Maps, Google+ Upgrades For iOS, Android
By Gary Krakow - 10/11/12
Tickers in this article: AMZN FB GOOG AAPL
NEW YORK (TheStreet) - Who will reign supreme in the mobile market? Google(GOOG)or Apple(AAPL)? Internet heavyweight Google calls it the industry's "defining fight."
Google's Executive Chairman Eric Schmidt expects more than one billion devices, worldwide, will be running his company's Android software within a year. But the search giant's not stopping there.
Early on Thursday, Google released a giant update to the Maps application; its 'Street View' feature in particular.
According to the company's blog,
Street View is now:
"more comprehensive than ever before by launching our biggest ever update--doubling our number of special collections and updating over 250,000 miles of roads around the world. We're increasing Street View coverage in Macau, Singapore, Sweden, the U.S., Thailand, Taiwan, Italy, Great Britain, Denmark, Norway and Canada. And we're launching special collections in South Africa, Japan, Spain, France, Brazil and Mexico, among others."
Apple dropped Google Maps from the latest version of its iOS mobile operating system in a long-brewing corporate battle for supremacy. Google has hinted/promised a new, standalone version of Maps for iOS fans by the end of the year.
And, it doesn't stop there. Google also released an update for its Google+ application on Thursday. The new software adds improved support for iPhone 5/iOS 6 users as well as new features and a redesigned widget for Android lovers.
In an interview with AllThingsD, Schmidt reiterated his belief that the industry will soon be dominated by software platforms from what he's termed the "Gang of Four" - Google, Apple, Amazon(AMZN) and Facebook(FB).
Friday, October 12, 2012
The saber rattling continues. Apple gets reprieve in Korea. Is this a hint?
Apple wins iPhone and iPad delay of ban in South Korea
Posted by Chris Burns on October 11, 2012.
Though it seemed as though Apple had lost a battle against Samsung earlier this year with a ban of both the iPad and the iPhone in South Korea, an update has been made today by the court that the defending party will be able to keep items for sale pending appeal. This event is rather similar to the situation currently happening in the USA with the Samsung Galaxy Nexus, also placed back up for sale pending appeal in a completely Apple vs Samsung case. This case in South Korea had the iPhone 3GS, iPhone 4, iPad 1, and iPad 2 banned from sale due to Samsung connectivity patents.
Oddly enough, several Samsung Galaxy devices remain banned from sale in South Korea because they’ve not sought appeals as Apple has. It is because an appeal has been sought by Apple in this case that they’re able to keep their devices up for sale in the country. The August 24th ruling in this case remains in place unless Samsung decides to take action as they have – so to speak – in the USA-based case.
Here in the USA, the case regards quite a few patens owned by Apple that Apple says Samsung crossed over with the Samsung Galaxy Nexus. This is just one of several devices that Apple successfully had banned over the past year inside the USA, another of them being the Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1, another device that has been placed back on sale after a brief period of time this Summer.
Have a peek at the timeline below to see what’s been happening in this epic battle that’ll be going on for a long, long time. It’s this battle that Google’s own people feel will be the death of us all, you might like to know, and it’s certainly not something that we’re glad to see continue – nor is anyone not profiting from the experience, of course. Stay tuned for more device wars in the courtroom.
Posted by Chris Burns on October 11, 2012.
Though it seemed as though Apple had lost a battle against Samsung earlier this year with a ban of both the iPad and the iPhone in South Korea, an update has been made today by the court that the defending party will be able to keep items for sale pending appeal. This event is rather similar to the situation currently happening in the USA with the Samsung Galaxy Nexus, also placed back up for sale pending appeal in a completely Apple vs Samsung case. This case in South Korea had the iPhone 3GS, iPhone 4, iPad 1, and iPad 2 banned from sale due to Samsung connectivity patents.
Oddly enough, several Samsung Galaxy devices remain banned from sale in South Korea because they’ve not sought appeals as Apple has. It is because an appeal has been sought by Apple in this case that they’re able to keep their devices up for sale in the country. The August 24th ruling in this case remains in place unless Samsung decides to take action as they have – so to speak – in the USA-based case.
Here in the USA, the case regards quite a few patens owned by Apple that Apple says Samsung crossed over with the Samsung Galaxy Nexus. This is just one of several devices that Apple successfully had banned over the past year inside the USA, another of them being the Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1, another device that has been placed back on sale after a brief period of time this Summer.
Have a peek at the timeline below to see what’s been happening in this epic battle that’ll be going on for a long, long time. It’s this battle that Google’s own people feel will be the death of us all, you might like to know, and it’s certainly not something that we’re glad to see continue – nor is anyone not profiting from the experience, of course. Stay tuned for more device wars in the courtroom.
The science of waiting in line?
According to the experts, the best explanation for why consumers wait in line just so that they can hand over money for the newest iPhone or a Black Friday doorbuster deal is that … it’s fun?
A New York Times op-ed published over the summer declared in the headline that waiting in line is “torture,” and here’s why:
Americans spend roughly 37 billion hours each year waiting in line. The dominant cost of waiting is an emotional one: stress, boredom, that nagging sensation that one’s life is slipping away. The last thing we want to do with our dwindling leisure time is squander it in stasis.
So true. Everybody hates lines. Or do they? Despite the largely universal loathing of lines and time wasting away unnecessarily, it’s become commonplace in society today for consumers to willingly, happily volunteer to partake in such torture, waiting on line for hours, if not days, for the latest iPhone or Nike sneakers, as well as for Black Friday sales and rides at Walt Disney World.
What can explain such behavior? Why is it that we can gripe about lines at airports and government offices one second, and then break our backs standing in them outside an Apple Store the next, all the while there are plenty of other, far more reasonable ways to get what we want?
For the most part, consumers aren’t waiting in line for logical reasons. They aren’t there to get the absolute best prices, nor (limited edition Nikes notwithstanding) to get their hands on a scarce, highly valuable commodity. What is it, then?
Consumer analysts and marketing researchers offer this explanation, which is puzzling to those of us who try to avoid queues like the plague: Waiting in line is fun, and makes you feel good about yourself.
Wait, what? What about the idea that lines are torture, and that we suffer the “nagging sensation that one’s life is slipping away” while waiting in them?
Apparently, stronger psychological forces are at work, at least when it comes to a certain breed of shopper. “The shared experience of waiting is part of what’s driving consumer satisfaction,” according to the experts cited in a MarketWatch story. Instead of the communal suffering in a wait to get through an airport TSA checkpoint, waiting outside an Apple Store for the latest iWhatever, or camping out on a Best Buy sidewalk before Black Friday, has become a giddy, exciting experience shared by those willingly joining in.
Being surrounded by like-minded consumers, who have also decided that it makes sense to wait in line, is a sign that you’re not alone—and that your choices on what to buy and how long it’s worth standing around to buy it are sound:
[It's] a concept known as “social proof.” And that holds true even in the face of considerable logic to the contrary; a name-brand television, for example, is actually more expensive on Black Friday than on several other holiday-season shopping days
Since Black Friday has just so-so prices on big-name TVs, and the iPhone can be purchased without requiring anyone to wait in lines, it would seem to be pretty easy to demonstrate that the emperor has no clothes. Instead, thanks to brilliant marketing and the stubborn crowd mentality, Daniel M. Ladik, a marketing professor at the Stillman School of Business at Seton Hall University, tells MarketWatch that he thinks lines for the newest, most buzzworthy products are here to stay:
“It’s a community thing,” he says of those lines stretched outside Apple stores. “There’s no other logic to it.”
If there’s one thing that people who hate all lines and people who only hate lines that don’t involve Nikes, Apple products, Black Friday, Disney, or video games can agree on, it’s this, from the Times story:
Perhaps the biggest influence on our feelings about lines, though, has to do with our perception of fairness. When it comes to lines, the universally acknowledged standard is first come first served: any deviation is, to most, a mark of iniquity and can lead to violent queue rage.
In the case of iPhones especially, fair line etiquette is observed and it’s always first-come, first-serve. And all who wait in line can call themselves winners: They secure bragging rights and an ego boost when getting their hands on the new gadget before anyone who didn’t wait in line.
Then again, the folks who didn’t bother to stand overnight outside an Apple Store can also consider themselves winners, and smarter-than-average consumers — because they didn’t just waste a bunch of time standing in line.
Brad Tuttle is a reporter at TIME. Find him on Twitter at @bradrtuttle. You can also continue the discussion on TIME’s Facebook page and on Twitter at @TIME.
A New York Times op-ed published over the summer declared in the headline that waiting in line is “torture,” and here’s why:
Americans spend roughly 37 billion hours each year waiting in line. The dominant cost of waiting is an emotional one: stress, boredom, that nagging sensation that one’s life is slipping away. The last thing we want to do with our dwindling leisure time is squander it in stasis.
So true. Everybody hates lines. Or do they? Despite the largely universal loathing of lines and time wasting away unnecessarily, it’s become commonplace in society today for consumers to willingly, happily volunteer to partake in such torture, waiting on line for hours, if not days, for the latest iPhone or Nike sneakers, as well as for Black Friday sales and rides at Walt Disney World.
What can explain such behavior? Why is it that we can gripe about lines at airports and government offices one second, and then break our backs standing in them outside an Apple Store the next, all the while there are plenty of other, far more reasonable ways to get what we want?
For the most part, consumers aren’t waiting in line for logical reasons. They aren’t there to get the absolute best prices, nor (limited edition Nikes notwithstanding) to get their hands on a scarce, highly valuable commodity. What is it, then?
Consumer analysts and marketing researchers offer this explanation, which is puzzling to those of us who try to avoid queues like the plague: Waiting in line is fun, and makes you feel good about yourself.
Wait, what? What about the idea that lines are torture, and that we suffer the “nagging sensation that one’s life is slipping away” while waiting in them?
Apparently, stronger psychological forces are at work, at least when it comes to a certain breed of shopper. “The shared experience of waiting is part of what’s driving consumer satisfaction,” according to the experts cited in a MarketWatch story. Instead of the communal suffering in a wait to get through an airport TSA checkpoint, waiting outside an Apple Store for the latest iWhatever, or camping out on a Best Buy sidewalk before Black Friday, has become a giddy, exciting experience shared by those willingly joining in.
Being surrounded by like-minded consumers, who have also decided that it makes sense to wait in line, is a sign that you’re not alone—and that your choices on what to buy and how long it’s worth standing around to buy it are sound:
[It's] a concept known as “social proof.” And that holds true even in the face of considerable logic to the contrary; a name-brand television, for example, is actually more expensive on Black Friday than on several other holiday-season shopping days
Since Black Friday has just so-so prices on big-name TVs, and the iPhone can be purchased without requiring anyone to wait in lines, it would seem to be pretty easy to demonstrate that the emperor has no clothes. Instead, thanks to brilliant marketing and the stubborn crowd mentality, Daniel M. Ladik, a marketing professor at the Stillman School of Business at Seton Hall University, tells MarketWatch that he thinks lines for the newest, most buzzworthy products are here to stay:
“It’s a community thing,” he says of those lines stretched outside Apple stores. “There’s no other logic to it.”
If there’s one thing that people who hate all lines and people who only hate lines that don’t involve Nikes, Apple products, Black Friday, Disney, or video games can agree on, it’s this, from the Times story:
Perhaps the biggest influence on our feelings about lines, though, has to do with our perception of fairness. When it comes to lines, the universally acknowledged standard is first come first served: any deviation is, to most, a mark of iniquity and can lead to violent queue rage.
In the case of iPhones especially, fair line etiquette is observed and it’s always first-come, first-serve. And all who wait in line can call themselves winners: They secure bragging rights and an ego boost when getting their hands on the new gadget before anyone who didn’t wait in line.
Then again, the folks who didn’t bother to stand overnight outside an Apple Store can also consider themselves winners, and smarter-than-average consumers — because they didn’t just waste a bunch of time standing in line.
Brad Tuttle is a reporter at TIME. Find him on Twitter at @bradrtuttle. You can also continue the discussion on TIME’s Facebook page and on Twitter at @TIME.
Amazon doesn't make profit from its Kindle's.
Amazon Confirms It Sells Kindles at Cost
Posted 3 hours ago
Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos confirmed that his conpany is selling its Kindle e-reader "at cost" with profits coming from the sales of online content, according to Reuters.
Bezos' remarks, in an interview with the BBC, marked the first time the company had confirmed long-held Wall Street assumptions that it did not make a profit on sales of the popular tablet.
The aggressive pricing furthers Bezos' goal of getting Kindle tablets into the hands of as many buyers of Amazon's online content -- from games and books to video -- as possible.
This technique has allowed Amazon to enter the tablet market fairly quickly and undercut most competition. The company recently announced a 8.9-inch Kindle Fire HD tablet.
Apple, on the other hand, makes much of its profit from hardware sales. The company is said to be announcing an iPad mini on October 23rd which would have a lower price tag than its big brother.
iPod Touch 5 review
When last we got a new iPod touch, the fourth-generation from 2010, it was so thin relative to other devices of that era we said it looked like "a toothpick." Its 7.2mm thinness was unparalleled -- at the time. But now, just two years later, the iPhone 5 is less than a half-millimeter thicker, and that is of course packing a lot more wizardry inside. Suddenly, that toothpick is looking a little portly, which means it's time for the touch to lose a little weight.
Enter the fifth-generation iPod touch, the 2012 model that has slimmed down to a mere 6.1mm in thickness. It's also about 10 percent lighter -- despite being grafted with a new 4-inch Retina display. Not only is it bigger and thinner, but it's far faster and has hugely improved cameras on both the front and rear. The perfect PMP package for $299? Click on through to find out.
View Gallery:iPod touch review (2012)
Hardware
The fourth-generation iPod touch had a curved chrome back that looked absolutely lovely coming out of the box. Roughly 30 seconds later that mirrored look would evaporate, replaced by a scratched-up patina that no amount of careful handling could prevent. But, its shape felt good in the hand, with its size and weight both seeming minimal compared to nearly every other device on the market -- two ingredients for a top-notch device.
