qc110.com

The iPhone is without a doubt a hot topic among other mobile-software development companies, such as Microsoft, Symbian, Research In Motion, and Google. However, if those companies really wanted to figure out how the iPhone works, it’s not much of a stretch to assume that they have ways of making that happen.

Apple’s hallmark is control: this is a company that requires an escort for reporters who want to walk 100 yards down a cavernous hallway in the Moscone Center from the media room to the bathroom in plain sight of dozens of people. That control sometimes serves Apple well, in that it can dictate a specific user experience free from outside distractions that might cause problems.

That’s what Apple did Wednesday. Now all the company needs to do is set clear guidelines for what constitutes a kosher iPhone application and what is too similar to Apple’s own plans to be released.

Communication has not been Apple’s strong suit this past summer. But with just four paragraphs, developers are now looking at the company in a new light. Imagine what a full-time iPhone developer evangelist could accomplish.

That was a ridiculous state of affairs, and it did nothing to further the mutual goal of Apple and iPhone developers: the continual improvement of software on the iPhone in order to boost sales. It would sort of be like if CNET forbade me from explaining to readers and colleagues how I developed my thoughts during the writing process for an article that had already been published.

A heavily moderated mailing list for Cocoa developers (Apple’s user interface technology) rejoiced at the prospect that they could discuss tips for
iPhone development the way they discuss
Mac development.

It’s also a sign that Apple–whose relationship with developers has been somewhat more strained than that other major operating-system company–is listening to the outside world.

Instead of throwing off the competition, the NDA merely angered developers who wanted nothing more than to help make Apple’s latest baby even better: they just needed a little help from their friends.

Before Wednesday morning, they simply couldn’t do such a thing in public, for fear of getting booted out of the iPhone Developer Program. Of course, in this era of ubiquitous communications, it’s pretty hard to keep people under wraps, if they have something they want to say, but Apple’s decision to apply the iPhone SDK’s NDA to released software forced developers to go underground simply to share tips and tricks they discovered when working on a freely available application.

But when you make the decision to take the training wheels off the iPhone, you have to let go a little. I’m in the camp that believes that Apple always intended to open up the iPhone to outside development–despite telling developers in June 2007 that Web apps are the coolest thing since widgets–but Apple clearly has had control issues, when it comes to how its technology is tinkered with by outside forces.

This move is a win-win-win, a rare time in which that cliche actually rings true. Apple will benefit from a vibrant developer community’s excitement over developing for the iPhone. The developers will be able to make their applications better and more reliable, which will make them more popular and profitable. And iPhone users are the direct beneficiaries of developer innovation.

Software development is complicated enough, even when you can ask for help.

The end result of Apple's decision to drop an NDA for released iPhone software? Better software.

Apple’s justification for applying the NDA to released software (it still applies to unreleased software under development) was that competitors might be able to glean insights into the iPhone from the technical details shared among developers.

Apple is never going to be Google, or even Microsoft, when it comes to placating developers. But developers are drawn to the iPhone because of the product itself, rather than the promise of freedom to tinker or a tight integration with IT. All Apple has to do to keep them happy is to give up the tiniest bit of control.

Apple’s decision to let its nondisclosure agreement on released iPhone software expire had an effect just hours after it was formally announced: developers such as Craig Hockenberry started sharing ideas for iPhone code.

(Credit:
Apple)

Treasury Secretary nominee Tim Geithner–the man who hopes to be entrusted with overseeing the Internal Revenue Service and a remaining $350 billion in bailout funds–apparently isn’t so smooth when it comes to Intuit’s TurboTax.

Advantage Intuit. No one watching Geithner’s testimony is likely to buy the blame-the-software routine. Clearly, this fiasco is a “garbage in, garbage out” issue. Geithner didn’t provide the necessary data.

The larger question is whether a guy who wrestles with TurboTax should realistically be expected to oversee the IRS and fork over $350 billion in bailout money. I’ll leave that for you to decide since that answer goes well beyond the scope of my blog. I’d hate to add yet another IT problem–scope creep–to this post.

