Media Search:



Apple 'in talks' over Facebook Home for iPhone

Weve shown them what weve built and were just in an ongoing conversation, Mosseri said, referring to discussions with Apple.

On iPhone devices, the Home software would be tailored to what Apple prefers, Mosseri said. It could look much different than the Android version.

It may or may not be Home, he said. We could also just bring some of the design values to the iOS app. That might be how it ends up. Or we could build just the lock screen. Maybe then its not called Home, its called something else.

Apple declined to comment.

Mark Zuckerberg has said Facebook and Apple have a great relationship.

We are integrated into the operating system with them, Zuckerberg said. We have an active dialogue to do more with them.

Already, Facebook has issued an update to its iOS app that brings Chat Heads, a new feature in Facebook Home, to the iPhone.

But the suggestion that Apple could allow Facebook Home or anything similar on iOS drew scepticism from industry observers. Many doubt that Apple would bend its strict rules to allow any other company to influence the user interface of iOS. At the unveiling of Facebook Home last month, Zuckerberg admitted it would not be possible on iOS in the same form as the Android version.

Wed love to offer this on iPhone, and we just cant today, and we will work with Apple to do the best experience that we can within what they want, he said.

Read the rest here:
Apple 'in talks' over Facebook Home for iPhone

GroupLink IT Klingon Battles: Free Asset Discovery In Help Desk Software

BUDAPEST, Hungary, April 16, 2013 /PRNewswire/ -- GroupLink Corporation announces today the upcoming beta of the asset discovery feature added as a free component to its IT help desk software, everything HelpDesk. The public beta will be available for download soon. This announcement came at the 2013 Open Horizons EMEA Summit, which includes technologists for Linux, Novell ZENworks and Filr, government, college, K-12 education and similar industries. A common interest for the attendees of this summit is their passion for finding and battling with IT Klingons.

Information about this beta release of asset discovery in the help desk software can be found at http://www.grouplink.com/landing/ehdbetatest.html

The addition of intelligent network discovery to the powerful suite of features available in GroupLink's help desk support software brings another element of ITservice management into one solution.

For more than 15 years, GroupLink has provided powerful software solutions to customers in many industries, including K-12 schools, higher education institutions including trade, technical and traditional colleges, state and local government, and healthcare. With the addition of the network scanner, organizations can now fully leverage the asset management tools already provided by the help desk software, such as tying assets to tickets and work orders. This gives organizations the ability to run critical reports to identify trouble assets, warranty information, lease dates, trends, and more.

GroupLink is committed to providing tools to leverage existing IT infrastructure in gathering, managing, and reporting information simply and efficiently, allowing organizations to increase revenue while lowering total cost of ownership (TCO). The ability to auto-discover asset information is a crucial piece in fulfilling this mission.

GroupLink Corporation services over 1,000 enterprise customers and 4,000 worldwide implementations from its US headquarters in Bountiful, Utah. Whether deployed for K-12, Higher Education, Government, or other commercial organizations, GroupLink's world class, best-practices Help Desk, CRM, Sales Force Automation and MDM software solutions feature key integration with Microsoft, Linux, Novell and Apple/Mac environments and help customers automate and add intelligence to business processes, enhance profitability, and lower total cost of ownership.

Media Contact:

Aimee Kocinski GroupLink Corporation (801) 335-0713

GroupLink and everything HelpDesk are registered trademarks belonging exclusively to GroupLink Corporation. Linux is a registered trademark belonging exclusively to Linus Torvalds. Novell and ZENworks are registered trademarks belonging exclusively to Novell, Inc.

Here is the original post:
GroupLink IT Klingon Battles: Free Asset Discovery In Help Desk Software

75% of Enterprises Encounter Problems When Using Free and Open Source Software, According to Univa Survey

MARKHAM, Ontario--(BUSINESS WIRE)--

Univa, the Data Center Automation Company, today announced the findings of its 2013 Free and Open Source Software survey. Conducted online by uSAMP, the report finds that Free and Open Source Software (FOSS) is prominent within businesses today with 76% using it internally; however, 75% of those users experience problems utilizing FOSS in mission-critical departments. Although businesses are relying on unsupported FOSS solutions today, 64% say they would pay for supported software to solve their issues.

