RSSMicrosoft's 'Live Mesh' aims to become the universal window to the Web
By Nate Mook | Published April 23, 2008, 5:00 AM
Microsoft has taken the wraps off a Technology Preview of its new Live Mesh platform, which promises to connect disparate devices so they can seamlessly share information. But beyond the surface, Live Mesh portends that Microsoft doesn't just want to compete on the Web; it wants to be the Web.
The brainchild of Redmond's new Chief Software Architect Ray Ozzie and in development for two years, Live Mesh is a bold endeavor that, if successful, could change the way PCs and other devices interact with Internet services and each other. Microsoft wants data and applications to be accessible from anywhere -- online and off -- using any device.
In order to accomplish this goal, Microsoft has created what is at its core a synchronization platform based on its FeedSync technology. Live Mesh takes the concept of RSS feeds used to share news and extends it to information and data used by Web services and desktop applications.
Why synchronization? Because it's the key to modern-day computing in which PCs no longer stand alone, but rather interact in an ecosystem of consumer electronics and the Internet. Apple discovered this with the launch of the iPod and iTunes, and continued the trend in its new Mac operating systems and iLife software suite. If you control the synchronization of information, you control the ecosystem.
Microsoft, on the other hand, has struggled to achieve simple synchronization between its products and services, and the result is frequently confusing and frustrating for the end user. When everything ran just on Windows this wasn't a problem because it controlled the underlying architecture. But now, devices rely instead on the Web to communicate and share data.
The Web has long posed a potential threat to Microsoft, but until recently it remained an island, cut off from entertainment and productivity. Now, it's becoming what company officials call the "central hub of social experience," and Windows is slowly being made obsolete by the likes of Google and Yahoo serving rich applications in a Web browser.
The solution to this problem is conceptually fairly simple: Make a "Windows for the Web" and encourage developers to write their applications for this new platform. The advantage to developers is the integration with the operating system that enables the application to function even when offline. Consumers will also see a benefit by having a single location to access their different devices and launch Web applications in a familiar desktop-like environment.
Enter Live Desktop, the centerpiece of Live Mesh and the first piece of the platform that Microsoft is unveiling Wednesday. "My Computer" is being replaced by "My Mesh," which displays the user's various devices (although it's currently limited to Windows XP and Windows Vista PCs.) Live Desktop becomes one of these devices -- essentially the user's hard drive located in the so-called "cloud." Microsoft wants it to become everyone's personal Web destination, and therefore it's compatible with IE, Safari and Firefox.
During the Technology Preview, testers will be granted 5GB of storage and two applications serve as an example of what the Live Mesh platform is capable of: file sharing and Remote Desktop. Files and folders can be made part of the mesh, which makes them available through the Live Desktop and from other devices on the mesh. This can include music, photos or work documents -- whatever the user wants to access from different locations or directly on the Web. Changes made to any file are then synchronized back to the mesh.
Sharing also spans to other people. "Take a picture folder, add e-mail addresses to the people you want to share with. Whoever you send the e-mail to can click the URL and consume the folder through their desktop," explained Abhay Parasnis, Product Unit Manager of Live Mesh. Users become "members" of your Live Mesh to facilitate social interaction.
In order to connect devices to the mesh, there is a small 2MB software component called the Mesh Operating Environment. It installs the Live Mesh Notifier application, which serves as a "news feed" for things happening in the mesh, and the Mesh Companion bar that integrates into Windows Explorer windows. For now, this simply makes it easier to share and access files over the mesh, although a Mac client is planned, along with a runtime for mobile phones.
Confused? View our Live Mesh highlights in bullet point form
The Remote Desktop capabilities of Live Mesh are similar to the existing software offering, but users can now control Windows machines directly in the browser with a new ActiveX plug-in for Internet Explorer. Microsoft plans to add support for other device types "that make sense," according to Parasnis.
But if Microsoft is to have any chance to succeed in establishing Live Mesh as a de-facto Web platform, it needs applications -- and that means courting developers. REST APIs will be offered, along with pre-made API kits for JavaScript and Silverlight developers. Applications can also communicate with Live Mesh through FeedSync without the need to bother with the APIs.
Because applications built for Live Mesh can function both online and off, any changes made when offline will automatically sync back to the service when connected again. P2P technology helps keep bandwidth usage at a minimum.
"We set a key goal so that the model should be symmetrical. Developers can write one app and change the URL to target it locally if local runtime software is installed," Paransis told BetaNews. "The second thing the symmetrical model gives us is Web projection for a rich client application. Developers can take the best of works on the Web and blend it with what they want to do on the client."