Geithner said he “mistakenly believed” he was meeting his tax obligations. When asked which tax preparation software he used, Geithner noted that the taxes were his responsibility, “but I used TurboTax to prepare my returns.”

Intuit was clear about where it stood. In a statement, Intuit said:

This was originally posted at ZDNet’s Between the Lines.

His mention of TurboTax as he tried to explain away back taxes during a confirmation hearing last week highlights two common problems in IT: users vs. software, and the “garbage in, garbage out” conundrum.

Was your application screwy or did you fail to input data? Were Geithner’s tax problems the result of TurboTax’s failure to flag potential issues–like payroll taxes–or Geithner’s failure to cough up critical information.

This incident–see The Wall Street Journal’s live blog and Senate Finance Committee video (TurboTax mention comes at the 48-minute mark on the January 21 video)–highlights the never-ending user error vs. software tug-of-war in IT.

Last week, a flurry of news reports noted Geithner’s comments about TurboTax. As background, he was grilled about failing to pay more than $34,000 in payroll taxes earlier this decade.

Each year, millions of Americans use TurboTax to accurately prepare and file their federal and state tax returns. The software helps taxpayers report their income and find the deductions and credits they’re entitled to claim. TurboTax, and all software and in-person tax preparation services, base their calculations on the information users provide when completing their returns. TurboTax also has built-in error-checking tools that routinely catch common taxpayer mistakes. Federal law and our own privacy policy prohibit us from discussing specifics of any customer’s return.

In the end, Geithner will probably be confirmed, but his standing has certainly been diminished.

Correction at 9 a.m. PST: Tim Geithner’s nomination status has been corrected. His nomination has not come up for a full Senate vote yet.

LogMeIn, a company best known for its free and pro-level remote access applications, is looking for carriers and Netbook manufacturers to preload its LogMeIn Ignition remote access software onto Netbooks so that consumers will be able to view and edit photos and documents from their main desktop or laptop computer from their tiny Netbooks. The deal would give carriers that sell Netbooks with mobile broadband plans and Netbook-makers two products in one–the remote tools for users to access their main computers, and an IT administration tool for themselves–called LogMeIn Rescue+ Mobile–that would let their support staff remotely access your Netbook for troubleshooting purposes. Both might become available to you for an additional fee.

(Credit:
LogMeIn)

Of course, for customers to use LogMeIn, their primary computer must be turned on–that’s fine when you’re planning to work remotely, but a stumbling block if your need to view files is more sudden. While a deal with carriers and Netbook makers would introduce more customers to remote access solutions, LogMeIn Free is a version of the remote-access software that end users don’t need to pay for to use on a Netbook. An additional offer of speedier remote support, however, is what rounds out the advantage for the consumer, and what could make the extra service worth a subscription.

A Netbook’s extremely limited hard drive space (typically half that of a laptop and one third of that for a desktop) makes it terrible for storing files, but its Internet-connectedness and light weight make it ideal for carrying around.

(Credit:
twitpic)

It seems that Apple, as a matter of policy, does not comment on the approval process for Apple applications. We have, however, contacted the company, and will update this post if we hear back.

But mom and dad can be crazy and illogical like that.

Somewhat similar to Google Trends, Twitter’s Trends is a list of the most frequently used topics or words on Twitter at any given moment. This means this live list of words/topics changes constantly (I checked it just now and the offensive word–which starts with an “F,” by the way–has gone). Yet, somehow it still bothers Apple enough to take action.

Post pictures with Mobypicture and yfrog (in addition to TwitPic) New “Link” button to add to Instapaper faster, and repost individual links View full-size profile images Dark theme Ping.fm integration Tweetshrink integration Twitlonger integration German localization Russian localization Allow DMs up to 255 characters Many UI tweaks Play back Song.ly links Option to use “RT” syntax Better feedback for posting a Map link Improved international date formatting Detect invalid profile images Fixed account sorting Fixed profile image URL decoding Fixed links with # anchors Fixed “(null)” problem when using bookmarklet Fixed problem with @ character in password field

If the fact that Apple rejected Tweetie 1.3 due to an offensive word was true–and it appears to be, according to Brichter–I wonder why it hasn’t removed Tweetie overall. It’s not like you can only tweet naughty words with the updated version.

