Are we ready for IBM's Smarter Planet?
by John Webster
By now you've surely seen at least one of the IBM "Let's Build a Smarter Planet" TV ads. I like them. They talk about computing possibilities that are truly big-picture. I also believe in the message that IBM is fundamentally delivering in these ads: systems that harvest data from a variety of wired and wireless sources are capable of producing new types of information and solving some important problems. The technologies needed (RFID, pattern recognition, Complex Event Processing, etc.) to turn the vision into reality are here and now.
And while they may put a very new face on a venerable IBM, the ad campaign is very much in keeping with a marketing technique IBM has honed for decades. In the beginning IBM had computers but companies didn't know what to do with them. So IBM had to first show them how to compute. IBM had to sell computing first before it could sell computers. Over time, IBM lost sight of the need to sell computing, relied on just selling computers, and consequently lost its vision. Lou Gerstner brought IBM back to selling computing once again by creating IBM Global Services. Smarter Planet is yet another way to sell computing--one that encompasses a myriad of sensory devices and compute nodes all working within some big harmonious system. Indeed, IBM likes to use the word "orchestration" in this context and talks of systems of systems.
Recently, IBM reported to a gathering of analysts that the C-level people within enterprises worldwide were not only getting the Smarter Planet message, some were able to teach IBM a thing or two about smarter systems they had already built. On the other hand, IBM reported that it was also well aware of potential barriers like perceived cost, resistance to trying new things, and fear. Yes, fear.
Here's an experiment you can try. At your next cocktail party, talk to someone about a retail chain you had heard of that was testing the use of technical gadgetry to enhance customers' in-store shopping experience. Customers identify themselves to an in-store system upon entering the retail space that tracks their positions in the store, knows what they have selected as they move around the store, knows when they are physically close to a special promotion and alerts them to the promotion, and knows how much to charge their credit cards as they exit. There are a number of these but perhaps the one most well known is METRO's Future Store. After you've walked your conversation partner through the high-tech store experience, get a reaction. Is the technology helpful or intrusive? Comforting or in some ways frightening? I'd bet on at least a discomforted response.
In the aftermath of Northwest Flight 253, it is abundantly clear that we want systems that connect the dots when someone is threatening us. We want systems to sift though huge amounts of data that could well be 99.99999 percent noise but for the few data points that say "don't let this guy on the plane." But when systems are connecting our dots we sense that Big Brother is watching.
Personal privacy is more easily surrendered after trust is first established. IBM can only go so far in convincing people that Smarter Planet systems are not only beneficial but trustworthy. After that, we have to trust the people behind the systems. That's the hard part.
John, a senior partner at Evaluator Group, has 30 years of experience in enterprise IT storage, spanning mainframe and open systems environments. He has served as principal IT adviser at Illuminata and has held analyst positions at IDC and Yankee Group Research. He also co-authored the book "Inescapable Data Harnessing the Power of Convergence." John is a member of the CNET Blog Network and is not an employee of CNET.
Saturday, January 9, 2010
Friday, January 8, 2010
The Next Mobile Ad Merger
The Next Mobile Ad Merger
Elizabeth Woyke, 01.07.10, 06:00 PM EST
Google's AdMob purchase and Apple's Quattro deal will likely kick off a new wave of acquisitions.
First came Google, with its November acquisition of AdMob, then Apple with its recent purchase of Quattro Wireless. Now, a host of Internet firms, device makers and even wireless operators are expected to snap up their own mobile advertising networks in the coming months. The challenge? There are only a few--possibly just two--ad firms left that are widely viewed as attractive candidates.
A series of new deals would represent a second wave of merger and acquisition activity for the mobile ad market. The industry experienced an earlier burst of M&A in 2007, when Nokia ( NOK - news - people ) bought Enpocket, AOL acquired Third Screen Media and Microsoft ( MSFT - news - people ) absorbed ScreenTonic. Rajeev Chand, a managing director at Rutberg & Co., says there are three reasons for a resurgence of interest: the strategic growth of the mobile Internet, a renewed interest in making acquisitions as the economy improves, and a greater number of potential acquirers.
Article Controls
Google ( GOOG - news - people ), in particular, is driving the deal-making, says Karsten Weide, program director of digital media and entertainment at researcher IDC. He estimates Google and AdMob together would control 21% of the U.S. mobile ad market, a chunk large enough to give them a comfortable lead over competitors (one reason the U.S. Federal Trade Commission is investigating the purchase.) The disparity will force other tech companies with mobile advertising ambitions to follow suit, says Weide.
Apple ( AAPL - news - people ) was the first to counter Google, announcing its Quattro buyout Jan. 5. Insiders say Yahoo! ( YHOO - news - people ) and Microsoft are likely to be next. Yahoo!, which holds an estimated 10% of the mobile ad market, likely wants to increase its share--and has the cash on hand to make such an acquisition, says Weide. Microsoft, which IDC estimates has an 8% slice of the market, is probably interested due to its "laser-like focus on search," he adds.
Other potential buyers include handset makers, which increasingly view their devices as platforms for tapping into mobile Internet traffic; publishers investing in digital content; and carriers looking for a new way to generate revenue. "Publishers are very interested in the mobile device market," says Noah Elkin, a senior analyst at eMarketer. "The same logic that applies to Apple [buying a mobile ad firm] could apply to a Hearst as well."
AOL is not on most analysts' short lists. The media giant, which is focused on a turnaround, currently lacks the means and "attention span" required for such an acquisition, says Weide.
The choicest targets appear to be Millennial Media and Jumptap, two U.S.-based firms that operate their own mobile ad networks and each command at least 5% of the mobile ad market, according to IDC. Analysts say the companies are likely meeting with potential buyers, or will be soon. Yahoo!, in fact, held talks with Millennial back in 2007, but walked away because the firm wanted too much money, says one analyst. IDC estimates Millennial's 2009 mobile ad revenue at $35 million and Jumptap's at $18 million.
Millennial and Jumptap declined to comment on acquisition rumors, but acknowledged that the AdMob and Quattro acquisitions have spurred interest in their own firms. "For people who thought the AdMob deal was a fluke, the Quattro deal validated the huge opportunity for mobile advertising ... the opportunities are just starting," says Jumptap Chief Marketing Officer Paran Johar.
But will there be opportunities for firms besides Jumptap and Millennial? Other companies, such as Amobee and Greystripe, are small enough that analysts don't track them. "It's hard to know how well [some of these companies] are doing and how much traction they have," says Julie Ask, a vice president at Forrester Research.
Some smaller players contend they're a better value. Bob Walczak, chief executive of the mobile ad tech firm Ringleader Digital, notes that Millennial raised $16 million in new funding in November while Jumptap secured more than $26 million in its last round, in August 2008. "They've put themselves in a higher price category," he says. "They'll have to show a lot of value to warrant an exit to their [venture capitalist investors]."
Analyst Weide says if Millennial and Jumptap garner the same high multiple Google paid for AdMob, they could be acquired for about $600 million and $300 million, respectively.
Elizabeth Woyke, 01.07.10, 06:00 PM EST
Google's AdMob purchase and Apple's Quattro deal will likely kick off a new wave of acquisitions.
First came Google, with its November acquisition of AdMob, then Apple with its recent purchase of Quattro Wireless. Now, a host of Internet firms, device makers and even wireless operators are expected to snap up their own mobile advertising networks in the coming months. The challenge? There are only a few--possibly just two--ad firms left that are widely viewed as attractive candidates.
A series of new deals would represent a second wave of merger and acquisition activity for the mobile ad market. The industry experienced an earlier burst of M&A in 2007, when Nokia ( NOK - news - people ) bought Enpocket, AOL acquired Third Screen Media and Microsoft ( MSFT - news - people ) absorbed ScreenTonic. Rajeev Chand, a managing director at Rutberg & Co., says there are three reasons for a resurgence of interest: the strategic growth of the mobile Internet, a renewed interest in making acquisitions as the economy improves, and a greater number of potential acquirers.
Article Controls
Google ( GOOG - news - people ), in particular, is driving the deal-making, says Karsten Weide, program director of digital media and entertainment at researcher IDC. He estimates Google and AdMob together would control 21% of the U.S. mobile ad market, a chunk large enough to give them a comfortable lead over competitors (one reason the U.S. Federal Trade Commission is investigating the purchase.) The disparity will force other tech companies with mobile advertising ambitions to follow suit, says Weide.
Apple ( AAPL - news - people ) was the first to counter Google, announcing its Quattro buyout Jan. 5. Insiders say Yahoo! ( YHOO - news - people ) and Microsoft are likely to be next. Yahoo!, which holds an estimated 10% of the mobile ad market, likely wants to increase its share--and has the cash on hand to make such an acquisition, says Weide. Microsoft, which IDC estimates has an 8% slice of the market, is probably interested due to its "laser-like focus on search," he adds.
Other potential buyers include handset makers, which increasingly view their devices as platforms for tapping into mobile Internet traffic; publishers investing in digital content; and carriers looking for a new way to generate revenue. "Publishers are very interested in the mobile device market," says Noah Elkin, a senior analyst at eMarketer. "The same logic that applies to Apple [buying a mobile ad firm] could apply to a Hearst as well."