Google has also seen the advantage of this software-plus-services model and has released Google Gears to help bridge the gap with its applications.
"If you are a Web developer building a photo sharing service like Flickr, one thing you will be able to do is take that Web application, written in AJAX, and offer a fully offline experience," said Paransis. "Developers can take their existing AJAX app or Python app or whatever, and connect it with the software+service sync machine of Live Mesh and run it offline. The application will get surfaced on the desktop and devices."
For security purposes, Live Mesh applications will run in protected "sandboxes," he added.
But despite wanting some early feedback and Live Mesh General Manager Amit Mital giving a keynote about the platform at the Web 2.0 conference Wednesday afternoon, Microsoft isn't quite ready for developers just yet. Over the next "weeks and months," Microsoft plans to start engaging the developer community and wants applications written atop the Live Mesh platform starting later this year.
Because the Live Mesh team is part of the broader Live organization within Microsoft, Paransis says it is "safe to expect" that Microsoft will also integrate existing Windows Live services like Hotmail, Photos and Spaces into Live Mesh.
Paransis emphasized that Live Mesh is still in its early stages and only 10,000 users will be invited to use the Technology Preview. Microsoft is soliciting feedback now so it can learn what developers and the general public likes and doesn't like. A broader beta test is currently slated for this fall, although it could happen closer to the end of the year. The company expects to be making major adjustments over the next 9 to 12 months, and many features -- like device support other than Windows computers -- are yet to come.
A lot of questions remain about Live Mesh, but perhaps the biggest is whether developers will be wary of Microsoft trying to control the Web with its own proprietary platform, or appreciate the added functionality they gain like offline support and local storage. Consumers will also need to see the benefit of having a virtual Windows desktop serving as their universal window to the Web rather than simply clicking a bookmark in their browser.
Live Mesh sounds like it is going to be a viable next step in the ever evolving technology.
The evolution of the web will depend greatly on microsoft's ability to optimize it for the world.
People sometimes forget that initial computing for the home and office was a direct result of microsoft's innovation.
Therefore, everyone including trolls, linux developers, governments, pornographers, children, students, big business, etc., have microsoft to thank.
Score: 0
|Nowadays I come to BN for the amusing troll remarks. For news, there are other sites, but the troll wars here are epic!
Score: 0
|Alright folks - why does this have to degenerate into a war of trolls? BN is (as far as I understand) a site for techies. Don't you think the concept is very cool?
Even if you don't like MSFT for whatever reason - if it succeeds it will spur competition and create new technologies that all of us will benefit from (unless someone hacks it and steals all our personal data of course...). I love the concept of acces to data and services from anywhere. There are challenges but that gives opportunity for the tech crowd to work on innovative solutions and bag in top money...
Score: 0
|Its because it says MSFT if ANYONE ELSE would have announced this there would be maybe 4 replies.
People forget that Apple would not exist had it not been for MSFT, Google would not have been if it had not been for MSFT, Competition is what keeps companies trying to innovate and or use existing technologies to enhance their products.
Score: 0
|I, for one, think it sounds cool. I already have my account pending on Microsoft Connect and am salivating at trying it.
Score: 0
|Sounds Very cool to me
Score: 0
|There are "web os" style systems online already, don't think it hasnt been done. Its funny how the power of a product is its marketing, not its creation.
This is the way of the future, but our broadband speeds will definitely need to keep up.
I think this is what m$ is going for:
http://demo.eyeos.org/
http://www.youos.com/html/
Score: 0
|Interesting. Thanks for the links.
Score: 0
|Except not quite, MS is using existing technology that it has acquired over the past couple of years (synctoy, foldershare, remote connect etcetc) and putting it altogether it will supplement the OS but not replace it.
The links you provided seem to be more of the "cloud" OS concept.
Score: 0
|Screw MS and their proprietary crap.
Score: 0
|Screw Apple and their propietary crap (iPod and an OS that only runs on their hardware). Screw Linux for being about 3 years behind the GUI of Apple and Vista. :)
Score: 0
|How does a kernel which does not have a GUI be three years behind a GUI? I am guessing your rant is about KDE or Gnome as those are the most popular Window Managers for GNU/Linux?
I would love to hear the criteria you used as to how KDE and Gnome are "...about 3 years behind the GUI of Apple and Vista."
Score: 0
|"Linux" is used to describe the OS as a whole.
had he said "Linux Kernel" you might of had a point.
but you don't
Score: 0
|How do you know what he means? Are you the same poster under different accounts? There seems to be a lot of that going on around here.
