Open source code!

---

Should we make Wildcat! open source?

I often wonder if we should go in this direction. I think for new start ups it might work, not sure for established companies with branded products and a large loyal customer base. Going open source can hurt your customer base who have stuck with a company expecting high quality product support and stability.

Does this imply products based on Open Source isn't stable or of high quality?

No, not really. But if you go by many examples in the market place of open source based products, you really never know what versions or trunks or custom changes are being used when customers generally discuss the brand - such as Wildcat!, the brand.

But I do also see where there might be some open source advantages for Wildcat!, especially on the hosting components that help create all the various hosting clients, such as the web server, ftp server, telnet server, etc.

If you have any comments about this, please do chime in. And no, please don't say you would like to see us do open source because others are doing it. In fact, I believe you are seeing those companies or people who started as open source, and now established with 3-5 years in the market, are starting to go more proprietary then you think - just look at the new GPL 3.0 licensing debates.

Web 2.0 Achilles Heel

---

Web 2.0 is the hottest fad right now. Web 2.0 is basically using Javascript to add some interactive and dynamic content to your web pages. This is done by a method called AJAX (Asynchronous Javascript And XML).

Web 2.0 is being used in the most intrusive ways, such as dynamic popups by moving your mouse over part of the screen. You don't need to click the mouse. Just move the mouse over word, phrase or object and you are being monitored and clocked for web personalization. Ads and videos are literallly being pushed down your throat.

The problem is that businesses are becoming far too dependent on AJAX.

Since users have the power to turn off Javascript in thier web browsers, disabled AJAX will quickly kill many of these new web sites that based their presence, operation and business on Javascript. Try it yourself. Disable JavaScript in your browser and watch how most of the ads, video and popups disappear. It will actually make your web surfing faster.

Could this be the reason to explain the movement by many web development tools vendors are now beginning make users download frontends?

This use to be way things were done, such as with our Wildcat! Navigator. The irony is that we are looking towards making a Web 2.0 version of WcNavigators, others are looking to making a "navigator" of their own.

The point is simple - unless the browser makers remove the option to allow users to disable javascript, businesses ought to think long and hard before creating a web site that is strictly Web 2.0 based - you might find users are so annoyed but the abuse of Web 2.0 they will begin to turn it off or worst, an Anti-Ajax market will emerge.

How to speed up and help secure your Web Surfing

---

Psst? You want to speed up your web surfing without all the baloney,
Advertising, Popups, and also help secure your privacy?

Simple!

Turn off JavaScript! Turn off Cookie Support!

Unless you desperately need it, you should avoid any web site that
demands these to be enabled.

Internet Video and Ads

---

Maybe it just a current interest, but I will say for the month of April, I've probably watch more video delivered via the Internet, then delivered via your typical TV.

I could say that maybe the main reason for that was that I received as a birthday present a subscription to MLB.COM Baseball games via the Internet. I'm finally able to see my favorite New York Mets and Yankees once again! I watched the Yanks beat Boston 3-1 today, and I'm now watching the Mets vs National, no score top of the 6th!

But like most people, YouTube phenomenon has proved that people are interesting in sharing not just words, but video. All the major networks have joined to show their shows via the Internet. Who needs TIVO? I can turn on Leno on TV and watch the highlights of David Letterman the next day or vice-versa. I can now watch all the TV news like at NBC.COM or MSNBC.COM, or even watch PBS "FrontLine" shows via the Internet!

This is all great, but there two concerns:

1) There is no standard. There need to be a standard for Internet Video viewing. We have FLASH or Windows Media Player, and others are coming out that will attempt to lock down consumers.

2) The FRIGGING Ads!!! They are SO in your FACE!! With TV, you can at least switch channels. But now the the established networks and providers are getting involved, some are showing ads for each video. Some like AOL TV, are actually breaking into the middle of a viewing to interrupt you with a stupid frigging AD!