The fifth generation improves on that in every regard. As mentioned above, it now measures 6.1mm thick, while its width and height clock in at 4.86 by 2.31 inches (123.4 x 58.6mm). Compared to the fourth-generation touch, which measured 111 x 58.9 x 7.2mm, the new iPod is considerably thinner, fractionally narrower and massively taller. It's also noticeably lighter, at 3.1 ounces (88 grams) compared to 3.56 ounces (101 grams) for the outgoing model. Storage capacities are now 32 or 64GB, priced at $299 and $399, respectively.
Gone is the mirrored back, replaced by a matte aluminum shell available in your choice of six anodized colors. We chose the special edition (Product) Red to evaluate and as soon as it came out of the box we were confident we made the right call. It's beautiful. The crimson hue sets up a nice contrast to the white bezel around the glass on the front, as well as the white plastic that forms the rim of the 3.5mm headphone jack, which still lives on the bottom, but has moved to the left to match the placement on the iPhone 5.
View Gallery:iPod touch (2012) vs. iPhone 5
That red color bathes a machined aluminum back that has a rather more square profile than the previous iPod touch, but it's still decidedly more comfortable in the hand than the angular, industrial iPhone. The metal enclosure (which has a soft feel similar to a MacBook) is punctuated for numerous sensors, buttons and other accoutrement, with the power/lock toggle still residing in the upper-right and the volume rocker on the left side. On the bottom, next to the headphone jack, is the new Lightning connector, which is rimmed by about a millimeter's worth of raw, uncolored aluminum. Five tiny holes are drilled on the other side of the bottom, making up a puny speaker grille.
On the back, the camera still peeks out of the top-left, but the module is considerably larger now and, where it was inset on the fourth-gen iPod touch, it now protrudes slightly -- just over 0.6mm, by our measurements. This means the overall actual thickness of the device is closer to 6.8mm, a difference that only those wearing the tightest of skinny jeans need concern themselves with. The camera portal is considerably wider in diameter, too, still flanked by a small microphone opening but now joined by a third opening: an LED flash. It's a 5-megapixel sensor this time with the same basic array of lenses and mechanics found in the iPhone 4S.
Keep moving across the top back and you'll find a small black plastic patch, similar in feel to the plastic section on the top of the iPad. It's here that the iPod's dual-band 802.11a/b/g/n module sends and receives its data. There's Bluetooth 4.0 support in here too, as well as Nike+ connectivity, but sadly still no GPS. The ability to properly track your movement using fitness apps like Strava would make this an even more compelling workout companion, and of course geotagging photos is more popular than ever. Sadly, the iPod touch is left out of that party yet again.
The most curious bit of connectivity is found at the bottom of the device. It's a little brushed metal circle that, when pushed, pops out slightly. It's here that you attach the curious little microfiber wrist strap that Apple includes with the device. But, in typical Apple style, it isn't called a wrist strap. It's "the loop" and it's designed to further ramp up this thing's street cred as a compact camera.
Finally, on the front things are more or less as they were before -- just taller. Up top, there's a 1.2-megapixel FaceTime HD camera peeking out of the bezel. Down below, there's the same subtly recessed home button we've come to expect. In between? Here lies something special.
Display
The vertical growth of the iPod touch is for one reason and one reason only: to accommodate the new 4-inch display that debuted in the iPhone 5. Yes, this is the exact same panel as the iPhone, not a cut-rate version like the last iPod touch received. That means a 326dpi, 1,136 x 640 IPS LCD screen.
We gushed about this panel in the recent iPhone 5 review, so we won't spend too much time covering such well-trod ground, but we will reiterate our thoughts from before: this is among the best panels on any mobile device. Brightness and contrast are top-notch and viewing angles are wide enough to ensure that you can enjoy everything from all sides. However, we would point out the lack of a brightness sensor here, so unlike the iPhone (and, indeed, the last iPod touch) this thing won't use an appropriate brightness for all lighting conditions -- at least, not without a little help from you.
Performance
The fifth-generation iPod touch sports a dual-core A5 processor and, while Apple isn't quoting specs, thanks to benchmarking apps we know it's running at 800MHz and is paired with dual-core PowerVR graphics. So, just like the iPhone 4S that came before. And our benchmark results back that up. An average Geekbench score of 627 is right where the 4S tends to rank in, and an average SunSpider score of 1,785 is even better. Our impressions upon using the device definitely match up with those numbers. The iPhone 5 leaves the new iPod in the dust in all regards, but it's a massive leap beyond the old iPod.
We've not been able to run the device through a full battery test, but Apple rates the new iPod touch as having the same music listening time as the previous generation (40 hours) and rates its video playback for an hour longer -- eight versus seven. We've never had a complaint with the longevity of the fourth-gen iPod, so we expect this new model to live up to expectations.
Cameras
While the new display is the most noticeable departure from the previous-generation iPod and the new silicon on the inside certainly makes for a markedly improved experience, it's the pair of new shooters that mark the biggest step forward from the previous touch. The 1.2-megapixel FaceTime HD camera up front appears to be the same as we've seen in other devices, meaning it's quite good even in conditions with middling light.
View Gallery:iPod touch review (2012) : sample shots
It's the 5-megapixel setup on the back that's the star of the show. No, it isn't as nice as the new 8-megapixel module on the iPhone 5, but the new iPod does match the performance of the iPhone 4S in most regards, which is to say it takes some great stills. Photos are light-years beyond those captured by the previous touch, meaning this does indeed do a reasonably good job as a compact camera. They don't live up to the photos on the 5, and indeed in lower light you'll see a good amount of noise, so serious photogs will still want to lug along something with a bit more horsepower. But, for more casual holiday snaps, the touch does a respectable job.
It also captures compelling video at 1080p, though the video stabilization here doesn't seem nearly as good as that on the iPhone 5. Trying to walk while filming, a situation handled commendably by the 5, creates a jittery mess here. You'll want to practice those deep-breathing and soft-walking techniques you learned in sniper school. Additionally, you're unable to take stills while recording video, as you can on the iPhone, but overall video quality is more than acceptable.
Software
Well, it's iOS 6, so you should know more or less what to expect here. Siri is now here, so you can get yourself some spoken-word advice from your slender PMP, and all the iCloud, Safari and other upgrades that were grafted onto the latest version of Apple's mobile OS have all come along for the ride.
There's also the new Maps, for better or for worse, but without GPS you'll be a little bit restricted in terms of what you can do with it. You can also load up third-party navigation apps like TomTom or CoPilot Live, but again they won't be much use anyway.
Sound quality
We stacked the new iPod touch up against a number of comparable offerings, including the fourth-generation touch, the new iPhone 5 and the new nano as well. We also lined up three sets of headphones, starting with Apple's own EarPods, which we put through the paces and found to be perfectly adequate. We also went a little higher-end with a set of Klipsch S4i buds and, finally, some Sennheiser HD555 cans. The new touch performed well with all, not noticeably better or worse than its predecessor. The internal speaker, meanwhile, is predictably weak, again performing about as well (or, rather, as poorly) as that on the previous touch. You can hear it, but you certainly won't want to use it for much.
Wrap-up
More Info
Apple announces fifth-generation iPod touch: 4-inch screen, 6.1mm thick, Siri included, starts at $299
Fifth-generation iPod touch hands-on
Apple EarPods review
As an upgrade, the fifth-generation iPod touch hits all the right marks. It's thinner and lighter despite packing a bigger and (far) better screen. It's faster despite having better battery life, its pair of cameras are markedly better than those found in the previous touch and its new matte aluminum exterior certainly seems like it will prove rather more durable in the long-run -- though time shall tell on that front.
That the new touch is rocking Apple's new Lightning connector will be a drawback for those with legacy docks and the like, but this is clearly the path the company is taking going forward, and there's not a lot of sugar we can put on that pill. The iPod touch is a comprehensively better package than the previous-gen unit but, at $299 to start, it certainly doesn't come cheap. If you're reasonably content with your fourth-gen this is probably not worth the upgrade, but if you have an older iPod that's ready for retirement, or are indeed just jumping on the iOS bandwagon for the first time and are happy with your current phone, this is a great place to start.
The Bottom Line
Pros
Beautiful design
Best-in-class 4-inch display
Much-improved cameras
Siri
Cons
Still no GPS
Pricey
Bottomline
Apple's latest iPod touch is by far its best, but it's priced far out of impulse-buy territory.
Thursday, October 11, 2012
Will Apple build their own chip ware?
Apple has poached Samsung talent to develop in-house chips for the Mac.
Apple and Samsung are in the midst of what is perhaps the most heated patent lawsuit in history, but that doesn’t mean the two companies won’t still steal from each other’s camps. One of Samsung’s most prominent chip designers has joined Apple, the Korean company’s sworn enemy. “Veteran” processor guru Jim Mergar could help Apple create proprietary chips for the Mac, reports The Wall Street Journal.
Mergar’s expertise could mean that Apple will eventually switch from Intel on the Mac to its own processors, like its in-house “A” chip series for iOS devices.
According to The Journal, Mergar was “known for playing a leading role in the development of a high-profile AMD chip that carried the code name Brazos and was designed for low-end portable computers.” He was seen as an instrumental part of Samsung’s team, and he also specializes in PC processor development.
Patrick Moorhead, a former AMD executive who now leads the research firm Moor Insights & Strategy, said Mergard brings deep expertise in both PC technology as well as in products known as SoCs–systems on a chip–that combine various kinds of special-function circuitry on a single piece of silicon.
Besides the current breed of Apple smartphones and tablets, Moorhead says Mergard’s talents could potentially be applied to Apple’s PC efforts, where its Macs use Intel chips but not SoCs. “He would be very capable of pulling together internal and external resources to do a PC processor for Apple,” Moorhead says.
A longstanding rumor has been that Apple is looking to ditch Intel’s processors on the Mac platform for its own. Chip design expertise is obviously needed to reach that goal, and Mergar may be the missing piece Apple needs.
Apple and Samsung are in the midst of what is perhaps the most heated patent lawsuit in history, but that doesn’t mean the two companies won’t still steal from each other’s camps. One of Samsung’s most prominent chip designers has joined Apple, the Korean company’s sworn enemy. “Veteran” processor guru Jim Mergar could help Apple create proprietary chips for the Mac, reports The Wall Street Journal.
Mergar’s expertise could mean that Apple will eventually switch from Intel on the Mac to its own processors, like its in-house “A” chip series for iOS devices.
According to The Journal, Mergar was “known for playing a leading role in the development of a high-profile AMD chip that carried the code name Brazos and was designed for low-end portable computers.” He was seen as an instrumental part of Samsung’s team, and he also specializes in PC processor development.
Patrick Moorhead, a former AMD executive who now leads the research firm Moor Insights & Strategy, said Mergard brings deep expertise in both PC technology as well as in products known as SoCs–systems on a chip–that combine various kinds of special-function circuitry on a single piece of silicon.
Besides the current breed of Apple smartphones and tablets, Moorhead says Mergard’s talents could potentially be applied to Apple’s PC efforts, where its Macs use Intel chips but not SoCs. “He would be very capable of pulling together internal and external resources to do a PC processor for Apple,” Moorhead says.
A longstanding rumor has been that Apple is looking to ditch Intel’s processors on the Mac platform for its own. Chip design expertise is obviously needed to reach that goal, and Mergar may be the missing piece Apple needs.
Microsoft and Klout? Influencers or influential?
Microsoft invests in Klout; integrates data into Bing
Summary: Microsoft's Bing team is teaming up with social-media vendor Klout in the name of social-influence and big data.
By Mary Jo Foley for All About Microsoft | September 27, 2012 -- 20:36 GMT (13:36 PDT)
5
Comments
0
Votes
inShare
more +
Microsoft is making a "strategic investment" of an undisclosed size in social-media vendor Klout, company officials announced on its Bing Community blog on September 27.
On Bing, Microsoft is going to display Klout data -- including a person's Klout score and topics they are "influential" about -- on the new Bing Sidebar pane for those users who can and want to see this information. And on Klout, "highlights from Bing will begin surfacing in the 'moments' section of some people's Klout profiles," a Microsoft spokesperson said.
This new partnership is related to Microsoft's ongoing work to integrate social-search results into its Bing search engine via the sidebar panel, the same way that it does with Quora and foursquare.
Your reaction to this news probably indicates a lot of things about you. (I know it does of me.)
If you're living in the Silicon Valley area and/or are someone who thinks your Klout score really matters, you probably are thinking: "Wow, Microsoft!" If you're a jaded non-Bubble-dwelling person like me, you might be thinking something more like "Wow, Microsoft?"
As one of my Twitter chums joked today, my Klout score on Microsoft -- which I truly don't know and don't care -- is probably minus-500 after my tweets and this post.
Microsoft is maintaining this isn't all fluff and no stuff. There's also a big-data connection to today's partnership and investment, according to today's post. Microsoft officials have said repeatedly that one of the biggest benefits of Bing is massive amount of information it helps Microsoft collect and parse.
"Search as a new outbound signal is an interesting new development in the way we think about big data and how it can add value to lots of the other services we use each day," according to today's post. (And no, I don't really know what, if anything, that sentence actually means, either.)
I'm not anti-social media. I find Twitter really useful, and I know some do take Klout score quite seriously. I am not among them. I would never use Klout to find an expert in a subject area, as I know that many folks give one another Klout points as jokes. But I'm also someone who doesn't want to see my Twitter, Facebook and LinkedIn friend's recommendations on my search queries, either -- which is something Microsoft is encouraging with its latest Bing redesign, which the company announced in March 2012.
To try the new Klout-Bing integration, users should go to Bing.com, log into Facebook and try some searches. Microsoft suggests starting with “movies, nfl schedule, or stanford university."
