Have you ever wanted to start your own video game company and create the games you have always dreamed of? With Game Dev Tycoon, you can replay the history of the gaming industry and become the leader of the game market with millions of fans around the world.
As in every business, in order to reach the top, you must build your company from scratch and make yo… (read more)
Okay, it’s a bit of a David and Goliath story – Joyent is a cloud provider that seems to maneuver just below the radar. But on Thursday it will come out fighting with an array of new compute instances — including reserved instance pricing — to position itself as an attractive alternative to big, bad Amazon Web Services.
Joyent CEO Henry Wasik
San Francisco-based Joyent has made noises about going up against Amazon before but now it’s more than tripled the number of instance types it will offer, including 7 different “standard” instance types with RAM allocations ranging from 0.5 to 128 GB; 5 high-memory instances; 6 high-CPU instances; 3 high-storage instances; and 3 high I/O instances (see chart.) But that’s just the beginning, said Joyent CEO Henry Wasik, who joined the company in November.
“We’ve completely reformatted what we do and dramatically expanded the number of instances — originally we had 10 and now 27, but once the portal is turned we’ll have 71,” said he said.
Depending on the workload, Joyent services may well be cheaper than AWS, he said. (Stay tuned for Amazon’s response.) But as many have pointed out, for cloud providers, competing on price alone is a fool’s errand.
Joyent seeks to differentiate itself on how well it runs high-performance applications on its own SmartOS (or on Linux or Windows); the tooling it provides; its service and support; and its ability to offer the hybrid cloud option that many companies prefer.
Earlier this week Dell said it would offer Joyent as one of three public cloud options it will sell to customers. Dell had promised to deliver an OpenStack-based public cloud this year, but thought better of it.
Face it, in the cloud computing world, it’s Amazon first and then everyone else. In one of my favorite posts of the year comparing cloud providers to hamburger franchises, GigaOM’s Derrick Harris posited that AWS is McDonalds, Rackspace is Wendy’s but a handful of providers — Joyent, Virtustream, CloudSigma — represent the In-N-Out Burger (yum!) or Five Guys of cloud. He wrote:
These cloud providers, like their analogous restaurant chains, are damn good at what they do and their patrons are loyal. They’re typically designed for maximum performance, maybe security, too, and will play around with new infrastructural or programming components in order to maintain their edge. They might even be the best at certain things and have some major customers (I’ve seen Maseratis leaving the In-N-Out drive-thru), but cost, geography or the desire to get a chicken sandwich, too, limit the number of users they can attract.
I know that we’re early on in cloud adoption and that the potential workloads moving to cloud is high. But to me it’s clear there will be a shakeout as enterprise players like VMware — which announced its public cloud option this week — along with Dell, IBM, HP and Red Hat try to preserve their traditional IT strengths in a cloud venue while newer look players built for the cloud — Joyent, Virtustream, and others — gear up.
There may be a ton of work out there but i would bet that some of these players will not be standing in two years’ time.
Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.
     |
When Facebook revealed Home for Android, it also revealed a new phone called the HTC First to go along with it. The phone apparently didn’t do so well in the American market leading to rumors of its demise. Now it looks like the phone won’t even get a chance across the pond.
Mobile News reports that pre-orders for the HTC First in the UK have been canceled. Those who were hoping to get ahold of a “Facebook Phone” will now have to settle for one of the preexisting Android devices that support Home.
Interestingly enough, it seems that the decision to cancel the HTC First launch in the UK was made by Facebook. An anonymous source speaking to Mobile News said that Facebook’s decision was spurred by the phone’s performance in the US:
“The HTC First has been pulled and will never go on sale in the UK. Sales in the US were poor and Facebook has taken the decision not to give it a more widespread release.”
The presumed death of the HTC First doesn’t spell the end of Facebook Home, but it does show that consumers don’t want a Facebook phone yet. Home is available on numerous high-end Android devices so it makes little sense to buy a mid-range device when Home compatible devices, like the Galaxy S III, are sold for around the same price.
Of course, I fully expect Facebook to try its hand at an officially branded phone again when it adds more features to Home proper. Reviews are not good at the moment, but improved Home software could make a future Facebook phone more appealing to the average consumer.
Marketing professionals have learned the hard way that no matter what they do or do not plan to do with consumer information, privacy matters. In part, that’s because marketing has always been something of a black art. When an ad appears to speak to a consumer directly, of course, it’s likely to be most effective. But that’s also the moment when the creepy response kicks in. How did they know what I wanted, perhaps even before I did?
Couple the lack of transparency of marketing generally with the shock of new technology, and you get anxiety over information use that increasingly translates into calls for legislation or regulatory intervention.
New laws aimed at specific technologies, however, are the worst possible outcome. Legal solutions are by their nature blunt instruments for managing uncertainty. At best, they add significant enforcement costs without solving the problem. Spam e-mails were made illegal by a 2003 federal law, but all that law has done is to provide lifetime employment for lawyers at the Federal Trade Commission.
At worst, special laws simply ban the new thing before its developers have the chance to test it in the market and make adjustments. In the U.S., for example, advocacy groups initially demanded that Congress outlaw Google’s Gmail when they learned the service would be paid for with contextual advertising that “reads” the content of user messages.
FCC Commissioner Ajit Pai recently referred to such efforts as “Red Flag Laws,” an allusion to legislation passed in response to the initial panic over an earlier disruptive technology: the automobile. He writes:
The temptation to overregulate new technologies is strong. It’s also misguided. Today, everyone would agree that it would be absurd for the government to require an automobile to be preceded by a person carrying a red flag to warn people that a car was coming. Or worse, imagine if regulators required motorists to stop, disassemble their vehicle, and conceal the parts in bushes if the car frightened a passing horse. The first actually happened at the dawn of the automobile age — they were called Red Flag Laws — and the second nearly happened, passing the Pennsylvania state legislature unanimously, only to be stopped by the Governor’s veto.
