Hello world!0
JR posted in Uncategorized on April 7th, 2005
Welcome to WordPress. This is your first post. Edit or delete it, then start blogging!
Hello world!0
10 Web Trends That Should Die0
JR posted in Web news on December 30th, 2005
Great article about 10 Web Trends That Should Die in 2006. The first item alone warrants spreading the word about the article. Combine this with the mentioned item 5 (treating the mobile web as a different entity) and it encompasses a couple of my general gripes on the web. I have a great fondness for simple, straight-forward presentations of information on the web. It has the additional benefit that doing so makes setting up a separate CSS for mobile devices easy. Fancy and elaborate web sites that rely on very complicated layout often leave me cold.
In conjunction with that, I’ll nominate Macromedia’s Flash as the best application that is all but useless to the general run of web readers. Flash is an excellent way of integrating a rich user interface into web pages, but instead, it is used almost exclusively for delivering useless on-screen toys or advertisements. In both cases, of limited use to the reader.
I’ll quibble about a couple of the other items included in the list (item 4, “Let’s spam everything…”, and item 6, “Let’s do a traditional homepage…”). Both are so old that they shouldn’t warrant an appearance on the list, but I didn’t write the article.
Welcome to E-Books0
JR posted in Writing, Devices on December 31st, 2005
I’ll admit that, as a life-long reader, I’ve always been looking for some way that I can conveniently take a book or two with me during my commute. Paperbacks have filled that role for almost all of us since their introduction almost a century ago. However, as a heavy and rapid reader, I was regularly faced with the dilema of determining what book to take with me as a backup when I approached the end of the current novel. And, if I had a particularly productive day of reading, I would sometimes find myself without reading material for the commute home. While not an onerous choice, sometimes I wished that it was one I didn’t have to make.
BusinessWeek has an article about Sony’s upcoming e-book reader slated to debut at the Consumer Electronics Show. They report that it is to be priced at $300-$500. Learning from Apple’s success with the iPod/iTunes close integration, they will be offering books via their Sony Connect web store.
I have some severe doubts about the appeal and success of this device. First, Sony’s previous attempt at such a device, the Japanese-only Librie, while promising, turned out to be a failure in the market. Overpriced, required a proprietary formats for e-books, and, as a result, little in the way of content. Nor was there any easy way for readers to get their own material onto the device.
Sony attacks these issues in multiple ways. It has content deals with major US publishers (Random House, Simon & Schuster and HarperCollins). They have included the nearly universal PDF as a readable format and, as previously noted, have embraced the common USB standard for connecting the device. Further, it will reportedly use the standard SD memory cards rather than Sony’s less popular and proprietary Memory Sticks.
Missing from this advance notice is any indication of what the price of an e-book will be or if there will be any way to get publications to the reader outside of Sony’s web store (though with PDF as an allowed format, one would hope so). Though Sony may have learned lessons from Apple, my guess is they aren’t likely to have noted that a lot of what is driving the success of the iPod is people placing their own existing music library on the device without paying another dime to the content owners (something that Sony-BMG despises and tried to do away with via their recent rootkit fiasco). This won’t be possible for the e-book reader unless people are willing to scan their own books to PDF.
Sony has a penchant for creating some great hardware and then missing the opportunity to make it a standard. I expect that to happen here. Also in early 2006, the BusinessWeek article reports that iRex Technologies (a Philips Electronics spin-off) and Jinke Co. (a Chinese device maker) will also debut similar devices. I doubt that either will be compatible with the Sony store, and Sony will lose any chance of setting a standard that will benefit themselves.
Lastly, and an objection that may readers will note, why does this need to be restricted to being an e-book reader only (and especially at that price). The e-ink screen is the real value of the product. That screen can display any black/white text with remarkable crispness and with a miserly use of power. Couldn’t this be mated with something like Nokia’s E770 web tablet which is already available for $350 and able to read web pages, PDFs and more?
Pundit Gets It Almost Right!0
JR posted in Windows on December 31st, 2005
In John Dvorak’s December 21 article, he examines Microsoft’s onrushing venture into software subscriptions as a revenue source. What he is missing is the reason that Microsoft is doing so.