Score: 0
|The same thing can be bounced off of you as well. How do YOU know what he means, its left open for interpretation so unless he clarifies there is no right or wrong answer
Score: 0
|I am going by the definition of the term. Linux is a kernel, not a GUI. You fail PC_Tool.
Score: 0
|fail? no because since he interprets Linux = gui means he probably doesn't know that kde and gnome are the desktop managers.
I am not pc tool, moron - there is more then one person here who use MS products and like them but we also see flaws as well.
Score: 0
|I understand what KDE and GNOME are. I also understand that Linux is failing to gain desktop usuage - and part of that is all the "flavors" of desktop managers. I also know any OS with a GUI (desktop manager) has issues including Linux. But yes - I do look at linux with a GUI desktop manager. Without a GUI it's pointless to me (yes...I know it can be used as a server).
Score: 0
|WoW this is the future
Score: 0
|Nurv? = Microsoft?
Come on this has got to be a lame ripoff of the movie Antitrust! lolol
Score: 0
|sounds creepy
Score: 0
|After their last foray into making things 'work together' called ActiveX with its fundamental fatal security flaws, why am I not overly exuberant about another attempt? - albeit on an even larger scale...
Score: 0
|ARE YOU WOWED YET ?
Score: 0
|I like the idea but, it would have to be way more secure then windows. The I have with storing all my data in one place is what happens if the data servers get hacked, I get screwed.
www.talkprice.net
Score: -1
|Was that an H or an S at the end of that "Mes" word?
The OPLC mesh is interesting, and useful for the intended purpose. But when I think of a Windows mesh, I can't help but think of Neoprimal's concerns. (and machines infecting each other, unless Microsoft has suddenly developed better security.)
As to becoming a standard, only one of my machines runs Windows, so this won't work with the rest, evidently. Nor will my PalmOS phone. Just as well, I'll take better security, over sharing my personal financial data, anyday. Will a "Microsoft Mesh" increase interoperability? How many other OS's initially work with this release of MS design?
Perhaps this should be called Web 3.0, where you have to use Microsoft software and Microsoft servers to participate?
Score: 0
|I like the idea, but i
Score: 0
|"Live Mesh portends that Microsoft doesn't just want to compete on the Web; it wants to be the Web."
NONONONONO, M$, you can't DO that.
Score: 0
|'Live Mesh' aims to become the universal window to the Web
Much like '.NET Passport' was the universal user account to the Web?
Score: 0
|I am mixed about the idea of Live Mesh and exactly what it is/will enable devs and users to do. Perhaps in practice it's different than what I imagine. For the most part, I do understand what they're trying to do and that it could really evolve the internet and computing as it stands, especially in the age of broadband, on the other hand however I feel like it's putting some control of my content in other hands....not necessarily OUT of mine, but like my stuff can be shared to the nth degree. It feels almost like social computing which is too close to home.
I mean, what happens when hackers and such gets their hands into platforms and systems that are unified and connected through these so called web apps? Is there no way sandboxed content that's infected so to speak, can seep into our so called, real software environment?
I feel like security needs to be a big part of the push otherwise it won't be worth it.
There'll be a smorgasborg of other peoples information just itching to be had.
Score: 0
|"Microsoft trying to control the Web with its own proprietary platform" What's left for the rest of mankind? Is every governement, corporation or individual in the world ready to leave such a lot of power in the hands of an american corporation? IMO uniformity is a real need, but should be reinforced by an international technical commision similar to that which is in charge of weights and measures.
Score: 0
|Agreed. Open standards is the way to go. Unfortunately, M$ has totally abused ISO and turned it into its puppet. It already owns ECMA.
So now we will see all of M$ proprietary, patent encombered, formats as "standards" released under discriminatory terms which does not allow for Open Source implementations.
Score: 0
|Pit...do everybody a favor and go back home to play with your wii, and let the grown ups talk now, ok?
Thanks.
Score: 0
|good work =]
Score: 0
|I realy hope MS succeeds. Not for the sake of Microsoft but for the sake of uniformity, there are too many standards already that create a real nightmare when trying to unify access to resources on the web. If Microsoft manages to create a united platform for all the applications to interact in a well defined uniform manner withouth the hassle of implementing houndreds of APIs of various vendors then the posibilitties are greatly increased compared to now. Just think about it, your mail is owned by one company, your flicker account is by another, your files are on your PC etc, and there is no connection between all of this except your user name and password on those sites (meaning you're the only connection between all your web resources). Things must change the user can't be the connecting point to all of those reources, it's inefficient and time consuming, and new thechology that connects all of thoses assets must emerge, and Microsoft seems to be on the right track.