AOL is not on most analysts' short lists. The media giant, which is focused on a turnaround, currently lacks the means and "attention span" required for such an acquisition, says Weide.
The choicest targets appear to be Millennial Media and Jumptap, two U.S.-based firms that operate their own mobile ad networks and each command at least 5% of the mobile ad market, according to IDC. Analysts say the companies are likely meeting with potential buyers, or will be soon. Yahoo!, in fact, held talks with Millennial back in 2007, but walked away because the firm wanted too much money, says one analyst. IDC estimates Millennial's 2009 mobile ad revenue at $35 million and Jumptap's at $18 million.
Millennial and Jumptap declined to comment on acquisition rumors, but acknowledged that the AdMob and Quattro acquisitions have spurred interest in their own firms. "For people who thought the AdMob deal was a fluke, the Quattro deal validated the huge opportunity for mobile advertising ... the opportunities are just starting," says Jumptap Chief Marketing Officer Paran Johar.
But will there be opportunities for firms besides Jumptap and Millennial? Other companies, such as Amobee and Greystripe, are small enough that analysts don't track them. "It's hard to know how well [some of these companies] are doing and how much traction they have," says Julie Ask, a vice president at Forrester Research.
Some smaller players contend they're a better value. Bob Walczak, chief executive of the mobile ad tech firm Ringleader Digital, notes that Millennial raised $16 million in new funding in November while Jumptap secured more than $26 million in its last round, in August 2008. "They've put themselves in a higher price category," he says. "They'll have to show a lot of value to warrant an exit to their [venture capitalist investors]."
Analyst Weide says if Millennial and Jumptap garner the same high multiple Google paid for AdMob, they could be acquired for about $600 million and $300 million, respectively.
Thursday, January 7, 2010
Google Conquers Time
Google Conquers Time
Quentin Hardy, 12.07.09, 04:50 PM EST
Real-time search, translation, location--everywhere?
MOUNTAIN VIEW, Calif. -- Years ago, Google defined its mission as "organizing all the world's information," which seemed to many like a slightly pretentious way of talking about Internet search. On Monday the company introduced products for simultaneous translation, real-time Web information and location-based awareness--in other words, evidence Google was serious about its boast.
At a press briefing at the Googleplex, the company displayed features like instantaneous recognition of photos taken with a mobile phone, translation of spoken speech from one language to another (also via a mobile phone), improved voice-based search on phones, maps that show nearby locations of any location pressed on a touch screen, and real-time search results based on updates from sources like Twitter, Facebook and MySpace, in addition to traditional sources. Google ( GOOG - news - people ) said the real-time product is already crawling 1 billion objects a day.
Article Controls
The functions Google showed are all, of course, based on the Internet, and largely dependent on the millions of computers inside the "cloud" of Google's data centers. Yet the features increasingly attempt to draw the physical world into the Web. In another feature, Google teamed with Best Buy ( BBY - news - people ) to offer real-time inventory information about product availability at local stores.
Google likely assumes it can make a bundle from all this immediacy. For one thing, its utility means we will spend even more time on the Internet, searching for the most recent facts and looking at even more Google ads. In addition, it's likely that the information Google collects as it watches people search and navigate in all these systems will increase the value of the ads it auctions. Better understanding of behavior, after all, makes if more likely Google can offer the appropriate advertisement.
In one demonstration, Google vice president of engineering Vic Gundotra spoke the words "Pictures of Barack Obama with the French president at the G-8 Summit," and received the appropriate images. The service, already available in English and Mandarin, was announced for Japanese, and Gundotra said Google's aim is to offer it for all the world's major languages.
Real-Time Quotes
01/06/2010 5:34PM ET
Searching for images via phone pictures is still somewhat limited--a demo using a wine bottle label flopped, and Gundotra had to rely on taking a photo of an image on screen (doubtless, already inside Google's servers). The product is likely being released so Google can build up a database of images and behaviors, to improve quality.
Quentin Hardy, 12.07.09, 04:50 PM EST
Real-time search, translation, location--everywhere?
MOUNTAIN VIEW, Calif. -- Years ago, Google defined its mission as "organizing all the world's information," which seemed to many like a slightly pretentious way of talking about Internet search. On Monday the company introduced products for simultaneous translation, real-time Web information and location-based awareness--in other words, evidence Google was serious about its boast.
At a press briefing at the Googleplex, the company displayed features like instantaneous recognition of photos taken with a mobile phone, translation of spoken speech from one language to another (also via a mobile phone), improved voice-based search on phones, maps that show nearby locations of any location pressed on a touch screen, and real-time search results based on updates from sources like Twitter, Facebook and MySpace, in addition to traditional sources. Google ( GOOG - news - people ) said the real-time product is already crawling 1 billion objects a day.
Article Controls
The functions Google showed are all, of course, based on the Internet, and largely dependent on the millions of computers inside the "cloud" of Google's data centers. Yet the features increasingly attempt to draw the physical world into the Web. In another feature, Google teamed with Best Buy ( BBY - news - people ) to offer real-time inventory information about product availability at local stores.
Google likely assumes it can make a bundle from all this immediacy. For one thing, its utility means we will spend even more time on the Internet, searching for the most recent facts and looking at even more Google ads. In addition, it's likely that the information Google collects as it watches people search and navigate in all these systems will increase the value of the ads it auctions. Better understanding of behavior, after all, makes if more likely Google can offer the appropriate advertisement.
In one demonstration, Google vice president of engineering Vic Gundotra spoke the words "Pictures of Barack Obama with the French president at the G-8 Summit," and received the appropriate images. The service, already available in English and Mandarin, was announced for Japanese, and Gundotra said Google's aim is to offer it for all the world's major languages.
Real-Time Quotes
01/06/2010 5:34PM ET
Searching for images via phone pictures is still somewhat limited--a demo using a wine bottle label flopped, and Gundotra had to rely on taking a photo of an image on screen (doubtless, already inside Google's servers). The product is likely being released so Google can build up a database of images and behaviors, to improve quality.
Baidu launches (legal) online video company
Baidu launches (legal) online video company
Shades of Hulu
By Austin Modine • Get more from this author
Posted in Music and Media, 6th January 2010 22:47 GMT
A Hulu-esque online television channel is being created for internet users behind China's Great Firewall.
The country's top o' the heap search engine Baidu said Wednesday it plans to form a new online venture that will serve free (and legal) copyrighted video content to Chinese internet users.
Baidu will spin-out a new, yet-to-be-named independent company to provide the service, which will generate revenue through online advertising. The search firm said it intends to stream a variety licensed movies, TV series, sport events, animation, and other content on the service, but didn't provide any details on specific licensing deals or partnerships.
Baidu was not immediately available for comment.
The online video venture will be helmed by Yu Gong, formerly the chief executive of China Mobile's 12580 hotline logistics service.
"By establishing this new company, we will be able to better serve our users and customers with superior content and focused resources," said Xuyang Ren, Baidu's vice president of business development in its English-language statement.
Ren said Gong's "strong" industry experience would enable growth through product innovation and a network of partnerships with content providers."
Baidu hasn't always been terribly concerned with copyrights when serving content. In fact, the company owes much of its popularity to a "deep links" unlicensed MP3 music scheme The Reg described in detail a year ago.
More recently, however, China's government has taken a harder hand against its home-grown online music services.
It wasn't mentioned how Baidu's licensed online video foray will affect its investment in PPLive, a separate Chinese web site that streams licensed movies and shows gratis. ®
Shades of Hulu
By Austin Modine • Get more from this author
Posted in Music and Media, 6th January 2010 22:47 GMT
A Hulu-esque online television channel is being created for internet users behind China's Great Firewall.
The country's top o' the heap search engine Baidu said Wednesday it plans to form a new online venture that will serve free (and legal) copyrighted video content to Chinese internet users.
Baidu will spin-out a new, yet-to-be-named independent company to provide the service, which will generate revenue through online advertising. The search firm said it intends to stream a variety licensed movies, TV series, sport events, animation, and other content on the service, but didn't provide any details on specific licensing deals or partnerships.
Baidu was not immediately available for comment.
The online video venture will be helmed by Yu Gong, formerly the chief executive of China Mobile's 12580 hotline logistics service.
"By establishing this new company, we will be able to better serve our users and customers with superior content and focused resources," said Xuyang Ren, Baidu's vice president of business development in its English-language statement.
Ren said Gong's "strong" industry experience would enable growth through product innovation and a network of partnerships with content providers."
Baidu hasn't always been terribly concerned with copyrights when serving content. In fact, the company owes much of its popularity to a "deep links" unlicensed MP3 music scheme The Reg described in detail a year ago.
More recently, however, China's government has taken a harder hand against its home-grown online music services.
It wasn't mentioned how Baidu's licensed online video foray will affect its investment in PPLive, a separate Chinese web site that streams licensed movies and shows gratis. ®
How Google Could Have Changed the World With Nexus One — and Still Might
How Google Could Have Changed the World With Nexus One — and Still Might
If you thought that the world would change with the release of a Google-branded phone Tuesday, be assured that sadly it did not.
At least not yet. It just got one more cool phone.
