Brent Phillips - Interoperability Blog : Community

The connected experience and a bit on how we got here...

brentphillips — Wed, 24 Jan 2007 07:46:00 GMT

I hate that I missed Bill's keynote at CES, but this article provides a solid recap of some interesting philosophy on the future of technology and how we use it to drive the connected experience. Coming from the wireless space, I am very comfortable with the idea of a ubiquitous computing infrastructure that we (as consumers) navigate with a flexible, sophisticated hand-held device (think 'lifestyle' remote control). Specifically, a PDA, Cell phone, MP3 player (whatever) combines all features required to communicate, self-locate, recieve - manage - create content, and tender transactions. Imagine, now, a seamless computing environment that you simply tap into from wherever you are to access whatever information you need - regardless of the access point, and regardless of the device.

Closing the loop - we're in an age where such possibilities are now being realized and, with the convergence of mobile and fixed infrastructure, the evolution of intelligent devices, and the advancement of storage and processing technologies, the onset of new gadgetry, applications, tools, and "ways to use them" will be limitless. As a colleague of mine likes to say, we talk on computers, we drive in computers, we fly in computers, and we live in computers. The age of ubiquitous computing, suggested to have started almost 16 years ago, is now advancing at a seemingly exponential rate.

And I ask myself [a la David Byrne]...how did we get here? I mean really get here. After all, companies like ours didn't have a master plan to role this stuff out. Nor did all of this innovation happen by just a handful of companies...(Now, to interject for a moment on my own point. I bring this up because there seems to be a great deal of discussion these days about how to accelerate innovation through openness, community, and a removal of IP (think patents) from software...Open source combined with a bit of copylefting, some might argue, is the panacea for society's innovation and technical complexity woes...) It seems to me, however, that innovation has taken care of itself quite well over the years - re: how we got here, and today it is accelerating and maturing just as the market requires. The market, after all, is the community that matters. And the dialogue in that community - broadly through industry associations or standards setting organizations, or more focused through customer engagements - is sufficiently open in my opinion to drive progress and to address integration woes created by rapid innovation cycles. And intellectual property protection gives incentive to everybody in the market to keep on developing...(even the open source guys patent some things)

How do we sustain an ecosystem of heterogeneity and complexity? Keep working. Keep talking and working together. And when we make new islands of technology, simply 1) standardize enough to connect, 2) build technical bridges, 3) seed new markets or 4) all of the above.

I'm going to noodle on this a bit more. Thoughts and feedback welcome!

Need details on the Open Spec Promise? Check out Channel 9...

brentphillips — Mon, 20 Nov 2006 21:53:00 GMT

If you have 30 minutes and are keenly interested in how Microsoft's new Open Specification Promise works, check out this video at Channel 9. Included in the clip are Jean Paoli, General Manager of Interoperability & XML Architecture; Tom Robertson, General Manager of IP and Corportate Standards Strategy; and Amy Marasco, General Manager of Standards Strategy. I worked on parts of the project for Amy and Tom, and work closely with all three on other efforts. Check it out here...

Zend joins Microsoft to optimize PHP for Windows Server

brentphillips — Tue, 31 Oct 2006 18:22:00 GMT

This morning Zend and Microsoft announced a technical collaboration to drive improved performance for running PHP on Windows Server. Having worked with both technologies on multiple projects, I think this is timely and a great effort toward improved interoperability for the developer community as a whole. Granted, PHP has been running on Windows for some time, but simply 'running on' is not enough. This collaboration ensure that leading technologies - while developed under different models and by different organizations - will work together optimally for the benefit of the user. Specific to the project, I thought the scope was particularly interesting:

Identify and implement improvements for PHP on IIS6 and IIS7 (32 bit and 64 bit) with that will be submitted under the PHP license to the PHP community.
Microsoft will develop and release an IIS add-on component (FastCGI) that will serve as the interface between PHP and the IIS webserver - made freely available for users of Windows Server 2003 and Windows Server ‘Longhorn.’
Zend will establish a Windows testing lab and conduct regular tests to foster improved performance as technologies evolve.
Zend and Microsoft will actively participate in community outreach.

Public releases of this effort are expected over the next couple of months. Read more over at port 25...