In an e-mail to CNET News, however, Tweetie developer Loren Brichter said Apple quoted this part of the company’s guidelines as a reason for the decision:

Since this report was published, Apple has decided to approve the app for the App Store. Read the updated story here.

“At the same time,” the developer added, “this could have been just a goof on Apple’s part. The App Store is still very young, they’re working out the kinks.”

“Applications must not contain any obscene, pornographic, offensive, or defamatory content or materials of any kind (text, graphics, images, photographs, etc.), or other content or materials that in Apple’s reasonable judgement may be found objectionable by iPhone or iPod Touch users.”

Tweetie won’t be getting an update, at least not right now, due to the Trends report above.

“The question then becomes whether is it an individual app’s responsibility to censor everything it gets from the Internet,” Brichter said. “Twitter themselves create the “top trends” list; Tweetie just displays it. The consensus is pretty much that it would be ridiculous to expect that.

According to iLounge, Apple has rejected version 1.3 of Tweetie, the popular Twitter client application for the
iPhone and
iPod Touch. The reason? An offensive word appeared in Twitter’s Trends data.

Well, the good news is you can still get and use the existing Twitter 1.2.1, which can be purchased for $3 at Apple’s App Store.

Remember the time your mom withheld your dessert because you said a bad word? Apple is doing something along those lines, with one major difference: it’s because a bad word has been heard in the neighborhood.

Updated at 3:10 p.m. PDT with comment from Tweetie developer.

Here’s the long list of improvements in Tweetie 1.3 that all you naughty Twitterers with iPhones and iPod Touches are gonna miss out on–at least for now:

This is a deal considering that AT&T’s iPhone plan, starts at $70 for voice service, unlimited Web usage, and no messaging. If subscribers want texting they can choose from a number of plans that cost extra or get an unlimited texting plan for $20 more a month. In total, a similar service plan that costs G1 users $70 a month on T-Mobile will likely run AT&T iPhone users about $90 a month.

“Our strategy is to provide one phone for your life,” he said. “And that’s not what Google is delivering with this phone. They don’t support many of the business applications that users have come to expect in the business space. It’s an entire area they completely ignored.”

Indeed, the G1 offers an experience that is hard to match on other smartphones. Google applications, such as Gmail and Google Search have been tightly integrated into the phone’s directory, making it easy and intuitive to quickly send e-mails or forward Web links to contacts. The G1 also has embedded GPS capability that allows users to get Google Maps Street View on their phones. An internal compass even allows users to navigate and see where they’re going by moving the phone in different directions.

Keeping up with the iPhone
The G1 also has to play catch-up to Apple’s iPhone, which during the second quarter of 2008 accounted for about 9 percent of all smartphones shipped, according to Gartner. While the iPhone may not dominate the market in terms of sales, it is gaining momentum. Many analysts predict that Apple will hit, if not exceed, its goal of shipping 10 million iPhones by the end of 2008.

(Credit:
Sarah Tew/CNET Networks)

“Not everyone who is interested in having a smartphone wants to check e-mail all the time. The G1 is about bringing the Web experience onto a phone and letting people do things with their phone they couldn’t do before.” –Leslie Grandy, VP of product development, T-Mobile USA

But when it comes to Web surfing, Google has created a user experience superior to what’s offered on most other smartphones today. And for T-Mobile this was critical as the company was looking for a smartphone to appeal to consumers looking for a robust mobile Web experience.

But under the hood, the
Google Android software greatly improves the mobile Web experience for users, making it a compelling competitor to the Apple iPhone and a hands-down winner when compared with other smartphones like Research In Motion’s BlackBerry or phones running Microsoft Windows Mobile operating system.

