text:
Essays > "Open Standards vs. Open Source"
How to think about software, standards, and Service Oriented Architecture at the beginning of the 21st century
Essays > "Open Standards vs. Open Source"
How to think about software, standards, and Service Oriented Architecture at the beginning of the 21st century
|One: Standards
|Two: Software
|Three: Open Source Software
|Four: The SOA Connection
|Also see:
|Adjusting to a more open world: Understanding and
overcoming resistance to open technologies
This year I blogged a wish list for the area of technology in which I work. The very first item was my desire for people to have a better understanding of the difference between open standards and open source. Authors have written entire books about these topics, and more are being written even as I pen this.
We saw in some of the public hearings in 2005 in Massachusetts about standardized document formats that there is some confusion between what a standard does and what the rules are when you go to implement it. I've been told secondhand that some people were even told things like "if you implement that standard, then all your software has to be given away for free." This, of course, was wrong and confused, if it wasn't, in fact, outright FUD (creation of Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt).
So let's talk about some of the basic notions about and the differences between standards and open source. In this section, I'll focus on the former and start the discussion of software and open source in the next section.
A standard is like a blueprint. It provides guidance to someone when he or she actually builds something. Standards are not limited to software, but are an important part of computer hardware, telecommunications, health care, automobiles, aerospace, and many areas of manufacturing.
One of the reasons an architect produces a blueprint is that a builder, an engineer, or an inspector can look at it and say "if you build according to this plan, it will be safe and the house won't fall down." In the same way, some standards are for safety, especially where they involve electrical or electronic components.
A standard is more than just a blueprint, though, because it has to be something with which a lot of people agree. Something that may not have this sort of "blessing," or common agreement, is usually called a specification. By abuse of language, we will sometimes call a standard a specification. Put another way, all standards are specifications, but not all specifications are standards.
Standards are also employed when we have to ensure that things made by different people will either work together or work in the same way. I live in the United States, and when I go to the store and buy a telephone, I know that the telephone wire will plug into the jack in my wall. I don't need different jacks for phones made by different vendors. The design of the telephone jack and the plug are not control points for any phone vendor. I make my choice based on the features of the phone, the color, the price, whether it is wireless or not, and so on.
There are standards that describe the "blueprints" for the plugs and jacks, but the standards themselves are not the actual plugs or jacks. We separate the ideas of "a standard which may be implemented" and "something that is an implementation of a standard."
To bring this back to software, the OpenDocument Format is a standard, a blueprint, created by a technical committee at the OASIS consortium. It is not software, but rather a description of how you should write out the information in word processing documents, spreadsheets, and presentations should you ever need to put them on disk or, say, attach them to emails. The same description also tells you that if someone gives you a document, spreadsheet, or a presentation and they tell you it is in OpenDocument Format (perhaps via the file extension), then your software applications know what to expect when they read the file.
Because it is a standard, the information can be used by anyone who builds software that complies with the standard. No one vendor can arbitrarily change it, and that provides a lot of security for people who save their documents in OpenDocument Format.
Another important standard is HTML, the rules by which you format pages for the World Wide Web. Although there were vendor differences in HTML in the mid 90s, most people no longer think that it is reasonable to allow vendors to break interoperability by implementing too little of the standard or doing their own special things. We don't need different browsers to view web pages from different people, though some browsers like Firefox and Opera are known to adhere to the web standards, essentially the blueprints for the web, better than other browsers.
To extend my earlier analogy, we know that a web page ("the plug") will fit into the browser ("the jack") and then I can see and interact with the page ("I can talk on the phone").
Just as we said in the 1990s that no vendor should have a control point by having their own flavor of HTML, we are saying the same thing about document formats in the 2000s. In fact, since word processors have been with us a lot longer than the web, it's surprisingly that standards weren't created, if not demanded, there earlier.
So, to summarize, a standard is a blueprint or a set of plans that can be implemented. Where do standards come from?
A de facto standard is a specification that became popular because everyone just happened to use it, possibly because it was implemented in a product that had significant market acceptance. The details of this specification may or may not be available publicly without some sort of special legal arrangement.
The basic problem with a de facto standard is that it is controlled by a single vendor who can, and often does, change it whenever the vendor decides to do so. This frequently happens when a product goes from one major version to another. At that point, everyone else who is trying to interoperate with the information created in the owning vendor's product must scramble and try to make their own software work again.
This is easier, of course, if they can actually see the new specification and there are no impediments, legal or otherwise, to implementing it. The owning vendor gets a time-to-market advantage, possibly increasing its marketshare, again.
Traditionally, it was not in the interest of the owner of a de facto standard to make the details too widely available because they didn't want to make it easier for anyone else to move into their market space. They would say, "Why would I voluntarily let other people build products compatible with my data? They might steal away my customers!".
To turn this around, it is not in the best interests of customers to be locked into de facto standards controlled by a single vendor. The customer might say, "I may have used your software, but it is my information, and I very much want and demand the freedom to use any application I want to process my information." De facto standards decrease customer empowerment and choice, though they linger on.
The second kind of standard I'll mention is something I'll call a community standard. As you might guess, this is something created and maintained by more than one person or company. The members of the community may work for companies or governments, belong to organizations, or may be experts who are otherwise unaffiliated. The standards creation process involves negotiation, compromises, and agreement based on what it best for the community and the potential users.
It is a classic fallacy to think that this necessarily creates a "lowest common denominator" or unsatisfactory compromise. Smart people can make good decisions together, even if they don't all work for the same company. Conversely, people who all work for the same company don't necessarily always make smart decisions. They might, for example, produce de facto standards that have security vulnerabilities.
Community standards usually get blessed, as I termed it above, by being created or submitted to a Standards Development Organization, or SDO. While it does happen that people may get together and write a standard from scratch in an SDO, it is very likely that one or more parties will bring drafts to the table as a starting point. It is usually expected that the developing standard will change over time as more minds are directed at the problem that the standard is expected to help solve.
A standard may go through multiple versions: it is not uncommon for the first version to take one to two years and then about the same time for each of the next one or two iterations. At some point it will stabilize and either become fairly universally used or else become eclipsed by an alternative way of tackling the same general problem. For example, the new web services standards are starting to be used for distributed computing, replacing older standards, as Service Oriented Architecture becomes more broadly deployed.
I want to return to this "community" idea for a moment. If you bring something to an SDO, you take a risk that others may change the specification, perhaps in ways that interfere with your product plans. One word: tough. Working within a community does not mean walking in and saying "I'm the king (or queen) and you can't change anything unless I say it is ok."
The value of creating a standard in a community is that products from different sources can work together to build solutions that solve real customer problems. If you can't compete by creating superior, higher performing, more scalable, more secure products and perhaps the services to give the customers what they need, then I would suggest you have problems beyond not controlling the creation of a standard.
What you are basically saying is "I can't win on a level playing field." Your customers might be interested in hearing that.
Some SDOs are de jure organizations: they have particular credentials in national or international settings. Some governments have laws that make it very difficult to use standards that do not come from de jure organizations. ANSI, ITU, and ISO are examples of de jure organizations while groups like the W3C, OASIS, and the OMG are usually just referred to as consortia.
Sometimes a standard produced by a consortium will be submitted and blessed by a de jure organization to make it more palatable for government procurements. Of course, de jure organizations, like all standards groups, must be very careful what they bless because they have reputations for quality and relevance that they hope to maintain.
The last topic on standards that I want to address is what it means for a standard to be open. I've spoken about this previously in the blog but, at the risk of repeating myself, let me say that I think we need to consider five aspects of standards and ask some important questions about each of them:
In answering these, we need to think in terms of transparency, community, democracy, costs, freedoms and permissions, and restrictions.
From these and perhaps other criteria, we should be able to come up with some sort of "Standards Openness Index." In the meanwhile, use them when deciding for yourself how open a particular standard is.
At this point I hope you have a good sense of what an open standard is. I also hope you understand there is a spectrum of "goodness" for several aspects of how a standard comes into being and how it might get used. "Open" has become a standard marketing term, so make sure you ask good questions of those who are trying to convince you that they are as or more open than the other guy.
In the next two sections, I'll talk about software development and we'll start to ask questions about openness in terms of software implementations. Just as we saw with standards, there is a spectrum of "openness" when it comes to the creation and use of software. Open source software is a large category, but I'll focus on some of the basic issues and how open source can be related to open standards.
One last thing to think about: near the very top of this discussion I talked about how a standard can be considered a blueprint. Do people ever freely give away things they make from blueprints? Does that make business sense? Did you ever sign up for a cellular phone service and get a free phone? Why didn't they charge you? Do they make their money elsewhere?
In the last section, I focused on what a standard is and what it means for it to be open. I compared a standard to a blueprint and said that we separate the ideas of "a standard which may be implemented" and "something that is an implementation of a standard." Open source is a particular way of implementing and distributing software, enabled by legal language that gives a range of permissions for what people may do with it.