A lack of enterprise-grade support is the largest problem FOSS users have experienced in their company with 27% of respondents raising it as their top concern. Other troublesome issues include usability (24%), maintenance (20%), crashes (19%), bugs (18%), downtime (16%), loss of productivity (16%) and interoperability (16%).

Indeed, FOSS importance today means that 64% are willing to pay for better quality, with the following listed as reasons to do so:

The demand for stability and enterprise-grade support suggests that the comfort of reliability is the number one factor that leads to investments beyond Open Source solutions.

We have always said that users are willing to pay for quality when it comes to Open Source software, and the results of the survey have confirmed as such, said Gary Tyreman, Univa CEO. A large number of organizations use Open Source Grid Engine as a key ingredient in product development, but as the company grows they cant afford to rely on unsupported Open Source Grid Engine. That is when they can turn to us for peace of mind, scalability and reliability provided by our team and proven Univa Grid Engine.

The key product development departments of a business where most mission-critical software resides - engineering and R&D rely most heavily on FOSS (32%). These trump executive (5%), legal (1%), finance (6%), sales (8%), HR (3%) and marketing (6%) combined. One in ten businesses uses FOSS across the board in every department, indicating how important FOSS is depended upon as the backbone of a company.

To download an infographic of the survey results, go to: https://www.yousendit.com/download/UVJqV0o5NmNVbThQWWNUQw

About Univa Corporation

Univa, the Data Center Automation Company, is the leading provider of automation andmanagement software for computational and big data infrastructures. Our products and global enterprise support give our customers the power to manage their entire computational space, no matter how big or where it is deployed. Many of the leading brands in the world depend on Univas unsurpassed expertise, and premier services and support. Univa is headquartered in Hoffman Estates, Illinois, USA, with offices in Markham, ON, Canada; Austin, Texas, USA and Munich, Germany.

View post:
75% of Enterprises Encounter Problems When Using Free and Open Source Software, According to Univa Survey

President Obama Embraces the Word Terrorism a Day After

After choosing not to call the Boston Marathon bombings terrorism on Monday, President Obama used variations of the word terror four times in a public address on Tuesday. Given what we know about what took place, the FBI is investigating it as an act of terrorism, Obama said. Anytime bombs are used to target innocent civilians, it is an act of terror.

His definition of terrorism was inaccurate, at least according legal guidelines that have been adopted by federal law enforcement. But the Presidents decision to embrace the term put him on the politically safer side of a linguistic problem that has bedeviled his presidency for years.

According to the U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, an act of terrorism has three parts. First, it is an unlawful use of force and violence against persons or property. Second, it is intended to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, any segment thereof. Third, that intimidation or coercion is intended in furtherance of political or social objectives.

There are, as a result, possible scenarios in which a bombing of civilians would not be considered terrorism. An attack by a madman without any coherent social or political objectives, a targeted assassination by bomb, or a bombing intended as a distraction for another criminal act, like a bank robbery, would be examples. None of those are likely explanations for what took place in Boston on Monday.

But the use of the term terrorism remains politically fraught one. Nearly four years after U.S. Army psychiatrist Nidal Malik Hasan allegedly went on a shooting rampage at Fort Hood, Texas, killing 13, the military has yet to call the event a terrorist act. Hasan had sent sympathetic e-mails about jihad and suicide attacks to Anwar al-Awlaki, a terrorist in Yemen who was later killed in a U.S. drone strike, and reportedly shouted Allahu Akbar before beginning his massacre. Despite the protests of victims and members of Congress, the Defense Department continues to categorize the event as workplace violence.

Last year, the use of the term terrorism became a major point of contention in the presidential election. Republicans, including Mitt Romney, charged that Obama had resisted labeling the attacks on a U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya, terrorism for political reasons during an election. Obama countered that he had referred to acts of terror in his first statement on the attacks. Just weeks before the election, press secretary Jay Carney made clear that the White House had adopted a broad definition of terrorism with regards to the Libyan attacks. Anytime an embassy or diplomatic facility is attacked by force with weapons and Americans are killed, that is an act of terror under the definition of terrorism that applies at the NCTC [National Counterterrorism Center] and elsewhere, he said in press gaggle onboard Air Force One.