T-Mobile's G1

From a hardware perspective, the G1 isn’t a game changer. The device, which has a full QWERTY keyboard that slides out from a touch-screen exterior, looks similar to other devices on the market, such as the T-Mobile Sidekick or Verizon’s LG Voyager.

For now, we’ll just have to wait and see how the G1 fares. But as the only Google Android phone on the market, it may see a quick uptick in sales simply out of curiosity.

But when it comes to actually making an impact on the market in terms of sales, T-Mobile and Google will have their work cut out for them. Without corporate e-mail support, it’s unlikely the phone will take a significant market share away from the market leaders in the U.S., RIM and Windows Mobile–at least in the near term.

Not surprisingly, Scott Rockfeld, group product manager for Windows Mobile at Microsoft, sees the lack of corporate applications as a key weakness in the new device.

Still, T-Mobile is available in most major metropolitan areas. And the company is currently expanding its 3G network and will have 22 markets with 3G when the G1 launches and 27 markets up and running with 3G by the end of the year, Brodman said during Tuesday’s press event. At that time nearly 80 percent of T-Mobile’s subscribers will have access to its 3G network.

For now, G1 is targeted at the consumer market, a fact Cole Brodman, chief technology and innovation officer for T-Mobile USA, acknowledged openly during the launch event.

NEW YORK–Google’s first Android phone may not win any beauty contests, but the smartphone’s software and advanced Web browsing will give today’s current crop of smartphones, including the
iPhone, a run for their money.

Still, T-Mobile executives and Google’s top mobile executives, Andy Rubin and Rich Miner, said that because the operating system is open, third-party developers could easily create an application to hook into corporate e-mail. And eventually, G1 users could download the application from the Android Market on their devices.

T-Mobile USA’s parent company Deutsche Telekom will also be selling the device starting in November in the United Kingdom through its T-Mobile service. And the phone will be available throughout the rest of Europe via T-Mobile starting in the first quarter of 2009.

If coverage isn’t an issue for consumers, then the G1 could make for a compelling competitor to the iPhone, especially with T-Mobile’s aggressive pricing structure. The G1, which will sell for $179 with a two-year contract, offers subscribers the choice of two service plans. Each plan requires users to also subscribe to a voice plan. With the most basic voice plan that costs about $35 a month, users can get unlimited Web surfing and 400 text messages for $25 extra a month for a total price tag of about $60 a month. For $35 extra, subscribers can get unlimited Web and unlimited texting, bringing the total cost to $70 per month.

One of the biggest hurdles for G1 in competing with these other phones is the fact that T-Mobile’s total network footprint is considerably smaller than footprints of other major carriers. For this reason, some iPhone users, who subscribe to AT&T’s network, or some Windows Mobile users subscribing to Sprint Nextel or Verizon Wireless, may not be able to get adequate coverage from T-Mobile.

That said, the G1 still has several hurdles to overcome to make a significant impact in the smartphone market. Because it lacks corporate e-mail, it won’t likely take significant market share from either RIM, which according to Gartner sold over 55 percent of smartphones in the second quarter of 2008, or Windows Mobile, which sold about 20 percent of the smartphones in the U.S. in the second quarter.

“Not everyone who is interested in having a smartphone wants to check e-mail all the time,” said Leslie Grandy, vice president of product development for T-Mobile USA. “The G1 is about bringing the Web experience onto a phone and letting people do things with their phone they couldn’t do before.”

Click here for full coverage of Google Android.

T-Mobile USA and Google unveiled the first Google Android phone Tuesday at an event here. The phone, previously code-named the HTC Dream, is now called the T-Mobile G1. And it goes on sale in the U.S. on T-Mobile’s network starting October 22 for $179 with a two-year service contract.

Read on for responses from Green Party candidate Cynthia McKinney, or check out the rest of CNET News’ election coverage.

