CloudHealth Technologies, now CloudHealth by VMware, is a software company based in Boston, Massachusetts. The company provides cloud computing services related to cost management, governance, automation, security, and performance. == History == CloudHealth Technologies was founded by Joe Kinsella in 2012. Dan Phillips joined as CEO and co-founder in late 2012, and Dave Eicher joined as co-Founder in January 2013. In May 2016, the company announced plans to expand from its Boston headquarters with branch offices in San Francisco, London, Washington, D.C., Sydney, Amsterdam, Tel Aviv, and Singapore. Headquarters moved in Boston from Fort Point to 100 Summer Street in the Spring of 2018, tripling in square footage. In September 2017, Tom Axbey—who was previously at Rave Mobile Safety—joined as the new CEO and President. VMware announced its intention to acquire CloudHealth Technologies on August 27, 2018. The acquisition is "part of the information technology company's continued push into cloud-based software services" according to Reuters. The deal closed on October 4, 2018, and was reported to be in excess of $500 million. == Technology == Delivered through a software as a service (SaaS) model, CloudHealth Technologies's platform collects and analyzes data from cloud computing services and other IT environments so clients can report on costs, inform their business models, and project future trends. CloudHealth Technologies is compatible with Amazon Web Services, Microsoft Azure, Google Cloud Platform, multicloud, and hybrid cloud environments. CloudHealth Technologies has received Amazon Web Services(AWS) Education Competency status, AWS Migration Competency status and achieved SOC 2 Type 2 Compliance. == Funding == As of June 2017, CloudHealth Technologies has raised a total of $85.7 million through four rounds of funding. In March 2013, CloudHealth Technologies announced that it had secured $4.5 million in Series A funding. This round was led by .406 Ventures and Sigma Prime Ventures. In January 2015, CloudHealth Technologies secured $12 million in Series B funding. This round was led by Scale Venture Partners, .406 Ventures, and Sigma Prime Ventures, and was followed by a $3.2 million extension round. In May 2016, CloudHealth Technologies announced $20 million in Series C funding, led by Sapphire Ventures, .406 Ventures, Scale Venture Partners and Sigma Prime Ventures. In June 2017, CloudHealth Technologies secured $46 million in Series D funding led by Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers with participation from Meritech Capital Partners, Sapphire Ventures, 406 Ventures, and Scale Venture Partners. == Competition == As of March 2023, CloudHealth Technologies competes with Cloudability by Apptio and CloudCheckr by NetApp.
Hi uTandem
Hi uTandem, also known as uTandem, is a free language exchange mobile app. It helps people to connect with other language learners in order to carry out face-to-face language exchange sessions and also offers learners lists of businesses in the field of language learning or language exchange. == Use == Hi uTandem is built around the concept of language exchange, which is a method of language learning based on mutual oral linguistic exchange between partners. Ideally, each partner is a native speaker of the language they are helping their counterpart to learn. The app designed for users to chat with other users and translate messages, find suitable language partners and to locate language schools, bars, cafés and language exchange groups around them. == Team and development == Hi uTandem was released in January, 2016. The initial idea was conceived by Alberto Rodríguez as part of a team of eight Spanish youngsters. Hi uTandem belongs to the company Velvor Tech S.L., founded by the same members and registered in Ronda (Spain). == Reception == Hi uTandem was listed on the Top 4 Apps to Learn Languages list by ElPlural.com and since its launch it has been featured in numerous online and physical sources, including 20 minutos, Europapress, ABC Andalucía and Telefónica's Think Big Blog.