Dvorak points out that Microsoft built a large part of its fortune on selling software directly to consumers and that this flew directly in the face of the previous paradigm which was licensing usage on a “per seat” basis for a fixed period of time. He notes that he doesn’t understand why they would now decide that the previous model was so good that Microsoft needs to get into that business.
Dvorak then goes on to say that Microsoft should instead invest effort into improving the Office suite and points to PowerPoint as needing particular improvement.
Dvorak is so close to answering his own question, but doesn’t see it staring him in the face. The problem that Microsoft wants to fix with a return to a software subscription model is that they are having trouble improving the Office suite at all. It is widely acknowledged that users don’t use even 10% of the capabilities built into Office (and, if my experience is any guide, that may be as little as 2% (still hitting two returns to space paragraphs?)). Why try to improve the software if no one is using all that is already there?
In conjunction with this is the Microsoft monopoly problem. They already so dominate the Office space that their real competition is from previous versions of their own suite. Why upgrade from the nicely working version of Word 97 when you are already not making use of any of its outdated ‘advanced’ functions? Microsoft has successfully created a near monopoly in the Office suite. How can they make more sales when the existing stuff is still doing everything and more than the users need to do?
If you want to get a revenue stream for something that isn’t changing and isn’t likely to change in general, a subscription model is a great idea. No problem with doing any more work on the software, just keep it working properly in the core functions. Any bells and whistles added are “giving increased value” to subscribers and can be done without risking a revenue stream.
There is plenty of reason to test a subscription model for software. But I have to agree with Dvorak, it will ultimately be a waste of money.
LA Times predictions - part 10
JR posted in Web news, Devices on January 3rd, 2006
Excellent article by Sallie Hofmeister of the LA Times highlighting her predictions for the coming year. Whether you agree with any of her predictions or not, there are several in the article which are well-worthy of attention from my readers.
The section which appears to have caught the attention of the tech community was her rather nebulous statements about Google getting into the consumer hardware business. Slashdot offered and early exposure. Later, C-Net’s News.com started placing it on their “News From The Web” section. The original article is pretty mild in its statement, “Google will unveil its own low-price personal computer or other device that connects to the Internet.”
The article then goes on to talk about unnamed sources reports that Google has been in negotiations with Wal-Mart to sell a “Google PC”. Speculatively running a Google-provided non-Microsoft operating system, it would supposedly be priced at a couple hundred dollars.
Alternatively, the article also points to a Bear Stearns analyst report that speculated about soemthing called “Google Cubes”. These are supposed to be a small hardware device that can connect a variey of devices and distribute media.
Last, in further support of something important happening with Google is the fact that Google’s co-founder, Larry Page, will be giving a keynote speech at the Consumer Electronics Show on January 6.
I’ll shoot my mouth off now and apologize later. While a Google PC is definitely doable (and would likely be Linux-based given their expertise), I think that this is a non-starter. Other than the novelty and a presumed tight link to Google’s existing services, it can’t help but run up against the wall that has defeated other Windows challengers; software selection and compatibility versus Microsoft’s Windows.
I first became aware of the speculative Google Cube from a November article by Robert X. Cringley. As he usually does, there is lots of excellent speculation and ideas, but little in the way of hard facts. That would appear to be much of the foundation of the Bear Stearns analyst report. More than the LA Times article speculated, Cringley speculated at a wide ecosystem that the Google Cubes would enable from multimedia distribution to a home alarm system. While a cheap device individually, it needs a massive and therefore expensive implementation of the devices.
Given the need for massive distribution of the Cubes, it suggests a reason for negotiations with Wal-Mart. Given that the PC would be destined for a troubled life, I hope that the keynote is about the Google Cube and that Larry pulls a Steve Jobs-like surprise and is able to have the Cubes appear in Wal-Mart shortly after the announcement (one would hope the day of the speech).
More from Sallie Hofmeister’s article in part 2.
LA Times predictions - part 20
JR posted in Windows, Web news on January 3rd, 2006
This is the second part of my commentary about the excellent article by Sallie Hofmeister of the LA Times.
After the initial part of the article about Google, she goes on to talk about Microsoft’s actions in the wake of its failed attempt to win AOL’s search business. Given that Google retained that place by taking a 5% stake in AOL, Microsoft is now supposedly in the market for some other way of capturing more market for its Internet ambitions. The article points at several expensive candidates; Yahoo (at $90+ billion), InterActiveCorp (of Ask Jeeves, Expedia, Ticketmaster and more), or the crown jewel, Time Warner itself.