Microsoft's Sender ID goes OSP

brentphillips — Mon, 23 Oct 2006 20:07:00 GMT

My guess is that most people don't even realize how 'at risk' they are to online threats these days. And what better way to take advantage of someone than by going through a trusted channel – their inbox. In response to these threats, Microsoft released SenderID nearly two years ago to foster online safety by preventing phishing, malware, spam attacks and other e-mail fraud. Today, and furthering its commitment to interoperability, Microsoft announced that it is releasing the SenderID framework specification to the global IT community under the Open Specification Promise. According to the press release, “The application of the OSP will promote further industry interoperability by making the e-mail authentication framework more clearly available to the entire Internet ecosystem, including customers, partners, Internet service providers, registrars and the developer community, no matter what model they use — commercial, open source or academic.”

In my mind - as important as email is to all of us - SenderID is one of those 'under the hood' technologies that we just can't live without. As an industry we fight online fraud every day and it’s only going to get more difficult as phishers (et al) become more sophisticated. Making SenderID available to the community (under any license) will help synchronize the industry to combat fraud with a widely adopted (600 million + users) and highly useful technology. Under the OSP, we are ensuring that anyone who wants to implement the technology – Microsoft’s Intellectual Property - can do so at no risk and completely free of charge. For more detail about the technology and the OSP, read Matusow's blog...

Other resources:
Press pass article here: http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/press/2006/oct06/10-23OSPSenderIDPR.mspx
Interoperability at Microsoft: http://www.microsoft.com/interop

Is it really open vs. proprietary?

brentphillips — Thu, 19 Oct 2006 20:41:00 GMT

...Or how well it works together. Its really about how well we connect people, data, and diverse systems to make processes more efficient right? It should not matter what the pieces are. Leave the choice of configuration to those who best know what they need. We'll meet them where they are!

I am borrowing the title from an interesting article by Simon Moores over at silicon.com entitled "Open Source: The New Front," an opinion piece suggesting that the future of technology is all about interoperability. I could not agree more - especially as he frames it so well in the following statement - so I thought I would share and offer two additional cents.

"By interoperability, I simply mean the ability of different IT networks, applications or components to exchange and use information, i.e. to 'talk' to each other.This goal can be achieved by four means - through the development of software that is 'interoperable by design' (e.g., inclusion of XML technology in software to facilitate the easy exchange of data across different applications); through licensing and cross-licensing proprietary technologies and essential intellectual property; through collaboration with partners, competitors and customers; and through the implementation of industry standards (including open standards and broadly accessible proprietary standards) in products and services."

For my part, I also want to offer that proprietary and open development (suggesting royalty free licensing and community contribution) can, in fact, go hand in hand - or coexist to put it more accurately. Consider Microsoft's Open Specification Promise under which we have released a number of web service specifications and most recently the Virtual Hard Disk Image Specification to the community - royalty free - in order to foster interoperability in the market. Likewise, we are seeing tremendous success of open source projects for the Window's platform - consider MeiRou, Phalanger,GibberMonkey and other projects on CodePlex or the ODF Translator over at SourceForge. Also consider the great work that was done between Microsoft and JBoss or SugarCRM for various interoperability initiatives and the Open Source lab team at Port 25. This is coexistence in action and it gets stronger and more collaborative as projects evolve. Do we compete? Of course, but our collective focus is customer need.

To finish my thought, the biggest mis-statement I hear about software these days is that 'open' (standards, source, etc) is the best way to achieve interoperability. Open development models and open licensing are great things if they work for your business - say if you sell services. But don't raise 'open' as a requirement for interop because open solutions can also be incompatible (as can competing implementations of standards). When this happens, as with non-open solutions, we must remember the unique quality of software as a bridging medium. This is unique to the virtual world of course - it would not be as easy to attach a firehose to a kitchen sink (enough duct tape perhaps), but digitally we get it figured out. I offer Biztalk Server as one example - with over 300 adapters - capable of connecting into any number of non-Microsoft technologies - in essence translating between independent systems.

I don't want to over simplify interoperability by any means, but in lock-step with innovation it happens every single day.

Its how the industry evolves.

Interoperability is...Revisited

brentphillips — Fri, 06 Oct 2006 23:56:00 GMT

Connecting People, Data, and Diverse Systems…

A few weeks (maybe months) back, I wrote about interoperability being people first. The context of this statement evolved from the notion that ‘work’ is what drives the requirements for the underlying technical systems to perform. It turns out that I am not the only who thinks of interoperability in “not entirely technical” terms, so I thought I would explore it some more. A quick thank you to Stephen McGibbon for an excellent discussion on all of the following…

When Microsoft describes its commitment to interoperability, we talk about the connection of people, data, and diverse systems. (the strata of organizational working parts).

