It's that happy time of year when I celebrate the anniversary of setting up my own company and the fact that I have made it through another year. Which means the usual round of fees and insurances (including of course, the mandatory employers liability insurance even though I am a one person company, just in case I sue myself for emotional damages) and the attendant paperwork, shareholders meeting and submitting my Annual Return.
Normally this is a simple procedure, since the only share holders are myself and my wife. However, Companies House have now added a new box - from this month - in which you must 'disclose the particulars of rights attached to any shares'.
Whatever that means.
From the limited blurb I get that this covers such things as voting rights, dividend distribution and the like, all as per the articles of association (you know, that long tedious piece of unpenetrable legalese you were sent when you bought your company from a web shop). Since this is a new provision that affects EVERY limited company, from the largest to one-person companies like mine, you would think that Companies House would offer some guidance on how this is to be completed or what they expect it to contain.
Wrong.
It's just a memo box. No guidance, template answers, standard wording, nothing.
Above all, nothing to suggest the level of detail they are requiring.
Internet search shows everyone else - including accountants - are equally confused.
What level of detail will they accept? Is a simple statement of 'all shares have equal voting rights and dividends are divided on the basis of shareholding' sufficient? Or do you need to reproduce all the relevant text from the articles of association? Which they have anyway, so what exactly is the point?
One small grain of comfort: after the website has predictably timed out whilst you try to find this garbage, after searching once again for those auth codes you filed back after logging in, you can at least resume back at the page where you left off.
And, correct me if I'm wrong, the point of the changes to the companies act was to make life simpler for small companies.
Saturday, 24 October 2009
Friday, 16 October 2009
U2 University
I'm just back from another U2 University event, this time held in the rather surprising location of Liverpool. This has proven to be another well run and highly informative symposium, with a broad range of talks spanning such diverse topics as Data Encryption, Web services, a talk by Susan Joslyn on standards and regulation, and the chance to hobnob with old and new friends. The U2 community is a tight-knit and friendly one, and so the opportunity to get together is always welcome.
The news about the acquisition seems to now have been accepted as a 'good thing'. Panic is decidedly over, and there is a strong sense that everyone wants to make this work.
The second piece of good news is that the product continues to move forward, keeping with - or in many cases well in front of - the technology curve.
In particular this year the spotlight has been on data security. As companies in the US and beyond grapple with PCI compliance, UniVerse and UniData are ready for the challenge with SSL being rolled into the final pieces of the middleware jigsaw (more below) to protect data in transit, and the now mature automated data encryption to protect data at rest.
One side effect of this will be a major change to WebDE (formerly RedBack) to fully meet with the challenges of encryption and NLS. Rather than beef up the legacy RedBack code that makes up the scheduler/responder architecture, IBM/Rocket have taken the sensible decision to move the whole thing over to UO.Net (RedPages) and UOJ (RedBeans).
This will then use connection pooling in place of webshares, which introduces a few potential issues:
IBM/Rocket are aware of these issues and are working to address them. The move in architecture should lead to quicker response times, and better focus as IBM/Rocket consolidate all the main architectures (web services, WebDE etc.) into a single middleware family in UO.
Top of the list on cool new technologies must be the introduction of EDA to UniVerse. EDA (Extensible Data Architecture) allows U2 products to directly map data at the file level to external data sources using a driver structure based loosely around the ODBC concepts. Once in place, this becomes entirely transparent to the application. Files are mapped individually, and - a very good piece of thinking here - only specific columns need to be mapped, with the addition fields being stored as a long string or blob in dynamic array format. This reduces the overheads on type mapping and updates.
Clearly IBM/Rocket have been thinking ahead with this one. In addition to moving data out permanently, they have also realized the potential for replicating data though this gateway to external databases for BI and reporting purposes. This uses the existing replication architecture to set up a publisher/subscriber model that
may reside in the same machine, and directing the subscriber to push data through EDA to a remote data source.
The fact that you do not need to individually map every column, also opens up the opportunities to use this as a general gateway - something I have asked for long ago. I can see this opening up services such as continuous backup and more intelligent auditing, since the drivers do not necessarily need to be directing to data sources.