Update: So maybe there really is a big data --and a Hadoop-specific play -- in this Klout arrangement after all. Thanks to another of my Twitter buds, @Lizasisler from Perficient, comes this May 2012 GigaOm story about the relationship between Hadoop, Microsoft and Klout. (Remember, Microsoft is working on Hadoop for Windows Azure, and supposedly still Hadoop for Windows Server.) It sounds from this article as though Klout is a big SQL Server shop and a likely MySQL switcher.
Summary: Microsoft's Bing team is teaming up with social-media vendor Klout in the name of social-influence and big data.
By Mary Jo Foley for All About Microsoft | September 27, 2012 -- 20:36 GMT (13:36 PDT)
5
Comments
0
Votes
inShare
more +
Microsoft is making a "strategic investment" of an undisclosed size in social-media vendor Klout, company officials announced on its Bing Community blog on September 27.
On Bing, Microsoft is going to display Klout data -- including a person's Klout score and topics they are "influential" about -- on the new Bing Sidebar pane for those users who can and want to see this information. And on Klout, "highlights from Bing will begin surfacing in the 'moments' section of some people's Klout profiles," a Microsoft spokesperson said.
This new partnership is related to Microsoft's ongoing work to integrate social-search results into its Bing search engine via the sidebar panel, the same way that it does with Quora and foursquare.
Your reaction to this news probably indicates a lot of things about you. (I know it does of me.)
If you're living in the Silicon Valley area and/or are someone who thinks your Klout score really matters, you probably are thinking: "Wow, Microsoft!" If you're a jaded non-Bubble-dwelling person like me, you might be thinking something more like "Wow, Microsoft?"
As one of my Twitter chums joked today, my Klout score on Microsoft -- which I truly don't know and don't care -- is probably minus-500 after my tweets and this post.
Microsoft is maintaining this isn't all fluff and no stuff. There's also a big-data connection to today's partnership and investment, according to today's post. Microsoft officials have said repeatedly that one of the biggest benefits of Bing is massive amount of information it helps Microsoft collect and parse.
"Search as a new outbound signal is an interesting new development in the way we think about big data and how it can add value to lots of the other services we use each day," according to today's post. (And no, I don't really know what, if anything, that sentence actually means, either.)
I'm not anti-social media. I find Twitter really useful, and I know some do take Klout score quite seriously. I am not among them. I would never use Klout to find an expert in a subject area, as I know that many folks give one another Klout points as jokes. But I'm also someone who doesn't want to see my Twitter, Facebook and LinkedIn friend's recommendations on my search queries, either -- which is something Microsoft is encouraging with its latest Bing redesign, which the company announced in March 2012.
To try the new Klout-Bing integration, users should go to Bing.com, log into Facebook and try some searches. Microsoft suggests starting with “movies, nfl schedule, or stanford university."
Update: So maybe there really is a big data --and a Hadoop-specific play -- in this Klout arrangement after all. Thanks to another of my Twitter buds, @Lizasisler from Perficient, comes this May 2012 GigaOm story about the relationship between Hadoop, Microsoft and Klout. (Remember, Microsoft is working on Hadoop for Windows Azure, and supposedly still Hadoop for Windows Server.) It sounds from this article as though Klout is a big SQL Server shop and a likely MySQL switcher.
iPod Touch number 5 teardown
iPod touch teardown: cheaper display assembly, weaker home button, low repairability
Published on October 11th, 2012
Written by: Christian Zibreg
Next
Skip to Responses
Prev
Apple’s fifth-generation iPod touch, which debuted alongside the iPhone 5 during the September 12 keynote, is on sale now, first reviews are great and already the wizards at iFixit have done what they do best: they tore apart the device to peek under the hood and analyze its innards.
Unlike the iPhone 5 that runs the latest A6 chip with 1GB of RAM, Apple’s ultra-thin (just 6.1mm) media player packs in the Apple-designed A5 processor with 512MB of Hynix-supplied RAM. The same silicon also powers the iPad 2 (the iPad 3 runs a souped up variant labeled the A5X). Perhaps unexpectedly, the new iPod touch has a weaker home button than that on the iPhone 5…
Other tidbits include NAND flash from Toshiba, meaning Apple passed on Samsung and turned to other suppliers for both the iPod touch’s storage and on-chip RAM. Note that Apple’s been distancing itself from Samsung on the display front as well, although the South Korean conglomerate continues to build Apple’s in-house designed processors at its facility in Austin, Texas.
Broadcom supplies the BCM 5976 touchscreen controller and Texas Instruments won a touchscreen system-on-a-chip contract (the 27AZ5R1 module). WiFi module is provided by Murata (the 339S0171) and the three-axis gyroscope is from STMicroelectronics (the AGD32229ESGEK module).
The impossibly thin iPod touch is quite a marvel of engineering.
As for the display, even though the iPod touch packs in all of the display technologies Apple uses for the iPhone 5, the manufacturing process is being described as cheaper.
When comparing the Touch to the iPhone 5 display assembly, it’s apparent that this is a much simpler, cheaper design, despite Apple claiming the two have very similar functionality.
The fourth-generation iPod touch’s display was of a noticeable lower quality compared to the iPhone 4/4S, especially when viewed at an angle.
Here’s a side-by-side comparison of the iPhone 5′s and iPod touch’s profile.
The iPod touch, pictured on the left, is jut 6.1mm thin versus the iPhone 5 (right) that is 7.6mm deep.
The backside iSight camera on the new iPod touch is essentially a rehashed version of the five-megapixel module found on the previous-generation model, capable of shooting 1080p video at 30 frames per second.
As for repairability, the new iPod touch scores 3 out of 10 (versus 7 out of 10 for the iPhone 5), largely due to hard-to-manage ribbon cables on the logic board and absence of external screws.
In case you thought that a quick zap with the heat gun and a gentle pry is all it would take to get into the Touch, think again! There are several clips and adhesive holding this iPod together.
The disassembly also found the volume buttons, microphone, LED flash and power button all connected through the same ribbon cable, which easily peels from the rear case.
The shift to a single ribbon cable is more cost-effective for the manufacturer, but unfortunately it has a negative impact on repairability. Cables connected to the logic board run over the top and connect on the bottom, making it difficult to remove the board or disconnect the cables.
iFixit notes that even though repair is not impossible, “it’s certainly going to be difficult and expensive if one component breaks”. The teardown experts were also surprised to find a weaker home button compared to the iPhone 5, largely stemming from a rubber-membrane design.
In our recent iPhone 5 teardown, we praised Apple for redesigning a stronger home button. We were somewhat disappointed with the weaker, rubber-membrane design of the iPod Touch’s home button.
I think the new iPod touch is a marvel of engineering and the best media player there is. I’d say that a weaker home button, cheaper display assembly (though image quality is on par with the iPhone 5) and low repairability score are all necessary trade-offs due to its impossibly thin design, ones that not many people will notice anyway.
For more, check out Jeff’s unboxing video and another one depicting the iPhone 5 versus iPod touch boot test. Also, stay tuned for his review, coming up later today.
Do you think the new iPod touch is worth the asking price of $299/$399 for the 32/64GB model?
Branding, Logo's and fame.
Infographic: The Cost Of A Famous Logo? From $0 To $211 Million
INFOGRAPHIC OF THE DAY
HOW MUCH DO YOU THINK BP SPENT ON ITS LATEST REBRANDING? YOU PROBABLY DON’T WANT TO KNOW.
Google spent nothing--Sergey Brin just opened up the free graphics app Gimp. Same with Coca-Cola--though John Pemberton’s bookkeeper drew the logo’s Spencerian script by hand. Nike famously gave just $35 to a design student. Which used to be an impressively thrifty figure, until Twitter picked up their ubiquitous bird for a mere $15 on iStockPhoto.
These, obviously, represent the low-end of what some of the world’s biggest companies have spent on their branding. The figures are from a list recently assembled by Stocklogos and Business Insider, which Trendland turned into a series of infographics. And if you think a company that spends nothing on their logo is a bit nauseating, wait until you see the opposite end of the spectrum.
Pepsi spent $1 million on their Obama-esque rebranding a few years back, and the BBC spent almost double that on a logo that basically just untoggled the italics button. But that’s nothing compared to the $221 million BP paid to make their oil company look like a new-age organic grocer--though maybe it was one of the few cases where we can all agree it was worth every penny. (It’s not clear from the stats here whether that $221 million was just for design services, or for the rebranding campaign, in which case $221 million is probably low.)
INFOGRAPHIC OF THE DAY
HOW MUCH DO YOU THINK BP SPENT ON ITS LATEST REBRANDING? YOU PROBABLY DON’T WANT TO KNOW.
Google spent nothing--Sergey Brin just opened up the free graphics app Gimp. Same with Coca-Cola--though John Pemberton’s bookkeeper drew the logo’s Spencerian script by hand. Nike famously gave just $35 to a design student. Which used to be an impressively thrifty figure, until Twitter picked up their ubiquitous bird for a mere $15 on iStockPhoto.
These, obviously, represent the low-end of what some of the world’s biggest companies have spent on their branding. The figures are from a list recently assembled by Stocklogos and Business Insider, which Trendland turned into a series of infographics. And if you think a company that spends nothing on their logo is a bit nauseating, wait until you see the opposite end of the spectrum.
Pepsi spent $1 million on their Obama-esque rebranding a few years back, and the BBC spent almost double that on a logo that basically just untoggled the italics button. But that’s nothing compared to the $221 million BP paid to make their oil company look like a new-age organic grocer--though maybe it was one of the few cases where we can all agree it was worth every penny. (It’s not clear from the stats here whether that $221 million was just for design services, or for the rebranding campaign, in which case $221 million is probably low.)
To succeed, you must have the right help.
Your Key to Investing Success
Dan Caplinger - October 11, 2012
No matter how good an investor you are, you can't do everything by yourself. Even if you do all your own research and analysis, digging through thousands of stocks and funds in search of the perfect investment, you still need a strong broker on your side at the end of the day to help you buy those investments, sell others, and eventually create the ideal portfolio.
Making sure you have the right broker on your side can make a huge difference in how successful you are over the long run. But how can you tell whether a particular broker will give you everything you need? You can get some of the answers by following one of many broker surveys that regularly come out, as long as you recognize the fact that brokers are not one-size-fits-all and that your specific needs may lead to a totally different decision.
A new winner
Kiplinger recently came out with its list of best online brokers for 2012. Given the cost savings that online brokers can give you compared to Morgan Stanley (NYSE: MS) and other full-service offerings, many investors turn to them first.
If you look no further than the headline, you'll see that E*TRADE Financial (Nasdaq: ETFC) beat out all its peers to take the top spot. With E*TRADE earning top ratings for investment choices and customer service, countless readers will inevitably pick the discount broker simply on that basis alone.
But if you dig deeper into the report, you'll realize that different brokers do well at different things. For instance, for research tools, Fidelity scored the best. For the best user experience with their websites, Scottrade and Bank of America's (NYSE: BAC) Merrill Edge joined E*TRADE as top picks. And for those looking for banking services to go along with their brokerage accounts, Merrill Edge and Fidelity received top scores.
Even with this added level of scrutiny, you still can't rely entirely on the report for definitive advice. For instance, one big omission from the list is Vanguard, which didn't even make the cut for consideration.
In addition, drilling down beyond broad categories often leads to different results. For instance, the primary motivation for E*TRADE's strong score for breadth of investment choices came from its extensive individual bond offerings. Yet if you want to invest with exchange-traded funds, then E*TRADE falls short, and TD AMERITRADE's (NYSE: AMTD) list of more than 100 commission-free ETFs from a variety of different ETF providers easily goes to the top of the list. If you prefer a certain brand of ETFs, though, you might be best served by a broker that has a specific relationship with that ETF provider, such as Fidelity's deal to offer 30 different offerings from BlackRock's (NYSE: BLK) iShares family of ETFs.
Dealing with costs
Perhaps the most contentious area in trying to compare brokers is cost. The most readily available piece of information is how much a broker charges for stock commissions, but if you're not a frequent trader, that number may not be nearly as important as other fees.
To make a better choice, be sure to consider how you're likely to invest and what sorts of miscellaneous fees you're likely to incur. Don't just look at the cover page for that information; dig deep into the brokerage agreement to ferret out obscure charges like inactivity fees or account closure and transfer fees. That way, you'll avoid a nasty surprise at some point down the road.
Go your own way
Guides and lists of brokers can be helpful in gathering information you can use to make an informed selection, but don't simply take a recommendation from a survey without understanding its methodology. That way, you can be sure that the broker you choose will be right for you.
Dan Caplinger - October 11, 2012
No matter how good an investor you are, you can't do everything by yourself. Even if you do all your own research and analysis, digging through thousands of stocks and funds in search of the perfect investment, you still need a strong broker on your side at the end of the day to help you buy those investments, sell others, and eventually create the ideal portfolio.
Making sure you have the right broker on your side can make a huge difference in how successful you are over the long run. But how can you tell whether a particular broker will give you everything you need? You can get some of the answers by following one of many broker surveys that regularly come out, as long as you recognize the fact that brokers are not one-size-fits-all and that your specific needs may lead to a totally different decision.
A new winner
Kiplinger recently came out with its list of best online brokers for 2012. Given the cost savings that online brokers can give you compared to Morgan Stanley (NYSE: MS) and other full-service offerings, many investors turn to them first.
If you look no further than the headline, you'll see that E*TRADE Financial (Nasdaq: ETFC) beat out all its peers to take the top spot. With E*TRADE earning top ratings for investment choices and customer service, countless readers will inevitably pick the discount broker simply on that basis alone.
But if you dig deeper into the report, you'll realize that different brokers do well at different things. For instance, for research tools, Fidelity scored the best. For the best user experience with their websites, Scottrade and Bank of America's (NYSE: BAC) Merrill Edge joined E*TRADE as top picks. And for those looking for banking services to go along with their brokerage accounts, Merrill Edge and Fidelity received top scores.