Awwwards
Awwwards (Awwwards Online SL) is an organization that hosts web design competitions and conferences across Europe and the United States. Website owners and developers can participate by submitting their websites for review. Submissions are assessed by a jury, and top entries are presented and awarded prizes on a rotational basis. == Nomination process == Web designers submit their websites through Awwwards' platform for consideration for the Site of the Day. A jury, composed of industry professionals, and the Awwwards community evaluate the entries. The best daily sites are published annually in "The 365 Best Websites Around the World" book. == Jury == The jury consists of international designers, developers, and agencies who assess the creativity, technical skills, and insight of the submitted web projects. The panel's expertise ensures a comprehensive review process. === Developer Award === Awwwards, in partnership with Microsoft, created the Developer Award to recognize web developers who demonstrate excellence in creating websites that meet modern standards. The award highlights websites that work seamlessly across various platforms and devices, using best practices in HTML5, JavaScript, and CSS. == Annual winners == Some prominent Site of the Year winners include Mercedes-Benz, Bloomberg L.P., Bose Corporation, Warner Brothers, Volkswagen, Uber, and Google. == Awwwards conference == Awwwards also organizes two-day conferences featuring speakers from major tech companies and industry leaders such as Microsoft, Google, Spotify, Adobe, Opera, and Smashing Magazine. These events focus on the latest trends in web design and development. Speakers at Awwwards conferences have included notable figures in the design and technology industry such as Stefan Sagmeister, Paula Scher, and design leaders from companies including Wix. == Corporate affairs == === Platform === Awwwards operates an online platform where web designers and developers submit websites for evaluation and awards. Submitted projects are reviewed by a jury based on design, usability, creativity, and content. The platform also serves as a community hub for discovering digital trends, showcasing work, and accessing educational resources including talks and interviews. Design professionals from international companies have participated in Awwwards events and platform content. For example, Wix, a cloud-based web development company known for its website builder tools, has featured prominently in Awwwards conferences, with its design leadership contributing to discussions on design trends and creative thinking.
Virtual DOM
A virtual DOM is a lightweight JavaScript representation of the Document Object Model (DOM) used in declarative web frameworks such as React, Vue.js, and Elm. Since generating a virtual DOM is relatively fast, any given framework is free to rerender the virtual DOM as many times as needed relatively cheaply. The framework can then find the differences between the previous virtual DOM and the current one (diffing), and only makes the necessary changes to the actual DOM (reconciliation). While technically slower than using just vanilla JavaScript, the pattern makes it much easier to write websites with a lot of dynamic content, since markup is directly coupled with state. Similar techniques include Ember.js' Glimmer and Angular's incremental DOM. == History == The JavaScript DOM API has historically been inconsistent across browsers, clunky to use, and difficult to scale for large projects. While libraries like jQuery aimed to improve the overall consistency and ergonomics of interacting with HTML, it too was prone to repetitive code that didn't describe the nature of the changes being made well and decoupled logic from markup. The release of AngularJS in 2010 provided a major paradigm shift in the interaction between JavaScript and HTML with the idea of dirty checking. Instead of imperatively declaring and destroying event listeners and modifying individual DOM nodes, changes in variables were tracked and sections of the DOM were invalidated and rerendered when a variable in their scope changed. This digest cycle provided a framework to write more declarative code that coupled logic and markup in a more logical way. While AngularJS aimed to provide a more declarative experience, it still required data to be explicitly bound to and watched by the DOM, and performance concerns were cited over the expensive process of dirty checking hundreds of variables. To alleviate these issues, React was the first major library to adopt a virtual DOM in 2013, which removed both the performance bottlenecks (since diffing and reconciling the DOM was relatively cheap) and the difficulty of binding data (since components were effectively just objects). Other benefits of a virtual DOM included improved security since XSS was effectively impossible and better extensibility since a component's state was entirely encapsulated. Its release also came with the advent of JSX, which further coupled HTML and JavaScript with an XML-like syntax extension. Following React's success, many other web frameworks copied the general idea of an ideal DOM representation in memory, such as Vue.js in 2014, which used a template compiler instead of JSX and had fine-grained reactivity built as part of the framework. In recent times, the virtual DOM has been criticized for being slow due to the additional time required for diffing and reconciling DOM nodes. This has led to the development of frameworks without a virtual DOM, such as Svelte, and frameworks that edit the DOM in-place such as Angular 2. == Implementations == === React === React pioneered the use of a virtual DOM to make components declaratively. Virtual DOM nodes are constructed using the createElement() function, but are often transpiled from JSX to make writing components more ergonomic. In class-based React, virtual DOM nodes are returned from the render() function, while in functional hook-based components, the return value of the function itself serves as the page markup. === Vue.js === Vue.js uses a virtual DOM to handle state changes, but is usually not directly interacted with; instead, a compiler is used to transform HTML templates into virtual DOM nodes as an implementation detail. While Vue supports writing JSX and custom render functions, it's more typical to use the template compiler since a build step isn't required that way. === Svelte === Svelte does not have a virtual DOM, with its creator Rich Harris calling the virtual DOM "pure overhead". Instead of diffing and reconciling DOM nodes at runtime, Svelte uses compile-time reactivity to analyze markup and generate JavaScript code that directly manipulates the DOM, drastically increasing performance.
