February 2006

Sun joins IBM in trying to use the open source software model to help with hardware as well.  (Thanks to Linux-Watch for the news.)  Creating a new project called OpenSPARC, Sun is open sourcing the specifications for its latest SPARC processor, the UltraSPARC T1, code-named “Niagara.”

According to the Linux-Watch article, the effort is intended to help drive the development of ports of Linux and BSD that can take full advantage of the CoolThreads technology in the UltraSPARC T1, which provides 32 threads of execution.  This allows the T1 to provide much greater throughput at lower clock speeds with dramatically lower power consumption.

In addition to the processor architecture and code, Sun is also open sourcing its HyperVisor API information.  Like other vendors’ hypervisor efforts, the idea is to allow multiple operating systems or multiple instances of an operating system to run simultaneously on the same hardware.  Again, ports of Linux and BSD that are designed to take full advantage of the UltraSPARC T1 architecture and HyperVisor API are beneficial to Sun because they can help drive sales of their hardware.

It’s a good idea, really, if you think about it.  Sun’s big into open source these days, after creating the OpenSolaris project in an effort to open source the entire Solaris operating system.  However, Solaris is really the only operating system that can run well on Sun’s SPARC hardware, and helping other alternatives to run equally well on SPARC hardware would encourage more people to buy SPARC hardware.  With any luck, Sun could create the kind of momentum and mystique around their SPARC hardware as they’ve done with their AMD-based “Galaxy” servers.

It’ll be interesting to see how it plays out.

My favorite Mac OS X web browser, Camino, has finally reached 1.0 status!  Built using the same Gecko rendering engine as Firefox, Camino is not a Mac OS X port of Firefox, but a separate project built specifically to integrate into the Macintosh environment.

Accompanying the final Camino release is Karlheinz Dobler’s fantastic CamiTools add-on, now at version 4.1.  Taking advantage of Camino’s extensible Preference Panes, CamiTools add some extremely useful functionality to the browser.  This includes the ability to further enhance Camino’s ad-blocking functionality, as well as the ability to block Flash animations, tune Camino performance, customize Camino’s appearance, and more.

Both Camino 1.0 and CamiTools 4.1 are also Universal apps, running natively on either PowerPC- or Intel-based Macs.

Bottom line:  If you’re a Macintosh user, you need to be using Camino.  If you’re a Camino user, you need to be using CamiTools.

I need some help with a solution for processing mail messages.  Specifically, I’m looking for an open source solution that will allow me to create filters (or rules, or policies, or whatever term you’d like to insert here) that will perform actions on inbound mail messages.  Does anyone out there have any suggestions?

In case you’re wondering why, I need something that can alert me (via e-mail, of course) when an e-mail message with specific words in the subject or body are delivered to a generic mailbox created on the mail server.  See, I have multiple customers whose systems and applications send non-urgent reports and notifications to a generic mailbox.  When one of those messages contains text that might indicate a failure or a problem, I want to be notified via e-mail on my primary e-mail account.  This way, I don’t have to check this generic mailbox every day, but instead I can be notified when a failure/error notification arrives.

This solution should integrate with both Postfix and Dovecot, as I use currently use both of these.  I’ve looked at procmail and maildrop, and these both seem good, but which is better?  Which is faster, more efficient, more flexible?  This is where I could use some feedback from those of you out there that have used these programs before, and can provide real-world input.  By the way, I’m using Maildirs instead of standard mailbox files, so I’ll need something that can work with Maildirs.

So, anyone have any suggestions for me?  Or, at the very least, some links to clear, concise instructions for either procmail or maildrop?  Feel free to bookmark them via del.icio.us and tag them as “for:slowe”, if you are so inclined.  Thanks!

Funambol, formerly Sync4j, is claiming that its latest product, Funambol 3, could function as an open-source Blackberry workaround, allowing push e-mail to be delivered to a variety of mobile devices, including Blackberries.  This is particularly important in light of the threat of a Blackberry shutdown due to the RIM-NTP patent dispute.

Currently in beta, the v3 server software runs on Linux or Windows, and clients are available for Outlook, Windows Mobile, Blackberry, Palm, and (believe it or not) iPod.

More information can be found in this article.