But the MONEY is too big. Nothing is going to change this and forget the idea that if you pay for a service, you won't see any ADs! That is how CABLE TV started - A paid service with no ADS - which today not only you are paying for CABLE TV, you are blasted with ADS left, right and center, and WORST, they are now taking 10% or more of your screen! Why are people accepting this?

On the bright side, Internet video ads allows for the first time high reliable DIRECT Marketing campaigns. If they did that, at the very least, I think people will accept "items of interest" and not the general annoying "broadcast to all" junk ads!

Got Stupid?

See this article about a new US government survey found no link between intelligence and wealth. Geez, maybe I've been too smart for my own good. God any stupid pills?

Jokes to the side, it basically means that if you find something you like, regardless of intelligence, if you are lucky and your are at the right time and place, and you the first to do it or do it better than the next guy, you can become pretty successful at almost anything.

Of course, lady luck also factors into our lives (see Dell, Gates, Jobs). So there is probably nothing but a bunch of stupid cliches in this article and what I am blabbing here.

But you see, this is my problem - I'm trying to be too smart about all this when there is really no magic formula or insight, or nothing to flip out about this stupid article. The best thing I should do right now is just shut up and be stupid!

Got stupid?

Exposing the Wildcat! API with REST

Lately, I've been hearing more or seeing references to something called REST in relationship to WEB 2.0, a buzz word for creating Web Services using HTML and Asynchronous Javascript (AJAX).

Like most of the near daily supply of the "next best thing," I just blew off REST as just another hyped up buzz word, and worst, another way to "connect" you to someone's new web service offering, i.e, Google's new "web service" of the day! Gawd, these guys are inventing something old as new every friggin day. But I guess when you got everyone using their favorite search tool, it opens the door to all kinds of "connectivity" potential - that is what scaring Microsoft to frigging death! They (Microsoft) are slowly and surely losing the developer mindset to folks like Google and Adobe with its nearly 90% Flash coverage.

Well, just a moment ago, I finally found out what REST with a very straight forward reading for its genesis.

What's funny is that I found myself being both pissed off and yet, extremly very happy that I now know what the "buzz" is all about with REST. Don't get me wrong, being both pissed off, yet happy are very positive feelings as I will explain.

Why pissed off?

Well, let me explain why I am happy about REST!

I'm happy because we can actually use REST with Wildcat! API system just like many companies are beginning to use it, and do so almost immediately.

So why am I pissed off?

Because for the longest of time, we were stuck in this time warp of having a very powerful API client/server development system. Wildcat! is one of the original systems that put integrated services together and it has a powerful API supporting all the major languages. But we were watching an industry move on to a non RPC/DCOM method called SOAP which is just XML on steroids. SOAP was a different way of defining your "API" and using them to create Web Services.

I had planned to incorporate SOAP but I found it difficult with this XML thing. I also ran into the problem of how do expose the Wildcat! API. A converter was attempted but never finished. I had some early SOAP/XML examples of Wildcat to allowed you to dynamically display your mail and file conferences without redisplaying the web page.

But it was never done, finished probably because it was too complex, and we didn't have the resources to hire a SOAP/XML to convert our API. In some way, we just didn't need it yet.

So what I did over the last 7 years, where it applied, I used a "fake version of SOAP" without the XML baloney for input, but maybe created XML output by simply using an URL with arguments.

A good example is our Wildcat! Sender Authentication Protocol where we developed an WCX (compiled Wildcat BASIC application) to authenticate SMTP based parameters.

You can run WCSAP in terminal mode from a command line:

wcrun -run html-wcsap?
cip=ip_address&
from=return_path&
cdn=client_domain

or you can run it with a HTTP URL

http://wildcat_site_domain/public/code/html-wcsap?
cip=ip_address&
from=return_path&
cdn=client_domain

To see a example of this WCSAP web service protocol in action, click this wcsap test site.

So why am I pissed?

Because REST is exactly what we did with WCSAP!!

