The findings of a survey by document management software company, Version One (www.versionone.co.uk), has revealed that 41% of senior IT professionals admit that they “don’t know” what cloud computing is. Version One carried out the research with 60 senior IT professionals (IT directors and managers) across a range of UK public and private sector organisations. This research follows-on from a similar survey carried-out by Version One which highlights that two-thirds of UK senior finance professionals (finance directors and managers) are confused about cloud computing.
Of the remaining 59% of IT professionals who profess to know what cloud computing is, 17% of these understand cloud computing to be internet-based computing while 11% believe it is a combination of internet-based computing, software as a service (SAAS), software on demand, an outsourced or managed service and a hosted software service. The remaining respondents understand cloud computing to be a mixture of the above.
Despite cloud computing being in the media spotlight, only a minority of respondents (5%) say that they use it “a lot” and less than a quarter of those surveyed (19%) reveal that they only use cloud computing sparingly. Almost half of respondents (47%) admit that their company doesn’t use cloud computing with the remaining 29% conceding that they “don’t know” whether their organisation uses it or not.
Julian Buck, General Manager of Version One, says, “Although this is only a small survey of IT professionals, the results are nonetheless very alarming, especially as IT professionals are the very people that need to understand cloud computing so that they can explain its benefits to management.”
Buck continues, “It is clear from the survey results that there are a number of contrasting views as to what cloud computing really is, which is hardly surprising in light of the many different cloud computing definitions in the public arena. For instance, Wikipedia defines it as ‘Internet-based computing’ while Gartner refers to it ‘as a service’ using Internet technologies. IT expert, John Willis, writing in his cloud blog says that ‘virtualisation is the secret sauce of a cloud’ and provides different levels of cloud computing. With so many definitions circulating, clarity is urgently needed.”
Only 2% of respondents say that their company is “definitely” going to invest in cloud computing within the next twelve months whilst 30% state that their organisations “may” invest in this technology. 45% admit that they “don’t know” whether their organisations will be investing in it or not with the remaining 23% stating that they currently have no investment plans. For those who definitely or maybe have plans to invest in cloud computing, some of the key business drivers cited include reduction in overheads and paper, ease of use, cost savings and the ability to provide collaborative tools for teaching and learning.
Buck adds, “If organisations are going to embrace cloud computing in the future it’s essential that a single, simplified explanation is adopted by everyone. Failure to cut through the confusion could result in organisations rejecting this technology and missing out on the benefits it provides.”
This is a combination Wine and Wheels post. Gabriele got a new (to us, anyway) car, and in celebrating we discovered a fantastic Zinfandel.
First the car. There was only one thing wrong with the white Murano we purchased last year – the former owner had been a smoker. Despite some kind of treatment the dealer had given the car, it still smelled on hotter days. So with summer here, Gabriele was thinking about a new vehicle. Last week we went to the CarMax at WoodBridge looking for another Murano.
There was no Murano that fit the bill, and I suggested she test drive the FX35. It’s probably the sportiest SUV this side of a Porsche Cayenne, built on the same platform as Infiniti’s G35 sports sedan and coupe. She loved the power, features and handling, and just like that the FX was our new target vehicle.
CarMax made the experience very easy by giving us a great quote on our Murano. From there, is was just finding the right used FX, and our salesman Mazen had two candidates on the lot this Saturday for us to check out. A beautiful 2005 Grey/Silver with tan interior and only 19K miles was the winner, and we drove her home feeling good about the transaction.
We drove our new vehicle to Del Ray that night for dinner at Bombay Curry Company, one of our favorite Indian restaurants. (I recommend the Saag Goosh.) Mount Vernon Avenue was hopping with people and activity, it’s just incredible how that area has changed since I lived there in the mid-1990s.
The evening was just beautiful, and after dinner we stopped in Cheestique for some, you guessed it, cheese and wine. They have a few outside tables along the avenue and we snagged one of them. We actually found a blue cheese Gabriele likes, Cambozola, a cow-based cheese from Grermany. But the find of the night was the 2007 Hart’s Desire Zinfandel.
A glass was $16, and I asked the waitress if it was worth it. She confidently said yes, and brought me out a small taste. The wine was unlike any other Zinfandel I’ve had. It was very rich, almost chocolately and a bit creamy. It had none of the pepper and spice a lot of Zins have. It had a very unusual aroma — this will sound very weird, but it reminded me of tiki torch fuel. (Gabriele backed me up on this.) That sounds awful, but it wasn’t. The wine was fantastic with the cheese, and I’d recommend it highly.