Microsoft is facing a challenging year. Google appears to have the momentum, the means and the will to press that advantage. Microsoft’s secure bases are looking less secure than at any recent time. Windows is on hold waiting for the release of Vista late in 2006 and continues to suffer imaging-damaging security breaches on what appears to be a bi-weekly basis. Microsoft Office, meanwhile, is suffering in comparison to its own earlier versions and will be having trouble defining a compelling reason to upgrade when the next version is released.
Next, Microsoft is gambling on finding some way of making the transition to web-based services while retaining their existing base. So far, Microsoft’s Live selections are showing a bit too much “me too” offerings. Don’t count them out, but Microsoft hasn’t shown the same sort of skill in dealing with the web as they did on the desktop. With the restrictions incumbent on a convicted monopolist, they may find it difficult to recapture that same dominance.
The remaining bulk of the article discusses the media merry-go-round of the executives at the various television and movie companies.
BellSouth & Tiered Access0
JR posted in Web news on January 6th, 2006
It looks like BellSouth is pressing forward with their plan to establish tiered Internet service. The Wall Street Journal is reporting today that it is currently in negotiations with a movie company and with an Internet gaming company to deliver their services at a higher priority.
This is something that they started speaking about in late November 2005, when their chief technologist, William L. Smith, suggested that companies should pay for transiting the telco networks. See the coverage in the Washington Post.
Municipal WiFi0
JR posted in Web news on February 1st, 2006
And astonishingly insightful essay and editorial detailing some of the history and benefits of municipal competition to entrenched monopolies. The recounted comparisons between municipal electrification in the early 20th century to the present-day considerations of municipal broadband are very insightful.
Let There Be Wi-Fi – Jan 10, 2006 – Digital Communities
Internet Neutrality - Tough Issue0
JR posted in Web news on June 16th, 2006
Ran across an excellent article about the need for neutral flow of packets on the Internet. But this article isn’t just the latest in the normal doom and gloom of how bad things will be. Rather Richard Bennet finds the balance to recognize that regulating the Internet at all carries its own peril as well.
What is his conclusion? Oppose monopolies (and duopolies) at every turn, but in those instances in which you can’t prevent them, regulate them so they can’t abuse that monopoly.
The Return of Turkey Guts0
JR posted in Web news on June 19th, 2006
We haven’t heard much from the world of turkey guts in recent months. Late in 2003, a company called Changing World Technologies received a lot of science press coverage for their pilot plant in Philadelphia that was converting organic waste from a turkey processing plant into a high quality oil. The oil was so good that it could be produced for an estimated $40 per barrel and was easily refined for anything that conventional oil could be used for. They were in the midst of building a demonstrator plant in Missouri.
Like many readers pained by the rising price of gasoline, I wondered what had happened to the project. After all, $40 per barrel sounds pretty good considering that crude is presently at just under $70 per barrel today. Discover magazine’s April 2006 edition has answered the questions.
First, it turns out that scaling up the plant wasn’t as easy as the developers originally thought. Building took more than a year longer than originally planned. Then there was the tweaking which is still going on.
One of the problems was that the process was sensitive to differences in what was being fed to the plant. Too much fluid in one batch required different tweaks than when they received truckloads of feathers. Eventually they settled that by simply blending a number of loads into a more consistent gruel.
Second, their estimated price of product was well short of the $40 they were expecting. One of these was understandable; they had originally thought that they were going to be paid to dispose of the turkey waste. After a ruling from the FDA that allowed turkey producers to use their waste as part of the feedstock for turkey feed (something that is suspected to have lead to mad cow disease when done with beef), they actually have to pay the turkey producers for their waste.
Third, they were competing with products like biodiesel which has a $1 per gallon subsidy from the US federal government. Just recently they started receiving the same subsidy and started managing a profit of about $4 per barrel of oil produced. Not a huge profit, but if the rules on waste change, a tremendous profit again.
Good news for the company is that there are several European countries that already have very restrictive waste rules and higher fuel costs. There, the company would already be very profitable and doing the good work of getting rid of the waste.