Included are answers to questions we asked presidential candidates. We received replies from Republican Sen. John McCain, Democratic Sen. Barack Obama, Libertarian candidate Bob Barr, and independent candidate Ralph Nader.

The Bush administration has supported legally requiring Internet service providers, and perhaps search engines and social-networking Web sites as well, to keep logs on who their users are and what they do. Do you support federal legislation, such as H.R.837, to mandate data retention?
McKinney: No. The bill is too vague and broadly written, particularly the section on record retention requirements for Internet service providers.

Q: Politicians have been talking for years about the need for high-speed Internet access. Should this be accomplished primarily through deregulation and market forces, or should the federal government give out grants or subsidies, or enact new laws?
McKinney: This should be done through grants and subsidies and new laws. America’s “digital divide” is an impediment to this country’s educational system. I would give special attention to programs that bring technology into the classrooms and homes of minority communities.

(Editor’s note: We sent our survey questions to John Judge, Cynthia McKinney’s press secretary, on August 21. We extended our deadline multiple times, and wrote to Judge last Thursday saying it was “too late” to make the deadline for the voter’s guide, which we published at noon on Friday. After it was published, we finally received the below replies. A side note: The last question asked McKinney what her favorite tech gadget was, but she didn’t answer the question, and Judge did not respond when we asked for a clarification.)

Do you support enacting federal laws providing for any or all of the following: a) a permanent research & development tax credit, b) a permanent moratorium on Internet access taxes, c) an increase in the current limits on H-1B visas?
McKinney: Yes to all.

Recently there’s been a lot of talk about sex offenders using social-networking sites. What, if any, new federal laws are needed in this area?
McKinney: I support federal laws to protect children that balance the right to privacy for Internet users.

Cynthia McKinney

We have to know: what’s your favorite gadget?

McKinney: I am most enthusiastic about participatory democracy via the Internet.

But knowing where the candidates stand on high-tech topics like digital copyright, surveillance, and Internet regulation can be revealing, which is why we’ve put together this 2008 Technology Voters’ Guide.

Telecommunications companies including AT&T have been accused in court of opening their networks to the government in violation of federal privacy law. Would you have supported giving them retroactive immunity for any illicit cooperation with intelligence agencies or law enforcement, an immunization that became law with the FISA Amendments Act of 2008, Pub. L. No. 110-261?

McKinney: As a member of Congress I voted against amending the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 (FISA) to allow the president and attorney general to authorize electronic surveillance without a court order. I do not support retroactive immunity for companies that violate federal privacy laws.

In the last few days before November 4, taxes and the economy have become the most pressing topics of the 2008 presidential campaign.

Congress considered Net neutrality legislation in 2006 but it never became law. Do you support the legislation reintroduced last year (S.215), which gives the FCC the power to punish “discriminatory” conduct by broadband providers?
McKinney: Yes. This legislation is very important to level the playing field for Internet users and providers.

The 1998 Digital Millennium Copyright Act’s section restricting the “circumvention” of copy-protection measures is supported by many copyright holders but has been criticized by some technologists as hindering innovation. Would you support changing the DMCA to permit Americans to make a single backup copy of a DVD, Blu-ray DVD, HD-DVD, or video game disc they have legally purchased?
McKinney: I would consider a bill to change the DMCA for this purpose.

The Department of Homeland Security has written extensive Real ID requirements restricting what state ID cards can be accepted at federal buildings and airports, with the next compliance deadline set for December 31, 2009. Do you support those regulations as written, would you want to repeal Real ID, or something in between?
McKinney: I would take immediate steps to repeal the Real ID Act once elected. The Real ID is a step toward implementation of a national ID that can then be expanded during a national emergency. We’ve already seen the violations of civil rights that can occur in a disaster, after Hurricane Katrina. I oppose any steps toward a national ID. I also oppose the waivers permitted by the Act to facilitate construction of the United States border fence. The border fence is a wasteful militarized approach to the issue of immigration. Thousands who have been funneled into hostile terrain by the Mexican border fence have perished in the past decade. Congress should not have delegated the power to waive federal, state, and local laws regarding the construction of the fence to the Department of Homeland Security.

