Cloud computing is a good thing? Well probably, however it is predicated on the availability of cloud applications to run in the cloud (Cloud computing will change business technology, knowledge.computing.co.uk).

Problem - applications to service particular functional needs are frequently determined and bounded by organisational preferences rather than inherent characteristics, so software tends to reflect the likes and dislikes of the commissioner, which many others reject on a "not invented here" basis.

The solution is that there needs to be a consensus on best of breed functional flows before applications can be easily picked up. For  example, the accounting industry has a best-of-breed process defined by the  accounting standards and several hundred years of double entry book-keeping. Result - companies can pick up most accounting software and use it successfully.

A converse example is the industry and sector where I am employed - public education for 16 to 19-year olds. Here we have little common and even less agreed mapping of function in, say, the administration of students. This results in multiple vendors with differing packages which do not even meet
external constraints in standard ways. Here, and throughout higher and further education generally, institutions cannot see a way to introduce even limited shared services, according to a recent survey.

So, for us, cloud computing is just a dream.

Jim Blair

Exams are the lazy way to solve the problem of student plagiarism (Write 100 lines: "I must not outsource my homework to India", markkobayashihillary.computing.co.uk).

I've been using interviews with students for over a decade to address the possibility that a student has plagiarised their programming assignments. Having to explain your code and make changes to the code in an interview is a very effective way of guaranteeing that the student actually wrote the code, or at the very least understands the code well.

Martin, submitted on the web

While I agree with much of what Paul Ashbrook says about open source software (Waste of money, letters.computing.co.uk), the school IT environment is very complex with schools typically running hundreds of often poorly-written pieces of software.

Most people in schools IT work towards bringing in as much free and open source software as possible, not least because it reduces the overhead of ordering and maintaining licences.

We are making inroads with individual applications, but we still have a long way to go. For example, our school runs Microsoft Office and Open Office in parallel and have done for several years, but a great deal of lessons taught in schools and the skills of staff are unfortunately based on MS Office.

Training time is very limited and training time for IT skills is virtually nil, so the upheaval of changing any application, regardless of its licensing terms, can  be very problematic. I am  convinced that is the reason few schools have solid plans for moving to Windows Vista or Office 2007.

As for Becta's framework deal, it is largely irrelevant. Anyone can look at Becta''s online software procurement platform, and I invite them to do so. It is woefully out of date and will not get better prices than any IT manager with half a clue could get in five minutes.

So now they are paying private firms to "sell" schools free software without any  experience of what schools want and need. Thanks but no thanks - let the taxpayers keep the £80m.

Sam P, submitted on the web

The advocates of punishing those who choose software suppliers such as RM for use in schools have missed the point and made a major error.

They have offered the "obvious solution" of training children to use Microsoft Office rather than use an "obscure" offering from others. Send them back to school before their ill-judged assumptions make an ass of them on a real project.

First, when examined properly, the requirement is not to train children in a tool but to educate them in using such tools and provide their teachers with the tools  they need to support that  education.

Microsoft Office is not a training tool but an operational one. It does not have any tools that track a pupil's  achievement of a new activity type or concept for the first time, nor can it record errors and suggest alternative methods - the educational software does. It does what it is designed for:
producing and manipulating office documents.

Second, over the past 20 years in IT, I have seen the difference in performance  in those who are expertly trained in one tool who stumble once the tool is changed. I have compared this with the results of those who have been educated in the underlying concepts and how adaptable they become when given the experience of another tool.

One supplier's dominance of the education market is concerning because of the lack of variation in education, but at least it is an alternative to simple indoctrination in the dominant product in the adult market.

While economies of scale are useful, adaptability and alternative strategies are needed for longer-term survival in the workplace. Educate first, train when needed.

Carol Long

The price of oil and gas will continue to rise, and everyone will take a hit in the short term at least (Surge in oil prices hits IT, www.computing.co.uk/2219448).

Virtualisation can help reduce power consumption, but the savings are not enough to offset continuous rises over the coming years.

The obvious and only long-term solution is to invest in viable alternatives to oil and gas. However, with the UK government widely expected to miss the 20 per cent renewable target by 2020, the solution seems to be for industry to secure its own renewable sources.

Few companies are willing to sacrifice profits just to tell a nice environmental story. But with some economists predicting oil prices of $250 (£126) a barrel, investing in green power sources is starting to make business sense.

As energy prices in IT departments start hitting the bottom line, we are likely to see sustainable power move from the marketing office into the boardroom, and companies not looking into renewable energy sources now will be left behind.

James Carnie, eLinia

Are energy prices a cause for consolidation (Surge in oil prices hits IT, www.computing.co.uk/2219448)? Supply versus demand is a point to ponder here.

Providing servers that are more efficient and applying technologies such as virtualisation are great low-level steps, helping on the supply side. But changing behaviours to reduce demand for unnecessary servers and ad hoc file storage is surely the bigger challenge.

Matt Quinn

The reason diligent school IT staff must think about issues such as security and compatibility is because they are both responsible and accountable for the network (Vice-like grip, letters.computing.co.uk).

If we simply act like robots and do as we are told, do you imagine the staff who asked us to carry out the task will take responsibility for its failure? Of course not. They will point the finger of blame in our direction.