EDA is already present for UniData with an initial driver for DB2: now that the link with IBM has been dissolved, the way is free to extend this more quickly to other databases such as SQL Server and mySQL.
UniVerse will gain the new facilities in version 11, which is being slated for release next year.
All in all, a good event and my thanks to the U2 team for organizing it so well.
The news about the acquisition seems to now have been accepted as a 'good thing'. Panic is decidedly over, and there is a strong sense that everyone wants to make this work.
The second piece of good news is that the product continues to move forward, keeping with - or in many cases well in front of - the technology curve.
In particular this year the spotlight has been on data security. As companies in the US and beyond grapple with PCI compliance, UniVerse and UniData are ready for the challenge with SSL being rolled into the final pieces of the middleware jigsaw (more below) to protect data in transit, and the now mature automated data encryption to protect data at rest.
One side effect of this will be a major change to WebDE (formerly RedBack) to fully meet with the challenges of encryption and NLS. Rather than beef up the legacy RedBack code that makes up the scheduler/responder architecture, IBM/Rocket have taken the sensible decision to move the whole thing over to UO.Net (RedPages) and UOJ (RedBeans).
This will then use connection pooling in place of webshares, which introduces a few potential issues:
- the question of how to licence existing customers transferring from multiple web servers, since the connection pooling will be managed in the middle tier and not at the database.
- the effect on upgrading method calls where subroutines are cached in memory (UniVerse) without bouncing the web servers themselves.
IBM/Rocket are aware of these issues and are working to address them. The move in architecture should lead to quicker response times, and better focus as IBM/Rocket consolidate all the main architectures (web services, WebDE etc.) into a single middleware family in UO.
Top of the list on cool new technologies must be the introduction of EDA to UniVerse. EDA (Extensible Data Architecture) allows U2 products to directly map data at the file level to external data sources using a driver structure based loosely around the ODBC concepts. Once in place, this becomes entirely transparent to the application. Files are mapped individually, and - a very good piece of thinking here - only specific columns need to be mapped, with the addition fields being stored as a long string or blob in dynamic array format. This reduces the overheads on type mapping and updates.
Clearly IBM/Rocket have been thinking ahead with this one. In addition to moving data out permanently, they have also realized the potential for replicating data though this gateway to external databases for BI and reporting purposes. This uses the existing replication architecture to set up a publisher/subscriber model that
may reside in the same machine, and directing the subscriber to push data through EDA to a remote data source.
The fact that you do not need to individually map every column, also opens up the opportunities to use this as a general gateway - something I have asked for long ago. I can see this opening up services such as continuous backup and more intelligent auditing, since the drivers do not necessarily need to be directing to data sources.
EDA is already present for UniData with an initial driver for DB2: now that the link with IBM has been dissolved, the way is free to extend this more quickly to other databases such as SQL Server and mySQL.
UniVerse will gain the new facilities in version 11, which is being slated for release next year.
All in all, a good event and my thanks to the U2 team for organizing it so well.
Thursday, 1 October 2009
Rocket Launch
Rocket have posted a news flash here about the acquisition. The deal has closed, and the U2 products are now under new ownership.
This promises to be an exciting time for us all. The potential for this platform is huge, especially in nervous financial times, and we all wish the new owners and all of the U2 teams involved the very best.
Expect to see the U2-sphere bursting with excitement as the news can now be posted.
This should be a good transition: Rocket has all the pieces in place to really set this product on the right path and let it flourish. THe people who have managed the products through the IBM years (not forgetting those still with IBM) have done an excellent job despite the constraints, and whilst we don't know what constraints Rocket will put upon them, everything heard so far seems good news.
Let's make sure we all give these guys our full support.
This promises to be an exciting time for us all. The potential for this platform is huge, especially in nervous financial times, and we all wish the new owners and all of the U2 teams involved the very best.
Expect to see the U2-sphere bursting with excitement as the news can now be posted.
