Over at Engadget, Josh Topolosky has written about a tip his site received about the next Apple TV–which supposedly is essentially a $99 screenless, diskless iPhone which streams 1080p content from the Internet or a Time Capsule network drive. It would presumably tie into a service along the lines of the one described in a musty old rumor known as iTunes Replay. And it would clearly compete with existing boxes such as Roku and future ones based on Google TV.
(One major Google TV selling point which Apple TV definitely won’t match, at least in our lifetime: Google’s gizmo will play all the Flash-based video on the Web.)
Josh’s tipster didn’t say anything about whether the next-generation Apple TV would run apps. But if it runs iPhone OS, it feels kind of inevitable that it would–if not at first, at least eventually. Stock iPhone and iPad apps would make no sense at all on an HDTV screen, but ones scaled to the right size and aspect ratio might. Netflix, for instance, could create something akin to the Netflix interface on Roku. And games would be a no-brainer.
It’s still not obvious that many folks want to run apps other than games on a TV set. Yahoo’s Connected TV platform has let you do that for awhile now on sets from multiple manufacturers, and although it’s well-done it doesn’t seem to have set off a living-room revolution just yet. But I’m even more cautious about one of the big ideas behind last week’s Google TV announcement: that consumers hunger for full-blown access to the Web on their TVs. I’ve sat through innumerable press events over the past fifteen years or so listening to tech execs who were confident that real people wanted to browse on a TV. Those real people, however, have always seemed to be in short supply.
Given how long we’ve all been online, most living rooms remain surprisingly short on Internet technology. I’m still not sure if there’s an iPod-like transformative device out there waiting to be invented by Apple or anybody else, but if both Google and Apple give it all they’ve got it’ll be fun to watch, if nothing else.
luni, 31 mai 2010
Asus' New 10- and 12-inch Eee Pad Tablets: First Pics
Asustek Computer on Monday unveiled two Eee Pad tablets running Windows software and an e-reader, the Eee Tablet, with a note-taking function.
The Eee Pad EP121 sports a 12-inch touchscreen and has Microsoft's Windows 7 Home Premium operating system and an Intel Core 2 Duo processor inside. The device is meant for Internet access, watching videos and other multimedia uses, computing and as an e-reader, the company said in a news release.
People can input data on the device using the on-screen keyboard or by typing on a keyboard that the Eee Pad docks onto. Asustek says the device can run for 10-hours before needing a recharge.
The other iPad-style device on show by Asustek has a 10-inch touchscreen and uses Microsoft's Windows Embedded Compact 7 software. The device is 12.2-millimeters thick and weighs 675 grams, designed thin and light for easy mobility.
The company's e-reader, named the Eee Tablet, is designed for digital note-taking in addition to reading e-books.
Asustek has sought to make the device a more educational tool by putting a 2-megapixel camera on board so students can take pictures of lecture slides as well, and sync the device to a laptop or desktop via a USB port or by using Micro SD cards.
Students can use the stylus for digital note-taking on the device's touchscreen. Asustek says the screen was designed so a user feels like they're writing on paper.
The Eee Pad EP121 sports a 12-inch touchscreen and has Microsoft's Windows 7 Home Premium operating system and an Intel Core 2 Duo processor inside. The device is meant for Internet access, watching videos and other multimedia uses, computing and as an e-reader, the company said in a news release.
People can input data on the device using the on-screen keyboard or by typing on a keyboard that the Eee Pad docks onto. Asustek says the device can run for 10-hours before needing a recharge.
The other iPad-style device on show by Asustek has a 10-inch touchscreen and uses Microsoft's Windows Embedded Compact 7 software. The device is 12.2-millimeters thick and weighs 675 grams, designed thin and light for easy mobility.
The company's e-reader, named the Eee Tablet, is designed for digital note-taking in addition to reading e-books.
Asustek has sought to make the device a more educational tool by putting a 2-megapixel camera on board so students can take pictures of lecture slides as well, and sync the device to a laptop or desktop via a USB port or by using Micro SD cards.
Students can use the stylus for digital note-taking on the device's touchscreen. Asustek says the screen was designed so a user feels like they're writing on paper.
China Flexes Supercomputing Muscle in Top 500 Rankings
China flexed its computing muscle with a supercomputer called Nebulae, rocketing to second place on the biannual Top500 list, which ranks the most powerful computers in the world.
The new supercomputer, which was made by Dawning and installed at China's National Supercomputing Center in Shenzhen, combines Nvidia graphics processors and Intel Xeon CPUs to provide 1.27 petaflops of performance. However, it could not top the Jaguar supercomputer at the U.S. Department of Energy's Oak Ridge National Laboratory, which held on to the top spot in the Top500 list with 1.76 petaflops of performance
The list was published on Monday at the International Supercomputing Conference 2010 conference in Hamburg, Germany. The list is published twice a year by Top500.org.
Nebulae is only the third supercomputer to break the petaflop performance barrier. It combines Nvidia's Tesla C2050 graphics processors with Intel's Xeon X5650 quad-core processor, which runs at 2.66GHz. Nebulae has a theoretical peak capability of almost 3 petaflops, which would be the highest ever for a supercomputer, according to Top500.org. That performance would beat Jaguar, which has a theoretical peak speed of 2.3 petaflops. The Jaguar is a Cray XT5-HE system and includes Advanced Micro Devices' six-core Opteron processors running at 2.6GHz.
There is growing interest in servers that use graphics processors along with CPUs. GPUs are specialized co-processors that are faster than traditional CPUs at executing certain tasks, such as those used in scientific and computing applications. Some institutions have already announced plans to deploy more GPUs in an effort to get more performance out of servers.
The Tokyo Institute of Technology last week said it was building a supercomputer designed by Hewlett-Packard and NEC called Tsubame 2.0 that will combine Intel's latest server chips with Nvidia's GPUs to deliver 2.4 petaflops of performance.
IBM's Roadrunner supercomputer at the Los Alamos National Laboratory was a casualty of Nebulae's rise, dropping from second to third on the list. Roadrunner combines dual-core AMD Opteron CPUs and IBM's Cell processors, and provides more than a petaflop of performance.
Another Cray XT5-HE system at the National Institute for Computational Sciences at the University of Tennessee is in the latest fourth spot, followed by IBM's Jugene - Blue Gene/P Solution in Germany.
Twenty-four supercomputers on the list are now in China, tying the country with Germany at fourth place behind the U.S., the U.K. and France. The U.S. maintained its dominance with 282 out of 500 supercomputers. China secured second in total system performance, ahead of European countries, but still behind the U.S.
Another top 10 system in China is the Tianhe-1 supercomputer at the National Supercomputing Center in Tianjin, in the seventh spot. It combines Intel's Xeon with AMD's ATI Radeon graphics processors.
IBM had four systems in the top 10 and a total of 198 systems on the list, gaining ground at the expense of HP, which led the list six months ago. HP had 185 systems, dropping from 210 systems in the previous list. IBM also led HP in total supercomputer system performance by a substantial margin.
However, IBM's Power microprocessors lost ground to Intel and AMD. Systems based on Power fell to 42, compared to 52 six months ago. A total of 408 systems -- about 81.6 percent -- used Intel processors, while AMD's Opteron processors were in 47 systems, up from 42 in the previous list. Quad-core processors were used in 425 systems, and six-core processors were used in 25 systems.
The new supercomputer, which was made by Dawning and installed at China's National Supercomputing Center in Shenzhen, combines Nvidia graphics processors and Intel Xeon CPUs to provide 1.27 petaflops of performance. However, it could not top the Jaguar supercomputer at the U.S. Department of Energy's Oak Ridge National Laboratory, which held on to the top spot in the Top500 list with 1.76 petaflops of performance
The list was published on Monday at the International Supercomputing Conference 2010 conference in Hamburg, Germany. The list is published twice a year by Top500.org.
Nebulae is only the third supercomputer to break the petaflop performance barrier. It combines Nvidia's Tesla C2050 graphics processors with Intel's Xeon X5650 quad-core processor, which runs at 2.66GHz. Nebulae has a theoretical peak capability of almost 3 petaflops, which would be the highest ever for a supercomputer, according to Top500.org. That performance would beat Jaguar, which has a theoretical peak speed of 2.3 petaflops. The Jaguar is a Cray XT5-HE system and includes Advanced Micro Devices' six-core Opteron processors running at 2.6GHz.
There is growing interest in servers that use graphics processors along with CPUs. GPUs are specialized co-processors that are faster than traditional CPUs at executing certain tasks, such as those used in scientific and computing applications. Some institutions have already announced plans to deploy more GPUs in an effort to get more performance out of servers.
The Tokyo Institute of Technology last week said it was building a supercomputer designed by Hewlett-Packard and NEC called Tsubame 2.0 that will combine Intel's latest server chips with Nvidia's GPUs to deliver 2.4 petaflops of performance.
IBM's Roadrunner supercomputer at the Los Alamos National Laboratory was a casualty of Nebulae's rise, dropping from second to third on the list. Roadrunner combines dual-core AMD Opteron CPUs and IBM's Cell processors, and provides more than a petaflop of performance.
Another Cray XT5-HE system at the National Institute for Computational Sciences at the University of Tennessee is in the latest fourth spot, followed by IBM's Jugene - Blue Gene/P Solution in Germany.
Twenty-four supercomputers on the list are now in China, tying the country with Germany at fourth place behind the U.S., the U.K. and France. The U.S. maintained its dominance with 282 out of 500 supercomputers. China secured second in total system performance, ahead of European countries, but still behind the U.S.
Another top 10 system in China is the Tianhe-1 supercomputer at the National Supercomputing Center in Tianjin, in the seventh spot. It combines Intel's Xeon with AMD's ATI Radeon graphics processors.
IBM had four systems in the top 10 and a total of 198 systems on the list, gaining ground at the expense of HP, which led the list six months ago. HP had 185 systems, dropping from 210 systems in the previous list. IBM also led HP in total supercomputer system performance by a substantial margin.
However, IBM's Power microprocessors lost ground to Intel and AMD. Systems based on Power fell to 42, compared to 52 six months ago. A total of 408 systems -- about 81.6 percent -- used Intel processors, while AMD's Opteron processors were in 47 systems, up from 42 in the previous list. Quad-core processors were used in 425 systems, and six-core processors were used in 25 systems.
Facebook Block Removed in Pakistan, Imposed in Bangladesh
The Lahore High Court in Pakistan on Monday ordered Facebook to be unblocked in the country, after the government said that the web site had promised to make material considered derogatory inaccessible to users in Pakistan.
Facebook was ordered to be blocked by the Lahore court on May 19 after a lawyers' organization filed a petition objecting to a page (http://www.facebook.com/pages/Everybody-Draw-Mohammed-Day/121369914543425?v=wall) on the Web site called "Everybody Draw Mohammed Day!" which invited users to draw cartoons of Prophet Mohammed.
Depictions of the Prophet are prohibited in some Islamic traditions.
Facebook has meanwhile run into trouble in neighboring Bangladesh where the site has been blocked since Sunday, after the government objected to content offensive to the Prophet on Facebook.
Facebook has agreed to block the page in Pakistan, and apologized for it, Naguibullah Malik, Pakistan's secretary of IT and telecom, said in a telephone interview on Monday. Malik said he had already issued the appropriate orders for unblocking Facebook in Pakistan.
Facebook was not immediately available for comment on the recent developments, but a spokeswoman for the Web site had earlier indicated that the company "may consider IP blocking in Pakistan upon further review of local regulations, standards and customs".
Access to the page has already been blocked by Facebook in India, at the request of local authorities, Facebook said last week.
Besides Facebook, YouTube was also blocked in Pakistan on May 20 for "sacrilegious" content. Over 450 links on the Internet were also blocked, Pakistan's telecommunications regulator, Pakistan Telecommunication Authority (PTA), said on May 20.
The block on YouTube was relaxed last week after the cabinet of Pakistan decided to unblock both Facebook and YouTube, while continuing to block content it considered offensive on these sites. The unblocking of Facebook was delayed until the decision of the Lahore court.
Facebook was ordered to be blocked by the Lahore court on May 19 after a lawyers' organization filed a petition objecting to a page (http://www.facebook.com/pages/Everybody-Draw-Mohammed-Day/121369914543425?v=wall) on the Web site called "Everybody Draw Mohammed Day!" which invited users to draw cartoons of Prophet Mohammed.
Depictions of the Prophet are prohibited in some Islamic traditions.
Facebook has meanwhile run into trouble in neighboring Bangladesh where the site has been blocked since Sunday, after the government objected to content offensive to the Prophet on Facebook.
Facebook has agreed to block the page in Pakistan, and apologized for it, Naguibullah Malik, Pakistan's secretary of IT and telecom, said in a telephone interview on Monday. Malik said he had already issued the appropriate orders for unblocking Facebook in Pakistan.
Facebook was not immediately available for comment on the recent developments, but a spokeswoman for the Web site had earlier indicated that the company "may consider IP blocking in Pakistan upon further review of local regulations, standards and customs".
Access to the page has already been blocked by Facebook in India, at the request of local authorities, Facebook said last week.
Besides Facebook, YouTube was also blocked in Pakistan on May 20 for "sacrilegious" content. Over 450 links on the Internet were also blocked, Pakistan's telecommunications regulator, Pakistan Telecommunication Authority (PTA), said on May 20.
The block on YouTube was relaxed last week after the cabinet of Pakistan decided to unblock both Facebook and YouTube, while continuing to block content it considered offensive on these sites. The unblocking of Facebook was delayed until the decision of the Lahore court.
Skype's New IPhone App Makes Calls Over 3G
Skype-to-Skype calls over Wi-Fi will remain free, but Skype will begin charging for Skype-to-Skype calls over 3G after the end of 2010, the company said. It has not yet decided how to charge for the calls, it said.
Users may have to pay an additional charge to their mobile operator for the 3G data traffic, according to Skype. They will also have to make sure that their data plan's terms and conditions allow IP telephony. Today, some mobile operators allow IP telephony, some don't and some charge an extra fee.
With the new Skype software, owners of the iPhone, iPhone 3G, iPhone 3GS and second- or third-generation iPod touch can make calls using Skype. The iPod touch requires a compatible headset with a microphone to be able to make phone calls, and since it lacks 3G, it can only make calls over Wi-Fi.
Other improvements in the new software for iPhone include improved sound quality, so users can expect "CD-quality sound" for Skype-to-Skype calls on their iPhone 3GS or second and third generation iPod touch, according to Skype. The iPhone client also has a call quality indicator, which will help customers choose the best moment to call, and improved start-up time, Skype said.
Owners of Symbian-based smartphones can already make phone calls over 3G, and Skype is also working on a version of its client for smartphones based on Android, but isn't ready to say when it will ship, according to a spokesman.
Users may have to pay an additional charge to their mobile operator for the 3G data traffic, according to Skype. They will also have to make sure that their data plan's terms and conditions allow IP telephony. Today, some mobile operators allow IP telephony, some don't and some charge an extra fee.
With the new Skype software, owners of the iPhone, iPhone 3G, iPhone 3GS and second- or third-generation iPod touch can make calls using Skype. The iPod touch requires a compatible headset with a microphone to be able to make phone calls, and since it lacks 3G, it can only make calls over Wi-Fi.
Other improvements in the new software for iPhone include improved sound quality, so users can expect "CD-quality sound" for Skype-to-Skype calls on their iPhone 3GS or second and third generation iPod touch, according to Skype. The iPhone client also has a call quality indicator, which will help customers choose the best moment to call, and improved start-up time, Skype said.
Owners of Symbian-based smartphones can already make phone calls over 3G, and Skype is also working on a version of its client for smartphones based on Android, but isn't ready to say when it will ship, according to a spokesman.
Woman Sues Google for Bad Directions
One day I was using my cell phone's GPS service to find the nearest Target. I was driving down the road when suddenly my cell phone piped up, "Turn right here." I looked to the right. There was no road, just a tree and some grass. I chalked it up to a GPS glitch and turned right at the next corner.
If I had been Lauren Rosenberg, however, I would have turned right at that very moment, hit the tree, suffered some cuts and minor brain damage, and then turned around and sued Verizon for the glitch in its GPS service.
Seriously.
Rosenberg, a Los Angeles California native, is suing Google because Google Maps issued directions that told her to walk down a rural highway. She started walking down the highway--which had no sidewalk or pedestrian paths--and was struck by a car. She is suing Google for her medical expenses ($100,000), as well as punitive damages. She is also suing the driver who struck her, Patrick Harwood of Park City, Utah.
On January 19, 2010, Rosenberg was apparently trying to get from 96 Daly Street, Park City, Utah, to 1710 Prospector Avenue, Park City, Utah. She looked up the walking directions using Google Maps on her Blackberry. Google Maps suggested a route that included a half-mile walk down "Deer Valley Drive," which is also known as "Utah State Route 224."
There's not much more to say--she started walking down the middle of a highway, and a car hit her. Who wouldn't have seen that one coming?
According to Rosenberg's complaint filing:
"As a direct and proximate cause of Defendant Google’s careless, reckless and negligent providing of unsafe directions, Plaintiff Lauren Rosenberg was led onto a dangerous highway, and was thereby stricken by a motor vehicle, causing her to suffer sever permanent physical, emotional, and mental injuries, including pain and suffering."
Google actually does offer up a warning about its walking directions--if you view Google Maps on a computer, it gives you the following message: "Walking directions are in beta. Use caution--This route may be missing sidewalks or pedestrian paths."
If I had been Lauren Rosenberg, however, I would have turned right at that very moment, hit the tree, suffered some cuts and minor brain damage, and then turned around and sued Verizon for the glitch in its GPS service.
Seriously.
Rosenberg, a Los Angeles California native, is suing Google because Google Maps issued directions that told her to walk down a rural highway. She started walking down the highway--which had no sidewalk or pedestrian paths--and was struck by a car. She is suing Google for her medical expenses ($100,000), as well as punitive damages. She is also suing the driver who struck her, Patrick Harwood of Park City, Utah.
On January 19, 2010, Rosenberg was apparently trying to get from 96 Daly Street, Park City, Utah, to 1710 Prospector Avenue, Park City, Utah. She looked up the walking directions using Google Maps on her Blackberry. Google Maps suggested a route that included a half-mile walk down "Deer Valley Drive," which is also known as "Utah State Route 224."
There's not much more to say--she started walking down the middle of a highway, and a car hit her. Who wouldn't have seen that one coming?
According to Rosenberg's complaint filing:
"As a direct and proximate cause of Defendant Google’s careless, reckless and negligent providing of unsafe directions, Plaintiff Lauren Rosenberg was led onto a dangerous highway, and was thereby stricken by a motor vehicle, causing her to suffer sever permanent physical, emotional, and mental injuries, including pain and suffering."
Google actually does offer up a warning about its walking directions--if you view Google Maps on a computer, it gives you the following message: "Walking directions are in beta. Use caution--This route may be missing sidewalks or pedestrian paths."
Nvidia CEO: Hardware Makers Uniting Behind Android
Hardware makers will unite behind Google's Android as the primary operating system for tablet computers, according to Nvidia's CEO.
