Author: Serkadis

(NaturalNews)These days, we are witnessing an acceleration in the use of psychiatry to target Americans, to label them as dangerous, to take away guns they own, to blame gun violence in the US on mentally ill people. It’s a winning strategy, because most Americans don’t have a…

Yesterday (yeah, yeah, I’m late), Google released a stunning new version of Gmail for iPad and iPhone. I tried to write this story several times on May 6, but the newsroom was short-staffed, keeping me extra busy. Vacations, bank holiday in United Kingdom and Orthodox Easter Monday just about emptied BetaNews. So, please, pardon this belated story about the great Google escape.

What a wild one, too. Control-freak Apple uses Safari to keep developers like Google in check. Especially such a rival that invades iOS with a remarkably rich set of apps tightly tied to myriad web services. So Gmail’s sudden liberation is quite surprising. Links now go to installed Google apps — gasp, Chrome, Maps and YouTube — rather than opening Safari. Chrome linkage really is a shocker, and all the more so with Google kissing WebKit to the wind in favor of its own browsing engine. Expect it in the Chrome stable channel soon.

Google is clearly set out to invade Apple’s mobile platform with strong apps and connected services. Last week, Google Now arrived, rivaling Siri, and available to more iOS users than members of the so-called Android Army. How strange a strategy is that?

Many of Google’s apps are even better than Apple’s. The search giant embraces iOS, extends utility with its own services and extinguishes competing ones, or tries to. That’s old business. The company’s business is long about co-opting other platforms, everything from desktop search app for Windows to Google Frame for Internet Explorer, and more. But the recent aggressiveness on iOS, which really started after Apple pulled Google Maps, is quite new — and good for iOS users, but probably bad for the fruit-logo company. That is long-term.

Apple wants iOS users connecting to its services and iCloud. But given Google’s far reach, a strategy of booting the search giant’s apps is no longer viable. Customers want Google apps and services, which co-opt the Apple experience. Still, I have to wonder if this linkage will last. If Google, why not other developers? Letting every Tom, Dick and Jane developer link to whatever — gee, like Chrome instead of Safari — is chaos, a control freak’s worst nightmare.

So, I wonder: Is Google’s prison break an open tunnel for other developers to follow? Or will Apple shoot the inmates and send the hounds after Gmail?

Photo Credit: Stasys Eidiejus/Shutterstock

In all the discussions I’ve had with hardware makers about their products, one thing is becoming clear: in the end, the cheap part is never cheap. Take a look at this post about a Kickstarter project for example. A maker, Michael Ciuffo, had recently funded a very cool QR code clock that used a simple array of LEDs to display the time in QR code.

He ordered the parts from an online supplier – 500 in total – and begin testing them. In all he saw 38 of the 500 fail in basic tests. In short, his “quick and easy” shipment of components from an inexpensive vendor resulted in a 7.6% failure rate.

“I found out this week that sometimes goods and services purchased in China can be of low quality,” he wrote.

In a similar vein, I once spoke to a hardware broker in Shenzhen who sold bargain-basement phones to the developing world. While his products were far from amazing, he did find similar failure rates in all of the phones he sold, resulting in the need to hire a separate QA tester who powered on and tried all the phones before he shipped them, thereby reducing his profit.

I want to make it clear that this is no jingoistic rant, but this is, in short, the biggest problem with off-shoring hardware manufacturing. However, because the perception is that local – and by local I mean a general U.S. or European audience – is expensive, this quality problem is endlessly repeated.

“When you off-shore hardware, every mistake, and there will be mistakes, causes a delay chain that multiplies by physically shipping prototypes, samples, tester units and more half-way around the world,” said Limor Fried of Adafruit Industries. “One of the best things you can do is keep your supply chain as close as possible.”

It is telling, however, that the company just invested in a $175,000 pick and place machine for their SoHo office.

“This is why we like to manufacture here in SoHo, have our injecting molding in North America, PCBs made in the USA and services like large volume laser cutting here in NYC,” she said.

The proximity of a vendor to your assembly point allows you to, in a pinch, drive to complain. As it stands, Ciuffo’s vendor was kind enough to respond and resend extra pieces but after a 35 day wait on the original LEDs he had already added a month to his build time. While the price of the pieces was obviously low enough for him to consider the opportunity, the cost in time and potentially QA headaches becomes an intangible.