This should be a good transition: Rocket has all the pieces in place to really set this product on the right path and let it flourish. THe people who have managed the products through the IBM years (not forgetting those still with IBM) have done an excellent job despite the constraints, and whilst we don't know what constraints Rocket will put upon them, everything heard so far seems good news.
Let's make sure we all give these guys our full support.
Wednesday, 30 September 2009
Update on the Update
I've spoken with IBM UK and there is good news: it appears the rumour of legal action is nothing more than baseless speculation - there is nothing planned outside of the usual TUPE requirements. So that can be well and truly laid to rest.
Monday, 28 September 2009
General Update
Plenty of opportunities for curmudgeon this week, after staying silent for a while. So a general round up seems in order.
Well the dust is settling after the shock announcement by IBM of the sale of the U2 assets to Rocket Software. The feeling in the community seems to have settled down to a grim resignation offset by a feeling that we should give these guys a chance. At the same time, the sale is still underway and not closed, and for the time being the U2 products are still part of IBM, which limits what any of us can say (IBM lawyers haven't gone on strike as far as we know).
Still, some useful information (or rumour) seems to have trickled out.
Here is what people are saying:
So there we have it. I can possibly look forward to editing all of my books, course ware, articles and other materials to remove the IBM name. No doubt screen shots and registry locations will change yet again. And there is still no solid news on what will happen to the ADO.NET provider in all of this.
I will post more when I have spoken with Andy Youniss, the head of Rocket, this week.
On the consulting front I'm embarking on a project to boost the FSA transaction reporting and compliance for a client. Not that their reporting is bad, I hasten to add, but the FSA is getting very tight on this with the announcement of a GBP 2.4 million fine for Barclays for misreporting, and the knowledge that they will be increasing their fines for companies and individuals is getting people worried.
Still, I must say I'm looking forward to this project - it should prove exciting!
All this getting tough is about time, some would say, but typically there is a fly in the ointment. Whilst the FSA puts great responsibility on firms to ensure that their reporting and controls are accurate and robust, the same cannot be said of their own guidelines. The FSA have now released a new version of their transaction reporting handbook, which explicitly excludes any guidance for data formats, and their web site is minimalist in the extreme when it comes to pertinent information. Whilst they will monitor companies to ensure they have sufficient controls in place, they offer no guidelines or advice on what they expect and what they would deem to be adequate.
This recalls the very first project I ever worked on, as a young and green analyst/programmer. I was hired by a company producing software for local government at the time the dreaded and hated Community Charge (aka poll tax) was brought out in a flurry of hurried and badly formed legislation, and I was accordingly set to work on that, taking over the development of the commercial side (NNDR) a year later. With the political to and fro the legislation was subject to constant revision, and whilst the key dates remained in force and enshrined in law, the guidance from the goverment lagged behind - in some cases by months.
The first legally enforced deadline was the registration period, during which local authorities had to ensure that all properties and individuals within their area were registered onto the new systems ready for billing, which AFAICR was in the April.
At that time (we're taking early eighties and PICK operating systems) most local authorities lacked the resources to print out and despatch the registration forms inhouse, and so half inch tapes containing the necessary details needed to be despatched to the printers some time in advance. This was duly undertaken and the registration completed on time.
So what was the problem with that? The guidance from the government for what information was required to complete the registration came out some six weeks later.
After long planning, various LME member firms are going live on SMART as we speak. SMART is the new interface to the LME trading platforms, and a project that has occupied me on and off for some months, which has meant radical changes to the ways in which trades are submitted and followed through their various registration, matching and clearing states.
This has seen a switch from the synchronous LCH protocols (where everyone knew where they were) to an asynchronous FIX based solution providing feedback using execution reports. The change was necessary with the new division of responsibilities between te LME and LCH, and as part of the LME's ongoing work to spearhead new development of their systems.
The advantage of course is that FIX is a known quantity, and the messages can be based on the FIX standards (with the usual 'tuning' to the specific industry that seems always to take place). The result has been the creation a general purpose FIX engine with validation and extraction layers that can be adapted to this, and to future FIX based interfaces.