Even with this added level of scrutiny, you still can't rely entirely on the report for definitive advice. For instance, one big omission from the list is Vanguard, which didn't even make the cut for consideration.
In addition, drilling down beyond broad categories often leads to different results. For instance, the primary motivation for E*TRADE's strong score for breadth of investment choices came from its extensive individual bond offerings. Yet if you want to invest with exchange-traded funds, then E*TRADE falls short, and TD AMERITRADE's (NYSE: AMTD) list of more than 100 commission-free ETFs from a variety of different ETF providers easily goes to the top of the list. If you prefer a certain brand of ETFs, though, you might be best served by a broker that has a specific relationship with that ETF provider, such as Fidelity's deal to offer 30 different offerings from BlackRock's (NYSE: BLK) iShares family of ETFs.
Dealing with costs
Perhaps the most contentious area in trying to compare brokers is cost. The most readily available piece of information is how much a broker charges for stock commissions, but if you're not a frequent trader, that number may not be nearly as important as other fees.
To make a better choice, be sure to consider how you're likely to invest and what sorts of miscellaneous fees you're likely to incur. Don't just look at the cover page for that information; dig deep into the brokerage agreement to ferret out obscure charges like inactivity fees or account closure and transfer fees. That way, you'll avoid a nasty surprise at some point down the road.
Go your own way
Guides and lists of brokers can be helpful in gathering information you can use to make an informed selection, but don't simply take a recommendation from a survey without understanding its methodology. That way, you can be sure that the broker you choose will be right for you.
Google readies a new flurry of activity.
Google’s mobile homepage gets a redesign
Posted by Craig Lloyd on October 11, 2012.
In a move to further improve on their mobile offerings, Google has redesigned its mobile homepage that includes much easier navigation and a cleaner look that’s almost identical to the desktop version. Google took a lot of the buttons and selections that were once taking up space on the homepage and moved them to a new hidden sidebar.
If you click the icon with the three bold lines in the upper-left corner ( called the “Options” tab), this reveals the magical sidebar that includes a ton of more selections, like a list of your most used Google services. However, if a certain service you want isn’t listed, you can find it by hitting “All Products” at the bottom.
Navigation is fairly straightforward and simple from here. Clicking on “Search” will bring up the main Google Search homepage, and it’s also the default window whenever the Google homepage is first launched. Then, obviously, tapping on “Images” will bring up Google’s Image Search. You can then tap on it again to close Image Search.
While it’s reported that the redesign is showing up on all mobile devices, it seems it’s mostly just working on Android through Google Chrome at the moment. We tried it on the iPhone in the Chrome browser, but we were still seeing the old design, and we’re not really sure when Google will roll out the redesign to all platforms and browsers, so we’ll just have to wait and be patient for the time being.
[via Android Community]
Arrogance or simplicity? You decide.
‘Arrogant’ Apple should be building bigger iPhones
Published on October 11th, 2012
Written by: Zach Epstein
Never one to mince words, Apple (AAPL) co-founder Steve Wozniak has once again offered up some solid criticism of the company he helped build. In an interview with TechCentral, Wozniak called Apple “arrogant” and said the reason the iPhone 5 doesn’t have a larger display — both wider and taller — is because the company thinks it’s “the only one with the right clue.” In a recent television commercial, Apple stressed the fact that all of the iPhone 5′s 4-inch display can be reached comfortably with a thumb during one-handed use, but Wozniak wants a bigger panel and thinks Apple should have made two different iPhone models, a smaller one and a larger one.
“Part of me wishes that Apple had not been so kind of arrogant and feeling we’re the only one with the right clue,” Wozniak told TechCentral. “I wish they had made a small and a large version of the iPhone; that would have been great for me. Keep the aspect ratio the same, horizontal and vertical the same, but just grow it in the other way.”
He continued, “I think Apple tricked itself and said ‘oh you could reach everything with one thumb’ and I don’t see anybody having any trouble using the larger screens. Apple said that as a defensive move because when the other phones came out they all had larger screens. Apple is now trying to run with that defence, saying ‘we are right’ and really there’s a mix of people. Not all people want the same thing and a lot of people really like the big screens.”
Apple launched the iPhone 5 on September 21st and sold more than 5 million handsets during the phone’s first three days of availability.
Published on October 11th, 2012
Written by: Zach Epstein
Never one to mince words, Apple (AAPL) co-founder Steve Wozniak has once again offered up some solid criticism of the company he helped build. In an interview with TechCentral, Wozniak called Apple “arrogant” and said the reason the iPhone 5 doesn’t have a larger display — both wider and taller — is because the company thinks it’s “the only one with the right clue.” In a recent television commercial, Apple stressed the fact that all of the iPhone 5′s 4-inch display can be reached comfortably with a thumb during one-handed use, but Wozniak wants a bigger panel and thinks Apple should have made two different iPhone models, a smaller one and a larger one.
“Part of me wishes that Apple had not been so kind of arrogant and feeling we’re the only one with the right clue,” Wozniak told TechCentral. “I wish they had made a small and a large version of the iPhone; that would have been great for me. Keep the aspect ratio the same, horizontal and vertical the same, but just grow it in the other way.”
He continued, “I think Apple tricked itself and said ‘oh you could reach everything with one thumb’ and I don’t see anybody having any trouble using the larger screens. Apple said that as a defensive move because when the other phones came out they all had larger screens. Apple is now trying to run with that defence, saying ‘we are right’ and really there’s a mix of people. Not all people want the same thing and a lot of people really like the big screens.”
Apple launched the iPhone 5 on September 21st and sold more than 5 million handsets during the phone’s first three days of availability.
Google Street View gets major update
Google rolls out 'biggest update ever' for Street View
October 11, 2012 | Zack Whittaker
The search giant has updated 250,000 miles of road across more than 17 different countries.
The Street View Trike collecting imagery of Cambridge Bay.
Google
Google said today that it has rolled out the "biggest update ever" to its Street View service.
The street-level image service that allows users to travel around the world from the comfort of their cushy homes and offices now extends to far reaches of the world previously not seen on the Google service.
On the Google LatLong blog, Street View program manager Ulf Spitzer explains that the service now has an additional 250,000 miles of road -- or ten times around the Earth -- in more than 17 countries, such as the U.S., the U.K., Italy, and Sweden.
Related stories
Street View lands on Google Maps Web app
Google Maps to insert Street View into mobile Web app
Few seem to heed Tim Cook's directions on mapping apps
Some of the new places include Catherine Palace, Russia, the Chiang Kai-shek Memorial Hall, Taiwan, and Stanley Park, Vancouver.
For developers, Google has added time-zone functionality to the Maps API allowing for greater local focus features, particularly for businesses that offer services in various countries.
Last Friday, Google Maps for browsers was updated to include Street View for those who can't access the mapping service on their mobile device.
Since iOS 6, the latest version of Apple's mobile operating system for the iPhone and iPad, arrived without Google Maps, the search giant has instead taken to developing a better experience for the mobile Web.
October 11, 2012 | Zack Whittaker
The search giant has updated 250,000 miles of road across more than 17 different countries.
The Street View Trike collecting imagery of Cambridge Bay.
Google said today that it has rolled out the "biggest update ever" to its Street View service.
The street-level image service that allows users to travel around the world from the comfort of their cushy homes and offices now extends to far reaches of the world previously not seen on the Google service.
On the Google LatLong blog, Street View program manager Ulf Spitzer explains that the service now has an additional 250,000 miles of road -- or ten times around the Earth -- in more than 17 countries, such as the U.S., the U.K., Italy, and Sweden.
Related stories
Street View lands on Google Maps Web app
Google Maps to insert Street View into mobile Web app
Few seem to heed Tim Cook's directions on mapping apps
Some of the new places include Catherine Palace, Russia, the Chiang Kai-shek Memorial Hall, Taiwan, and Stanley Park, Vancouver.
For developers, Google has added time-zone functionality to the Maps API allowing for greater local focus features, particularly for businesses that offer services in various countries.
Last Friday, Google Maps for browsers was updated to include Street View for those who can't access the mapping service on their mobile device.
Since iOS 6, the latest version of Apple's mobile operating system for the iPhone and iPad, arrived without Google Maps, the search giant has instead taken to developing a better experience for the mobile Web.
Faster Galaxy S3 and Galaxy Note 2 for Japan?
Phones / NTT Docomo Introduces Galaxy Note II And Improved Galaxy S III In Japan
NTT Docomo Introduces Galaxy Note II And Improved Galaxy S III In Japan
By kunal • October 11, 2012
NTT Docomo today introduced their 2012 winter collection which includes two Samsung devices – the Galaxy Note II (SC-02E) and an improved Galaxy S III (SC-03E). Both devices will support Docomo’s Xi LTE service and runs Android 4.1 OS.
The Galaxy Note II is expected in November and features a 1.6GHz Exynos 4412 quad-core processor, 5.5-inch 1280×720 HD Super AMOLED Display, Wi-Fi, 8MP rear-facing camera, 1.9MP front-facing camera, 1Seg TV support, NFC and 3100mAh battery.
The Galaxy S III Alpha on the other hand is slightly different to the variant that is currently on sale on NTT Docomo. The device features a bumped up 1.6GHz Exynos 4412 quad-core CPU, Android 4.1, 4.8-inch HD Super AMOLED Display (1280×720), Wi-Fi, NFC, 8MP and 1.9MP cameras, 1Seg TV and 2100mAh battery. It is expected to go on sale in Titanium Gray and Sapphire Black in December.
NTT Docomo Introduces Galaxy Note II And Improved Galaxy S III In Japan
By kunal • October 11, 2012
NTT Docomo today introduced their 2012 winter collection which includes two Samsung devices – the Galaxy Note II (SC-02E) and an improved Galaxy S III (SC-03E). Both devices will support Docomo’s Xi LTE service and runs Android 4.1 OS.
The Galaxy Note II is expected in November and features a 1.6GHz Exynos 4412 quad-core processor, 5.5-inch 1280×720 HD Super AMOLED Display, Wi-Fi, 8MP rear-facing camera, 1.9MP front-facing camera, 1Seg TV support, NFC and 3100mAh battery.
The Galaxy S III Alpha on the other hand is slightly different to the variant that is currently on sale on NTT Docomo. The device features a bumped up 1.6GHz Exynos 4412 quad-core CPU, Android 4.1, 4.8-inch HD Super AMOLED Display (1280×720), Wi-Fi, NFC, 8MP and 1.9MP cameras, 1Seg TV and 2100mAh battery. It is expected to go on sale in Titanium Gray and Sapphire Black in December.
Wednesday, October 10, 2012
Housing in America. Some quick tips...
Sections
Real Estate Financial Fitness Q&A
October 9, 2012By ALISON ROGERS+
MICHAEL MELFORD / GETTY IMAGES
Wondering what’s the latest in real estate? Every year, the Financial Planning Association of New York sponsors a “Financial Fitness Day” at New York University, co-sponsored by Moneyland. This year’s real estate discussion (which I participated in with Hedda Nadler of Mount and Nadler and David Breitstein of Apple Mortgage) addressed some especially timely questions.
Here’s a sample:
Q: Is the old rule that the time horizon to hold a property should be at least five years still in effect?
A: With the housing slump, average “tenure” — length of time Americans spend in their homes – has actually lengthened, from six to nine years, according to a chart published at Credit Sesame using statistics from the National Association of Realtors. If you’re planning on become a homebuyer, though, the issue is not average tenure, but will you be in the home long enough to ride out an economic down-cycle. So you want to take a look at housing statistics in your area, which your realtor should be able to give you. In many markets five years will be long enough, but in some — as residents of speculative markets like Phoenix and Vegas can tell you — seven years is a better rule of thumb.
(MORE: Why Reform Will Push Money Mark Fund Yields Even Lower)
Q: Should I get a mortgage if I have the ability to pay all cash?
A: This isn’t so much a real estate question as it is a personal finance question. If you buy a home with cash, you’ll be giving up the time value of the money you spend. The question is what you would do with the money if you borrowed instead? Invest in stocks? Buy a car? If you can borrow at 4%, and are confident that you could earn more with the money by investing it, then it may make sense to borrow. But bear in mind that you’ll also get a tax deduction on the mortgage interest you pay on the first $1 million that you borrow.
Q: How are millennials affecting the housing market?
A: This generation (generally defined as people born from 1980 to 2000, and therefore including people in their twenties and early thirties) faces special challenges, as they’ve come of age in a climate where student loan debt is high — almost like a second mortgage. The jobs market in recent years hasn’t been pretty either, with the result than many young people have come back to roost with their parents. That’s the bad news. The good news is that this generation has a lot of pent-up housing demand, and, with today’s low rates, should be able to enter the market as the economy recovers.
(Rental Vacancies Drop as Young People (Finally) Move Out)
Q: If I know my mortgage costs, how can I estimate my total housing costs?
Too often, a potential homebuyer will think of her housing costs as simply the cost of her mortgage. This simplification especially distorts rent-vs.-buy calculations. (As one industry saying goes, “You can rent your house, or you can rent the money to buy your house.”) Don’t forget to add in property taxes (ask home sellers to provide copies of their property tax bills) which can range from .18% to 1.89% of your home’s value annually, according to the Tax Foundation. Property taxes can be deducted on your federal income taxes, but that’s a deduction that gets phased out for homeowners who get hit by the AMT.
Also worth considering are utility bills, especially those you might not be used to paying as a renter — heat and water, for example. Homeowner’s insurance should also be figured into the calculation. And don’t forget to include a number in your budget for home maintenance; a good rule of thumb there is that you’ll spend between 2% and 3% of your home’s value each year. Some years you won’t spend that much, but setting it aside will enable bigger projects, like re-shingling the roof or renovating the kitchen, in other years.