All in all, a very productive summertime Saturday!
Nicole Burton – GSA’s Usability Specialist – uses this chart when she teaches courses on website usability. It’s based on user experience, showing how people scan a web screen. The red areas are the places their eyes go first; yellow areas second; and green areas third. If you want your web audience to pay attention to something, then, you should put it in the red area. My experience was mixed. I’ll give you a just a couple of examples.
On the EPA site, my pre-determined tasks were:
Good news. I did find a path to the answers for both. In a section called “My Environment,” I can type my zip code and get maps and other information about the environment in my area. I can “Pick 5 for the environment” or click on “Protect the Environment” and get clear and specific ideas for things I can do to help the environment. So EPA gets an A for letting me achieve my top tasks. But placement should be better. “Pick 5…” and “Protect the Environment” are in the red quadrant – but just barely. “My Environment” is in the lower left corner of the screen – in the green area (and my screen is set at 1680 X 1050, so I see more content in a screen than others may see).
A large rotating billboard graphic at the top of the screen takes up a lot of space. Might be better to shrink (or get rid of) that (annoying) feature and move the top tasks up. Still, I think EPA does a pretty good job.
On the Department of Interior site, I looked for a list or a map showing the national parks. Surely that would be a top task. I thought I’d hit a “bingo” right off the bat. First thing I see in the navigation column on the left is: How Do I…” and the first item is “Get a National Parks Pass.” OK – it’s not exactly a listing of parks, but I figured this could be a path to that list. Wrong. I came to a very wordy and long press release.
I looked through the rest of the topics in the left…webcams, For Teachers, For DOI Employees…I don’t see anything there for me. In fact, I don’t see anything in the first screen about national parks. So I started scrolling down. In the lower right of the second screen (and this home page is way too long - over 4 screens), I found a link to the National Park Service website. When I clicked on it, it went to an (annoying) pop-up that, indeed, did have a link to a map of parks. So I was eventually able to complete my task – but it took a lot of work. Further, I really wasn’t sure what Interior’s top tasks are, based on my review of the home page.
Oh top tasks, where art thou?
I’ve come to 3 conclusions.
One thing more…and it’s important. How you organize your website says a lot about your priorities. Many of the cabinet agency sites I reviewed use much of the “red zone” space on narrative, topics, or links that promote the agency or the administration, when most of the public comes to government websites looking for narrative, topics, or links that get them to the tasks they want to complete. Frankly, it’s annoying to have to wade through that organization-centric content when I just want to do what I want to do. I'll think better of you if you put my needs first.
Oh top tasks, where art thou?
Related Links
Top Task Management For Websites (Gerry McGovern)
Cross-posted at Cosmo.Sphere
One of the advantages of working in the ISS National Laboratory Office is that I get to support projects that actually fly in space. This morning, I got to sit with my Department of Defense counterparts on-console while astronaut Mike Barratt operated the SPHERES experiment.
We’re using the SPHERES free-flying satellites inside the Space Station to develop and test new algorithms for flying satellites in formation and autonomous rendezvous & docking procedures. As space gets more crowded and we endeavor to fly more commercial and government operations, this kind of knowledge will be increasingly important.
Watching on the live feed from the ISS as the SPHERES tumble and re-orient reminded me, yet again, why I got into this field and how important the work we do is. With every experiment, we are working to build a better future and advance humanity as a spacefaring species.
As the National Lab activities of the Station ramp up and we bring more and more commercial and government partners on-board, I am increasingly excited to see what the future will hold. From new propulsion systems to optical communications to space-based solar power to NIH research grants, we’re doing new and exciting things that can only be done in space.
When it comes to the Space Station, you ain’t seen nothin’ yet. 
<!
v\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
o\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
w\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
.shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
--> <!
st1\:*{behavior:url(#ieooui) }
--> <!
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0in;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";}
-->
Warning: This is an idea of how to meet our mission to explore space, bring enthusiasm to the general public all while helping expand the space market. Some of the ideas are based on things that are already developed. The depth to which this train of thought can take us is not complete and requires your input to get there.