Tablets are shaping up to be one of the highlights of the annual Computex show in Taipei, where hardware makers are showing off their latest products and prototypes. Most manufacturers are expected to show off tablets, with some designed to run Android and others Windows. But Windows isn't the best choice for a tablet, said Jen-Hsun Huang, president and CEO at Nvidia.
"Windows is too big and it's too full featured for smartbooks and tablets," Huang said, speaking with reporters in Taipei on Monday. Smartbook is a term used to describe low-cost laptops containing processors designed by Arm instead of x86 chips from Intel or Advanced Micro Devices.
"The good news is that we finally have an operating system to unite behind. Android is an operating system that has gained a tremendous amount of momentum all over the world," Huang said.
Android was originally developed with cell phones in mind but computer makers wasted no time putting it to use in other devices. Several hardware makers showed off netbooks running the OS at Computex last year. In addition, Acer shipped a version of its Aspire One netbook that came with Windows XP and Android installed.
"Android has become the fastest growing mobile operating system in the world and, in fact, it has surpassed the iPhone in terms of growth and in terms of users," he said.
The iPad's success proved there is widespread demand for tablets and set the bar high for rivals. Apple sold 1 million iPads during the first four weeks it was on sale, winning praise from users for its sleek and intuitive user interface, as well as its long battery life. Matching Apple's success won't be easy and will require modifications to optimize Android for tablets.
"Andy Rubin and his team [at Google] know exactly where the industry needs to go. Android started out as a phone but it's not lost on them that the tablet is going to be very important and that the Android operating system has to evolve, and be enhanced in certain capabilities, in order to be a good tablet operating system," Huang said, citing graphics performance as one area where Android needs to be improved to match the iPad.
Nvidia has a vested interest in seeing the tablet market take off. The company is selling its own Arm-based processor, called Tegra 2, that's designed for tablets. The chip combines a dual-core Arm processor, a graphics processor, and other components on a single piece of silicon. While tablets based on Tegra 2 have yet to hit the market, they will go on sale before the end of this year.
"I think we'll have to wait until this fall. The operating systems are coming together, the devices are coming together," Huang said.
Tablets are shaping up to be one of the highlights of the annual Computex show in Taipei, where hardware makers are showing off their latest products and prototypes. Most manufacturers are expected to show off tablets, with some designed to run Android and others Windows. But Windows isn't the best choice for a tablet, said Jen-Hsun Huang, president and CEO at Nvidia.
"Windows is too big and it's too full featured for smartbooks and tablets," Huang said, speaking with reporters in Taipei on Monday. Smartbook is a term used to describe low-cost laptops containing processors designed by Arm instead of x86 chips from Intel or Advanced Micro Devices.
"The good news is that we finally have an operating system to unite behind. Android is an operating system that has gained a tremendous amount of momentum all over the world," Huang said.
Android was originally developed with cell phones in mind but computer makers wasted no time putting it to use in other devices. Several hardware makers showed off netbooks running the OS at Computex last year. In addition, Acer shipped a version of its Aspire One netbook that came with Windows XP and Android installed.
"Android has become the fastest growing mobile operating system in the world and, in fact, it has surpassed the iPhone in terms of growth and in terms of users," he said.
The iPad's success proved there is widespread demand for tablets and set the bar high for rivals. Apple sold 1 million iPads during the first four weeks it was on sale, winning praise from users for its sleek and intuitive user interface, as well as its long battery life. Matching Apple's success won't be easy and will require modifications to optimize Android for tablets.
"Andy Rubin and his team [at Google] know exactly where the industry needs to go. Android started out as a phone but it's not lost on them that the tablet is going to be very important and that the Android operating system has to evolve, and be enhanced in certain capabilities, in order to be a good tablet operating system," Huang said, citing graphics performance as one area where Android needs to be improved to match the iPad.
Nvidia has a vested interest in seeing the tablet market take off. The company is selling its own Arm-based processor, called Tegra 2, that's designed for tablets. The chip combines a dual-core Arm processor, a graphics processor, and other components on a single piece of silicon. While tablets based on Tegra 2 have yet to hit the market, they will go on sale before the end of this year.
"I think we'll have to wait until this fall. The operating systems are coming together, the devices are coming together," Huang said.
Intel Unveils New Server Chip With 32 Cores
Intel announced a new 32-core server chip based on a new high-performance computing server architecture that mixes general x86 cores with specialized cores for faster processing of highly parallel scientific and commercial applications.
The chip, called Knights Ferry, is Intel's fastest processor ever and delivers more than 500 gigaflops of performance, Kirk Skaugen, vice president and general manager of Intel's data center group said Monday in a speech at the International Supercomputing Conference in Hamburg, Germany, which was also webcast.
The chip's cores run at 1.2GHz. It is the first in a new family of server chips called Knights, which the company describes as being based on a new "many integrated core" architecture.
The 32-core chip will be available in the second half of 2010, for development purposes.
The first commercial product will include more than 50 cores and be called Knights Corner. An Intel spokesman would not say when that chip will be available. However, the chip will be part of the Sandy Bridge chip architecture, manufactured using the 22-nanometer process, and those processors are due to reach laptops and servers in 2011.
The initial 32-core chip is made using the existing 32-nm process.
Knights Ferry includes 32 main Xeon chip cores in the server CPU socket, with corresponding 512-bit vector processing units in the PCI-Express slot. The chip runs four threads per core and includes 8MB of shared cache, and up to 2GB of fast GDDR5 memory.
The company will merge the CPU cores and vector units into a single unit as chip development continues, Skaugen said.
The Knights architecture is the biggest server architecture shift since Intel launched Xeon chips, Skaugen said. The chip includes elements of the Larrabee chip, was characterized as a highly parallel, multicore x86 processor designed for graphics and high-performance computing. However, Intel last week said it had cancelled Larrabee for the short term, but said elements of the chip would first be used in server processors, and and later in laptops.
The new architecture could also fend off competition from Nvidia's Tesla and Advanced Micro Devices' FireStream graphics processors, which pack hundreds of computing cores to boost application performance. The graphics processors are faster at executing certain specialized applications. The second fastest supercomputer in the world, Nebulae in China, combines CPUs with GPUs to boost application performance.
The chip will accelerate highly parallel applications, Skaugen said. It could also standardize software development platforms around the x86 architecture, making it easier to recompile programs, Skaugen said.
Intel has many new server chips in the pipeline. Earlier this month, the chip maker said it would release a successor to its eight-core Nehalem-EX chips next year, with more cores and faster speeds. The new chips, code-named Westmere-EX, will be for servers with four or more sockets. The company is also developing an experimental 48-core x86 chip with a mesh design, but has not announced plans to sell it.
Intel already has a significant lead in the HPC market, but the new chip and surrounding architecture could extend its presence. According to the Top500 list, 408 supercomputers -- more than 80 percent of the list -- use Intel's chips, giving it a significant lead over other chip companies like Advanced Micro Devices and IBM.
The chip, called Knights Ferry, is Intel's fastest processor ever and delivers more than 500 gigaflops of performance, Kirk Skaugen, vice president and general manager of Intel's data center group said Monday in a speech at the International Supercomputing Conference in Hamburg, Germany, which was also webcast.
The chip's cores run at 1.2GHz. It is the first in a new family of server chips called Knights, which the company describes as being based on a new "many integrated core" architecture.
The 32-core chip will be available in the second half of 2010, for development purposes.
The first commercial product will include more than 50 cores and be called Knights Corner. An Intel spokesman would not say when that chip will be available. However, the chip will be part of the Sandy Bridge chip architecture, manufactured using the 22-nanometer process, and those processors are due to reach laptops and servers in 2011.
The initial 32-core chip is made using the existing 32-nm process.
Knights Ferry includes 32 main Xeon chip cores in the server CPU socket, with corresponding 512-bit vector processing units in the PCI-Express slot. The chip runs four threads per core and includes 8MB of shared cache, and up to 2GB of fast GDDR5 memory.
The company will merge the CPU cores and vector units into a single unit as chip development continues, Skaugen said.
The Knights architecture is the biggest server architecture shift since Intel launched Xeon chips, Skaugen said. The chip includes elements of the Larrabee chip, was characterized as a highly parallel, multicore x86 processor designed for graphics and high-performance computing. However, Intel last week said it had cancelled Larrabee for the short term, but said elements of the chip would first be used in server processors, and and later in laptops.
The new architecture could also fend off competition from Nvidia's Tesla and Advanced Micro Devices' FireStream graphics processors, which pack hundreds of computing cores to boost application performance. The graphics processors are faster at executing certain specialized applications. The second fastest supercomputer in the world, Nebulae in China, combines CPUs with GPUs to boost application performance.
The chip will accelerate highly parallel applications, Skaugen said. It could also standardize software development platforms around the x86 architecture, making it easier to recompile programs, Skaugen said.
Intel has many new server chips in the pipeline. Earlier this month, the chip maker said it would release a successor to its eight-core Nehalem-EX chips next year, with more cores and faster speeds. The new chips, code-named Westmere-EX, will be for servers with four or more sockets. The company is also developing an experimental 48-core x86 chip with a mesh design, but has not announced plans to sell it.
Intel already has a significant lead in the HPC market, but the new chip and surrounding architecture could extend its presence. According to the Top500 list, 408 supercomputers -- more than 80 percent of the list -- use Intel's chips, giving it a significant lead over other chip companies like Advanced Micro Devices and IBM.
sâmbătă, 29 mai 2010
Feds May Have Antitrust Case against Apple in iTunes
Federal antitrust regulators may be able to build a case against Apple over its iTunes business because the company has a dominant share of the U.S. music download market, an antitrust lawyer said today.
The Department of Justice is reportedly in the early stages of an investigation of Apple's business practices, in part because of a complaint that the company pressured music labels to pull support of Amazon's "MP3 Daily Deal," a promotion in which the online retailer received exclusive access to new tracks.
Apple has an estimated 70% share of the U.S. retail digital music download market, significantly larger than Amazon and Wal-Mart, which each account for 12% of all sales.
And the size of Apple's share matters to the government, said Hillard Sterling, an antitrust attorney at Chicago-based law firm Freeborn & Peters LLP.
"This has much stronger promise than the mobile device case because Apple's market share in digital music is much more attractive to government regulators," said Sterling, referring to reports earlier this month that officials at the DOJ and the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) are also looking into Apple's ban of third-party development tools for creating iPhone software.
"The DOJ seems to be sniffing around for a stronger foundation for an antitrust case," Sterling said. "And 70% is sufficient market share to raise the specter of a monopoly. It's a strong indicator to the government."
However, there's noting unlawful about having a monopoly, Sterling continued. What may be illegal is how a monopolist uses or abuses that position of strength.
"The next, more difficult step for the government would be to show an abuse of that power," said Sterling. "[The DOJ] has to show that a monopolist's conduct is truly anti-competitive. The big question is whether consumers are facing fewer choices or higher prices because of Apple's behavior."
It's no coincidence that reports of two DOJ probes of Apple have surfaced so closely together, Sterling said. "The reality is that there isn't a lot of antitrust for the government to seize on right now, but the department wants to show that this administration is tougher and more activist in the antitrust arena than the previous," he said.
And like everyone, the DOJ wants to find a battle it believes it has a good shot at winning. "Few companies have the dominant share and control of their respective markets like Apple has of music," Sterling argued. "They want to shoot the biggest fish in the smallest barrel."
But just because Apple's in the DOJ's sights doesn't mean it will go down. If federal regulators do push their inquiry to a formal investigation, Apple could make concessions. "There's plenty of room for Apple to negotiate a resolution long before this reaches a courtroom," said Sterling. "These types of disputes usually end with companies agreeing to modify their business practices."
If Apple stuck it out, it could face not just a flood of piggyback lawsuits, but a very long, very expensive legal war with the government. "Apple is one of the few companies that could take on this battle, but it would be incredibly expensive and distracting," Sterling said.
Microsoft's antitrust case, for example, began in 1991 with an inquiry by the FTC, didn't go to trial until 1998, and was only settled in 2004 when a U.S. appeals court approved the deal the company had struck with the federal and several state governments. Microsoft remains under judicial oversight.
"Apple would clearly prefer not to saddle itself with that if a deal was palatable," said Sterling.
Gregg Keizer covers Microsoft, security issues, Apple, Web browsers and general technology breaking news for Computerworld . Follow Gregg on Twitter at @gkeizer , or subscribe to Gregg's RSS feed . His e-mail address is gkeizer@ix.netcom.com .
The Department of Justice is reportedly in the early stages of an investigation of Apple's business practices, in part because of a complaint that the company pressured music labels to pull support of Amazon's "MP3 Daily Deal," a promotion in which the online retailer received exclusive access to new tracks.
Apple has an estimated 70% share of the U.S. retail digital music download market, significantly larger than Amazon and Wal-Mart, which each account for 12% of all sales.
And the size of Apple's share matters to the government, said Hillard Sterling, an antitrust attorney at Chicago-based law firm Freeborn & Peters LLP.
"This has much stronger promise than the mobile device case because Apple's market share in digital music is much more attractive to government regulators," said Sterling, referring to reports earlier this month that officials at the DOJ and the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) are also looking into Apple's ban of third-party development tools for creating iPhone software.
"The DOJ seems to be sniffing around for a stronger foundation for an antitrust case," Sterling said. "And 70% is sufficient market share to raise the specter of a monopoly. It's a strong indicator to the government."
However, there's noting unlawful about having a monopoly, Sterling continued. What may be illegal is how a monopolist uses or abuses that position of strength.
"The next, more difficult step for the government would be to show an abuse of that power," said Sterling. "[The DOJ] has to show that a monopolist's conduct is truly anti-competitive. The big question is whether consumers are facing fewer choices or higher prices because of Apple's behavior."
It's no coincidence that reports of two DOJ probes of Apple have surfaced so closely together, Sterling said. "The reality is that there isn't a lot of antitrust for the government to seize on right now, but the department wants to show that this administration is tougher and more activist in the antitrust arena than the previous," he said.
And like everyone, the DOJ wants to find a battle it believes it has a good shot at winning. "Few companies have the dominant share and control of their respective markets like Apple has of music," Sterling argued. "They want to shoot the biggest fish in the smallest barrel."
But just because Apple's in the DOJ's sights doesn't mean it will go down. If federal regulators do push their inquiry to a formal investigation, Apple could make concessions. "There's plenty of room for Apple to negotiate a resolution long before this reaches a courtroom," said Sterling. "These types of disputes usually end with companies agreeing to modify their business practices."
If Apple stuck it out, it could face not just a flood of piggyback lawsuits, but a very long, very expensive legal war with the government. "Apple is one of the few companies that could take on this battle, but it would be incredibly expensive and distracting," Sterling said.
Microsoft's antitrust case, for example, began in 1991 with an inquiry by the FTC, didn't go to trial until 1998, and was only settled in 2004 when a U.S. appeals court approved the deal the company had struck with the federal and several state governments. Microsoft remains under judicial oversight.
"Apple would clearly prefer not to saddle itself with that if a deal was palatable," said Sterling.
Gregg Keizer covers Microsoft, security issues, Apple, Web browsers and general technology breaking news for Computerworld . Follow Gregg on Twitter at @gkeizer , or subscribe to Gregg's RSS feed . His e-mail address is gkeizer@ix.netcom.com .
$100 Million 'scareware' CEO Was Already a Fugitive
The CEO of a company accused of making more than US$100 million selling harmful "scareware" antivirus products was already a fugitive from U.S. authorities, following his arrest in 2008 on criminal counterfeiting charges.
Shaileshkumar "Sam" Jain is one of three men who were charged by the U.S. Department of Justice on Wednesday for allegedly operating a massive scareware distribution ring.
He's now thought to reside in Ukraine, but arrived there only after giving authorities the slip after being arrested by federal agents in 2008 on charges that his company sold counterfeit versions of Symantec antivirus products. Jain has been considered a fugitive by U.S. authorities since early 2009, when he skipped out on a $250,000 bond and failed to show up for a Jan. 12 California court appearance.
Jain ran a Ukrainian company called Innovative Marketing, which prosecutors say sold an astounding 1 million copies of fake antivirus products such as WinFixer, Antivirus 2008 and VirusRemover 2008.
According to court filings, Innovative Marketing was one of several companies that Jain operated, first selling counterfeit Symantec products and later moving into the scareware business with products such as WinFixer.
Symantec had already gone after Jain in the courts, winning a $3.1 million judgment against him in 2005.
Three years later, the U.S. Federal Trade Commission filed suit against Jain and the two other men charged Wednesday: Innovative Marketing Chief Technology Officer Bjorn Daniel Sundin and the man whose call center provided technical support for the products, James Reno of Amelia, Ohio.
The FTC won its court case, effectively putting Innovative Marketing and Reno's company, Byte Hosting Internet Services, out of business.
The scareware products that the three men are accused of selling are perhaps the most annoying problems on the Internet, and a constant source of complaints to security companies and federal regulators. They not only fail to protect computers, they often also bog down systems with spyware and malware.
Innovative Marketing allegedly pioneered the trade.
The company would set up fake advertising agencies with names such as BurnAds and NetMediaGroup, and then buy online advertising, pretending that it was for legitimate buyers, prosecutors say. These ads would be programmed to deliver scary-looking pop-up windows straight to users' desktops. The windows would typically look like Windows error messages or security alerts. To dismiss them, the victim would have to pull out a credit card and pay between $30 and $70 to buy Innovative Marketing's dubious products, prosecutors say.
Before the scareware came the fake Symantec software. Prosecutors allege that in 2003 and 2004, Jain operated a handful of Web sites -- Discountbob.com, shopenter.com, winantivirus.com and others -- that all sold fake Symantec products.
Jain allegedly drummed up new business by spamming victims or using pop-up ads to flog the fake software, which was then mailed out by someone identified in court documents as "J.R." of Amelia, Ohio -- presumably James Reno.
In a September 2009 e-mail to the IDG News Service, Reno said he was a young and naïve businessmen who was taken advantage of by Innovative Marketing. "I made some mistakes, of course," he said, "however they kept us in the dark on a lot of their operation."
Profits from the businesses -- which took in more than $100 million from victims in 60 countries -- were funneled offshore, prosecutors say.
That estimate is probably on the low side, said Joseph Bochner, an attorney who brought a class-action suit against Jain and his business partners in 2006.
Bochner says he tried for years to get federal authorities interested in his case, but without success. If they responded at all to his offers to share information, they told him the case was not a criminal matter, he said. "I'm extremely pleased to see the DoJ finally taking action in this case," Bochner said.
The harm these products cause consumers is immeasurable, he said. "What they're doing is charging you money for a program that doesn't work, on false pretenses, and then destroying your computer in the bargain."
Still, the U.S. authorities have none of the accused in custody. While Jain is believed to be in Ukraine, Sundin is in Sweden, the DoJ says, and Reno is expected to turn himself in "at a later date."
In a move that might help U.S. authorities prosecute their case overseas, the Department of Justice quietly filed international money laundering charges against Jain in federal court in New York last week. The charges allege that Jain moved millions of dollars overseas in an effort to conceal the source of the money he made from his counterfeit Symantec software sales.