In retrospect, of course, Red Flag Laws always look ridiculous. But in the heat generated by torch-wielding mobs, the absurdity of calls to do something — anything — to stop the march of progress aren’t always so easy to counter. Consider what Techdirt’s Mike Masnick has called a “moral panic” over the release in a year or so of Google Glass, a head-mounted computing device that projects information onto a tiny display positioned in front of one eye.
Glass will also be voice activated, capable of performing many basic computing functions (sending messages, looking up information), and of recording and sharing audio and video. The product is about to enter a controlled beta release to some 8,000 early users, or what the company is calling “explorers.”
In a literal sense, Google Glass is nothing new. Head-mounted displays have been around for decades, initially designed for military and advanced simulation applications but now cost-effective for consumers. At this year’s Consumer Electronics Show, I saw perhaps a dozen companies offering such devices, pitched for the convenience of hands-free computing, as aids to those with disabilities, or for high-end immersive gaming.
Nor are any of the functions performed by Glass especially novel. The device will simply mimic some of what billions of us can already do with a smartphone. Except that you wear it on your head rather than holding it in your hands. As many of us also already do with Bluetooth headsets.
There is, I suppose, one difference that’s worth mentioning. The product will be made and sold by Google. On the one hand, that seriously ups its coolness factor, making Glass a “must have” for the technorati. On the other hand, it also increases the anxiety level of those already uncomfortable with the company, and with smartphones and other mobile devices that can record audio and video more or less without notice.
The Red Flags are flying high. A White House petition asks the Obama Administration to “ban Google Glass from use in the USA until clear limitations are placed to prevent indecent public surveillance.” (So far, 38 of 100,000 required signatures have been collected.) One site, Stop the Cyborgs, already offers downloadable signs businesses are encouraged to display announcing that “Google Glass is Banned on these Premises.” They also sell t-shirts, though one customer complained that the material used was so thin as to be transparent, an unfortunate irony.
Lawmakers are eager to get in on the fun. A West Virginia legislator, after reading a short article about the product, immediately introduced a bill that would prohibit driving while “using a wearable computer with head mounted display.” And last week, eight members of a bi-partisan Congressional “Privacy Caucus” wrote Google CEO Larry Page to say they were “curious whether this new technology could infringe on the privacy of the average American.” The questions that followed made the point clearer: we don’t know what this product will be, but we don’t like it.
I shouldn’t be flippant. It’s certainly true that ever-smaller and ever-more-powerful mobile devices raise important questions about the costs and benefits of persistent surveillance, and of the line between personal autonomy and acceptable social behavior.
These, however, are more philosophical issues than legal problems, or at least they should be. We already have privacy laws on the books, and there’s very little about Google Glass that suggests a need to start over. (Driving while using head-mounted displays is already either legal or illegal, depending on each state or country’s law regarding distracted driving.)
What’s more interesting has been Google’s response to the uproar over a product that doesn’t even have a launch date. By and large, the company has said nothing, other than to actively promote Glass’s future release and highlight its great potential.
For years, I have advised companies of the importance of getting ahead of privacy concerns on new applications, especially those that might trigger the creepy response. That’s because the real privacy constraint on companies has always been consumer outrage. Thanks to social media, that’s become an ever-more potent force — arguably more compelling than anything lawmakers might do.
Once the moral panics start, it’s impossible to predict where they will lead. So the wisest course is to head them off. The important take-away for product makers isn’t so much about what they do with personalized data, but how they design and test a new offering, launch it, explain it to consumers, and provide tools for information management.
Public education and transparency can do a great deal to defuse angry mobs before they’ve had a chance to storm your castle. The difference between personalization that everyone loves from the beginning (Amazon and iTunes recommendations, TiVo suggestions) and personalization that stimulates a fatal rejection (Facebook Beacon, Google Buzz, LinkedIn personal ads) has little to do with the nature of the data being used. It’s all in how you explain it. And you don’t get a second chance.
But Google seems to be taking a different tack — at least so far — by largely ignoring the rising tide of negative commentary. The company has refused numerous requests for comment. At a developer’s conference last week, Glass product director Steve Lee said only that “Privacy was top of mind when we designed the product.”
It’s hard to know if this is actually Google’s strategy, or whether they’re waiting for a more appropriate moment to leap directly into the fire. But maybe the company has evolved to the next stage of privacy management. Perhaps they’ve decided that saying anything in response to pre-launch fears of product misuse only adds fuel to a generalized moral panic that is now more-or-less persistent.
Given the high level of irrationality around privacy these days, Google might be onto something. Perhaps arguing logically with those who are reacting emotionally just makes things worse. One way or the other, marketing executives should keep a close eye on how the Google Glass story plays out. It may prove the best case study yet in how to — or not to — manage privacy fears.
There is a fun little question-asking technique called the 5 Whys. It was developed by Sakichi Toyoda at Toyota to determine the root cause — and solution — to any given problem in the manufacturing process. The technique has been borrowed by coders, sysadmins and executives alike. Let’s say a CIO just learned that a data breach occurred in which 50,000 sensitive files had been stolen from the company. Below is the 5 Whys exercise that this exec worked out:
Problem: 50,000 files were stolen.
Why? The files were accessible to everyone in the company, even guests.
Why? The folder’s access control list was configured incorrectly.
Why? Chuck the intern configured that file server in 2007 and it hasn’t been reviewed since.
Why? We don’t have a process to review file system permissions.
Why? Because manually reviewing every folder’s ACL for problems is like searching for a needle in a haystack . . . and THERE’S ONLY THREE OF US AND A THOUSAND FILE SERVERS! SHEESH!
See, behind every technical problem is usually a human problem!
It seems like the above fictional security incident was technical in nature — the ACL was configured incorrectly. The value of the 5 Whys technique is that it encourages us to really understand the underlying cause: a nonexistent entitlement review policy.
We hope this post has started you thinking about your entitlement procedures.