What would it be like if you could control a spider-bot in Mars from your home computer? You could use it to explore Mars (or any other planet) as if you were actually there. Wouldn’t that be fun? I think so! That is why I think it would be awesome if NASA helped spearhead an initiative to create the infrastructure necessary so that one day any citizen could log on to their computer to explore space virtually.
Now I know some of you will think this is too expensive and it can’t be done. I disagree, and I think it can be profitable to our economy. NASA has already done a lot of work on spider-bots. This work can be leveraged to make it possible so that one day (not 100 years from now, but 10-20 years from now) we could easily choose to explore space virtually through the eyes of one of these spider-bots.
This post will go through the technological infrastructure that is necessary to make it feasible, and the method of developing the spider-bot to increase its versatility.
What is necessary?
The first thing that is necessary is the Satellite infrastructure so that the person in front of his computer can communicate with the spider-bot. This is critical, because if we do this right there is a high potential that industry will be able to use this work to expand space exploration beyond anything that is written in this post. That is why any Satellite infrastructure that is created must have the ability to have ultra-fast connections with earth. The satellite network must be able to communicate with earth instantly with high rates of data at any time. The satellite network must be flexible enough to be able to increase its bandwidth when and if industry demands it to be increased. (Hint: radiation issues that need to be considered on earth (for health reasons) don’t necessarily need to be considered in space where there is nothing there, so we can experiment more in space.)
The reason that creating a strong satellite/communications infrastructure in space is necessary is because it is more cost effective to explore space and also to build infrastructure for human space flight through the implementation of robotic technologies. In the future, companies won’t send humans to mine for resources, they will send robots. However, the ability to send robots is limited to whether they can communicate with these robots. Further, if we plan to have human exploration of Mars, it is prudent to send robots to build the infrastructure that humans will use. All this is becoming feasible/practical now that computer computation capability is nearing the capability dreamed about in science fiction. (Hint: Building this infrastructure is a high cost investment that will ultimately lower the operations cost of space exploration.)
The Dao of the Spider-bot
The spider-bot is cool because of the flexibility that it allows. You could easily add wheels to some of the legs and it becomes a car. You could make it walk on two legs (if you can figure this out) and it emulates a human with four hands (that is better than a robot that emulates a regular human). You could use four legs as a base and use two to build and work on things. Heck you could add another pair of legs and increase its versatility even more. Let us just say the spider-bot is pretty cool, because of the flexibility inherent in its design.
How do we develop the functionality of the spider-bot? The first step to developing the spider-bot is to develop the basic mechanics of the spider-bot so that it allows the most flexibility for upgrades in actuator technology and micro-controller technology (CPU). Once the basic mechanics is developed, the infrastructure should become open-source for all technologist enthusiast can hack the hardware to make it better than it was ever deemed possible. This should be further enhanced by creating a prototyping version of the spider-bot that can be sold in the free market for around $200-$500 bucks. This prototyping version would basically be a “toy” by the standards of NASA, but it would also be an inexpensive replica that amateurs could hack and improve on. Opening the infrastructure of the space spider-bot, with the double punch of creating a prototyping spider-bot would quicken the development of future generations of the spider-bot. Creating a prototyping spider-bot will also help create the economies of scale necessary to lower the costs of developing the spider-bot.
1st Generation Spider-bot
The first generation spider-bot would not necessarily ever launch. The first prototyping spider-bot would likely be the “development” model. We could use the App model made famous by Apple, so that developers can work off of the “development” model to do mundane tasks in your home or any other cool thing that would provide incentives for developers to work on the spider-bot.
2nd Generation Spider-bot
By creating a market of development in the work that NASA is doing, we have a lot of infrastructure to work off of. We can use that work to create an inherently more flexible and robust spider-bot. Darwin had his fun with the 1st generation and the 2nd generation is that much better for it. Now this is going to be the version that will likely be ready for prime time.
Moving Forward
Once the satellite/communications infrastructure is developed and the spider-bot development is advanced enough. Companies will find ways to leverage these technologies to open the market of space exploration. First, as stated previously they will send robots to mine for goods, or maybe it will just be a company that caters to giving “the space experience” to enthusiasts on earth. Then eventually the technology will develop enough so that I or you can log on to our computers to control our own robot so that we can make it do what we want it to do. (I am an optimist, I know, but that is cool!)