You can buy the Google Android OS phone, dubbed Nexus One, unlocked directly from Google. But in the United States the only place you can really take it to is the country’s fourth largest carrier, T-Mobile. Or you can buy it through T-Mobile for a hair under $200 and pay about as much per month as a Palm Pre owner and about $20 a month less than an iPhone user.
What would something revolutionary have looked like?
How about a smartphone starter plan, deeply subsidized by ads, that offered a cheap data plan to entice the “I don’t need a smartphone” crowd into joining the revolution? Even better, would have been an order form where you could buy the Google phone and then choose from three or more carriers who are competing to provide you with a data and voice plan — just as you do when you buy a laptop. Instead, there’s just the one option — T-Mobile, which costs basically the same as all the other smart phones.
Google clearly wants the mobile-phone world to look different, it’s just not clear that this phone or its current manufacturing strategy will actually bring about the changes in the telecom world that Google is looking for.
Now, getting on par with Apple (and in some ways past it) is no small feat, especially when Google made this phone in partnership with HTC, a business model that rarely leads to the hardware that the design team really wants. Compare the Nexus One, for instance, to the first Apple phone, which the world has seemingly forgotten — the Motorola ROKR. That phone was limited to having 100 songs on it, couldn’t buy songs over the air and was full of compromises. With the Nexus One, Google managed to make a device that Wired magazine’s Steven Levy called “curvy,” “classy” and “impressive.”
And that’s important, because Google has recognized that mobile computing is a massive part of the net’s future — and thus its own.
With the recent $750 million purchase of mobile-ad provider AdMob and its reported overtures to buy the popular local-business–rating site Yelp, Google is showing it clearly thinks that mobile (and local) is the next place on the net to mine for riches. But what it doesn’t like is all the ways that users could get detoured, from the time they pull the phone out of the pocket until the time their search travels to a Google server.
Remember that the more people use the internet and the faster the internet works, the more Google makes money. Low-cost, uncontrolled devices with low-cost connections equals more people using Google software and seeing Google ads, even if that phone is made by Motorola, Nokia or even Apple.
That’s why it’s pushing hard to break down barriers between the average user and an online Google ad, by finishing the mobile-computing revolution that Apple started, but didn’t finish because of Steve Jobs’ fanatical need to control the iPhone.
Google’s created the mostly open source Android OS, which manufacturers can and are using for free. That’s pushing Microsoft out of the market, and keeping carriers from doing stupid things like forcing a user’s browser home page to divert to its software store in perpetuity, no matter how hard they try to change it. And third-party-app developers can write programs for Android devices without getting permission, a stark contrast to Apple, which must approve every iPhone app and controls the only way to add programs to the device.
Google bet more than $4 billion in an FCC wireless auction in 2008 just to make sure that openness rules would adhere to new spectrum, which led the eventual winner — Verizon — to sue the feds. Google’s won a battle in D.C. to make the wireless companies subject to the same FCC rules that force cable and DSL companies to treat all online content similarly.
In short, Google wants to transform the phone market with its complicated charges, long contracts, bizarre fees and bundling of devices with service plans and make it more like how you buy a television or a computer: Buy the device. Then find the service. That’s even as cable and satellite providers look at the wireless companies and decide those contracts look like a mighty good way to keep customers.
But the question becomes how far does Google have to push, how much capital must it invest, how many devices must it design and regulators must it convince, before it can back out of the mobile hardware business and simply focus on software and advertising?
Here’s the scenario that might get us there: Google convinces HTC that it’s not suicide to create a phone that can be used on any U.S. 3G network (maybe two phones — one for GSM and one for CDMA) and then sells it unlocked. It’s a great phone, and lots of people want it, and there are lots of great apps that run on it.
Users then could then take it to whichever carrier they like, and get a data plan a la carte. The carriers will hate this, perhaps create unfairly high prices and very annoying “device registration fees” — trying to protect the money they make offering phones at an initial discount in exchange for a two-year contract.
But the FCC will have passed a rule forcing carriers to accept any device that doesn’t hurt their network — much as Ma Bell was forced to open its lines after 1968 — and Google, regulators and consumers will break down those barriers. Or the market could simply take care of it, with a desperate Sprint breaking ranks with the other large U.S. telecoms and accepting a Nexus or any other device with no registration fee and a fair price for users.
And that’s when Google will stop making phones, and you’ll know that the Nexus One actually meant something.
Photo: Google employee Sara Rowghani looks over a jumbo model of the Nexus One phone at a demo in Mountain View, California, on Tuesday.
Jeff Chiu/AP
If you thought that the world would change with the release of a Google-branded phone Tuesday, be assured that sadly it did not.
At least not yet. It just got one more cool phone.
You can buy the Google Android OS phone, dubbed Nexus One, unlocked directly from Google. But in the United States the only place you can really take it to is the country’s fourth largest carrier, T-Mobile. Or you can buy it through T-Mobile for a hair under $200 and pay about as much per month as a Palm Pre owner and about $20 a month less than an iPhone user.
What would something revolutionary have looked like?
How about a smartphone starter plan, deeply subsidized by ads, that offered a cheap data plan to entice the “I don’t need a smartphone” crowd into joining the revolution? Even better, would have been an order form where you could buy the Google phone and then choose from three or more carriers who are competing to provide you with a data and voice plan — just as you do when you buy a laptop. Instead, there’s just the one option — T-Mobile, which costs basically the same as all the other smart phones.
Google clearly wants the mobile-phone world to look different, it’s just not clear that this phone or its current manufacturing strategy will actually bring about the changes in the telecom world that Google is looking for.
Now, getting on par with Apple (and in some ways past it) is no small feat, especially when Google made this phone in partnership with HTC, a business model that rarely leads to the hardware that the design team really wants. Compare the Nexus One, for instance, to the first Apple phone, which the world has seemingly forgotten — the Motorola ROKR. That phone was limited to having 100 songs on it, couldn’t buy songs over the air and was full of compromises. With the Nexus One, Google managed to make a device that Wired magazine’s Steven Levy called “curvy,” “classy” and “impressive.”
And that’s important, because Google has recognized that mobile computing is a massive part of the net’s future — and thus its own.
With the recent $750 million purchase of mobile-ad provider AdMob and its reported overtures to buy the popular local-business–rating site Yelp, Google is showing it clearly thinks that mobile (and local) is the next place on the net to mine for riches. But what it doesn’t like is all the ways that users could get detoured, from the time they pull the phone out of the pocket until the time their search travels to a Google server.
Remember that the more people use the internet and the faster the internet works, the more Google makes money. Low-cost, uncontrolled devices with low-cost connections equals more people using Google software and seeing Google ads, even if that phone is made by Motorola, Nokia or even Apple.
That’s why it’s pushing hard to break down barriers between the average user and an online Google ad, by finishing the mobile-computing revolution that Apple started, but didn’t finish because of Steve Jobs’ fanatical need to control the iPhone.
Google’s created the mostly open source Android OS, which manufacturers can and are using for free. That’s pushing Microsoft out of the market, and keeping carriers from doing stupid things like forcing a user’s browser home page to divert to its software store in perpetuity, no matter how hard they try to change it. And third-party-app developers can write programs for Android devices without getting permission, a stark contrast to Apple, which must approve every iPhone app and controls the only way to add programs to the device.
Google bet more than $4 billion in an FCC wireless auction in 2008 just to make sure that openness rules would adhere to new spectrum, which led the eventual winner — Verizon — to sue the feds. Google’s won a battle in D.C. to make the wireless companies subject to the same FCC rules that force cable and DSL companies to treat all online content similarly.
In short, Google wants to transform the phone market with its complicated charges, long contracts, bizarre fees and bundling of devices with service plans and make it more like how you buy a television or a computer: Buy the device. Then find the service. That’s even as cable and satellite providers look at the wireless companies and decide those contracts look like a mighty good way to keep customers.
But the question becomes how far does Google have to push, how much capital must it invest, how many devices must it design and regulators must it convince, before it can back out of the mobile hardware business and simply focus on software and advertising?
Here’s the scenario that might get us there: Google convinces HTC that it’s not suicide to create a phone that can be used on any U.S. 3G network (maybe two phones — one for GSM and one for CDMA) and then sells it unlocked. It’s a great phone, and lots of people want it, and there are lots of great apps that run on it.
Users then could then take it to whichever carrier they like, and get a data plan a la carte. The carriers will hate this, perhaps create unfairly high prices and very annoying “device registration fees” — trying to protect the money they make offering phones at an initial discount in exchange for a two-year contract.
But the FCC will have passed a rule forcing carriers to accept any device that doesn’t hurt their network — much as Ma Bell was forced to open its lines after 1968 — and Google, regulators and consumers will break down those barriers. Or the market could simply take care of it, with a desperate Sprint breaking ranks with the other large U.S. telecoms and accepting a Nexus or any other device with no registration fee and a fair price for users.
And that’s when Google will stop making phones, and you’ll know that the Nexus One actually meant something.
Photo: Google employee Sara Rowghani looks over a jumbo model of the Nexus One phone at a demo in Mountain View, California, on Tuesday.
Jeff Chiu/AP
Innovation as Resource and China's New Magnetism
Innovation as Resource and China's New Magnetism
BY Jamais CascioWed Jan 6, 2010 at 1:00 PM
China is set to cut off access to rare-earth elements--and this might be a very good thing.