Varonis DatAdvantage and DataPrivilege improve your company’s breach mitigation solutions by automating the entitlement review and permissions audit process.
| |
Samsung’s fabled flexible displays are one of the most hotly anticipated technological developments in recent memory, and today MobiLeaks has brought us a leaked concept showing off one such display. As you can see in the picture, this leak is a full render of a new Samsung 10″ tablet, and if thats not enough, the leak came with some specs too. The flexible screen is a full 1080p HD resolution (1920×1080 pixels) and has a front facing 3-megapixel camera. Inside is Samsung’s very own Exynos 5 Octa processor clocked at 1.6 GHz, 2 GB of RAM, an 8000 mAh battery and 16 or 32 GB storage options, expandable via a microSD card slot.
Come comment on this article: Samsung tablet concept with flexible display leaks with specs
Central banks may be regaining some two-way control over global markets that had started to behave like a one-way bet. After flagging some unease earlier this month that frothy markets were assuming endless QE, the Fed and others look to be responding with at least some frank reality checks even if little new in the substance of their message. In truth, there may be no real change in the likely timing of QE’s end, or even the beginning of its end, but the size of the stock and bond market pullbacks on Wednesday and Thursday shows how sensitive they now are to the ebb and flow of central bank guidance on that score. Although the 7% drop in Japan’s stock market looks alarming – Fed chief Bernanke actually played it fairly straight, signalling no imminent change and putting any possible wind down over the “next few meetings” still heavily conditional on a much lower jobless rate and higher inflation rate. The control he gains from here is an ability to nuance that message either way if either the data disappoints or markets get out of hand.
The central banks are clearly treading a fine line between getting traction in the real economy and not blowing new financial bubbles. The decider may be inflation and on that score central banks have a lot of leeway right now – global inflation is still evaporating and, as measured by JPM, fell in April to just 2.0% – its lowest in 3-1/2 years. That said, CPI was also very well behaved in the run-up to 2007 credit crisis – it was asset prices and not consumer inflation that caused the problem. So – expect to hear plenty more cat-and-mouse on this from the central banks over the coming weeks/months.
For investors, periodic pullbacks from here are justified and likely sensible. But it’s still hard to argue against a wholesale change of behaviour – which is merely to assume central banks will prevent further growth shocks but will take some time to transform persistently sluggish growth into anything like a sustained inflation-fueling expansion . As a result, funds will likely steer clear of “safe” havens of cash, gold, Swiss franc and yen despite this bounce and continue their migration to income everywhere, with a bias to relative growth stories within that and an exchange rate tilt according to the likely sequencing of QE exit– all of which points to the U.S. dollar if not its stock markets. And for many that may just mean repariation or staying at home –the US is still the homebase for two thirds of the world’s institutional funds, or some $55 trillion of savings.
And the dollar move is just starting to play out big in emerging markets, where emerging market currencies are on the back foot everywhere from Turkey to South Africa, South Korea and others. The reaction so far as been to lift local stock markets on potential exporter relief but a big question moving ahead is to what extent persistent exchange rate weakness will start to deter or even reverse foreign investment flows.
Next week is a busy if mixed bag – a heavy G7 data slate, with Japan a focus; rate decisions in Brazil, Thailand, Hungary and Canada, US Treasury and JGB debt auctions, EU flash inflation and jobless reports, and China’s Premier visiting Germany.
GLOBAL DATA/EVENTS TO WATCH
China Premier Li Keqiang meets German Chancellor Merkel in Berlin Sat
Africa Union summit in Addis Ababa Sat
Equatorial Guinea parliamentary elections Sun
BoJ’s Kuroda speaks in Tokyo Sun
Israel rate decision Mon
Japan 20-yr JGB auction Tues
French May consumer confidence Tues
Hungary rate decision Tues
French/German labour ministers meet in Paris Tues
US May consumer confidence/March house prices Tues
US 2-yr Treasury auction Tues
BoJ’s Kuroda speaks in Tokyo Weds
Japan April retail sales Weds
German May jobless/CPI Weds
Italy May biz confidence Weds
EZ April credit/M3 Weds
Brazil/Thai rate decisions Weds
Canada rate decision Weds
US 5-yr note auction Weds
IMF annual report on Japan Thurs
Japan 2-yr JGB auction Thurs
Swiss Q1 GDP Thurs
Italy govt bond auction Thurs
EZ May biz/consumer sentiment Thurs
EU summit in Brussels Thurs
US 7-yr Treasury auction Thurs
US Q1 GDP revision Thurs
Japan April jobless/production, May Yokyo CPI Fri
EZ flash May inflation/April jobless Fri
Italy April jobless, French April consumer spending Fri
UK April consumer credit/mortgage Fri
US May Chicago PMI, April personal spending/income/PCE Fri
Canada Q1 GDP Fri
China May manufacturing PMI Sat
At the time of ints conception, toll-free phone lines made a world of sense. Many businesses wanted to encourage phone sales, but hefty long distance charges created friction for the consumer. These businesses could ease that friction by purchasing an 800 number that would essentially transfer the long distance charge from the consumer to the business. That is to say, Ma Bell didn’t care how she got paid so long as she got paid.
Toll-free numbers still exist today, though they really only serve the function of creating an easier-to-remember phone number (i.e., it’s easier to remember the seven digits after 800 or 888 or 877 than it is to remember an entire 10-digit phone number). Cell phones, with free long distance as a standard feature, started killing the usefulness of 800 numbers, and the switch from traditional copper wire landlines to VOIP services really put the nail in the coffin. New technology made the idea of toll-free obsolete.
That is, at least as it pertains to voice calls. In general voice calls are a nonfactor for modern telecoms. You can look right to Verizon’s Share Everything plans as evidence. Every plan, even for feature phones, comes with unlimited voice. They’re not just handing that out, without an alternative tier, if voice is a valuable asset. Instead telecoms today focus on the one feature that can earn them billions: data. And as we’ve seen, the quest to squeeze more money out of us for the same data usage is in full effect.
While Verizon’s and AT&T’s ploys to charge more for less data have prompted some users to simply fork over more money, many have chosen the alternative, which is to curb their data usage. So, as in the days when Ma Bell turned to big business to fund people’s increased use of long distance, so will Verizon target big businesses — namely big content businesses — to fund consumers’ rising data consumption habits. CFO Fran Shammo yesterday talked about the idea of businesses paying Verizon for data usage, allowing consumers to view that business’s content without depleting their data plans.