But therein lies the problem: you can’t always source, say, an array of LEDs locally. Chances are the pieces are pulled from the same factory you’d be going to in Shenzhen and, barring a bit of QA on arrival, you might be running into the same problems. However, as companies like Adafruit begin catering to the hobbyist and local manufacturers begin catering to smaller batch hardware creators, I could definitely see it becoming easier to become a true hardware locovore.

We, as consumers, should also require that the things we buy be locally sourced. While I am well aware that manufacturing is not all puppy dogs and rainbows, there is something to be said for a sourcing infrastructure that allows a Kickstarter project lead to make a few calls and flow a bit of money back into the community, state, or country. You either pay for cheap hardware up front or later on, in support costs. An active slow hardware movement would allow far more control over the process of making cool things and would, in the end, benefit us all by raising quality across the board.

No one rightly can accuse Adobe of playing the ostrich, digging in and pretending the cloud isn’t changing the market for desktop software. The developer of popular publishing tools like InDesign and Photoshop takes huge risks that will either make or break future revenue. A year ago, Adobe unveiled the Creative Cloud subscription service. Today, in Los Angeles, the company rebranded CS suite as CC and moved all future features, updates and versions to the cloud subscription service. You want new Photoshop, Adobe will take your money monthly, baby.

I cannot understate the risk taken here, as Adobe delivers double-whammy to customers. Changing an iconic brand is trouble enough — how people pay and what for, even more so. But the CC (for Creative Cloud) also demarks change, break from the old model for the new. With risks come rewards.

June Wedding

New versions of Dreamweaver, InDesign, Illustrator, Photoshop and Premiere Pro will be available in June, but only as part of Creative Cloud. Users pay a monthly subscription fee rather than purchase software upfront. That means shelling out less and getting more for it, at least initially, and sacrificing some usage rights in the process. Buying software gets you a perpetual license. Subscription means the software deactivates after you stop paying, ending your rights to use the applications.

Standard pricing is $49.99 per month, which provides access to most Adobe software. You cannot buy the new CC versions in stores; subscribe and download instead. Student and teacher monthly pricing is $19.99, which is the same for single apps. Existing individual customers of CS3 or later pay $29.99 and business ones $39.99. CS6 users get in for $19.99 per month. A team option is $69.99 per month, or $39.99 for existing customers. If you qualify as existing, the discounted offer ends July 31.

I count 34 products currently available for the monthly fee — everything from Acrobat to Flash, Illustrator, Lightroom, Photoshop Touch and Premiere.

Adobe will continue to sell and update Creative Suite 6, but new features go to Creative Cloud. So this is a forced migration to the subscription service, if you want the new thing. I wondered a year ago if the scheme might affect Adobe revenue, since Creative Suite costs so much more upfront. Nope.

Looked at differently, laws of volume work greatly to Adobe’s advantage if monthly payments open up a huge number of students, sole-proprietorships and small businesses to buy into Creative Suite who otherwise couldn’t justify the expense — and that appears to be the case so far. The scheme also will pull forward customers running older CS versions, who either can’t afford or don’t see value paying for new applications, to upgrade by taking a subscription. They no longer have a choice, other than switching.

Marriage Bliss

The scheme also solves a big problem for Adobe, and it’s commonplace among big software publishers: New features come out too slowly, and when they do, many customers don’t get them right away because they want to maximize their investment in older software.

“Our customers will no longer have to wait 18 to 24 months to access new Photoshop innovation”, Winston Hendrickson, Adobe vice president, asserts. “When a new Photoshop feature is ready, whether it’s the next Healing Brush or something as mind-blowing as Content Aware Fill, we’ll deliver it via Creative Cloud”. Adobe releases updates as they’re ready, and all customers get them immediately.

Subscriptions smooth out Adobe revenue, too. Monthly pays are a sure thing for the contract period and something sustainable conceptually longer. Consider someone purchasing CS6 Design & Web Premium, which includes Acrobat X, Bridge, Dreamweaver, Fireworks, Flash Pro, InDesign, Illustrator, Media Encoder and Photoshop. Adobe sells the suite for $1,899, with perpetual licensing. For $49.99 per month, a subscriber gets these applications and another 23. That’s $599.98 for a year, or less than what Adobe sells Photoshop CS6 ($699; $999, Extended) direct. The three-year cost ($1,799.64) is still less than the suite, and Adobe keeps subscriber software up-to-date.