Last July I wrote about a serious security flaw in the domain name system (DNS). It was discovered by researcher Dan Kaminsky and got a lot of coverage: It’s Tuesday — Must be Time to Fix DNS
There was two parts to the DNS vulnerability that quickly became known as the Kaminsky flaw. One was related to poor port number randomization, making it easier for criminal elements to hijack DNS queries and redirect them to fraudulent sites. That problem could be addressed with a software patch, and most of the coverage last year focused on the concerted efforts made by companies like Microsoft, Sun, Cisco and many others to distribute the patches.
But there was another part to the flaw that could not be patched, since it was fundamental to the DNS protocol itself. Internet consumers are still at risk of being redirected through something called cache poisoning, which fools a DNS server into thinking a fraudulent site is authentic. Until recently there was little public acknowledgement of this happening, because most companies are loathe to discuss security breaches.
But in April there was a major breach of a Brazilian IPS Virtua and one of its big customers, the Brazilian back Bradesco. Here’s coverage of the incident from the The Register.
Last week my client NeuStar announced Cache Defender, a way for ISPs to protect their customers from this fundamental Internet vulnerability. ISPs can deploy this solution to create a secure DNS link between their customers and the domains NeuStar is authoritative for, including some of the largest Internet brands such as Amazon, Advertising.com, Oracle and Zappos. Cache Defender is designed to be an interim solution until DNSSEC, a more secure version of DNS can be implemented by the global Internet community.
Here’s some coverage of the announcement:
I’ve worked on DNS issues previously in my career, so this news was very exciting and fun to promote. If you’d like to know more, check out a discussion going on over at CircleID, a top online forum for Internet infrastructure discussions. Not surprisingly, some negative comments about Cache Defender are coming from NeuStar competitors. But the company already has one announced ISP deployment, with more in the works.
DNSSEC is no doubt the definitive answer, but probably won’t be widely deployed until 2011 for a number of technical and political reasons. Until then, Cache Defender is an excellent way for ISPs to show they are doing all they can to protect their customers.
Participatory Exploration. Frednet. Lunar Boom Town. Open Luna.
These all deal with the concept that we are trying to take the brainpower of the interested public and use it to solve the technical, political, and business problems that confront our efforts to expand into space. Consider a tool that can facilitate this.
Look at Wikipedia. According to last year’s annual report (check it out in your spare time, Nick,) there were “approximately 100,000 active editors (defined as users who made more than 5 changes in the last month).” 100,000! That’s a huge number of people!
With the 11 million articles on Wikipedia, you can be sure that many of these editors are fueled to participate in a wide range of articles by the synergistic combination of articles that they can work on. In other words, editing in Wikipedia gets “sticky” (Check the definitions at the bottom)
So here is the point. Crowd Sourcing is good. Better Crowd Sourcing is better. Better Crowd Sourcing can be had by implementing a dedicated web based methodical structure that fosters and requires attention to the essential questions of systems design.
So I am hatching this idea for something that could be a Wikimedia project, specifically for designing things. It would work a bit like this:
You come to the wiki design sight and tell it that you want to start a new design. It asks you some basic questions like what your primary objective of need is, what kind of system it is (Vehicle, building, processing machine, etc.), Does it require data processing, etc.
The site shepherds your thoughts into a rudimentary top level systems architecture framework by asking you questions like: what does it do? And how might it do that?
It gives you some templates for functional and physical breakdowns, templates with high level headings for a system specification document, and you, the user get as detailed or a vague as you want at this point.
So then your site is live and anyone can come in and populate the content, like with Wikipedia, but unlike Wikipedia, some powerful organizing tools and templates are integrated with the content.
Some of the possible features:
The idea is that most people don’t know beans about systems engineering, requirements, or interfaces. Design by committee, forum posting, voting, or by blind feel with no knowledge or application of systems engineering is not an effective method of harnessing the domain knowledge that many people do have.
So who is with me? Let’s storm the Wikimedia foundation and get them to put this thing online so that we can go about the business of designing space vehicles in style!
var sc_project=4846085;
var sc_invisible=1;
var sc_partition=56;
var sc_click_stat=1;
var sc_security="cb020573";
<div
class="statcounter"><a title="web counter"
href="http://www.statcounter.com/" target="_blank"><img
class="statcounter"
src="http://c.statcounter.com/4846085/0/cb020573/1/"
alt="web counter" >