So far, touch wood, the roll out seems to be going as planned, though the LME have 'temporarily' issued a severe throttling rate for messages to ensure their systems are not overwhelmed during the early phases. Good idea that, introduce a protocol known for its speed and then throttle back. Fortunately, forewarned is forearmed and so the solution we put together has the necessary throttling built in, but it's hardly a glowing endorsement.
U2 and Rocket
Well the dust is settling after the shock announcement by IBM of the sale of the U2 assets to Rocket Software. The feeling in the community seems to have settled down to a grim resignation offset by a feeling that we should give these guys a chance. At the same time, the sale is still underway and not closed, and for the time being the U2 products are still part of IBM, which limits what any of us can say (IBM lawyers haven't gone on strike as far as we know).
Still, some useful information (or rumour) seems to have trickled out.
Here is what people are saying:
- It seems that the push came from within the U2 division.
- IBM was not planning on getting rid of U2, but U2 wanted out of IBM.
- All the U2 staff have been invited to join Rocket.
- The senior U2 management will be moving with the product.
- There were nine companies in the frame for purchasing U2.
- Rocket was chosen because they offered an opportunity to take the products forward.
- Rocket has a 'hands-off' style of management that should let the products breathe.
- Most of the U2 people in the US are excited about the opportunities.
So there we have it. I can possibly look forward to editing all of my books, course ware, articles and other materials to remove the IBM name. No doubt screen shots and registry locations will change yet again. And there is still no solid news on what will happen to the ADO.NET provider in all of this.
I will post more when I have spoken with Andy Youniss, the head of Rocket, this week.
FSA Transaction Reporting
On the consulting front I'm embarking on a project to boost the FSA transaction reporting and compliance for a client. Not that their reporting is bad, I hasten to add, but the FSA is getting very tight on this with the announcement of a GBP 2.4 million fine for Barclays for misreporting, and the knowledge that they will be increasing their fines for companies and individuals is getting people worried.
Still, I must say I'm looking forward to this project - it should prove exciting!
All this getting tough is about time, some would say, but typically there is a fly in the ointment. Whilst the FSA puts great responsibility on firms to ensure that their reporting and controls are accurate and robust, the same cannot be said of their own guidelines. The FSA have now released a new version of their transaction reporting handbook, which explicitly excludes any guidance for data formats, and their web site is minimalist in the extreme when it comes to pertinent information. Whilst they will monitor companies to ensure they have sufficient controls in place, they offer no guidelines or advice on what they expect and what they would deem to be adequate.
This recalls the very first project I ever worked on, as a young and green analyst/programmer. I was hired by a company producing software for local government at the time the dreaded and hated Community Charge (aka poll tax) was brought out in a flurry of hurried and badly formed legislation, and I was accordingly set to work on that, taking over the development of the commercial side (NNDR) a year later. With the political to and fro the legislation was subject to constant revision, and whilst the key dates remained in force and enshrined in law, the guidance from the goverment lagged behind - in some cases by months.
The first legally enforced deadline was the registration period, during which local authorities had to ensure that all properties and individuals within their area were registered onto the new systems ready for billing, which AFAICR was in the April.
At that time (we're taking early eighties and PICK operating systems) most local authorities lacked the resources to print out and despatch the registration forms inhouse, and so half inch tapes containing the necessary details needed to be despatched to the printers some time in advance. This was duly undertaken and the registration completed on time.
So what was the problem with that? The guidance from the government for what information was required to complete the registration came out some six weeks later.
LME SMART
After long planning, various LME member firms are going live on SMART as we speak. SMART is the new interface to the LME trading platforms, and a project that has occupied me on and off for some months, which has meant radical changes to the ways in which trades are submitted and followed through their various registration, matching and clearing states.
This has seen a switch from the synchronous LCH protocols (where everyone knew where they were) to an asynchronous FIX based solution providing feedback using execution reports. The change was necessary with the new division of responsibilities between te LME and LCH, and as part of the LME's ongoing work to spearhead new development of their systems.