The deal is sweeter, if taking advantage of the $29.99/month promotion, which applies to the first year. Cost is $359.98, or less than Dreamweaver CS6 ($359), for first 12 months or $1,559.74 after 3 years. The point: Adobe may point a gun to your head, so to speak, but the bang is more for your buck, with less outlay up front to get any of the applications and more of them available over time.

Photo Credit: Galushko Sergey/Shutterstock

Telcos feel like they are between a rock and hard place. When you consider the transition to all IP networks, the margin pressures associated with meeting the insatiable demand for mobile data and the threat that over-the-top services represent to their businesses; it’s clear that they are doing more than just trying to change the jet engine mid-flight, they are trying to replace the engine while others are looting the plane for parts. Meanwhile the skies are getting more crowded with more flyers demanding more routes.

Telcos must invest in their infrastructure, even as demand for their services rises. Yet they cannot ask revenue to continue rising at the pace of consumption, and in some cases, such as text messaging and voice calls their revenue is falling. So far their response has been to decry bandwidth hogs, implement new pricing plans that try to hold the line on the dollars coming in even if users choose to use over-the top-alternatives.

But some are realizing that that’s not enough. They are investing in technologies such as OpenFlow, or at least software defined networking, as they try to get a handle on their costs. And they are demanding their suppliers provide them with specialized software running on commodity hardware, as opposed to the pricey, proprietary boxes of previous generations’ of technology.

Metaswitch’s big switch for telco gear.

For example, Metaswitch, a three-decade-old company based in San Francisco has created Project Clearwater, a software-based IMS core for telephone networks. An IMS (it stands for IP Multimedia Subsystem for those who care about these things) system is the glue that connects the old analog wireline systems to the newer digital systems. The thought behind IMS was that mobile operators would use them as a bridge into the IP world, but in reality they proved complex and expensive and telcos put off making those investments.

As Metaswitch looked at the market two years ago it saw an opportunity. The company, which provides other hardware to wireless carriers, saw the world was changing. So CTO Martin Taylor said the company decided to build an IMS core that ran on commodity hardware. And if that wasn’t revolutionary enough (remember, we’re talking about telcos here) on May 8 Metaswitch will open source the software.

Taylor points out that telcos used to have the largest scale systems, but that is changing. The globe-spanning networks delivering five nines that once inspired such awe, are now common as Google, Microsoft and others build out their own globe-spanning infrastructures. And telco’s know that to keep up they must adopt the same tricks the web scale companies have, like open source software and commodity hardware. Thus Metaswitch will open source its Clearwater software, and follow a Red Hat model of supporting the software and releasing regular updates. Taylor has the right idea, but telcos need to go even further.

But the real solution isn’t open-source software

As forward-thinking as Metaswitch is with its open source business model and trying to deliver a software-based IMS core built for commodity hardware, its customers are making a mistake if they rely on Metaswitch to hold their hand. As the telco network looks more like cloud and webscale infrastructure — in that telco networks they are taking on more load without adding costs — telcos need to think like real cloud vendors and webscale companies, not like enterprise IT customers.

Telcos are providing essential infrastructure in their mobile networks. Many of them also provide cloud computing services. In yesteryear it was enough to just provide the pipes, but if you’re going to provide compute and networking infrastructure today you need to adjust to the new reality for infrastructure providers.

The new infrastructure reality

And that reality is you need to own your systems. Infrastructure is going to be a commodity, even in mobile access (look at Free Mobile’s plans in France or even Republic Wireless here in the U.S. if you want to see the future). And people are going to want more and more of it, so the build out had better be cheap. So if telcos really want to be cloud providers, and the really want to compete in an all IP world, they need to stop demanding hand-holding from their vendors, hire smart people to own their infrastructure development, and get off their butts and start innovating.

For example, Amazon doesn’t hire a company to provide help on its operating systems or databases. When it chooses an open source technology it also chooses and hires smart people to make sure that technology is up and running and maintained. Google, Facebook, Netflix, they all operate the same way in the core areas of their business. Because when you cut out the middle man you cut costs. When you have smart people on staff, you can keep innovating at your pace and in the direction you want to go.