Usage share of operating systems
The usage share of an operating system is the percentage of computers running that operating system (OS). These statistics are estimates as wide scale OS usage data is difficult to obtain and measure. Reliable primary sources are limited and data collection methodology is not formally agreed. Currently devices connected to the internet allow for web data collection to approximately measure OS usage. As of December 2025, Android, which uses the Linux kernel, is the world's most popular operating system with 38.94% of the global market, followed by Windows with 29.99%, iOS with 15.66%, macOS with 2.14%, and other operating systems with 10.78%. This is for all device types excluding embedded devices. For smartphones and other mobile devices, Android has 72% market share, and Apple's iOS has 28%. For desktop computers and laptops, Microsoft Windows has 60.8%, followed by unknown operating systems at 19.7%, Mac OS at 14.4%, desktop Linux at 3.2%, then Google's ChromeOS at 1.6%, as of March 2026. For tablets, Apple's iPadOS (a variant of iOS) has 52% share and Android has 48% worldwide. For the top 500 most powerful supercomputers, Linux distributions have had 100% of the market share since 2017. The global server operating system market share has Linux leading with a 63.1% marketshare, followed by Windows, Unix and other operating systems. Linux is also most used for web servers, and the most common Linux distribution is Ubuntu, followed by Debian. Linux has almost caught up with the second-most popular (desktop) OS, macOS, in some regions, such as in South America, and in Asia it's at 6.4% (7% with ChromeOS) vs 9.7% for macOS. In the US, ChromeOS is third at 5.5%, followed by (desktop) Linux at 4.3%. The most numerous type of device with an operating system are embedded systems. Not all embedded systems have operating systems, instead running their application code on the "bare metal"; of those that do have operating systems, a high percentage are standalone or do not have a web browser, which makes their usage share difficult to measure. Some operating systems used in embedded systems are more widely used than some of those mentioned above; for example, modern Intel microprocessors contain an embedded management processor running a version of the Minix operating system. == Worldwide device shipments == Shipments (to stores) do not necessarily translate to sales to consumers, therefore suggesting the numbers indicate popularity and/or usage could be misleading. Not only do smartphones sell in higher numbers than PCs, but also a lot more by dollar value, with the gap only projected to widen, to well over double. According to Gartner, the following is the worldwide device shipments (referring to wholesale) by operating system from 2012 to 2016, which includes smartphones, tablets, laptops and PCs together. On 27 January 2016, Paul Thurrott summarized the operating system market, the day after Apple announced "one billion devices": Apple's "active installed base" is now one billion devices. [..] Granted, some of those Apple devices were probably sold into the marketplace years ago. But that 1 billion figure can and should be compared to the numbers Microsoft touts for Windows 10 (200 million, most recently) or Windows more generally (1.5 billion active users, a number that hasn’t moved, magically, in years), and that Google touts for Android (over 1.4 billion, as of September). My understanding of iOS is that the user base was previously thought to be around 800 million strong, and when you factor out Macs and other non-iOS Apple devices, that's probably about right. But as you can see, there are three big personal computing platforms. And only one of them is actually declining. We’ll see how Windows 10 fares over the long term, but even if Microsoft hits the 1 billion figure in 1-2 years as promised, it will by then still be the smallest of those three platforms. In 2018, Apple stopped revealing unit sales in its reports. Since 2018, the company have been publishing only revenues per device models which, nonetheless, allowed the analysers to extrapolate the unit sales from the model revenues by applying the wholesale device prices. Other hardware manufacturers usually do not report unit sales. === PC shipments === For 2015 (and earlier), Gartner reports for "the year, worldwide PC shipments declined for the fourth consecutive year, which started in 2012 with the launch of tablets" with an 8% decline in PC sales for 2015 (not including cumulative decline in sales over the previous years). Microsoft backed away from their goal of one billion Windows 10 devices in three years (or "by the middle of 2018") and reported on 26 September 2016 that Windows 10 was running on over 400 million devices, and in March 2019, on more than 800 million. In May 2020, Gartner predicted further decline in all market segments for 2020 due to COVID-19, predicting a decline of 13.6% for all devices. while the "Work from Home Trend Saved PC Market from Collapse", with only a decline of 10.5% predicted for PCs. However, in the end, according to Gartner, PC shipments grew 10.7% in the fourth quarter of 2020 and reached 275 million units in 2020, a 4.8% increase from 