Many schools have very good IT staff because they have large and complex networks. With the abuse they receive from people who know nothing, they should expect better from those who profess to know it all.

Tony Forder

You recently published a letter (Waste of money, letters.computing.co.uk) that said: "It's a shame to see yet another initiative that will result in millions of pounds being spent on equipment and software that will be consigned to the technicians' cupboards when the teachers and governors (rightly or wrongly) decide not to teach children using minority software platforms."

The underlying operating system and software packages used to teach children IT skills are irrelevant. What matters is to teach them the principles of using and operating computer software, rather than teaching them how to use a specific software package by rote, which unfortunately seems to be the case in many of our schools.

I would strongly dispute the assertion that Linux is a minority operating system. That might be the case in UK schools, but it certainly is not the case elsewhere.

I recently corresponded with a Polish gentleman who is working here. He was surprised how many schools in the UK were using Microsoft products; apparently most Polish schools use Linux.

Tim Williams

I agree that tasks such as software testing can be done elsewhere (Lloyds TSB cuts are a sign of testing times, markkobayashihillary.computing.co.uk).

But the combined effects of outsourcing, offshoring, onshoring, right-sourcing and the countless other sourcing variations make the IT industry an awful place to work. 

The bottom line is: if the company doesn't need you it throws you on the scrapheap. We don't even have the same employment protection as that of our European counterparts.

Rob, submitted on the web

My experience of suppliers is the same as your columnist - whether buying software or hardware (Hard sell is becoming hard buy, www.computing.co.uk/2217764).

Some suppliers, despite having unfettered access to us - a revenue stream - continually find ways to make no effort and seem to require being spoon-fed. Why is that?

John Romeis

I take issue with the comment from your reader that Becta's preference for open source software wouldbe a waste of money (Waste of money, letters.computing.co.uk).

Buying proprietary software is a waste of money when there is a cheaper or free comparable product available. A waste of money is when a student pays more than £100 for a stripped-down version of Microsoft Office, when Open Office is free, offers compatibility and has more features. A waste of money is when people dispose of IT equipment that is unable to run Windows Vista - a product they have been brainwashed into buying.

There has been much talk of Web 2.0 - we will use the internet and networks for all our computing needs. So why pay for an operating system that will just provide web and email access? It is a waste of opportunity that our children are not taught the basics of programming, but are taught how to point and click instead.

As IT users we are getting lazy. We need to build our  IT skills base back up, and contribute to the wealth
of open source solutions out there.

I work in local government, and times are hard, yet the pressure to deliver is increasing. Open source software is starting to permeate through my organisation, because it works and we do not need to buy licences.

Open source is not going away, neither are budget restraints and restrictive licences.

Paul Ashbrook

It's a shame to see yet another initiative that will result in millions of pounds being spent on equipment and software (Schools set to go open source), that will be consigned to the technicians' cupboards when the teachers and governors - rightly or wrongly - decide not to teach children using minority software platforms.

Ross, submitted on the web

Legacy programming skills are somewhat required, but do not think all skills are
needed (Look to the future, letters.computing.co.uk).

I got my first job as a Cobol developer, which I have had for three years since graduating. I wish I had stayed away from Cobol and so should all graduates. It does not matter whether or not there are 70 billion lines of Cobol if you cannot get a job in this area.

I have been looking for work and finding it very hard to get a job. I am a  first-class graduate with a masters degree, and even with these academic qualifications three years of doing Cobol has crippled my chances.

All you have to do is type Cobol in a job search and there you have it - the last time I received just 40 hits. Cobol is dead in the job market. When you narrow down your search to London, there are only about seven hits.

Some developers say Cobol is not dead and that they have recently got a job. These people have probably been programming in Cobol for  a lifetime, so everyone is  competing with these guys for a handful of jobs.

A company might give people with Cobol skills lots of money to fix a bug, but how often do these bugs cause faults? You could be unemployed for years before anything goes wrong, waiting for your one-off big contract payment - it is too risky an investment.

I have three years' experience in Cobol and if another candidate has three years of Java, C or C#, I am out of the competition. Do not listen to those who say it does not matter what the language is, because it does.

I am now hoping to build on my skills at university and will keep trying to apply for jobs. I am also hoping to do some courses to refresh my knowledge in areas I have neglected over the past three years. Cobol should not be taught at university.

Peter, submitted on the web

Despite calls to introduce pure computer software patents in the UK, many observers will be encouraged to see the UK Intellectual Property Office (IPO) appealing the recent Symbian court decision (Confusion reigns on software patents). It is worth reflecting on the importance of this move.

Judging from the US, where pure computer software patents can be granted, the evidence of success in
extending patent law in this field is mixed. The software industry in the US grew exponentially without pure software patents, suggesting they are not necessary to promote innovation and, rather than acting as an incentive, prevent competitors from developing in a similar field.

Extending patent law in this case is widely recognised as unworkable, particularly in a field where
innovation is usually accomplished in increments too small to be viewed as inventive steps, and where freelance businesses use the free and automatic protection of copyright protection.

Introducing pure software patents could raise the costs for small software developers to mitigate against risks surrounding research and development, thereby inflating the capital needs of  software development.

The government-commissioned Gowers Review of Intellectual Property agreed with this position, and recommended that changes in the current position on pure software patents, business method patents and gene patents should only be  made in light of economic evidence that they would enhance innovation to offset the considerable costs.