Some people are also suggesting the use of open standards to ease the impact of a potential Blackberry shutdown as well.  While not as functionally rich as a typical Blackberry implementation, the use of POP3/IMAP4 and SMTP to handle mobile messaging needs is certainly very viable.  This is easily implemented via most commercial messaging systems and through a number of open source packages as well.  For example, I use Dovecot and Postfix to provide IMAP4/SMTP support for my Treo, all secured by SSL/TLS encryption.  Like the Funambol approach, this also offers a great deal of client-side variety as well, instead of locking users into a single client device.

Ever since the announcement that Apple was transitioning its entire product line to Intel-based processors, there has been one thing primarily on my mind as the “I-really-want-this” item.  Sure, now that the first Intel-based Macs have been announced and specs published, I’m looking forward to fast dual-core CPUs, higher FSB speeds, etc.  But there is still this one thing that I’m really, really hoping to see:  virtualization.

We all know and love Microsoft’s Virtual PC for the Mac, which allows PowerPC-based Macs to run Microsoft Windows (which, of course, does not run natively on the PowerPC, despite its Windows NT roots—keep in mind that the PowerPC was one of the four architectures targeted by Windows NT in its early releases).  Because Windows only runs in x86-compatible CPUs, Virtual PC has to perform processor emulation, and that really kills performance.  Even so, it’s the only way to run those few legacy Windows applications that can’t be replaced by a native Mac OS X application.  (You can run Linux this way, too, but Microsoft doesn’t support it.)

Ah, but now the Macs are running on Intel-based processors, so the need for processor emulation has suddenly disappeared.  This opens the door not only for Microsoft (with Virtual PC) but also for VMware (with VMware Workstation and/or VMware Player) to bring full virtualization (including virtualization of hardware and the base OS) to the Macintosh world.  This would, in turn, mean the ability to run Linux, BSD, Windows, or Mac OS X on a gorgeous dual-core laptop, with only minor performance impacts for non-Apple operating systems.

And this scenario doesn’t even take into account the very likely possibility that Intel will add hardware virtualization support to the Core Solo and Core Duo processors in the near future.

This scenario is not mine alone; this recent article theorizes that Apple has the ability to double their marketshare through support for virtualization (building on many of the same points I mentioned above—thanks to virtualization.info for the pointer to the article!).  Think about it:  if you could run your choice of operating system (even multiple operating systems simultaneously) on a laptop designed by Apple, wouldn’t you?  After all, you won’t be able to run Mac OS X on any other hardware besides Apple’s.

It’s a sweet scenario.  I can hardly wait.

A few days ago I discussed the possibility of VMware giving away GSX Server for free.  With the official announcement now made and lots of articles appearing about the subject, I thought I’d provide an update.

Yes, it’s true.  The next generation of GSX Server, called VMware Server, will be provided at no charge.  Rather than rehash all the same information, allow me to point you in the direction of some very pertinent articles from those more educated:

• VMware Server Goes Free, but Not Open
• More details on VMware Server
• VMware details migration terms for GSX Server customers
• Offical: VMware Introduces Free VMware Server
• VMware introduces free VMware Server

Overall, I’m very excited.  Some of the VMware installations I manage could really use the Virtual SMP functionality.  I’m toying with the idea of testing the beta, but I’m not sure yet.  I’ll probably wait just a bit longer.

Now, let’s hope they don’t push everything into some clunky web-based interface…

I just installed Virtual Server 2005 for a customer yesterday, and I thought I’d just briefly discuss my impressions of the product.  Keep in mind that these are subjective, not objective, impressions, and—as always—your mileage may vary.

Here are my thoughts regarding Virtual Server 2005, in no particular order:

• First of all, I don’t like web-based interfaces.  I just dont.  I’d rather have a traditional application any day of the week.
• If you absolutely must use a web-based interface, at least make it browser- and platform-independent.  The Virtual Server 2005 interface uses ActiveX controls, which means you must use Internet Explorer on Windows.
• I didn’t like how Virtual Server 2005 didn’t have the ability to “dynamically” capture media like a floppy drive or a CD-ROM.  Instead, you had to manually capture the media, and that media was then unusable by the host system.
• Did I mention I don’t like web-based interfaces?
• The whole scenario regarding in which security context the web-based interface should run (i.e., within the security context of the authenticating users, or within the security context of the local system account) seemed confusing and overly complicated to me.  Perhaps I’m just too simplistic, but it seemed like a good idea to me to make the application run within the context of the authenticating users (the local system account is often considered too powerful), but I could never make it work.  I had to uninstall the application and reinstall again (using the security context of the local system account) in order for it to work.
• Of course, there’s the whole deal about what operating systems are supported by Virtual Server 2005 (i.e., only other versions of Windows).
• It uses a web-based interface.
• I find it interesting that the VMRC (Virtual Machine Remote Control) uses TCP port 5900.  Can anyone say, “VNC”?  (Anyone been able to confirm this with a network sniffer?)
• Last, but not least, the web-based interface.

