The Pebble and the Avalanche

Moshe Thumbnail
Current Revolutions in Business and Technology

by Dr. Moshe Yudkowsky,

author of The Pebble and The Avalanche: How Taking Things Apart Creates Revolutions

 

Mon, 2007-Jun-25, 08:11

Story Marker
The Fierce Struggle Between the Internet and Your Computer

Your computer's operating system — Linux, Mac OS, or even Windows — is a collection of services that programmers use to create applications. For example, in a word processing application, the application uses services to access the hard drive; other services update the screen. Browsers such as Firefox and Internet Explorer access the Internet through operating system services.

In this article, the authors update the long-standing discussion about how the Internet has become a giant operating system. While this has been true for a long time for other operating systems, the authors claim that now even Windows, under competitive pressure from the Internet, is rapidly relinquishing its monolithic control of your computer by disaggregating into individual services ("APIs"), ones that compete with services provided over the Internet.

The competition, "local" services vs. Internet services, is fierce. Google, for example, has become the de facto service that provides maps; eBay is trying hard to be the de facto commerce service; Paypal (purchased by eBay long ago) is the de facto method to transfer money. All of these companies avoid the enormous costs associated with writing an operating system, and they also have a constant stream of revenue as people use their services. Microsoft, on the other hand, only gets one bite: when you purchase your operating system. That's the reason behind their struggle to introduce "Microsoft Live," subscription anti-virus protection, and other products that even they barely understand: they want a constant revenue stream from each computer running Windows, and as yet they don't have one.

Thu, 2006-Oct-05, 05:38

Story Marker
Another Arrogant Attack by Microsoft

Before the invention of the videotape recorder, local broadcast stations controlled your TV. Sure, you paid for the television set; but what appeared on the set was under the control of the station owners. All that changed with the advent of videotape recorders; VCRs took schedule and content authority away from the station owners and gave it to the TV owners.

Now there's Microsoft, which views your computer as an appliance that you own but they control. The lastest manifestation of this is Microsoft's draconian "Windows Genuine Advantage" program, now renamed the "Windows Software Protection Platform."

This isn't a virus protection scheme for your benefit: it's a Microsoft protection scheme. If Microsoft's watchdog software — "spyware" is probably not too harsh a term — suspects your computer is running an unauthorized copy, "Windows Software Protection Platform" automatically disables your system and will even boot you off the computer without warning. And of course Microsoft never makes a mistake, right?

What's most distressing about the SPP [Windows Software Protection Platform] announcement is Microsoft's continued insistence that its anti-piracy tools are nearly perfect and that innocent victims never suffer from errors in their code.
I can just see this happening to me on a business trip to Europe or Asia; wouldn't it be fun to scramble and try to fix this problem? Do I get to bill Microsoft for my time as I work to clean up their mess?

Windows Software Protection Platform is another attempt by Microsoft to run the wheels backwards — to reverse the benefits of disaggregation and assert total control over how you use your computer. I stand by my chapter title: "Marx, Lenin, and Gates: Failed Counterrevolutions."

Thu, 2006-Jun-22, 21:03

Story Marker
Battlefield Map: Microsoft vs. Open Source

A funny map that shows the current state of the war Microsoft is waging against open-source software, or perhaps vice-versa.

Wed, 2006-May-17, 09:08

Story Marker
Amazon.com and the Transition to Full Disaggregation

In the early days, Amazon's online business was One Big Application that held

all the business logic, all the display logic, and all the functionality that Amazon eventually became famous for: similarities, recommendations, Listmania, reviews, etc.
In 2001, Amazon simply couldn't grow that system any longer, but they still needed to innovate. Amazon pioneered what's now called "service-oriented architecture" — dozens of different "services" devoted to one aspect of their business:
If you hit the Amazon.com gateway page [today], the application calls more than 100 services to collect data and construct the page for you.

Mon, 2006-Apr-17, 10:19

Story Marker
Diagrams: The Complexity of Microsoft's Internet Services

One of the reasons that Microsoft's security is so poor is that they refuse to disaggregate their software into easily maintained modules. They've got what they believe are solid business reasons for that choice, along with a good strong dose of institutional intertia and corporate arrogance.

To see just how tangled Microsoft's software is, here are two diagrams of how "servers" send web pages. The first diagram shows the "system calls" that go into serving up a web page using the free, open-source Apache's web server; think of it as the path a request takes from the time you request a web page until it shows up at your computer's browser. While it looks pretty complicated, the paths are actually fairly clean.

Now take a look at how Microsoft's IIS system treats that same request. It's a tangle of spaghetti that makes the first one look like a walk in the park. And I agree with the blogger who commented that the more tangled the code, the more opportunities for security holes.

