Kill It With Fire! How Facebook is Assimilating and Destroying the Internet
It began as a trickle. An email from Windows Live on behalf of my friend Tricia. An hour later three more arrive from something called Flixter on behalf of three other friends who signed up for whatever it is the site has to offer. As more websites adapt the new Facebook for Website's interface in a grab for a slice of their 300 million users, Facebook will quickly become the glue that holds the Web together. And that's not a good thing.
The Thing About Glue Is...
Dan Yoder at rocket.ly already outlined 10 Reasons You Should Stop Using Facebook, but let me break it down for you. Facebook is not a responsible steward of your private information and online relationships. As I said, Facebook aims to be the glue that holds the Web together. But glue--like many building materials--contains formaldehyde, a known respiratory irritant and carcinogen. In other words it rots your guts from the inside out. Facebook seems to be doing the same to the Web.
If you stay logged into Facebook, any website that implements the new Facebook for Websites API can communicate back to Facebook and perform various actions on your behalf including but not limited to: posting to your wall, and emailing your friends on your behalf. That's email, not Facebook messages which is an important distinction, especially considering the stringent email archiving requirements of today's businesses and corporations. In other words, Facebook and other websites are now sending me emails I have absolutely no control over, and because I work at a school those emails are becoming part of public record.
The Repercussions
I've long accepted that anything I do on a social network is public knowledge. If you don't want it to be public, then don't post it online. This is the law of the land when it comes to Facebook, but do you accept those same conditions for every other website that you visit?
Do you want your coworkers to see a stream of wall posts on your behalf throughout the workday?
Do I want everyone knowing what I rented from Netflix?
For the sake of argument, lets say you're a closeted atheist/democrat/homosexual/whatever your parents hate. A stream of your Internet activity would almost certainly out you, were the sites you visit and the news you read to be posted to Facebook. How would you feel if Facebook came out of the closet for you? Perhaps angry, perhaps liberated, perhaps thirsty for a lawsuit.
The Internet was never supposed to work like this. Cookies, the technology that websites use to store data about you as you surf, are "sandboxed" for a reason. That is, a website can only read cookies that that website has created. It's both a safety precaution and a barrier to innovation. Facebook has breached that barrier and in the process torn that safety net wide open.
What to Do?
Perhaps I'm alone in my reasonable expectation of privacy. Perhaps not. But unless something changes, I will be deleting my Facebook account and I won't be looking back. If you are concerned with privacy and how Facebook uses what used to be personal information about you and your personal relationships, I urge you to do the same.
Going 64-Bit, Revisited
In my last post I expressed my frustration with HP's lack of 32-bit OS support on a laptop purchased by one of my clients. I received some constructive criticism on that post that I think deserves special attention.
ArunHorne Expands my Vocabulary: "Luddism!"
A user name ArunHorne on Dzone made the following comment:
If you are arguing that manufacturers should not have switched to 64-bit operating systems this is Luddism to the extreme. If you really need to use a 32-bit OS you could always try something like VMWare to run legacy software.
My post wasn't intended as a rant against 64-bit technology. Obviously my style of writing needs some adjustment because I didn't get the point across that I was trying to make. I did try to make it clear that I was talking specifically about the lack of 64-bit support for software and devices used in niche markets such as that of my customer, a hearing specialist.
I'm all for moving ahead with 64-bit architecture, and I don't think I made a case against it in my article. I simply live in a reality where I (and my customers) cannot embrace the 64-bit revolution. My complaint was that HP has locked us in to using a 64-bit operating system on a laptop that should have no problem supporting a 32-bit OS.
JP Says: We Got Exactly What We Paid For
A reader named JP made the following comment:
So, the technology should not evolve because there are some legacy applications out there? If the laptop had windows vista 64 bit as advertised (and they DO advertise it), it is a well known fact that you won’t have 16 bit support. Its not like there aren’t any laptops with xp or vista 32 bit. So, if someone made an ignorant choice, now is the manufacturer’s fault?
Btw most of these issues can easily be solved using vmware, virtualbox or something like it. If the laptop’s cpu has VT support, a vm will be a lot faster than a 4 or 5 year-old computer.
Should Legacy Applications Hold Back Technology?
Certainly not. However on behalf of my clients and as the person who supports them I have to ask: how is this our choice? Again my complaint was never with changing technology, it was with the fact that HP was locking us in to a 64-bit operating system when many industries have yet to adopt it.
The Customer Knowingly Bought 64-Bit
JP makes a good point: the OS that an OEM system runs is advertised in it's description and so we can't plead false advertising regarding the purchase.
Had the client asked me to select a laptop for them this system would have been red-flagged and there never would have been an issue. Unfortunately I can't stop anyone from making a bad purchase if they don't ask for my advice ahead of time; I can only help remedy the situation after the fact.