Many commercial and  individual software developers are glad the UK IPO is  taking a stand to listen to all interests in our industry, not merely vested practitioners.

Laura Creighton
Foundation for a Free Information Infrastructure
www.ffii.org
Shareholder Report
www.reportlab.org

Pieter Hintjens
Director Imatix Ltd
www.imatix.com
General Secretary European Software Market Association (ESOMA)
www.esoma.org

Aidan Maguire,
Director Blue Fountain Systems
www.bluefountain.com

It is a pity that this kind of legal action only stifles progress (High Court rewrites UK software patent rules). Imagine if someone had patented binary or the alphabet.

Introducing patents to software is the reason all the big software companies are embroiled in constant court battles. Every company seems determined to patent every software concept they can, knowing that it will screw up some other software producer's ideas.

Ah well, one of the few remaining bastions of the UK's computer industry is destroyed.

Andrew, submitted on the web

While I would agree with Andy Hopkirk's statement that the number of people interested in virtualisation is large (Windows Server: the verdict), I would not wholly agree that the number of those with the ability to experiment with virtualisation is quite small.

The drive for virtualisation is not coming from the lofty heights of academia or research, or from some long-developed strategic plan, but from the ground floor of computing Ð where daily firefighting with limited datacentre space, ever-increasing power requirements and the need to get better value out of
datacentre assets.

Virtualisation has moved rapidly from an interesting technology to an essential part of dealing with the datacentre challenges of the 21st century.

While the National Computing Centre might be able to stand back and take a strategic view, the average IT user cannot wait and wants today's solutions to today's problems.

As second-generation virtual server products have slashed prices without  sacrificing functionality, techniques which have been the preserve of the enterprise are becoming available to small businesses.

Virtualisation is not  optional. That bandwagon is rolling and it will not wait for people to catch up.

David Galton-Fenzi

How demoralising to see yet another example of IT systems being blamed for failure in meeting business deadlines (Concerns over child welfare IT continue).

Several years ago, government directives called for councils across the country to invest in computer equipment and software.

Social Services were additionally required to buy in applications that would support electronic case recording for all service users - adults and children - with each local authority responsible for deciding the most suitable application and  supplier.

Since then, several high-profile social cases involving children have rightly highlighted the need to tighten up the process. As a result, more structured methods of assessments and controlling workflow have been introduced - including eCAF and ICS - which require substantial upgrades to the computer systems already in use.

Unfortunately, some of these hitherto reliable systems are not upgradeable to the extent required and need replacing, involving substantial investment in new software, networks, staff retraining and data migration from existing systems.

The authorities concerned have been doing this as best they can within their timescale and budget and the fact that two-thirds missed the 31 March deadline merely reflects the amount of work involved. Having been involved in the training programmes of several authorities, I have seen these efforts first hand.

One positive aspect is that the business actually knows what is needed and is asking for the IT tools to make it happen, but in such a sensitive area the process cannot be rushed as any errors could have a negative impact on the very same vulnerable children whom these  systems are being installed to protect.

John McGhee

Johan Rock is absolutely right that backups are still one of the least appreciated aspects of IT until, in many cases, it is too late (Back up or face the consequences, letters.computing.co.uk).

I still come across businesses that are so cavalier with their data it is a wonder that they stay in business - unfortunately, many fail after a serious event such as a fire or flood.

What I find even more amazing are the companies that spend large amounts of money on exotic backup architectures, but never find time to test a restore of their backups. Many home PC users are just as much in the dark, which is surprising when just about every PC has a read-write device and with free backup software available on the internet it could not be easier.

It is even more incredible when you think that 8GB memory sticks are now available for less than £50 - less than it costs to fill the average family car with petrol.

Mike McNamara

I am disappointed that your story reports that the High Court decision over Symbian's patent application "may benefit UK software makers" (High Court rewrites UK software patent rules).

For each software maker that gets a monopoly over an idea - a patent - there will be many more that are  presented with a barrier to entry to a market. Do you think more protectionism would be a good thing for UK software makers?

We need to remove the algorithm patents from other markets, not introduce them to the UK for the benefit of Nokia, Panasonic, Samsung, Siemens, Sony Ericsson and Ericsson - Symbian's owners - which are not struggling UK firms, are they?

MJ Ray

Of course the two convictions on the basis of DNA forensics was good news and just one of many lines of  enquiry that can secure the evidence for conviction (Hysteria clouds database debate, comment.computing.co.uk).

When we have a DNA  profile but no culprit, we only have the means to  identify them when they are known. Consequently, there is a respectable and growing body of opinion that believes routine blood tests should populate the DNA database.

It makes perfect sense to know the "owner" of DNA  beforehand so a match can be made. I have little doubt the time is not far away when routine sampling will be used to populate DNA databases. Then we can   reflect about the benefits of a society that determines  citizenship on the premise that if someone commits a criminal act we will know about it. While I agree databases are simply a way to store information, the  people who design and use them are a different matter.

Richard Mills

I have been a Cobol developer for three years since graduating (Marks & Spencer searches for business-savvy IT recruits). I wish I had stayed away from Cobol and so should all recent graduates.