Just as we saw that there are a number of factors that can determine the relative openness of a standard, so too are there conditions that allow, encourage, or even demand behaviors from people who use or further develop open source software. I'm now going to look at traditional commercial software and then in the next section contrast that with open source.
I'm going to assume you have an intuitive sense of what software is, though we'll return to that in a few moments since it is important for understanding what one does with open source software. Software is what makes the physical hardware in a computer do its magic.
That is, software might be a web browser, an online customer sales tool, a video game, a database that supports your local bank, the reservation system for an airline, the invisible commands that respond to your actions in your handheld MP3 player, or even what controls how your automobile changes its mix of gasoline and air as you start to drive up a hill. These are just examples, and I'm sure you can think of many more.
You can also probably think of several different "titles" of software that are in the same category, such as Halo, Doom, and Syberia in the video game category, and Microsoft Word, Corel WordPerfect, and Lotus WordPro in the word processor category. These are all examples of commercial software: you pay money and you get a legal license to play the game or write a novel by using the software.
The license gives you certain rights but also places certain restrictions on what you can do. The features and value of the software, the cost, and the rights you obtain determine if you pay for the license. Similarly, if you don't find the restrictions too onerous or unreasonable, then you might be inclined to agree to get and use the software.
Depending on how you look at it, some of the rights might be seen as restrictions. For example, if the license says "you have the right to use this software on one and only one computer," then you are restricted to not putting the software on two or more computers. From the perspective of the company that wrote and licensed you the software, this is probably very reasonable because the company (the "developer") wants to be remunerated for its efforts and its costs for creating the software.
The solution to running the software on multiple computers is easy: you make some sort of deal by paying more. Minimally, if you paid $50 for one copy then you might expect to pay $100 for two copies, $150 for three, and so on. You might be able to do better than that, particularly if you are dealing directly with the software provider and you need a lot of copies. Tell them you need 1000 copies and see what they offer you!
Ultimately, the provider of the software wants to get paid and even make a profit, and probably the more the better as far as he or she is concerned. It can be complicated to figure out how much to charge, but sometimes the market will decide for you.
For example, my son William has a handheld video game machine and games for that never cost more than $40. A vendor could try to charge more for a game he or she creates for the machine, but if potential customers think it is too much, then they won't buy it and the vendor won't recoup his or her development costs.
If the vendor charges too little and the game becomes very popular then he or she might be "leaving money on the table." That is, the vendor might have been able to generate greater revenue and profit by charging as much as the market would bear.
Sometimes charging less for a video game can cause more people to buy it. If there is an aftermarket for things like game hint books, stuffed animals of the game characters, and a movie deal, then the software provider might significantly lower the game price to get as many people as possible playing the game. The real profit might come from the aftermarket products.
Might the price ever go to zero? In theory yes, but it rarely happens when the game is new. Nevertheless, it is an interesting idea to give a game away if you can generate a tremendous amount of money in other ways.
This sort of thing is not entirely unheard of: my family has bought boxes of cereal that had free DVDs in them and the local fast food restaurant has given away DVDs with certain meals for children. In this last example, if the DVD promotion is successful enough that it significantly drives up the sales of food, then the restaurant chain might end up paying quite a bit of money to the distributor of the film or films.
Business models around software therefore are more sophisticated then simply saying "I will get all my revenue from what I charge to license my software." The software developer is interested in the total revenue, remember, even if not all of it or even the majority of it comes from licensing.
Thinking beyond the video game category, we can see other ways to make money in the software business. One is support. What happens when the user of the software has a problem? He or she might search the Web for an answer or, failing to find a solution, might call the software provider for assistance.
Is this assistance free? It depends. Sometimes there is free support for the first thirty or more days after you bought and registered the software. Another option is to give the user one or two free calls and then charge after that on a per phone call/time taken to resolve the issue basis. Yet another option is to charge a fixed fee for a year's worth of support, though there may be limitation on how many times you can call.
It's not uncommon to have tiers of support levels, from something fairly minimal to something which is comprehensive. The more you get or think you are going to need, the more you pay.
There can be significant money in providing support. In fact, if the support just concerns how to use the software, there can be companies with no relationship to the original software provider that provide support packages. In this way, a particular piece of software starts to create what might be termed an "industry" that extends beyond the original developer.
What happens if there is fundamentally something wrong with the way the software operates, a "bug"? Someone with access to the original source code must go in and figure out what the problem is, find a solution, and then distribute either a new version of the software or something that fixes the specific area that is causing the problem.
If you do not have the source code from which the software was created you can: 1) wait until the original vendor decides to fix it, which may very well be the best solution for non-critical items, 2) find a work-around, that is, another way of doing what you wanted, or 3) switch to an entirely different application that does not have the problem. There can be many kinds of problems, but security and data corruption ones are especially serious.
If you had access to the source code for the software, could you fix it yourself? Maybe, or you might be able to find or pay someone to do it for you. Are you concerned that the provider of your software might not be in business forever and so you want the extra insurance of having the source code in case you need it eventually? Maybe.
You might sleep better at night, as they say, by having the source code but you also might sleep just as well if you had a vendor you trusted and knew was going to be around for a long time. You will need to decide for yourself. You should make this decision from practical business considerations, not political or ideological reasons. We'll return to this in the next section.
Another area where a software provider might be able to generate revenue is in services. If I decide to buy new accounting software, how do I get the information from my old system to the new one? How do I connect the new software to the customer relationship management (CRM) software that my sales team uses?
These tasks might be easy to accomplish but, then again, they might not be. You might have the expertise yourself or on your staff to do this work but, then again, you might not. To whom do you turn for help in making your systems work together? It's possible that the provider of your new software will do the upgrade and integration work for you, but they may not do it for free. There may be other service providers who can do the job better or at a better price.
Perhaps there was a company that put together the various hardware, software, and networking components on which you run your organization. It might be a good idea to pay them to do the transition to the new software. Again, there may be someone who provides value to you around the software who is not the original developer.
The more successful and widely used the software is in the market, the more service providers there will be. This can be a bit of a "chicken and egg" problem because the software might not become successful until there are enough service providers to help customers get the most value from it. This is one reason why software vendors like to have many business partners.
The partners may provide software rather than services. It's not uncommon for a partner to specialize software for use in a particular industry. For example, the partner may work in the legal industry and provide special templates that make it easier to produce a broad range of legal documents with consistent formatting. They might provide document management software so that the attorneys can find and retrieve documents.
In this case again, the original word processing software enabled others to develop an aftermarket. The aftermarket can further increase sales of the software, setting up a "virtuous cycle" in which everyone makes money and the software might achieve commanding market share.
I went through this to show you how the creation, distribution, and use of software can create economic value and revenue that extends beyond the initial price that is charged for a license. Anyone who only looks at the license cost is not thinking broadly enough about the big picture.
Software quality is also important. If a customer support application crashes often and loses important data, then it probably isn't too important that it is less expensive than a more stable product. Conversely, higher quality software that costs less than the competition deserves to gain significant market share. In particular, software with security and privacy problems can sometimes not be worth any price.
Software features can affect price, though it is not the total number of features that is important. Rather, are the features that people really need well implemented? Are they easy to use? If I only use 20% of the features of a piece of software and I can find another application that only implements the features I need and costs less money, should I go with that?
Before I leave this discussion about commercial software, I want to talk again about standards. Standards make things work together. In an example above, I talked about integrating a new accounting system with my sales' team CRM software. How exactly do you do that?
If both pieces of software come from the same vendor, it might have some special language and protocols that link the two together. The vendor will probably claim that this makes everything work more efficiently. This is dangerous.
Proprietary schemes for connecting software make it very difficult to substitute software made by one vendor with software made by another. This is exactly what the vendor that creates the accounting and the CRM software wants. This gives control of your system to the vendor and limits your choices. Again, this is what the vendor in question wants.
This situation is called "lock-in" and, as I said, is dangerous. You want the ability to choose the best software for your organization, no matter what the cost or who the provider is. These proprietary schemes can become the de facto standards I discussed in the first section.
When the industry agrees to common ways of having software from different providers interact, then you the user, the customer, the consumer, the citizen wins. To repeat myself for emphasis, open standards allow software made by different people to work together and gives you choice and control.
One of the ways in which software works together is by sharing information. It should be a hallmark of modern software that the way this information is represented should not be proprietary. You want the ability to use any software that you wish to interact with your own information.
The price of the software is irrelevant in this regard. More expensive software should not be accorded more leeway in using proprietary ways to represent your information. Similarly, software with greater market share should not force more restrictions on who and what can use your data.
Through this discussion I've highlighted several important aspects of software, and have focused on examples of software for which you pay for a license:
What would happen if the price of the software was zero (in any currency)? What if you had access to the source code and could make any changes you wished? What if you could build new software on top of software created by others without paying them?
Is this anarchy? Will capitalism survive? How will we make any money?
We'll look at these issues next.
I want to jump to the punch line even before I make some definitions: open source software is something that you need to consider very seriously.