You've probably seen "neodymium" (actually neodymium-iron-boron) magnets advertised in techie-oriented magazines and gadget blogs. They're actually the strongest type of magnet available, and a pair of them can easily smash fingers. They're also incredibly useful, with small neodymium magnets found in everything from hard drives to wind turbines. Neodymium is one of 17 "rare-earth metals," and these elements have turned out to be critical to the rapidly-growing green technology industries. Rare-earth metals are used in hybrid and electric cars and low-energy lightbulbs, along with windmills (and numerous other greentech applications).
And China is the source for over 95% of the rare-earth metals now in use--something that increasingly looks like a problem. How we respond to this problem can tell us something about how we can respond to other imminent resource and sustainability crises.
Conventional wisdom says that we live in a globalized economy and if China can offer the metals at cheaper prices than other sources (namely, now-closed mines in South Africa, Greenland, and Canada), it's good for us all, right? The fact that many high-tech military technologies rely on Chinese rare-earth metals may give some people pause, but so far, so good. But that model assumes that China is willing to sell as much mineral as it can produce, to whomever wants to buy--and that assumption may no longer be true.
The U.K.'s Independent reports that China has been gradually cutting the amount of rare-earth elements it exports, now down 40% from seven years ago. China now exports only 25% of the rare-earth elements it mines. More worrisome, they say:
Industry sources have told The Independent that China could halt shipments of at least two metals as early as next year, and that by 2012 it is likely to be producing only enough REE ore to satisfy its own booming domestic demand, creating a potential crisis as Western countries rush to find alternative supplies... Beijing announced last month that it was setting exports at 35,000 tonnes for each of the next six years, barely enough to satisfy demand in Japan. From this year, Toyota alone will produce annually one million of its hybrid Prius cars, each of which contains 16kg of rare earths. By 2014, global demand for rare earths is predicted to reach 200,000 tonnes a year as the green revolution takes hold.
With industries relying on rare-earth elements making up a rapidly-growing part of the global economy, this isn't good.
So what are our options? We (as in, the non-China parts of the industrialized world) could try to pressure China to sell more, but that's unlikely to work--and China tends not to respond well to even mild criticism. We could try to rapidly reopen the now-closed rare-earth element mines, but mining is, frankly, an environmental nightmare and incredibly dangerous--hardly a sustainable practice.
Our best option is to innovate our way out of the problem. Ideally, we'd figure out a way to make what we need without those elements. In the shorter term, however, we'd want to figure out a way to obtain those necessary elements without either trying to push China around or reopening dirty mines. If the innovation manages to help solve an otherwise unrelated problem, too--a so-called "economy of scope"--so much the better.
Researchers from Leeds' Faculty of Engineering have discovered how to recover significant quantities of rare-earth oxides, present in titanium dioxide minerals. [...] The Leeds breakthrough came as Professor Jha and his team were fine-tuning a patented industrial process they have developed to extract higher yields of titanium dioxide and refine it to over 99 per cent purity. Not only does the technology eliminate hazardous wastes, cut costs and carbon dioxide emissions, the team also discovered they can extract significant quantities of rare earth metal oxides as co-products of the refining process.
This is, to me, a perfect example of how we should deal with resource problems. Not by simply fighting over the remaining scraps, or trying to get at marginal sources, but by looking at ways to increase supplies while reducing waste, with methods that have a smaller impact on the planet.
Can we do it for every limited resource? Probably not--but focusing research into how to use resources more efficiently, how to extract the resources with less waste, and ultimately how to move beyond them entirely will bring enormous benefits.
BY Jamais CascioWed Jan 6, 2010 at 1:00 PM
China is set to cut off access to rare-earth elements--and this might be a very good thing.
You've probably seen "neodymium" (actually neodymium-iron-boron) magnets advertised in techie-oriented magazines and gadget blogs. They're actually the strongest type of magnet available, and a pair of them can easily smash fingers. They're also incredibly useful, with small neodymium magnets found in everything from hard drives to wind turbines. Neodymium is one of 17 "rare-earth metals," and these elements have turned out to be critical to the rapidly-growing green technology industries. Rare-earth metals are used in hybrid and electric cars and low-energy lightbulbs, along with windmills (and numerous other greentech applications).
And China is the source for over 95% of the rare-earth metals now in use--something that increasingly looks like a problem. How we respond to this problem can tell us something about how we can respond to other imminent resource and sustainability crises.
Conventional wisdom says that we live in a globalized economy and if China can offer the metals at cheaper prices than other sources (namely, now-closed mines in South Africa, Greenland, and Canada), it's good for us all, right? The fact that many high-tech military technologies rely on Chinese rare-earth metals may give some people pause, but so far, so good. But that model assumes that China is willing to sell as much mineral as it can produce, to whomever wants to buy--and that assumption may no longer be true.
The U.K.'s Independent reports that China has been gradually cutting the amount of rare-earth elements it exports, now down 40% from seven years ago. China now exports only 25% of the rare-earth elements it mines. More worrisome, they say:
Industry sources have told The Independent that China could halt shipments of at least two metals as early as next year, and that by 2012 it is likely to be producing only enough REE ore to satisfy its own booming domestic demand, creating a potential crisis as Western countries rush to find alternative supplies... Beijing announced last month that it was setting exports at 35,000 tonnes for each of the next six years, barely enough to satisfy demand in Japan. From this year, Toyota alone will produce annually one million of its hybrid Prius cars, each of which contains 16kg of rare earths. By 2014, global demand for rare earths is predicted to reach 200,000 tonnes a year as the green revolution takes hold.
With industries relying on rare-earth elements making up a rapidly-growing part of the global economy, this isn't good.
So what are our options? We (as in, the non-China parts of the industrialized world) could try to pressure China to sell more, but that's unlikely to work--and China tends not to respond well to even mild criticism. We could try to rapidly reopen the now-closed rare-earth element mines, but mining is, frankly, an environmental nightmare and incredibly dangerous--hardly a sustainable practice.
Our best option is to innovate our way out of the problem. Ideally, we'd figure out a way to make what we need without those elements. In the shorter term, however, we'd want to figure out a way to obtain those necessary elements without either trying to push China around or reopening dirty mines. If the innovation manages to help solve an otherwise unrelated problem, too--a so-called "economy of scope"--so much the better.
Researchers from Leeds' Faculty of Engineering have discovered how to recover significant quantities of rare-earth oxides, present in titanium dioxide minerals. [...] The Leeds breakthrough came as Professor Jha and his team were fine-tuning a patented industrial process they have developed to extract higher yields of titanium dioxide and refine it to over 99 per cent purity. Not only does the technology eliminate hazardous wastes, cut costs and carbon dioxide emissions, the team also discovered they can extract significant quantities of rare earth metal oxides as co-products of the refining process.
This is, to me, a perfect example of how we should deal with resource problems. Not by simply fighting over the remaining scraps, or trying to get at marginal sources, but by looking at ways to increase supplies while reducing waste, with methods that have a smaller impact on the planet.
Can we do it for every limited resource? Probably not--but focusing research into how to use resources more efficiently, how to extract the resources with less waste, and ultimately how to move beyond them entirely will bring enormous benefits.
Tuesday, January 5, 2010
China's Changing, 'Learning-Minded' Party
China's Changing, 'Learning-Minded' Party
Robert Lawrence Kuhn, 01.04.10, 04:36 PM EST
An exclusive interview with a rising star in Chinese politics, Li Yuanchao.
While pundits pondered whether President Barack Obama, on his first trip to China, had been out maneuvered by President Hu Jintao or whether he had achieved his objectives with quiet diplomacy, a bigger, underreported, story was developing. China's leaders have recognized that for the Communist Party to retain its status as China's ruling party it must elevate its commitment to learning and innovation. Although previous generations of China’s senior leaders have emphasized learning, it now has been made prime Party policy--which will likely present a significant challenge to America's economic competitiveness.
Recently I sat down with Politburo Member and rising star in Chinese politics, Li Yuanchao, a champion of the learning-minded policy. A longtime colleague of China’s President Hu Jintao, Li is currently head of the Party's powerful Organization Department, which appoints and trains senior officials in government and executives in state-owned enterprises, a critical function in government and the economy. Li has pioneered new mechanisms for training and oversight of officials and executives, and has enhanced transparency in the process of governance in order to better serve the public interest.
Li said that China's leaders have determined to build a "learning-minded party." In China, relating current polices to past leaders helps legitimatize current policies, and Li stressed the Party's long-held devotion to learning. "When he was still in Yan'an (Shaanxi province) and living in the caves (1937-1948), Mao Zedong called on the Party to transform our study," said Li. "When reform and opening-up began, Deng Xiaoping stressed that we should learn the world's advanced knowledge. Then Jiang Zemin put forward that if China were to achieve modernization we must build a learning-oriented country and society. Recently, the Party's Central Committee, led by General Secretary Hu Jintao, asserted that a learning-minded party must be built, seeking to revitalize our penchant for learning so as to take up the arduous tasks and challenges ahead of us." These challenges include severe economic imbalances between different sectors of society, particularly urban vs. rural, coastal vs. inland; unemployment; corruption; unsustainable development; resource scarcity; pollution; and more. To China's leaders, social stability is a constant concern.