It really does not matter whether there are billions of lines of Cobol in use, or whether developers say Cobol is not dead. Such people have probably been programming in Cobol for 25 years, so you are competing with these guys for just a handful of jobs.

I am a first-class graduate with a masters degree and even with these qualifications, three years of Cobol has crippled my career chances. I am now hoping to build on my skills at university and will continue to apply for jobs. I am also hoping to do a range of courses to refresh the knowledge I have neglected during the past three years.

I know my opinions are all negative, but Cobol has made it very difficult for me to forward my career and I really do not want the same thing to happen to other graduates.

Look from the perspective of your career, do the research and see the truth for yourself. Basically, Cobol is dead.

Anonymous, submitted on the web

Businesses are finally catching on to the importance of the consumer web – but companies need to embrace Web 2.0 from the inside (Businesses can learn from social web sites).

The Facebook generation expects collaboration and dynamism – not just through social networks, but also in corporate software. And this is something that stagnant, on-premise applications simply aren’t able to provide.

While users of traditional desktop applications are unwrapping boxes of software and waiting for it to install so that they can register it, hosted solutions are allowing other businesses to gain a head start.

Enabling collaboration and online sharing, Software as a Service allows businesses to access vital information wherever they are. And with our workforces becoming increasingly mobile, what use are office-based applications?

Organisations need to stop pigeonholing Web 2.0 as a consumer phenomenon. They must start embracing such common sense benefits as ease of use and greater intuitiveness in the enterprise. Only then will businesses fully reap its benefits.

Lindsey Armstrong,Salesforce.com

What you say is true (The world is going to India, Outsourcing blog). IBM has its largest operation outside the US in India. Indian brains are tapped by all international giants for cutting-edge research work. GE, Siemens, Merck, Microsoft, Oracle – you name it, all have research and development operations in India.

The world’s largest bank, food and beverage, insurance, steel and pharmaceutical companies are all headed by Indian chief executives. India itself is kind of a mini-Europe.

Jay, submitted on the web

There are far more important things surrounding the misuse of the internet that the government should be dealing with before it even thinks about media piracy (Government to attack download pirates).

The government does not seem to care as much when the little people are wronged, but any injustice to industry makes it pulls its finger out. I doubt the entertainment industry is going to have a lean Christmas because of media piracy.

Dylan, submitted on the web

It is typical of the Business Software Alliance (BSA) to come out with these comments and supposed research (IT piracy costing UK billions).

The BSA makes no attempt to counter mass piracy of this kind in the same way that the Federation Against Software Theft (Fast) does. If the BSA concentrated more on these mass software piracy markets instead of destroying a business because it did not have all the paperwork for those licences, there would be a chance of stopping the pirates.

As a software trade organisation, the BSA should also concentrate its efforts on making licensing simple, instead of letting its members push off complex agreements and licences for sometimes simple off-the-shelf products, creating an administrative nightmare for IT departments and a waste of precious resource.

Ben Rattigan

I've read through this story several times (Bill Gates outlines his vision for the next digital decade), even between the lines, but I still cannot find Gates making reference to the future being shiny, overpriced and as functional as a wet haddock with a small iPod forced into its mouth. iPhone reference? I think not.
However, Gates is stating the obvious. What happened to the days when he used to predict and propose as opposed to spieling about obvious "Web 2.0" tech horizons? Come on, we know that rubbish, tell us something.

JT, submitted on the web

I think "super user" is the new term for "let one person do everything, it's cheaper" - that is, cheaper in the short term, until the first bugs start to appear (Super users replace programmers).

What will a super user do when a bug appears, what application programming language is he going to use and will he make a good practice of it? What about relational databases and SQL? Object-oriented programming? Web design?

I propose that as users are promoted to "super users", we should be called "super programmers". That sounds fair to me.

Lazaros, submitted on the web

I am amazed at the naivety of the views expressed in the article "Super users replace programmers" and in particular the comments from the IT director at Marks & Spencer.

As an independent IT consultant specialising in retail systems, perhaps I should be pleased from a selfish point of view that there will no longer be any permanent development staff. To imagine that the ability to use a package such as Business Objects to enquire on data suddenly qualifies a super user to develop complex systems is unbelievable. 

While I recognise that pure development projects are in decline with user IT departments, the requirement for skilled development staff is just as vital, but the role has changed.

Development, analysis and design skills are required to integrate financial, supply chain and point-of-sale systems in the retail environment. A decision may even be made to use offshore facilities to perform some of this development. This does not then mean that no development skills are required in-house to support, configure and enhance such systems.

For the 90 per cent of IT activity which typically cannot be performed by user departments, key decision-makers should be focusing on architecture, systems analysis and configuration skills required to develop the "glue" between a business requirement and a hypothetical business solution.

They also need to ask themselves how these people are trained and develop these skills; a background in software development is key to these roles.

After all, would finance departments outsource annual audits to a stock control clerk with spreadsheet experience?

Nic Manfield

Your letter from Al Lawrence cannot go uncontested (Computer says no, Letters blog, letters.computing.co.uk). We all know that keeping software patches up to date is the only way to stay more secure .

In reality things are far from ideal, as anyone at the coalface will tell you. How many times do the security downloads render working machines into a heap of gibbering rubbish? We have all lost servers after reboot only to have the problem fixed in the next update cycle.