OK, so perhaps I’m a bit biased toward VMware (no, I don’t work for them).  I like to try to keep an open mind when it comes to technology issues.  So, in that vein, can anyone out there enlighten me to as to what advantages Virtual Server 2005 has over VMware GSX Server (or even ESX Server)?

Lots of bloggers are talking about the rumors, perhaps justified, that VMware will announce on Monday, February 6, that it is giving away for free a product called “VMware Server.”  It’s not clear yet if this is actually the equivalent of VMware GSX Server, or if this is entirely new product.

I was first alerted to this possibility by a posting at RTFM Education; soon after that, more articles began cropping up in various places:

• VMware moves to free with Server product
• VMware cuts VMware Server price to zero
• VMware Server to become a free product
• VMware to give virtualization server for free

There’s bound to be some truth to all of this, since some of these stories are coming from fairly reputable sources (the virtualization.info article has a link to a CNet article).

If it’s true, that’s fantastic news—there are so many customers that I really want to start using virtualization, but I can’t get them past the price tag.  And while Microsoft’s Virtual Server 2005 is a good product (just did an install for a customer yesterday, as a matter of fact), it’s just not in the same league as VMware’s products (in my humble opinion).

I’ll post more once the official announcement occurs on Monday.

In case you’re wondering what I read in my ever-so-plentiful free time (OK, stop laughing), here’s a list of the RSS/ATOM feeds to which I subscribe (I use PulpFiction as my RSS newsreader).

• Apache DevCenter (RSS)
• blog.scottlowe.org (RSS)
• BlogSavvy (RSS)
• BSD DevCenter (RSS)
• Computerworld Security News (RSS)
• Evan’s Weblog (RSS)
• eWeek Technology News (RSS)
• Gerod Serafin’s Weblog (RSS)
• Mac OS X Downloads (RSS)
• Mac OS X Hints (RSS)
• MacDevCenter (RSS)
• MacNN (RSS)
• Mark’s Sysinternals Blog (RSS)
• Nerd Vittles (RSS)
• NewsForge (RSS)
• Novell Cool Solutions (RSS)
• ONLamp.com (RSS)
• RTFM Education (RSS)
• Top Mac OS Docs (RSS)
• Version Tracker: Mac OS X (RSS)
• virtualization.info (RSS)
• You Had Me At EHLO… (RSS)

By the way, I don’t suppose anybody knows of any easy way to convert OPML to HTML?

A few of my favorite Mac OS X applications have been updated recently.

Cyberduck, an open source FTP/SFTP client, was recently updated to version 2.5.4.  No major new changes in this version, just bug fixes and incremental improvements.  This is a great application that I highly recommend.

Adium X, now in version 0.88, is also making steady improvements.  This latest version brings a Universal binary and numerous bug fixes and improvements.  If you need a multi-protocol IM client (and who doesn’t?), Adium is an excellent choice.  I currently use it on MSN, Google Talk, and Jabber.  (I was using it on AIM, too, until my .Mac account stopped working with AIM.)

Cocoalicious was also updated in the last few weeks, this time to version 1.0b40.  If you are a Mac-toting del.icio.us user, you need Cocoalicious.

The Growl notification framework, used by a pretty large number of applications, was recently updated to 0.7.4.  Quite a few of the applications that I now use on a regular basis—including Cyberduck and Adium, among others—I started using because they included Growl support.

Reviewing this list and looking at the changes, it’s nice to see independent developers moving so quickly to provide Universal binaries.  Many of the open source applications I use are already Universal or will be Universal very quickly.  Kind of makes you wonder why it’s going to take Adobe a year to get Universal binaries for its applications, doesn’t it?