This is true whether you are a user of software, a creator of software, a software distributor, a software integrator, a software solutions provider, or a venture capitalist. There is a difference, though, between seriously considering something and eventually doing something with it. Nevertheless, if you don't educate yourself about the possible role of open source in your business, organization, or government, you might be leaving yourself open to missed opportunities and cost savings, as well as increased competitive pressures.
You need to be able to accurately assess what is the right balance of proprietary and open source software that will optimize the results you are trying to achieve. In this section I'm going to look at open source software and some of the factors that you need to examine in your serious consideration of its use.
Fundamentally (and informally), "open source software" is software where you can see, re-use, and redistribute all or part of the source code, plus some fine print. There are two fundamental concepts here: what do I mean by "source code" and just what is this "fine print"? If you are a software developer, you know all about the former, and if you are an intellectual property attorney, the second is your specialty. For those of you who are one or the other or neither, I'll discuss both.
"Proprietary software" is usually made available in a form that will run on your computer, but you are not given the original material from which it was created. You cannot freely incorporate proprietary software in your own products, though you may be able to obtain some sort of fee-based license to let you do this. The basic idea here is that proprietary software contains intellectual property that was created by the software provider and that is not shared because it offers competitive advantage.
Licensing proprietary software to users for a fee is a long standing business model in the software industry. Licensing is not the only way revenue can be created, and it is often supplemented with subscription, maintenance, and support charges.
There are precise definitions of what is and is not open source software, and I think the Open Source Initiative should be your primary source of this information. I'm going to adopt a more informal approach to give you enough of an idea of what people talk about when they discuss open source. That said, when you develop your open source strategy and management plan, you need to be quite careful of the details, particularly the legal ones concerning licenses. Of course, if you are using proprietary, commercial software I hope you are looking at those licenses with a great deal of care as well.
There are people who think all software should be open source and there are others who think that no software should be made available that way. This has at times caused political, if not almost ideological, arguments about the nature of open source and its relationship to economic systems. I am not exactly neutral, but neither am I at either extreme. The ultimate choice of what to use belongs to the customer and consumer.
If open source drives innovation and increases competition, that's a good thing. If it allows businesses to be more creative in their business models as I described in the last section, then that is a positive effect. If proprietary software provides the functionality, scalability, security, and performance that you need, then it may very well be what you should use today. (This is with the caveat that proprietary software should not lock you into its use by avoiding the use of real open standards.)
The software industry is changing rapidly, so make sure you re-evaluate your decisions at least yearly, if not every six months. Open source projects may get better in that time, but so too may proprietary products, possibly spurred on by open source competition.
It is likely that your world will increasingly be a hybrid mix of both open source and proprietary software. You may not even know this is happening. For example, approximately 70% of all websites use the open source Apache web server. When you browse the web, even if you are using a proprietary operating system and browser, you are still employing open source to carry out your tasks.
"Code" is the set of instructions that makes computer hardware do things. Hardware has low level code built right into the circuitry. There are also special chips that can be altered dynamically to have different instructions: this type of code is called "firmware."
"Software" is a general term that includes firmware, but most frequently means the very large class of sets of instructions that make general purpose chips made by IBM, Intel, AMD, Sun Microsystems, and others do a wide range of things. Using the same hardware, I can create and run software like video games, operating systems such as Linux or Windows, accounting software, word processors, web browsers, email programs like Lotus Notes, banking systems, travel reservation systems, databases, and many others.
Software can run on top of other software, such as a spreadsheet running on the OS X operating system. A macro in a spreadsheet is also an example of software, though it is relatively small compared to the spreadsheet software itself. Informally, we call software that runs on operating systems "applications."
The term "program" is used generally and vaguely to refer to any software that accomplishes a particular task. People who create software go by many titles. Here are a few: programmer, software developer, software engineer, application developer, and coder.
Just as I am using a text editor to create and then save this document to my hard disk so that you and others can read it later, I can use a programmer's editor to create the code for a particular piece of software and then save that on disk. This document is translated by your eyes (if you reading it) or your ears (if you are listening to it), and then your brain into something meaningful (I hope). In the same way, there are special programs that translate high level code into the low level form that some particular kind of hardware understands.
My words in the text are the source for any direct understanding you may get from this document. The high level code is the source for the low level instructions that the hardware understands, hence the phrase "source code."
Just as it would have been possible to write this article in French, German, Russian, Japanese or some other language and still have it understood by a speaker of those languages, there are different languages in which a software developer can create source code. In fact, the original source code for an application can be a collection of parts done in several languages.
To fix ideas, here are some of the names of some software programming languages: Assembler, FORTRAN, BASIC, COBOL, Lisp, APL, C, SmallTalk, C++, Java, Perl, C#, Python, JavaScript, and PHP. The languages tend to get newer as you move from the beginning of the list to the end. Some of these languages, for example Lisp and PHP, are very different, yet they nevertheless all are ultimately translated to instructions that are run on hardware.
Some languages are better than others for helping you accomplish certain tasks. PHP is better for developing websites than COBOL, but COBOL is better for developing traditional transactional enterprise applications like high performance banking systems.
I don't think there will ever be a time when only one programming language is used by everyone for every kind of task. There are engineering reasons that determine why programming languages are created and used. There are also computer industry political and competitive motivations, such as the developer of a particular operating system who creates a language that primarily runs on that operating system and makes it difficult to move applications to other platforms.
As I mentioned above, an application may be created by combining several different parts. Why might I do this when I am developing software? One reason has to do with design: if I can factor a big application into smaller parts, or modules, and they have well defined ways in which they talk to each other, then it is easier to understand, create and fix the smaller sections, while having the whole fit together like a jigsaw puzzle.
Modules can also be written by different people, sometimes living in different parts of the world or working in another part of an organization. For example, if I am an expert in writing code that draws and manipulates photographs on a computer screen, then it makes the most sense for me to focus on implementing modules that need that sort of function, rather than have me write code for something completely different, like databases.
Another good reason for using this modular kind of design is that I can re-use the pieces in different projects. The more I can re-use, the faster I can develop software. If I know that the individual modules were written and maintained by experts, I have greater confidence that the software I put together will be higher quality and that I am efficiently leveraging the work of others.
So software applications can be broken down into components called modules and they can also use collections of special routines that are stored in what are called libraries. For example, I might have a library that does fancy mathematical calculations. If the modules and libraries are available as open source, then many people can use them freely. They can also look at and possibly improve the code and then share that.
This means that a community can develop around the code to create, maintain, and improve it. This benefits everyone who might be able to take advantage of the code in their own projects.
One important place to do this sort of thing is where standards need to be implemented. If I am creating a word processor, then it makes sense to have a module that knows how to read and write the OASIS OpenDocument Format (ODF), and it is the only part of the program that does this. The rest of the application can use whatever form makes sense internally to store the information from the document, but when it needs to saved to or read from disk, then that one module will be used.
If I am writing an extension for a web browser that needs to read and then display an ODF document, I can re-use that module if I have access to it and have permission to use it. If there is a problem in the module or the standard gets updated, I can change the module if I have access to the source code. If I have access to the source code, I can read it and become a better software developer by looking at how certain tasks are handled.
If I don't have access to the module or its source code, I have to write new code to process the ODF. With luck, I'll do it perfectly ... eventually, though it seems a waste of effort if someone has done it before.
If everyone uses the same software module to implement a standard and it is high quality software, then more people can develop applications faster that use the standard correctly. In this way, the easy availability of software can accelerate the adoption of a standard, with all the resultant goodness of systems that can speak to each other.
If support for a standard comes with an operating system or a software development environment, then many of the things I just described may be true. However, if the standards support is proprietary you probably will not have access to the source code and you may not be able to use that standard as easily on other platforms, such as different operating systems.
This trade-off may be acceptable, but you should accept it, if you do, after careful consideration. You will need to depend on the vendor for updates and fixes to the software at the pace he or she decides to provide it. You also need to be careful that the vendor supports the standard correctly and that there are not hidden security problems or special vendor extensions.
This can be hard to tell if you don't have the source code but, again, might be acceptable. You get to make the choice. If the vendor supports multiple operating systems and platforms, you are less likely to have the sorts of problems described.
If a vendor has a history of and reputation for delivering proprietary software that provides significant value and high quality, secure products with good support, this may outweigh the advantages, to you, of having the source code open. If, however, the way the vendor develops, licenses, and supports his or her software will lead you to being locked into his or her world with limited future choices and flexibility, then you should carefully consider the possible advantages of an open source solution.
In a somewhat round-about way, I've described software development and pointed out some situations where it would be advantageous to have access to the source code. There is more to it than just seeing the code or having it shared in some limited way by a vendor.
Open source fundamentally means that you can benefit from the work of others and, in turn, others get to benefit and extend your work. In this way, the software development community can make progress by working and innovating in a collaborative way. It's the power of this community working in an open, transparent way that helps make this model of software development work.
Why would you not want to make the source code for your software open and available? Here are some possible reasons:
Here are some reasons why you might want to make the code available as open source:
Now, the fine print.