As it turns out, Santronics wasn't the only company with a powerful client/server API framework and suffered like other companies in not exposing our API using the very complex SOAP model. Now you are seeing all these companies, such as Yahoo, Ebay, Google, Microsoft and others beginning to expose their legacy API using the more simplistic REST model to create new Web Services.

In short, I have been using REST like ideas all along since at least 2001, and felt bad that I wasn't with the SOAP crowd by not implementiong it with Wildcat! over these many years.

So I am pissed and very happy to know that we can use this REST idea for Wildcat! because we were been doing it already - The "Web Service" applications like WCSAP is a class example of what REST is all about!

The Wildcat! API is unlike anything else in this world. I truly believe that. But I felt that we were quickly falling behind but not keeping up with the Jones.

With REST, Wildcat! will be revitalize. We will be able to once again, with confidence, market the powerful Wildcat! system and its unique API system, its unique social and intranet networking features, and do so without any quilt that its old technology.

Stay tune... There is more to come into this area with REST and how it will be used to revitalize the Wildcat! brand name.

Java on Guice!

Oh brother! Google, you doing a great job, but re-inventing ideas and giving them new names like "Java On Guice" is no substitute grabbing concept prior-art technology that at least 20 years and claiming you invented it!

What I am talking about?

Well, Wildcat! is already a multiple device system. You can write application code once, create "display adapters" with each client already knowing its dependencies, and the application is usable for each type of device, interface and presentation.

This wildcat! BASIC code:

PRINT "HELLO WORLD"

is usable for any kind of DEVICE depending on the client that runs it!

You call this "Java on Guice - Dependency-Injection Framework!"? What, did you just wake up understanding your your billion dollar business is strictly WEB base and know realize there are other forms of output? Like Text? DUH!

Give me a break GOOGLE!

WEB Personalization

In recent days, I have pondered the questions; How much is too much when it comes to people posting their inner thoughts, opinions, comments, their daily lives on the web? Where do you draw the line between what should be keep secret, what should be shared? What motivates people to do this? Why I am here asking these questions?

For a company person, what are the legal issues involved? I remember in the old days where an employee posting, writing or sharing information outside the firm might get the person in trouble for breaching the company's NDA. I know, as CTO/CEO of Santronic, I would have concerns and a hard time with the idea an employee was getting too loose with external activities discussing and directly or even indirectly giving away company technologies, ideas, trade secrets, concepts and strategies.

But it seems a growing amount of corporations are now begining or planning to do this - be more open with their inner workings. I wonder what is the legal framework for allowing this to occur in corporations, especially large ones with thousands, per haps hundreds of thounds of employees.

There is so much sharing in the web, whether its of private or public nature. For myself, a person who was an early pioneer in the telecommunications and cyberspace market explosion since the 80's, ironically, I find myself far behind in what seems to be a unstopping growth of blogging and in the technology of "Network Sharing."

With our Wildcat Interactive Net Server (WINSERVER), how much do I talk about? Do I share my strategic thoughts and plans for the future? Do I share it with others so that they might share their thoughts and provide comments with to improve Wildcat!? What about Open Source? Should we make WINSERVER open source?

For the most part, the reason I am doing a blog is because I do have a lot to say, not just about Wildcat!, but about the direction of the Internet, the world in general. I find myself needing to get my own voice more out there.

Right now, the blog is pretty much private site. I haven't published or advertised this blog, so of course, this will be my little private haven for now. Maybe I am just using blogger.com to learn from it so we can add blogging capabilities to Wildcat!. Its backend infrastructure is already there - what is missing is the fancy interface.

Anyway, I'm here and if you find me, go ahead and share your thoughts with me.

Sincerely,

Hector Santos, CTO
Santronics Software, Inc.

A day late, 3300 soldiers short

Yesterday, I watched Bill Moyer's PBS episode "Buying the war."