Q: Why can’t I find real bargains on foreclosures in my area? If the housing market slumps, then you should be able to find some serious bargains, right? Unfortunately, a lot of the low-hanging fruit gets snapped up quickly by flippers and local real estate agents or contractors who know the local housing stock intimately.
It’s also important to consider condition when you talk about distressed properties: Heavily discounted foreclosures have often suffered through months, if not years, of neglect — so some of the money you save will have to be reinvested in additional maintenance. I’m not saying that you can’t find a foreclosure that’s right for you, but don’t expect to save a huge amount of money in the process.
Real Estate Financial Fitness Q&A
October 9, 2012By ALISON ROGERS+
MICHAEL MELFORD / GETTY IMAGES
Wondering what’s the latest in real estate? Every year, the Financial Planning Association of New York sponsors a “Financial Fitness Day” at New York University, co-sponsored by Moneyland. This year’s real estate discussion (which I participated in with Hedda Nadler of Mount and Nadler and David Breitstein of Apple Mortgage) addressed some especially timely questions.
Here’s a sample:
Q: Is the old rule that the time horizon to hold a property should be at least five years still in effect?
A: With the housing slump, average “tenure” — length of time Americans spend in their homes – has actually lengthened, from six to nine years, according to a chart published at Credit Sesame using statistics from the National Association of Realtors. If you’re planning on become a homebuyer, though, the issue is not average tenure, but will you be in the home long enough to ride out an economic down-cycle. So you want to take a look at housing statistics in your area, which your realtor should be able to give you. In many markets five years will be long enough, but in some — as residents of speculative markets like Phoenix and Vegas can tell you — seven years is a better rule of thumb.
(MORE: Why Reform Will Push Money Mark Fund Yields Even Lower)
Q: Should I get a mortgage if I have the ability to pay all cash?
A: This isn’t so much a real estate question as it is a personal finance question. If you buy a home with cash, you’ll be giving up the time value of the money you spend. The question is what you would do with the money if you borrowed instead? Invest in stocks? Buy a car? If you can borrow at 4%, and are confident that you could earn more with the money by investing it, then it may make sense to borrow. But bear in mind that you’ll also get a tax deduction on the mortgage interest you pay on the first $1 million that you borrow.
Q: How are millennials affecting the housing market?
A: This generation (generally defined as people born from 1980 to 2000, and therefore including people in their twenties and early thirties) faces special challenges, as they’ve come of age in a climate where student loan debt is high — almost like a second mortgage. The jobs market in recent years hasn’t been pretty either, with the result than many young people have come back to roost with their parents. That’s the bad news. The good news is that this generation has a lot of pent-up housing demand, and, with today’s low rates, should be able to enter the market as the economy recovers.
(Rental Vacancies Drop as Young People (Finally) Move Out)
Q: If I know my mortgage costs, how can I estimate my total housing costs?
Too often, a potential homebuyer will think of her housing costs as simply the cost of her mortgage. This simplification especially distorts rent-vs.-buy calculations. (As one industry saying goes, “You can rent your house, or you can rent the money to buy your house.”) Don’t forget to add in property taxes (ask home sellers to provide copies of their property tax bills) which can range from .18% to 1.89% of your home’s value annually, according to the Tax Foundation. Property taxes can be deducted on your federal income taxes, but that’s a deduction that gets phased out for homeowners who get hit by the AMT.
Also worth considering are utility bills, especially those you might not be used to paying as a renter — heat and water, for example. Homeowner’s insurance should also be figured into the calculation. And don’t forget to include a number in your budget for home maintenance; a good rule of thumb there is that you’ll spend between 2% and 3% of your home’s value each year. Some years you won’t spend that much, but setting it aside will enable bigger projects, like re-shingling the roof or renovating the kitchen, in other years.
Q: Why can’t I find real bargains on foreclosures in my area? If the housing market slumps, then you should be able to find some serious bargains, right? Unfortunately, a lot of the low-hanging fruit gets snapped up quickly by flippers and local real estate agents or contractors who know the local housing stock intimately.
It’s also important to consider condition when you talk about distressed properties: Heavily discounted foreclosures have often suffered through months, if not years, of neglect — so some of the money you save will have to be reinvested in additional maintenance. I’m not saying that you can’t find a foreclosure that’s right for you, but don’t expect to save a huge amount of money in the process.
Rogers gets in the NFC game.
According to a sales bulletin issued to stores, Rogers will be rolling out a new NFC mobile payment service dubbed suretap on October 15th. The partnership with CIBC was announced back in May and will be available in just a few days. Suretap will allow eligible customers with an NFC enabled device (Bold 9900 or Curve 9360) to pay for "small ticket items" with their CIBC credit card at participating stores. To pay, users will simply load up the app and tap the merchant's POS system. The service is free to use but will require an NFC SIM card (available from Rogers) as well as the CIBC Mobile Payment App which will be available at launch.
I have to admit I'm pretty jealous of this one as I'd love to see the same here in the US. Having the ability to go cardless and pay for items with just your BlackBerry is awesome.
Do you plan on using suretap? Hit the comments and let us know!
I have to admit I'm pretty jealous of this one as I'd love to see the same here in the US. Having the ability to go cardless and pay for items with just your BlackBerry is awesome.
Do you plan on using suretap? Hit the comments and let us know!
Is Microsoft Office coming to iOS and Android?
Microsoft is going through an extremely busy schedule at the minute with their next major release of Windows about to hit the marketplace on October 26th, as well as their much-anticipated Surface tablet slated for a first public outing on the same day. The old saying of there’s no rest for the wicked definitely applies here, as it turns out that the Redmond-based software giants are also hard at work on producing mobile versions of the Office suite for iOS and Android users.
There are plenty of apps that allow popular office documents to be opened, read and edited on various mobile platforms, but users have been a little perturbed about the lack of an official Office set of apps from Microsoft. A certain set of mobile users have resorted to using services like OnLive that offer virtualized Office apps delivered from the cloud, but it really doesn’t provide the native on-device experience that a lot of people crave.
According to recent reports; Microsoft could be planning on launching the official Office suite of apps for iOS and Android at the end of the first quarter of 2013. Definitely something for us productivity fans to look forward to. The information is coming directly from Petr Bobek who works as a product manager for Microsoft and has been speaking at a press event in the Czech Republic. During his talk at the event; Bobek confirmed that his company is indeed planning to release native iOS and Android iterations of Office 2013.
The good news doesn’t stop there either. In addition to pushing out native apps for the iOS and Android platforms, Microsoft will apparently conjure up some goodness for users of Windows Phone, Windows RT, OS X and Symbian. If this is indeed true then 2013 should be a good year for a wide number of users who love the consistency and power which Microsoft Office brings to their professional lives. As well as the native experiences for mobile device users, Microsoft is also planning on updating and releasing new versions of their current web apps that can be used in the absence of native offerings. We now just need to wait and see the pricing points of the company’s rather gorgeous looking Surface tablet at the end of this month to see if we will be running Office 2013 on that or our iPads.
Tuesday, October 9, 2012
A Galaxy S3 with a four inch screen?
Samsung to reveal mini Galaxy S III Thursday
Posted by Brittany Hillen on October 10, 2012.
Last week, we posted that Samsung seemingly planned to announce the existence of the much-rumored Galaxy S III Mini on October 11th. The company had sent out invitations to an event, which hinted at the announcement of “something small that will be big,” and given the massive popularity of the Galaxy S III, it wasn’t hard to guess what they meant. Following this is an announcement that Samsung does, indeed, plan to announce a 4 inch version of the massively popular Galaxy S III, confirming the rumors that have been circulating.
JK Shin of Samsung Mobile Communications stated that the 4-inch version of the S3 will be released in Germany on October 11th. Less the smaller size make you think otherwise, Shin assured reports at the announcement that the phone will have “full form factor,” and that it will not be an entry-level smartphone. The Galaxy S III Mini will be bucking the trend set by other high-end Android smartphone by offering such a small screen; most high-end smartphones have considerably larger displays.
Perhaps most intriguing was that this announcement has come shortly before the fabled Apple iPad Mini announcement that has been circulating the Internet. Rumor has it that Apple will be releasing a smaller form-factor iPad in order to compete with the variety of 7-inch Android tablets that have been gaining traction in the market, mostly due to their much lower price point. The Kindle Fire and Google Nexus 7, in particular, have proven to be very popular, but a cheaper iPad made possible by adopting a smaller form factor could cause serious competition for both.
Although Samsung’s announcement has trumped whatever announcement Apple might have planned, it’s not likely that a miniature Galaxy S III would pose any threat to either a smaller iPad or any of the currently popular Android tablets. The mini iPad is rumored to have an 8 inch screen, twice the size of the Galaxy S III Mini, and while the mini iPad (if it comes to fruition) is a tablet, the mini S3 is a smartphone. Any comparisons made between the two should be taken lightly, since, while similar on the surface, they are dissimilar devices with different markets.
Posted by Brittany Hillen on October 10, 2012.
Last week, we posted that Samsung seemingly planned to announce the existence of the much-rumored Galaxy S III Mini on October 11th. The company had sent out invitations to an event, which hinted at the announcement of “something small that will be big,” and given the massive popularity of the Galaxy S III, it wasn’t hard to guess what they meant. Following this is an announcement that Samsung does, indeed, plan to announce a 4 inch version of the massively popular Galaxy S III, confirming the rumors that have been circulating.
JK Shin of Samsung Mobile Communications stated that the 4-inch version of the S3 will be released in Germany on October 11th. Less the smaller size make you think otherwise, Shin assured reports at the announcement that the phone will have “full form factor,” and that it will not be an entry-level smartphone. The Galaxy S III Mini will be bucking the trend set by other high-end Android smartphone by offering such a small screen; most high-end smartphones have considerably larger displays.
Perhaps most intriguing was that this announcement has come shortly before the fabled Apple iPad Mini announcement that has been circulating the Internet. Rumor has it that Apple will be releasing a smaller form-factor iPad in order to compete with the variety of 7-inch Android tablets that have been gaining traction in the market, mostly due to their much lower price point. The Kindle Fire and Google Nexus 7, in particular, have proven to be very popular, but a cheaper iPad made possible by adopting a smaller form factor could cause serious competition for both.
Although Samsung’s announcement has trumped whatever announcement Apple might have planned, it’s not likely that a miniature Galaxy S III would pose any threat to either a smaller iPad or any of the currently popular Android tablets. The mini iPad is rumored to have an 8 inch screen, twice the size of the Galaxy S III Mini, and while the mini iPad (if it comes to fruition) is a tablet, the mini S3 is a smartphone. Any comparisons made between the two should be taken lightly, since, while similar on the surface, they are dissimilar devices with different markets.
Apple's iOS family and the field of medicine.
How Apple's mobile devices are re-defining medicine
Mike Schramm | Oct 9th 2012
The New York Times examines how Apple's iPhone, iPod touch, and iPad are changing the way the health industry works. Of course, a light, powerful, and simple touchscreen computer can be handy almost anywhere, but that's especially true in the field of medicine. Much of the work involves reference materials and careful measurements, and Apple's little devices are quickly becoming many doctors' first step in helping patients. From huge reference books slimmed down into easy-to-access apps and websites, to special accessories designed to measure specific patient conditions.
In fact, the Times notes, some professors of medicine are cautioning their students to remember that they have more tools at their disposal than just that iPhone in their pocket. Examining and dealing directly with the patient is always a priority, obviously, and some doctors in the piece say certain tasks just call for a good old fashioned pen and paper.
But Apple's iOS devices are certainly great tools to be used in the medical field, as we've seen before. Apps and accessories both, in conjunction with Apple's great computers, are just adding more and more weapons to doctors' growing arsenal of tools to do their jobs.
Mike Schramm | Oct 9th 2012
The New York Times examines how Apple's iPhone, iPod touch, and iPad are changing the way the health industry works. Of course, a light, powerful, and simple touchscreen computer can be handy almost anywhere, but that's especially true in the field of medicine. Much of the work involves reference materials and careful measurements, and Apple's little devices are quickly becoming many doctors' first step in helping patients. From huge reference books slimmed down into easy-to-access apps and websites, to special accessories designed to measure specific patient conditions.
In fact, the Times notes, some professors of medicine are cautioning their students to remember that they have more tools at their disposal than just that iPhone in their pocket. Examining and dealing directly with the patient is always a priority, obviously, and some doctors in the piece say certain tasks just call for a good old fashioned pen and paper.
But Apple's iOS devices are certainly great tools to be used in the medical field, as we've seen before. Apps and accessories both, in conjunction with Apple's great computers, are just adding more and more weapons to doctors' growing arsenal of tools to do their jobs.
The new iPod touch 5th gen....
Apple has today begun shipping its new, fifth-generation iPod touch. The device was announced alongside the iPhone 5 on September 12, and the first orders are expected to arrive on October 15 — more than a month after they first went on sale.
Like the iPhone 5, the new iPod touch boasts a larger 4-inch display, with a widescreen 16:9 aspect ratio. It also features a dual-core A5 processor and 512MB of RAM, which provide speeds comparable to those offered by the iPhone 4S. This is the first iPod touch to come in a variety of colors, including green, red, pink, blue, silver, and black.
Prices start at $299 for 32GB of storage, and rise to $399 for for 64GB of storage. Apple’s website still says that the devices will ship in “October,” and it’s yet to offer more specific estimates. It’s likely the Cupertino company will deal with the backlog of orders before updating that.
The reason the new iPod touch takes so long to arrive after shipping is that, like a lot of new Apple products, it’s going to be coming straight from China — hot off the factory floor. When you get your email to say it’s on its way, you’ll be able to track your device to your front door.
Has your new iPod touch begun shipping yet?
[Via: The Next Web]
VW does it again.
Behold the fastest production hybrid in the world. For the second time this year, the Volkswagen Jetta Hybrid LSR has moved the terminal-veolcity bar higher by averaging 186.313 mph at Bonneville. That breaks the SCTA's land speed record for production cars with forced induction engines of less than 1.5 liters.