So we now all have a well-practiced caution on this automation after many lost days, a jaded opinion akin to trying to patch a colander so it doesn't leak.

But much more important is the small programmer who spends his waking hours creating an excellent piece of software that sells to a limited niche market. How is he supposed to test every patch and change from Microsoft for its bloated operating system before his software is sent out?

Security issues are on every page along with lost data issues. One wonders if we should start again with an operating system that is closed first, and not try to be backward-compatible on every release.

Let's admit our early attempts have gone wrong and that it's time to move on from the "Ford Model T" stage of computers.

We have the hardware power, let's think again about the software from the ground up and not add another layer to the foundations of sand we created when we did not know any better.

Phil Geeson

I was recently asked by a local village shop to help because they were having a problem with their computer, and they know I have "something to do with computers".

The problem turned out to be a software package which had decided not to launch, but was not giving much away in the error message. Eventually we found a phone number for a support desk for the package, and the first question the technician asked was which version of Internet Explorer was on the PC. On replying IE7, he asked me to remove it.

Ah, the IE7 incompatibility problem, I said. Yes, he replied, we have not upgraded our software yet Ð we normally just disable Windows Automatic Updates. The shopkeeper, on hearing me mention Windows Updates, said he had applied the updates that morning, because he knew that was good practice. The technician did some more maintenance via a remote session, and disabled Windows Automatic Updates.
So, for the right reasons, the shopkeeper was still inconvenienced. But the internet has another unknown number of insecure PCs  because of deliberate bad practice.

Al Lawrence

I thought Lisa Kelly's article was excellent but it gave me a sense of deja vu (Super users replace programmers).

Many years ago I witnessed the rapid spread of user-developed spreadsheets. Some of these were developed by capable super users who were able to make Excel stand on its head and dance.

Unfortunately, the spreadsheets were passed on to less-super users who, over time, made small changes. Needless to say, they did not understand some of the logic, which of course was not documented, and introduced some interesting bugs.

This would not have been an issue, had the output from these spreadsheets not been given to the firm's clients. To compound the problem, some of these spreadsheets had become business-critical applications and the super users who originally developed them had long since left.

The solution was to allow super users to develop anything they like to make their jobs easier or more effective - but to restrict how it was used in one important way.

If output were to be given to a client or used for client-related work, it should be treated as any other software application development and subjected to the normal testing. With these caveats in place good user-developed software could be produced.

However, most busy professionals baulk at the imposition of these rules and the amount of time it would take to comply with them.

The solution would seem to be treating their development as a prototype and then, if it is to become a business application, turning it over to a development team to produce a robust, quality-assured version.

This approach allows super users to develop quick and cheap tools for their own use, while protecting the firm from potentially disastrous tinkering.

John Carroll

In the hunt for solutions to the skills crisis, end user-driven development (EUDD) is something that the UK IT industry needs to get behind (Super users replace programmers).

While many IT seniors will quote the failure of 4GLs, it should be recognised that specialised EUDD tools are rife, and many users not even aware they are using EUDD. A good example is Excel, another is Web 2.0 sites such as Bebo. EUDD is here, make the most of it now.

Dharmesh Mistry

Regarding the reply from the TfL spokesman (No system failure for iBus, Letters blog, letters.computing.co.uk). The radios fitted to buses are either Band 111 or iBus, there is no such thing as a backup radio system. When the iBus radio is fitted to a bus the Band 111 one is taken out – the only backup the drivers have is their personal mobile phone.

With the Band 111, when the system fails at the garage the controller has no two-way contact with that bus or any other bus from that garage. But the driver can still call for emergency assistance by pushing the Code Red button on his radio.

If the iBus system fails at that garage, no one, including CentreComm – the central control station – has contact with that bus or any other bus. To reboot the system, every iBus workstation across the fleet, including CentreComm, has to log back on, hence the loss of emergency communication for those drivers. And unless they sort out that problem all 87 garages will have to log off and on once they have all been fitted out.

TFL needs to realise the main reason the radio is fitted to the bus. It is not just for controllers to contact the driver to control routes. The radios are there primarily to give drivers emergency assistance via a main London Buses control room, which is CentreComm.

If the bus has a defective radio and no Code Red facility, it is deemed unfit and does not go out on the road.

Name withheld on request

Despite your anonymous source claiming to have worked at one of our garages, the information he gave your reporter about London’s satellite bus communications project is totally inaccurate (Bus system chokes at startup, www.computing.co.uk/2202955).
There has been no “continual system failure”. The system uses two independent radio systems, so if one fails, there is a backup in place. This meant that drivers were constantly able to contact the emergency control centre and were not forced to use mobile phones, as alleged by your source. Our emergency control centre, not Arriva, handles driver incident reports and provides them with assistance.
There has been a remarkably small number of temporary faults. The longest incident, which was less than a day, was the result of a power failure at a garage, not the iBus system. Thanks to the robustness of the system there was no loss of driver incident reports.
When the system was first introduced there were a small number of “ghost” driver incident reports. But this problem was quickly resolved and it was never the case that “bad wiring” meant that every time some buses were started they made an emergency call.
I would also like to make it clear that every driver incident report is checked by the emergency control centre, they would never assume it was a ghost call.
Martin Davey
Project director and head of Technical Services Group
London Buses

Mark Wheeler asks me how Dell's pricing of Linux and Windows offerings works (Dell beats Linux, Letters blog, letters.computing.co.uk).