A particular open source project makes its code available under a specific legal license and this lays out the rights, restrictions, and responsibilities you have when you use the code. There are many licenses and the Open Source Initiative lists many of them. They are not all compatible with each other and you cannot and must not necessarily mix code covered under one license with code covered under another license.
The most widely used license is the GNU General Public License (GPL). While it is hard to quantify, it appears likely that approximately 70% of all open source projects use the GPL. Code that uses the GPL is referred to as "free software."
By its nature, the GPL makes new code that incorporates older GPLed code also use the GPL. That is, the GPL is somewhat self-propagating as code that uses it is picked up and re-used elsewhere. This is exactly as the authors intended.
The GNU/Linux operating systems use the GPL. You cannot charge others for a license to use GPLed software and you must make your source code available.
Another commonly used license is from the Apache Software Foundation. This is an open source license that does allow direct use of the source code within commercial products. Unlike the GPL, the Apache License allows "defensive termination": if you sue someone because you claim that the software infringes on one of your patents, then you lose the right to freely use the patents of others that are implemented in the software.
In other words, you stop having the right to use the software if you are trying to stop others from using it. Much of the open source software that implements the standards of the World Wide Web is covered under the Apache license.
There are many other licenses but a handful of them cover well more than 90% of all free and open source software. I illustrated a few of the sorts of things that licenses can include but there are others. If you are planning to open source your code, study the licenses carefully. If you are planning to use open source code in a product, also study the licenses carefully and you should probably speak with an intellectual property attorney.
With care and some flexibility on your part, you can very likely accomplish what you wish to do. Treat license considerations very seriously.
In the first section I spoke about standards, in the second I discussed software and business models, and in this section I dove into what open source is in a way that I hope makes clear some of the differences from the traditional, proprietary development methods. I hope that I've justified to you the assertion from the very first sentence, that you must seriously consider open source software.
I want to emphasize that we are now and will continue to live in a hybrid open/proprietary world. I also fundamentally believe that whether we are talking about standards or software, we are advancing towards increasing openness.
We are seeking greater transparency into what our software does, how it works, and how it interoperates with software elsewhere in our own organization as well as those of customers, partners, and suppliers. We are looking to leverage the community to build a strong foundation of software and standards on top of which we can innovate.
Finally, we want greater certainty that vendors will not be building things into software that benefit themselves at our expense, particularly if it limits our future choices of what applications we use to access the data that we ourselves created.
In the fourth and final section I'll tie all these threads together and talk about how and why Service Oriented Architecture, or SOA, is accelerating this movement towards openness.
In the beginning, there was one computer and it was big and slow and it filled an entire room. Eventually, there were many computers and they were smaller and they could talk to each other.
All was not good, however, because they did not speak to each other in the same way. Strangely enough, this was often true even when a particular collection of machines all tried to work together in a hospital, an automobile manufacturer, an insurance company, or a government agency.
In the meanwhile, the software that ran on the computers got bigger, more powerful, and sometimes needlessly complicated. If two computers did communicate with each other to get some job done, it was very difficult to put in similar software created by someone else on one of the machines. This was true even if that new software might have been significantly better in some way or less expensive.
It became very hard to substitute in different hardware that was much faster or otherwise better suited to more efficiently accomplish the intended task. We also discovered that machines started to know too much about each other. This was not nosiness on their part, of course, it was just that people started to depend on particular special features of the software or the hardware when putting everything together so the machines could do their jobs.
There were times when we wanted to use knowledge of special features in very high performance situations, but for most situations with application software, building in these kinds of dependencies eventually caused more problems than they were worth. What we really needed was a way for the computers, really the software running on these networked machines, to be able to ask each other for information or to do certain jobs in ways that did not give away the underlying details of the software, the operating systems, or the hardware.
If you could do this, and computer scientists refer to such systems as being loosely coupled, then it would be much easier to completely hide the underlying details of how the systems were built. This would allow us to make changes or improvements to the systems while still allowing the software to communicate in the same way.
We could make the overall job run faster by putting in speedier hardware running a different operating system, yet the systems could still communicate in the same way. We could move one computer closer or farther away, speed up the communication technology, and yet everything would still keep working.
If a car manufacturer needed to order parts, then it could use exactly the same language and communication style to talk to two or more suppliers. If a new supplier offered better quality or a lower price, then that supplier could be added into the system and the same kinds of interchanges could take place with it as had been happening with the older suppliers.
What we're describing here is interoperability, software and hardware systems made by different people that can nevertheless communicate in a high level way that does not depend on the underlying implementation details. This means we don't all have to buy our computer hardware from the same vendor and we don't all have to use the same operating system and applications.
It means that we have the choice to buy or build or otherwise obtain what is right for us and it gives us control. This means that we don't have to rely on proprietary software communication schemes from vendors and we don't have to get software interoperability via one vendor's trade secrets.
A vendor or a software provider gets our business if they offer the best product, code, or service at the right price. They know we can substitute in something made by someone else. Hence we get more competition and ongoing improvements, both technical and economic.
The world doesn't quite work this perfectly now, but it could come close. We can build open, interoperable software systems useful for businesses, governments, schools, hospitals and anything else that could benefit from the advantages discussed above. Standards can make it all work together while open source and traditional proprietary software will give us a range of choices in how we build the systems.
Let's stop and think about the World Wide Web. When you use the Web, do you ever worry about what software is being used to deliver the pages you view? Do you think about the hardware?
Websites often run both proprietary and open source software and they use hardware from many different vendors. From the perspective of a consumer of web pages and someone who sends personal information on the Web, you want the transmissions to be fast, reliable and secure. You want to be able to fully interact with the pages within your browser, no matter which browser you choose.
That is, you care about the quality of service and you care about the standards being used to encode the pages and the way they are sent back and forth. This is possible today and has been for many years.
Recent releases from open source browser software providers and smaller proprietary browser software vendors has focused the spotlight on the importance of good, current support for standards and consistent attention to security issues. As a result, the market leader has been forced to update its browser in order to try to remain competitive and stop losing market share. Standards are like that: they force vendors to support interoperability in the way customers demand.
The Web illustrates the success of standards in hiding how sites are actually implemented. This allows a website owner to use any software or hardware that suits his or her purpose. That owner also wants good quality of service. He or she wants happy customers who are pleased with using whatever services are offered on the site.
Users of the sites don't have to think about the technology being used but rather can think about whatever they are trying to accomplish. This may be buying music, finding the local movie listings, ordering presents for an upcoming holiday, or reading blogs. There are many such examples, but in all of them the standards that make up the web allow you to think about what you are trying to do versus technically how you are doing it.
It also enables geographic independence. To give you an example, I have a personal website and I don't have the vaguest idea where the machine running it is physically located. As long as interactions with it are fast enough, the location makes no difference.
This allows a lot of flexibility for website owners, especially the ones who may be running hundreds if not thousands of hardware servers. As long as the quality of service—performance, reliability, and security—is sufficiently high, it makes no difference where on the planet the hardware is. The Web is loosely coupled and its success is evident to hundreds of millions of people every day.
If we can accomplish all this with the Web and what it has done for e-commerce and making information available globally, can we do something similar but a bit more sophisticated and more general for interactions between arbitrary pieces of software? Can we have more fine-grained security where we can allow doctors to digitally sign the different parts of medical records for which they are responsible? Can we encrypt different parts of purchase orders so that only authorized people can see information relevant to them in a business process?
Can we easily substitute in new supply chain partners without disrupting our ongoing business and workflow? Can we transparently link multiple hospitals together so that all the electronic services we need to treat patients are available? Can a government provide the necessary infrastructure to take care of its citizens' needs while being able to use open source or proprietary software ... or both?
Many people, including myself, think the answer is yes, and the way to do is via something called Service Oriented Architecture, or SOA. Open standards are what make it work.
A service is something that does a particular set of activities and has a consistent interface. Think about an ATM, an automatic teller machine. I have used these all over the world and but for language and currency, they all pretty much do the same thing.
You put in your card, type in your personal identification numbers, and then you can interact with your accounts. You can transfer money from one account to another, withdraw money in the local currency, and ask about how much money you have. There are also other activities, but we would summarize all them as being "banking services."
Because of years of experience, there is a good and common understanding of what the standard banking services are. In fact, if you use the Web to do online banking, you will also be using some of the services. (I don't know of any that allow you to withdraw or print money from your computer!)
Whether you are using an ATM or using online banking, the steps are similar. You authenticate yourself (that is, you provide enough evidence that you are who you say you are) and then you invoke one or more services. You may use the balance inquiry service before you use the money transfer service. Eventually you do everything you want to do and you end your session. The next person who uses the ATM or your computer does not continue using your identity to access your accounts.
When you use an ATM, do you have any idea how the back-end banking systems are built? Do you care?
I maintain that you care about how quickly and robustly the ATM responds to you and that your privacy is maintained. This is quality of service again. You also care about successfully using any ATM you may encounter. This is standardization reappearing.