Again, HP said they would not support the laptop if we installed a 32-bit OS (which the hardware supports). Why should installing an operating system 100% compatible with the hardware I'm installing it on to void my warranty? Fans of Linux and other open source operating systems should be very scared of this line of thinking.
Another point to be made is that 64-bit versus 32-bit means nothing to the average consumer unless they have memories of the video game console wars where we all just assumed that "more bits is better." Even if my client had read "Vista Home Basic 64-Bit Edition" they wouldn't have had a clue what it meant.
Virtualization as a Solution
JP as well as other users posed virtualization as a solution to this issue. It was noted that I could easily use VMWare, VirtualBox or VirtualPC to run a 32-bit OS on top of the 64-bit operating system. Taking only the technology involved into consideration this is certainly one possible solution, however there are other factors involved.
The first kink in this plan is that my clients are not technically inclined individuals and don't have full or even part-time IT support. I come around about once a month to help with IT issues, so adding the (what we might consider minimal) complexity of virtualization software and a second operating system on top of a technology they already find a little confusing isn't a viable option for either one of us.
The second issue is that, from my understanding of Microsoft's EULA, they'd have to pay for a second Windows license to run the OS under the virtual machine. I'm against this simply on the principle that I don't think someone should have to pay for a second operating system just to make their computer work the way that it needs to.
Third and possibly most important issue is that I'm not sure how well any virtualization technology will support their hardware. I have a fair amount of experience with VirtualBox and VirtualPC but not VMWare. Though both programs seem to support serial and some USB communications, I required flawless USB support as well as Bluetooth, which I'm not sure that either one supports. I know someone will feel free to correct me if that's not the case.
Gene: You Made a Bad Purchase, Deal With It!
Gene writes,
Sounds like he just bought a laptop that wasn’t suited to the task. Would you have blamed HP if the user’s software was all Linux-based? The first step in buying hardware is making sure it will support the software you need it for.
I completely agree with Gene. It was a poorly thought-out purchase and we shouldn't hold it against HP that my customer bought a laptop incapable of doing what we wanted it to do. In the future I'll encourage (or insist) my clients include me in all computer purchasing decisions so we avoid this type of complication.
KL Says: Your Story Sucks!
A reader named KL says,
Sorry, but this is a terrible story for the title. I thought it was going to be an analysis of the state of 64 bit systems, etc, etc. But it’s a story about someone purchasing (most likely accidentally) a 64-bit computer, and you (the author) are saying it’s the manufacturers fault? This article has little relevance to 64-bit architecture.
It’s like saying a man went in to buy a Diet Coke, but instead walked out with a regular Coke. Is Coke jumping the gun and adding sugar unnecessarily?
The Problem is, it's My Story KL!
All I have to say is this: who writes this blog? Me, and not you? Because if this were my blog I'd tell you that I wrote exactly what I advertised in the title and description. Remember the description? The one that said "If you intend to run niche software or devices, think twice before switching to a 64-bit operating system?" Remember how I then wrote about switching to a 64-bit OS to run niche industry software and devices? Remember how I then wrote about how that failed? Yeah, I don't remember that either. Just kidding KL. I kid because I care.
All ball-bustery aside, there isn't much I can do about the fact that KL wanted to read about something else, other than point him in a different direction.
Diet Coke Analogy
Ignoring the distinct possibility that KL is a Coke employee hired to keyword stuff their brand into other people's websites, the analogy still doesn't make sense to me. I'm not buying a can of Coke. I'm buying an expensive piece of hardware that is, technically speaking, is completely capable of running the software and devices that I need it to run. Yet the manufacturer is telling me that I cannot. Elaborating on KL's analogy, it's more like Mack Truck telling Coke that the warranty on their 18-wheelers are void because they hauled Diet Coke, when they clearly marked the truck with regular Coke branding.
I admit this analogy makes even less sense. But I entertained myself for at least three minutes while thinking of it, so I consider it a great success.
Bubak: Did You Even Try to Make This Work?
Finally, a reader named Bubak writes:
Did you actually __tryed__ installing those apps? 32 bit emulation is very good and it may work fine.
Also upgrade to Windows 7 may be cheep solution.
I tried knowing that I was going to fail. It is absolutely correct to say that the 64-bit editions of both Windows XP and Vista have impeccable 32-bit software support. I've been running 64-bit operating systems exclusively both at home and at the office for about two years now without a single software issue. Drivers, however, are a different story entirely.
