Submitted by “What, exactly, is Live Mesh and what do developers, customers and partners need to know about it? Here are 10 things that grabbed me about Live Mesh, after distilling my notes from chatting with some of the Softies involved in bringing Live Mesh to fruition.” IN short, Live Mesh is “a Software + Services platform for synchronization and collaboration.”
It sounds like that live mesh is influenced by the OLPC XO mesh network hence the name. Whether that method will work remains to be seen.
The only thing they have in common is the word “mesh”.
Not really! Mesh comes from the networking concept/model and recently has become another buzzword Web2.0ists throw around.
Wow, another way for MSFT to hold hapless consumer data hostage…now it will be even easier for them to make your data obsolete – all they have to do is decide the project isn’t making enough money and you lose everything. Woohoo, Sign me up.
How is this different than any other web based service you signed up for? What if Flickr suddenly shuttered (pun intended) its service? Or if MySpace decided to go away? You run that risk with any kind of web based service. Why don’t you just say what’s REALLY on your mind?
Well, Microsoft have a well documented history of actively persuing vendor-lockin strategies.
Take, for example, the IM wars that have fragmented the Instant Messenger market so much.
Having been forced to [slightly] open their Office document formats, Microsoft will now have to find new methods to force their customers to stick with them.
Edited 2008-04-23 20:12 UTC
I dont see how MS is any more to blame for that than AOL and ICQ.
I didn’t say they were. Please explain where you think I said that they were.
Yeah, I’m glad that it will work with open standards, so it sounds like it might actually not be something your data is trapped in, but I won’t hold my breath.
I think that Microsoft might realize that open standards will pretty much be a requirement for any ‘cloud computing’ services they offer. What I really hope is that people have the same negative image of Microsoft I have, and will shun anything by MS that they’re not locked in to.
Meaning if MS isn’t going to somehow tie this as the only available service to integrate with their other products, people will naturally stay away from it in favor of something like AWS.
Well, it’s fun to dream anyway
By their definition, OOXML is an Open Standard. Think about that one for a minute.
Edited 2008-04-23 22:14 UTC
OOXML is ISO-certified. It is an open standard.
It is a standard for which *no conforming implementations exist*, much less the “at least two” that I, and I think most people, would like to see.
The format may be documented, mostly, in an official ISO document, but that doesn’t make it an open standard.
First, I don’t see any proof that that’s true. Second, even if it were true, that doesn’t obviate the fact that OOXML is an open standard.
Sure, and Mugabe is a democratic president.
How would you define an open standard? What are the requirements for making it “open” instead of “closed”? For that matter, how would you define a standard?
A recent article I saw on one of the many news sites I frequent described MS office 2007 word as creating files which fail to check out as conforming to the standard. Since MS actually wrote the “standard” based on the output of existing Office programs, I find that to be both funny and horrifying. If they can’t get it right, who can?
Care to tell me how synchronizing files/data that reside on your device is being held hostage by teh evul Microsoft?
This looks, to me, like a cross between My Briefcase and Office Groove. I have used both, and they both failed so badly for me that I can’t see adding some web-2.0-ification will magically fix anything.
When I was at school, our only-moderately-incompetent ICT department had a go at using XP offline synchronisation on some laptops. All locally cached files were stored without any security or encryption, so anyone could freely view 10Gb of cached profile data from the last people to log on to the machine.
Just another example of Microsoft playing catchup/me-too with Google Docs.
Google’s way is MUCH better.
Who wants to share out of sync copies of documents when you can collaborate in real-time with google docs.
Not to mention the most likely vendor LOCK-IN proprietary crap that will come with any Microsoft solution.
Microsofts idea of ‘collaboration’ is only valid if your talking to people who have the exact same $500 worth of Vista Ultimate Home Media Business Ultra Extreme Edition with IE 92.5 and Office 99.2332.2332.
Googles idea of collaboration is…..hmm…anyone with a browser on any platform.
You’re not too bright. First, your Google Docs comparison is limited, Mesh (And things like FolderShare) are not limited to a single service and second, your petty comment about “IE92.5” and costs is silly since they’ll be supporting Windows XP/Vista + Mac on FF, IE, Safari, etc for free.
As I write this, the URL of the link in the osnews summary is http://blogs.zdnet.com/microsoft , which is just the front page of Mary Jo Foley’s Microsoft column, and the “Ten Things to Know About Microsoft’s Live Mesh” story is already sliding off of that page. The osnews summary should be updated to link instead to http://blogs.zdnet.com/microsoft/?p=1355 , the permanent link of the “Ten Things About Live Mesh” story.
Edited 2008-04-24 04:35 UTC