“The content providers will be willing to pay for the content, if we don’t charge the consumer,” Shammo said.
The topic of net neutrality, a fight that Verizon fights alone, came up, but Shammo rightly brushed it aside. “This is who pays for the delivery of the content,” he said, as opposed to carrier-driven content prioritization. Yes, allowing users to consume certain content without depleting their data plans can be considered prioritization. But to me it seems to be a minor point. What I’m wondering is…
Where is this money coming from?
Content companies doesn’t exactly have Scrooge McDuck money. While some content providers have found ways to be profitable even as advertising dollars have dwindled, others have gone through massive restructuring, including layoffs. Then again, the prior statements refer primarily to text-based content providers. No text-heavy publication would have to pay Verizon; that kind of content requires very little data. It’s streaming video where we see the opportunity.
At the same time, a content provider has to be very sure that mobile video can truly rake in the dollars. They have all the same overhead costs as they do now, plus the money they’ll pay Verizon for the toll-free service. All in all they have to think that the revenues from more easily reaching Verizon’s customers will far outstrip the money they pay to Verizon. Otherwise such an arrangement doesn’t provide enough value to the content provider.
(To be even more clear, the content provider has to find that the profits from serving video to Verizon customers who wouldn’t have viewed the content if charged for the data would outstrip the costs paid to Verizon for the toll-free service.)
At a distance, it seems far-fetched. Then again, basically every media company has placed an enormous emphasis on making money from mobile content. If they think they have a model that works, and think that they can encourage people to view more of their content, and thereby make them more money, by offering their content toll free, then this could work. This is definitely one of those instances where I’d love to see some field tests before coming to a solid judgement.
Via FierceWireless.
The post Toll-Free Data Would Benefit Consumers, but Where’s the Money? appeared first on MobileMoo.
Florin Dejeu, director of product management, SEPATON, Inc., has more than 20 years of product management experience, overseeing the development of products that address the information management needs of large enterprises with emphasis on storage, archiving, classification, HSM and data protection solutions.
FLORIN DEJEUWhile data center managers have grown accustomed to rapid data growth, few could have anticipated the unprecedented data growth and increased complexity that has overwhelmed many data center backup environments in the past few years. According to industry analysts, data in large enterprises is growing at 40-60 percent compounded annually.
Data growth is fueled by the proliferation of new business applications, the introduction of Big Data analytics, the increased use of mobile devices and tablets in the work place, and the increased use of large databases to run core company functions (ERP, payroll, HR, production management). Companies are not only creating massive volumes of data, they are also under pressure to meet increasingly stringent and complex requirements for protecting and managing that data. For example, they have to back it up in shorter times, retain it for longer periods of time, encrypt it without slowing backup performance, replicate it efficiently, and restore it quickly.
Until recently, many enterprise data managers responded to data growth by simply adding disk-based backup targets. The most common type of disk-based backup target provided inline data de-duplication and a reasonable level of performance and capacity to accommodate the increased data volume. However, these systems are simply not designed for today’s massive data volumes or fast data growth because they lack two critical capabilities: they do not scale and they do not de-duplicate enterprise backup data efficiently. As a result, for many large enterprise data centers, the “add another system” approach has reached its breaking point.
For many organizations the breaking point for non-scalable systems is the point at which they cannot any longer meet their backup windows. While adding a single system may not seem overly cumbersome, for large enterprise data centers that require several of these systems, it can add unplanned cost, complexity, risk, and administrative time. The hidden costs and total cost of ownership (TCO) impact are significant:
In today’s fast-growing enterprise backup environments, consolidating backups onto a single, enterprise-class disk-based backup appliance is proving to be both more cost-efficient and less prone to human error and data loss than the “siloed” approach described above.
Backup and recovery appliances are designed specifically to handle the massive data volumes and complex backup requirements of today’s data centers. These purpose built backup appliances (PBBAs) are designed to backup, de-duplicate, replicate, encrypt, and restore large data volumes quickly and cost efficiently. To ensure you choose an enterprise-class backup and recovery appliance, ensure to use the following best practices:
Understand the performance impact that processing-intensive functions, such as de-duplication, replication, and encryption have on the system. Enterprise-class systems are designed to perform these functions in a way that does not slow performance. Some even offload CPU functions Ensure that any published performance rates are for guaranteed, continuous performance, and not simply the highest rates achievable in a widely varying ingest rate.
As described above, adding, managing, and using multiple backup systems is not practical or cost-efficient in today’s fast-growing, complex data centers. Enterprise-class backup and recovery systems offer grid scalability, that is, the ability to add performance and/or capacity independently as you need it. This pay-as-you-grow model eliminates over-buying, reduces IT management time, and enables you to store tens of petabytes of data in a single, consolidated backup appliance.
Storing data in a single, optimized system has the additional benefits of enabling highly efficient, global de-duplication, and eliminating the need for load balancing and ongoing system-tuning.
One of the most effective ways to reduce the cost of backup and recovery is to implement enterprise-class de-duplication. Unlike de-duplication optimized for small-to-medium-business, enterprise de-duplication is designed to enable faster backup performance and better overall capacity requirements. It is also capable of tuning de-duplication to the specific data types for optimal use of CPU, disk, and replication resources. For example they can de-duplicate database data at the byte level for optimal capacity savings or recognize data that will not de-duplicate efficiently (i.e., image data) and back it up without de-duplication. This “tunability” can save enterprises thousands of dollars in savings in capacity and processing costs.
Detailed reporting and dashboards are key to enabling IT administrators to manage more data per person. They automate all disk subsystem management processes and put detailed status information at the administrator’s fingertips. They also provide predictive warning of potential issues enabling administrators to take action before they become urgent.