"To construct a learning-oriented Party," Le continued, "we need to learn both theoretical knowledge, such as Marxist classics and the theory of socialism with Chinese characteristics, and all the advanced human scientific knowledge and advanced experience. In addition to learning, we must also apply leading-edge science and technology. The Internet was invented in America," he added, "but has found its largest number of users in China."
"Surfing the Internet every day has become a habit for many leaders and officials, including myself," Li continued, calling it "compulsory homework." He noted how President Hu Jintao answered questions by netizens and interacted with Internet users online. "We often acquire new information and knowledge from the Internet," Li said. "For example, when we want to develop a certain industry, we first search it online to see how people in China or around the world are developing it."
"During my recent visit to the United States," Li recalled, "I visited Google's ( GOOG - news - people ) headquarters. When executives started to instruct me how to use Google's features, I told them it was unnecessary as I used them every day. I often do searches on the Organization Department to find latest news about the ministry and comments about us by Internet users."
"We ask our officials to cultivate a reading habit and encourage them to read more books, and more importantly, good books," Li said. "The Chinese have a habit of reading. Many families regard books as the most valuable family asset. They can do without cars, but there would be cases of books in the house. Recently we recommended a whole set of books in various genres to officials of the Organization Department. This may sound hard to believe, but we also included A Brief History of Time, a classic by Stephen Hawking. Not only do we want our officials to learn latest knowledge of physics and cosmology but also to develop a way of scientific thinking."
"Every year all ministerial-level officials in the Organization Department will take time out for intensive study and discussions together," said Li. "This year's topic was how to expand democracy in our work. We read books by Marxist classic writers, expositions on democracy by Deng Xiaoping, Jiang Zemin and Hu Jintao, even The Theory of Democracy Revisited by Giovanni Sartori. All of us read together. After we finished, we had comparative discussions, taking into account China's special reality."
"We believe that a ruling party only remains viable and vibrant when it masters state-of-the-art knowledge," Li said.
"Of course, in addition to reading books, we also acquire knowledge through evaluating our experiences," Li continued. "Each year the Party holds a plenum, where an important agenda item is to sum up our own recent experiences. For example, last year we summed up experiences of the 2008 [Sichuan] earthquake and relief efforts. By doing this, we improve how we deal with future situations, for example natural disasters."
Li calls talent "the primary resource of scientific development," and has established "democratic, open, competitive, merit-based" principles in selecting and promoting future leaders. In response to the financial crisis, and in order to achieve the "goal of making China an innovation-oriented nation," Li instituted a "Thousand People Plan" to attract high-level personnel to China from overseas, such as scientists, financial experts, entrepreneurs and senior managers. Li's plan promises high salaries and attractive government funding to elite Chinese professionals, especially top science and technology researchers, who are working abroad and willing to return home. (Many whom China hopes to repatriate have been pursuing careers in the U.S.) Recognizing China's new place in the world, Li stresses training leaders with international knowledge and perspective--the "internationalization of the mind," he says, is a needed new way to "emancipate the mind."
In 1978, Deng Xiaoping initiated China's reform by calling for the Chinese people to "Emancipate the Mind," which meant casting aside Mao's leftist ideological dogmatism. In recent years President Hu Jintao has called for further reform, empowered by a new kind of mental emancipation. Circumstances have changed; the world is more complicated, variegated. This is why Hu stresses creativity and innovation in all areas: science and technology, industry and commerce, global partnerships, political participation, and cultural and spiritual life in all their diverse expressions. Without a further emancipation of the mind, Hu says, China's development will face obstacles and difficulties.
"The change China is undergoing is the greatest China and the Chinese people have experienced in thousands of years," Li said. "It may also be the greatest sustained change in human history."
In a 2009 international computer competition--sponsored by the super-secret U.S. National Security Agency (for obvious reasons)--China fielded the most finalists (20), well ahead of second-place Russia (10) and far ahead of America (2). The worldwide winner of the algorithm-coding contest was an 18-year-old Chinese student.
I need not have to spell out the challenge ahead.
Robert Lawrence Kuhn, an international investment banker and corporate strategist, is a longtime adviser to the Chinese government. He is the author of How China's Leaders Think: The Inside Story of China's Reform and What This Means for the Future (John Wiley).
Robert Lawrence Kuhn, 01.04.10, 04:36 PM EST
An exclusive interview with a rising star in Chinese politics, Li Yuanchao.
While pundits pondered whether President Barack Obama, on his first trip to China, had been out maneuvered by President Hu Jintao or whether he had achieved his objectives with quiet diplomacy, a bigger, underreported, story was developing. China's leaders have recognized that for the Communist Party to retain its status as China's ruling party it must elevate its commitment to learning and innovation. Although previous generations of China’s senior leaders have emphasized learning, it now has been made prime Party policy--which will likely present a significant challenge to America's economic competitiveness.
Recently I sat down with Politburo Member and rising star in Chinese politics, Li Yuanchao, a champion of the learning-minded policy. A longtime colleague of China’s President Hu Jintao, Li is currently head of the Party's powerful Organization Department, which appoints and trains senior officials in government and executives in state-owned enterprises, a critical function in government and the economy. Li has pioneered new mechanisms for training and oversight of officials and executives, and has enhanced transparency in the process of governance in order to better serve the public interest.
Li said that China's leaders have determined to build a "learning-minded party." In China, relating current polices to past leaders helps legitimatize current policies, and Li stressed the Party's long-held devotion to learning. "When he was still in Yan'an (Shaanxi province) and living in the caves (1937-1948), Mao Zedong called on the Party to transform our study," said Li. "When reform and opening-up began, Deng Xiaoping stressed that we should learn the world's advanced knowledge. Then Jiang Zemin put forward that if China were to achieve modernization we must build a learning-oriented country and society. Recently, the Party's Central Committee, led by General Secretary Hu Jintao, asserted that a learning-minded party must be built, seeking to revitalize our penchant for learning so as to take up the arduous tasks and challenges ahead of us." These challenges include severe economic imbalances between different sectors of society, particularly urban vs. rural, coastal vs. inland; unemployment; corruption; unsustainable development; resource scarcity; pollution; and more. To China's leaders, social stability is a constant concern.
"To construct a learning-oriented Party," Le continued, "we need to learn both theoretical knowledge, such as Marxist classics and the theory of socialism with Chinese characteristics, and all the advanced human scientific knowledge and advanced experience. In addition to learning, we must also apply leading-edge science and technology. The Internet was invented in America," he added, "but has found its largest number of users in China."
"Surfing the Internet every day has become a habit for many leaders and officials, including myself," Li continued, calling it "compulsory homework." He noted how President Hu Jintao answered questions by netizens and interacted with Internet users online. "We often acquire new information and knowledge from the Internet," Li said. "For example, when we want to develop a certain industry, we first search it online to see how people in China or around the world are developing it."
"During my recent visit to the United States," Li recalled, "I visited Google's ( GOOG - news - people ) headquarters. When executives started to instruct me how to use Google's features, I told them it was unnecessary as I used them every day. I often do searches on the Organization Department to find latest news about the ministry and comments about us by Internet users."
"We ask our officials to cultivate a reading habit and encourage them to read more books, and more importantly, good books," Li said. "The Chinese have a habit of reading. Many families regard books as the most valuable family asset. They can do without cars, but there would be cases of books in the house. Recently we recommended a whole set of books in various genres to officials of the Organization Department. This may sound hard to believe, but we also included A Brief History of Time, a classic by Stephen Hawking. Not only do we want our officials to learn latest knowledge of physics and cosmology but also to develop a way of scientific thinking."
"Every year all ministerial-level officials in the Organization Department will take time out for intensive study and discussions together," said Li. "This year's topic was how to expand democracy in our work. We read books by Marxist classic writers, expositions on democracy by Deng Xiaoping, Jiang Zemin and Hu Jintao, even The Theory of Democracy Revisited by Giovanni Sartori. All of us read together. After we finished, we had comparative discussions, taking into account China's special reality."
"We believe that a ruling party only remains viable and vibrant when it masters state-of-the-art knowledge," Li said.
"Of course, in addition to reading books, we also acquire knowledge through evaluating our experiences," Li continued. "Each year the Party holds a plenum, where an important agenda item is to sum up our own recent experiences. For example, last year we summed up experiences of the 2008 [Sichuan] earthquake and relief efforts. By doing this, we improve how we deal with future situations, for example natural disasters."
Li calls talent "the primary resource of scientific development," and has established "democratic, open, competitive, merit-based" principles in selecting and promoting future leaders. In response to the financial crisis, and in order to achieve the "goal of making China an innovation-oriented nation," Li instituted a "Thousand People Plan" to attract high-level personnel to China from overseas, such as scientists, financial experts, entrepreneurs and senior managers. Li's plan promises high salaries and attractive government funding to elite Chinese professionals, especially top science and technology researchers, who are working abroad and willing to return home. (Many whom China hopes to repatriate have been pursuing careers in the U.S.) Recognizing China's new place in the world, Li stresses training leaders with international knowledge and perspective--the "internationalization of the mind," he says, is a needed new way to "emancipate the mind."