We can now translate these two banking ideas—ATMs and online banking—to computer to computer interactions. Using services, we could build software that automatically paid bills once a month without any human interaction once it was set up. We could automatically transfer money from a parent's checking account to her college student child's savings account in a different bank on the other side of the country. We could do all this without knowing the exact details of the service implementations.
To be clear, we would have to have the right authorizations to do any of this, but I'm talking about technical feasibility. For the sake of brevity of discussion, I'll assume from now on that the appropriate security is being used with any service.
If we think about health care, we can come up with other services that might be useful: ordering drugs from one or more pharmacies, requesting lab tests or their results, retrieving medical records including subsets such lists of allergies, and so on. For government, we might recall traffic violation or arrest records, request local tax records to compare with federal ones, or provide real time epidemic status information.
For the travel industry, there might be services that query hotel availability, make airline reservations, book restaurants, and reserve theater tickets. These individual services could all be combined into a compound service that might be called "book my next vacation." I encourage you to imagine other software services that might be useful in various industries, your business, and your life.
The "orientation" part of SOA means that you try to use services for everything possible and practical. The "architecture" part of SOA means that you have some discipline and governance in how you design, create, run and maintain the services and how they all fit together. Services will increasingly be the way we implement the components of our business processes. They help us once again separate the "what" is being done from the "how."
The standards that we use to make this work fall into three categories: data formats, protocols, and interfaces. When we talk about software interoperability, this is what we mean.
A data format is how we represent the information we send back and forth. A protocol wraps up that data with the necessary transmission and security information so it can be moved reliably from one computer to another. The interface is the exact specification of how you tell a service to do something, whether it is a query or an action to be performed. All together, these three things describe how you talk to a service and how they talk to each other.
Data formats can be highly structured information such as the details of a banking transaction expressed in XML or something less structured like a doctor's notes contained in an OpenDocument Format memo. Protocols and interfaces are typically very structured. The standards being developed in the W3C and OASIS for web services are an important way of implementing SOA for many people.
If one vendor, individual, or group owns any one of these, there is a potential problem. We want the freedom to call any service we wish if we have the right authorization to invoke it. If a vendor prevents others from using a particular format unless they pay a fee, then there is effectively a tax on the communication between software services.
This was a major fear when the Web was maturing but luckily it came to naught, though it was not without some significant challenges. If a vendor requires software interfaces to be licensed then they are effectively trying to lock users into their way of doing things. When protocols are proprietary then we limit a customer's ability to link together software systems and services in ways that they choose.
In short, we need truly open standards and not vendor controlled or dictated specifications in order for SOA to reach its full potential as a solution for customers.
If I am insisting on open standards for SOA, is there any room for doing anything proprietary here? Yes, and that is in how the services themselves might be built. Since we are using open standards to communicate to and from a service, we have the freedom to implement the service using any hardware or software that we choose. The implementation will not affect what the user sees or does other than how it delivers its quality of service.
If we want to use open source software and it gets the job done in terms of features, cost, and maintenance, great! If proprietary software gives you the security, performance, scalability and ability to run on multiple hardware platforms, use it! If you use a combination of both, that's just fine as well. That's your choice and it is under your control.
Service Oriented Architecture is now a major driving force in the IT world. As we redesign our older software to operate in this new SOA environment, the value of truly open standards is becoming more and more clear.
Collectively we're getting a better understanding of how open standards provide the freedom we need to factor our systems in the right way. This will allow us to openly interoperate with the software systems of our customers, partners, suppliers and, in the case of governments, citizens.
Open source is playing a role here because it is often how standards are first made available. SOA presents new business opportunities and better ways for industries to communicate within and between themselves.
There's a healthy future for software development, be it open source or proprietary, and I believe open standards will be at the core of our success in the days to come.


text:
Get Involved
Johnson & Wales University recognizes that you are a very important partner in your student's success. Parent & Family Relations helps you stay connected to campus and serves as your ongoing resource throughout your student's college career.
Parent & Family Advisory Board
Wildcat parents and families get involved by serving on our Parent & Family Advisory Board (PFAB). The PFAB consists of family members from each class year. They meet on campus and serve as ambassadors, hosts at many events, and as resources for our parent and family community. The PFAB consists of committees who communicate in between meetings to accomplish their goals. At most meetings, a member of the JWU community visits to address issues of importance to our parent and family community. Frequent presenters include the CEO and President, the Executive Director of Campus Safety & Security, the Director of Experiential Education & Career Services, and other administrators from key areas.
Parent & Family Advisory Board Postcard (200K PDF)
The Johnson & Wales University Parent & Family Advisory Board (PAB) serves the university and the parent and family community by:
- Sharing their own experiences to promote the university to interested students and their families
- Welcoming new students and their families at university events
- Sharing information about JWU resources, and what is expected of their student
- Advocating for parents and families
- Encouraging parents and families to get involved with the JWU community
- ollaborating with the university to create the best living and learning environment for students
How do I get involved on the Parent & Family Advisory Board?
New parents and families who are interested in more information about the Parent & Family Advisory Board are encouraged to speak with a board member at our campus events. You can also contact Parent & Family Relations at 401-598-2895.
PFAB membership does require an application process.
- New member applications are available during New Student & Family Orientation and at Homecoming & Family Weekend. Candidates may also submit the online application provided below.
- Your application will be reviewed and a current board member will contact you to discuss the process of selection, membership requirements, etc.
- This position is a non-paid, volunteer appointment.
- The motivation for volunteering is to collaborate with the university to create the best learning and living environments on campus for our students.
- If you have any questions about your application, email email@example.com.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Login to my Lennar
Forgot Your Password?
Enter the email address that was
used to create your account. If found
in our system, password reset url will be
emailed to this account.
Thank You!
An email has been sent to your account with password reset url. Please follow the instruction to update your password.
To comply with real estate laws in some states, we require your state of residency before we can respond to your request.
Thank you for your interest in Lennar homes in Dallas / Ft. Worth, TX. Your request has been submitted and a Lennar Associate will contact you shortly.
New homes for sale in Fort Worth, TX offering the best shopping in the south and a refreshing atmosphere influenced by cowboy culture.
Fort Worth Stockyards
Dallas Arts District
Texas Motor Speedway
View byGridList
Sort byPriceAlphabeticalLocation
First PagePreviousNextLast Page
DFW iNHC Team866-314-4477
We're here to help.
Want to meet your Internet New Home Consultant? Select the desired location of your new home:
Meet your personal Internet New Home Consultant.
DFW iNHC Team
Meet your INHC
Let's talk
Enter your phone number and we'll immediately call you to talk about all things Lennar.
Fort Worth has morphed from an iconic Lone Star State cowtown to a cosmopolitan competitor and cultural powerhouse. In the dynamic Metroplex's "other" city, new homes for sale are surrounded by Fort Worth's still-celebrated Western heritage. Distinctive architecture, cultural destinations and even world-renowned entertainment venues hark back to a colorful past. From barbecue to breweries and from parks to performance halls, Fort Worth remains a genuine American gem.
Dallas's Metroplex sidekick may be famous for its cattle-and-cowboy past, but new homes here are enveloped by world-class culture. The prestigious Van Cliburn International Piano Competition and the renowned Kimbell Art Museum are just two among dozens of high-class opportunities.
Two of the most popular sites include the iconic Fort Worth Stockyards and historic Log Cabin Villages. Check out the National Cowgirl Museum and Hall of Fame, the Texas Motor Speedway, an actual drive-in movie theater, country-music honky-tonks and parks galore.
New homes for sale are just around the corner from mouth-watering barbecue, along with so many other flavors, past and present, in north Texas's most beguiling city.
Thanks Giving Square in Dallas
White Rock Lake
The Perot Museum of Nature and Science
The Dallas Zoo
The Latina Cultural Center
DFW International Airport
The Dallas Arboretum
Dallas Farmers Market
The Dallas Dart
The Rangers Ballpark in Arlington
The JFK Memorial
Are you beginning your home buying journey? Consider the opportunities that come with buying a brand new home. From modern design to quality features, you'll discover an array of benefits when you buy new!
You're ready to buy a home. What now? myLennar is where you'll find all the info you need to manage the personal process of shopping, buying, owning and enjoying your Lennar home. So whether you're taking the first steps to purchase a home or learning how to care for the one you already own – you can find it all at myLennar.
Learn more
Save your favorite Lennar homes and communities. Create a scrapbook of your home coming to life. Manage your home contacts and documents all in one place.
Thanks for your interest
Lennar doesn't currently build homes in this area.View everywhere we build.
Use your current location or View everywhere we build
in Fort Worth


text:
FC: the sixties
1: John Fitzgerald Kennedy, the 35th President of the United States, was assassinated at 12:30 p.m. on Friday, November 22. 1963
3: Martin Luther king Jr. lead the civil rights movements in the 60's with speech's like i have a dream
5: six Apollo missions flew to the moon and five landed between... John f. Kennedy's mandate to land a man on the moon before the sixties ended
7: from 1968 to 1973 effects where made to end the conflict through diplomacy. 58169 where killed and 304,000 where wounded out of 2.58 million who served.