For today’s large enterprise backup and recovery environments, the days of adding more and more backup systems are over. The speed of data growth, massive volume of data, and complexity of backup and recovery policies necessitate the use of enterprise-class purpose-built backup appliances. These appliances enable organizations to maintain backup windows by moving massive data volumes to the safety of the backup environment at predictable, fast ingest rates. They also streamline and simplify complexity by consolidating tens of petabytes of stored data onto a single, cost-efficient easy-to-manage system.
Industry Perspectives is a content channel at Data Center Knowledge highlighting thought leadership in the data center arena. See our guidelines and submission process for information on participating. View previously published Industry Perspectives in our Knowledge Library.
Being behind in a market sucks, and it’s understandable to want to lash out at the top dog, as Microsoft has shown it’s willing to do with Google in search and email, and now with Apple in tablet computers. A brand new Windows 8 ad pits the iPad against Microsoft’s Windows 8 tablet, in an attempt to show how much more versatile the Asus VivoTab is vs. the iOS device.
Microsoft uses Siri’s voice (which isn’t difficult, given that it’s a fairly generic computer-generated female tone) to highlight what the Windows 8 tablet can do that the iPad can’t, including things like live tiles (it took me a couple views to figure out what “I don’t update like that” even meant), Windows Snap multitasking, and… PowerPoint. Then finally we get a price comparison, showing the much cheaper price tag for the Asus.
The problem is that not only is the Siri construct weak and her actual lines poorly written, but the abilities Microsoft chooses to highlight show exactly why it doesn’t “get” the tablet market. People aren’t looking for multitasking PowerPoint slide deck-creating machines; they have computers for that.
The closing bit here is maybe the worst part; showing that Apple’s iPad can easily provide a remarkably realistic experience for playing Chopsticks on the screen is not the way to trash your competition, especially if you noticeably can’t offer up an equivalent experience on your own hardware. Apple uses that in its own ads for a reason, and that’s to highlight the magical, delightful experiences users can have on its device. Countering that with a bunch of sober (though admittedly useful) features isn’t the way to turn the tide back in your favor.
An earlier version of this post mistakenly identified the Asus VivoTab in this ad as a Surface.
 |
| Fragment of fallen ceiling in the open air storage of the lovely Temple of Tod complex, south of Luxor |
Research
Books
Journals, Magazines and Newsletters
Job Opportunities
Miscellaneous
Northampton faces legal challenge over Sekhemka statue sale from Marquis of Northampton. Museums Journal http://bit.ly/10U7Vgf
Zahi Hawass, long-reigning king of AE antiquities was forced into exile but is now plotting a return. Smithsonian Mag http://bit.ly/16a12PH
David Karp, who sold Tumblr to Yahoo for $1.1 billion, is one more in a line of twenty-somethings and even pre-twenty-somethings whose technology innovations have made them a fortune.
We’ve seen this before. In the 1990s, young techies with purple hair, ponytails, and earrings (that was the men) disrupted boardrooms; in the 2000s, they wear hoodies. College dropouts such as Mark Zuckerberg have quickly created empires. Parents or future parents-in-law have lent their kitchen tables and garages, as Sergey Brin’s mother-in-law-to-be Esther Wojcicki did for Google.
Tumblr’s Karp takes all this one step further. He dropped out of high school at his mother’s urging, and bypassed the garage phase to go directly to New York City offices.
This an extreme version of American culture in action. Historically, the U.S. was the first nation in which the young routinely taught their parents. Parents are pals, or angel investors in their kids’ ventures. Some venture capital firms go beyond college campuses to look for high school students with good ideas, as David Fialkow, founder of General Catalyst (and a friend) said recently.
Added to this is a rising disdain for large companies, or establishments of any kind. When a Twitter commentator referred to an idea as “that’s so Fortune 500,” he wasn’t offering a compliment.
Does this mean that older generations have nothing to teach the next (except on a short Khan Academy math video)? Are the founders of new digital startups flourishing without seeking the “adult supervision” that used to be a tech company norm (the way Google’s young founders brought in Eric Schmidt as CEO until Larry Page was ready)?
Before Karp syndrome becomes the new version of “don’t trust anyone over thirty” reasoning that prevailed during earlier eras of student protests, let’s consider the reasons older generations can serve as sources of wisdom for young entrepreneurs. I’ve observed six characteristics among digital entrepreneurs that suggest room for inter-generational relationships:
They are learning all the time. The learning might not take place in formal settings, but entrepreneurially-oriented young people can be voracious and critical readers, devouring textbooks or online sources to learn a field fast when they don’t want to enroll in a course. On campuses, the line between “curricular” and “extra-curricular” is blurring, as peer groups pursue topics that might teach more than classes or at least feel more relevant. Internships, “after-school” apprenticeships like those offered by Citizen Schools, practical problems, and the chance for independent projects or business-building as part of formal schooling seems to encourage young people to stay in school longer, because school is more relevant — or at least that’s what some preliminary observations suggest. John Werner of TEDx Beacon Street (where I spoke), are organizing learning communities around TEDx speakers, wherever they are. Sharing knowledge-from-experience in online forums reaches young entrepreneurs and opens relationship possibilities.
They love mentors and thrive when they have them. Even more important than access to capital, some analysts say, is access to advice. New business incubators are becoming increasingly common in the U.S. and elsewhere; the best results come from those that provide access to sources of advice, which is why University-linked incubators show a slightly higher survival rate for new ventures after the crucial five-year mark, as my research overview for the HBS US Competitiveness Project showed. As many more young people try the David Karp/Mark Zuckerberg path, the demand for mentors increases. Mentors can be at the cutting-edge while sharing the benefits of experience — and perhaps getting a new business tool. In Massachusetts, some of us working on economic development for distressed areas have urged established companies to provide some space in their facilities for startups, whether related or not.
They appreciate great questions. While they don’t always like to be told how the world supposedly works, and might not know much history, they resonate with dialogue that allows them to express their views, and they like questions that get them thinking new thoughts along new directions. They can be cynical about praise, especially if it feels patronizing, but they like provocative give-and-take.