Duh! Everyone knew this moronic war was based on incredible lies. Everyone knew wayyyyyyyy before Bush became President, he and his compadres had their sight on the liquid gold - the Iraqi Oil!

So what is learned from this Moyer's documentary?

NOTHING! NADA!, KAPULTZ, ZILCH! Its a day late, and now we are over 3300 soldiers short!

Now here is the real story - THE MISSING EMAIL!

Two Dangerous Industry Patterns

In my line of work, there are clearly two key concerns or on-going industry patterns that will affects all of us - the world:

• Disruption in electronic mail operations and integrity, and
• Unsolicited P2P networking

The first one has to do with how the email industry is slowly but surely moving towards stronger authentication methods and the growth of lower reliability of email delivery. If you write something, you really can not guaranteed it will be delivered any more. While this practice can be justified, the end result is that people are left with the idea that censorship is prospering.

The second has to do with the idea of how we are more and more "connected" to each other. In the past, remote systems or user had no right to enter your property or computer or use your system as a vehicle for unsolicited communications. This is changing in the name of security and network and social connectivity.

What you are seeing if a shift towards (what is currently an illegal concept) where vendors believe it is their right to a) enter your computer, b) monitor your computer usage, c) control the licensing and d) to deliver unsolicited content (advertising and direct marketing).

In fact, Microsoft believes it is their "right" to be able to do this and they are using their Live .NET strategy to show what they can do. The problem is that once you open the door and allow this to happen, the begin to go further and further into the privacy domain - which again, push comes to shove, is currently an illegal activity.

But who is going to sue Microsoft? Me? You? Is there going to be anyone who is going to take the lead to fight the Microsofts from changing the rules and the laws to allow them to control your computer?

Well if no one speaks up, soon enough, if not already, it is going to be too late - Microsoft will claim it is too late - the technology is already embedded in their new Vista operating system and it is too late to remove it.

Fake Steve

Man, for the longest I thought Steve Jobs was frigging greedy a-hole!
Well, I just finishing reading his blog from the beginning and I think
the mo-fo is KING!! The guy even has gotten me frigging cursing now
like he does!! Sweet!! Keep it real Steve!!

Web 2.0 and Interactive Systems

I've always felt that as the web interface improved, vendors, web sites and "people" will begin to demand more interactive I/O with the end users.

At first, I felt that the need to download special frontends will be required and hence this would slow down the moment - it will be really stupid if you had to download a special frontend from everyone.

With HTML + JavaScript and other things like Flash, lump together as WEB 2.0, the need to download frontends has been less and less. WEB 2.0 sites exploded in the year or so, and the greater speed of computers and higher bandwidths, interactive sites has become very useful and usable.

But guess what?

Now you are seeing vendors requiring you to download special frontends! Microsoft has its LIVE plans, Adobe has its Apollo flash, Google has its download agents, like Google Desktop, Google Earth, Yahoo is the same game, and with the video explosion, new you are beginning to see new ventures that will require new special downloads!!

For video, it seems the fight for consumer mindset be Microsoft (Media Player) vs Adobe (Flash) vs Apple (QuickTime). Could you imagine having to have three TV Cable Boxes, one for each vendor just to watch TV? Someone has to grab this and create a universal standard here.

New SMTP standards

It seems like we are making major progress towards a new SMTP 2821 standard. There was some input I provided which was rejected, but it turned out to help clarify and codify some broken code in practice that now makes them officially compliant - how nice!

I MISSED IMUS

Now that we have a new right-wing nut job replacing IMUS, I finally
realized how much I miss the bastard!

Bring IMUS BACK!

Is DKIM safe without a strong policy framework?

DKIM (Domain Keys Identified Mail) seems to be on the road to IETF standardization at a rapid pace. For the first time in 20 years, I sense a rare wide industry interest to incorporate this new technology to help address the major problem of spam.

But at what expense? Will it work?

Anyone with a good engineering conscious will tell you DKIM is an unprotected digital signature protocol which lacks signature authorization consideration.