9: there where lots of people who pretested the war in Vietnam ''hippies'' over 300,000 people went to woodstock
11: greasers where around in the 60's the greases there hair back and wore leather jackets.
13: in 1962 the Cuban missile crisis happened.
15: the first Wal-mart opened in 1962 in Arkansas
17: in 1962 the Beatles first aired on American television.
19: to kill a mocking bird,author Harper Lee uses characters to explore Civil Rights and racism in the segregated southern United States of the 1930s written 1962.


text:
The weather here has been absolutely sweltering…and I haven't turned on the oven in days. Meals have been mostly sandwiches and salads. And the grill has been my best friend in (or out, I guess) of the kitchen.
Not that I'm complaining. I love heat and I love salads even more. So I've been taking this opportunity to play around with different tastes and textures in salads and came up with this gem featuring grilled California Avocados.
You might be wondering if you'll like grilled avocado? My answer is probably YES. When warm and grilled, the buttery-ness of the avocado really shines and lends a hearty bite to this salad. Make sure you pick avocados that are JUST ripe. Too mushy and they'll fall right through the grill.
The other stars of this dish? Grilled nectarines add sweetness and the peppery arugula is the perfect base for this refreshing, yet satisfying, salad.
If you're a carnivore and need a little protein, simple grilled chicken is a perfect addition.
And a glass of white. Naturally. Eat al fresco and soak up summer!
Step by Step
- Throw the orange juice, vinegar, shallot and salt and pepper into a blender.
- Turn it on medium high and slowly stream in 1/4 cup of the olive oil.
- Blend till emulsified, set aside.
- Heat your grill to medium high (350-400F) and give the grate a nice little rub with some olive oil and a paper towel.
- Cut in your avocados in half, then into quarters. You can easily peel the skin off this way and get all the good outer green part of the fruit. Once you've got quarters, slice once more into eighths.
- Do the same to your nectarines, except don't peel them. But you want the eighths.
- Put the avocados and nectarines into a bowl and drizzle the remaining olive oil over them. Sprinkle with a little salt and pepper, then toss gently to coat.
- Very gently place your avocado and nectarine slices onto the grill. Grill each side about 2 minutes, so you have a nice grill mark and they're warmed through.
- Remove from grill.
- Arrange the arugula on four plates.
- Divide the blueberries, pistachios, nectarine and avocado evenly.
- Drizzle with the dressing.
- Enjoy, preferably al fresco!
WWPP 8; Calories 407; Total Fat 33.1g; Saturated Fat 4.5g; Trans Fat 0.0g; Cholesterol 0mg; Sodium 97mg; Potassium 922mg; Total Carbohydrates 28.1g; Dietary Fiber 10.1g; Sugars 13.0g; Protein 6.8g
- How do you know if an avocado is ripe? Check out this great guide for finding the perfect fruit!
- You can totally substitute any stone fruit in this recipe. Peaches would work great!
- Not a fan of arugula? No problem. Sub any dark leafy green, but make sure it's a softer leaf. Baby spinach or baby greens are perfect!
Did you make this recipe?
Disclosure: I was compensated by the California Avocado Commission for the development of this recipe and this post. As always, all opinions are my own.


text:
Sleep Apnea therapy in Chesapeake
Do you struggle with snoring, daytime drowsiness, or memory loss? Do you have trouble concentrating or routinely feel sleepy behind the wheel? These are all signs that you may be struggling with a serious sleep disorder known as sleep apnea. Patients with sleep apnea stop breathing for 10 seconds or longer while asleep, and as a result, sleep apnea patients also wake up multiple times throughout the night to restore normal breathing. Not every patient wakes up completely, though; some only move to a lighter stage of sleep. That's why sleep apnea is a commonly underdiagnosed condition.
What Causes Sleep Apnea?
In many cases, sleep apnea is caused by an obstruction of the tongue or lower jaw. During sleep, the tongue and lower jaw relax, cutting off the air's pathway to the lungs. As a result, patients end up snoring or struggling to breathe properly. Known as Obstructive Sleep Apnea (OSA), it can be diagnosed with a sleep study and easily treated without surgery. One common method of treatment is a CPAP machine. CPAP stands for continuous positive airway pressure, and it uses a steady stream of air to keep the airway open. However, more and more dentists are helping patients treat sleep apnea and snoring with oral appliance therapy.
Oral Appliance Therapy for Chesapeake and Beyond
At Estrada Dentistry, we're happy to offer care for sleep apnea and snoring using oral appliance therapy. This effective treatment method uses a customized oral appliance, which is similar to a mouthguard, to reposition your tongue and lower jaw so that air can pass through normally to the lungs while you sleep. With your tongue and lower jaw out of the way, you can sleep peacefully at night without snoring.
Not only can you benefit from treatment with oral appliance therapy, your bed partner will as well. Many couples experience conflict as a direct result of a patient's snoring. With oral appliance therapy, you can both rest better at night.
We would be happy to talk to you about your symptoms and how treatment with oral appliance therapy could help. With a customized appliance, you and your partner will finally get the rest you both deserve.
Are you ready to schedule an appointment with Estrada Dentistry? Call us today. Our office is located in the Greenbrier area of Chesapeake on the corner of Kempsville and Volvo Parkway.


text:
Blue/Green paisley paper birthday card with vellum "Happy Birthday" Happy Birthday Elise! Aka Boca
Posted in August 2012 …
It's a dog's life
"Dogs are not our whole life, but they make our lives whole." Roger Caras Always remember to treat your pet the way you want to be treated. They do not have the privilege of being here as long as we do and deserve to be given the best. Always donate to your local Animal Shelter.
Peanut Butter Cookies
Yum Peanut butter cookies! I was "pinspired" and made this recipe that I found on Pinterest. I was attracted to the recipe because it's flour-less. Ingredients 2 cups peanut butter – I used creamy Skippy but next time I think I will try Chunky Jiff! 2 cups white sugar 2 eggs 2 teaspoons baking soda … Continue reading


text:
Summer afternoon – summer afternoon; to me those have always
been the two most beautiful words in the English language. –– Henry James
The piper at gates of dawn has resumed his or her ritual after taking most of the summer off. Now from just before the first light hits the high meadow with its benediction of the new day 'til several minutes later when it's the slate roof of Kinrowan Hall which the sunrise glistens on the moss covered slate roofing tiles up there, the piper plays on. Some say the instrument is Great Medievel Pipes but I doubt that as I've never seen them here; more likely is that they border pipes or uilleann pipes.
I'm now inside our Kitchen this morning as it's bone numbing cold this morning. No not just chilling but rather a brutally cold damp with the promise of rain and strong winds later today. Autumn's not even here but the weather's giving us an early taste of November is usually like. Even the Estate felines and canines who like going outside are sticking close to the fireplaces and other warm spots inside Kinrowan Hall today.
In between lots of coffee and setting up my 'office' which is myself, a large mug of Blue Mountain coffee and my iPad, in the sitting corner of the Kitchen, I've been editing this Edition which includes a Russian River Brewing Company release, Gerard Way's GN series, modern Balkan music, an unusual A.A. Milne work and much, much more.
The manor house and the woods that surround that A.A. Milne lived in as that inspired the tales of Pooh and friends is for sale for a staggering number of pounds, but for considerably less you can read The Red House Mystery, a classic English manor house novel by him that gets a look-see by Lory: 'The story is not really a "whodunit" — the "who" is pretty clear from the outset — the question is "how" and, even more, "why" he did it, and Milne keeps us guessing until the end. The plausibility of the solution is not one that would hold up to heavy scrutiny, but the pleasure lies not in the verisimilitude of the puzzle but in the ingenuity of its construction and unravelling, and the witty repartee among the characters.'
Denise has been holding on to her review of Crystal King's Feast of Sorrow, but that's just because she couldn't resist going back to it over and over again. If you've a taste for a story full of intrigue, Ancient Rome, and flamingo tongues, you need look no further. And if you just want a page-turner, you've come to the right place as well. 'Sorrow is so thoroughly researched it feels as if her tale is exactly what happened, instead of what possibly could have. … Come for the fascinating premise, stay for the amazing characters and wonderful way King has with prose.'
Marian looks at a trilogy by Jane Yolen that deserves to be a classic. First up is 'The Books of Great Alta which is the compilation of Yolen's two books in the series, Sister Light, Sister Dark and White Jenna. It is the story of the women of Dale, who worship Great Alta, the mother goddess and what happens to them for better or worse.' If you've read these already, then do read Marian's review of the final volume, The One-Armed Queen, but otherwise do not as it has major spoilers about what happens in the first two novels.
Robert has a book that should resonate with all those who are familiar with images such as the Green Man: Garth Dahl's Masks from Around the World: 'Masks occur in every human culture I've ever run across, and their purpose is always the same: disguise. In the theater of ancient Greece, the disguise served to submerge the actor in the persona of the god or hero he portrayed. Among the Cherokee and Iroquois of North America, the fearsome headgear served to frighten malignant spirits away. In Mycenae, masks were funerary effigies, a practice found throughout the ancient world and also found among the great pre-Columbian cultures of the Americas.'