They need connections. They might have social media networks and tap crowd-sourcing or crowd-funding sources, but they don’t yet know very many people who are well-connected in worlds they might want to enter. Opening doors and suggesting contacts makes everything else you say seem wiser.
They work for food. Well, not exactly. But small investments can go a long way at the early stages of idea development for students who do not yet have families to support or expensive tastes. General Catalyst’s Fialkow urged a group of leaders to consider angel investing in young people for whom a thousand dollars is a lot of money; a modest pool could connect with dozens of young entrepreneurs. Adding mentoring and connections to the cash could increase the success potential.
They care about mission and values. The evidence keeps mounting. In a survey of young people interested in media and communications in Europe issued by Publicis Groupe, the results indicate that an expectation of “social responsibility” is now a given. They feel it is inextricably linked to business strategy. When they start their own businesses, the newer generations often have a social mission right from the start. When I ask students what they learn from CEOs of large established companies, the lessons often have to do with having inspiring principles and sticking with them. Finding ways to involve young entrepreneurs in social causes, or to find the entrepreneurs among those volunteering to do good, can create bonds. The social mission/business mission combination is powerful, as I showed in my book SuperCorp. Business plan contests increasingly include social entrepreneurs.
These six characteristics can guide the young to more readily learn from their elders, while older generations pass on new knowledge and opportunities. Wise older heads can help more startups succeed — and perhaps tumble onto the next Tumblr in the process.
Ubiquity Critical Environments, a newly-created unit of Sears Holdings, will convert this Sears retail store in Chicago into data center space. (Photo: Ubiquity)
Will blinking blue lights of servers soon fill the aisles that previously offered the Blue Light Special? Sears Holdings has formed a new unit to market space from former Sears and Kmart retail stores as a home for data centers, disaster recovery space and wireless towers.
With the creation of Ubiquity Critical Environments, Sears hopes to convert the retail icons of the 20th century into the Internet infrastructure to power the 21st century digital economy. Sears Holdings has one of the largest real estate portfolios in the country, with 3,200 properties spanning 25 million square feet of space. That includes dozens of Sears and Kmart stores that have been closed over the years.
“It’s an amazing real estate portfolio,” said Sean Farney, the Chief Operating Officer of Ubiquity. “The goal is not to sell off properties. It’s to reposition the assets of this iconic brand. The big idea is that you have a technology platform laid atop a retail footprint, creating the possibility for a product with a very different look to it.”
Farney is an industry veteran who previously managed Microsoft’s huge Chicago data center, and then ran a network of low-latency services for the financial services firm Interactive Data. He sees an opportunity to build three lines of businesses atop the Sears portfolio: data centers, disaster recovery sites and “communications colocation” in which Ubiquity leases rooftop space to wireless providers.
Ubiquity will be able to leverage real estate at both closed stores and some that are still operating, depending on the opportunity. The first step has been to evaluate the portfolio and identify properties that could work as data centers. Chicago engineering firm ESD has been conducting a “data center fitness test” on promising properties to size up their power, fiber and risk profiles. Ubiquity is also working with Newmark Grubb Knight Frank to market the portfolio to the brokerage community.
The first Ubiquity project will be a Sears store on the south side of Chicago, nestled alongside the Chicago Skyway. The 127,000 square foot store is closing at the end of June, and will be retrofitted as a multi-tenant data center. Farney says he already has a commitment for the first tenant at the site on East 79th Street, which has 5 megawatts of existing power capacity and the potential to expand.
“It’s a building that’s lit very well, from both a fiber and power perspective,” said Farney. “It’s going to be great data center building.”
Farney acknowledges that many of Sears’ mall-based retail locations aren’t viable for data center usage. “I don’t think the industry is yet ready for a mall-based data center,” he said. “That may take some time. The stand-alone location is optimal.”
Ubiquity has those stand-alone facilities, along with distribution centers and some parcels of vacant land. ”There are closed Kmarts that are stand-alone, 200,000 square-foot properties with good fiber and power and 10 acres of parking,” said Farney. “These are owned assets.”
Farney says Ubiquity has flexibility in how it works with tenants. It could finance a buildout and then hand over a wholesale data center to an enterprise or managed hosting provider, or could opt for a powered shell solution for a tenant, depending on the customer needs.
After initially focusing solely on data centers, Ubiquity has expanded its strategy. Although mall-based stores may not be right for data centers, they could be ideal for disaster recovery facilities, Farney said. That includes mall stores that have closed, as well as those that have downsized to a smaller retail footprint. In either scenario, a separate work space could be created with an exterior entrance to restrict access, while still allowing employees to take advantage of nearby stores and eateries.
I’m not a fan of the “Scroogled” campaign, because Microsoft is just attacking Google rather than focusing on selling its own products. It’s a negative campaign dressed up as consumer championing, and I don’t think it does the software giant any favours.
However, I do like the new Windows 8 commercial which is a clever attack on the Apple iPad (a device I own and love).
In the 30-second spot, which is called “Windows 8: less talking, more doing”, Microsoft highlights things that the iPad can’t do that Windows 8 tablets can, and cleverly employs the voice of Siri to point out the failings of Apple’s device.
The advert starts by showing an iPad sitting next to an ASUS VivoTab Smart tablet. As Windows 8’s live tiles refresh, Siri admits, “Sorry, I don’t update like that”. Next the VivoTab is shown running two apps side by side, while Siri bemoans the fact she can “only do one thing at a time”.
While the ASUS device displays PowerPoint, the iPad shows a virtual piano keyboard and Siri suggests they “just play Chopsticks” instead.
While I like the ad, and really appreciate its inventive use of Siri, it could be argued there’s no clear winner in it. The iPad appears simple, but the Windows 8 tablet overly complicated. And if Apple was to make a response it could simply show all the official apps that exist on iPad that are entirely absent from Windows 8, like Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, Gmail, Google Maps, BBC iPlayer…
But that’s just my opinion. What do you think of Microsoft’s new ad?
Most often, journalists have an over tendency to spin things. Heck we do it from time to time (mainly to grab your attention), but twisting and inadequately covering a story is just bad journalism. Here is the rant.