The U.S. Department of Justice currently is reviewing the proposed advertising deal between Google and Yahoo, and the Federal Trade Commission approved the merger of Google and DoubleClick. Should the federal government take a more or less regulatory position on antitrust and high tech firms?
McKinney: The federal government should take a more regulatory position, particularly in the area of protecting customers’ personal information.

Yahoo investors weighed in with cautious optimism Wednesday following the appointment of former Autodesk CEO Carol Bartz as the embattled company’s chief executive.

Vision still undetermined, but progress now at least possible.

Shareholder activist and Yahoo investor Eric Jackson, meanwhile, said he was initially disappointed with the selection of Bartz, but in the last 24 hours has become cautiously optimistic as more information about the new CEO has surfaced.

“I’m still skeptical. I have a show-me attitude,” Jackson said. “Right now, Yahoo is guilty until proven innocent.”

(Credit:
Yahoo Finance)

Nonetheless, Jackson noted some concerns still linger, such as the fact that Bartz managed a smaller workforce than what she’ll encounter at Yahoo, and he questions her ability to manage a high-growth business given that he considers Autodesk to play in a sector with slower growth.

One source, familiar with the board’s thinking, noted that the company may not necessarily keep Microsoft at bay while Bartz ramps up her learning curve at the company.

“I think it’ll be the second half of the year before we begin to see some impact,” Smith noted.

Bartz, Smith noted, had a good reputation while at Autodesk. He added she managed to turn things around with its portfolio of businesses and reignite growth for the drafting and design company.

And while we don’t know the new direction just yet, clearly Ms. Bartz and the board have discussed their views and walked through scenarios, including potential partnerships (MSFT, AOL, etc.). Given the recent stagnation at Yahoo, we think almost any movement from here will be forward.

Analysts with Cowen & Co. noted in a research note Wednesday:

UBS Securities analyst Ben Schachter, meanwhile, sounded more bullish in his research note Tuesday regarding Bartz’s appointment as Yahoo CEO:

Smith, while declining to say whether he plans to increase his fund’s position in Yahoo now that Bartz has been named CEO, noted that the fund has generally been increasing its stake in the Internet search pioneer over the last year.

We do not believe the announcement of Carol Bartz as CEO and the resignation of president Sue Decker will result in a material change in Yahoo’s prospects. We think the odds of a search deal with Microsoft and/or an acquisition of AOL increase under the new CEO, but the terms may not be highly attractive due to the current economic environment.

“(Executive recruiter) John Thompson was told to get the top five candidates, no matter where they were from,” said the source.

Depending on the type of offer that Microsoft may bring to its door, Yahoo could potentially react immediately, noted the source.

Smith, whose fund held 727,280 shares of Yahoo as of November 30, pointed to the company’s frequently visited Web sites as a core asset. But he noted past redesigns of the sites have appeared somewhat haphazard and that’s an issue he believes can be addressed with strong operational skills.

Jackson said he plans to sit it out on the sidelines for now and keep an eye on Bartz’s performance before considering whether to increase his holdings, which current are a few hundred shares.

“Yahoo needs more of an operator than a visionary right now,” said Kenneth Smith, senior portfolio manager for Munder Capital Management, who runs the Munder Internet Fund. “Yahoo has missed out on some opportunities like social networking, but at the end of the day, the company needs someone to manage all their valuable assets and stem the brain drain.”

While noting that Bartz, for the most part, lacks name recognition beyond Silicon Valley and has little experience with media companies and the Internet, investors pointed to her reputation as a strong operator as boding well for Yahoo’s future.

Bartz, who was the only candidate offered the job, was selected for her track record, added the source, noting it was among a number of other characteristics that made her the top choice.

Microsoft, or not, Yahoo’s board believes it has landed one of the top technology executives.

“It depends on their offer,” said the source. “If they were to come to (Yahoo) with an offer of $33 a share, (the company) would be stupid to say no now.”