To highlight the concerns, I've written an IETF draft called DSAP (DKIM Signature Authorization Protocol) showing the major security problems related to the unprotected nature of the DKIM protocol and how the most obvious of the DKIM loopholes in the protocol can be addressed using an extremely easy to implement and strong email DKIM signature authorization policy framework.

I don't wish to excuse the fine people involved putting together the DKIM protocol and pushing it thru the IETF RFC standardization process of acting in bad faith, but there are far too many involved with a direct or indirect conflict of interest in the promotion of new Reputation Business services who see a strong email signature policy framework competing with these new business ventures. To see in action the seriousness of the DKIM problems be pushed back or aside, is both shocking and surreal.

When a message comes in, the DKIM verification process will have some fundamental questions to ask:

• Does the domain ever distribute mail?
• Does the domain expect the mail to be unsigned?
• Does the domain expect the mall to be sign?
• Is the domain the exclusive signer?
• Are 3rd party signers allowed by the domain?
  
• Are 3rd party signers allowed to strip original domain signatures?

These are basic questions that are ignored by the unprotected insecured DKIM protocol

It remains to be seen to how DKIM will play out, but there is no doubt in my mind, DKIM can create more harm than good if it is unleashed in its pure unprotected DKIM base form, a form special interest will require a "Batteries Required" Reputation Services trust layers will be expected to help protect its designs flaws.

- Hector

Microsoft Patents Prior Art "Local DLL/COM File" usage concept

This is ridiculous. Microsoft has just patented the idea of having a local DLL in a directory and it be used first over another in a path directory.

Here is the patent:

1

6,976,037

Method and systems for DLL/COM redirection

Methods, systems and data structure are described for implementing local isolated DLL and/or COM components. A version of a shared component is stored in a local directory with an application that uses that particular version. Another version of the shared component exists on the system and is useable by any number of other computer programs. A local file is created in the local directory that indicates the presence of an isolated version of the shared component. When the application calls the shared component, the system uses the isolated version of the shared component stored locally with the application program. Thus, specific versions of components may be provided to a calling application without making any code changes to the calling application or to the Component to which the calling application is bound.

Wonderful!

Developers been been doing this FOR YEARS! We been doing this since atleast 1996!! We don't store our DLLS in the SYSTEM directory. Its all maintained in a LOCAL installed directory.

Suddenly Microsoft is now developing more "Application" software that is wants to KEEP out of their Windows OS directory structure and THEY GET THE BRIGHT IDEA that keeping a DLL in a local directory to override the system dlls is now PATENTABLE!!!

Here's the scoop:

The Win32 API function, LoadLibrary(), always used the the logic is checking the Local Directory first. See MSDN help for this function to see the order listed.

However, if the loaded DLL has a dependency that is in another directory and it needs to LOAD a DLL, then it no longer checks the Local directory first. In other words, the secondary DLL loading is based on the parent DLL location.

This presented barriers to having local testing of DLLs if you happening to have a copy in another directory.

LoadLibrary() always used the the logic is checking the Local Directory first. See MSDN help for this function to see the order listed. However, if the loaded DLL has a dependency thats in another directory and it needs to LOAD a DLL, then it no longer checks the Local directory first.

This was solved with the LoadLibraryEx() function with its ALTERNATE PATH SEARCH strategy.

Apparently, Microsoft decided to patent this alternate path search logic.

Yet another language!

Lets see? Sometime around 1974 I learned my first language FORTRAN. Over the course of the next thirty plus years, I had learned over nearly twenty different computer languages on over fifteen difference machines and operating systems.

However, I recall the critical and key point in my programming life when I realized my linguistic lust for computer languages was really making my life overly complex. Even though I have developed a keen sense of general software engineering, switching your brain from one language mindset to another was getting pretty tiresome.