First, here is the link to the AutoNews.com story. Our main exception to the story is this: if you take Lentz’s two quotes and one indirect quote and put them together, it makes more sense to what he is saying. Not that way it was portrayed in the story. Mr. Rechtin makes it seem like Toyota is throwing in the towel on being a full-size truck competitor.
Here are Mr. Lentz’s quotes together:
“We’re never going to challenge the Big 3 in terms of volumes,” Jim Lentz, CEO of Toyota’s North American region, said in an interview.
Now, he says Toyota will combine compact and full-sized pickup volumes when measuring its success in the truck market.
“Some shoppers will only consider compact,” Lentz said. “Some will only consider full-sized. But in the middle, there is some interchangeability between those two.”
The reality is that Lentz is simply saying that Toyota is going to measure success in the truck market LIKE EVERYBODY ELSE DOES. Ford releases their F-series truck sales numbers (basically every truck they make), RAM trucks does the same and GM separates out their numbers (Silverado and Sierra) for some analysts, but combines them for marketing purposes. Why won’t Toyota do the same?
Now, the “shock” factor that Mr. Rechtin is trying to obtain is that the sales projections of the 2006 Toyota Tundra failed to reach the target of 300,000. That 300,000 target is “within spitting distance of the Dodge Ram.” Ok. Let’s COMBINE the numbers for say March, 2013 using the numbers from Pickuptrucks.com.
Hmm…. Looks like Toyota Trucks are barely behind RAM Trucks.
Now, Mr. Rechtin does point out that the recession took a big hit on truck sales. We would also suggest that the Earthquake and Tsunami had an impact too. Parts suppliers couldn’t supply factories and new vehicle production lagged. And research and development took a back seat too. In fact, Toyota and their pickups are finally seeing restored inventories on many dealer lots.
The last and probably most disappointing statement Mr. Rechtin makes is: “Both the Tundra and Tacoma now come off the same assembly line in San Antonio. If the Tundra can’t reach its numbers, Toyota can crank up Tacoma production.”
Cut back production of the Tundra? Look, the Tacoma sells really well and we are big fans of it. But, the Tundra also is selling really well. Both vehicles are seeing double-digit increases in sales volumes (March, 2013 – Tacoma +22.9%, Tundra +15.4%) and a new Tundra is coming out this fall.
The truth is that I respect the heck out of automotive writers, but this article is simply wrong.
What do you think? Is the Tundra “a bit player?”
The post AutoNews Calls Toyota Tundra “A Bit Player” appeared first on Tundra Headquarters Blog.
ConteXtream, an early player in software-defined networking (SDN), has apparently deployed its software for around 40 million subscribers of a wireless service provider in the United States, although it refuses to say which company is using the services. Telecommunications companies have been kicking the tires on implementing software-defined networks for the sake of efficiency, cost savings and agility, but a big one like this suggests that the benefit could outweigh the cost.
With offices in Israel and Palo Alto, Calif., ConteXtream was founded in 2007 and focuses on using software to help service providers virtualize network functions. It has picked up investments from Comcast Ventures and Verizon Ventures, among others. “You can imagine that those two investment arms are very interested in what we do,” said Nachman Shelef, ConteXtream’s CEO and a co-founder.
The customer’s total subscriber base is least double the number that the virtualized network covers, Shelef said, meaning that it could be either AT&T or Verizon, and given that Verizon has invested in ContexTream, it seems hard to imagine it would be selling services to its investor’s biggest rival, although Shelef wouldn’t say one way or the other.
Running ConteXtream’s Grid software on servers would allow a wireless carrier to more quickly roll out new revenue-generating features while also looking at traffic flows and directing certain subscribers only to the services they need, such as content filtering, customized billing, video optimization and subscriber statistics. “The old way of doing this was all the traffic goes through all functions, whether it needs to or not, without identifying each flow,” Shelef said. As a result, network appliances can be used more efficiently.
It’s a step toward the future of running all network functions as software on servers. “That vision is still very far off,” Shelef said.
Early SDN deployments have come from managed-hosting providers. Webscale deployments from Amazon and Facebook appear to be in the works. Enterprises have been slower to jump on board, even though many have expressed interest in SDN.
ConteXtream and other SDN vendors are eager to capitalize on the continuing hype cycle, and VMware is no exception to that, following its $1.26 billion acquisition last year of Nicira. Using software to virtualize networks is one component of VMware’s software-defined data center vision, which VMware CEO Pat Gelsinger will discuss with my colleague Om Malik at GigaOM’s Structure conference in San Francisco on June 19. Also at Structure, Juniper Networks executive Bob Muglia will talk SDN with GigaOM Research Analyst David Linthicum.
Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.
| |
If you were an avid user of the popular email app Mailbox and were worried by the company’s acquisition by Dropbox, never fear. Mailbox isn’t slowing down or turning away from email, as evidenced by Thursday’s launch of the new Mailbox for iPad app and word that an app for Android is in the works.
Mailbox for iPad is the first new product from the company since its Dropbox acquisition, which Om’s sources put above $50 million and potentially closer to $100 million. No matter the exact price tag, it was a significiant deal for the small company, and CEO Gentry Underwood said the transition to working within Dropbox has been remarkably smooth.
The new iPad app will look pretty similar to the existing iPhone app, with a few minor changes to account for the larger screen. Underwood said designing for the iPad is actually a significant challenge, since if you look at it one way it’s an overzized mobile phone, and another way it’s a small computer. Figuring out how to accomodate for the size of the keyboard (or wireless external keyboards), as well as not overcrowding the screen, is tricky.
“We’re trying to create an experience that’s as consistent as possible, that doesn’t misuse all that extra space,” he said, noting that it would be easy to see the larger size of the tablet and cram it with features. “And sometimes it’s like a luxury-sized mobile device and sometimes it’s a desktop replacement.”