The history of beer is, if nothing else, tasty. And that's why I'm offering you a review as done by Kelly of a Russian River Brewing Company release: 'Wandering through my neighborhood grocery store on a Saturday afternoon, I came across a wine tasting. "What the heck!" I said to myself and sauntered up to the guy with the wine glasses. I was chatting pleasantly with a couple sipping next to me when the male part of the party stopped a young man in an apron walking by and asked if they had any Pliny the Elder in the back. The young man scowled, but said he would bring one. My fellow taster boldly asked for a second bottle for his wife and received another black look.'
It's summer here which means lots of fresh hand churned ice cream with various fruits, principally the Border strawberries that start out blood red and turn as white as bleached bone as they ripen. So it's apt that Richard has this book for us: 'Ask anyone waving around a Drumstick cone or Klondike Bar where ice cream comes from, and you're lucky if you get a smart-aleck response like "the freezer". Ice cream may be near-universally loved (there's an ice cream truck going down my block as we speak, and it's not being shy about it), ice cream has an oddly shrouded history. Admittedly, most consumers of ice cream wouldn't care if the first ice cream cone sprang, fully formed, from the forehead of Zeus, but for those who are actually curious about where their double-dip hot fudge sundaes originated – and who don't want to read a tome the size of a cinderblock – there's Ivan Day's slender Ice Cream.'
April has a look at the opening salvo in a not-run-of-the-mill graphic novel series, The Umbrella Academy: Apocalypse Suite: 'Part steam punk, part superhero comic and all attitude, Umbrella Academy is the brainchild of rock front man Gerard Way (My Chemical Romance). The titular "academy" is actually a group of oddly powered kids, raised by an eccentric space alien masquerading as an entrepreneur known for his work with chimpanzees.'
Robert follows up with his take on the second volume, The Umbrella Academy: Dallas: 'The story is rather fragmented, but does draw together into a coherent narrative focusing on the assassination of JFK — eventually. But first there's a dog race (Number 5 loses heavily), a trip back to 1963, a short interlude in Heaven, and a stint in Vietnam before everyone winds up where they're supposed to be.'
American indie folk-rockers Deer Tick have returned from hiatus with a self-titled two-disc set, Deer Tick Vol. 1 & Deer Tick Vol. 2. The former is mostly acoustic folk-rock, the latter mostly electric rock of the punk or garage variety, but built around lyrics that largely wouldn't be out of place in folk-rock. Gary says it 'is an impressive release, one not to be missed by fans of thoughtful, independent-minded music, whether you call it folk or rock.'
English singer-songwriter Jack Cooper usually plays in a two-man band called Ultimate Painting. But he's just released his first solo album. Gary says Cooper's Sandgrown 'is a song cycle of sorts painting a sonic picture of his hometown, the port city of Blackpool on the Lancashire coast in northwestern England.'
Gary also looks at the modern Balkan album Dvoijka by Sarajevan Damir Imamovič and his band Sevdah Takht. The music comes from a mix of tradition and innovation, he says: 'Growing up in Sarajevo, he steeped himself not only in the roots of legends of sevdah like his father and grandfather, but also in the other Sarajevo, the city of rebels and bohemians.'
And not far from the Balkans, at least geographically, is Italy. Robert gives us his take on two CDs of Italian music, Italia 3: Atlante di Musica Tradizionale — Roots Music Atlas and Italian Café: 'Hmmm' says Robert.
For our What Not this week, Robert gives us a look at one of his favorite places in Chicago, Lincoln Park Zoo's South Pond Nature Boardwalk: 'If you're visiting Chicago and need a break from the museums, architecture tours, shopping, and theater, check out South Pond in Lincoln Park, just south of Lincoln Park Zoo, for a nice relaxing hour or two. It's another restoration project in the Park, this one under the auspices of the Lincoln Park Zoological Society, and it's come along quite nicely — I call it "the Lakefront, BC — Before Chicago".'
And as we linger on the last long summer afternoons, a song to to tuck away with our memories: 'Summertime' from George Gershwin's Porgy and Bess.


text:
Everyone who has been to the village of Stanford near Hermanus in the Cape Overberg agrees that you need to be very, very hungry before you visit. There are so many good places to eat and enjoy wine tasting that the town is becoming a serious contender for foodie capital of the Cape. Franschhoek had better watch out. Here are 12 restaurants and wineries in Stanford worth visiting.
1. Havercrofts
If you like good food that's well cooked and served in a rustic farmhouse with views of the mountains, you have to visit Havercrofts. It doesn't hurt either that it's listed No. 1 of the restaurants in Stanford by TripAdvisor. Highly recommended by locals for Sunday lunch, it's owned and run 'with heart and humour' by husband and wife team, Bryden and Innes Havercroft – also known at the Saturday morning market as the 'good-looking husband and rude wife'.
Open for lunch Thurs to Sun 12.30-3pm
Are you a locavore? If you visit Springfontein Eats on the Springfontein wine estate just west of the village, you'll discover that this means eating fresh herbs, veggies and fruits that are grown locally. Executive chef Jürgen Schneider had a Michelin-starred restaurant in Germany for many years and now he brings the same skill to Stanford, aiming to create a 'gastronomic destination with Michelin star quality'. Expect a taste adventure with ingredients like prawns, calamari, duck, veal, goats cheese, truffles, Pinotage, pears or gooseberries.
Three- to six-course lunch Thurs to Sun 12:00, four- to six-course dinner Tues to Sat 18:30; prices from R290 to R590pp
When this homestyle country restaurant opened, it had Stanford virtually to itself. Its fame spread so that Capetonians would make the two-hour trek to Stanford just to visit Marianas. Even now, when so many other eateries are flourishing in the little town, it's still popular – testament to the local ingredients (many of these from Mariana Esterhuizen's own herb and vegetable garden and fruit orchard) that dominate in the kitchen and on the plate. The menu changes according to what's available, but might include slow-roasted lamb, chicken pie or gruyere soufflé.
Open Thurs to Sun from 12pm
4. Madre's Kitchen
This country-style restaurant on the Robert Stanford Estate is surrounded by vineyards and dams. Chef and entrepreneur Madré Malan grows organic veg and herbs to use in what she calls onthoukos (memorable food). Everything is freshly prepared. Sit inside or outside while your kids play on the jungle gym. You can also phone ahead 028-3410647 to order a picnic basket of farm bread, meat, cheese, paté, salads and fruit to eat under a shady tree in the gardens.
Open Thurs to Sun 8am-4pm
Graze Café in the heart of Stanford village is a popular spot for breakfast, but their lunch menu and cakes are also worth mention. Chef Tabby does wonders in the kitchen with local fresh produce – some of which she grows herself – while husband Alex is the friendly face out front. Treats of the day might include granadilla cheesecake, steak sandwich on ciabatta and rabbit wraps.
Open Wed 9am-12pm, Fri 6pm-11pm, Sat 9am-4pm
This restaurant on the Blue Gum Country Estate, about 7km from Stanford along the R326, is open for breakfast, light lunch and dinner. Their breakfast spread is epic, with to-die-for croissants, creamy yoghurt and French toast among its yummiest offerings. There's fresh fruit and a full English breakfast too. The lunch menu includes the ever-popular steak sandwich and chicken wrap as well as daily specials. The doors open to the view of vineyards, gardens and mountains, and the restaurant doubles as a wedding venue. There's also a more formal sister restaurant, the Blue Gum.
Open Thurs to Sun 8.30am-10pm
This café at the Mosaic Private Sanctuary & Spa on the edge of the Hermanus lagoon is about 8km from Stanford village. Built of stacked limestone blocks in 1892 – and rumoured to have a resident ghost – it offers salads, sandwiches, cheese and meze platters, and pastries. You can also order a picnic basket to enjoy under the milkwood trees on the lagoon. (It's also a gorgeous wedding and event venue, so phone first to check if it's booked out, tel 028-3132814.)
Open daily 11am–5pm (except if there's a private function)
8. Stanford Hills
This is more than just a winery, it also produces indigenous flowers, roses and olives. Don't miss at least a taste of the Jacksons Pinotage. Also on the farm are self-catering cottages and The Tasting Room restaurant overlooking a dam, where you can enjoy farm-fresh food and the view over the valley.
Tasting, sales and restaurant Thur to Mon and public holidays 11-5pm, Tues/Wed by appointment
9. Springfontein
Zimbabwean winemaker Tariro Masayiti is a biochemist who later studied winemaking at Stellenbosch and worked at Nederburg before coming to this boutique winery. Seven of its wines earned four stars in Platter's South African Wines 2014. Visit the winery to taste their estate wines or buy a glass or two of their Sopiensklip range at the sunset market that takes place in the village square on the last Friday of the month. There's also a restaurant (see 2 above) and accommodation on the estate.