On Oct. 5, Motor Trend Associate Road Test Editor Carlos Lago also posted the fastest run ever by a hybrid, hitting 187.147 mph during the last part of his second run. That bests the previous record by 1.753 mph set by the same car and driver in August.
In the official press release from Volkswagen (available below), the company brags that the "all-new 2013 Jetta hybrid is a distinctly different offering in the compact hybrid class, offering excellent fuel economy while retaining the fun-to-drive nature expected from a Volkswagen." But don't let that fool you. While the car may look stock, SCTA rules allow some major modifications in the "production car" class.
The suspension was lowered, the interior gutted and replaced with a full roll cage, and the car got special Salt Flat wheels and tires. Major engine modifications took the 170-horsepower motor all the way to 300 horses.
Totally allowed under the rules, but a bit misleading considering the production car name.
Leave it well enough alone? That's what Jim Cramer says...
NEW YORK (TheStreet) -- Kicking the can down the road is working
Jim Cramer
He reflected on the economic policies in both Europe and China over the past year, noting that this time last year U.S. markets were caught off guard by the faltering global economies.
This year, the U.S. has become important again.
Cramer said "kicking the can" has been scorned but in retrospect it's been working. Last year the Europeans had no idea how badly their economies were faltering, but the strategy of endless delays gave the markets time to process and prepare for the worse-case outcomes. U.S companies, he said, have moved to contain their losses in Europe, which is why they're able to thrive this year.
In China the same is true. As the Chinese have made small steps to stabilize their economy, U.S. companies have also been given time to prepare and adjust. More importantly, U.S. investors have taken the time to realize that not that many U.S. companies are even affected by China.
Look at today's biggest winners, said Cramer, companies like Netflix (NFLX), Carmax (KMX) and Marathon Petroleum (MPC) are all domestic stocks with no European or Chinese exposure. Other winners today included Eli Lilly (LLY), Petsmart (PETM) and Chipotle Mexican Grill (CMG). No international worries there either.
Even Cliffs Natural Resources (CLF), which is dependent on China, was able to rally today on the hopes of a "bad news is good news" scenario where things get so bad in China that the country is forced to act to save itself.
Cramer gave "three cheers" for the kick-the-can strategy, as its helped put American stocks back on the map.
Know Your IPO
In the "Know Your IPO" segment, Cramer featured Workday, the enterprise resource management company that's set to come public later this week under the ticker WDAY.
Cramer said Workday plays in the same space as Salesforce.com (CRM), only instead of offering cloud-based software solutions for sales and customer service, Workday is offering similar software for human resources, payroll and employee expense management. This is a red-hot sector, said Cramer, which is why Workday should be on everyone's radar.
Workday is not yet profitable and only has 340 customers thus far, but Cramer said what's important to note is both the market opportunity, $39 billion, and Workday's growth rate -- the company increased revenue by 98% last year. While Workday is still losing money while it invests in its business, the percentage of the company's costs versus its revenue is declining rapidly, which is a very good sign.
So how much should investors be willing to pay for Workday? The IPO is expected between $21 and $24 a share, but Cramer said strong demand may send shares higher. At the middle of that range, Workday would be trading at 18 times sales, which is expensive by traditional metrics, but well below stocks like Guidewire (GWRE) and Palo Alto Networks (PANW), two recent IPOs that popped on their first day of trading and continued higher.
Based on the valuations those companies received, Cramer said he'd be willing to pay up to 20 times sales for Workday, which would put the share price at no more than $27.50 a share. He said this premium is justified given how fast the company is growing and how solid its management team has executed thus far. Beyond $27.50 a share however, Cramer said he'd take a pass.
Looking for Winners
As we enter the fourth quarter of the year, Cramer said growth and momentum fund managers follow a predictable pattern, they identify a handful of stocks that they deem winners and start piling in. These "anointed" stocks just cannot be stopped, noted Cramer, which is why he's featuring 10 of them throughout the week.
His first two anointed winners were Amazon.com (AMZN) and Google (GOOG).
Shares of Amazon are already up 50% for the year, while Google is trading just 17% higher. But these gains won't stop money managers from taking them a lot higher, said Cramer, as there is a lot to like at both companies.
Amazon has become the Wal-Mart (WMT) of the Web, said Cramer, a beloved retailer with prices and selection that are second to none. But Amazon hasn't stopped there. Under the leadership of CEO Jeff Bezos, the company has expanded into making hardware like it's successful Kindle tablets, as well as into online media distribution, making it a true online marketplace for the world.
With over $5 billion in cash on its books, Amazon currently trades at a whopping 110 times earnings. That may sound wildly expensive, noted Cramer, but fund managers look at the "out years," like 2015, where Amazon is expected to trade for a more reasonable 35 times earnings. This makes the stock not so expensive given its 36% growth rate.
Google is in a similar position. It dominates online search, commanding a 66% market share in the U.S. The company is a major in mobile with its Android operating system and it has a mobile and social strategy, as well as YouTube and other opportunities.
Given that online advertising still represents only 10% of all advertising, Google clearly has lots of growth ahead of it. Google trades at only 11 times its expected 2015 earnings of $67 a share.
Jim Cramer
He reflected on the economic policies in both Europe and China over the past year, noting that this time last year U.S. markets were caught off guard by the faltering global economies.
This year, the U.S. has become important again.
Cramer said "kicking the can" has been scorned but in retrospect it's been working. Last year the Europeans had no idea how badly their economies were faltering, but the strategy of endless delays gave the markets time to process and prepare for the worse-case outcomes. U.S companies, he said, have moved to contain their losses in Europe, which is why they're able to thrive this year.
In China the same is true. As the Chinese have made small steps to stabilize their economy, U.S. companies have also been given time to prepare and adjust. More importantly, U.S. investors have taken the time to realize that not that many U.S. companies are even affected by China.
Look at today's biggest winners, said Cramer, companies like Netflix (NFLX), Carmax (KMX) and Marathon Petroleum (MPC) are all domestic stocks with no European or Chinese exposure. Other winners today included Eli Lilly (LLY), Petsmart (PETM) and Chipotle Mexican Grill (CMG). No international worries there either.
Even Cliffs Natural Resources (CLF), which is dependent on China, was able to rally today on the hopes of a "bad news is good news" scenario where things get so bad in China that the country is forced to act to save itself.
Cramer gave "three cheers" for the kick-the-can strategy, as its helped put American stocks back on the map.
Know Your IPO
In the "Know Your IPO" segment, Cramer featured Workday, the enterprise resource management company that's set to come public later this week under the ticker WDAY.
Cramer said Workday plays in the same space as Salesforce.com (CRM), only instead of offering cloud-based software solutions for sales and customer service, Workday is offering similar software for human resources, payroll and employee expense management. This is a red-hot sector, said Cramer, which is why Workday should be on everyone's radar.
Workday is not yet profitable and only has 340 customers thus far, but Cramer said what's important to note is both the market opportunity, $39 billion, and Workday's growth rate -- the company increased revenue by 98% last year. While Workday is still losing money while it invests in its business, the percentage of the company's costs versus its revenue is declining rapidly, which is a very good sign.
So how much should investors be willing to pay for Workday? The IPO is expected between $21 and $24 a share, but Cramer said strong demand may send shares higher. At the middle of that range, Workday would be trading at 18 times sales, which is expensive by traditional metrics, but well below stocks like Guidewire (GWRE) and Palo Alto Networks (PANW), two recent IPOs that popped on their first day of trading and continued higher.
Based on the valuations those companies received, Cramer said he'd be willing to pay up to 20 times sales for Workday, which would put the share price at no more than $27.50 a share. He said this premium is justified given how fast the company is growing and how solid its management team has executed thus far. Beyond $27.50 a share however, Cramer said he'd take a pass.
Looking for Winners
As we enter the fourth quarter of the year, Cramer said growth and momentum fund managers follow a predictable pattern, they identify a handful of stocks that they deem winners and start piling in. These "anointed" stocks just cannot be stopped, noted Cramer, which is why he's featuring 10 of them throughout the week.
His first two anointed winners were Amazon.com (AMZN) and Google (GOOG).
Shares of Amazon are already up 50% for the year, while Google is trading just 17% higher. But these gains won't stop money managers from taking them a lot higher, said Cramer, as there is a lot to like at both companies.
Amazon has become the Wal-Mart (WMT) of the Web, said Cramer, a beloved retailer with prices and selection that are second to none. But Amazon hasn't stopped there. Under the leadership of CEO Jeff Bezos, the company has expanded into making hardware like it's successful Kindle tablets, as well as into online media distribution, making it a true online marketplace for the world.
With over $5 billion in cash on its books, Amazon currently trades at a whopping 110 times earnings. That may sound wildly expensive, noted Cramer, but fund managers look at the "out years," like 2015, where Amazon is expected to trade for a more reasonable 35 times earnings. This makes the stock not so expensive given its 36% growth rate.
Google is in a similar position. It dominates online search, commanding a 66% market share in the U.S. The company is a major in mobile with its Android operating system and it has a mobile and social strategy, as well as YouTube and other opportunities.
Given that online advertising still represents only 10% of all advertising, Google clearly has lots of growth ahead of it. Google trades at only 11 times its expected 2015 earnings of $67 a share.
FB. Charging fees, really?
Now That Facebook Is Charging Users, Why Not Offer These Paid Features?
If you really love someone, promote it from the rooftops! Facebook shows how your 'reach' can increase if you pay.
Back in 2011, a rumor spread that Facebook was going to introduce a membership fee. Facebook put a stop to it with an update to its Wall, saying, “We have no plans to charge for Facebook. It’s free and always will be.” But now it’s 2012, and the revenue-hungry company is hedging on that statement.
Last week, Facebook engineer Abhishek Doshi informed U.S. users that if they really want to make sure to spread their personal news on the network, they should consider paying to promote their posts.
A diamond is forever, but an engagement announcement’s appearance in the News Feed will be fleeting… unless you put a down payment on it.
“When you promote a post – whether it’s wedding photos, a garage sale, or big news – you bump it higher in news feed so your friends and subscribers are more likely to notice it,” wrote Doshi. Only those with fewer than 5,000 friends can take advantage of the promotion opportunity, which costs $7 per post for now — which is more than triple what it cost when being tested in New Zealand in May. Either prices are rising fast in the attention economy or notice from American friends is more valuable than that from Kiwi ones.
Matt Silverman called it “bad for users” on Mashable. Dan Rowinski of RWW said it had a “whiff of extortion: ‘Pay to promote your post or nobody will ever see it.’” Will Oremus of Slate was the lone positive voice calling it “a smart strategy for a company that is under enormous pressure to start squeezing some money out of its massive free-riding user base.” Now Facebook will find out whether users are willing to whip out their credit cards to ensure drunken party photos get the attention they deserve.
But why stop there? If Facebook is going the “freemium route,” there are many other services Facebook users would gladly pay for. Here’s a potential price list to consider:
$5 for Retro Facebook: Allow Timeline haters to revert to “old Facebook.”
$8 for Break-up Protection: Hide photos of and updates from an ex without actually blocking or de-friending him or her. This gives you the option to protect your heart in the short term, but leaves open the option to creep at a later date.
$15 for Divafication: Force said ex and/or frenemies to be bombarded with photos and status updates documenting the good times in your own life.
$5 for Ego Boost: Facebook analytics page that lets you know how often your profile and photos are viewed.
$50 for See-Your-Stalkers: Make the “who viewed your profile” meme come true! A Friendster-style “Who’s Viewed My Page” option to see exactly which Facebook users are creeping on your page and looking at your photos. LinkedIn already offers a partial list of “Who’s Viewed Your Profile” for free, after all.
$50 for Stalk-Without-Being-Seen: Facebook could then sell the right to shadow stalk, and be exempted from the listing above.
$0.25 for Famous Facebook Follows: Charge a small fee to follow people of note. Lady Gaga‘s Little Monsters could yield a scary profit. Dave Winer would suggest throwing a percentage of this to the notable user.
$10 for Actual Privacy Protection: “Privacy, duh!” says Jeff Roberts of GigaOm. Facebook could offer the option to “stay out of sponsored story ads, see no ads, avoid Facebook data collection, etc.”
$3.50 for MySpaceBook: Joe Brown of Gizmodo says he would pony up “for inline animated gifs.”
$7 for I-Don’t-Want-To-See-That:
Facebook could charge $7 a pop for specific filters. “I would pay to block all pictures of new mothers nursing,” says one of my anti-breastfeeding friends. “I [want to] axe those Mitt Romney ‘likes’ that friends keep posting,” says a commenter on a Facebook thread I started.
$1,000 for I-Want-To-See-Everything: All-access pass to Facebook. You can see everyone’s full profiles, no matter what their privacy settings are. Mwah ha ha.
If you really love someone, promote it from the rooftops! Facebook shows how your 'reach' can increase if you pay.
Back in 2011, a rumor spread that Facebook was going to introduce a membership fee. Facebook put a stop to it with an update to its Wall, saying, “We have no plans to charge for Facebook. It’s free and always will be.” But now it’s 2012, and the revenue-hungry company is hedging on that statement.
Last week, Facebook engineer Abhishek Doshi informed U.S. users that if they really want to make sure to spread their personal news on the network, they should consider paying to promote their posts.
A diamond is forever, but an engagement announcement’s appearance in the News Feed will be fleeting… unless you put a down payment on it.
“When you promote a post – whether it’s wedding photos, a garage sale, or big news – you bump it higher in news feed so your friends and subscribers are more likely to notice it,” wrote Doshi. Only those with fewer than 5,000 friends can take advantage of the promotion opportunity, which costs $7 per post for now — which is more than triple what it cost when being tested in New Zealand in May. Either prices are rising fast in the attention economy or notice from American friends is more valuable than that from Kiwi ones.
