Posts Tagged ‘Technology’

Philly software project to implement lobbyist disclosure law crashes

May 10th, 2012

After paying $227,000 to a national consulting firm, the city of Philadelphia has decided to scrap a year-long project to develop software to implement the city’s first-ever lobbyists’ disclosure law, which City Council passed in 2010.

As a result, lobbyists who register under the law and clients who submit quarterly reports showing their spending will make those filings on paper for now, and the City of Philadelphia Board of Ethics will have to figure out a way to post the information on the city website.

It’s back to square one on developing the software that was supposed to get the data from filers, let the ethics board manage it, and make a simple, searchable data base available on the Web.

Perficient, Inc., which describes itself as “a leading technology and management consulting firm,” was engaged to develop the software. Ethics board executive director Shane Creamer said there were problems with Perficient’s work from the beginning.

“But we held out hope for a long time that we would ultimately get something that was workable, not perfect, but something we could continue to improve upon,” Creamer said.

But with a more than a quarter million bucks down the drain and little prospect of getting anything workable, the city recently pulled the plug on the project.
“It became apparent that we weren’t going to get a product that was functional or usable on the most basic level,” Creamer said. “And that was disappointing, after having gone through that process for the better part of a year now.”

The city is exploring its options for adapting software from another city, such as New York, hiring a firm to build a new system, or having the city’s IT geeks do the job in-house.

How does a seemingly straightforward information technology project like this crash and burn in 2012?
City Councilman Bill Green raised the question in an April 10 budget hearing at which the lobbyists software debacle came up.
“This is a basic form of information,” Green said. “It could be on Google Forms. I mean, it is not a complicated undertaking, I don’t believe, to get data in fields and have it made available on the Internet for public consumption,” Green said.

The city’s technology chief, Adel Ebeid didn’t return my call, but he did tell Green in the hearing that “there is some complexity in it with regard to work flow and credentialing. So, it is not all straight forward.”

I called the number for Perficient’s Philadelphia-area office, and got a recording inviting me to dial my party’s four-digit extension, or use a dial-by-name directory. There was no option to reach anybody if you didn’t have the name of somebody working there. Hitting zero restarted the original recording. What a surprise that a company like that would struggle to get a software project done.

I did reach Liz Drazen, Perficient’s national public relations manager, who sent the following statement:
“Unfortunately, we cannot discuss details specific to a particular client or engagement. However, Perficient remains dedicated to serving our clients and helping them achieve their business objectives through the use of innovative technology solutions. We have been one of the fastest-growing consulting firms in the country for more than a decade in part because of our high client satisfaction rates. Perficient strives to be a strong economic contributor to the local Philadelphia community, and we remain committed to working with all of our clients to resolve issues when they arise.”

Mark McDonald, Mayor Michael Nutter’s press secretary, said the city’s Office of Innovation and Technology is “now consulting with the law department about its options.”

Source:http://www.newsworks.org/index.php/off-mic/item/38216

Yodot Software Launches the Latest in Photo Recovery Technology

May 9th, 2012

The recently launched version of Yodot Photo Recovery Software for Windows is the most advanced photo recovery tool available today. The software is loaded with advanced scanning algorithms to recover any type of photo from hard drives, memory cards and other removable external storage devices.

The recent technological advances made in the field of computing have brought all electronic devices closer to each other. A digital camera is a value addition to a gaming device, mobile phone, tablet and notebook. Digital images captured with these devices can be stored in an electronic format – i.e., as a file. With the increasing usage of media files the number of data loss incidents related to loss of photos and other media files from storage devices has also increased.

Yodot’s photo recovery software helps users recover lost and deleted media files. It uses the most advanced algorithms designed for not only recovering deleted photos, but the software can also recover deleted and lost songs, video and other types of camera specific RAW image files.

“Yodot Photo Recovery Software for Windows provides the state-of-the-art photo recovery abilities to any professional photographer, photography enthusiasts or to anyone who has lost their important photo, audio or video file,” said Ken Miller, spokesperson for Yodot Software.

4 important features of this software:

Can find a photo even when the file system of a drive is completely damaged & can calculate the exact file size to recover
Can differentiate a file as an actual photo or a thumbnail of a photo, this helps in recovering the file with exact resolution and size
Preview feature of the software helps in previewing all the recovered files before registering the software
Provides two different recovered files viewing option – Data Tree View and Sorted File Type View

Pricing and availability:

You can download Yodot Photo Recovery Software from Yodot’s website. To save the recovered data, software must be registered. For registration a “license key” is sent through email to unlock the trial version after purchasing the software. The application can be purchased with a limited time launch discount for a MSRP of $39 from the official website.

Source:http://www.businessrevieweurope.eu/press_releases/yodot-software-launches-the-latest-in-photo-recovery-technology

Oracle depicts Google as software thief as trial over Android technology rights kicks off

April 17th, 2012

Oracle began Monday trying to convince a jury that Google’s top executives have long known that they stole a key piece of technology to build the Android software that now powers more than more than 300 million smartphones and tablet computers.