I would suggest he asks Dell and Microsoft.

The fact is that the list price for a copy of Windows is about £200 and the list for Linux goes down to nothing, depending on distribution and sourcing.

My original letter suggested that the true costs of operating systems were distorted, and in this follow-up I suggest that Dell and Microsoft may be the source of some of that distortion.

Peter Clinch

In his letter (Windows' hidden price tag, Letters blog, letters.computing.co.uk), Peter Clinch seems to suggest that a PC with Linux rather than Windows would cost £200 less.

Dell is currently selling a Vostro 200 with Windows Vista Basic and no monitor for £179 plus VAT and a Vostro 200 with Windows Business and a 19-inch flat panel for £249 plus VAT. How does that work then, Peter?

Mark Wheeler

As a product marketing executive, I can't always wait for my developer teams to write, test and launch new code in today's compressed market cycles (The death of packaged applications revisited, Freeform Dynamics blog, freeform.computing.co.uk).

I am not knocking software programmers, without whom marketing guys would have nothing to promote. They are the engineers that build the infrastructure that makes a better life for everyone. But in my defence, I'm the guy who lets people know about developers' inventions. I also add value by creating new uses for their applications.

So if my customers need a new feature now, I have two choices. I can reach out to my already-overloaded development team to create a new application, or I can find a company that already has a solution that we can integrate. Thus my job becomes more of a packager of third-party technology into one workable solution that I can price and sell to my market.

If I have a great idea for a new product, a quick web search will return three companies that have already launched it and have a platform with which we can connect. The product rollout game has become faster.

Mark Dlugozima

Roger Spencelayh asks how many people would select a non-Windows operating system given the option (No getting rid of Windows, Letters blog, letters.computing.co.uk).

Granted, the option he suggests at the point of sale - "Do you want Windows or Linux with your PC?" - would almost always come back Windows, but point out to the customer that the difference is £200 in favour of Linux and people might start getting more interested in the freeware.

Windows is largely seen as being free with a PC, but the reality is not quite the same. Get people to see the reality and the answers may start to change.

Peter Clinch

I assume that in Roger Spencelayh's world (No getting rid of Windows, Letters blog, letters.computing.co.uk), should I wish to buy a diesel-engined car, I would still have to pay Microsoft for the petrol engine.

Eric Lee

How is it that new software can be deployed without being tested to identify such issues? (Web site glitch exposes hotel customers' details).

Or was it deployed in spite of the fact that the fault was known about, as it appears to have been identified and fixed in "less than a day"?

This sort of incident only encourages the type of scare story beloved of the popular press that puts many people off using the internet for commercial transactions. IT needs to get its house in order if it is to show that it is a genuine profession contributing seriously to the nation's economy.

Andrew Fuller

I read your article (Call for computers without Windows) and started thinking of the effect of such a move.

Many large corporates buy PCs with a custom setup from their IT supplier, so no change there. Those small businesses with their own IT department will be able to install their preferred operating system (OS) without a lot of trouble - having made sure all required drivers are available, of course.

Maybe all PCs will have to be shipped with CDs containing all required drivers for all flavours of Windows, Linux, Unix and any other OS I'm not aware of. And what of consumers and small businesses without an IT department? I can hear the calls to the help lines now: "I've just bought a PC, turned it on and it's saying 'Boot partition not found'."

On the plus side, it'll be a great revenue stream for the smaller systems installers, but when you add that onto the cost of a new PC, the cost of ownership will certainly rise, putting PCs out of the reach of many home users and making many small businesses think twice before upgrading their hardware.

And in reality, how many people would select a non-Windows OS given the option? Just try asking at point of sale: "Do you want Windows or Linux with your PC?" It would certainly be interesting if one of the large PC/electrical retailers ran such a survey.

So is the next headline going to be "EU shoots itself in foot yet again", or "Cars in EU to be sold without engine management software"?

Roger Spencelayh

There was nothing in the conversation you recounted that suggests problems were caused by poor software testing (A testing conversation, Industry view blog, intellect.computing.co.uk). What you were talking about was poor software development.

There's no question that poor software testing and poor software development are often related. The former is a subset of the latter, and both are arguably subsets of poor management when the products make their way to release.

However, one man's poor management may be another man's pragmatic management. Decisions about software quality are ultimately business decisions, and there are lots of bugs - especially in in-house programs - that make more sense to ship than to fix.

Testers don't put bugs in; they have to find bugs that are hidden and placed there by someone else. Nor do the testers take bugs out; that is a development task. The decision on whether to take them out is a business task.

Michael Bolton

Regarding Rob Hindle's letter in the 6 September issue of Computing (UK software prices shiver me timbers, letters.computing.co.uk).

I am an IT manager and have previously bought multiple Adobe software products. I have noticed for years that Adobe prices in the UK are unjustifiably too high compared with the US prices, no matter what the exchange rate at the time. However, with the recent release of Adobe Creative Suite 3, and the continuing decline in the value of the US dollar, this has gone from being merely outrageous to what should be criminal.

I will not be upgrading our existing Adobe software and I will not be buying any additional Adobe software until Adobe comes to its senses and stops ripping off UK and European customers.