Tasting, sales and cellar tours at the winery Mon to Fri 8-5pm, Sat/Sun 9-4pm
10. Raka
You'll find Raka wine farm on the R326, about 17 kilometres from Stanford. Owner Piet Dreyer is so obsessed with the sea that he named the farm after his fishing boat. But that doesn't mean his wines are fishy; Raka boasts six four-star wines, while the award-winning Biography Shiraz and the Cabernet Franc each has four-and-a-half stars in the 2014 Platter's wine guide.
Tasting and sales Mon to Fri 9-5, Sat 10-2.30pm
Take your pick from Walker Bay next to the Birkenhead Brewery, Robert Stanford Estate (try the Cabernet Sauvignon blend called Hansom), Boschrivier and Brunia (both known for their Shiraz), and Vaalvlei (also known for fly-fishing and owner/winemaker Naas Terblanche's passion for the conservation of frogs and toads).
12. Take a side-trip to Creation Wines
Chances are that when you're driving to Stanford you may go through Hermanus and it's certainly worth taking a detour to visit Creation Wines in the beautiful Hemel-en-Aarde valley. Their delicious, aromatic and flavoursome wines have won multiple awards. They offer stunning food and wine pairings. You can have a main dish and dessert – highly recommended to taste more of the Creation magic.
Tasting, sales and cellar tours daily 10-5pm (except Christmas and New Year's Day)
To uncover more must-visit places in Stanford and the Overberg region, visit Stanford Tourism's website.
Like it? Pin this image!
Things to do in Stanford in the Overberg
Why to visit Stanford Valley Guest Farm in Stanford, South Africa
Where to eat in Swellendam restaurants
Copyright © Roxanne Reid - No words or photographs on this site may be used without written permission from roxannereid.co.za


text:
Medicare Supplemental Insurance Plans
Get A Free Quote 1-888-781-6026
Medicare Supplement Quote
We value your privacy and would never spam you
Medicare Supplemental Insurance Plans Costs
Original Medicare pays for many, but not all, health care services and supplies. Medicare Supplement Insurance policies, sold by private companies, can help pay some of the health care costs that Original Medicare doesn't cover, like copayments, coinsurance, and deductibles. Medicare Supplement Insurance policies are also called Medigap policies.
Some Medigap policies also offer coverage for services that Original Medicare doesn't cover, like medical care when you travel outside the U.S. If you have Original Medicare and you buy a Medigap policy, Medicare will pay its share of the Medicare-approved amount for covered health care costs. Then, your Medigap policy pays its share. You have to pay the premiums for a Medigap policy.
Medigap policies are standardized
Every Medigap policy must follow federal and state laws designed to protect you, and it must be clearly identified as "Medicare Supplement Insurance." Insurance companies can sell you only a "standardized" policy identified in most states by letters A through D, F through G, and K through N. All policies offer the same basic benefits, but some offer additional benefits so you can choose which one meets your needs. In Massachusetts, Minnesota, and Wisconsin, Medigap policies are standardized in a different way.
Note: Plans E, H, I, and J are no longer available to buy, but if you already have one of those policies, you can keep it. Contact your insurance company for more information.
How do I compare Medigap policies?
Different insurance companies may charge different premiums for the same exact policy. As you shop for a policy, be sure you're comparing the same policy (for example, compare Plan A from one company with Plan A from another company).
In some states, you may be able to buy a type of Medigap policy called Medicare SELECT (a policy that requires you to use specific hospitals and, in some cases, specific doctors or other health care providers to get full coverage). If you buy a Medicare SELECT policy, you have the right to change your mind within 12 months and switch to a standard Medigap policy
The chart below shows basic information about the different benefits that Medigap policies cover. If a percentage appears, the Medigap plan covers that percentage of the benefit, and you're responsible for the rest.
What else should I know about Medicare Supplement Insurance (Medigap)?
- You must have Part A and Part B.
- You pay the private insurance company a monthly premium for your Medigap policy in addition to your monthly Part B premium that you pay to Medicare. Contact the company to find out how to pay your premium.
- A Medigap policy only covers one person. Spouses must buy separate policies.
- You can't have prescription drug coverage in both your Medigap policy and a Medicare drug plan.
- It's important to compare Medigap policies since the costs can vary and may go up as you get older. Some states limit Medigap premium costs.
When to buy a Medigap Policy
- The best time to buy a Medigap policy is during your Medigap Open Enrollment Period. This 6-month period begins on the first day of the month in which you're 65 or older and enrolled in Part B. (Some states have additional Open Enrollment Periods.) After this enrollment period, your option to buy a Medigap policy may be limited and it may cost more.
- If you delay enrolling in Part B because you have group health coverage based on your (or your spouse's) current employment, your Medigap Open Enrollment Period won't start until you sign up for Part B.
- Federal law doesn't require insurance companies to sell Medigap policies to people under 65. If you're under 65, you might not be able to buy the Medigap policy you want, or any Medigap policy, until you turn 65. However, some states require Medigap insurance companies to sell Medigap policies to people under 65.


text:
JERUSALEM (Reuters) - Israel's prime minister canceled a visit to Germany on Wednesday after a spate of attacks that included the stabbing of an Israeli soldier by a suspected Palestinian militant who police said was then shot dead by special forces.
A steady rise in street violence, which Israeli and Palestinian leaders have sought to calm, has been fueled by confrontations around Jerusalem's al Aqsa mosque complex, Islam's third holiest shrine which Jews also revere as the vestige of their two ancient temples.
In the third knife attack in Jerusalem in less than a week, a young Palestinian woman stabbed an Israeli on Wednesday near that contested site and was then shot by the injured man.
On a day of multiple attacks, the bloodshed also spread to other parts of Israel.
The stabbing of the soldier by the presumed militant took place in the southern town of Kiryat Gat, and in the central city of Petah Tikva near Tel Aviv, a Palestinian stabbed and lightly wounded an Israeli man outside a busy shopping center, police said.
Four Israelis have been killed in stabbings in Jerusalem and a drive-by shooting in the occupied West Bank since Thursday, and two Palestinians have been shot dead and scores injured in clashes with security services, triggering fears of an escalation.
With those concerns still acute after Wednesday's incidents, Netanyahu canceled a trip to Germany, Israel's most important European ally, scheduled for Thursday.
Israel Radio reported that in a bid to ease tensions, a few days ago, Netanyahu instructed his ministers and governing lawmakers to temporarily refrain from visiting the volatile mosque compound, which Jews refer to as Temple Mount.
Palestinians fear increasing visits by Jewish groups to al-Aqsa are eroding longtime Muslim religious control there. Netanyahu has stated that he is committed to keeping the "status quo" at Temple Mount.
A small group of ultranationalist lawmakers and at least one minister have visited the plaza around al-Aqsa in recent months, heightening tensions there.
Both Netanyahu and Palestinian president Mahmoud Abbas - though at diplomatic loggerheads over peace talks that stalled in April 2014 - have sought to avert an escalation, and Netanyahu on Wednesday praised Israelis' resolve.
"The object of terror is to instill fear and the main way to defeat terror is to display calm and resolve... we have known worse periods than this and we will overcome this," he said.
Striking a similar tone, the Fatah Central Committee, the highest decision making body of the movement led by Abbas, praised Palestinians who participate in rallies "to defend the holy Muslim and Christian sites in Jerusalem."
The stabbing of the Israeli man by the 18-year-old Palestinian woman occurred near the Western Wall, a Jewish prayer site in Jerusalem's walled Old City abutting the al Aqsa mosque complex. The Israeli, lightly injured, drew a gun and shot the woman, seriously wounding her, police said.
Hoping to head off the violence and potential knock-on attacks by ultra-nationalist Israelis, Netanyahu has beefed up the military presence in Jerusalem and the West Bank.
On Wednesday, Israeli troops clashed with Palestinians in the West Bank, with two Palestinians who suffered serious injuries near the settlement of Beit El near Ramallah taken for treatment in Israeli hospitals.
Video footage of the clash showed Israeli undercover soldiers dressed as masked Palestinians appearing to take part in the stone throwing before suddenly drawing their concealed weapons and turning on the Palestinians to carry out arrests.
The Palestinian Red Crescent ambulance service said 288 Palestinians were hurt in Wednesday's clashes, including 10 by live fire.
The Palestinians seek a state in East Jerusalem, the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, territories Israel captured in the 1967 Middle East war.
Reporting by Dan Williams and Ori Lewis; Editing by Andrew Heavens, John Stonestreet, Toni Reinhold


text:
January 3 – May 31, 2018
Whether big or small, life is full of special moments worth celebrating. The new occasions catalogue is filled with products to help you commemorate each of these moments. From stamps to paper, and accessories to tools, all are sure to become your new favourites.
Join me on my Facebook page tonight at 8pm for a virtual launch party. I'll be spotlighting some of the new products and there will be prize drawings throughout the hours. RSVP to the event here.
If you'd like to have a hardcopy of the new catalogue, please send me an email with your address details and I will get one out to you this week.
Happy stampin'!