In 1978, Deng Xiaoping initiated China's reform by calling for the Chinese people to "Emancipate the Mind," which meant casting aside Mao's leftist ideological dogmatism. In recent years President Hu Jintao has called for further reform, empowered by a new kind of mental emancipation. Circumstances have changed; the world is more complicated, variegated. This is why Hu stresses creativity and innovation in all areas: science and technology, industry and commerce, global partnerships, political participation, and cultural and spiritual life in all their diverse expressions. Without a further emancipation of the mind, Hu says, China's development will face obstacles and difficulties.
"The change China is undergoing is the greatest China and the Chinese people have experienced in thousands of years," Li said. "It may also be the greatest sustained change in human history."
In a 2009 international computer competition--sponsored by the super-secret U.S. National Security Agency (for obvious reasons)--China fielded the most finalists (20), well ahead of second-place Russia (10) and far ahead of America (2). The worldwide winner of the algorithm-coding contest was an 18-year-old Chinese student.
I need not have to spell out the challenge ahead.
Robert Lawrence Kuhn, an international investment banker and corporate strategist, is a longtime adviser to the Chinese government. He is the author of How China's Leaders Think: The Inside Story of China's Reform and What This Means for the Future (John Wiley).
Monday, January 4, 2010
(1) 10 Things Microsoft Did Right over the Past Decade, (2) Microsoft's 2010 Will Rely on Windows 7 Sales, Yahoo Deal, Cloud
(1)10 Things Microsoft Did Right over the Past Decade
News Analysis: Microsoft had an interesting decade. The company made some mistakes, but it also did some things right that helped it maintain its position as one of the world's largest software companies and a top influencer in the global IT industry. We take a look at those 10 things Microsoft did right over the past 10 years.
Although Microsoft made some mistakes over the past 10 years that adversely affected the company's position in the industry, the software giant has also done a lot of things right. Over the past 10 years, Microsoft has been able to maintain its position as the dominant software developer in the world. It has also stayed relevant both in the consumer space and the enterprise. That's a feat that few companies have been able to achieve.
Perhaps that's why discussions surrounding Microsoft and Windows are so heated today. Although many like to rail against Redmond, it keeps coming back stronger. With each bit of adversity, it seems that somehow, in some way, Microsoft is able to overcome the problem and offer something to customers that appeals to their desire. Of course, it hasn't succeeded every time. And the past decade has shown that Microsoft needs to be more diligent in its decision making. But the company has also done a number of things right that it can use as a foundation for all the future decisions it will make. Let's take a look.
indows Vista was a nightmare for Microsoft. Consumers hated it. The enterprise wouldn't even adopt it. And vendors, once the partners that did Microsoft's bidding, were forced to offer downgrade rights to customers that wanted to run Windows XP. Microsoft knew it had to do something to repair the damage that Vista caused, so it quickly released Windows 7. Microsoft's latest operating system is everything Windows Vista should have been. It's innovative. It's far more secure than previous versions of the operating system. And it appeals to customers. It's a great comeback product.
2. The move to Bing
Microsoft was in deep trouble toward the latter part of the decade. Although it commanded the software market, Google was cornering the search space without any worry of competition. Microsoft's Live Search was largely inconsequential. But rather than wave the white flag, Microsoft released Bing. Microsoft's latest search tool is outstanding. Its results match Google's search results. And thanks to some extras, like a visual search feature, it's a fine alternative to anything Google is offering up.
3. Get in on the gaming
When Microsoft first announced that it would break into the gaming space, some wondered if it could make it. As 2009 gives way to 2010, that question has been answered with a resounding affirmation that yes, indeed, Microsoft can take the gaming industry by storm. Over the past decade, Microsoft has turned its Xbox platform from the "other" console on the market into a gaming leader. The Xbox 360 is now even more popular than Sony's PlayStation 3. That's no small feat. And it should be commended.
4. The enterprise focus
As Apple and Google turned to the consumer over the past decade, Microsoft stayed true to its base—the enterprise. Windows is still the dominant force in the business world. Microsoft has so firmly cemented its position there that most companies wouldn't even consider deploying any other software. Going forward, Microsoft has almost ensured that the enterprise will be its playground.
5. Marginalizing Mac OS X
Apple's Mac OS X made significant strides over the past 10 years, but it's important to note that its rise in the market was largely inconsequential to Microsoft's bottom line. Through smart strategies and partnering with third parties, as well as vendors, Microsoft did a fine job of limiting the impact Mac OS X's rise really had on Windows. Did Apple's operating system steal market share away from Windows? Sure. But did it really change the OS market? No way. Microsoft is still on top by a wide margin.
6. Keeping Linux away
Some would argue that Linux is the operating system that more people should use. After all, most distributions are safe, they are generally lightweight and many are free. But the past 10 years haven't helped Linux gain a substantial footing in the OS market. I would argue that Linux is more well known than it was in 2000, but to say it is any more appealing to the mainstream is a bit of a stretch, even though more distributions have become user-friendly. That can be mainly attributed to Microsoft's ability to keep the OS at arm's length. Simply put, Redmond didn't allow the Linux craze to get out of hand. It was a smart move.
7. Addressing the Web
For too long during the past 10 years, Microsoft allowed Google and others to innovate on the Web. It might also be argued that the company has yet to do enough to stop Google's rise in that space. But over the past year or two, Microsoft has done a better job of realizing that the Internet is the future and it had better be in a position to capitalize on it. That's most evident in its acquisition of several online sites, as well as the launch of Bing and Bing Maps. Microsoft is getting ready to focus on the Web in the new decade.
8. The smooth transition
When Bill Gates announced that he would be stepping down from day-to-day activities at Microsoft, it sent shock waves through the industry. Bill Gates was the face of Microsoft. Investors placed millions of dollars in Microsoft stock because of their faith in its co-founder. It was a dicey situation. But Microsoft handled the transition of day-to-day activities from Gates to Steve Ballmer, the company's CEO, with aplomb. It made Ballmer a more vocal evangelist of the brand, while limiting Gates' influence. It reassured investors. It also proved that Ballmer was up for the job. Kudos, Microsoft. It could have been much worse.
9. Maintaining profitability
Being an extremely profitable company over a period of 10 years isn't always easy. In the tech industry, things change so rapidly that companies can be dominating a market one year and wondering why all the cash dried up the next—just ask Sony. But Microsoft maintained strong profitability numbers throughout the past 10 years. Today, Microsoft still earns billions of dollars of profit each year. And all that cash is being socked away for big acquisitions or investments the company might need to make in the new decade.
10. Cornering the netbook market
Although it failed to see the writing on the wall in so many markets over the past 10 years, Microsoft made one big move that will substantially improve its chances of maintaining profitability into the next decade: It cornered the netbook market. At first, netbooks ran Linux. But in a very short time, Microsoft was able to steal netbook-OS market share away from Linux to such a degree that today, it's in a dominant position in that space. That's no small feat. Netbook popularity has grown rapidly over the past year. Most analysts believe that that growth will continue. By solidifying its position with netbooks, Microsoft is positioned to profit heavily off those lightweight PCs.
(2)Microsoft's 2010 Will Rely on Windows 7 Sales, Yahoo Deal, Cloud
News Analysis: Microsoft underwent substantial challenges in 2009, few of which it will alleviate in 2010. However, a stronger economy could translate into increased sales, reversing its revenue decline, and some products launched in 2009 will likely continue their strong adoption trend. Areas such as cloud computing pose the chance for Microsoft to bolster its market share in the enterprise, but the company will likely find itself in critical shape in other areas, notably the smartphone space.
With declining revenues and robust competition in many of its product areas, 2009 was not exactly a banner year in Microsoft’s history. Will 2010 be any better? Redmond can certainly look toward a few bright spots: Both Windows 7 and Bing, its search engine, experienced disaster-free launches followed by solid early adoption rates, which could translate into greater success in the coming year.
However, Microsoft also faces substantial challenges. Despite a search-and-advertising partnership deal with Yahoo that could see Bing’s market share nearly triple, Google remains the dominant force in online search. Microsoft’s mobile division remains weak and is faced with substantial competition from the likes of Apple and RIM. And if the economy doesn’t pick up, then there’ll be no rising PC sales to buoy sales of Microsoft software.
So how will 2010 fare? The following traces out Microsoft’s prospects in certain key areas.
Microsoft-Yahoo Deal Goes into Effect, Presenting Bigger Google Challenge
Microsoft poured millions of marketing and development dollars into Bing, its search engine that launched in June 2009, but the biggest increase to its market share in 2010 will likely come courtesy of the search-and-advertising agreement struck between Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer and Yahoo CEO Carol Bartz.
On July 29, Microsoft and Yahoo jointly announced a 10-year partnership that would see Bing powering search on Yahoo’s sites, while Yahoo assumed exclusive worldwide sales duties for both companies’ search advertisers. The deal is expected by both parties to be cleared by antitrust regulators and should go into effect in 2010.
When that happens, assuming that Yahoo’s market share ports over to Bing’s with a minimum of attrition, Microsoft’s share of the U.S. search-engine market could rise to close to 30 percent. Google continues to occupy roughly 70 percent of that market, so even a more robust Bing won’t present a survival threat. Nonetheless, 2010 will likely be the year where the world of online search narrows down to two engines whaling at each other for market share. Yahoo, meanwhile, seems intent on giving up the search game entirely for becoming a Web applications provider.
