Globalize Networks blog

Google and Verizon have stirred the ire of Net Neutrality proponents by working on a deal to prioritize certain web content.

At issue for consumers is how the companies that provide the pipeline to the Internet will ultimately direct traffic on their system, and how quickly consumers are able to gain access to certain Web content. Consumers could also see continually rising bills for Internet service, much as they have for cable television.

The prospect of a Google-Verizon agreement infuriates many consumer advocates, who feel that it would concentrate in a few corporations control of what to date has been a free and open Internet system in which consumers decide which companies are successful.

“The point of a network neutrality rule is to prevent big companies from dividing the Internet between them,” said Gigi B. Sohn, president and a founder of Public Knowledge, a consumer advocacy group. “The fate of the Internet is too large a matter to be decided by negotiations involving two companies, even companies as big as Verizon and Google.”

The FCC’s meetings with big internet providers were recently called off, so it’s unclear how Net Neutrality legislation will move forward.

I am somewhat divided on this issue. Currently, the more resources a content provider has, the better experience it can provide to end-users (more servers, etc.). So the internet playing field isn’t really level right now. However, in cases where ISPs are also content providers or have exclusive deals with content providers there does seem to be a risk that competing content could be restricted or even blocked. So that’s bad for competition and innovation. I had previously thought that the content companies like Google would have a vested interest in preventing ISPs from blocking content, but now I am not so sure.

The sad truth is that competition is great for society and thus business in general but bad for any specific business. The best outcome might be for the FCC to re-assert the authority over ISPs that they gave up under the Bush administration.

What do you think?

Ernest Hemingway at his standing desk

Stand up desks have been used to counteract back pain and improve productivity for years, but there might be a more important reason to consider changing the way you work.  A recent study suggests that more time spent sitting increases mortality risk regardless of physical activity.  So even you exercise a lot, your health may be negatively impacted by sitting at a desk all day.

“Several factors could explain the positive association between time spent sitting and higher all cause death rates,” said Dr. Patel. “Prolonged time spent sitting, independent of physical activity, has been shown to have important metabolic consequences and may influence things like triglycerides, high density lipoprotein, cholesterol, fasting plasma glucose, resting blood pressure, and leptin, which are biomarkers of obesity and cardiovascular and other chronic diseases.”

I can’t say that I have ever noticed much back pain from sitting all day myself.  However, I tend to prefer decreasing my risk of death.  When I heard about this study, my stomach dropped thinking about how much time I spend sitting each day.

I decided to look into standing desks and explore some alternatives.  Some of them were fairly expensive, but I feel that it’s foolish for me to not spend a little money to improve my health and possibly improve the experience that consumes most of my day.

Here is a gorgeous desk from Stilvoll that I haven’t found the price for yet.  I have a feeling that if you need to ask, you might as well not.

StilVoll Crescendo C2

An uglier but utilitarian desk is available from GeekDesk.com for $799.

Geek Desk

And if you are really on a budget, Lifehacker has a $20 solution.   I showed this to my girlfriend and she nearly strangled me.

Stand up desk on the cheap

Finally, don’t forget the ergonomic mat to stand on.

It’s hard to picture changing the way you work, but I for one am going to give it a try by assembling a trial version using some inexpensive cabinets and a desk top.

I finally (and reluctantly) upgraded my own production machines from Windows XP SP3 to Windows 7 this past month. (What with the new Android phone and the new OS, I feel like a new man!) We also recently upgraded one very small client to Windows 7. I have not yet come across any software or hardware that worked with XP but is completely incompatible with Windows 7. In fact, our client had an OLD 16-bit MS Access based application that ran just fine after I copied over the program files manually and stuck a few DLL’s into the \Windows\System directory. It made me yearn for those simpler times before installers.

Whenever we do an migration like this, it’s always nice to have the old system available in case something is forgotten.  In the event that we need to do an in-place upgrade, and we don’t have extra hardware standing by I like to use Virtual Machines.  (Note: When I say “in-place upgrade”, I mean a clean re-install of a new OS on the existing hardware.)

So the idea is to:

1. Convert the OS running on the existing hardware (i.e. XP sp3) to a Virtual Machine (confirm that it is functional and copy to a USB drive or network location)
2. Install Windows 7 on the existing hardware
3. Move the VM into the Win 7 environment, run it whenever a missing application or configuration is encountered

Now Microsoft does offer XP Mode based on their free Virtual PC product. However, their Disk2VHD tool to convert physical disks to virtual disks seems pretty basic. It’s not really a full P2V tool. If you don’t mind spending some extra money, there are plenty of good 3rd party apps for P2V such as Acronis Universal Restore.

VMWare is a more robust and mature virtualization platform and their VMware vCenter Converter Standalone product is an excellent free P2V solution. Also, the free VMWare Player actually seems to have more configuration options than Virtual PC. So I chose to use the VMWare products.

Now you may run into Windows Activation issues if using OEM Windows licenses because OEM licenses are not transferable. In this scenario where the VM is running on the OEM licensed hardware there does appear to be a way for VMWare to pass the physical BIOS info into the VM. You can add the following to your .vmx config file:
smbios.reflecthost=”TRUE”

One positive feature of Microsoft virtualization products is the lenient licensing. You can run multiple servers with Windows Virtual Server products and up to 5 VMs on Windows 7 when you have Software Assurance. But I don’t want to get into Microsoft licensing right now, that might be a good topic for another post.