Matt Silverman called it “bad for users” on Mashable. Dan Rowinski of RWW said it had a “whiff of extortion: ‘Pay to promote your post or nobody will ever see it.’” Will Oremus of Slate was the lone positive voice calling it “a smart strategy for a company that is under enormous pressure to start squeezing some money out of its massive free-riding user base.” Now Facebook will find out whether users are willing to whip out their credit cards to ensure drunken party photos get the attention they deserve.
But why stop there? If Facebook is going the “freemium route,” there are many other services Facebook users would gladly pay for. Here’s a potential price list to consider:
$5 for Retro Facebook: Allow Timeline haters to revert to “old Facebook.”
$8 for Break-up Protection: Hide photos of and updates from an ex without actually blocking or de-friending him or her. This gives you the option to protect your heart in the short term, but leaves open the option to creep at a later date.
$15 for Divafication: Force said ex and/or frenemies to be bombarded with photos and status updates documenting the good times in your own life.
$5 for Ego Boost: Facebook analytics page that lets you know how often your profile and photos are viewed.
$50 for See-Your-Stalkers: Make the “who viewed your profile” meme come true! A Friendster-style “Who’s Viewed My Page” option to see exactly which Facebook users are creeping on your page and looking at your photos. LinkedIn already offers a partial list of “Who’s Viewed Your Profile” for free, after all.
$50 for Stalk-Without-Being-Seen: Facebook could then sell the right to shadow stalk, and be exempted from the listing above.
$0.25 for Famous Facebook Follows: Charge a small fee to follow people of note. Lady Gaga‘s Little Monsters could yield a scary profit. Dave Winer would suggest throwing a percentage of this to the notable user.
$10 for Actual Privacy Protection: “Privacy, duh!” says Jeff Roberts of GigaOm. Facebook could offer the option to “stay out of sponsored story ads, see no ads, avoid Facebook data collection, etc.”
$3.50 for MySpaceBook: Joe Brown of Gizmodo says he would pony up “for inline animated gifs.”
$7 for I-Don’t-Want-To-See-That:
Facebook could charge $7 a pop for specific filters. “I would pay to block all pictures of new mothers nursing,” says one of my anti-breastfeeding friends. “I [want to] axe those Mitt Romney ‘likes’ that friends keep posting,” says a commenter on a Facebook thread I started.
$1,000 for I-Want-To-See-Everything: All-access pass to Facebook. You can see everyone’s full profiles, no matter what their privacy settings are. Mwah ha ha.
New SEO. What does it mean?
Over the past decade, the publishing industry been swinging on a pendulum created by the effects of search engine optimization (SEO). In the old, primarily print days, the most successful publishers were those that could produce great content for a specific audience and keep that audience engaged via subscriptions or at the newsstands. More recently, the kings of publishing were those that could best engage web crawlers and monetize their sites through a windfall of free search traffic. The focus has been less on creating great content and engaging readers than on producing lots of words on lots of pages to engage web crawlers.
But there is a silver lining to all of this. With last year's Panda release, and the more recent Penguin release, Google is going to flip SEO on its head. If Old SEO enabled some to fool a crawler into indexing borderline junk content to get high rankings, New SEO looks likely to take any notion of fooling anyone out of the equation.
New SEO will put all publishers on more equal footing, favoring those that produce quality content that is highly engaging to a certain audience. If SEO was previously a linear method of feeding a crawler with words and links, Google's results are now the result of a feedback loop: show them that you can produce quality content that people are attracted to, and free search traffic will follow.
There are two ways for a user to arrive at content -- the first is actively searching for it on a search engine like Google or Bing. The second is to discover or stumble onto it via a link on another website, an e-mail from a friend, a link shared on Twitter or Facebook, etc. "Discovery" encompasses all those times we reach a page without first typing a keyword into a search box.
To feed the search rankings with New SEO, publishers must be thinking about the discovery side. How can they get more engaged people discovering their content and engaging with it outside of Google? Ironically, a New SEO expert will probably need to focus more on Facebook than on Google to improve search rankings. The same goes for brands that are investing in content creation and content marketing. To be successful, everyone needs to play by the New SEO rules.
With New SEO, the pendulum is finally swinging back to favoring humans over crawlers. The New SEO rules point directly back to what was valued in the traditional print-dominated days -- content will not be a mechanism to convert clicks but a tool to boost awareness, increase overall engagement and offer opportunities to connect with a quality audience. And the "customer" that content is tailored for will no longer be SEO bots (the software apps that work the web automatically), as the New SEO favors the true end-user: the reader.
These are great days for publishing, and I'm very optimistic about future, weighted by quality content. Like many others, I hated much of what SEO had done to the industry, but the world of New SEO is one I'm looking forward to.
But there is a silver lining to all of this. With last year's Panda release, and the more recent Penguin release, Google is going to flip SEO on its head. If Old SEO enabled some to fool a crawler into indexing borderline junk content to get high rankings, New SEO looks likely to take any notion of fooling anyone out of the equation.
New SEO will put all publishers on more equal footing, favoring those that produce quality content that is highly engaging to a certain audience. If SEO was previously a linear method of feeding a crawler with words and links, Google's results are now the result of a feedback loop: show them that you can produce quality content that people are attracted to, and free search traffic will follow.
There are two ways for a user to arrive at content -- the first is actively searching for it on a search engine like Google or Bing. The second is to discover or stumble onto it via a link on another website, an e-mail from a friend, a link shared on Twitter or Facebook, etc. "Discovery" encompasses all those times we reach a page without first typing a keyword into a search box.
To feed the search rankings with New SEO, publishers must be thinking about the discovery side. How can they get more engaged people discovering their content and engaging with it outside of Google? Ironically, a New SEO expert will probably need to focus more on Facebook than on Google to improve search rankings. The same goes for brands that are investing in content creation and content marketing. To be successful, everyone needs to play by the New SEO rules.
With New SEO, the pendulum is finally swinging back to favoring humans over crawlers. The New SEO rules point directly back to what was valued in the traditional print-dominated days -- content will not be a mechanism to convert clicks but a tool to boost awareness, increase overall engagement and offer opportunities to connect with a quality audience. And the "customer" that content is tailored for will no longer be SEO bots (the software apps that work the web automatically), as the New SEO favors the true end-user: the reader.
These are great days for publishing, and I'm very optimistic about future, weighted by quality content. Like many others, I hated much of what SEO had done to the industry, but the world of New SEO is one I'm looking forward to.
Windows Phone 8. Who wants one?
Get ready...
Windows Phone 8 pre-orders to begin on October 21st
By Tom Warren 15 Hours Ago
Microsoft's first Windows Phone 8 devices will be available for pre-order in the US on October 21st. Sources familiar with AT&T and Microsoft's plans have revealed to The Verge that the carrier will start taking pre-orders for its range of Windows Phone 8 handsets on October 21st — including the HTC 8X and Nokia's Lumia 920.
Pre-orders for Samsung's Ativ Smart PC and the Asus Vivo Tab RT will also commence on October 21st in preparation for a launch on October 26th. We understand that the Windows Phone 8 devices will be made available in early November, following the pre-orders on October 21st. A Microsoft spokesperson refused to comment on the pre-order date directly, stating that "Windows Phone 8 phones will be available to customers later this year."
Windows Phone 8 pre-orders to begin on October 21st
By Tom Warren 15 Hours Ago
Microsoft's first Windows Phone 8 devices will be available for pre-order in the US on October 21st. Sources familiar with AT&T and Microsoft's plans have revealed to The Verge that the carrier will start taking pre-orders for its range of Windows Phone 8 handsets on October 21st — including the HTC 8X and Nokia's Lumia 920.
Pre-orders for Samsung's Ativ Smart PC and the Asus Vivo Tab RT will also commence on October 21st in preparation for a launch on October 26th. We understand that the Windows Phone 8 devices will be made available in early November, following the pre-orders on October 21st. A Microsoft spokesperson refused to comment on the pre-order date directly, stating that "Windows Phone 8 phones will be available to customers later this year."
Video hosting service and Twitter? More control or a new charge service?
Mike Isaac
Twitter Mulls an In-House Video-Hosting Service
OCTOBER 9, 2012
If you want something done right, do it yourself.
Twitter is considering building its own video-hosting technology, according to sources. That means users could upload video directly via the service’s mobile apps, instead of using hosting services like yFrog, TwitVid and Vodpod.
That potential change would be in line with a number of tweaks the site has made to its applications throughout 2012. Until recently, Twitter also delegated photo hosting to third-party services; Twitter moved that hosting in-house with the most recent app updates.
Mind you, this doesn’t mean Twitter expects users to start using its homegrown solution for the bulk of the videos people share of the service. It still expects most people to post clips using links from sites like YouTube, Hulu and Vimeo.
People familiar with Twitter’s thinking say the switch would be a way of further refining Twitter’s consistency and user experience, better shaping how users encounter Twitter content. It’s Twitter’s theme over the past year. (Example: The LinkedIn situation from months ago.)
While these video services take some of the heavy lifting off of Twitter, they also create difficulties. For one, Twitter has no control over the changes others make to their products. Yet often, Twitter must deal with the fallout when these changes occur. So, say, a third-party Twitter developer screws something up for its users — those users don’t necessarily go to the developer with complaints, but instead take it directly to Twitter.
I’d imagine, too, that every time Twitter updates one of its clients, it is frustrating to configure the new version to work with a number of outside hosting services. Add in the fact that Twitter has clients across multiple operating systems, and it fast becomes a logistical headache.
It’s not only about tech problems, but creating better ways to make tweets richer. Over the past few months, Twitter has slowly, increasingly updated the product to be more media-friendly, with full photos, videos and snippets of news articles now viewable from within individual tweets themselves.
Owning that rich video experience has monetization upside. One source says building a more effective video player could be a way of better enhancing the company’s existing advertising products, namely the promoted suite.
Look at it this way: If a big brand buys a promoted tweet, the advertiser needs to make that tweet as compelling as possible to get their money’s worth. The better the tweet, the higher the likelihood of click-through or, at minimum, brand awareness. A simpler, more reliable way for partners to host their video makes for a better, media-rich stream. In theory, it’s good for both users and advertisers.
Who it’s not so good for: These third-party hosting services. Were Twitter to follow through with the plan, this would seriously dampen the number of video uploads these services would receive. Users could still upload video to these third-party services and then add the link in manually, but the loss of official Twitter app integration would sting.
As of today, it’s not a done deal; Folks inside the company are still hashing out whether to make the change. But if it were to come about, I’d expect it to come quietly in a future product update.
(Image courtesy of Juan Manuel Romo)
Twitter Mulls an In-House Video-Hosting Service
OCTOBER 9, 2012
If you want something done right, do it yourself.
Twitter is considering building its own video-hosting technology, according to sources. That means users could upload video directly via the service’s mobile apps, instead of using hosting services like yFrog, TwitVid and Vodpod.
That potential change would be in line with a number of tweaks the site has made to its applications throughout 2012. Until recently, Twitter also delegated photo hosting to third-party services; Twitter moved that hosting in-house with the most recent app updates.
Mind you, this doesn’t mean Twitter expects users to start using its homegrown solution for the bulk of the videos people share of the service. It still expects most people to post clips using links from sites like YouTube, Hulu and Vimeo.
People familiar with Twitter’s thinking say the switch would be a way of further refining Twitter’s consistency and user experience, better shaping how users encounter Twitter content. It’s Twitter’s theme over the past year. (Example: The LinkedIn situation from months ago.)
While these video services take some of the heavy lifting off of Twitter, they also create difficulties. For one, Twitter has no control over the changes others make to their products. Yet often, Twitter must deal with the fallout when these changes occur. So, say, a third-party Twitter developer screws something up for its users — those users don’t necessarily go to the developer with complaints, but instead take it directly to Twitter.
I’d imagine, too, that every time Twitter updates one of its clients, it is frustrating to configure the new version to work with a number of outside hosting services. Add in the fact that Twitter has clients across multiple operating systems, and it fast becomes a logistical headache.
It’s not only about tech problems, but creating better ways to make tweets richer. Over the past few months, Twitter has slowly, increasingly updated the product to be more media-friendly, with full photos, videos and snippets of news articles now viewable from within individual tweets themselves.
Owning that rich video experience has monetization upside. One source says building a more effective video player could be a way of better enhancing the company’s existing advertising products, namely the promoted suite.
Look at it this way: If a big brand buys a promoted tweet, the advertiser needs to make that tweet as compelling as possible to get their money’s worth. The better the tweet, the higher the likelihood of click-through or, at minimum, brand awareness. A simpler, more reliable way for partners to host their video makes for a better, media-rich stream. In theory, it’s good for both users and advertisers.
Who it’s not so good for: These third-party hosting services. Were Twitter to follow through with the plan, this would seriously dampen the number of video uploads these services would receive. Users could still upload video to these third-party services and then add the link in manually, but the loss of official Twitter app integration would sting.
As of today, it’s not a done deal; Folks inside the company are still hashing out whether to make the change. But if it were to come about, I’d expect it to come quietly in a future product update.
(Image courtesy of Juan Manuel Romo)
Monday, October 8, 2012
Scape, Brian Eno, and the iPad.
Pereptual innovator Brian Eno has developed a new iPad app for composing music.
The app, called Scape, was designed with Peter Chilvers for Generative Music and is available to purchase on iTunes for $5.99.
With Scape, users create atmospheric soundscapes using a pallet of on-screen "building blocks" of various shapes and colors. Each element triggers a unique piece of sound-- drone, melody, percussion, or texture-- which all "respond intelligently to each other," as demonstrated in the video, below. Users also control the work's key, scale, and tone, and can save work in playlists or share with others.
"Can machines create original music?" the creators ask in the iTunes description. "Scape is our answer to that question... Scape makes music that thinks for itself."
According to the video demonstration, "each element has an independent life story," allowing for slight variations of a "scape" with each play. The whole app seems to emphasize the ritualistic quality of music-making.