In his statement on the Boston attacks Monday night, Obama seemed deliberately cautious about using the word terrorism, even though the FBI was already moving to take over the investigation of the incident as a possible act of terrorism. With events still unfolding in Boston, the President issued a statement that seemed intended to avoid inflaming national alarm. But in an unusual move, an aide to the President spoke to the press moments after the President had concluded his remarks about the classification of the bombings. Any event with multiple explosive devices as this appears to be is clearly an act of terror, and will be approached as an act of terror, the White House official said.

Nonetheless, Obama received some criticism overnight about shying away from the word in his Monday remarks. On Tuesday, the clear emphasis of the term seemed designed to head off another Benghazi-like controversy. The American people refuse to be terrorized, Obama said.

With additional reporting by Zeke Miller

Original post:
President Obama Embraces the Word Terrorism a Day After

Obama Embraces the Word 'Terrorism' a Day After

After choosing not to call the Boston Marathon bombings terrorism on Monday, President Obama used variations of the word terror four times in a public address on Tuesday. Given what we know about what took place, the FBI is investigating it as an act of terrorism, Obama said. Anytime bombs are used to target innocent civilians, it is an act of terror.

His definition of terrorism was inaccurate, at least according legal guidelines that have been adopted by federal law enforcement. But the Presidents decision to embrace the term put him on the politically safer side of a linguistic problem that has bedeviled his presidency for years.

According to the U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, an act of terrorism has three parts. First, it is an unlawful use of force and violence against persons or property. Second, it is intended to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, any segment thereof. Third, that intimidation or coercion is intended in furtherance of political or social objectives.

There are, as a result, possible scenarios in which a bombing of civilians would not be considered terrorism. An attack by a madman without any coherent social or political objectives, a targeted assassination by bomb, or a bombing intended as a distraction for another criminal act, like a bank robbery, would be examples. None of those are likely explanations for what took place in Boston on Monday.

But the use of the term terrorism remains politically fraught one. Nearly four years after U.S. Army psychiatrist Nidal Malik Hasan allegedly went on a shooting rampage at Fort Hood, Texas, killing 13, the military has yet to call the event a terrorist act. Hasan had sent sympathetic e-mails about jihad and suicide attacks to Anwar al-Awlaki, a terrorist in Yemen who was later killed in a U.S. drone strike, and reportedly shouted Allahu Akbar before beginning his massacre. Despite the protests of victims and members of Congress, the Defense Department continues to categorize the event as workplace violence.

Last year, the use of the term terrorism became a major point of contention in the presidential election. Republicans, including Mitt Romney, charged that Obama had resisted labeling the attacks on a U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya, terrorism for political reasons during an election. Obama countered that he had referred to acts of terror in his first statement on the attacks. Just weeks before the election, press secretary Jay Carney made clear that the White House had adopted a broad definition of terrorism with regards to the Libyan attacks. Anytime an embassy or diplomatic facility is attacked by force with weapons and Americans are killed, that is an act of terror under the definition of terrorism that applies at the NCTC [National Counterterrorism Center] and elsewhere, he said in press gaggle onboard Air Force One.

In his statement on the Boston attacks Monday night, Obama seemed deliberately cautious about using the word terrorism, even though the FBI was already moving to take over the investigation of the incident as a possible act of terrorism. With events still unfolding in Boston, the President issued a statement that seemed intended to avoid inflaming national alarm. But in an unusual move, an aide to the President spoke to the press moments after the President had concluded his remarks about the classification of the bombings. Any event with multiple explosive devices as this appears to be is clearly an act of terror, and will be approached as an act of terror, the White House official said.

Nonetheless, Obama received some criticism overnight about shying away from the word in his Monday remarks. On Tuesday, the clear emphasis of the term seemed designed to head off another Benghazi-like controversy. The American people refuse to be terrorized, Obama said.

With additional reporting by Zeke Miller

Read the rest here:
Obama Embraces the Word 'Terrorism' a Day After