Connecting people describes the workflows and collaboration that takes place within and among organizations at the ‘people’ level – the social aspect of work. Connecting data describes the need to integrate data stores, optimize information flow, and to address semantic issues that arise with structured (e.g. databases) and unstructured (e.g. files) data. Connecting diverse systems speaks to technical, legal, and operational processes ranging from simple connectivity between internal systems, to industry frameworks that facilitate value chain work flows. Legal interoperability, incidentally, applies to regulatory issues whereby laws between governing bodies are not compatible and outputs are slowed or prohibited completely.

So where are the real challenges? I have heard it argued that technical interoperability is a non-issue these days and that the real problems lie at semantic, operational, and legal levels. Not sure I am sold on the technical part, but we’ll leave that for another time. For now, let’s look at what organizations are facing on the other three.

Semantic Interoperability addresses the compatibility of how we describe the information we wish to exchange. Organizations can share data pretty well these days, but what they mean to represent by the data they capture might not be compatible with another organization. Consider a government body that deals with ‘citizens’ – as in all of them…

The department of transportation, as an example, might consider ‘citizen’ to be anyone (immigrant or otherwise) who meets minimum eligibility requirements for a driver’s license. The State Department might, and does, have a more selective definition of the same term. How would they exchange information about ‘citizens’ effectively and know that they were talking about the same group of people? Now think of how often this ‘misunderstanding’ could happen – globally - across industries, across organizations, and across governments.

Operational Interoperability describes a need for compatibility across work-flows or organizational protocols, or even value chains. A recent publication of the International Association of Fire Chiefs outlines the importance of operational interoperability here…

“Examining the status of operational interoperability (how disciplines and jurisdictions work together) provides the opportunity to make improvements in the effectiveness of joint operations and ultimately in your ability to provide emergency services for the public.”

This can also broaden to include entire value chains such as what Microsoft worked through with other industry leaders to address insurance ecosystem inefficiencies. See Insurance Architecture Value Chain Framework to get more information.

Social Interoperability falls under this umbrella as well, and is more commonly referred to, I think, as simply collaboration – but the system idea still applies. This describes the person to person workflows within an organization and make me think about knowledge management / communities of practice. We can fit PC’s, mobile devices, e-mail, IM, and video conferencing into this category from a technical perspective (all pretty well connected I would say)…

Legal Interoperability came to my attention specifically through discussions with Mr. McGibbon, and I would love to explore it in more detail. As I understand it, the issue of regulatory compatibility is becoming an increasing challenge because laws sometimes inadvertently constrain optimal business flow (or they may be areas where laws have not been fully defined). The example he gave – which was peculiar to say the least – described European trains at the border of Spain (intending to cross) having to stop and swap and swap drivers due to insurance issues. The new driver would assume control of the train and bring it into the country. Other issues that come to mind, as I think about it, are taxation, shipping, and buying regulations for e-commerce perhaps. Any other thoughts please share…

So this is not comprehensive – as I am sure other areas of interoperability will come into play - but it paints a good picture (for me anyway) as to why a holistic approach to solving interop is important. I see too many orgs trying to tackle only the technical areas of interoperability and then only doing so through too narrow a focus area (standards only for example). I think the better approach would include standards, but also include engineering best practices; collaboration, community outreach, and skill building; and finally licensing and market development. The pragmatic, technical activities of the aforementioned ensure that innovation is not hindered by the slower pace of standardization while the broader issues of operational, semantic, and legal interoperability can be effectively addressed.

As always, feedback welcome.

Openness @ Microsoft…

brentphillips — Tue, 12 Sep 2006 21:42:00 GMT

Furthering our commitment to working broadly with the IT community to drive interoperability, Microsoft announced an Open Specification Promise this morning to make a number of web service specs freely available to the development community. Follow the link above to see the text. If you want to know how easy it is, here is a quote from the FAQ on ‘how it works:’

'No one needs to sign anything or even reference anything. Anyone is free to implement the specification(s), as they wish and do not need to make any mention of or reference to Microsoft…'Pretty straightforward!

...And the specs themselves?

WS-Addressing, WS-RM Policy, WS-AtomicTransaction, Remote Shell Web Services Protocol, WS-BusinessActivity, WS-SecureConversation, WS-Coordination, WS-Security: Kerberos Binding, WS-Discovery, WS-Security: SOAP Message Security, WSDL, WSDL 1.1 Binding Extension for SOAP 1.2, WS-Security: UsernameToken Profile, WS-Enumeration, WS-SecurityPolicy, WS-Security: X.509 Certificate Token Profile, SOAP, WS-Eventing, WS-Federation, SOAP 1.1 Binding for MTOM 1.0, WS-Federation Active Requestor Profile, SOAP MTOM / XOP, WS-Federation Passive Requestor Profile, SOAP-over-UDP, WS-Management, WS-Transfer, WS-Management Catalog, WS-Trust ,WS-MetadataExchange, WS-I Basic Profile, WS-Policy, Web Single Sign-On Interoperability Profile, WS-PolicyAttachment, Web Single Sign-On Metadata Exchange Protocol, WS-ReliableMessaging

If you are interested in industry adoption of the specifications, see Jorgen Thelin’s blog…

Looking forward to seeing how this evolves in the coming months!