Shaileshkumar "Sam" Jain is one of three men who were charged by the U.S. Department of Justice on Wednesday for allegedly operating a massive scareware distribution ring.
He's now thought to reside in Ukraine, but arrived there only after giving authorities the slip after being arrested by federal agents in 2008 on charges that his company sold counterfeit versions of Symantec antivirus products. Jain has been considered a fugitive by U.S. authorities since early 2009, when he skipped out on a $250,000 bond and failed to show up for a Jan. 12 California court appearance.
Jain ran a Ukrainian company called Innovative Marketing, which prosecutors say sold an astounding 1 million copies of fake antivirus products such as WinFixer, Antivirus 2008 and VirusRemover 2008.
According to court filings, Innovative Marketing was one of several companies that Jain operated, first selling counterfeit Symantec products and later moving into the scareware business with products such as WinFixer.
Symantec had already gone after Jain in the courts, winning a $3.1 million judgment against him in 2005.
Three years later, the U.S. Federal Trade Commission filed suit against Jain and the two other men charged Wednesday: Innovative Marketing Chief Technology Officer Bjorn Daniel Sundin and the man whose call center provided technical support for the products, James Reno of Amelia, Ohio.
The FTC won its court case, effectively putting Innovative Marketing and Reno's company, Byte Hosting Internet Services, out of business.
The scareware products that the three men are accused of selling are perhaps the most annoying problems on the Internet, and a constant source of complaints to security companies and federal regulators. They not only fail to protect computers, they often also bog down systems with spyware and malware.
Innovative Marketing allegedly pioneered the trade.
The company would set up fake advertising agencies with names such as BurnAds and NetMediaGroup, and then buy online advertising, pretending that it was for legitimate buyers, prosecutors say. These ads would be programmed to deliver scary-looking pop-up windows straight to users' desktops. The windows would typically look like Windows error messages or security alerts. To dismiss them, the victim would have to pull out a credit card and pay between $30 and $70 to buy Innovative Marketing's dubious products, prosecutors say.
Before the scareware came the fake Symantec software. Prosecutors allege that in 2003 and 2004, Jain operated a handful of Web sites -- Discountbob.com, shopenter.com, winantivirus.com and others -- that all sold fake Symantec products.
Jain allegedly drummed up new business by spamming victims or using pop-up ads to flog the fake software, which was then mailed out by someone identified in court documents as "J.R." of Amelia, Ohio -- presumably James Reno.
In a September 2009 e-mail to the IDG News Service, Reno said he was a young and naïve businessmen who was taken advantage of by Innovative Marketing. "I made some mistakes, of course," he said, "however they kept us in the dark on a lot of their operation."
Profits from the businesses -- which took in more than $100 million from victims in 60 countries -- were funneled offshore, prosecutors say.
That estimate is probably on the low side, said Joseph Bochner, an attorney who brought a class-action suit against Jain and his business partners in 2006.
Bochner says he tried for years to get federal authorities interested in his case, but without success. If they responded at all to his offers to share information, they told him the case was not a criminal matter, he said. "I'm extremely pleased to see the DoJ finally taking action in this case," Bochner said.
The harm these products cause consumers is immeasurable, he said. "What they're doing is charging you money for a program that doesn't work, on false pretenses, and then destroying your computer in the bargain."
Still, the U.S. authorities have none of the accused in custody. While Jain is believed to be in Ukraine, Sundin is in Sweden, the DoJ says, and Reno is expected to turn himself in "at a later date."
In a move that might help U.S. authorities prosecute their case overseas, the Department of Justice quietly filed international money laundering charges against Jain in federal court in New York last week. The charges allege that Jain moved millions of dollars overseas in an effort to conceal the source of the money he made from his counterfeit Symantec software sales.
'iPhone Killer' is Finally Here: It's Not Quite What You Think
A new open-source device that will kill any past, current, or even future iPhones may soon make its way to the market. It is also compatible with all iPads...and any Apple product for that matter. Ronen Kadushin presents to you, the iPhonekiller!
The iPhonekiller is a simple device; it literally does exactly what its name implies--it kills iPhones--unlike current products on the market. The device features a nice wooden handle, and a heavy laser-cut piece of steel. Because it has no moving parts, the iPhonekiller is the latest in solid-state technology.
The device is simple to use: You place the iDevice onto the pavement, hold the “mallet” by its wooden handle high in the air, and give one big swoop at the iPhone, bashing it to smithereens with lots of joy. Finally, you put a smile on your face for a job well done.
The iPhonekiller is a simple device; it literally does exactly what its name implies--it kills iPhones--unlike current products on the market. The device features a nice wooden handle, and a heavy laser-cut piece of steel. Because it has no moving parts, the iPhonekiller is the latest in solid-state technology.
The device is simple to use: You place the iDevice onto the pavement, hold the “mallet” by its wooden handle high in the air, and give one big swoop at the iPhone, bashing it to smithereens with lots of joy. Finally, you put a smile on your face for a job well done.
What You Don't Know about Your Online Reputation Can Hurt You
Social networking, and the broader concept of online privacy, have been under some rather intense scrutiny over the past couple of weeks. The issues at Google--voracious indexer of all things Internet, and Facebook--the largest social network and number one most visited site (according to Google) have made many users more acutely aware of what information is available about them on the Internet. However, your online reputation is being used in ways you may not be aware of, and could cost you.
Users don't necessarily need to be concerned, but should at least be aware of who they are connected with online, and what they say. No, Big Brother isn't watching, but potential employers and lenders are.
Increasingly, your online reputation is becoming a deciding factor in whether you get that job, or get approved for that car loan. Businesses have online footprints as well, and the online reputation of the business could impact partner or vendor agreements, or affect the creditworthiness of the business.
Companies and lenders are turning to services like those offered by Rapleaf, a San Francisco-based company focused on social media monitoring. Rapleaf scours the Web to compile your status updates, Twitter "tweets", the online organizations you join, the sites you link to, and the comments you post and convert it all into a consumer profile called a social graph.
The social graph reveals behavior patterns related to what you like, what you don't like, what you want, what you don't want, etc.. Rapleaf presents the service as a marketing tool--enabling companies to target marketing efforts more intelligently, and with more precision than base demographics like age, gender, or location.
At face value that seems like a reasonable use of your online footprint--at least to me. However, some employers or lenders are using information from services like Rapleaf for more invasive purposes. Using the Rapleaf social graph, or any other aggregate of an individual's online presence, companies can dive deeper into your social networks and see who you're connected to.
A bank considering you for a credit card can scan your social network and identify other users connected to you that are already customers of the bank. The bank can analyze the payment history and credit stability of those customers, and make assumptions about you based on them. The presumption is that birds of a feather flock together, so if you're social network is filled with credit rejects, you are also probably a bad credit risk.
Who you know online, and what you don't know about your online reputation may prevent you from getting a job or credit card. Even worse, sloppy online sleuthing or mistaken identity could lead to your rejection, and you may never even know why.
A friend--we'll call him Greg--was hired by a company and moved his family across the country to accept the job. The company had conducted a background check on Greg prior to hiring him, but subsequently launched a more exhaustive background check about a month after Greg had started working for them.
One day, Greg was called in to see his manager and was told that his services would no longer be needed. He was asked to clear his desk and escorted from the building with no further explanation. His family hadn't even finished unpacking from the cross-country move, and Greg was faced with the shock of unemployment.
Thankfully, after some pushing Greg was able to learn that the company had fired him because the subsequent background check had uncovered a criminal background and outstanding warrants the company was unaware of. Of course, Greg was also unaware of the criminal background and outstanding warrants because the company had uncovered information on the wrong "Greg".
The company put the burden of proof on Greg to produce evidence that it was the wrong Greg, which Greg did and eventually got his job back. Others might not be so lucky, though.
When you don't get the job, get turned down for a loan, or get rejected for a credit card, you may never really know if you were rebuffed on your own merits, or as a function of the crowd you choose to associate with online, or due to completely mistaken identity.
Rapleaf offers a service to discover your online footprint and get a view of what others might see on your social graph. Google offers a similar tool--the Google Privacy Dashboard--which presents an overview of the accounts and information you are connected with through Google.
Take advantage of tools like these to monitor your own online reputation and keep your online persona clean. What you don't know can hurt you.
Users don't necessarily need to be concerned, but should at least be aware of who they are connected with online, and what they say. No, Big Brother isn't watching, but potential employers and lenders are.
Increasingly, your online reputation is becoming a deciding factor in whether you get that job, or get approved for that car loan. Businesses have online footprints as well, and the online reputation of the business could impact partner or vendor agreements, or affect the creditworthiness of the business.
Companies and lenders are turning to services like those offered by Rapleaf, a San Francisco-based company focused on social media monitoring. Rapleaf scours the Web to compile your status updates, Twitter "tweets", the online organizations you join, the sites you link to, and the comments you post and convert it all into a consumer profile called a social graph.
The social graph reveals behavior patterns related to what you like, what you don't like, what you want, what you don't want, etc.. Rapleaf presents the service as a marketing tool--enabling companies to target marketing efforts more intelligently, and with more precision than base demographics like age, gender, or location.
At face value that seems like a reasonable use of your online footprint--at least to me. However, some employers or lenders are using information from services like Rapleaf for more invasive purposes. Using the Rapleaf social graph, or any other aggregate of an individual's online presence, companies can dive deeper into your social networks and see who you're connected to.
A bank considering you for a credit card can scan your social network and identify other users connected to you that are already customers of the bank. The bank can analyze the payment history and credit stability of those customers, and make assumptions about you based on them. The presumption is that birds of a feather flock together, so if you're social network is filled with credit rejects, you are also probably a bad credit risk.
Who you know online, and what you don't know about your online reputation may prevent you from getting a job or credit card. Even worse, sloppy online sleuthing or mistaken identity could lead to your rejection, and you may never even know why.
A friend--we'll call him Greg--was hired by a company and moved his family across the country to accept the job. The company had conducted a background check on Greg prior to hiring him, but subsequently launched a more exhaustive background check about a month after Greg had started working for them.
One day, Greg was called in to see his manager and was told that his services would no longer be needed. He was asked to clear his desk and escorted from the building with no further explanation. His family hadn't even finished unpacking from the cross-country move, and Greg was faced with the shock of unemployment.
Thankfully, after some pushing Greg was able to learn that the company had fired him because the subsequent background check had uncovered a criminal background and outstanding warrants the company was unaware of. Of course, Greg was also unaware of the criminal background and outstanding warrants because the company had uncovered information on the wrong "Greg".
The company put the burden of proof on Greg to produce evidence that it was the wrong Greg, which Greg did and eventually got his job back. Others might not be so lucky, though.
When you don't get the job, get turned down for a loan, or get rejected for a credit card, you may never really know if you were rebuffed on your own merits, or as a function of the crowd you choose to associate with online, or due to completely mistaken identity.
Rapleaf offers a service to discover your online footprint and get a view of what others might see on your social graph. Google offers a similar tool--the Google Privacy Dashboard--which presents an overview of the accounts and information you are connected with through Google.
Take advantage of tools like these to monitor your own online reputation and keep your online persona clean. What you don't know can hurt you.
Microsoft Windows Phone 7 Should Rule Business Smartphones
Microsoft is ubiquitous with business computing. The vast majority of organizations rely on Windows as a server operating system, and Active Directory as a directory framework. Many businesses use Microsoft Exchange as their messaging platform, Windows as the desktop operating system, and Microsoft Office for office productivity applications.
Microsoft isn't just involved in these areas--for most of these technologies Microsoft virtually owns the market. It holds a preeminent role in all areas of business technology...except smartphones. Somehow, Microsoft conceded the business smartphone market to RIM, and the BlackBerry OS.
The problem with Microsoft's attempts at a mobile platform for smartphones is that Microsoft sees the world through the eyes of a desktop. Windows Mobile treats smartphones as if they are just much smaller notebook computers and tries to apply the same principles and technologies as it does for Windows desktops.
What Microsoft learned the hard way, and even RIM is now realizing, is that mobility requires a different vision. Smartphones, and now the emerging tablet market led by the Apple iPad, are peripherally related to traditional computing, but require more innovative thinking about what "mobility" is.
The primary role of the smartphone is to enable the business professional to stay connected from anywhere, and at any time. Business professionals want access to e-mail, and instant messaging, and the Web in the palm of their hand. Business professionals want to be able to view and edit documents and conduct business from the smartphone when necessary, but that doesn't mean that the smartphone should try to be a Windows desktop in your pocket.
From an IT administrator perspective, though, Microsoft should be a natural choice for smartphone platform. IT administrators want to be able to provision, manage, monitor, and protect smartphones and other mobile devices centrally and remotely. Active Directory provides a powerful framework capable of meeting that objective, but Microsoft let RIM take the lead with the BlackBerry Enterprise Server (BES) mobile platform.
Apple revolutionized the smartphone with the iPhone. The Android OS from Google offers a compelling alternative to the iPhone for business professionals that want more control over the smartphone experience, or don't want to rely on AT&T as a wireless carrier. Apple and Google are aggressively competing with each other to define the mobility experience, while RIM and Microsoft are playing catch up.
Windows Phone 7 looks impressive from what has been revealed thus far. If this were two years ago, Windows Phone 7 might even be a cutting edge innovation that could set the smartphone world on fire. When it's finally launched, though, Windows Phone 7 will face a formidable challenge just to establish relevance and slow Microsoft's slide into smartphone oblivion.
Once upon a time, Microsoft was in a position to define smartphones, and its dominant stake in desktop operating systems, messaging servers, and office productivity software established it as the natural leader for the business smartphone platform.
Microsoft should be the de facto ruler of business smartphones. That was then, this is now, though, and that ship may have sailed no matter how phenomenal Windows Phone 7 might be when it finally arrives.
Microsoft isn't just involved in these areas--for most of these technologies Microsoft virtually owns the market. It holds a preeminent role in all areas of business technology...except smartphones. Somehow, Microsoft conceded the business smartphone market to RIM, and the BlackBerry OS.
The problem with Microsoft's attempts at a mobile platform for smartphones is that Microsoft sees the world through the eyes of a desktop. Windows Mobile treats smartphones as if they are just much smaller notebook computers and tries to apply the same principles and technologies as it does for Windows desktops.
What Microsoft learned the hard way, and even RIM is now realizing, is that mobility requires a different vision. Smartphones, and now the emerging tablet market led by the Apple iPad, are peripherally related to traditional computing, but require more innovative thinking about what "mobility" is.
The primary role of the smartphone is to enable the business professional to stay connected from anywhere, and at any time. Business professionals want access to e-mail, and instant messaging, and the Web in the palm of their hand. Business professionals want to be able to view and edit documents and conduct business from the smartphone when necessary, but that doesn't mean that the smartphone should try to be a Windows desktop in your pocket.
From an IT administrator perspective, though, Microsoft should be a natural choice for smartphone platform. IT administrators want to be able to provision, manage, monitor, and protect smartphones and other mobile devices centrally and remotely. Active Directory provides a powerful framework capable of meeting that objective, but Microsoft let RIM take the lead with the BlackBerry Enterprise Server (BES) mobile platform.
Apple revolutionized the smartphone with the iPhone. The Android OS from Google offers a compelling alternative to the iPhone for business professionals that want more control over the smartphone experience, or don't want to rely on AT&T as a wireless carrier. Apple and Google are aggressively competing with each other to define the mobility experience, while RIM and Microsoft are playing catch up.
Windows Phone 7 looks impressive from what has been revealed thus far. If this were two years ago, Windows Phone 7 might even be a cutting edge innovation that could set the smartphone world on fire. When it's finally launched, though, Windows Phone 7 will face a formidable challenge just to establish relevance and slow Microsoft's slide into smartphone oblivion.
Once upon a time, Microsoft was in a position to define smartphones, and its dominant stake in desktop operating systems, messaging servers, and office productivity software established it as the natural leader for the business smartphone platform.
Microsoft should be the de facto ruler of business smartphones. That was then, this is now, though, and that ship may have sailed no matter how phenomenal Windows Phone 7 might be when it finally arrives.
vineri, 28 mai 2010
Hackers Will Keep Hammering Facebook, Say Researchers
Attacks targeting Facebook users will continue, and could easily become even more dangerous, a security researcher said today.
Over the last two weekends, cyber criminals have launched large-scale attacks using rogue Facebook applications that infect users of the popular social networking site with adware that puts pop-ups on their screens.
"There are limitations to what Facebook can do to stop this," said Patrik Runald, a U.K.-based researcher for Websense Security. "I wouldn't be surprised to see another attack this weekend. Clearly, they work."
According to Roger Thompson, the chief technology officer at antivirus vendor AVG Technologies, last weekend's attack was about half the size of the one the weekend before . Both used messages that pimped sex-oriented videos as bait to convince users to install a Facebook application, then download a purported update to a free video player program. The download was actually adware.
Thompson agreed with Runald that the attacks would keep coming. "They're trying to make money, and looking for ways to 'work' Facebook," said Thompson in an instant message of hackers.
Runald also pulled apart the rogue application's source code and found it "very simple" in its construction. "It's not designed to do mass spreading," he said, noting that the software sent messages to the walls of just 10 friends of an infected Facebook user. "Facebook has automated [security] systems in place," Runald said. "I assume that one of them is based on the volume of the same message, so [the attackers] are trying to lay low by only sending to 10 friends."
Websense has identified more than 100 variations of the same Facebook attack app used in the two attacks, all identical except for the API keys that Facebook requires. The number of permutations was simply a tactic to make it more difficult for Facebook to remove the rogues.
Last Monday -- and after two consecutive weekends of attacks -- Facebook asked for users' help in spotting the malevolent software.
"Several malicious applications have surfaced recently," Facebook wrote on its security page . "We've been disabling these applications as soon as they're reported to us or surfaced by our systems -- and before the scammers can get very far. We need your help, though. Report applications that look suspicious, and as always, don't click on strange links, even if they've come from friends."
But the attacks could easily become more treacherous. "The download [that attackers] prompt users to install could be anything," said Runald. "It could be fake antivirus software or a full-blown Trojan. It could be the Koobface Trojan, for instance," he said, referring to the botnet malware that has repeatedly targeted Facebook users as well as those on other social networks such as MySpace.
Koobface is still very active , other security researchers have said.
"They could monetize it more than by pushing adware to people," said Runald, "but I think they're doing it this way so as to attract less attention from Facebook."
Facebook will continue to have trouble roping in these kinds of attacks, said Thompson. "Facebook has more than a million developers the last time I looked," he said. "I'm fairly confident that not all of that one million have sweetness and light in their hearts. And being a Facebook developer is, well, free, so there's not a huge entry barrier for hackers."
What alarms Thompson is that it's very difficult to know who the developers really are, and thus separate the wheat from the malicious chaff. "Any other software that I use or buy, I can go to their home page and think about them a bit," he said. "But I see many [Facebook] apps whose ownership is hidden behind privacy protections. No way in Hades I'd buy or use normal software from someone like that."