Score: 0
|Just like M$. Copy what Apple and Google are already doing. Can't M$ innovate at all?
Score: 0
|"The brainchild of Redmond's new Chief Software Architect Ray Ozzie and in development for two years,"
Score: 0
|Google and Apple have this stuff in production _now_. They have been in production for _years_.
So, yes, M$ is following as usual.
Score: 0
|Seriously can you not come off it for ONCE? You've replied in every single MS themed thread with complete and utter BS with absolutely no sense of impartiality whatsoever. Not satisfied with that, you also comment in every Apple themed thread saying pretty much the same thing.
The Iphone is innovation, DESPITE the fact that Windows Mobile has been doing it for YEARS. (But look at what you say when MS goes about doing the same thing?)
Apple is wonderful despite the fact that MS/Windows dominate the PC market. (By your logic, MS only dominates the market because, excuse, excuse, etc. etc.)
Itunes is the best music service around, despite the fact that it includes DRM (or used to for the most part), because it dominates the market for digital downloads.
Honestly, if you're going to fanboy, don't be so rabid about it. You don't need to bash MS in every MS themed or Apple themed thread, people know by now that you love Apple and hate MS. You can be passionate about your points without being absolutely ridiculous about it.
Score: 0
|You mean Apple as in the guys with the pretty little computers who sue everybody mentionintg where they steal their ideas from or when they screw up or expose security holes? Brave new world. Just too dumb to see it, eh?
Score: 0
|If it wasn't for MSFT Google would have never happened and Apple would have gone tits up years ago without financial aid.
Score: 0
|Its the chicken and egg factor--which came first MSFT or Google when it comes to web based applications--well which came first--MSFT or Google when it comes to software in the first place?
Score: 0
|First of all my humble apologies. I actually noticed and reacted to pitdumbo in a moment of weakness.
Now... you are aware MSFT was founded 1975 (Google 1998), right? That's older than most smart asses on this forum.
Score: 0
|Give up dude. They all copy each other. Apple got the idea for some basic Xerox concept machine. Apple took a lot of music code MS (which cost them about 200 million in fines), then again, MS had to pay Apple 400 million in fines taking some Quicktime stuff.
Score: 0
|"If it wasn't for MSFT Google would have never happened..."
huh?
Score: 0
|"Apple took a lot of music code MS (which cost them about 200 million in fines),..."
I googled for this but found nothing. So exactly what music code did Apple take from MS?
Score: 0
|You need to learn to Google and also know that I rounded my numbers. I was a Mac user from 1984 to 1997-98. I worked at first Apple Store in California when I got out of college. Trust me, I used your logic for almost a decade, until they got caught and had to pay MS (it was a sad day). But even then search for "Apple agrees to pay lawsuit" (you will see a lot of them in the Millions, which means they took an idea or code that wasn't theirs). My favorite is 100 Million to Creative, as then needed of stuff to make the iPod better :)
It was 1997
http://www.cbsnews.com/e...1720211_0_content.shtml
I remember as Apple owed them a crap load of money, MS to them, and at that time Windows 95 was killing them. So they voided the money and shared some "common" technology. MS still gave about 400 Million to keep Apple afloat, as they were almost done for.
I'm now a Windows fan, as I like to make a living :)
Score: 0
|Again, i am looking for the 200 million you say Apple paid to MS due to taking music code.
So I called your BS statement, and now you are generalizing say they have settled lawsuits against them. Sure, what company has not settled lawsuits?
Granted, it is very hard to follow your poor English. Not saying you are dumb as for all i know English is not your first language.
Score: 0
|Score: 0
|Your funny - and really don't know the history of Microsoft and Apple few well.
as i said it was around 200. As I serch more it was 150. Sorry about, there was so much going one in 97 with Microsoft Bailing out Apple, Micrsoft bailing out Corel (also 150 million) I remeber all of this. i'm ways ti was bad things, it was just becuming normal steal code, get cought and then bail htem out with alot so money. Again, if yollow the last 15 yers on this, it is tool Sorry worked 18 hours today (serveer miggrati that went prety good). Typing need to stop and go to bad after this beerl. ssssecreen savvvvvaaaavvvviiiiiinnggggggggggg. COl000plllll
http://70.125.157.216/archive/feature199709b.html
Score: 0
|So...according to you, Apple stole code from M$, and because of that, M$ bailed out Apple with 150 million?