Without exception you cannot install a 32-bit driver on a 64-bit version of Windows, and so you are at the mercy of your hardware manufacturers (or a clever, reverse-engineering third party) to release a 64-bit driver. Windows 7 has some features that will solve backwards compatibility issues with software designed for older versions of Windows, but I don't think it has any solutions that bridge the gap between architectures.
Other Affected Industries
Though the client I was discussing works in the hearing aide sales and testing industry, his is not the only industry that will have problems upgrading to a 64-bit operating system. I also work a full-time job as an IT Specialist at a vocational school, and I've run into similar issues there with hardware and software in the following industries: dentistry (drivers for computerized and network-enabled imaging and X-Ray machines), machining (drivers for routers, rapid prototyping devices, and laser engravers), electrical engineering (PLC interface drivers), and all facets of the automotive industry (drivers for vehicle diagnostic links).
Summary
Obviously my complaint that OEM's and hardware manufacturers are moving at a much faster pace than industry was missed by most of my readers and taken as an attack on progression toward the future of 64-bit computing. I'd love for that to happen, but I have to live in a reality where that might not occur for another three to four years.
In hindsight it was probably a mistake to post this piece on Dzone, where the audience is highly technical and naturally wanted to solve the problem by throwing more technology at it.
Thanks to all of my readers who left positive feedback and suggestions on how to overcome my 64-bit dillema.
To those who left comments treating me and my client like idiots, I admit I don't know everything, and compared to some of you I might know much at all. But I do know that if I approached my clients with the same "Big Man Behind the Keyboard Syndrome" with which some folks communicate, I wouldn't have clients very long at all!
Going 64-Bit: A Cautionary Tale
Recently a customer of mine who makes a living testing patient's hearing and troubleshooting issues with their hearing aides bought a new laptop to take out on call. The laptop he bought was an HP Pavilion TV5, a powerful system with a very reasonable price. Last night I stopped at his office to configure his diagnostic software and devices on the new laptop, and ran into a major issue that was anything but surprising.
The Pavilion TV5 comes with Vista Home Premium 64-bit Edition preinstalled. Niche industries such as my client's are often years behind in operating system and platform support, and 64-bit architecture is no exception. None of my client's hardware or software were supported by his new system. So what's a geek to do?
HP will not provide or support a 32-bit operating system for this laptop. Microsoft will not allow us to exchange the operating system for the 32-bit equivalent. Best Buy will exchange the laptop but the only replacements they offer running Vista 32-bit are, for lack of a better word, crap.
Did manufacturers jump the gun with the switch to 64-bit?
Update: Apparently this post caused some controversy both here on my blog as well as on my submission over on DZone. In an effort to keep the discussion going, I replied to some reader comments in a separate entry, called Going 64-Bit, Revisited.
No Media Center on Vista Business Editions?
I wanted to write a positive article about Windows Vista. I really did. In fact I'm disappointed that this article didn't turn out that way.
I Kind of Like Vista
For the past five days of my life I've been taking part in Windows Vista training courses (5115A and 5116A
) working towards my MCITP Microsoft certification. Every day I walk away liking Microsoft's pariah operating system more and more, thinking that if they had only tried to market Vista's features rather than compete for the hearts of individuals Steve Jobs-style, it just might have had a chance.
I get back to my hotel room with grandiose plans of using Vista to simplify and organize my life, and maybe even give my computing experience that personal touch that Mac users are so fond of casting in our rank-and-file, robotic Microsoft borg faces. I was going to use Media Center, a fantastic application that centralizes all your videos, pictures, and music into a single, organized interface. As trivial as this sounds, I was excited to see what Media Center could do not just for me, but for the school that I work for as well.
But Media Center Center Doesn't Come With Vista Business or Enterprise
Umm, what? Microsoft tempts me all day by training me on how to use and secure Media Center on my customer's machines, only to find out that neither me nor my customers even have this software.
I suppose in Microsoft's defense I did learn this in my last class when I was forced to memorize the differences between the various versions of Windows Vista. However I can and will give you a strong argument as to why they should provide Media Center with Vista Enterprise Edition.
Public Displays and Kiosks
My first thought for Media Center was to integrate it with my Netflix account on my laptop, which is obviously not a business case for providing me with Media Center. My second thought, however, was to use it to retool an old SmartBoard that has fallen out of use by sliding it into a large showcase in our lobby and using as a promotional attraction loaded with the hundreds of videos and pictures that our school produces annually.
And a school is certainly not the only environment where such a setup would be useful. What about a business showroom? A photography studio? There are plenty of reasons why a networked, enterprise-grade machine would also need quality media capabilities.
Of course I understand Microsoft's decision not to include it in Vista Enterprise. If it did, there would be no reason to buy Ultimate Edition, except for that "free download" of Texas Hold'em Poker. The more Microsoft changes, the more they seem to stay the same.