The unflattering portrait of Google Inc. was drawn by Oracle lawyer Michael Jacobs in the opening phase of a complex trial pitting two Silicon Valley powerhouses in a battle delving into the often mind-numbing minutiae of intellectual property and computer coding.

“We will prove to you from beginning to end … that Google knew it was using someone else’s property,” Jacobs said near the end of his hour-long opening statement.

Google’s lawyers will counter with their opening statements Tuesday.

The showdown in a San Francisco federal court centres on Oracle’s allegations that Google’s Android software infringes on the patents and copyrights of Java, a programming technology that Sun Microsystems began developing 20 years ago.

Oracle Corp., a business software maker based in Redwood Shores, acquired the rights to Java when it bought Sun Microsystems for $7.3 billion in January 2010.

Google Inc., the Mountain View-based Internet search leader, has steadfastly denied Oracle’s allegations since the lawsuit was filed seven months after the Sun deal closed.

The impasse has left it to a 12-member jury to resolve the dispute in a trial scheduled to last as long as 10 weeks. U.S. District Judge William Alsup devoted most of Monday’s session to picking the jury, leaving only enough time for Oracle to lay out the framework for its case.

Oracle is seeking hundreds of millions of dollars in damages and an injunction that would force Google to pay future licensing fees or find an alternative to Java to keep its Android system running smoothly.

At one point in the lawsuit, Oracle estimated it might be owed as much as $6.1 billion. But Alsup has whittled the case down in a way that has substantially lowered the size of the potential payout if Google loses.

In a sign of how far apart the two sides are, Google last month said it would be willing to pay $2.8 million plus a tiny percentage of its future revenue if the jury decides Android infringed on two Java patents. Google hasn’t publicly estimated what it thinks its liability might be if the jury decides Android violated 37 Java programming copyrights as alleged by Oracle.

The copyright disagreement the most important point of the case will be covered in the first phase of the trial followed by the patent dispute. If necessary, a third phase will be devoted to how much money Google owes Oracle.

Much of the evidence presented during the trial will delve into highly technical fare likely only to appeal to programming geeks and patent-law aficionados. However, there may be dramatic interludes that lift a veil on the inner workings of two of the world’s most influential technology companies.

The intrigue will include testimony from the two companies’ multibillionaire CEOs, Oracle’s Larry Ellison and Google’s Larry Page. Oracle indicated on Monday that it could call Ellison to the stand as early as Tuesday.

Several other industry luminaries, including former Google CEO Eric Schmidt and former Sun Microsystems CEO Jonathan Schwartz, are also on the list of potential witnesses.

Jacobs focused much of his opening statement on excerpts in internal emails that suggest Google knew it needed to pay licensing fees to use some of the Java technology that went into Android, a project that began in earnest in 2005 when Google bought a startup run by Andy Rubin. The first phone running on Android software didn’t go on sale until October 2008, about 15 months before Oracle bought Sun Microsystems and stepped up the attempts to make Google pay up for the Java technology.

Oracle cited an October 2005 email from Rubin to Page as an early sign that Google realized it probably would have to pay Sun for using Java in Android.

“My proposal is that we take a license that specifically grants the right for us to Open Source our product,” Rubin wrote.

Jacobs pointed to a May 2006 email from Schmidt to Rubin as an indication that Google knew it might need to seek other solutions for Android if it couldn’t work out an agreement with Sun.

“How are we doing on the Sun deal?” Schmidt asked in his message. “Its (sic) it time to develop a non-Java solution to avoid dealing with them?”

By August 2010, Google still hadn’t been able to find any satisfactory alternatives to Java, according to an email that Google engineer Tim Lindholm sent to Rubin.

“We have been over a bunch of these, and think they all suck,” wrote Lindholm, who worked at Sun Microsystems before joining Google. “We conclude that we need to negotiate a license for Java under the terms we need.”

The lack of a licensing agreement ultimately didn’t deter Google, Jacobs told the jury, because the company realized it needed a mobile software system to preserve its digital search-and-advertising empire as more sophisticated phones enabled more people to surf the Internet while they were away from their desktop computers. Java provided Google with a springboard into mobile computing because 6 million software programmers were already familiar with the technology and could easily create applications that would run on Android, Jacobs said.

Although Google doesn’t charge device makers to use Android, the company makes money from some of the mobile advertising and mobile applications sold on the system. Google has said its mobile advertising revenue now exceeds $2.5 billion, but it hasn’t specified how much of that money comes from Android-powered devices.

Source:http://www.canadianbusiness.com/article/79937–oracle-depicts-google-as-software-thief-as-trial-over-android-technology-rights-kicks-off

Get Adobe Flash playerPlugin by wpburn.com wordpress themes