The advantage of course is that FIX is a known quantity, and the messages can be based on the FIX standards (with the usual 'tuning' to the specific industry that seems always to take place). The result has been the creation a general purpose FIX engine with validation and extraction layers that can be adapted to this, and to future FIX based interfaces.
So far, touch wood, the roll out seems to be going as planned, though the LME have 'temporarily' issued a severe throttling rate for messages to ensure their systems are not overwhelmed during the early phases. Good idea that, introduce a protocol known for its speed and then throttle back. Fortunately, forewarned is forearmed and so the solution we put together has the necessary throttling built in, but it's hardly a glowing endorsement.
Wednesday, 16 September 2009
IBM Sells U2 (more)
Tony G has written an excellent blog that distills some of the initial reaction and brims with perceptive comments. Read it here.
Another thought just struck me: maybe they will do away with the 'U2' moniker. That would be such a relief. As long as nobody there thinks 'rocket base' is a good alternative..
Another thought just struck me: maybe they will do away with the 'U2' moniker. That would be such a relief. As long as nobody there thinks 'rocket base' is a good alternative..
IBM Sells U2 Products
Well the news that greeted me this morning was certainly a surprise. IBM is selling off the U2 brands - UniVerse and UniData - to Rocket Software.
The loss of the IBM branding will a hard blow for the U2 community.
On the other hand, there are silver linings to this cloud. The same people will be involved in driving the product forward, and now unshackled from the restrictions of working through IBM. What restrictions Rocket apply will remain to be seen, but there is positive news in this.
Yes, there are already murmurings, but let's give these guys the benefit of the doubt. They have chosen U2, and so are coming in with some commitment. IBM have done a good job in the work they have done with the product, especially with the XML features. But they could have gone much further, and marketing always seemed compromised by the DB2 banner.
There are practical questions raised, of course. What happens to the ADO.NET support, since that is a generic IBM provider? What happens to training - does this mean that independent trainers like myself can now get a foot back into the market? What about strategic partnerships for products? Rocket already have a portfolio that includes reporting and data migration, amongst others: perhaps they will realize the value of the tools that face end users, or maybe they have their own plans for that space.
It could have been worse. IBM could have sold off the U2 products to one of the major vendors (assuming they had the money), which would have fractured the community. Rocket is, to the best of my very limited knowledge, independent in this regard. They could have sold it to another database vendor, with competing products: once again, through Rocket have storage solutions, the U2 products look like a brand that could carve a space in their portfolio, if the will is there to do so.
I just hope that the move to Rocket opens up as many opportunities as it closes.
Fingers crossed and keep faith.
We've been through this before, and U2 has remained intact.
The loss of the IBM branding will a hard blow for the U2 community.
On the other hand, there are silver linings to this cloud. The same people will be involved in driving the product forward, and now unshackled from the restrictions of working through IBM. What restrictions Rocket apply will remain to be seen, but there is positive news in this.
Yes, there are already murmurings, but let's give these guys the benefit of the doubt. They have chosen U2, and so are coming in with some commitment. IBM have done a good job in the work they have done with the product, especially with the XML features. But they could have gone much further, and marketing always seemed compromised by the DB2 banner.
There are practical questions raised, of course. What happens to the ADO.NET support, since that is a generic IBM provider? What happens to training - does this mean that independent trainers like myself can now get a foot back into the market? What about strategic partnerships for products? Rocket already have a portfolio that includes reporting and data migration, amongst others: perhaps they will realize the value of the tools that face end users, or maybe they have their own plans for that space.
It could have been worse. IBM could have sold off the U2 products to one of the major vendors (assuming they had the money), which would have fractured the community. Rocket is, to the best of my very limited knowledge, independent in this regard. They could have sold it to another database vendor, with competing products: once again, through Rocket have storage solutions, the U2 products look like a brand that could carve a space in their portfolio, if the will is there to do so.
I just hope that the move to Rocket opens up as many opportunities as it closes.
Fingers crossed and keep faith.
We've been through this before, and U2 has remained intact.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