One defense against such attacks is a free tool from Websense. Defensio 2.0 protects Facebook pages against spam, unwanted URLs and malicious content.
Over the last two weekends, cyber criminals have launched large-scale attacks using rogue Facebook applications that infect users of the popular social networking site with adware that puts pop-ups on their screens.
"There are limitations to what Facebook can do to stop this," said Patrik Runald, a U.K.-based researcher for Websense Security. "I wouldn't be surprised to see another attack this weekend. Clearly, they work."
According to Roger Thompson, the chief technology officer at antivirus vendor AVG Technologies, last weekend's attack was about half the size of the one the weekend before . Both used messages that pimped sex-oriented videos as bait to convince users to install a Facebook application, then download a purported update to a free video player program. The download was actually adware.
Thompson agreed with Runald that the attacks would keep coming. "They're trying to make money, and looking for ways to 'work' Facebook," said Thompson in an instant message of hackers.
Runald also pulled apart the rogue application's source code and found it "very simple" in its construction. "It's not designed to do mass spreading," he said, noting that the software sent messages to the walls of just 10 friends of an infected Facebook user. "Facebook has automated [security] systems in place," Runald said. "I assume that one of them is based on the volume of the same message, so [the attackers] are trying to lay low by only sending to 10 friends."
Websense has identified more than 100 variations of the same Facebook attack app used in the two attacks, all identical except for the API keys that Facebook requires. The number of permutations was simply a tactic to make it more difficult for Facebook to remove the rogues.
Last Monday -- and after two consecutive weekends of attacks -- Facebook asked for users' help in spotting the malevolent software.
"Several malicious applications have surfaced recently," Facebook wrote on its security page . "We've been disabling these applications as soon as they're reported to us or surfaced by our systems -- and before the scammers can get very far. We need your help, though. Report applications that look suspicious, and as always, don't click on strange links, even if they've come from friends."
But the attacks could easily become more treacherous. "The download [that attackers] prompt users to install could be anything," said Runald. "It could be fake antivirus software or a full-blown Trojan. It could be the Koobface Trojan, for instance," he said, referring to the botnet malware that has repeatedly targeted Facebook users as well as those on other social networks such as MySpace.
Koobface is still very active , other security researchers have said.
"They could monetize it more than by pushing adware to people," said Runald, "but I think they're doing it this way so as to attract less attention from Facebook."
Facebook will continue to have trouble roping in these kinds of attacks, said Thompson. "Facebook has more than a million developers the last time I looked," he said. "I'm fairly confident that not all of that one million have sweetness and light in their hearts. And being a Facebook developer is, well, free, so there's not a huge entry barrier for hackers."
What alarms Thompson is that it's very difficult to know who the developers really are, and thus separate the wheat from the malicious chaff. "Any other software that I use or buy, I can go to their home page and think about them a bit," he said. "But I see many [Facebook] apps whose ownership is hidden behind privacy protections. No way in Hades I'd buy or use normal software from someone like that."
One defense against such attacks is a free tool from Websense. Defensio 2.0 protects Facebook pages against spam, unwanted URLs and malicious content.
Server Found With 44 Million Stolen Online Game Accounts
Leading antivirus product manufacturer Symantec recently came across a submitted database with an astounding amount of stolen gaming accounts. If each account came from a different person, the amount of affected players would be larger than the population of Argentina.
The database was populated by accounts from Chinese online gamers who had their information stolen by a password checker. The 44 million stolen accounts take up roughly 17GB of space and include passwords for at least 18 online gaming websites.
The four most plundered games included Aion, which had around 60,000 accounts stolen; World of Warcraft, which had roughly 210,000 accounts stolen; NCsoft's PlayNC system, which had around 2 million thefts; and Wayi Entertainment, which suffered from 16 million stolen accounts. While online accounts are difficult to place resale value on due to hazy legalities, online auction sites have placed values as low as $6 for a PlayNC account and as high as $28,000 for a World of Warcraft account.
The database was populated by accounts from Chinese online gamers who had their information stolen by a password checker. The 44 million stolen accounts take up roughly 17GB of space and include passwords for at least 18 online gaming websites.
The four most plundered games included Aion, which had around 60,000 accounts stolen; World of Warcraft, which had roughly 210,000 accounts stolen; NCsoft's PlayNC system, which had around 2 million thefts; and Wayi Entertainment, which suffered from 16 million stolen accounts. While online accounts are difficult to place resale value on due to hazy legalities, online auction sites have placed values as low as $6 for a PlayNC account and as high as $28,000 for a World of Warcraft account.
Of Smartphone Owners, iPhone Users Are the Most Satisfied
's iPhone came out on top in terms of customer satisfaction compared with other smartphones, according to a survey of 1,009 consumers who bought smartphones in the last six months.
But Motorola phones running the Android operating system, including the Motorola Droid , came in a close second in the survey conducted by ChangeWave Research.
ChangeWave found 77% of iPhone customers said they were very satisfied with their purchase, ahead of owners of Motorola smartphones, with 64%. Motorola's second place finish puts it well above the industry average for recent purchasers, ChangeWave said Wednesday.
In terms of mobile operating systems, the iPhone also finished on top with 71% saying they were very satisfied customers, while the Android coming in with a close second, with 67% very satisfied. The Palm Web OS came in third with 57% of Palm users saying they were very satisfied. The RIM OS finished "well behind the three industry leaders" with 37%, but ahead of Windows Mobile with 24%, ChangeWave wrote.
Owners of HTC devices finished third in customer satisfaction with 51% very satisfied, while Research in Motion's BlackBerry devices finished fourth, with 46%. Palm devices were fifth with 45%, followed by LG at 40% and Samsung at 35%.
Motorola's Droid is driving the high satisfaction levels for Motorola, with 69% of Droid buyers saying they were very satisfied with the new Droid running on Android compared with 50% for all other Motorola models, ChangeWave said.
For HTC models, 68% of HTC Hero customers surveyed said they were very satisfied, ahead of the HTC Droid Eris with 50% and HTC Touch with 38%.
The ChangeWave survey, conducted April 21 through May 2, did not include results for the HTC Droid Incredible, which hit stores April 29. The Tour got the highest very satisfied rating of BlackBerry phones with 56%, beating out the Bold with 48% and the Storm with 45%.
ChangeWave also found that the biggest dislike on the minds of iPhone owners was AT&T as its service provider, by 22%, ahead of their dislike of the battery life (19%) and lack of multitasking (11%). For Motorola, the biggest dislike was battery life, with 14%.
ChangeWave also saw a surge of interest in Android devices in a survey of 4,000 potential smartphone buyers it conducted in December.
ChangeWave also has studied AT&T's role as the exclusive wireless carrier of the iPhone in the U.S., noting in early May that more than half of Verizon Wireless subscribers surveyed said they would buy an iPhone if it were available with Verizon .
In the latest survey, 32% of smartphone owners said they would have purchased the iPhone if it was available from their carrier instead of the phone they did purchased. Palm smartphone buyers showed the strongest interest in buying the iPhone, followed by Motorola buyers.
But Motorola phones running the Android operating system, including the Motorola Droid , came in a close second in the survey conducted by ChangeWave Research.
ChangeWave found 77% of iPhone customers said they were very satisfied with their purchase, ahead of owners of Motorola smartphones, with 64%. Motorola's second place finish puts it well above the industry average for recent purchasers, ChangeWave said Wednesday.
In terms of mobile operating systems, the iPhone also finished on top with 71% saying they were very satisfied customers, while the Android coming in with a close second, with 67% very satisfied. The Palm Web OS came in third with 57% of Palm users saying they were very satisfied. The RIM OS finished "well behind the three industry leaders" with 37%, but ahead of Windows Mobile with 24%, ChangeWave wrote.
Owners of HTC devices finished third in customer satisfaction with 51% very satisfied, while Research in Motion's BlackBerry devices finished fourth, with 46%. Palm devices were fifth with 45%, followed by LG at 40% and Samsung at 35%.
Motorola's Droid is driving the high satisfaction levels for Motorola, with 69% of Droid buyers saying they were very satisfied with the new Droid running on Android compared with 50% for all other Motorola models, ChangeWave said.
For HTC models, 68% of HTC Hero customers surveyed said they were very satisfied, ahead of the HTC Droid Eris with 50% and HTC Touch with 38%.
The ChangeWave survey, conducted April 21 through May 2, did not include results for the HTC Droid Incredible, which hit stores April 29. The Tour got the highest very satisfied rating of BlackBerry phones with 56%, beating out the Bold with 48% and the Storm with 45%.
ChangeWave also found that the biggest dislike on the minds of iPhone owners was AT&T as its service provider, by 22%, ahead of their dislike of the battery life (19%) and lack of multitasking (11%). For Motorola, the biggest dislike was battery life, with 14%.
ChangeWave also saw a surge of interest in Android devices in a survey of 4,000 potential smartphone buyers it conducted in December.
ChangeWave also has studied AT&T's role as the exclusive wireless carrier of the iPhone in the U.S., noting in early May that more than half of Verizon Wireless subscribers surveyed said they would buy an iPhone if it were available with Verizon .
In the latest survey, 32% of smartphone owners said they would have purchased the iPhone if it was available from their carrier instead of the phone they did purchased. Palm smartphone buyers showed the strongest interest in buying the iPhone, followed by Motorola buyers.
Microsoft Official Admits to Quiet Security Patching
Microsoft doesn't report all security vulnerabilities that it fixes in its software. Bug comparisons between vendors therefore paint an incorrect picture.
"We don't document every issue found," Mike Reavey, director of the Microsoft Security Response Center (MSRC), said at a meeting with reporters at the company's corporate headquarters in Redmond, Washington.
Microsoft will issue a Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures (CVE) number to a vulnerability for flaws that share the same severity, have an attack vector and a workaround. If several flaws share all the same properties, they will not be reported separately, Reavey said.
The nondisclosure of fixes was brought to light early this month by a company called Core Security Technologies. After studying the Microsoft patches MS10-024 and MS10-028, it noticed three silent fixes. Security bulletin MS10-028 addressed a flaw that would expose a user of Microsoft Visio to a buffer overflow attack, which would allow an attacker to take over control of the system.
Microsoft didn't report the additional flaws that it patched in the Visio case because: "The attack vector was exactly the same, the severity was exactly the same. From a customer's perspective, the same workaround -- not opening Visio documents from untrusted sources -- applied," Reavey told Webwereld, an IDG affiliate, in an interview after his presentation.
Adobe too is keeping quiet about internal vulnerability fixes. During a presentation at the Microsoft event, Adobe's director of product security and privacy, Brad Arkin, admitted that it won't assign CVE numbers to bugs that the firm found itself. Adobe considers these updates "code improvements," Arkin said. CVE numbers are used only for bugs that are actively exploited or that were reported by external researchers.
Keeping quiet on security updates isn't without consequence. Both vendors and security researchers have used CVE counts to assess the security of different operating systems and applications. At the press event, Microsoft showed a slide comparing the number of security updates that issued for UbuntuLTS, Red Hat Enterprise Linux 4, OS X 10.4 as well as Windows Vista and Windows XP. In a different slide the company compared security updates for SQL Server 2000, SQL Server 2005 and an unnamed competing database.
Reavey admits that these vulnerability count comparisons are flawed, but argues that they still make sense as a basic comparison tool. "There is a lot of different ways that you can measure security. Vulnerability counting is one way, and it is not perfect." Comparing the number of vulnerabilities per line of software code provides another metric. Reavey argues that vulnerability counts are in fact a useful way to compare between products from one vendor.
The Microsoft director downplayed the vulnerability count discussion as "accounting" that mostly distracts researchers from fixing flaws. When one flaw is reported, the firm would prefer to optimize a research tool that surfaces 200 related bugs through fuzzing. Technically, the code may contain 200 vulnerabilities, but "you change one line of code and it blocks all 200 potential fuzzing issues. Is that one vulnerability? Is that 200 vulnerabilities? I don't really know."
"If we spend time to get the accounting correct, that is time that we take away from getting a solution out to protect customers," he said.
"We don't document every issue found," Mike Reavey, director of the Microsoft Security Response Center (MSRC), said at a meeting with reporters at the company's corporate headquarters in Redmond, Washington.
Microsoft will issue a Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures (CVE) number to a vulnerability for flaws that share the same severity, have an attack vector and a workaround. If several flaws share all the same properties, they will not be reported separately, Reavey said.
The nondisclosure of fixes was brought to light early this month by a company called Core Security Technologies. After studying the Microsoft patches MS10-024 and MS10-028, it noticed three silent fixes. Security bulletin MS10-028 addressed a flaw that would expose a user of Microsoft Visio to a buffer overflow attack, which would allow an attacker to take over control of the system.
Microsoft didn't report the additional flaws that it patched in the Visio case because: "The attack vector was exactly the same, the severity was exactly the same. From a customer's perspective, the same workaround -- not opening Visio documents from untrusted sources -- applied," Reavey told Webwereld, an IDG affiliate, in an interview after his presentation.
Adobe too is keeping quiet about internal vulnerability fixes. During a presentation at the Microsoft event, Adobe's director of product security and privacy, Brad Arkin, admitted that it won't assign CVE numbers to bugs that the firm found itself. Adobe considers these updates "code improvements," Arkin said. CVE numbers are used only for bugs that are actively exploited or that were reported by external researchers.
Keeping quiet on security updates isn't without consequence. Both vendors and security researchers have used CVE counts to assess the security of different operating systems and applications. At the press event, Microsoft showed a slide comparing the number of security updates that issued for UbuntuLTS, Red Hat Enterprise Linux 4, OS X 10.4 as well as Windows Vista and Windows XP. In a different slide the company compared security updates for SQL Server 2000, SQL Server 2005 and an unnamed competing database.
Reavey admits that these vulnerability count comparisons are flawed, but argues that they still make sense as a basic comparison tool. "There is a lot of different ways that you can measure security. Vulnerability counting is one way, and it is not perfect." Comparing the number of vulnerabilities per line of software code provides another metric. Reavey argues that vulnerability counts are in fact a useful way to compare between products from one vendor.
The Microsoft director downplayed the vulnerability count discussion as "accounting" that mostly distracts researchers from fixing flaws. When one flaw is reported, the firm would prefer to optimize a research tool that surfaces 200 related bugs through fuzzing. Technically, the code may contain 200 vulnerabilities, but "you change one line of code and it blocks all 200 potential fuzzing issues. Is that one vulnerability? Is that 200 vulnerabilities? I don't really know."
"If we spend time to get the accounting correct, that is time that we take away from getting a solution out to protect customers," he said.
Beware of Office 2010's 64-bit Shortcomings
When Windows 7 hit the stands, most advanced users reveled in the fact that 64-bit Windows had finally come of age. In spite of a few driver and application compatibility problems, 64-bit Windows 7 promised faster speeds, access to more memory, improved security, and the ability to run a whole new crop of killer 64-bit applications.
Well, I have seen the future of 64-bit killer applications, and it ain't pretty.
[ Should you run 32-bit Windows 7 or 64-bit Windows 7? See InfoWorld Test Center's Windows 7 bitwise FAQ for the straight scoop on Win7 bittedness. ]
The retail version of Microsoft Office 2010 -- which will hit store shelves shortly -- includes both the 32-bit version and the 64-bit version of Microsoft's latest application suite. Those of you who get your bits through Software Assurance already have access to both the 32-bit and 64-bit flavors right now. Whether you love Office 2010 (see the Test Center's Top 10 Office 2010 features for business) or hate it, make sure you understand the problems people have encountered before you entrust a real, production machine to the 64-bit evil twin.
The OS requirements are quite exact. You can only install 64-bit Office 2010 on a sufficiently updated 64-bit Vista, Windows 7, or Windows Server 2008 machine. Those of you stuck with 64-bit XP or Server 2003 need not apply. And installing the 64-bit version from the retail DVD requires a bit of adroitness: Navigate to the DVD's \x64 folder and run setup.exe from there.
Potential benefits of the 64-bit version include Excel's ability to handle spreadsheets larger than 2GB (a real whopper of a spreadsheet), Microsoft Project's ability to accommodate similarly enormous projects, and native Data Execution Protection for potentially improved security.
So what's not to like? Plenty.
None of your old Office add-ins will work in the 64-bit world. They have to be rewritten and recompiled specifically for 64-bit Office 2010. In some cases, programming controls commonly used in the 32-bit world aren't even available in 64-bit. (Details are available in the MSDN Library article on compatibility.) Microsoft now offers conditional compilation support that differentiates between 32-bit and 64-bit, so sufficiently savvy programmers can write 32-bit and 64-bit ActiveX controls at the same time, but every single line of old code has to be examined and, in many cases, rewritten.
If you have Web applications that work with Office, they may fall over and play dead, too. Even Microsoft has had trouble with SharePoint co-existing with 64-bit Access. Syncing Outlook 64 with Windows mobile phones may not work as expected. OneNote integration isn't working right -- even at this late date, nobody's entirely sure what integration problems bedevil the evil twin.
Some of the supposed benefits of 64-bit may be illusory at best. For example, if you create a 64-bit Excel spreadsheet that's bigger than 2GB, anybody who needs to edit it -- or even look at it -- had better be running 64-bit as well.
Microsoft knows all about the 64-bit problems, although the 'Softies hardly trumpet the shortcomings in their marketing material. If you know where to look, you can find the whole story. For example, the official Microsoft Office 2010 Engineering blog puts it this way:
Few people remember, but Office 2003 had a 64-bit version. It failed so badly Microsoft passed on a 64-bit Office 2007.
Office 2010 64-bit has all of the hallmarks of a traditional Microsoft "version 2.0" product -- it works, but not like it should, and it doesn't play well with others. Wise folks will wait until version 3.
Well, I have seen the future of 64-bit killer applications, and it ain't pretty.
[ Should you run 32-bit Windows 7 or 64-bit Windows 7? See InfoWorld Test Center's Windows 7 bitwise FAQ for the straight scoop on Win7 bittedness. ]
The retail version of Microsoft Office 2010 -- which will hit store shelves shortly -- includes both the 32-bit version and the 64-bit version of Microsoft's latest application suite. Those of you who get your bits through Software Assurance already have access to both the 32-bit and 64-bit flavors right now. Whether you love Office 2010 (see the Test Center's Top 10 Office 2010 features for business) or hate it, make sure you understand the problems people have encountered before you entrust a real, production machine to the 64-bit evil twin.
The OS requirements are quite exact. You can only install 64-bit Office 2010 on a sufficiently updated 64-bit Vista, Windows 7, or Windows Server 2008 machine. Those of you stuck with 64-bit XP or Server 2003 need not apply. And installing the 64-bit version from the retail DVD requires a bit of adroitness: Navigate to the DVD's \x64 folder and run setup.exe from there.
Potential benefits of the 64-bit version include Excel's ability to handle spreadsheets larger than 2GB (a real whopper of a spreadsheet), Microsoft Project's ability to accommodate similarly enormous projects, and native Data Execution Protection for potentially improved security.
So what's not to like? Plenty.