Smith, however, said after Bartz has “one quarter under her belt,” he hopes she’ll show signs of grasping the issues that plague Yahoo and its solutions. And by the end of the second quarter, he hopes to see Bartz implement some of those solutions.

Wall Street analysts, meanwhile, where largely neutral to bullish on Bartz’s appointment, noting there was not much more the new CEO could do to damage Yahoo.

Investors Jackson and Smith hope Bartz has it within her skill set to signal to Microsoft a willingness to sit back down at the negotiating table.

Jackson said he hopes Bartz will demonstrate within the next 30 to 60 days that she has clear ideas of what she is going to do to reignite Yahoo’s various media businesses.

Both investors do not expect anything to happen with Microsoft in the immediate future, with Jackson predicting as long as one to two months and Smith as long as three months before signs will surface that any such activity is underway.

With Ms. Bartz first approached just this past December, her full vision for the company must still be evolving. Still, simply by putting in place a capable outsider with a strong track record, Yahoo should finally be able to make decisions on various strategic and operational choices.

Yahoo, which formally announced Bartz as its new chief executive after the markets closed Tuesday, climbed as high as 3.2 percent during morning trading Wednesday to $12.49 a share, while the broader markets were down.

“The manifesto does not speak to application code or licensing but instead to the fundamental principles that the Internet was founded upon–an open platform available to all,” Cohen said. “It is a call to action for the worldwide cloud community to get involved and embrace the principles of the open cloud.”

A group of Web services providers, reportedly including IBM, is set to unveil a “manifesto” next week that lays out a number of principles for open cloud computing. Two of the biggest names in the field, though, say they aren’t signing on.

“Like other ideas on standards and practices, we’ll review this one,” Amazon said in a statement. “Ideas on openness and standards have been talked about for years in Web services. And we do believe standards will continue to evolve in the cloud-computing space. But what we’ve heard from customers thus far, customers who are really committed to using the cloud, is that the best way to illustrate openness and customer flexibility is by what you actually provide and deliver for them.”

Although the document has yet to be released, one of its proponents, Enomaly’s Reuven Cohen, has said it will be will be released on Monday. In a blog post, Cohen suggests that there will be at least a dozen signatories of the document, including “several of the largest technology companies.”

Update at 1:30 p.m. Friday: Turns out, the manifesto is even more open than we thought. We found it online here. For more information on the Open Cloud Manifesto, read our first take.

“In one move, Microsoft has provided more visibility to our cloud interoperability effort than all our previous efforts combined,” Cohen wrote.

“We were admittedly disappointed by the lack of openness in the development of the (Open) Cloud Manifesto,” Microsoft’s Steven Martin wrote in the blog post. “What we heard was that there was no desire to discuss, much less implement, enhancements to the document, despite the fact that we have learned through direct experience. Very recently, we were privately shown a copy of the document, warned that it was a secret, and told that it must be signed ‘as is,’ without modifications or additional input.”

Updated with a link to the Open Cloud Manifesto document.

Microsoft posted blog message to that effect on Wednesday night, while Amazon.com on Friday said it, too, is not among the companies signing the document.

Martin wrote that “it appears to us that one company, or just a few companies, would prefer to control the evolution of cloud computing, as opposed to reaching a consensus across key stakeholders (including cloud users) through an ‘open’ process.”

Cohen also posted a follow-up blog thanking Microsoft for the attention generated by the rejection of the manifesto.

Amazon noted that over the past three years, it has made its Web services available on different operating systems and programming languages.

The cloud-computing field may be in its infancy, but there is a fight breaking out at the preschool.

Microsoft, for its part, said there were some things it agreed with in the manifesto, but others that were either too vague or did not reflect its interests. The company also objected to the fact that it was shown the document just last weekend, not allowed to make changes, and given just 48 hours to decide whether to sign.

As for the manifesto itself, we’ll have to wait until Monday to see it, but Cohen’s blog and this site give some idea where they are headed.