Tue, 2006-Apr-04, 08:51

Story Marker
New Products from Old

Convedia manufactures proprietary hardware and software. Their gadgets handle media streams (such as internet-based telephone calls, streaming movies, and prosaic recorded announcements) and are found in networks everywhere.

Recently Convedia announced that they will "disaggregate their software from their hardware. Instead of being bound just to their proprietary hardware, they will put their software inside everything from "purpose-built high end media servers, through ATCA blade and hardware accelerator products, to software-only implementations running on generic Linux servers or embedded in proprietary third-party platforms such as routers, switches, and gateways." It's a bold move, and one that illustrates perfectly how to use disaggregation to find new products inside old ones.

Mon, 2006-Mar-27, 19:13

Story Marker
More FUD from Microsoft

Chapter 10 of the book, "Marx, Lenin, and Gates: Failed Counterrevolutionaries," discusses Microsoft's use of FUD: Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt. Today Microsoft re-started its FUD campaign against Linux by hinting that it might use its portfolio of patents to sue Linux developers (and, presumeably, Linux users).

Given Microsoft's huge stumble — the delay of the Vista operating system — this lastest attack smacks of another desparate move to stop Linux's inroads into the business commmunity.

Mon, 2006-Jan-16, 08:52

Story Marker
Brilliant Advertising from Oracle

Oracle has a brilliant advertisement out that compares their database with SAP's database.

Each database allows developers to create programs that run internally to the database. Oracle's advertisement is quite simple:

Oracle
Applications written in Java. Java is the standard language of the Internet supported by the entire IT Industry.
SAP
Applications written in ABAP. ABAP is a 25-year-old proprietary language invented by SAP and supported only by SAP.
Who could ask for a more pointed, perfect skewering of the competition? I don't know whether Oracle's claims are true. What I find fascinating is that Oracle finds an accusation of this nature — lack of disaggregation by SAP — to be a potent, highly effective marketing tool.

Fri, 2006-Jan-06, 10:36

Story Marker
How My Computer Avoided a Disaster

I had a near-disaster on Monday evening: my hard disk hiccuped late in the evening, the kind of glitch that often results in lost data and a frantic search for backup files. But I'd taken advantage of a design based on disaggregation that made the glitch a non-event. In fact, I didn't even notice the hiccup until Thursday evening when I was looking through old mail.

It's pretty easy to think of a "disk" as being a simple object. For example, when I put a CD into my drive, it shows up on Windows as a new disk with its own icon or drive letter. But actually the idea that a physical disk must show up as a single drive on your desktop isn't a hard-and-fast rule, because computer design can be more complex than that. The disk drive that shows up on your desktop can be completely disaggregated from the physical piece of hardware in your computer. What's to stop you from "dividing" — using software — a single physical disk drive in half and having it appear as two separate drives on your desktop? Actually, people do that on Windows computers all the time.

But it's possible to go deeper than that, and that's what saved my computer system. Using a common set of software tools, I configured my system to take advantage of a further disaggregation: a "disk drive" doesn't have to be a single device. A disk drive can be a collection of disks that appears as a single drive to the desktop.

The advantages of a collection of drives, acting as if they were a single device, can be very substantial. In my case, I had two drives acting in tandem, and all data from one is completely replicated on the other. When one of the drives hiccuped, it dropped out of the collection and the other drive kept going — smoothly, invisibly, and without data loss. This kind of setup is called "RAID," by the way, and it's available for any computer system.

So, thank goodness for disaggregation. If someone hadn't thought of separating the idea of "the disk drive that appears on your desktop" from "the actual collection of hardware and whatnot inside your computer," I could have been badly burned. Instead, I've had a smooth and complete recovery.

Thu, 2005-Nov-10, 13:14

Story Marker
Shark in the Patent Pool

The goal of granting patents is not just to guard intelletual property; patents require disclosure, which means that after the patents expire everyone can apply the techniques in the patent to their own work.

As usual, any idea can serve an evil purpose. Some firms purchase old patents that have fallen into disuse and then suddenly turn around and sue companies for infringement. Another problem is software patents; software engineers are leery of the recent rash of software patents, which often cover techniques which they consider completely obvious.

To keep the lines of innovation open, some software companies announced a patent pool called the Open Invention Network, which will act as a patent pool. By taking the ownership of the patents out of the hands of individual companies — by breaking the link between invidual companies and software techniques — they hope to prevent companies from using patents to stifle competition.

What I find quite puzzling is a press report that Microsoft is in the pool. The very same report notes that Microsoft recently attempted to cast fear, uncertainty, and doubt ("FUD") on Linux as they have done before, this time by announcing that Linux violated Microsoft patents. Since the Open Invention Network will provide strong benefits to Linux, I'll be really surprised if the Microsoft shark enters the patent pool.