None of your old Office add-ins will work in the 64-bit world. They have to be rewritten and recompiled specifically for 64-bit Office 2010. In some cases, programming controls commonly used in the 32-bit world aren't even available in 64-bit. (Details are available in the MSDN Library article on compatibility.) Microsoft now offers conditional compilation support that differentiates between 32-bit and 64-bit, so sufficiently savvy programmers can write 32-bit and 64-bit ActiveX controls at the same time, but every single line of old code has to be examined and, in many cases, rewritten.
If you have Web applications that work with Office, they may fall over and play dead, too. Even Microsoft has had trouble with SharePoint co-existing with 64-bit Access. Syncing Outlook 64 with Windows mobile phones may not work as expected. OneNote integration isn't working right -- even at this late date, nobody's entirely sure what integration problems bedevil the evil twin.
Some of the supposed benefits of 64-bit may be illusory at best. For example, if you create a 64-bit Excel spreadsheet that's bigger than 2GB, anybody who needs to edit it -- or even look at it -- had better be running 64-bit as well.
Microsoft knows all about the 64-bit problems, although the 'Softies hardly trumpet the shortcomings in their marketing material. If you know where to look, you can find the whole story. For example, the official Microsoft Office 2010 Engineering blog puts it this way:
Few people remember, but Office 2003 had a 64-bit version. It failed so badly Microsoft passed on a 64-bit Office 2007.
Office 2010 64-bit has all of the hallmarks of a traditional Microsoft "version 2.0" product -- it works, but not like it should, and it doesn't play well with others. Wise folks will wait until version 3.
Samsung vs. LG Spark at World IT Show 2010 With 3D
3D technology is one of the hottest products at 'World IT Show 2010,' the greatest IT exhibition event in Korea. The competition between Samsung and LG around 3D display will be the main highlight of the event.
In COEX, Seoul, where World IT Show 2010 is held, many people drop by to see 3D displays created by Samsung Electronics and LG Electronics.
Samsung's display, named '3D Cube,' is a kind of tower that consists of 36 televisions. These are 55-inch full 3D LED TVs from Samsung, and visitors can experience full 3D images. In addition, Samsung demonstrates other 3D products, such as a 3D Blu-ray player and 3D home theater.
While Samsung catches visitors' attention with 3D Cube, LG has the largest 3D TV. The size of this full LED 3D TV measures 72 inches, and many people form a line to watch it with glasses. Also, LG offers the opportunity to take 3D pictures with the popular LG Twins baseball player mannequins.
It is not only Samsung and LG that are a part of the exhibition but many others vendors are also excited to display their new products incorporating 3D technology.
3DIS is one such vendor that exhibited a 3D LCD monitor that doesn't require users to wear special glasses. The 3DIS monitor uses high-precision optical 3D LCD technology to mimic the effect of 3D without requiring users to wear any kind of special glasses.
The popular Korean simulation company GolfZon also demonstrated "Seoul-Tokyo Virtual City Golf Course." Like the title suggests, the game lets players experience a game of golf in virtual courses located around Seoul and Tokyo's most recognizable buildings, roads, and landmarks.
Another technology that is catching the visitors' attention is the smartphone. Since Apple's iPhone launch in Korea last year, many manufacturers have invested more of their resources into the smartphone market. Two leaders and competitors in this market are LG and Samsung.
At this year's World IT Show, LG publicly debuted two smartphones; the Optimus Q (LG-LU2300) and the Optimus Z (LG-SU950/KU9500). Both run Google's Android operating system.
Samsung also displayed the 'Wave,' the first phone to feature 'Bada OS.' Samsung has dubbed Wave an easy smartphone, as it gives users the simplest experience downloading new applications.
There are many other key exhibitors including SK Telecom, HP, KT, Google, Kodak and Panasonic. There are also meetings arranged for foreigners and domestic companies so that they can launch joint ventures. Contracts will be made among them as export consultation meetings are to be held during the show.
At World IT Show 2010, under the slogan of 'Feel IT, See the Next,' the trend of future IT industry can be experienced through new technologies displayed in 1,500 booths from 550 international technology businesses.
This event is hosted by the Ministry of Knowledge Economy (MKE), Korea Communications Commission (KCC) and Ministry of Culture, Sports and Tourism (MCST), and is held on May 25-28 in COEX, Seoul.
In COEX, Seoul, where World IT Show 2010 is held, many people drop by to see 3D displays created by Samsung Electronics and LG Electronics.
Samsung's display, named '3D Cube,' is a kind of tower that consists of 36 televisions. These are 55-inch full 3D LED TVs from Samsung, and visitors can experience full 3D images. In addition, Samsung demonstrates other 3D products, such as a 3D Blu-ray player and 3D home theater.
While Samsung catches visitors' attention with 3D Cube, LG has the largest 3D TV. The size of this full LED 3D TV measures 72 inches, and many people form a line to watch it with glasses. Also, LG offers the opportunity to take 3D pictures with the popular LG Twins baseball player mannequins.
It is not only Samsung and LG that are a part of the exhibition but many others vendors are also excited to display their new products incorporating 3D technology.
3DIS is one such vendor that exhibited a 3D LCD monitor that doesn't require users to wear special glasses. The 3DIS monitor uses high-precision optical 3D LCD technology to mimic the effect of 3D without requiring users to wear any kind of special glasses.
The popular Korean simulation company GolfZon also demonstrated "Seoul-Tokyo Virtual City Golf Course." Like the title suggests, the game lets players experience a game of golf in virtual courses located around Seoul and Tokyo's most recognizable buildings, roads, and landmarks.
Another technology that is catching the visitors' attention is the smartphone. Since Apple's iPhone launch in Korea last year, many manufacturers have invested more of their resources into the smartphone market. Two leaders and competitors in this market are LG and Samsung.
At this year's World IT Show, LG publicly debuted two smartphones; the Optimus Q (LG-LU2300) and the Optimus Z (LG-SU950/KU9500). Both run Google's Android operating system.
Samsung also displayed the 'Wave,' the first phone to feature 'Bada OS.' Samsung has dubbed Wave an easy smartphone, as it gives users the simplest experience downloading new applications.
There are many other key exhibitors including SK Telecom, HP, KT, Google, Kodak and Panasonic. There are also meetings arranged for foreigners and domestic companies so that they can launch joint ventures. Contracts will be made among them as export consultation meetings are to be held during the show.
At World IT Show 2010, under the slogan of 'Feel IT, See the Next,' the trend of future IT industry can be experienced through new technologies displayed in 1,500 booths from 550 international technology businesses.
This event is hosted by the Ministry of Knowledge Economy (MKE), Korea Communications Commission (KCC) and Ministry of Culture, Sports and Tourism (MCST), and is held on May 25-28 in COEX, Seoul.
Verizon's Tiered LTE Plans Fuel 'Bill Shock' Debate
Verizon's apparent decision to offer tiered LTE services in the near future could spark more debate on carriers' overage fees and so-called "bill shock."
Cell phone "bill shock" hits a nerve, FCC says
According to the Financial Times, Verizon Wireless CEO Lowell McAdam said during a Barclays Capital conference Thursday that users who sign up for the company's 4G LTE services should expect to pay for "buckets" of data rather than pay a flat monthly fee for unlimited use. In other words, LTE plans would give users a certain amount of data they could consume every month before they would have to pay overage fees.
New tiered pricing plans for LTE services could add fuel to the debate over the fees telecoms can charge their customers who exceed their monthly limits, as well as the carriers' obligations to inform customers when they're almost at their monthly limits. A survey commission by the Federal Communications Commission and released Wednesday shows that 17% of U.S. cell phone users said their cell phone bills had "increased suddenly from one month to the next" even if they "did not change the calling or texting plan" they subscribed to.
Although we don't yet know how Verizon plans to implement its tiered pricing system for LTE, it's quite possible that the new data plans could lead to even more potential bill shock, especially if users are unaware that they're about to reach their monthly data limits. An extreme example of this sort of problem occurred last year, when a woman in Oklahoma was billed more than $5,000 for exceeding the 5GB monthly data cap for her notebook on AT&T's 3G network.
This is particularly important because the FCC survey found that carriers didn't do a good job of contacting people when they were about to hit their monthly limits on voice or data. According to the survey, only 14% of users hit with bill shock said that their carrier tried to contact them when they were about to exceed their monthly voice, SMS or data usage, while only 10% of users said their carrier contacted them after their bill suddenly increased.
Of course, from Verizon's perspective it's understandable why the carrier would want to impose some kind of bandwidth caps on their 4G services. Since most voice calls on LTE-capable phones are projected to be made over a VoIP network and not a standard cellular network, carriers will lose the revenues they used to get through minute-based cellular plans.
Additionally, carriers are also worried that allowing unlimited data consumption on their LTE networks will lead to degraded network performance. This may sound paradoxical since 4G networks will undoubtedly deliver much faster speeds than today's 3G networks, but consider that the relative slowness of 3G compared to fixed broadband connections means that very few users are trying to stream long high-definition videos or use bandwidth-intensive peer-to-peer protocols on their 3G connections. Once more users have the ability to use such applications over a 4G connection, however, carriers fear that such high-bandwidth applications will severely degrade network performance if left unchecked.
Unsurprisingly, Verizon's proposed tiered LTE plans are not without their critics. Blogger Mike over at GadgetSteria predicted that the limited LTE data plans would become a way for carriers to bilk consumers by continuing to garner overage charges even as the cost of transmitting data for the carrier goes down.
"On the surface, it seems to make sense and be 'fair' -- charge heavier users for the larger amount of data they use," he wrote. "They only problem is that 4G will make transmitting data cheaper than 3G. Not only that, but the high-end 4G data plan should never be more than $30-$40. I guarantee that carriers will milk customers for all their [sic] worth."
Kevin Krauss, writing at Phandroid, warned readers to "kiss your unlimited data goodbye" and attacked Verizon's reasoning for placing data caps on its 4G network.
"What part about serving up bandwidth in capped blocks makes sense for a network with higher data speeds and more smartphone users taking advantage of those speeds?" he wrote. "I guess it does make great sense for investors and Verizon who will be able to easily tag on overage fees, but they'll have a hard time selling this to customers."
Cell phone "bill shock" hits a nerve, FCC says
According to the Financial Times, Verizon Wireless CEO Lowell McAdam said during a Barclays Capital conference Thursday that users who sign up for the company's 4G LTE services should expect to pay for "buckets" of data rather than pay a flat monthly fee for unlimited use. In other words, LTE plans would give users a certain amount of data they could consume every month before they would have to pay overage fees.
New tiered pricing plans for LTE services could add fuel to the debate over the fees telecoms can charge their customers who exceed their monthly limits, as well as the carriers' obligations to inform customers when they're almost at their monthly limits. A survey commission by the Federal Communications Commission and released Wednesday shows that 17% of U.S. cell phone users said their cell phone bills had "increased suddenly from one month to the next" even if they "did not change the calling or texting plan" they subscribed to.
Although we don't yet know how Verizon plans to implement its tiered pricing system for LTE, it's quite possible that the new data plans could lead to even more potential bill shock, especially if users are unaware that they're about to reach their monthly data limits. An extreme example of this sort of problem occurred last year, when a woman in Oklahoma was billed more than $5,000 for exceeding the 5GB monthly data cap for her notebook on AT&T's 3G network.
This is particularly important because the FCC survey found that carriers didn't do a good job of contacting people when they were about to hit their monthly limits on voice or data. According to the survey, only 14% of users hit with bill shock said that their carrier tried to contact them when they were about to exceed their monthly voice, SMS or data usage, while only 10% of users said their carrier contacted them after their bill suddenly increased.
Of course, from Verizon's perspective it's understandable why the carrier would want to impose some kind of bandwidth caps on their 4G services. Since most voice calls on LTE-capable phones are projected to be made over a VoIP network and not a standard cellular network, carriers will lose the revenues they used to get through minute-based cellular plans.
Additionally, carriers are also worried that allowing unlimited data consumption on their LTE networks will lead to degraded network performance. This may sound paradoxical since 4G networks will undoubtedly deliver much faster speeds than today's 3G networks, but consider that the relative slowness of 3G compared to fixed broadband connections means that very few users are trying to stream long high-definition videos or use bandwidth-intensive peer-to-peer protocols on their 3G connections. Once more users have the ability to use such applications over a 4G connection, however, carriers fear that such high-bandwidth applications will severely degrade network performance if left unchecked.
Unsurprisingly, Verizon's proposed tiered LTE plans are not without their critics. Blogger Mike over at GadgetSteria predicted that the limited LTE data plans would become a way for carriers to bilk consumers by continuing to garner overage charges even as the cost of transmitting data for the carrier goes down.
"On the surface, it seems to make sense and be 'fair' -- charge heavier users for the larger amount of data they use," he wrote. "They only problem is that 4G will make transmitting data cheaper than 3G. Not only that, but the high-end 4G data plan should never be more than $30-$40. I guarantee that carriers will milk customers for all their [sic] worth."
Kevin Krauss, writing at Phandroid, warned readers to "kiss your unlimited data goodbye" and attacked Verizon's reasoning for placing data caps on its 4G network.
"What part about serving up bandwidth in capped blocks makes sense for a network with higher data speeds and more smartphone users taking advantage of those speeds?" he wrote. "I guess it does make great sense for investors and Verizon who will be able to easily tag on overage fees, but they'll have a hard time selling this to customers."
Border Searches of Laptops May Be Taken Off-site for Cause, Court Rules
In recent cases, U.S. courts have supported the government's right to search the contents of computers and other electronic devices carried by travelers arriving at U.S borders.
A federal court in Michigan this week added that if such a search could not be performed at the border, the government has the right to seize and transport computers to a secondary inspection facility, so long as there's reasonable suspicion.
The issue of border laptop searches is important for corporate executives arriving at U.S airports carrying business computers. Privacy advocates, security analysts and others have expressed concern that such searches could result in the exposure of sensitive corporate or customer data. The U.S. Department of Homeland Security has previously asserted its right to inspect, copy or download the contents of a computer or other electronic device belonging to travelers at U.S. borders even without cause.
The federal court's ruling was first reported by the FourthAmendment.com Web site. The ruling was in response to a motion filed by the defendant in a child pornography case, who alleged that U.S. customs officials violated his Fourth Amendment rights when they took away one of his computers at Detroit Metropolitan Airport.
The defendant, Theodore Stewart, is charged with transporting child pornography on two laptop computers in his possession when he arrived at the Detroit airport after a trip to Indonesia last May. According to court papers, a U.S. immigration and customs agent discovered images that appeared to depict child pornography on one of Stewart's computers during a secondary inspection of his belongings at the airport.
Customs officials were unable to immediately inspect the other computer, however, because of a damaged battery and no adapter was available to power up the system. Both computers were seized and Stewart was allowed to go after being informed that the seized devices were being transported to a separate forensic facility for inspection.
Stewart was later charged with transporting child porn based on evidence gathered from both computers during the inspection at the secondary forensic facility. To do the inspection on the second computer, forensics agents had to remove the hard disk and mount it on another system.
Stewart sought to have the evidence from the second computer suppressed. In a brief, Stewart argued that while the initial inspection of one computer at the airport may have been valid, the seizure of the second computer and its inspection at the forensic facility amounted to an unreasonable, extended border search. Stewart also claimed that the evidence found on the second computer was discovered in violation of his Fourth Amendment rights against unreasonable seizure and search.
The government contended that the search at the forensic facility was a continuation of the search at Detroit airport. Having found what appeared to be evidence of child pornography on one computer, it was reasonable to suspect that the other one might also contain such content, the government said. It claimed that the search of the second computer was no different than multiple entries being made into a premises using a single search warrant.
In a 10-page ruling, Judge David Lawson of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan said he could not fully accept either argument.
"Removing the laptops from the point of entry into the country and transporting them to a remote forensic laboratory may result in an intrusion greater than one might reasonably expect upon entering or re-entering the United States," Lawson wrote. Stewart was therefore correct in arguing that he was subjected to an extended border search, the judge wrote.
However, the search of the computer was valid, because agents clearly had reason to believe it might contain child porn based on their inspection of the first computer at the airport, Lawson said.
In dismissing Stewart's motion to suppress evidence from the second computer, the judge also stressed that the search was only justified because the government was able to show "a particularized and objective" basis for suspicion in this case. The fact that the inspections were conducted within a day of the computers being seized also made it a reasonable search, he said.
"There comes a point when the passage of time or other circumstances can transform a seizure of property reasonable at its outset into an unreasonable intrusion," he said. But in this case that did not happen, Lawson wrote.
A federal court in Michigan this week added that if such a search could not be performed at the border, the government has the right to seize and transport computers to a secondary inspection facility, so long as there's reasonable suspicion.
The issue of border laptop searches is important for corporate executives arriving at U.S airports carrying business computers. Privacy advocates, security analysts and others have expressed concern that such searches could result in the exposure of sensitive corporate or customer data. The U.S. Department of Homeland Security has previously asserted its right to inspect, copy or download the contents of a computer or other electronic device belonging to travelers at U.S. borders even without cause.
The federal court's ruling was first reported by the FourthAmendment.com Web site. The ruling was in response to a motion filed by the defendant in a child pornography case, who alleged that U.S. customs officials violated his Fourth Amendment rights when they took away one of his computers at Detroit Metropolitan Airport.
The defendant, Theodore Stewart, is charged with transporting child pornography on two laptop computers in his possession when he arrived at the Detroit airport after a trip to Indonesia last May. According to court papers, a U.S. immigration and customs agent discovered images that appeared to depict child pornography on one of Stewart's computers during a secondary inspection of his belongings at the airport.
Customs officials were unable to immediately inspect the other computer, however, because of a damaged battery and no adapter was available to power up the system. Both computers were seized and Stewart was allowed to go after being informed that the seized devices were being transported to a separate forensic facility for inspection.
Stewart was later charged with transporting child porn based on evidence gathered from both computers during the inspection at the secondary forensic facility. To do the inspection on the second computer, forensics agents had to remove the hard disk and mount it on another system.
Stewart sought to have the evidence from the second computer suppressed. In a brief, Stewart argued that while the initial inspection of one computer at the airport may have been valid, the seizure of the second computer and its inspection at the forensic facility amounted to an unreasonable, extended border search. Stewart also claimed that the evidence found on the second computer was discovered in violation of his Fourth Amendment rights against unreasonable seizure and search.
The government contended that the search at the forensic facility was a continuation of the search at Detroit airport. Having found what appeared to be evidence of child pornography on one computer, it was reasonable to suspect that the other one might also contain such content, the government said. It claimed that the search of the second computer was no different than multiple entries being made into a premises using a single search warrant.
In a 10-page ruling, Judge David Lawson of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan said he could not fully accept either argument.
"Removing the laptops from the point of entry into the country and transporting them to a remote forensic laboratory may result in an intrusion greater than one might reasonably expect upon entering or re-entering the United States," Lawson wrote. Stewart was therefore correct in arguing that he was subjected to an extended border search, the judge wrote.
However, the search of the computer was valid, because agents clearly had reason to believe it might contain child porn based on their inspection of the first computer at the airport, Lawson said.