Wow, i need to start stealing code from M$.
Score: 0
|If M$ has been doing the iPhone for years, why is no one buying it? Where is a M$ Windows Mobile device that equals the iPhone? LOL. did not think so.
M$ is in the position it is in today due to anti-competitive behavior. Sorry in your mind, M$ is the best thing ever and got to where it is because of its best of breed products. The reality is very different as proven in courts of both USA and the EU.
DRM sucks no matter who makes it. iTunes is a brilliant piece of software. How many time has M$ attempted to match it and failed? yeah, quite a few. PlaysForSuckers just bit the dust. how long until the failed Zune does the same?
I bash whoever deserves it. M$ happens to be the most deserving. I will bash Apple, Nintendo, Sony, etc... when they deserve it too.
Score: 0
|you know saying "M$" and being a apple fanboy doesn't make a whole lot of sense, it it also makes you look like a douche.
ever look at the price of apple products?
hardware at triple to quadruple the cost.
Score: 0
|No - they both got caught using each others code. It was a "mutual" way out for both, many MS needed an true competitor so it wouldn’t be a monopoly, and Apple needed some huge money to get OSX out, and just try not to sink. Then Steve Jobs came back…and look at Apple go now.
But yes sometimes Stealing Code works. There are many examples of people making it rich from code.
Score: 0
|What a minute pitdinogo2. I'll agree the iTunes is a great (wait it's getting it update again..wait again...again). And Zune 2 software is very good (please update it...please update it). But hardware, most sites now say for music only MS did it, the Zune 2 is better then iPods. I'm not saying the touch iPods but the standard iPods. Zune 2 is just better for music.
Score: 0
|Not an Apple fanboy (was in the 80s though). Nope, not only a huge Windows fan but also I love my Vista (of course I have money to throw at my system so it kicks ass). I can't use OSX, I still can't give over the not being able to right-drag an icon, or right-click and copy,paste files. But I can respect what each OS brings to the table. I am sory though about the above conversation, the guy almost makes it look like MS is evil (ok they might be) and apple is a saint. I was only putting out there that they both have used each other's code.
You will never see Apple hardware in my house. OK my daughter as an iPod (I'm a Zune fan). OK and I like there new flat keyboard.
Score: 0
|"ever look at the price of apple products?
hardware at triple to quadruple the cost. "
love the troll posts. Anything to back up that nonsense? i can say the same thing...
Ever look at the price of M$ products? hardware at triple to quadruple the cost.
Score: 0
|How is it better? M$ basically cloned the iPod. ever seen the insides? They basically use the exact components Apple does.
M$ falls short on the design and software. If you are cloning, you are not leading.
Score: 0
|Yeah except it wouldn't be true.
You do know the difference between hardware and software right?
Windows is Software (still isn't triple the price though)
Zune, xbox360 and mouse and keyboards would be hardware
None of the above hardware is triple to quadruple the price.
you fail again.
Score: 0
|That is my point. Apples hardware and software for that matter is not quadruple the price.
So you fail again, hate to be the one making you look like an idiot yet again. ;)
Score: 0
|"a new teardown of the third-generation Nano suggests. Conducting by the research firm iSuppli, the teardown notes that the parts of the 4GB Nano -- selling for $150 -- cost less than $60, while the parts of the 8GB model ($200) are under $83. In each case this is a reduction of more than $13 over the second-generation Nanos"
here is a nice little read too
http://techon.nikkeibp.c...NEWS_EN/20080220/147736/
shows the shoddy workmanship of apple products.
all for only $1,800 lol
Score: 0
|still not triple to quadruple the price. You fail again. Keep it going though, your twisting and turning to try and escape your stupid statement is quite enjoyable!
Score: 0
|You do realize the technologies they are using in live mesh is smaller services that have been around for the last couple years (remote connect, foldershare, synctoy) before google and apple....
Score: 0
|Except my point was your statement did not hold any water, but pcs bought from apple are more expensive then a wintel
Apple pcs do not generally decrease that much in price when a new product is released, pcs go down significantly
But it is, if I want a simple laptop I can buy one for $500 if I want a Apple I pay at least 1000 for a laptop granted not quadruple or triple in this case but more expensive, yes.
Score: 0
|Close to triple, and im glad to see you agree on the shoddy workmanship.
Score: 0
|Candybars
Score: 0
|sure and your Apple at $1000 has way more power, software, and features that the bargain bin $500 laptop.
Score: 0
|