So I decided very early on to concentrate on just a few principal languages and built my future and company products around them. The languages were C/C++, BASIC and Delphi (only because I had an early product based on Pascal) and when required, ASM. For the most part, today, C/C++ and BASIC are my primary languages. I don't think BASIC will every leave this earth. Marketing always seems to prevail showing that BASIC is the status quo mass langauge for the "common" person. I think Microsoft learned this lesson several times over.

I know I am a few years late (by design) but I finally took the plunge to find out what this C# language and .NET environment was all about. I downloaded VS 2005 C++ Express Edition.

Wow! Its hard (and too much) to describe, but this is a whole new environment!

I believe it is not for my age group! I don't think I want to spend the precise time and energy to learn the "ins and out" of a whole new language and framework. To be a great programmer or "craftman of a tool", you have to roll up your sleeves and simply put the time in. Learn thru faults, trial and error and well as success.

Maybe I am just feeling the age. Maybe I am just falling victim to all the hype; I certainly don't need C# and .NET to continue with my career. Maybe we have just allowed Microsoft to once again change the "standards." They are known to do such things, you know?

I don't care how many layers one adds to a development environment. It still takes time to learn it. This has raised a question for me. Is there truly a new mentality of thinkers and new breed computer programmers who see the new language and framework as a natural environment for them? I guess the question may also be: What was wrong with C/C++ object oriented programming? Was it still too hard for the masses?

In the PC world, Visual Basic and Delphi opened the door to event driven GUI programming abd Component Engineering. Remember Dan's Brinklin's DEMO program? I attributed this popular early "modeling" tool for the masses as the early prototyping system. Add a real language behind it and you get your VB and Delphi.

With the new Visual Studio 2005 IDE, you can see how it touches base with VB and Delphi. They had a direct influence in the new framework now owned by Microsoft. In fact, Delphi's original architect was hired away from Borland a few years back and guess we are finally seeing the fruition of this man's work for Microsoft.

Is Microsoft opening Pandora's Box with unsolicited networking?

Recently, Microsoft released Visual Studio 2005 and now offers free stripped down Express Editions for everyone to download. The free offering ends sometime next year and its an excellent way to explore the next system.

I downloaded the C++ Express Edition (EE) to get a look and feel of the package. It reminded me of the powerful Delphi IDE framework with its easy GUI designers, but in new, nice visual colors and pop up windows that seem to come from all angles! At one point I must of had altleast 100 windows opened, sliding left, right, up and down in the IDE!

However, the most striking feature is the entire framework designed around external communications with Microsoft MSDN Online and the outside internet world. It is an OPT-OUT feature. The entire help system, the search system, the integration with other web sites called CodeZone, is built-in right out the box and they don't make it easy to turn off. Even then, after turning it off, I wasn't confident it wasn't still going out the internet sending or collecting information. I got so paraniod that I know disconnect my internet connection every time I start the Visual Studio Editor.

The issue of Security vs Privacy sparks many debates. My concern is not so much with Microsoft, but with everyone else jumping on board and doing the same type of activity.

Microsoft has opened Pandora's Box.

HLS

Telco exec wants ISPs to charge for download prioritization!

Yesterday, I read in the Washington Post, the following:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/11/30/AR2005113002109.html

What does this mean?

Well, the way I see it, it means that if you search for something via the bellsouth.net channels and network, they can begin to CAP the bandwidth or even FILTER the results depending on who are you searching.

This would be a whole new business model and paradigm for the search industry. If the TELCO gets it way, then the search industry will begin to charge for their services. There is already talk about this. Would you pay $5 per month to Google to use their search system?

I always said if this was to happen, then a new "No Frills" google-like free search site will emerge and I believe Google knows this and are deafly afraid of the next "No Frills" search site. That is why it hasn't happen yet.

However, with the Telco's like BS, now wanting to get into this new business model, they can control the freebies versus the fee-based search results via domain based capping, bandwidth and filter controls. Slower for freebie site, normal/faster for fee-based search site that
has a contract with BellSouth.

Wonderful!

HLS