The excuses Adobe gives for UK prices being higher than the US include higher cost of wages, higher cost of office space, other higher costs of doing business, currency fluctuations and tax.

While the above may justify some price premium, they do not justify, for example, Creative Suite 3 Design Premium Upgrade costing more than double the US price.

While our software licences are legal, such punitive pricing by Adobe hardly discourages piracy.

John Lockwood

The UK, with one of the lowest rates of piracy, must be the most profitable market for the US software industry given its widespread policy of converting the dollar price to sterling at a rate approaching 1:1. For example Adobe CS3 Web Premium is $1600 or £1400; Microsoft Vista Ultimate is $400 or £370 (Businesses must crack down on piracy).

Those are UK VAT-inclusive list prices and reflect what a private individual will be paying. The price differential will contribute to the incentive to use an illegal copy, as does our lower average per capita income and higher cost of living.

Comparing the VAT-free prices, Adobe and Microsoft are still valuing the pound at $0.74 and $0.79 respectively compared with today's market rate of $0.49 - on that basis we are paying 50 per cent more than the US. Maybe if the manufacturers were to bring UK prices in to line with the US, our piracy rate would fall still further.

Rob Hindle

I can tell you a few secrets I've discovered about Google, the basis of which, as an IT professional and systems manager, I believe are of some concern (I know Google's secret - but I can't tell you, Editor's Diary, editor.computing.co.uk).

My first secret is that a laptop user was having serious performance issues which turned out to be partly down to a whole gamut of Google downloads, installs, cookies, and so on.

Simple, one might think, just remove the Google installs. However, removing the Google toolbar from Firefox proved to be a marathon task requiring changes to the registry, deleting Firefox profiles and completely reinstalling Firefox. Simply selecting Firefox add-ons and clicking uninstall is the recommended method but when relaunching Firefox a screen appears thanking you for installing the Google toolbar and one is obliged to tick one or more boxes to continue with the installation; cancelling is not an option. This reminded me of the problem one might experience when digging out a Trojan or self-replicating worm.

My second Google secret is that our revised rule is that no Google material is to be installed on our in-house networks. Our Firefox browser installations are all set to block Google cookies and scripting. My final Google secret is that in my opinion, Google is not to be trusted.

Chris Thompson

It is ironic that Microsoft commissioned this study (UK IT managers spend too much time fire fighting), when most of the ‘fires’ that I have to contend with are started by Microsoft products spontaneously combusting.

Monty

There are many advantages for government agencies and users in capitalising software and development costs (IT’s economic value too low).

Part of the problem relates to how accountants measure software. Traditionally, software expenditure has been written off in the year of acquisition, unless bought in as a package. The new IFRS standards have relaxed certain requirements to write off expenditure on intangibles, but the bulk of development work would still have to be written off to revenue.

This approach grew out of the justifiable concern of standard setters during the 1970s that capitalising research and development (R&D) expenditure would give a false impression of profitability. Although the company’s accounts would show glowing profits, the net cash inflow would be quite anaemic.

In addition, much R&D expenditure is wasted either because of inefficiencies in running projects or the development expenditure is of little or no economic benefit. If capitalising R&D is to be permitted, then it is vital that stringent impairment review processes are mandated and implemented, ensuring that any aborted or wasted expenditure is written off to revenue.

Patrick Mulvey

Databases are only as good and as accurate as the data entered by the human user (DVLA holding inaccurate data on 7.8 million drivers)

Let’s face it, even with all of the logging, auditing and error handling you still cannot program a human being to enter data 100 per cent accurately every time.

This means that data must be checked, checked again and re-checked and that takes time and money. In today’s world of doing things cheaper and faster, there is little room for covering the same ground more than once.

P Jones

In the days of tobacco advertising, the big players used to maintain they were not encouraging folks to take up smoking, but trying to steal existing smokers from the other brands. Non-smokers were apparently impervious to their advertising.

The claims by Google and Yahoo that they are trying to be more specific in who they advertise to sound rather familiar (Google’s battles are breaking new ground).

Their claim that small businesses only want to advertise to people who want their products will soon see these small businesses stagnate or disappear. You cannot expand if you only sell widgets to people who already buy widgets, you need to encourage the folks who may never have even seen them to start buying.

The search companies are simply trying to justify their hoarding of masses of data while they try to think of ways to make money from it.

Mike Pepper

Your article (BSA demands stricter software piracy laws) included the following quote from the British Software Alliance (BSA): ‘It is only the software industry that allows that to happen ­ you would not let someone drive off the forecourt with a car they did not pay for.’

But it is only the software industry that sells defective products to customers and expects those customers to pay extra for upgrades.

If you buy a car, you have a guarantee that it is fit for purpose. If the car has a defect, the manufacturer will fix it at no extra charge.

If a particular model of car has a safety-related defect, the manufacturer will write to all legitimate buyers of that model and invite them to have the defect fixed at no cost to the buyer.

When the software industry guarantees its products are fit for purpose, when defects are fixed under that guarantee, and when suppliers write to all legitimate purchasers offering to fix security-related defects for free, then they will be able to compare themselves with car manufacturers.

I’m not justifying piracy ­ just that the comparisons offered by the software industry are inappropriate.