Seemingly as soon as Mailbox launched, users were clamoring to download the app, which limited signups and put most people on a reservation list. The full app finally launched to everyone and Mailbox removed the signup list last month. At that point, it was delivering more than 100 million messages a day, and while Underwood said they are reluctant to continue releasing numbers, he said the growth remains strong, and that 40 percent of users hit inbox zero every week.
Mailbox for iPhone and iPad are available in the Apple iTunes store, and a full review of the iPhone app can be found on the GigaOM Pro blog.
Underwood said the company is working on an Android app (the iPad app was in the works before the acquisition), but he wouldn’t say when Android would launch. The company decided to go with iPad first since it was an often-requested feature, and because much of the code was the same for iPad, even if it presented new design challenges, whereas Android would be something of the opposite.
“There’s always this constant tension between, ‘This is great,’ and ‘Oh, there’s so much more we want to do.’”
Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.
| |
Today marks one year since we released the Digital Government Strategy (PDF/ HTML5), as part of the President’s directive to build a 21st Century Government that delivers better services to the American people.
The Strategy is built on the proposition that all Americans should be able to access information from their Government anywhere, anytime, and on any device; that open government data – data that are publicly accessible in easy-to-use formats – can fuel innovation and economic growth; and that technology can make government more transparent, more efficient, and more effective.
Trevor Bolder, English rock bassist and songwriter who is best known for his time with David Bowie’s The Spiders from Mars and progressive hard rock band Uriah Heep, has died of cancer. He was 62.
Bolder played with Bowie’s The Spiders from Mars across four studio albums: Hunky Dory, Ziggy Stardust, Aladdin Sane and Pin Ups. He also played with The Spiders From Mars with Mick Woodmansey and the late Mick Ronson on the subsequent Bowie tours. In 1976 Bolder joined Uriah Heep, replacing John Wetton.
“Trevor was a wonderful musician and a major inspiration for whichever band he was working with. But he was foremostly a tremendous guy, a great man,” said David Bowie.
Uriah Heep had this to say in a statement on their website:
It is with great sadness that Uriah Heep announce the passing of our friend the amazing Trevor Bolder, who has passed away after his long fight with cancer. Trevor was an all time great, one of the outstanding musicians of his generation, and one of the finest and most influential bass players that Britain ever produced.
His long time membership of Uriah Heep brought the band’s music, and Trevor’s virtuosity and enthusiasm, to hundreds of thousands of fans across the world. He joined the band in 1976 and, barring one short break, was a fixture until his ill health forced him to take a step back early this year.
Mick Box said, “Trevor was a ‘World Class’ bass player, singer & songwriter, and more importantly a World Class friend. He will be sadly missed by family, friends and rock fans all over the world. We are all numb to the core”.
“I had the great pleasure of knowing Trevor for the best part of 30 years, he was one of my idols growing up, I got to know him when Uriah Heep opened for DL on the Pyromania tour in 1983 and we became firm friends. I stayed with him, he stayed with me and we recorded and toured together as The Cybernauts. For myself & Phil it’s devastating because we were looking forward to finishing up some new Cybernauts recording pretty soon, that may now not happen, but our real thoughts right now are with his family. TB was one of the good guys, I’m sure Mick Box & the guys in Heep feel the same way, we have lost a brother, a great bass player, a funny, funny man who lit up any room he walked into. I guess now, him & Ronno have a bit of catching up to do…RIP my friend,” said Def Leppard’s Joe Elliot
Surprising as it may seem, the Egyptian pound has got some fans. The currency has languished for months at record lows against the dollar and the headlines are alarming — the lack of an IMF aid programme, meagre hard currency reserves, political upheaval. So what’s to like ?
Analysts at Societe Generale say that just looking at the spot exchange rate of the pound is missing the bigger picture. Instead, they advise buying 12-month non-deliverable forwards on the pound — essentially a way of locking into a fixed rate for pound against the dollar in a year’s time depending on where you think it may actually trade. They write:
The implicit yield at this point is 21 percent for the 12m NDF, which we think is quite attractive. The way to think about Egypt NDFs is to approach them as a distressed asset. The risk/reward is quite attractive, and a lot of the bad news has been priced in. Yes, there have been serious delays in the programme negotiations with the IMF and that has clearly been a negative for the overall country view, but I would like to point out that the actual 12m NDF level has hardly budged in the process. This to me suggests that the valuation looks particularly good.
One year forwards are typically calculated by assuming the currency will depreciate over 12 months by an amount equivalent to the currency’s deposit rate over that period. However, the non-deliverable forward on dollar/pound, a cash-settled FX forward calculated from open market pricing, implied a pound exchange rate at 8.5 pounds per dollar in a year’s time – more than 20 percent weaker than today’s spot price of 6.9 per dollar. This means that there is more than 10 percent pure currency depreciation (i.e. outside of the deposit rate) priced on the NDF. Given that this is well in excess of what many assume will be the actual pound decline, the trade starts to look attractive despite all the economic and political pessimism. In other words, the NDF rate is assumed to have priced in excessive gloom.
Graham Stock, an investment strategist at frontier fund Insparo, also likes the pound. He says a maxi devaluation does not appear on the cards as wealthier neighbours such as Qatar, Libya and Turkey have stepped up with multi-billion dollar loans. The currency collapse that looked imminent at the end of 2012 hasn’t happened as the central bank has managed to stabilise the pound by rationing dollars. Moreover analysts now reckon that Egypt will muddle through without IMF aid this year – instead it may tap the IMF after elections (due later this year) when measures such as scrapping subsidies can be more easily implemented. Meanwhile (Stock says):
You get compensated for taking the risk and you earn good carry. They may not be able to do an IMF deal but they are getting a lot of support from neighbours, there is general willingness to support them. You want the yield which is 15-20 percent.
Not everyone is into the trade though. The implied yield of 18-21 percent — well above what one can earn in other high-yield markets such as India or Brazil — is alluring but risks too are big given Egypt’s balance of payments problem and ugly politics. Luis Costa, head of CEEMEA currency and debt strategy at Citi, first wants to see Egypt cutting energy subsidies which currently eat up a third of government spending. Once that happens, Costa says, he will take another look at the pound.