Bing and Google will also likely continue their grudge match over features. In November and December, Microsoft rolled out several new Bing features, including a beta version of Bing Maps that made it a more robust competitor to Google’s Street View. Additionally, Bing now features a more robust video-search page and results from Wolfram Alpha. In 2010, expect both companies to go through several new rounds of competing feature tweaks and add-ons.
Microsoft will also spend 2010 trying to push Bing into foreign markets, notably China; but with Google’s robust presence overseas, and the Yahoo deal restricted to the United States, Bing could have some trouble increasing its market share in those areas.
A Possible Revenue Rebound, Powered by Windows 7
The economic recession battered Microsoft. For the fourth quarter of fiscal 2009, the company reported a 17 percent decline in year-over-year revenue, with earnings arriving at $1 billion below Wall Street estimates. Results for the next quarter offered a somewhat shallower decline of 14 percent year-over-year, with operating income, net income and diluted earnings all continuing to fall by double-digit numbers.
Both Microsoft and its OEMs hope that companies with Windows-based IT infrastructure will use Windows 7 as an excuse to upgrade their systems, and buy the next generation of Microsoft products, in 2010. In both interviews with eWEEK and larger conference calls with investors and media, company executives have suggested that any uptick in sales of Windows 7 and associated products will be roughly in line with any rise in PC purchases through 2010 and beyond, irrevocably linking Microsoft’s fortunes to those of the wider tech industry.
A number of analysts seem to think a tech-refresh scenario is possible.
“It looks like the Win7 inspired upgrade cycle can start in late 2010 and run through early 2013,” Katherine Egbert, an analyst with Jefferies & Co., wrote in an Oct. 12 report. “We expect new hardware purchases to precede the software upgrades by about 6 months.”
But the economy could certainly hit the skids again, in which case a tech refresh would be necessarily blunted as companies battened down their budgetary hatches. In any case, Microsoft executives seem intent on curbing expectations: in an Oct. 23 earnings call, Microsoft Chief Financial Office Chris Liddell suggested that the company would remain “reasonably cautious” about the prospect of a tech refresh, echoing comments earlier in the year from Steve Ballmer.
Microsoft Throws Its Hail Mary Pass for Mobile
By the second quarter of 2009, Microsoft’s share of the mobile operating system market had declined to around 9 percent. October saw the release of Windows Mobile 6.5, but even the company’s executives admitted that the update to Microsoft’s Mobile OS was just a placeholder until 2010, when the company is expected to roll out Mobile 7.
Mobile 7 is supposedly a major upgrade to Microsoft’s operating system franchise, and the company has thus far kept details under wraps. However, continued pressure from a variety of competitors in the space, including Google, Apple and Research In Motion, makes Mobile 7’s quest for market share a decidedly difficult one.
Some have declared that quest an impossible one. “It’s time to declare Microsoft a loser in phones. Just get out of dodge,” Mark Anderson of the Strategic News Service told The New York Times on Dec. 10, in comments widely circulated. “Phones are consumer items, and Microsoft doesn’t have consumer DNA.”
But 2010 will ultimately determine whether Anderson’s comments prove accurate, and Windows Mobile becomes an also-ran, or if Mobile 7 allows Microsoft to retain or gain incremental share in the market space.
Microsoft Plunges into the Cloud, Again Facing Google
Microsoft built its business primarily on the desktop. However, it has taken steps to embrace the paradigm shift inherent in the rise of cloud computing, some of which will bloom to fuller life in 2010.
Jan. 1, 2010 marks the full “switch on” of Microsoft’s Azure cloud platform, composed of three parts that work in symphony to create Web applications and services: Windows Azure, an operating system as a service; SQL Azure, a cloud-based relational database; and .Net services, which provide both secure connectivity and federated access control for applications.
Customers will have three payment options for the service: a pay-as-you-go model, subscription format or volume licensing. Microsoft’s competitors in the space include Amazon and Google.
Given that cloud services represent a potential $150 billion market opportunity, according to research firm Gartner, it’s unsurprising that these companies are all fighting for market-share. For its part, Microsoft could help increase the acceptance of cloud computing within the enterprise.
“There are many enterprises that consider themselves Microsoft shops that have people that only know Microsoft tools and APIs,” Gartner analyst Ray Valdes told eWEEK in 2008, when the Azure platform was first announced. “Amazon and Google have been chipping away at these, but Microsoft is firmly entrenched.”
Microsoft may be positioned well for the enterprise cloud market in 2010, but its other cloud-based endeavors may prove a riskier bet. In a bid to compete with Google Apps, Microsoft will introduce browser-accessible versions of OneNote, Excel, Word and PowerPoint for Windows Live subscribers. Although these Web-based applications will lack the full functionality of the upcoming Office 2010, Microsoft is evidently hoping that enough users will gravitate toward their own cloud productivity suite in place of Google’s offering.
Given that Google Apps have attracted attention among consumers, municipal governments and businesses, however, Microsoft could find itself in a bit of fight when it comes to spreading its own brand of Web-based productivity. But Redmond also doesn’t have much of a choice; in 2010, Google will attempt to spread Google Apps even further among the enterprise and consumers via the propagation of Google Chrome, its upcoming browser-based OS for netbooks and—potentially—more robust PCs. Browser-accessible versions of Office may blunt some of Google’s impact.
News Analysis: Microsoft had an interesting decade. The company made some mistakes, but it also did some things right that helped it maintain its position as one of the world's largest software companies and a top influencer in the global IT industry. We take a look at those 10 things Microsoft did right over the past 10 years.
Although Microsoft made some mistakes over the past 10 years that adversely affected the company's position in the industry, the software giant has also done a lot of things right. Over the past 10 years, Microsoft has been able to maintain its position as the dominant software developer in the world. It has also stayed relevant both in the consumer space and the enterprise. That's a feat that few companies have been able to achieve.
Perhaps that's why discussions surrounding Microsoft and Windows are so heated today. Although many like to rail against Redmond, it keeps coming back stronger. With each bit of adversity, it seems that somehow, in some way, Microsoft is able to overcome the problem and offer something to customers that appeals to their desire. Of course, it hasn't succeeded every time. And the past decade has shown that Microsoft needs to be more diligent in its decision making. But the company has also done a number of things right that it can use as a foundation for all the future decisions it will make. Let's take a look.
indows Vista was a nightmare for Microsoft. Consumers hated it. The enterprise wouldn't even adopt it. And vendors, once the partners that did Microsoft's bidding, were forced to offer downgrade rights to customers that wanted to run Windows XP. Microsoft knew it had to do something to repair the damage that Vista caused, so it quickly released Windows 7. Microsoft's latest operating system is everything Windows Vista should have been. It's innovative. It's far more secure than previous versions of the operating system. And it appeals to customers. It's a great comeback product.
2. The move to Bing
Microsoft was in deep trouble toward the latter part of the decade. Although it commanded the software market, Google was cornering the search space without any worry of competition. Microsoft's Live Search was largely inconsequential. But rather than wave the white flag, Microsoft released Bing. Microsoft's latest search tool is outstanding. Its results match Google's search results. And thanks to some extras, like a visual search feature, it's a fine alternative to anything Google is offering up.
3. Get in on the gaming
When Microsoft first announced that it would break into the gaming space, some wondered if it could make it. As 2009 gives way to 2010, that question has been answered with a resounding affirmation that yes, indeed, Microsoft can take the gaming industry by storm. Over the past decade, Microsoft has turned its Xbox platform from the "other" console on the market into a gaming leader. The Xbox 360 is now even more popular than Sony's PlayStation 3. That's no small feat. And it should be commended.
4. The enterprise focus
As Apple and Google turned to the consumer over the past decade, Microsoft stayed true to its base—the enterprise. Windows is still the dominant force in the business world. Microsoft has so firmly cemented its position there that most companies wouldn't even consider deploying any other software. Going forward, Microsoft has almost ensured that the enterprise will be its playground.
5. Marginalizing Mac OS X
Apple's Mac OS X made significant strides over the past 10 years, but it's important to note that its rise in the market was largely inconsequential to Microsoft's bottom line. Through smart strategies and partnering with third parties, as well as vendors, Microsoft did a fine job of limiting the impact Mac OS X's rise really had on Windows. Did Apple's operating system steal market share away from Windows? Sure. But did it really change the OS market? No way. Microsoft is still on top by a wide margin.
6. Keeping Linux away
Some would argue that Linux is the operating system that more people should use. After all, most distributions are safe, they are generally lightweight and many are free. But the past 10 years haven't helped Linux gain a substantial footing in the OS market. I would argue that Linux is more well known than it was in 2000, but to say it is any more appealing to the mainstream is a bit of a stretch, even though more distributions have become user-friendly. That can be mainly attributed to Microsoft's ability to keep the OS at arm's length. Simply put, Redmond didn't allow the Linux craze to get out of hand. It was a smart move.
7. Addressing the Web
For too long during the past 10 years, Microsoft allowed Google and others to innovate on the Web. It might also be argued that the company has yet to do enough to stop Google's rise in that space. But over the past year or two, Microsoft has done a better job of realizing that the Internet is the future and it had better be in a position to capitalize on it. That's most evident in its acquisition of several online sites, as well as the launch of Bing and Bing Maps. Microsoft is getting ready to focus on the Web in the new decade.