Richard Parkins

For years there have been industry surveys ­ annually since the mid 1990s ­ that talk about how much money the software, music and movie industry is ‘losing due to piracy’ (BSA demands stricter software piracy laws).

Many people do not believe the statistics being used by these industry surveys, hence they tend to ignore even the advice of the BSA.

It is not really that important how much the software, fonts, music and movie industry is losing. What should be relevant is by how much more you could improve your bottom line and cash flow. Until you check out your systems you will not know.

Rob Harmer
PCProfile

Open source software can reduce costs whether in the public sector or private (Letters, 5, 12 April). But you must understand what the software you are looking at is capable of providing.

So many projects involving a deployment of open source on the desktop encounter less than 100 per cent compatibility with Microsoft Office macros. This merely demonstrates a lack of understanding of the software, with a blind focus on making savings.

Open source is just software, nothing special. Does it meet your needs or not? When buying cars we tend to have a list of requirements in our mind, for example, airbags, servicing, price, hatchback or estate. We then look in the market to find a car we like, matched against our requirements.

A Smart-car is cheaper to buy and run than an average major brand 4x4. But it may not be an ideal choice to tow your caravan. Even among 4x4s you would have to consider all their features before picking the best one. Surely we should be using the same principles when selecting software?

Jason Simmons

The general thrust of the letter from Panos Stavoulis (Letters, 5 April) seems to be a pitch based on return on investment in favour of using propriety tools, laced with some negative views about open source software.

But when attempting to deliver the coup de grâce in the final paragraph, he swaps over to the phrase ‘freeware’. It may well be that the poor developer in the story was committed to some open-source freeware application. But it is more likely that it was a non-supported, proprietary application, that was distributed as freeware.

Clearly not all open-source software is distributed as freeware, and - I speculate - most freeware is not open source.

This appears as a non-sequitur in the article, and could have done with being judiciously edited out.

Tom Hodder

Introducing more open source into the public sector is complicated because each department has different needs and context (computing.co.uk/2185470).

Attempts to introduce open source on the desktop have had mixed success. Often many individual pieces of software, such as macros, have been developed over the years by different offices. The conversion of these is expensive.

As with most IT issues the technology is well understood but people and structures militate against progress. One way forward is for the government to encourage collaboration between public administrations, the software industry and users to share the development costs for migration.

Unfortunately the costs may then be comparable to proprietary software and may lack the integration capabilities of modern desktop environments. Moving to open source is unlikely to deliver cost savings or efficiency without a massive supporting infrastructure and a change in culture. Going open source sounds great but in practice it is likely to be problematic.

Mike Holcombe

Yes, the public sector should use more open source but doing so is not that simple  (computing.co.uk/2185470).

I work for a fairly small district council and we only use package systems, which frequently have links to Microsoft Office.

Using an alternative to Office could be risky. It might work, but it is equally likely to fail at a critical point because of subtle differences in the way data is handled.

We have no control over the way our package systems are developed or what suppliers link to, other than to decide not to use their system.

The best way to overcome this, and a number of other problems, is to change our approach. Some councils develop their own software so why should we not all use those systems as packages.

We all provide the same basic services and should be moving to a standard process, which means we could have a standard system that would be maintained at much lower cost.

This would allow us to use open source products much more effectively and easily. There are barriers but they can all be overcome if there is the will to change. It might not be easy but the benefits would be significant.

Geoff Sissons

From my own experience as a software developer for the last 10 years, I know that the people you employ to run and develop your systems cost more than the software (www.computing.co.uk/2185470, Letters, 22, 29 March).

You might save £50 on the licence but then have to pay £1,000 more on employing someone to develop or fix the application. Using a second-rate product to develop your project will cost you more in money and human resources.

Unfortunately open source is fragmented and not as reliable or as well supported. I will never forget my developer friend who, rather than use data feeds, employed a secretary to enter the Olympics results manually into a system used by a TV channel.

I argued that with my tools I could develop the software in 30 minutes to accomplish the task. He could not because he was using a freeware tool, while I was using a proper development environment. Nothing comes free.

Panos Stavroulis

You ask whether the government should use more open source software (computing.co.uk/2185470, Letters, 22 March). That is the wrong question.
You should really be asking whether the government knows enough about open source to make the right deployment decisions. Open source should be treated like any other potential solution. Define your needs, clarify your requirements, then measure all the alternatives against your requirements and budget.
To do this, you have to have enough knowledge of open source solutions to make sure that they match your requirements. Get the right tool for the right job.
Jason Simmonds

I was a C and C++ software engineer from 1993 to 2001. Then schizophrenia brought my life and career to a crashing halt. As an aside, I wrote some of my best work when psychotic – until the auditory hallucinations and delusions became too much to bear.
I work at a mental health charity in Morpeth called Contact as an IT volunteer so I am still using my skills. Between 2001 and 2003 I lurched between hospitalisations from one ill-advised job to another. Contact has a scheme where we solicit donations of unwanted computers and refurbish them and give them away to carers or cared for people. Eventually we shall have a small pool of people with mental health problems who will be seeking supported employment to make use of their recently acquired skills. I would like to see positive discrimination or supported employment for people with mental health problems become more established and would be grateful for any ideas on how to take this plan forward.
Name withheld on request