2019 and the highest growth in ten years." Apple in 4th place for PCs had the largest growth in shipments for a company in Q4 of 31.3%, while "the fourth quarter of 2020 was another remarkable period of growth for Chromebooks, with shipments increasing around 200% year over year to reach 11.7 million units. In 2020, Chromebook shipments increased over 80% to total nearly 30 million units, largely due to demand from the North American education market." Chromebooks sold more (30 million) than Apple's Macs worldwide (22.5 million) in pandemic year 2020. According to the Catalyst group, the year 2021 had record high PC shipments with total shipments of 341 million units (including Chromebooks), 15% higher than 2020 and 27% higher than 2019, while being the largest shipment total since 2012. According to Gartner, worldwide PC shipments declined by 16.2% in 2022, the largest annual decrease since the mid-1990s, due to geopolitical, economic, and supply chain challenges. In 2024 and 2025, due to lower adoption of Windows 11 and Microsoft ending its support to Windows 10, the number of PCs shipped with pre-installed Windows OS dropped. Pundits attribute the low Windows 11 acceptance to its steep hardware requirements and especially the TPM 2.0 ready chipset requirement and the 2024 CrowdStrike-related IT outages. Meanwhile, the macOS device market share in PC device shipments increased to new heights, with improved numbers seen for Linux devices too. In Q3 2025, the macOS pre-installed device shipments increased by 14.9% year-over-year (YoY), while the overall PC-shipments increased only by 8.1%, in Q2 2025, it grew 21.4% YoY while the global PC-shipments increased only by 6.5%, and in Q1 2025, it grew 7% YoY while the global PC-shipments increased by 4.8%. === Tablet computers shipments === In 2015, eMarketer estimated at the beginning of the year that the tablet installed base would hit one billion for the first time (with China's use at 328 million, which Google Play doesn't serve or track, and the United States's use second at 156 million). At the end of the year, because of cheap tablets – not counted by all analysts – that goal was met (even excluding cumulative sales of previous years) as: Sales quintupled to an expected 1 billion units worldwide this year, from 216 million units in 2014, according to projections from the Envisioneering Group. While that number is far higher than the 200-plus million units globally projected by research firms IDC, Gartner and Forrester, Envisioneering analyst Richard Doherty says the rival estimates miss all the cheap Asian knockoff tablets that have been churning off assembly lines.[..] Forrester says its definition of tablets "is relatively narrow" while IDC says it includes some tablets by Amazon — but not all.[..] The top tech purchase of the year continued to be the smartphone, with an expected 1.5 billion sold worldwide, according to projections from researcher IDC. Last year saw some 1.2 billion sold.[..] Computers didn’t fare as well, despite the introduction of Microsoft's latest software upgrade, Windows 10, and the expected but not realized bump it would provide for consumers looking to skip the upgrade and just get a new computer instead. Some 281 million PCs were expected to be sold, according to IDC, down from 308 million in 2014. Folks tend to be happy with the older computers and keep them for longer, as more of our daily computing activities have moved to the smartphone.[..] While Windows 10 got good reviews from tech critics, only 11% of the 1-billion-plus Windows user base opted to do the upgrade, according to Microsoft. This suggests Microsoft has a ways to go before the software gets "hit" status. Apple's new operating system El Capitan has been
Continuum robot
A continuum robot is a type of robot that is characterised by infinite degrees of freedom and number of joints. These characteristics allow continuum manipulators to adjust and modify their shape at any point along their length, granting them the possibility to work in confined spaces and complex environments where standard rigid-link robots cannot operate. In particular, we can define a continuum robot as an actuatable structure whose constitutive material forms curves with continuous tangent vectors. This is a fundamental definition that allows to distinguish between continuum robots and snake-arm robots or hyper-redundant manipulators: the presence of rigid links and joints allows them to only approximately perform curves with continuous tangent vectors. The design of continuum robots is bioinspired, as the intent is to resemble biological trunks, snakes and tentacles. Several concepts of continuum robots have been commercialised and can be found in many different domains of application, ranging from the medical field to undersea exploration. == Classification == Continuum robots can be categorised according to two main criteria: structure and actuation. === Structure === The main characteristic of the design of continuum robots is the presence of a continuously curving core structure, named backbone, whose shape can be actuated. The backbone must also be compliant, meaning that the backbone yields smoothly to external loads. According to the design