First 'Open' Movie...

brentphillips — Tue, 29 Aug 2006 10:05:00 GMT

First Open Movie…

I have been fascinated by open source technology and business models for some time - the following caught my attention recently.

Earlier this year, a small team of CG developers and animators, working as part of what is known as the Orange Open Movie Project, completed what they are calling the first fully open film entitled The Elephant’s Dream, released under the Creative Commons license. As part of the effort, project sponsors made the film free to download, along with all supporting files and musical score, giving their audience full access to the content used to create the film. Not surprisingly, custom versions – mostly in the form of videos and short clips – have started popping up from CG enthusiasts. The movie itself runs about 10 minutes and can be downloaded from the website above.

For truly inspired supporters of the project, a DVD set can be ordered online containing all of the above for about 35 Euro (it is also apparently being released as the EU’s first HD DVD title as well).

To summarize, the story is incomplete and, for me personally, was a bit non-specific (I felt like I was dropped into a few pages of a much larger story too complex to grasp in the short glimpse I was given) - but the visuals and score were decent. What interested me from the beginning of the project - specifically - is that it was born out of the Blender Foundation whose 3D Modeling tool was used to develop scenes, characters, and animation sequences.

Blender, if you are not familiar, is a 3D modeling tool that migrated to open-source a few years ago under the leadership of Ton Roosendaal – the program’s creator (also project lead on the film). Briefly, Ton – then owner of the bankrupt design firm NaN - raised funds from CG community members to buy the rights to the software from the company’s investors. 100,000 euros and seven weeks later(according to their website), the solution became open source - offered under the GNU GPL. Since then, Ton has remained head of the Blender Foundation, which is a Dutch non-profit, organized to maintain the core of the software as its primary goal.

As with any open-source project, how Blender grows and how it may or may not evolve into commercial success will be interesting to watch. Not that commercial success is its goal, per se, but I am intrigued at the dynamic evolving around its use. As I mentioned, the foundation is non-profit but its flagship technology (which is incidentally open source with proprietary file formats) is being used by many artists to support their own commercial projects. To me, it seems that the value chain is broken somehow…Contributing developers, I assume, are not paid by the foundation and, I further assume, that not all of them are successful 3d artists (suggesting that they are not benefiting from the capabilities of the tool). All hobbyists? Perhaps. If so, what do they seek to accomplish? Perhaps simply free software (FSF)…Perhaps something more. At any rate, the movie is getting tremendous press at the moment (especially in the EU), and the Blender 3D project seems to be moving forward quite well and at a steady pace.

If anyone from the Blender community cares to offer deeper insight on future direction, please feel free to email me or post here.

Incidentally, Blender is available on Windows (works great on XP), and some of our guys are already getting it setup for Vista’s Windows Presentation Foundation. Check out Daniel Lehenbauer’s blog for additional info…

A little ingenuity and some smart developers...

brentphillips — Tue, 29 Aug 2006 07:21:00 GMT

…Go along way. And we see the results of such efforts paying off in a big way for the government of Massachusetts who decided earlier this week to leverage a new openDocument Format converter built for Microsoft Office. You may remember that, a few months ago, the state of Mass decided that the recently iso-certified OpenDocument file format would be used as the document default by state agencies - leading to speculation that the entire state government may migrate to another productivity tool such as Open Office. Now, for the purpose of this post, I will not get into the ROI or TCO issues related to such a migration (and there are plenty), but I will point out that the converter was noted by Louis Gutierrez – CIO of Massachusetts' Information Technology Division - as being “more economical and less disruptive to end users.(zdnet)”

The end result? Massachusetts gets an open file format to exchange and archive unstructured data (documents) while meeting the needs of its internal and external customers with a best of breed productivity tool. In this particular case, to clarify, accessibility limitations with non-Microsoft productivity tools caused concern for many users. As such, and for the time being, Massachusetts will keep Microsoft Office on its desktops.

Kudos to the folks participating in the sourceforge project for the ODF converter. Interested in checking out the project? Follow on http://sourceforge.net/projects/odf-converter/