In dismissing Stewart's motion to suppress evidence from the second computer, the judge also stressed that the search was only justified because the government was able to show "a particularized and objective" basis for suspicion in this case. The fact that the inspections were conducted within a day of the computers being seized also made it a reasonable search, he said.
"There comes a point when the passage of time or other circumstances can transform a seizure of property reasonable at its outset into an unreasonable intrusion," he said. But in this case that did not happen, Lawson wrote.
5 Ways Steve Ballmer Can Save Microsoft's Mobile Bacon
It appears that Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer has finally woken up and realized that Microsoft's laughable mobile position is more than a product failure but a potential loss of relevance in the computing world of the future, where desktop PCs are like TVs and the real action is in mobile devices of all stripes.
This week, the heads of Microsoft's mobile and entertainment (Windows Mobile, Zune, and Xbox) division announced their pending departures. It's not a moment too soon, given the widespread doubts that the long-sagging division's mobile and music fortunes would revive under the status quo. (The Xbox is doing fine.) Unfortunately, Ballmer says the departures had nothing to do with Microsoft's slide into mobile irrelevance and that business will continue as usual. That's suicidal.
[ Stay up on tech news and reviews from your smartphone at infoworldmobile.com. | Get the best iPhone and iPad apps for pros with our business iPhone apps finder. | Keep up on key mobile developments and insights with the Mobile Edge blog and Mobilize newsletter. ]
With Apple's huge lead in mobile with the iPhone, iPod Touch, and iPad; Google's Android surge in smartphones and perhaps soon in slate-style tablets; and Research in Motion's seeming lock on messaging devices, people might wonder why Microsoft doesn't cut its losses and shift more emphasis to the company's cloud strategy, which Microsoft's execs hope will be its next-generation platform dominator à la Windows.
Ballmer should know why: Because mobile devices are where the client figure is, and a Microsoft without a strong mobile position means Microsoft loses any hope of owning the emerging technology ecosystem. At worst, Google would own it; at best, it would be a combination of Google, Apple, and Microsoft.
Microsoft has wasted a decade -- it's been that long since Windows Mobile (née CE) did anything that mattered to customers -- with meaningless updates on an operating system that showed signs of innovation in 2000 but quickly became a confused mess of desktop wannabe functions by 2004. Complacency clearly set in as Palm frittered its future on endless reorganizations and RIM stayed happily in the mud of messaging. Then the iPhone showed up in 2007 and changed the mobile world. Google saw it and after a rough start started to deliver serious alternative. Both now outsell the establishment mobile OS that Windows Mobile had meant to be.
Steve, what did your company do? It wasted several years on the hapless Windows 6.5 and the moronic Kin -- talk about throwing good money after bad. Now you have to turn around the mobile gap, and fast. Here's what you need to do -- and you have only the rest of this year to do it.
1. Kill the Crap (And do the Rest Right, or Not at All)
Microsoft produces a lot of mediocre software that it slowly fixes over a half-dozen or more iterations -- adding more crap along the way. I've never understood this business strategy, but it worked for Windows, so it's now accepted at Redmond. Practically every product from Office to Dynamics is developed this way.
For Windows Mobile, the crap caught up to it, smothering the operating system in a pile of excrement that as of Windows Mobile 6.5 could not longer be disguised for what it was. The new Kin mobile platform is also full of crap, lacing some interesting ideas around social networking on a badly designed user interface running on crappy hardware. It's Windows Mobile all over again.
The successor to Windows Mobile -- Windows Phone 7 -- can't contain crap. It needs to be a good OS, with a UI that works at all levels. The operating system needs to be elegant, simple, intentional, and consistent -- something Microsoft has never been good at.
Instead, Steve, your company's engineers confuse elegance with decoration, simplicity with obscurity, intentionality with brutishness, and consistency with -- well, they don't know that word. If you provide three ways to do the same thing, clutter up the screen with menus and dialog boxes and radio buttons, badger users with "helpful" alerts and confirmations, rely on multifinger keyboard shortcuts, and change navigation techniques across apps, you're dead.
Everyone cites Apple as the master of this game, but I don't believe for a minute that only Apple's designers can produce such quality. Apple is a standout, but it doesn't have a lock on good design. Amazon.com, Acer, Renault, and Nike are some top-of-mind examples.
Ironically, Microsoft has occasionally shown itself capable of design excellence: The original Excel was the first application to show that a graphical UI wasn't just for pretty pictures, and its success is what I believe made Windows possible. Before that, the original Word was a very well-designed application in a sea of ungainly competitors back in the DOS era.
The bottom line: If you can't do something at a level of excellence, pull it. Add it later, when it's truly ready, as a free update. Get out of the crapware and shovelware business -- you won't believe the kind of loyalty you'll get if you deliver quality products without compromises. (Just ask Apple.) I'm not suggesting everything be perfect -- often, there's no such thing -- but customers can spot half-assed and rushed a mile away, and you already are too well known for those.
Your new mobile OS needs to run on hardware that oozes quality, fit and finish, and confident capability. You don't need to clone the iPhone to get that; the HTC Droid Incredible is another example, as are the top-end PCs and laptops from Acer, Hewlett-Packard, and Dell. Don't add a ton of perpherals and ports; instead, provide just one or two MicroUSB ports, the fewest buttons needed (without making any one button do unrelated things), a really good camera for still photography and videoconferencing (and remember it's not the megapixels that matter but the CCD quality, despite what the Gizmoids say), an amazing screen with excellent multitouch sensing, a memory card slot, flexible radios (CDMA and GSM 3G, Wi-Fi, Bluetooth not limited to headsets and keyboards, and maybe WiMax), and great audio in/out. A distinctive look that isn't distracing would be icing on that cake.
Furthermore, you should allow only two models: one with a physical keyboard, and one without. Memory and maybe a couple other noncritical features can vary within each model line, but don't create confusion. You don't need 15 different Windows Phone 7 devices of varying quality. You've already been burned going down that road. If you can't bring yourself to having just two models (and thus picking only HTC or Samsung as your hardware partner), enforce very tough requirements on the permissible variability. And don't let HTC add its own UI overlay; like Windows Mobile before it, Android needed the Sense UI to be usable, which, in essence, means they screwed up the OS. If you don't need it, you've just permitted an inconsistency in your platform's core.
Along these lines, don't confuse listening to the customer with delivering what you heard the customers say. Apple succeeds because Steve Jobs and the company's other key leaders have a strong vision, and they deliver it time and time again. Despite their outward arrogance, they do listen to customers, but make their own decisions. That results in cohesive products that more often than not move the ball forward. After all, it is a truism in market research that customers don't know what new features they want, just the ones they know they don't have. You have to invent the future the customers didn't know they wanted until you showed it to them.
Microsoft makes a lot of noise about listening to its customers, but that often leads to muddled products like Vista, whose aspirations of "everything but the kitchen sink OS" couldn't be put together despite the years of efforts and $6 billion or so of investment. Instead, try out novel concepts with users and see how they react; that's more likely to result in positive innovation and identify areas of confusion than trying to please or accommodate everything you hear.
2. Get the Basics Right
The underlying capabilities in your new mobile platform must be what's needed. Don't do the usual Microsoft thing and skimp. Apple got away with inferior business capabilities around security and manageability in its early iPhones and only in the last year has made serious headway to correct that. You don't have that luxury. Though I believe it harbors a deep desire for the iPhone to be the corporate standard, Apple doesn't pretend to be a business-oriented company; thus, it could ignore that audience and play to its entertainment strengths honed with the iPod and its creative strengths honed with the Mac. Microsoft has no such waves of passion to carry it past key omissions or compromises.
Don't think Windows Mobile's business strengths -- the security and management capabilities where it did lead -- will cut you any slack for the corporate audience. More than half of people who use smartphones in business buy their own, so those IT fond memories don't carry the weight they used to. In business, you're competing with both the iPhone and the BlackBerry. For individuals, you're competing with the iPhone and Android. You can't underperform in any core capabilities.
We all know what those core expectations are today, so if Windows Phone 7's multithreading doesn't deliver the experience users typically associate with multitasking, don't pretend it does and ship it anyhow. If Zune is locked into Windows PCs, don't include it; media management needs to be universal. The UI paradigm can't change because the app does its own thing; the gesture language needs to be universal, and human interface guidelines need to be rigorously enforced. You get the idea.
3. Decide Who You Are
A major challenge is to figure out what Microsoft mobile is all about -- that is, what kind of mobile platform you are. The Windows Phone 7 demos thus far focus on a social networking metaphor. Palm had a similar marketing pitch but didn't really make it the organizing primciple of its WebOS.
I get the attraction: 20-somethings spend much more time texting and tweeting and Facebooking than they do emailing or making voice calls. If you believe that behavior will carry over into their 30s, you want adopt their behavior to become their preferred platform and displace Apple and Google as the young generation ages.
If that's the case, be explicit about it. If owning the 20-somethings is your strategy but you pretend to be all things to all people, you'll peeve a lot of users, including most in business. You can't afford that lack of trust. Better to say who you are aimed at so that the rest of us don't feel misled.
Conversely, if you want the new mobile platform to be multigenerational and appealing to both personal and business uses -- which your Windows Mobile 7 team has suggested -- you'd better stop the social networking fixation as your operating system's organizing principle. It won't work for most of us.
Instead, make great social networking apps that you provide with the OS, but don't impose the social betworking style of constant interruption and fractional, reactive thinking on the operating system as a whole. Likewise, don't market it as a social networking device but really deliver a multipurpose device; you'll tee off the 20-somethings that way, perhaps forever.
In other words, figure out what kind of OS you are and deliver -- no apologies, no fudges.
4. Drop the Windows Name
You should not call the operating system "Windows" anything. It's not Windows. That advice doesn't mean that Windows is bad; it means that the mobile OS is not a version of Windows but is instead its own thing. There's a reason Apple doesn't call the iPhone "mobile Mac OS X," even though it's based on Mac OS X. Along the same lines, Google was smart enough not to rename the Android OS it acquired to Chrome OS, the name of its forthcoming Web-device OS. Be as smart as they are.
While you're at it, drop any Windows dependencies. That's hard for Microsoft, given its historic desire to make Windows the basis of everything, but it's a mistake. If Apple can learn to embrace Windows for its broad services like iTunes and MobileMe, and actively support Microsoft's Exchange ActiveSync email protocol, so can you make Zune and Studio platform-neutral. After all, you want everyone to embrace your mobile platform, right? The Windows/Mac wars are history, as far as mobile users are concerned. Stop fighting that old battle in this new realm.
5. Kill the Kin
The Kin was a really stupid idea. When everyone is wondering if Microsoft can even take part in the mobile game, you come onto the field ready to play Twister when everyone else is limbering up for the baseball championship.
Even more stupid was calling it a Windows Phone -- that's sure to confuse its grab bag of an operating system with the forthcoming Windows Phone 7 OS that is supposed to be your reset moment. The Kin has some interesting ideas around social networking and, with the Kin Studio, social memory, but reviewers agree the Kin device and the OS are dogs.
I can't believe you think it's a successful product in the eyes of the market. You're repeating your Vista blindness here. You need to put those dogs down, so when the real Microsoft mobile OS ships, the Kin is long forgotten. Pull the Kin from the market today, and recommend its team look for jobs at a competitor, where they might do you more food (maybe Nokia?).
If you really think you need a separate social networking phone for 20-somethings, fine. Make that a product line in your new mobile platform -- but be sure to have a product line for grownups that isn't about social networking. Right now, both the Kin and the forthcoming Windows Phone 7 are focused on a social networking approach to mobile. Why are you competing with yourself? At the very least, don't do so until you can first successfully compete with Apple and Google.
None of This Will be Easy
Most of the advice in this blog post goes against Microsoft's standard operating procedure. Steve, most of the mistakes I've highlighted have occurred under your watch as CEO and so are your responsibility -- Windows 6.5 and Kin for darned sure.
Getting rid of the leadership that has failed you is a good step, and it served you well when you finally owned up to the debacle that was Vista, clearing the path for the cleaned-up version known as Windows 7. But your challenge here is actually greater than fixing Vista.
Windows 7 is essentially a retooling of Vista; your next mobile OS is a new mobile OS, not a retooling of Windows Mobile. Starting over should be freeing, and what little I've seen of Windows Phone 7 indicates there is some truly new thinking involved. But even if it is freeing, starting over is not easy, and if you're using the same team that got and kept you in this mess, it's even harder. Replacing the generals is likely not enough.
Plus, fixing the corrosive Microsoft culture of "we'll get it right enough a few versions out" is an even tougher challenge. Corporate cultures are hard to change, and bad ones are like the Ebola virus: They infect anyone new very fast. You may want to separate this group from Microsoft, as if it were a separate company. Palm essentially had to do a engineering and leadership transplant to end years of destructive management maneuvering before it could create WebOS, but it lost its window of opportunity and came out with something that was a 90 percent solution to what Apple was already offering. You face the same danger.
You really have just this year to get this right. The iPhone is about to get its fourth OS version in the next few weeks, as well as new hardware. Apple has already moved the market past the smartphone to the slate with the iPad, yet Microsoft hasn't even figured out the smartphone yet. Google now seems to be getting its act together for Android and could have a credible iPhone alternative in place by the holidays. RIM's BlackBerry wil continue to decline to a core "all we want is email" customer base, but that customer base is as fiercely loyal as an Apple fanboy. There's little space for Microsoft in all of this.
This week, the heads of Microsoft's mobile and entertainment (Windows Mobile, Zune, and Xbox) division announced their pending departures. It's not a moment too soon, given the widespread doubts that the long-sagging division's mobile and music fortunes would revive under the status quo. (The Xbox is doing fine.) Unfortunately, Ballmer says the departures had nothing to do with Microsoft's slide into mobile irrelevance and that business will continue as usual. That's suicidal.
[ Stay up on tech news and reviews from your smartphone at infoworldmobile.com. | Get the best iPhone and iPad apps for pros with our business iPhone apps finder. | Keep up on key mobile developments and insights with the Mobile Edge blog and Mobilize newsletter. ]
With Apple's huge lead in mobile with the iPhone, iPod Touch, and iPad; Google's Android surge in smartphones and perhaps soon in slate-style tablets; and Research in Motion's seeming lock on messaging devices, people might wonder why Microsoft doesn't cut its losses and shift more emphasis to the company's cloud strategy, which Microsoft's execs hope will be its next-generation platform dominator à la Windows.
Ballmer should know why: Because mobile devices are where the client figure is, and a Microsoft without a strong mobile position means Microsoft loses any hope of owning the emerging technology ecosystem. At worst, Google would own it; at best, it would be a combination of Google, Apple, and Microsoft.
Microsoft has wasted a decade -- it's been that long since Windows Mobile (née CE) did anything that mattered to customers -- with meaningless updates on an operating system that showed signs of innovation in 2000 but quickly became a confused mess of desktop wannabe functions by 2004. Complacency clearly set in as Palm frittered its future on endless reorganizations and RIM stayed happily in the mud of messaging. Then the iPhone showed up in 2007 and changed the mobile world. Google saw it and after a rough start started to deliver serious alternative. Both now outsell the establishment mobile OS that Windows Mobile had meant to be.
Steve, what did your company do? It wasted several years on the hapless Windows 6.5 and the moronic Kin -- talk about throwing good money after bad. Now you have to turn around the mobile gap, and fast. Here's what you need to do -- and you have only the rest of this year to do it.
1. Kill the Crap (And do the Rest Right, or Not at All)
Microsoft produces a lot of mediocre software that it slowly fixes over a half-dozen or more iterations -- adding more crap along the way. I've never understood this business strategy, but it worked for Windows, so it's now accepted at Redmond. Practically every product from Office to Dynamics is developed this way.
For Windows Mobile, the crap caught up to it, smothering the operating system in a pile of excrement that as of Windows Mobile 6.5 could not longer be disguised for what it was. The new Kin mobile platform is also full of crap, lacing some interesting ideas around social networking on a badly designed user interface running on crappy hardware. It's Windows Mobile all over again.
The successor to Windows Mobile -- Windows Phone 7 -- can't contain crap. It needs to be a good OS, with a UI that works at all levels. The operating system needs to be elegant, simple, intentional, and consistent -- something Microsoft has never been good at.
Instead, Steve, your company's engineers confuse elegance with decoration, simplicity with obscurity, intentionality with brutishness, and consistency with -- well, they don't know that word. If you provide three ways to do the same thing, clutter up the screen with menus and dialog boxes and radio buttons, badger users with "helpful" alerts and confirmations, rely on multifinger keyboard shortcuts, and change navigation techniques across apps, you're dead.
Everyone cites Apple as the master of this game, but I don't believe for a minute that only Apple's designers can produce such quality. Apple is a standout, but it doesn't have a lock on good design. Amazon.com, Acer, Renault, and Nike are some top-of-mind examples.
Ironically, Microsoft has occasionally shown itself capable of design excellence: The original Excel was the first application to show that a graphical UI wasn't just for pretty pictures, and its success is what I believe made Windows possible. Before that, the original Word was a very well-designed application in a sea of ungainly competitors back in the DOS era.
The bottom line: If you can't do something at a level of excellence, pull it. Add it later, when it's truly ready, as a free update. Get out of the crapware and shovelware business -- you won't believe the kind of loyalty you'll get if you deliver quality products without compromises. (Just ask Apple.) I'm not suggesting everything be perfect -- often, there's no such thing -- but customers can spot half-assed and rushed a mile away, and you already are too well known for those.
Your new mobile OS needs to run on hardware that oozes quality, fit and finish, and confident capability. You don't need to clone the iPhone to get that; the HTC Droid Incredible is another example, as are the top-end PCs and laptops from Acer, Hewlett-Packard, and Dell. Don't add a ton of perpherals and ports; instead, provide just one or two MicroUSB ports, the fewest buttons needed (without making any one button do unrelated things), a really good camera for still photography and videoconferencing (and remember it's not the megapixels that matter but the CCD quality, despite what the Gizmoids say), an amazing screen with excellent multitouch sensing, a memory card slot, flexible radios (CDMA and GSM 3G, Wi-Fi, Bluetooth not limited to headsets and keyboards, and maybe WiMax), and great audio in/out. A distinctive look that isn't distracing would be icing on that cake.
Furthermore, you should allow only two models: one with a physical keyboard, and one without. Memory and maybe a couple other noncritical features can vary within each model line, but don't create confusion. You don't need 15 different Windows Phone 7 devices of varying quality. You've already been burned going down that road. If you can't bring yourself to having just two models (and thus picking only HTC or Samsung as your hardware partner), enforce very tough requirements on the permissible variability. And don't let HTC add its own UI overlay; like Windows Mobile before it, Android needed the Sense UI to be usable, which, in essence, means they screwed up the OS. If you don't need it, you've just permitted an inconsistency in your platform's core.
Along these lines, don't confuse listening to the customer with delivering what you heard the customers say. Apple succeeds because Steve Jobs and the company's other key leaders have a strong vision, and they deliver it time and time again. Despite their outward arrogance, they do listen to customers, but make their own decisions. That results in cohesive products that more often than not move the ball forward. After all, it is a truism in market research that customers don't know what new features they want, just the ones they know they don't have. You have to invent the future the customers didn't know they wanted until you showed it to them.