principles chosen for the continuum manipulator, we can distinguish between: single-backbone: these continuum manipulators have one central elastic backbone through which actuation/transmission elements can run. multi-backbone: the structure of these continuum robots has two or more elastic elements (either rods or tubes) parallel to each other and constrained with one another in some way. concentric-tube: the backbone is made of concentric tubes that are free to rotate and translate between each other, depending on the actuation happening at the base of the robot. === Actuation === The actuation strategy of continuum manipulators can be distinguished between extrinsic or intrinsic actuation, depending on where the actuation happens: extrinsic actuation: the actuation happens outside the main structure of the robot and the forces are transmitted via mechanical transmission; among these techniques, there are cable/tendon driven actuators and multi-backbone strategies. intrinsic actuation: the actuation mechanism operates within the structure of the robot; these strategies include pneumatic or hydraulic chambers and the shape memory effect. The Actuated Flexible Manifold (AFM), introduced by Medina, Shapiro, and Shvalb (2016), models flexible grid-based robots that approximate smooth manifolds using discrete segments, each contributing one degree of freedom. Their work provides forward and inverse kinematics for planar and spatial configurations, bridging hyper-redundant and continuum robotics. == Advantages == The particular design of continuum robots offers several advantages with respect to rigid-link robots. First of all, as already said, continuum robots can more easily operate in environments that require a high level of dexterity, adaptability and flexibility. Moreover, the simplicity of their structure makes continuum robots more prone to miniaturisation. The rise of continuum robots has also paved the way for the development of soft continuum manipulators. These continuum manipulators are made of highly compliant materials that are flexible and can adapt and deform according to the surrounding environment. The "softness" of their material grants higher safety in human-robot interactions. == Disadvantages == The particular design of continuum robots also introduces many challenges. To properly and safely use continuum robots, it is crucial to have an accurate force and shape sensing system. Traditionally, this is done using cameras that are not suitable for some of the applications of continuum robots (e.g. minimally invasive surgery), or using electromagnetic sensors that are however disturbed by the presence of magnetic objects in the environment. To solve this issue, in the last years fiber-Bragg-grating sensors have been proposed as a possible alternative and have shown promising results. It is also necessary to notice that while the mechanical properties of rigid-link robots are fully understood, the comprehension of the behaviour and properties of continuum robots is still subject of study and debate. This poses new challenges in developing accurate models and control algorithms for this kind of robots. == Modelling == Creating an accurate model that can predict the shape of a continuum robot allows to properly control the robot's shape. There are three main approaches to model continuum robots: Cosserat rod theory: this approach is an exact solution to the static of a continuum robot, as it is not subject to any assumption. It solves a set of equilibrium equations between position, orientation, internal force and torque of the robot. This method requires to be solved numerically and it is therefore computationally expensive, due to its high complexity. Constant curvature: this technique assumes the backbone to be made of a series of mutually tangent sections that can be approximated as arcs with constant curvature. This approach is also known as piecewise constant-curvature. This assumption can be applied to the entire segment of the backbone or to its subsegments. This model has shown promising results, however it must be taken into account that the segment/subsegments of the backbone may not comply to the constant curvature assumption and therefore the model's behaviour may not entirely reflect the behaviour of the robot. Rigid-link model: this approach is based on the assumption that the continuum robot can be divided in small segments with rigid links. This is a strong assumption, since if the number of segments is too low, the model hardly behaves like the continuum robot, while increasing the number of segments means increasing the number of variables, and thus complexity. Despite this limitation, rigid-link modelling allows the use of the standard control techniques that are well known for rigid-link robots. It has been proven that this model can be coupled with shape and force sensing to mitigate its inaccuracy and can lead to promising results. == Sensing == To develop accurate control algorithms, it is necessary to complement the presented modelling techniques with real time shape sensing. The following options are currently available: Electromagnetic (EM) sensing: shape is reconstructed thanks to the mutual induction between a magnetic field