So if you’re going to be an infrastructure provider, that mindset and skill set is par for the course. And telcos do not seem to get this.

They can’t say they want to be like Amazon and play in that world if they want their vendors to do the work. They’ve got to find a way to embrace not just the technologies but the economic realities of competing in the commodity and cutthroat business that is the cloud and IP networks. Otherwise they will begin a long decline.

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

• How tomorrow’s mobile-centric data centers will look
• Microsoft Azure: What It Is, What It Costs and Who Should Care
• Report: How Mobile Cloud Computing Will Change Tech

Former Indiana Governor Otis Bowen, sometimes known as “Doc,” died in a nursing home in Donaldson, Indiana at the age of 95 from unspecified causes.

As Governor, Bowen served for two terms, from 1973 to 1981. He also served as Secretary of Health and Human Services from 1985 to 1989 under Reagan. He also served as Speaker of the House after being elected to the Indiana House of Representatives.

Indiana Governor Mike Pence released a statement saying, “Governor Otis R. Bowen’s contributions to the life of this state and nation are incalculable, and I mark his passing with a sense of personal loss. His story is as inspiring as it is uniquely Hoosier.”

Here’s a report from IndianaNewsCenter.com:

Bowen was born in Rochester, Indiana, and began is career as an intern at Memorial Hospital in South Bend in 1942. He went on to serve in the Medical Corps of the U.S. Army in World War II. He set up his own practice in Bremen, which lasted until ’72.

Bowen is survived by a wife, children and grandchildren.

Chris Mitchell promotes community networks. He’s at the Institute for Local Self Reliance, so his view makes sense. He follows broadband access closely. Late last week he posted an interesting article on CenturyLink, noting that CenturyLink’s plan for 1 Gbps service in Omaha is an outlier, not a sign of the times to come.

Chris points out that Omaha – or at least the part of Omaha getting the upgrade – needed the upgrade for technical reasons. And I think it doesn’t hurt that the area getting the upgrade sounds like an affluent area. It’s certainly positive news for Omaha that the upgrade is coming. And if it does well financially, it could be good news for other areas as well – but for the reasons that Chris points out, I agree that it’s probably an outlier, especially in terms of rural communities. Also I’ve heard the folks at CenturyLink say as much. Rural areas are a tough investment – tough terrain, low population density and managers are obliged to make business decisions that benefit shareholders.

What does this mean for local underserved communities? Chris looks at that question…

CenturyLink just doesn’t have the money to upgrade most of its communities. Will it in future years? That is a question that Phil Cusick of JPMorgan asked: “Okay. And, so we should look at CapEx as being essentially flat for the next few years?”

CFO Stewart Ewing response:

That’s our thinking now. Pretty flat, we could bring it down some, cut it off a little bit depending on. It’s really based on the success of these new initiatives, I mean, what we think we can drive in terms of revenue and margins going forward.

CenturyLink is not dumb or evil, it just has different priorities for investment than what communities need. The sooner local governments understand this, the better. Heck, CenturyLink itself has made this point in Minnesota:

We’re a public company. We have shareholders. We have rules and commitments. If you’re smaller, the shareholders are the owners. There’s more flexibility – especially if owners/shareholders are local.

Minnesota Public Radio summed it up:

Noting that CenturyLink wants every customer it can find, Ring pointed out that the company nonetheless needs a return on investment that satisfies shareholders and meets the demands of larger commitments and fiduciary responsibilities.

If you’re a community looking at broadband and you are served by CenturyLink (or CenturyLink is nearby), it still makes sense to invite them to the table to talk about broadband. They know broadband. They may know if your area is expecting an upgrade in the near future. They may be in a position to be swayed by growing interest in broadband. Most providers will talk to specific customers about upgrades to their service – maybe it’s a matter of aggregating those demands. But it’s also wise to keep Chris’ observations in mind. The key to a public-private partnership is finding a solution that meets the needs of the community and commercial provider and the first step may be recognizing that those needs are not necessarily the same.

An area/project to watch is the North East Central communities. They held a broadband summit in February – inviting community leaders and providers. One of the stated outcomes from the summit was an effort to continue discussion between community leader and providers. Brian Estrem from U-reka Broadband spoke about the moving the public-private effort forward…