Microsoft makes a lot of noise about listening to its customers, but that often leads to muddled products like Vista, whose aspirations of "everything but the kitchen sink OS" couldn't be put together despite the years of efforts and $6 billion or so of investment. Instead, try out novel concepts with users and see how they react; that's more likely to result in positive innovation and identify areas of confusion than trying to please or accommodate everything you hear.
2. Get the Basics Right
The underlying capabilities in your new mobile platform must be what's needed. Don't do the usual Microsoft thing and skimp. Apple got away with inferior business capabilities around security and manageability in its early iPhones and only in the last year has made serious headway to correct that. You don't have that luxury. Though I believe it harbors a deep desire for the iPhone to be the corporate standard, Apple doesn't pretend to be a business-oriented company; thus, it could ignore that audience and play to its entertainment strengths honed with the iPod and its creative strengths honed with the Mac. Microsoft has no such waves of passion to carry it past key omissions or compromises.
Don't think Windows Mobile's business strengths -- the security and management capabilities where it did lead -- will cut you any slack for the corporate audience. More than half of people who use smartphones in business buy their own, so those IT fond memories don't carry the weight they used to. In business, you're competing with both the iPhone and the BlackBerry. For individuals, you're competing with the iPhone and Android. You can't underperform in any core capabilities.
We all know what those core expectations are today, so if Windows Phone 7's multithreading doesn't deliver the experience users typically associate with multitasking, don't pretend it does and ship it anyhow. If Zune is locked into Windows PCs, don't include it; media management needs to be universal. The UI paradigm can't change because the app does its own thing; the gesture language needs to be universal, and human interface guidelines need to be rigorously enforced. You get the idea.
3. Decide Who You Are
A major challenge is to figure out what Microsoft mobile is all about -- that is, what kind of mobile platform you are. The Windows Phone 7 demos thus far focus on a social networking metaphor. Palm had a similar marketing pitch but didn't really make it the organizing primciple of its WebOS.
I get the attraction: 20-somethings spend much more time texting and tweeting and Facebooking than they do emailing or making voice calls. If you believe that behavior will carry over into their 30s, you want adopt their behavior to become their preferred platform and displace Apple and Google as the young generation ages.
If that's the case, be explicit about it. If owning the 20-somethings is your strategy but you pretend to be all things to all people, you'll peeve a lot of users, including most in business. You can't afford that lack of trust. Better to say who you are aimed at so that the rest of us don't feel misled.
Conversely, if you want the new mobile platform to be multigenerational and appealing to both personal and business uses -- which your Windows Mobile 7 team has suggested -- you'd better stop the social networking fixation as your operating system's organizing principle. It won't work for most of us.
Instead, make great social networking apps that you provide with the OS, but don't impose the social betworking style of constant interruption and fractional, reactive thinking on the operating system as a whole. Likewise, don't market it as a social networking device but really deliver a multipurpose device; you'll tee off the 20-somethings that way, perhaps forever.
In other words, figure out what kind of OS you are and deliver -- no apologies, no fudges.
4. Drop the Windows Name
You should not call the operating system "Windows" anything. It's not Windows. That advice doesn't mean that Windows is bad; it means that the mobile OS is not a version of Windows but is instead its own thing. There's a reason Apple doesn't call the iPhone "mobile Mac OS X," even though it's based on Mac OS X. Along the same lines, Google was smart enough not to rename the Android OS it acquired to Chrome OS, the name of its forthcoming Web-device OS. Be as smart as they are.
While you're at it, drop any Windows dependencies. That's hard for Microsoft, given its historic desire to make Windows the basis of everything, but it's a mistake. If Apple can learn to embrace Windows for its broad services like iTunes and MobileMe, and actively support Microsoft's Exchange ActiveSync email protocol, so can you make Zune and Studio platform-neutral. After all, you want everyone to embrace your mobile platform, right? The Windows/Mac wars are history, as far as mobile users are concerned. Stop fighting that old battle in this new realm.
5. Kill the Kin
The Kin was a really stupid idea. When everyone is wondering if Microsoft can even take part in the mobile game, you come onto the field ready to play Twister when everyone else is limbering up for the baseball championship.
Even more stupid was calling it a Windows Phone -- that's sure to confuse its grab bag of an operating system with the forthcoming Windows Phone 7 OS that is supposed to be your reset moment. The Kin has some interesting ideas around social networking and, with the Kin Studio, social memory, but reviewers agree the Kin device and the OS are dogs.
I can't believe you think it's a successful product in the eyes of the market. You're repeating your Vista blindness here. You need to put those dogs down, so when the real Microsoft mobile OS ships, the Kin is long forgotten. Pull the Kin from the market today, and recommend its team look for jobs at a competitor, where they might do you more food (maybe Nokia?).
If you really think you need a separate social networking phone for 20-somethings, fine. Make that a product line in your new mobile platform -- but be sure to have a product line for grownups that isn't about social networking. Right now, both the Kin and the forthcoming Windows Phone 7 are focused on a social networking approach to mobile. Why are you competing with yourself? At the very least, don't do so until you can first successfully compete with Apple and Google.
None of This Will be Easy
Most of the advice in this blog post goes against Microsoft's standard operating procedure. Steve, most of the mistakes I've highlighted have occurred under your watch as CEO and so are your responsibility -- Windows 6.5 and Kin for darned sure.
Getting rid of the leadership that has failed you is a good step, and it served you well when you finally owned up to the debacle that was Vista, clearing the path for the cleaned-up version known as Windows 7. But your challenge here is actually greater than fixing Vista.
Windows 7 is essentially a retooling of Vista; your next mobile OS is a new mobile OS, not a retooling of Windows Mobile. Starting over should be freeing, and what little I've seen of Windows Phone 7 indicates there is some truly new thinking involved. But even if it is freeing, starting over is not easy, and if you're using the same team that got and kept you in this mess, it's even harder. Replacing the generals is likely not enough.
Plus, fixing the corrosive Microsoft culture of "we'll get it right enough a few versions out" is an even tougher challenge. Corporate cultures are hard to change, and bad ones are like the Ebola virus: They infect anyone new very fast. You may want to separate this group from Microsoft, as if it were a separate company. Palm essentially had to do a engineering and leadership transplant to end years of destructive management maneuvering before it could create WebOS, but it lost its window of opportunity and came out with something that was a 90 percent solution to what Apple was already offering. You face the same danger.
You really have just this year to get this right. The iPhone is about to get its fourth OS version in the next few weeks, as well as new hardware. Apple has already moved the market past the smartphone to the slate with the iPad, yet Microsoft hasn't even figured out the smartphone yet. Google now seems to be getting its act together for Android and could have a credible iPhone alternative in place by the holidays. RIM's BlackBerry wil continue to decline to a core "all we want is email" customer base, but that customer base is as fiercely loyal as an Apple fanboy. There's little space for Microsoft in all of this.
Ballmer: I'm Not Going to WWDC
Contrary to a published report, Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer will not be presenting at the Apple WWDC (Worldwide Developers Conference) in two weeks.
Speculation had centered on Ballmer appearing at the San Francisco event to talk about Visual Studio 2010 accommodating Apple's iPhone OS-based devices, which feature applications based on the Objective-C language. But a Microsoft twitter message on Thursday account rejected the notion of Ballmer speaking at the conference.
[ See InfoWorld's review of Visual Studio 2010, which shipped last month. ]
"Steve Ballmer not speaking at Apple Dev Conf. Nor appearing on Dancing with the Stars. Nor riding in the Belmont. Just FYI," the tweet said. The company, however, has no plans to support Objective-C, a Microsoft representative said.
Visual Studio 2010 accommodations for Objective-C would benefit Microsoft, an analyst said, though Visual Studio currently does not support Objective-C development. "If Visual Studio was to support Objective-C, it would be a great strategic move for Microsoft," said IDC analyst Al Hilwa.
(This story was updated on May 27, 2010, with new information from Microsoft regarding Objective-C development.)
This article, "Ballmer: I'm not going to WWDC," was originally published at InfoWorld.com. Follow the latest developments in business technology news and get a digest of the key stories each day in the InfoWorld Daily newsletter and on your mobile device at infoworldmobile.com.
Read more about developer world in InfoWorld's Developer World Channel.
Speculation had centered on Ballmer appearing at the San Francisco event to talk about Visual Studio 2010 accommodating Apple's iPhone OS-based devices, which feature applications based on the Objective-C language. But a Microsoft twitter message on Thursday account rejected the notion of Ballmer speaking at the conference.
[ See InfoWorld's review of Visual Studio 2010, which shipped last month. ]
"Steve Ballmer not speaking at Apple Dev Conf. Nor appearing on Dancing with the Stars. Nor riding in the Belmont. Just FYI," the tweet said. The company, however, has no plans to support Objective-C, a Microsoft representative said.
Visual Studio 2010 accommodations for Objective-C would benefit Microsoft, an analyst said, though Visual Studio currently does not support Objective-C development. "If Visual Studio was to support Objective-C, it would be a great strategic move for Microsoft," said IDC analyst Al Hilwa.
(This story was updated on May 27, 2010, with new information from Microsoft regarding Objective-C development.)
This article, "Ballmer: I'm not going to WWDC," was originally published at InfoWorld.com. Follow the latest developments in business technology news and get a digest of the key stories each day in the InfoWorld Daily newsletter and on your mobile device at infoworldmobile.com.
Read more about developer world in InfoWorld's Developer World Channel.
Roku Launches New Netflix, More
As I’ve chatted with various folks about Google TV over the past week, one question has come up repeatedly: What does this mean for Roku? The inexpensive little box is currently one of the simplest, most effective ways to get Internet video onto an HDTV, and I’ve never met anyone who owned one who wasn’t a fan. Products based on Google TV won’t be carbon copies of Roku boxes by any means, but they’ll surely compete with them.
The good news is that Roku’s player has a solid track record of getting better over time. Earlier this month, the company announced a major makeover of its Netflix channel, and plans to begin to push this update out to Roku owners this Friday.
I got to try the Netflix update a bit early, and it’s nice–really nice. I’ve always thought the fact that Netflix video on demand on the Roku, TiVo, and other gadgets made you find and select videos on a computer rather than the device was a feature, not a bug, since it’s so much easier to navigate a vast selection of titles in a browser. But Roku has done an outstanding job of making it easy to browse, search, and choose movies with its remote. And unlike Netflix’s browser-based service, it doesn’t make you wade through titles available only on DVD to find ones you can Watch Instantly.
Roku is busy on other fronts, too: It’s adding radio channels from RadioTime (with 30,000 stations) and Radio Paradise, and recently branched into pay-per-view sports with Ultimate Fighting Championship coverage. I’m looking forward to experiencing Google’s foray into TV for myself–but whether it’s a boon or a bust, I hope there’s room for Roku for a long time to come.
The good news is that Roku’s player has a solid track record of getting better over time. Earlier this month, the company announced a major makeover of its Netflix channel, and plans to begin to push this update out to Roku owners this Friday.
I got to try the Netflix update a bit early, and it’s nice–really nice. I’ve always thought the fact that Netflix video on demand on the Roku, TiVo, and other gadgets made you find and select videos on a computer rather than the device was a feature, not a bug, since it’s so much easier to navigate a vast selection of titles in a browser. But Roku has done an outstanding job of making it easy to browse, search, and choose movies with its remote. And unlike Netflix’s browser-based service, it doesn’t make you wade through titles available only on DVD to find ones you can Watch Instantly.
Roku is busy on other fronts, too: It’s adding radio channels from RadioTime (with 30,000 stations) and Radio Paradise, and recently branched into pay-per-view sports with Ultimate Fighting Championship coverage. I’m looking forward to experiencing Google’s foray into TV for myself–but whether it’s a boon or a bust, I hope there’s room for Roku for a long time to come.
Microsoft Needs a 'Killer' Windows 7 Tablet to Topple Apple
The hits came fast and furious for Microsoft this week. Microsoft's top mobile and gaming executives were ousted in a management shakeup, and rival Apple finally toppled Microsoft as the world's most valuable technology company measured by market capitalization.
Steve Ballmer as emoticons
Microsoft is still the world's dominant business software vendor, of course, but Apple's success with the iPad and Microsoft's own failures on the tablet computing front have made it "imperative" that Microsoft build a viable Windows 7 tablet, analysts say.
"The future of the operating system" is at stake, according to a report issued Thursday by Forrester analysts.
"Tablets are the next important computing form factor. To keep its products front and center, Microsoft needs a partner to produce a successful Windows tablet that competes with the Apple iPad," Forrester analysts J.P. Gownder and Sarah Rotman Epps write in the report titled "The Windows 7 Tablet Imperative."
"For Microsoft to remain relevant to consumers, it needs to adapt its operating system to new form factors beyond the traditional PC."
Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer previewed the HP Slate tablet in January at the Consumer Electronics Show, but HP later dumped Windows 7 from Slate, apparently due to concerns about OS performance.
Microsoft has also canceled its Courier tablet project and is getting rid of Robbie Bach and J Allard, top executives in Microsoft's Entertainment and Devices Division.
Bach and Allard's replacements will report directly to Ballmer, but some observers suggest that "Microsoft's real problem is Ballmer."
The HP tablet failure "is just an early warning signal" for Microsoft, which "must find an OEM partner that can create a killer tablet" to get back on solid ground, Forrester said.
A Windows 7 tablet is crucial for several reasons, the Forrester analysts said.
"Tablets represent a fourth form factor for consumer computing. After desktops, laptops, and netbooks, tablets represent the next wave of mass-market consumer computing devices," Forrester writes. "The iPad sold 1 million units in its first month of release, bolstering the entire category."
A Windows 7 tablet is also necessary because Windows "will soon face greater competition in netbooks," with Google pushing its Chrome operating system as an ideal platform for netbooks, Forrester said.
Google may also be developing a tablet based on its popular Android mobile operating system.
Microsoft cannot simply slap Windows 7 onto a tablet without optimizing the OS for this new form factor, analysts warned.
The Windows 7 tablet interface should not be identical to the laptop version. Instead, user experience must be simplified and adapted for touchscreen usage. A successful Windows 7 tablet should be priced attractively, at less than $750, or perhaps even under $500, Forrester suggested.
Microsoft learned with Zune "that it can't beat Apple at its own game if Apple makes the rules," Forrester said.
But Microsoft has strengths that it can take advantage of in the tablet market. For example, Microsoft could integrate a Windows 7 tablet with the Xbox 360.
"A Microsoft tablet that synchs with the Xbox 360 - with all the implied benefits, including the Natal [motion control] interface - would be a killer hub for the digital home, enabling back-and-forth streaming of videos and games that one-ups the capabilities of the iPad and makes Microsoft relevant for the next decade," Forrester said.
Steve Ballmer as emoticons
Microsoft is still the world's dominant business software vendor, of course, but Apple's success with the iPad and Microsoft's own failures on the tablet computing front have made it "imperative" that Microsoft build a viable Windows 7 tablet, analysts say.
"The future of the operating system" is at stake, according to a report issued Thursday by Forrester analysts.
"Tablets are the next important computing form factor. To keep its products front and center, Microsoft needs a partner to produce a successful Windows tablet that competes with the Apple iPad," Forrester analysts J.P. Gownder and Sarah Rotman Epps write in the report titled "The Windows 7 Tablet Imperative."
"For Microsoft to remain relevant to consumers, it needs to adapt its operating system to new form factors beyond the traditional PC."
Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer previewed the HP Slate tablet in January at the Consumer Electronics Show, but HP later dumped Windows 7 from Slate, apparently due to concerns about OS performance.
Microsoft has also canceled its Courier tablet project and is getting rid of Robbie Bach and J Allard, top executives in Microsoft's Entertainment and Devices Division.
Bach and Allard's replacements will report directly to Ballmer, but some observers suggest that "Microsoft's real problem is Ballmer."
The HP tablet failure "is just an early warning signal" for Microsoft, which "must find an OEM partner that can create a killer tablet" to get back on solid ground, Forrester said.
A Windows 7 tablet is crucial for several reasons, the Forrester analysts said.
"Tablets represent a fourth form factor for consumer computing. After desktops, laptops, and netbooks, tablets represent the next wave of mass-market consumer computing devices," Forrester writes. "The iPad sold 1 million units in its first month of release, bolstering the entire category."
A Windows 7 tablet is also necessary because Windows "will soon face greater competition in netbooks," with Google pushing its Chrome operating system as an ideal platform for netbooks, Forrester said.
Google may also be developing a tablet based on its popular Android mobile operating system.
Microsoft cannot simply slap Windows 7 onto a tablet without optimizing the OS for this new form factor, analysts warned.
The Windows 7 tablet interface should not be identical to the laptop version. Instead, user experience must be simplified and adapted for touchscreen usage. A successful Windows 7 tablet should be priced attractively, at less than $750, or perhaps even under $500, Forrester suggested.
Microsoft learned with Zune "that it can't beat Apple at its own game if Apple makes the rules," Forrester said.
But Microsoft has strengths that it can take advantage of in the tablet market. For example, Microsoft could integrate a Windows 7 tablet with the Xbox 360.
"A Microsoft tablet that synchs with the Xbox 360 - with all the implied benefits, including the Natal [motion control] interface - would be a killer hub for the digital home, enabling back-and-forth streaming of videos and games that one-ups the capabilities of the iPad and makes Microsoft relevant for the next decade," Forrester said.
Verizon Wireless’s New Plan: So Long Unlimited Data, Hello Buckets?
Remember the bad old days, before the advent of unlimited wireless data plans? Well unfortunately, with the vaunted arrival of 4G, it looks like those times might be returning if Verizon Wireless has its way. At the Barclays Capital conference in New York City this week, Verizon Wireless’s CEO Lowell McAdam said he hopes to ditch unlimited plans entirely on the company’s upcoming 4G LTE network, charging instead for “buckets” of megabytes.
McAdam also noted that, after the release of the first LTE-enabled device, Verizon anticipates using its 4G LTE network for voice starting in 2011. It remains unclear, however, whether Verizon’s LTE will also spell the end of unlimited voice calling plans.
Meanwhile, big carriers haven’t even been waiting for 4G to get here before doing whatever they can to increase people’s phone bills. A survey released this week by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) shows that one in six mobile phone users has been hit by “bill shock,” or an unanticipated hike in their monthly service fee not caused by a change in their calling plan. The majority–or 52 percent–of these “shocks” added $25 or more to the consumer’s monthly bill, with the hikes amounting to $100 or more 23 percent of the time.
Also this week, AT&T–another big carrier now readying 4G LTE services–upped its early termination fee (ETF) on smartphones and netbooks by an astounding $150, from $175 to $325. For its part, Verizon has already been charging an even higher ETF of $350–or $25 more than AT&T–on Droids and other high-end mobile devices.
By the way, in the very same study released by the FCC this week, 43 percent of the respondents acknowledged that ETFs have represented a “major reason” why they’ve remained with their current carriers. (Yet somewhat ironically, 18 percent of the cellular customers surveyed were apparently blissfully unaware of ETFs at all.)