generator and a magnetic field sensor. The most common external EM tracking system is the commercially available NDI Aurora: small sensors can be placed on the robot and their position is tracked in an external generated magnetic field. The validity of this method has been extensively assessed, however its performance is hindered by the limited workspace, whose dimension depends on the magnetic field. Another alternative is to embed the sensors internally in the continuum robot, combining magnetic sensors with Hall effect sensors: the magnetic field is measured at the level of the Hall effect sensors in order to estimate the deflection of the robot. However, it has been noticed that the higher the bending of the manipulator, the higher is the estimation error, due to crosstalk between sensors and magnets. Optical sensing: fiber Bragg grating sensors incorporated in an optical fiber can be embedded into the backbone of the continuum robot to estimate its shape; these sensors can only reflect a small range of the input light spectrum depending on their strain; therefore, by measuring the strain on each sensor it is possible to obtain the shape of the robot. This type of sensor is however expensive and is more prone to breaking in case of excessive strain, and this can happen in robots that can perform high deflections. == Control strategies == The control strategies can be distinguished in static and dynamic; the first one is based on the steady-state assumption, while the latter also considers the dynamic behaviour of the continuum robot. We can also differentiate between model-based controllers, that depend on a model of the robot, and model-free, that learn the robot's behaviour from data. Model-based static controllers: they rely on one of the modelling approaches presented above; once the model is defined, the kinematics must be inverted to obtain the desired actuator or configuration space variables. There are several ways to do this, like differential inverse kinematics, direct inversion or optimization. Model-free static controllers: these approaches learn directly, via machine learning techniques (e.g. regression methods and neural networks), the inverse kinematic or the direct kinematic representation of the con
W3C Device Description Working Group
The W3C Device Description Working Group (DDWG), operating as part of the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) Mobile Web Initiative (MWI), was chartered to "foster the provision and access to device descriptions that can be used in support of Web-enabled applications that provide an appropriate user experience on mobile devices." Mobile devices exhibit the greatest diversity of capabilities, and therefore present the greatest challenge to content adaptation technologies. The group published several documents, including a list of requirements for an interface to a Device Description Repository (DDR) and a standard interface meeting those requirements. The group was rechartered in 2006 to work in public towards the development of the Application Programming Interface (API) for a DDR. Early in 2007, the group launched a wiki and a blog to add to the public mailing list. The group subsequently published a formal vocabulary of core device properties, and an API called the DDR Simple API, which became a W3C Recommendation in December 2008. The group closed at the end of 2008, but with the intention of maintaining the Web pages, blog and wiki through W3C volunteer effort. == Publications == The DDWG published several W3C Working Group Notes and one W3C Recommendation. A W3C WG Note that articulates what the W3C and other organizations are doing or have already done with regard to device information. This document suggests an environment in which these technologies work together to meet the goals of content adaptation. The completed document was published on 31 October 2007. A W3C WG Note describing the ecosystem surrounding creation, maintenance and use of device descriptions. The completed document was published on 31 October 2007. A W3C WG Note describing a set of requirements for a reference repository of device descriptions. The completed document was published on 17 December 2007. A W3C WG Note describing a process to manage contributions to an initial core vocabulary, identification of key device properties, a formal initial core vocabulary and the identification of a maintainer for the core vocabulary. The details were contained in the Working Group Note describing the DDWG Core Vocabulary published on 14 April 2008. A W3C WG Note defining useful grouping and structure patterns in device descriptions. The Device Description Structures document was published as a Working Draft on 5 December 2008. The intention is that this document will be future input to other W3C groups. A W3C Recommendation defining a language-neutral programming interface to a Device Description Repository. The DDR Simple API was published on 5 December 2008. There is the possibility of future publications on the DDWG wiki describing implementations of the API in various languages, including Java, IDL, WSDL, C# etc. Much of the DDWG's material was developed in public via the DDWG Wiki and through their public mailing lists.