8. The smooth transition
When Bill Gates announced that he would be stepping down from day-to-day activities at Microsoft, it sent shock waves through the industry. Bill Gates was the face of Microsoft. Investors placed millions of dollars in Microsoft stock because of their faith in its co-founder. It was a dicey situation. But Microsoft handled the transition of day-to-day activities from Gates to Steve Ballmer, the company's CEO, with aplomb. It made Ballmer a more vocal evangelist of the brand, while limiting Gates' influence. It reassured investors. It also proved that Ballmer was up for the job. Kudos, Microsoft. It could have been much worse.
9. Maintaining profitability
Being an extremely profitable company over a period of 10 years isn't always easy. In the tech industry, things change so rapidly that companies can be dominating a market one year and wondering why all the cash dried up the next—just ask Sony. But Microsoft maintained strong profitability numbers throughout the past 10 years. Today, Microsoft still earns billions of dollars of profit each year. And all that cash is being socked away for big acquisitions or investments the company might need to make in the new decade.
10. Cornering the netbook market
Although it failed to see the writing on the wall in so many markets over the past 10 years, Microsoft made one big move that will substantially improve its chances of maintaining profitability into the next decade: It cornered the netbook market. At first, netbooks ran Linux. But in a very short time, Microsoft was able to steal netbook-OS market share away from Linux to such a degree that today, it's in a dominant position in that space. That's no small feat. Netbook popularity has grown rapidly over the past year. Most analysts believe that that growth will continue. By solidifying its position with netbooks, Microsoft is positioned to profit heavily off those lightweight PCs.
(2)Microsoft's 2010 Will Rely on Windows 7 Sales, Yahoo Deal, Cloud
News Analysis: Microsoft underwent substantial challenges in 2009, few of which it will alleviate in 2010. However, a stronger economy could translate into increased sales, reversing its revenue decline, and some products launched in 2009 will likely continue their strong adoption trend. Areas such as cloud computing pose the chance for Microsoft to bolster its market share in the enterprise, but the company will likely find itself in critical shape in other areas, notably the smartphone space.
With declining revenues and robust competition in many of its product areas, 2009 was not exactly a banner year in Microsoft’s history. Will 2010 be any better? Redmond can certainly look toward a few bright spots: Both Windows 7 and Bing, its search engine, experienced disaster-free launches followed by solid early adoption rates, which could translate into greater success in the coming year.
However, Microsoft also faces substantial challenges. Despite a search-and-advertising partnership deal with Yahoo that could see Bing’s market share nearly triple, Google remains the dominant force in online search. Microsoft’s mobile division remains weak and is faced with substantial competition from the likes of Apple and RIM. And if the economy doesn’t pick up, then there’ll be no rising PC sales to buoy sales of Microsoft software.
So how will 2010 fare? The following traces out Microsoft’s prospects in certain key areas.
Microsoft-Yahoo Deal Goes into Effect, Presenting Bigger Google Challenge
Microsoft poured millions of marketing and development dollars into Bing, its search engine that launched in June 2009, but the biggest increase to its market share in 2010 will likely come courtesy of the search-and-advertising agreement struck between Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer and Yahoo CEO Carol Bartz.
On July 29, Microsoft and Yahoo jointly announced a 10-year partnership that would see Bing powering search on Yahoo’s sites, while Yahoo assumed exclusive worldwide sales duties for both companies’ search advertisers. The deal is expected by both parties to be cleared by antitrust regulators and should go into effect in 2010.
When that happens, assuming that Yahoo’s market share ports over to Bing’s with a minimum of attrition, Microsoft’s share of the U.S. search-engine market could rise to close to 30 percent. Google continues to occupy roughly 70 percent of that market, so even a more robust Bing won’t present a survival threat. Nonetheless, 2010 will likely be the year where the world of online search narrows down to two engines whaling at each other for market share. Yahoo, meanwhile, seems intent on giving up the search game entirely for becoming a Web applications provider.
Bing and Google will also likely continue their grudge match over features. In November and December, Microsoft rolled out several new Bing features, including a beta version of Bing Maps that made it a more robust competitor to Google’s Street View. Additionally, Bing now features a more robust video-search page and results from Wolfram Alpha. In 2010, expect both companies to go through several new rounds of competing feature tweaks and add-ons.
Microsoft will also spend 2010 trying to push Bing into foreign markets, notably China; but with Google’s robust presence overseas, and the Yahoo deal restricted to the United States, Bing could have some trouble increasing its market share in those areas.
A Possible Revenue Rebound, Powered by Windows 7
The economic recession battered Microsoft. For the fourth quarter of fiscal 2009, the company reported a 17 percent decline in year-over-year revenue, with earnings arriving at $1 billion below Wall Street estimates. Results for the next quarter offered a somewhat shallower decline of 14 percent year-over-year, with operating income, net income and diluted earnings all continuing to fall by double-digit numbers.
Both Microsoft and its OEMs hope that companies with Windows-based IT infrastructure will use Windows 7 as an excuse to upgrade their systems, and buy the next generation of Microsoft products, in 2010. In both interviews with eWEEK and larger conference calls with investors and media, company executives have suggested that any uptick in sales of Windows 7 and associated products will be roughly in line with any rise in PC purchases through 2010 and beyond, irrevocably linking Microsoft’s fortunes to those of the wider tech industry.
A number of analysts seem to think a tech-refresh scenario is possible.
“It looks like the Win7 inspired upgrade cycle can start in late 2010 and run through early 2013,” Katherine Egbert, an analyst with Jefferies & Co., wrote in an Oct. 12 report. “We expect new hardware purchases to precede the software upgrades by about 6 months.”
But the economy could certainly hit the skids again, in which case a tech refresh would be necessarily blunted as companies battened down their budgetary hatches. In any case, Microsoft executives seem intent on curbing expectations: in an Oct. 23 earnings call, Microsoft Chief Financial Office Chris Liddell suggested that the company would remain “reasonably cautious” about the prospect of a tech refresh, echoing comments earlier in the year from Steve Ballmer.
Microsoft Throws Its Hail Mary Pass for Mobile
By the second quarter of 2009, Microsoft’s share of the mobile operating system market had declined to around 9 percent. October saw the release of Windows Mobile 6.5, but even the company’s executives admitted that the update to Microsoft’s Mobile OS was just a placeholder until 2010, when the company is expected to roll out Mobile 7.
Mobile 7 is supposedly a major upgrade to Microsoft’s operating system franchise, and the company has thus far kept details under wraps. However, continued pressure from a variety of competitors in the space, including Google, Apple and Research In Motion, makes Mobile 7’s quest for market share a decidedly difficult one.
Some have declared that quest an impossible one. “It’s time to declare Microsoft a loser in phones. Just get out of dodge,” Mark Anderson of the Strategic News Service told The New York Times on Dec. 10, in comments widely circulated. “Phones are consumer items, and Microsoft doesn’t have consumer DNA.”
But 2010 will ultimately determine whether Anderson’s comments prove accurate, and Windows Mobile becomes an also-ran, or if Mobile 7 allows Microsoft to retain or gain incremental share in the market space.
Microsoft Plunges into the Cloud, Again Facing Google
Microsoft built its business primarily on the desktop. However, it has taken steps to embrace the paradigm shift inherent in the rise of cloud computing, some of which will bloom to fuller life in 2010.
Jan. 1, 2010 marks the full “switch on” of Microsoft’s Azure cloud platform, composed of three parts that work in symphony to create Web applications and services: Windows Azure, an operating system as a service; SQL Azure, a cloud-based relational database; and .Net services, which provide both secure connectivity and federated access control for applications.
Customers will have three payment options for the service: a pay-as-you-go model, subscription format or volume licensing. Microsoft’s competitors in the space include Amazon and Google.
Given that cloud services represent a potential $150 billion market opportunity, according to research firm Gartner, it’s unsurprising that these companies are all fighting for market-share. For its part, Microsoft could help increase the acceptance of cloud computing within the enterprise.
“There are many enterprises that consider themselves Microsoft shops that have people that only know Microsoft tools and APIs,” Gartner analyst Ray Valdes told eWEEK in 2008, when the Azure platform was first announced. “Amazon and Google have been chipping away at these, but Microsoft is firmly entrenched.”
Microsoft may be positioned well for the enterprise cloud market in 2010, but its other cloud-based endeavors may prove a riskier bet. In a bid to compete with Google Apps, Microsoft will introduce browser-accessible versions of OneNote, Excel, Word and PowerPoint for Windows Live subscribers. Although these Web-based applications will lack the full functionality of the upcoming Office 2010, Microsoft is evidently hoping that enough users will gravitate toward their own cloud productivity suite in place of Google’s offering.
Given that Google Apps have attracted attention among consumers, municipal governments and businesses, however, Microsoft could find itself in a bit of fight when it comes to spreading its own brand of Web-based productivity. But Redmond also doesn’t have much of a choice; in 2010, Google will attempt to spread Google Apps even further among the enterprise and consumers via the propagation of Google Chrome, its upcoming browser-based OS for netbooks and—potentially—more robust PCs. Browser-accessible versions of Office may blunt some of Google’s impact.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)