No contact syncing, no software installs... Nothing. I will post when the update is released.

I have been taking Office Live for a test spin. I am not going to delve into the why or anything like that, rather I want to take the time to help out anyone else who perhaps has found a major annoyance when using Office Live. Specifically, when attempting to navigate to any page of Office Live a yellow alert like the pop-up one displayed below has the following message:

To help protect your security, Internet Explorer has blocked this website from displaying non-secure content

This is more than a little annoyance, it essentially makes Office Live unusable while navigating with Internet Explorer 7. I immediately began searching and altering security settings in hopes of making it go away, but nothing worked. I added officelive.com to my trusted sites. No dice. I added my specific subdomain of officelive.com. No again. I unchecked the need for HTTPS and put the non-HTTPs sites as trusted. The message still appeared.

I finally gave in and contacted Microsoft and received an email which in part read:

Microsoft Web Plan takes aim at Google - via News.com

Now this may be what I wanted... Very exciting. It appears Scoble either did not know or was playing a masterful game of poker (okay - I am not sure how masterful, but it sounded better).  Here is another link (via Dare Obasanjo) worth checking out. I must say that while I am not entirely surprised because of the open Google release, this does appear to be a departure from previous actions. I do recall that in 2002/2003 there were plans to open up the system, but all of a sudden it closed up to only the IMLogic's of the world. Either way, 2+ years later, this could be good news for the developer.

Sadly this post by Scoble is exactly what I was talking about here and here. Note the following:

And, no, Chris Payne, I didn't make any deals with Joe to open up MSN Messenger's APIs. Although if we had continued drinking the wine Buzz brought you never know! ;-)

I know this is meant to be funny, but I honestly wish Scoble would have had more to drink and signed an agreement. No I am not joking. As I have already stated in the above linked items, it serves not only customers, but Microsoft too. There has been (at least in the past and if the above is any indication, continues to be) this walled garden approach and attitude within the MSN Messenger group. Yes, I know MSN is a "separate" part of Microsoft, but I would say it is important to recall how Windows became ubiquitous and it was not by being closed... not by being what Apple became. I know a little more than I am writing, but I think now is the time for the Messenger group to wake up before the competition forces it down their throats. This is not just about Messenger either, but Messenger is an example of an oft repeated mistake... Once again, another reminder of the lesson learned via search engines. Say it with me, developers, developers, developers developers! They are the gardeners, planters, seeders and nurturers of the Microsoft ecosystem... they are not to be feared.

I hope I am not breaking Microsoft NDA here but I was a Windows 95 beta tester. I am going to even go more out on the edge and share another tidbit, I also tested the original MSN as a part of Windows 95.

Now that we have that out of the way, I want to feel 10 years ago. No, not physically, nor mentally but OS wise. I want Microsoft to make Windows Vista strike a chord like Windows 95 did. Lets face it, when was the last time people lined up and declared "This is the Woodstock of the '90s," when going to buy an operating system? How about, "I probably won't install it for a couple of weeks, but (I need it) just to have it in the house, to hold the box, something fun like that." That sounds pretty funny doesn't it? But people really were excited about the launch of Windows 95. I was excited! Just looking at the new user interface was exciting. The start button was even new! It was an exciting time. The Internet was just becoming mainstream, Netscape was newly founded, multimedia was becoming more common on the PC, Visual Basic/ Delphi made programming Windows apps easy... Encarta seamlessly tied the online world to the PC... There was a lot going on, many new things to many people. When was the last time the computer industry has felt like that at the PC operating system level?

As I have lamented previously, IntelliPoint/ IntelliType software for Microsoft keyboards and mice will not work with Windows XP x64 Edition. Since XP x64  was released those many months ago I have searched high and low, far and wide, for answers as to when we x64 users will be able to fully utilize our none-too-cheap hardware.

Today I received the answer via Microsoft evangelist and blogging machine, Robert Scoble: they are doing the 64-bit version now and it should be out in November (2005).

While I am disappointed the release will not be until November, I would like to thank the ever busy Mr. Scoble. For those of you who do not already read his blog, you really should. After searching and contacting support for many months, Robert took the time and let me know his findings within days of contact. Thank you.

I thought the whole purpose of the first level of activation found in Windows was to thwart and curb piracy? I do not mind particularly, since this only applies to value-add extras, and not automatic updates. Nor do I mind since I think people should pay for software that is intended to cost money. However, I wonder if this ultimately presents a competitive disadvantage for Microsoft?

As noted in this CNET article, roughly a third (33%) of Microsoft operating systems are "pirated"; that is they are installed and used, either knowingly or unknowingly, without having been legally paid for. There are certainly many users who will not pay for software, but there are also many who have purchased a system from an unscrupulous seller, or purchased a counterfeit copy and are unknowingly guilty. Microsoft seems to have zeroed in on the "knowing" crowd and has done the right thing (in my opinion) with the bamboozled.

I have been using Windows XP x64 edition since it was launched several months ago. Overall, the move has ben fairly transparent, and has been rock solid. If I had to rate the system compared to other Windows systems, I would put it just below Windows XP (32-bit). The reason for the slight downgrade is because the driver support is not quite there yet. I expected this to some degree, and can accept that... However, what I have a hard time accepting is the lack of support for Windows XP x64 from Microsoft.