So, as for Verizon’s future intentions around unlimited service plans, although 4G bandwidth constraints might play some kind of role here, the primary driver is far more likely a old-fashioned desire to boost the bottom line.
The timing of MacAdam’s remarks this week couldn’t have been more unfortunate, actually, if wireless carriers really want to sell 4G services. Many folks are still struggling to pay all kinds of existing bills. Right now, the still impending 4G stands to many as a glittering diversion, a shining beacon of hope for better times ahead.
In the midst of this seemingly endless grim economy, who wants to be brought down ahead of time by thoughts of how much these sparkling new 4G wireless services might cost you in the future? Verizon Wireless might find it tough to turn back the hands of time, anyhow. Sprint is about to start selling the U.S.’s first 4G phone, the EVO 4G, and it offers unlimited 4G data–albeit at a $10 premium over 3G. In the wildly competitive wireless services market, how can Verizon abandon unlimited wireless calling plans unless all of its rivals decide to do just about the same?
McAdam also noted that, after the release of the first LTE-enabled device, Verizon anticipates using its 4G LTE network for voice starting in 2011. It remains unclear, however, whether Verizon’s LTE will also spell the end of unlimited voice calling plans.
Meanwhile, big carriers haven’t even been waiting for 4G to get here before doing whatever they can to increase people’s phone bills. A survey released this week by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) shows that one in six mobile phone users has been hit by “bill shock,” or an unanticipated hike in their monthly service fee not caused by a change in their calling plan. The majority–or 52 percent–of these “shocks” added $25 or more to the consumer’s monthly bill, with the hikes amounting to $100 or more 23 percent of the time.
Also this week, AT&T–another big carrier now readying 4G LTE services–upped its early termination fee (ETF) on smartphones and netbooks by an astounding $150, from $175 to $325. For its part, Verizon has already been charging an even higher ETF of $350–or $25 more than AT&T–on Droids and other high-end mobile devices.
By the way, in the very same study released by the FCC this week, 43 percent of the respondents acknowledged that ETFs have represented a “major reason” why they’ve remained with their current carriers. (Yet somewhat ironically, 18 percent of the cellular customers surveyed were apparently blissfully unaware of ETFs at all.)
So, as for Verizon’s future intentions around unlimited service plans, although 4G bandwidth constraints might play some kind of role here, the primary driver is far more likely a old-fashioned desire to boost the bottom line.
The timing of MacAdam’s remarks this week couldn’t have been more unfortunate, actually, if wireless carriers really want to sell 4G services. Many folks are still struggling to pay all kinds of existing bills. Right now, the still impending 4G stands to many as a glittering diversion, a shining beacon of hope for better times ahead.
In the midst of this seemingly endless grim economy, who wants to be brought down ahead of time by thoughts of how much these sparkling new 4G wireless services might cost you in the future? Verizon Wireless might find it tough to turn back the hands of time, anyhow. Sprint is about to start selling the U.S.’s first 4G phone, the EVO 4G, and it offers unlimited 4G data–albeit at a $10 premium over 3G. In the wildly competitive wireless services market, how can Verizon abandon unlimited wireless calling plans unless all of its rivals decide to do just about the same?
iPhone Security Flaw: Using a PIN Won't Help You
Using a four-digit PIN to lock your iPhone doesn't really protect your data, security and IT blogger Bernd Marienfeldt has discovered. In an article describing the iPhone's business security framework, Marienfeldt has found a "data protection vulnerability" in Apple's iPhone 3GS.
Marienfeldt, working with security expert Jim Herbeck, has been able to reproduce the vulnerability on at least three non jail-broken iPhone 3GS handsets with different iPhone OS versions installed (including the latest). All tested iPhones were protected with a four-digit PIN.
In Marienfeldt's own words:
"The unprotected iPhone 3GS mounting is “limited” to the DCIM folder under Ubuntu < 10.04 LTS, Apple Macintosh, Windows 2000 SP2 and Windows 7. The way Ubuntu Lucid Lynx handles the iPhone 3GS [6,7,8] allows to get more content (please do make sure that the native Ubuntu system is fully up to date, e.g. “apt-get update, “apt-get upgrade” - any virtualization based solution will not work as described). I used the Alternate CD with x86 and AMD64 on different hardware."
Basically, plugging an up-to-date, non jail-broken, PIN-protected iPhone (powered off) into a computer running Ubuntu Lucid Lynx will allow the people to see practically all of the user's data--including music, photos, videos, podcasts, voice recordings, Google safe browsing databases, and game contents. The "hacker" has read/write access to the iPhone, and the hack leaves no trace.
According to Marienfeldt, "The allowed write access could also lead into triggering a buffer overflow." A buffer overflow could allow full write access, and full write access could potentially lead to the attacker being able to make phone calls (as far as we know, the attacker can access all of your data but they can't make any phone calls…how reassuring).
Marienfeldt points out that this is especially an issue for corporate/business users, who "rely on the expectation that their iPhone 3GS’s whole content is protected by encryption with a passcode based authentication in place to unlock it."
Apple has been notified of the flaw, but has yet to correct it (or give a timeline for the correction).
Obviously, this is not the first iPhone security flaw to have ever been found--but it's an interesting discovery, especially as AT&T currently states that it generates almost half of its revenue from business customers (and that the reason for this is because of the iPhone's awesome security).
According to a report from ZDNet, Ron Spears, CEO of the AT&T Business Solutions unit, said on Thursday that "four out of ten sales of the iPhone are made to enterprise users."
Spears also noted that, "By the time the 3G came out in ‘08 they had solved about 80% of the security issues. By the time the 3GS came out last summer, most CIOs will tell you today they have very few issues around the security that they need provided as they have come to know that RIM can do it because of the way RIM provides their solution."
Marienfeldt, working with security expert Jim Herbeck, has been able to reproduce the vulnerability on at least three non jail-broken iPhone 3GS handsets with different iPhone OS versions installed (including the latest). All tested iPhones were protected with a four-digit PIN.
In Marienfeldt's own words:
"The unprotected iPhone 3GS mounting is “limited” to the DCIM folder under Ubuntu < 10.04 LTS, Apple Macintosh, Windows 2000 SP2 and Windows 7. The way Ubuntu Lucid Lynx handles the iPhone 3GS [6,7,8] allows to get more content (please do make sure that the native Ubuntu system is fully up to date, e.g. “apt-get update, “apt-get upgrade” - any virtualization based solution will not work as described). I used the Alternate CD with x86 and AMD64 on different hardware."
Basically, plugging an up-to-date, non jail-broken, PIN-protected iPhone (powered off) into a computer running Ubuntu Lucid Lynx will allow the people to see practically all of the user's data--including music, photos, videos, podcasts, voice recordings, Google safe browsing databases, and game contents. The "hacker" has read/write access to the iPhone, and the hack leaves no trace.
According to Marienfeldt, "The allowed write access could also lead into triggering a buffer overflow." A buffer overflow could allow full write access, and full write access could potentially lead to the attacker being able to make phone calls (as far as we know, the attacker can access all of your data but they can't make any phone calls…how reassuring).
Marienfeldt points out that this is especially an issue for corporate/business users, who "rely on the expectation that their iPhone 3GS’s whole content is protected by encryption with a passcode based authentication in place to unlock it."
Apple has been notified of the flaw, but has yet to correct it (or give a timeline for the correction).
Obviously, this is not the first iPhone security flaw to have ever been found--but it's an interesting discovery, especially as AT&T currently states that it generates almost half of its revenue from business customers (and that the reason for this is because of the iPhone's awesome security).
According to a report from ZDNet, Ron Spears, CEO of the AT&T Business Solutions unit, said on Thursday that "four out of ten sales of the iPhone are made to enterprise users."
Spears also noted that, "By the time the 3G came out in ‘08 they had solved about 80% of the security issues. By the time the 3GS came out last summer, most CIOs will tell you today they have very few issues around the security that they need provided as they have come to know that RIM can do it because of the way RIM provides their solution."
RIM Joint Venture to Invest $100M in China's Mobile Industry
BlackBerry Partners Fund, which invests in applications for the BlackBerry and other mobile devices, has come together with China Broadband Capital Partners to set up a US$100 million fund, called BlackBerry Partners Fund China, that will invest in mobile Internet and mobile cloud technologies in China.
China Broadband Capital Partners, or CBC, is a China-based venture capital and private equity manager focused on telecommunications, the Internet and media investments. BlackBerry Partners Fund is the venture capital arm of Research In Motion, the company that sells the BlackBerry.
This is the right time to invest in mobile cloud and mobile Internet technology and the fund aims to tap into increasing network sophistication and 3G development in the world's most populous country, said Gregory Shea, corporate vice president and managing director of RIM China.
Shea said the new fund would facilitate the eventual Chinese launch of RIM's BlackBerry App World application store by supporting local developers.
China Broadband Capital Partners, or CBC, is a China-based venture capital and private equity manager focused on telecommunications, the Internet and media investments. BlackBerry Partners Fund is the venture capital arm of Research In Motion, the company that sells the BlackBerry.
This is the right time to invest in mobile cloud and mobile Internet technology and the fund aims to tap into increasing network sophistication and 3G development in the world's most populous country, said Gregory Shea, corporate vice president and managing director of RIM China.
Shea said the new fund would facilitate the eventual Chinese launch of RIM's BlackBerry App World application store by supporting local developers.
RIM Too Busy to Work With China Unicom, Exec Says
Research In Motion (RIM) is too busy with its existing partners in China to partner with China Unicom, according to the company's top executive in China.
RIM has already partnered with two of China's three mobile carriers, China Mobile and China Telecom. Li Gang, a vice president at China Unicom, recently told Chinese media that China Unicom would launch a BlackBerry handset this year but it's not clear if that will happen.
RIM "already has its hands full" working with China Mobile and China Telecom, said Gregory Shea, corporate vice president and managing director of RIM China, noting that China Mobile runs the world's largest GSM network and China Telecom will soon have the world's largest CDMA network.
At the end of April, China Mobile had 544.2 million customers while China Telecom had 64.5 million mobile subscribers, according to company figures. China Unicom had about 153 million mobile subscribers.
RIM has worked with China Mobile since 2006 and announced a tie-up with China Telecom earlier this month. As part of that deal, China Telecom will sell RIM's BlackBerry Storm for use on its CDMA2000 3G network. China Mobile, which operates a 3G network based on China's homegrown standard, TD-SCDMA (Time Division Synchronous Code Division Multiple Access), doesn't yet offer a 3G BlackBerry handset.
However, RIM has announced plans to make BlackBerry handset that will work with China Mobile's TD-SCDMA network. When that will be released remains unclear. Shea declined to give a timeline for the launch of a TD-SCDMA handset, but said that the project is "progressing well."
Last year, RIM and China Mobile also announced plans for handset that will support TD-LTE, a 4G mobile technology now being developed in China. Discussions between the two companies related to that phone are ongoing, Shea said.
RIM has already partnered with two of China's three mobile carriers, China Mobile and China Telecom. Li Gang, a vice president at China Unicom, recently told Chinese media that China Unicom would launch a BlackBerry handset this year but it's not clear if that will happen.
RIM "already has its hands full" working with China Mobile and China Telecom, said Gregory Shea, corporate vice president and managing director of RIM China, noting that China Mobile runs the world's largest GSM network and China Telecom will soon have the world's largest CDMA network.
At the end of April, China Mobile had 544.2 million customers while China Telecom had 64.5 million mobile subscribers, according to company figures. China Unicom had about 153 million mobile subscribers.
RIM has worked with China Mobile since 2006 and announced a tie-up with China Telecom earlier this month. As part of that deal, China Telecom will sell RIM's BlackBerry Storm for use on its CDMA2000 3G network. China Mobile, which operates a 3G network based on China's homegrown standard, TD-SCDMA (Time Division Synchronous Code Division Multiple Access), doesn't yet offer a 3G BlackBerry handset.
However, RIM has announced plans to make BlackBerry handset that will work with China Mobile's TD-SCDMA network. When that will be released remains unclear. Shea declined to give a timeline for the launch of a TD-SCDMA handset, but said that the project is "progressing well."
Last year, RIM and China Mobile also announced plans for handset that will support TD-LTE, a 4G mobile technology now being developed in China. Discussions between the two companies related to that phone are ongoing, Shea said.
Glasses-free 3D LCD TVs Likely out by 2015
Consumers will likely see 3D LCD TVs that don't require people to wear polarized glasses out on global markets by 2015, according to a Taiwanese research group that showed off an early version of such a device this week.
Taiwan's Industrial Technology Research Institute (ITRI) displayed a 42-inch glasses-free 3D LCD TV this week, and the company can currently make them with screens as large as 65 inches, according to Stephen Jeng, director of ITRI's 3D System & Application Division.
The technology is considered vital to getting 3D into more people's living rooms. Analysts say most people don't want to wear polarized glasses to watch 3D TV, and many balk at the price, up to $200 per pair for some of the glasses. The high price might make a person think twice about hosting a World Cup or Super Bowl party with friends.
Jeng says ITRI's technology will be used in digital signs and 3D digital photo-frames initially. The main issues for glasses-free 3D TV are broadcasting, availability of content, and eye safety, he said. Small quantities of glasses-free digital signage and 3D photo frames are already available on the market, he said, but may yet take a year or two to take off.
The glasses-free 3D LCD TV on display from ITRI this week showed pictures of objects that ITRI's software converted into a 3D image. The image was blurry and the technology appears to still be a long way from being ready.
The research group is using parallax barrier technology to create the 3D effect on the TV. The TV was branded Chi Mei, from Chimei Innolux, but Jeng said the company gave ITRI a regular LCD TV to use for the show and that ITRI added its 3D technology to the set on display. Chimei Innolux is not making glasses-free 3D TVs.
A number of companies are working on glasses-free 3D TVs, mainly in Japan and South Korea.
The 3D TV concept took off early this year at the International Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas as most major TV makers, including Samsung Electronics, showed off sets that are 3D-capable, meaning people can use them as regular high definition (2-dimensional) TVs or as 3D TVs.
The global 3D TV market this year will likely reach 6.2 million units, according to market researcher Displaybank, with sales growing to 33 million units by 2012.
Taiwan's Industrial Technology Research Institute (ITRI) displayed a 42-inch glasses-free 3D LCD TV this week, and the company can currently make them with screens as large as 65 inches, according to Stephen Jeng, director of ITRI's 3D System & Application Division.
The technology is considered vital to getting 3D into more people's living rooms. Analysts say most people don't want to wear polarized glasses to watch 3D TV, and many balk at the price, up to $200 per pair for some of the glasses. The high price might make a person think twice about hosting a World Cup or Super Bowl party with friends.
Jeng says ITRI's technology will be used in digital signs and 3D digital photo-frames initially. The main issues for glasses-free 3D TV are broadcasting, availability of content, and eye safety, he said. Small quantities of glasses-free digital signage and 3D photo frames are already available on the market, he said, but may yet take a year or two to take off.
The glasses-free 3D LCD TV on display from ITRI this week showed pictures of objects that ITRI's software converted into a 3D image. The image was blurry and the technology appears to still be a long way from being ready.
The research group is using parallax barrier technology to create the 3D effect on the TV. The TV was branded Chi Mei, from Chimei Innolux, but Jeng said the company gave ITRI a regular LCD TV to use for the show and that ITRI added its 3D technology to the set on display. Chimei Innolux is not making glasses-free 3D TVs.
A number of companies are working on glasses-free 3D TVs, mainly in Japan and South Korea.
The 3D TV concept took off early this year at the International Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas as most major TV makers, including Samsung Electronics, showed off sets that are 3D-capable, meaning people can use them as regular high definition (2-dimensional) TVs or as 3D TVs.
The global 3D TV market this year will likely reach 6.2 million units, according to market researcher Displaybank, with sales growing to 33 million units by 2012.
Former Google Exec Mentors Chinese Startups
Kai-Fu Lee, the former head of Google China, is turning his attention to China's start-up scene with his new company, Innovation Works.
Lee is investing in Chinese companies in the mobile Internet space through Innovation Works, which functions as both a venture capital fund and a startup incubator. He serves as co-founder and CEO of the company and aims to give young Chinese entrepreneurs the mentoring, resources and funds they need to stop relying on copy-cat ideas.
Many Chinese startups simply copy what companies are doing outside China, hoping to replicate their success.
But the latest generation of Chinese entrepreneurs are watching companies in the U.S. and Japan and figuring out how to integrate and optimize their ideas for the local market, Lee said, saying pure copies of foreign companies are no longer viable.
After six months of operation, Innovation Works has so far provided seed funding to nine entrepreneurs, seven of which are in the mobile Internet space, Lee said. Only one is looking to enter the overseas market.
Innovation Works has been compared to venture firm Y Combinator, which targets early-stage start-ups, but Lee says they are "very different."
Y Combinator usually invests US$20,000 per three-founder team for a 6 percent to 7 percent stake, while Innovation Works invests about $150,000 to $200,000 for each entrepreneur, who can be paired with five engineers, and takes a stake of between 15 percent and 25 percent. Lee says that means Innovation Works is pickier when choosing investment targets.
Besides mobile Internet startups, Innovation Works is interested in e-commerce but is steering clear of Twitter-like microblogging services.
While microblogging is becoming popular in China, stringent media regulations means its likely to be left to the big boys, like Sina, one of China's largest Internet portals, said Lee. He has first-hand knowledge of China's censorship policies from his time at Google, where he oversaw the launch of the censored search engine that the company developed for China.
Lee is investing in Chinese companies in the mobile Internet space through Innovation Works, which functions as both a venture capital fund and a startup incubator. He serves as co-founder and CEO of the company and aims to give young Chinese entrepreneurs the mentoring, resources and funds they need to stop relying on copy-cat ideas.
Many Chinese startups simply copy what companies are doing outside China, hoping to replicate their success.
But the latest generation of Chinese entrepreneurs are watching companies in the U.S. and Japan and figuring out how to integrate and optimize their ideas for the local market, Lee said, saying pure copies of foreign companies are no longer viable.
After six months of operation, Innovation Works has so far provided seed funding to nine entrepreneurs, seven of which are in the mobile Internet space, Lee said. Only one is looking to enter the overseas market.
Innovation Works has been compared to venture firm Y Combinator, which targets early-stage start-ups, but Lee says they are "very different."
Y Combinator usually invests US$20,000 per three-founder team for a 6 percent to 7 percent stake, while Innovation Works invests about $150,000 to $200,000 for each entrepreneur, who can be paired with five engineers, and takes a stake of between 15 percent and 25 percent. Lee says that means Innovation Works is pickier when choosing investment targets.
Besides mobile Internet startups, Innovation Works is interested in e-commerce but is steering clear of Twitter-like microblogging services.
While microblogging is becoming popular in China, stringent media regulations means its likely to be left to the big boys, like Sina, one of China's largest Internet portals, said Lee. He has first-hand knowledge of China's censorship policies from his time at Google, where he oversaw the launch of the censored search engine that the company developed for China.
Abonați-vă la:
Comentarii (Atom)