Speaking to The Guardian, Eno said,
I felt what was very interesting to do as a composer was to construct some kind of system or process which did the composing for you. You'd then feed inputs into it, and it would reconfigure it and make something beyond what you had predicted. I worked on things like that for a while: Music for Airports and Discreet Music were examples, but they represented recordings of these processes in action. What I really wanted to do was be able to sell the process to somebody, not just my output of it.
This follows Eno's 2008 iPhone app, Bloom, and comes just after the news that he'll release a new solo album, Lux, November 13 via Warp.
The app, called Scape, was designed with Peter Chilvers for Generative Music and is available to purchase on iTunes for $5.99.
With Scape, users create atmospheric soundscapes using a pallet of on-screen "building blocks" of various shapes and colors. Each element triggers a unique piece of sound-- drone, melody, percussion, or texture-- which all "respond intelligently to each other," as demonstrated in the video, below. Users also control the work's key, scale, and tone, and can save work in playlists or share with others.
"Can machines create original music?" the creators ask in the iTunes description. "Scape is our answer to that question... Scape makes music that thinks for itself."
According to the video demonstration, "each element has an independent life story," allowing for slight variations of a "scape" with each play. The whole app seems to emphasize the ritualistic quality of music-making.
Speaking to The Guardian, Eno said,
I felt what was very interesting to do as a composer was to construct some kind of system or process which did the composing for you. You'd then feed inputs into it, and it would reconfigure it and make something beyond what you had predicted. I worked on things like that for a while: Music for Airports and Discreet Music were examples, but they represented recordings of these processes in action. What I really wanted to do was be able to sell the process to somebody, not just my output of it.
This follows Eno's 2008 iPhone app, Bloom, and comes just after the news that he'll release a new solo album, Lux, November 13 via Warp.
FB. Who uses it more often, iOS or Android?
Everyone knows that Google’s Android operating system has a larger market share than Apple’s iOS market share. When it comes to Facebook users, however, the two mobile platforms aren’t quite as far apart as you’d think. Android is still ahead of iOS, but just barely.
20.1 percent of Facebook users connect to the service via an Android device, compared to 18.9 percent of users who do so with an iOS device, according to data from social advertising and analytics platform Optimal, cited by Inside Facebook. It’s worth noting that these are unofficial numbers and aren’t comparable to the latest figures we’ve seen from Facebook (1 billion users, 600 million mobile users).
More specifically, Optimal says there are about 189.8 million active users on Android (including the app and accessing the service via the browser) and about 178.3 million active iOS users (also app and browser). If you’ve already done the basic math in your head, you’ll see that this doesn’t add up, because Optimal is comparing the figures against the 944.2 million monthly active users that it found via the Facebook Ads API, not the full 1 billion.
Android has the highest Facebook share in South Korea: 52.6 percent compared to 20.3 percent on iOS. On the flipside, Singapore and Australia have the highest iOS penetration for Facebook users, both with 48.8 percent. Lastly, and least surprisingly, the US has the highest penetration of both platforms combined with 83.5 percent of its Facebook population using Android and iOS smartphones and tablets.
These Facebook numbers will continue to see huge shifts in the coming months, and not just because Facebook hard with its mobile apps. A recent study from Macquarie Research, first noted by MediaPost (via All Facebook) says 56 percent of users between ages 15 and 25 check Facebook from their phones, up from 24 percent last year.
So, where is the huge skew towards iOS coming from? It’s most likely the mobile Web version of Facebook. Since almost every mobile market share study shows the iOS browser is used significantly more than the Android browser (see Net Applications for an example), it’s safe to say it is tipping the scales away from Android and toward iOS. As Chrome gets on more Android devices, this will likely start to change.
See also: Zuckerberg: More people use Facebook on mobile web than on Android and iPhone combined
Image credit: Math TheRivo
20.1 percent of Facebook users connect to the service via an Android device, compared to 18.9 percent of users who do so with an iOS device, according to data from social advertising and analytics platform Optimal, cited by Inside Facebook. It’s worth noting that these are unofficial numbers and aren’t comparable to the latest figures we’ve seen from Facebook (1 billion users, 600 million mobile users).
More specifically, Optimal says there are about 189.8 million active users on Android (including the app and accessing the service via the browser) and about 178.3 million active iOS users (also app and browser). If you’ve already done the basic math in your head, you’ll see that this doesn’t add up, because Optimal is comparing the figures against the 944.2 million monthly active users that it found via the Facebook Ads API, not the full 1 billion.
Android has the highest Facebook share in South Korea: 52.6 percent compared to 20.3 percent on iOS. On the flipside, Singapore and Australia have the highest iOS penetration for Facebook users, both with 48.8 percent. Lastly, and least surprisingly, the US has the highest penetration of both platforms combined with 83.5 percent of its Facebook population using Android and iOS smartphones and tablets.
These Facebook numbers will continue to see huge shifts in the coming months, and not just because Facebook hard with its mobile apps. A recent study from Macquarie Research, first noted by MediaPost (via All Facebook) says 56 percent of users between ages 15 and 25 check Facebook from their phones, up from 24 percent last year.
So, where is the huge skew towards iOS coming from? It’s most likely the mobile Web version of Facebook. Since almost every mobile market share study shows the iOS browser is used significantly more than the Android browser (see Net Applications for an example), it’s safe to say it is tipping the scales away from Android and toward iOS. As Chrome gets on more Android devices, this will likely start to change.
See also: Zuckerberg: More people use Facebook on mobile web than on Android and iPhone combined
Image credit: Math TheRivo
YouTube adds 60 new channels to its programming.
YouTube has announced they are taking its original programming global with 60 new channels. The new channels will come from Britain, Germany, France and the US, will follow the current YouTube model of being celebrity driven or niche-oriented. Check out this link for a list of current and upcoming channels.
The new YouTube channels cover everything from local cuisine, health and wellness and parenting to sports, music, comedy, animation and news, and YouTube says they are "backed by some of the biggest producers, well-known celebrities and emerging media companies from Europe and the U.S."
Online education? For sure. It's the new paradigm shift in society.
Building open-learning platforms in Canada
JAMES BRADSHAW
THE GLOBE AND MAIL
Last updated Sunday, Oct. 07 2012
Using the BlueJeans networking software, developed by the Technology Integration and Evaluation (TIE) Lab, and a high definition video conferencing camera students in the Educational Psychology and Leadership Studies class at the University of Victoria are able to learn from home in BC, Alberta and the Yukon with students locally from the MacLaurin Building at the University of Victoria, in Victoria,BC Friday September 28, 2012 . (CHAD HIPOLITO for The Globe and Mail)
Among the tens of thousands of people signed up for the University of Toronto’s online computer science course Learn to Program: The Fundamentals, there are a lot of unconventional students. There are 30-somethings who never went to university and never earned a degree, and are searching for skills that might lead to a job. There is an octogenarian with a curious streak and a stable of retirees looking for a chance to buck the stereotypes of a generation that grew up without computers. And there is a student from Malaysia.
EDUCATION Can Canada's schools pass the next great intelligence test?
Our Time to Lead Editor's note: Education needs a course correction
Education Innovator Daphne Koller: Education as a right
Paul Gries, one of the course’s two instructors, does not know if that student is male or female, but he knows it is someone whose education stopped at high school, and who badly wanted to learn programming but couldn’t find a viable local option.
“These are people I’d never, ever have imagined teaching,” Prof. Gries said. “This is a big rush.”
These students are online learners, a few of the 100,000 who have enrolled so far in three courses the Toronto school just launched. They hail from Indonesia and Tunisia, Lithuania, Sudan and Kyrgyzstan – and the United States, the United Kingdom, China and Canada too.
The classes are the University of Toronto’s first through U.S.-based Coursera, one of several new ventures in massive open online courses, or MOOCs, the not-for-credit courses available for free to anyone with an Internet connection. (The University of B.C. is also offering a small slate of courses.)
Of late, MOOCs have dominated the conversation around online learning. They drastically change distance learning, breaking down the barriers of geography and fees, while connecting students across the globe with each other and with some of the world’s top teaching talents. Through Coursera, Princeton is offering Spanish civilization professor Jeremy Adelman’s A History of the World since 1300, while Wesleyan has its president, Michael S. Roth, teaching The Modern and the Postmodern.
Armed with millions of dollars from venture capitalists and university coffers, and fuelled by universities eager to brand themselves as innovators, three American MOOC providers – Coursera, edX and Udacity – have launched in the last nine months alone. Yet despite excitement over this apparent democratization of higher learning, skeptics are multiplying. They argue the medium hasn’t fixed the message: Many MOOCs simply take traditional classes that were small, closed and expensive, and amplify them to be huge, open and free. The learning may be multiplied, but so are the classroom’s existing limitations.
“These ways of teaching don’t adapt to diversity, to different learning styles,” said Sara Diamond, president of OCAD University in Toronto. “The learning experience is absolutely uniform.”
The Canadian answer to how much MOOCs can contribute to learning will have to rely largely on the American experience. But it didn’t have to be this way – Canada had a chance to lead.
In 2008, two University of Manitoba teachers prepared a course for 25 paying students exploring ways to make learning more social and less hierarchical. In a nod to the subject matter, UManitoba’s George Siemens and Stephen Downes of the National Research Council decided to throw open the virtual doors and let anyone join in for free.
“We just said, it costs us nothing to do what we do in a regular classroom and reduce the walls and open it up,” said Dr. Siemens, who now teaches at Alberta’s fully-online Athabasca University.
They expected a couple of hundred responses at best. But soon 2,300 people from 60 countries delved digitally into blogging assignments, discussion forums and “synchronous” online get-togethers, unconcerned that they would receive no credit – not even the certificates of completion offered in some newer MOOCs.
The UManitoba course, widely acknowledged as the first MOOC, took early inspiration from an idea that is only now gaining momentum in the U.K., Finland and Spain: that universities should be less protective of their newest ideas and brightest minds, allowing them to mingle more freely online.
“We used to think that when you hold on tightly to your ideas, you’re going to get better recognition, but the reverse [is now true]: If you put things out there, people look at you,” said Alec Couros, an educational technology professor at the University of Regina who has similarly experimented with opening for-credit online courses to a wider community.
Looking back on the UManitoba course, Dr. Siemens wishes Canadian schools would band together and build their own open learning platform.
MOOCs are not a cure-all for higher education’s challenges, he says. Even fervent e-advocates caution online classes are not a substitute for in-person instruction. But they offer a low-risk testing ground for ways to engage students in remote locations using video, new learning software and social media.
“It would give Canadian university leaders an opportunity to experiment and to really have their finger on the pulse,” he said.
Rather than investing in their own technological platforms, however, Canadian and U.S. administrators have felt it “safer to contract out,” said American instructional technologist Jim Groom, of the University of Mary Washington. Universities settled into secure but limited learning-management systems such as Blackboard or Moodle, creating “a decade of lost innovation.”
For Canadian innovators, spreading change is difficult in a university system that that has been averse to taking risks. The collaborative, egalitarian spirit of the online world demands a different style of teaching than a professor delivering a lecture. Students say professors in good online courses have allowed them to alter the course outline by adding their own sources and materials.
“[Universities] don’t want to fail. They don’t want to get a black eye,” Dr. Siemens said.
A few schools have created administrative roles dedicated to teaching innovation, but most are “not really pushing limits,” said Valerie Irvine, a professor of educational technology and co-director of the University of Victoria’s Technology Integration and Evaluation (TIE) Lab.
At UVic, Dr. Irvine has piloted a teacher-education course that joined 10 students in a classroom with 17 tuned in from afar by live video stream, which she now calls “multi-access learning.” She also applied to a corporate foundation for a $1.75-million grant, hoping to develop a pan-Canadian open online program that faculty from numerous universities could join. Despite the huge enrolment in MOOCs, Canadian and U.S. surveys show students and educators are still lukewarm toward online learning, though research also suggests the more exposure they have to online classes, the more positively they react to them.
Alison Seaman is a convert. At age 34, she has two bachelor’s degrees, a college certificate, and will soon finish a master’s – and until last fall, she hadn’t taken a single online course. She was dubious of e-learning after hearing tales of heavy readings, scarce support from professors, and superficial message-board discussions.
But a friend prodded her to sign up as one of 20 paying students in Social Media and Open Education, a URegina online course taught by Dr. Couros, who invited another 200 people from several countries – many of them professors and experts – to join less formally as participants and mentors. They blogged assignments, met once a week through a live video stream, and traded ideas on Twitter at all hours, across continents, and even after the course ended.
It was a “transformative experience” Ms. Seaman said. “The structure of the class really lends itself to collaboration.”
As digital prophets and classroom traditionalists polarize the debate over online education’s future, Dr. Couros’s mini-MOOC hints at the potential to harness the technology’s unlimited reach to enrich more traditional, for-credit classes. “Instead of the ratio being one instructor to 20 students, it ended up being 10 mentors to every student, which was sort of amazing,” he said.
But more broadly, it may signal the start of a new, more open university culture that could change the way Canadian knowledge moves and grows around the world.
“When you take those Nobel Prize winners, those Canada Research Chairs, those excellent minds from a research angle, and you actually open access to them, I think that’s where we can really blow the future of higher-ed in a different way,” Dr. Irvine said. “I think a lot of these bricks-and-mortar institutions are kind of like sleeping giants. And I think they’re about to wake up.”
JAMES BRADSHAW
THE GLOBE AND MAIL
Last updated Sunday, Oct. 07 2012
Using the BlueJeans networking software, developed by the Technology Integration and Evaluation (TIE) Lab, and a high definition video conferencing camera students in the Educational Psychology and Leadership Studies class at the University of Victoria are able to learn from home in BC, Alberta and the Yukon with students locally from the MacLaurin Building at the University of Victoria, in Victoria,BC Friday September 28, 2012 . (CHAD HIPOLITO for The Globe and Mail)
Among the tens of thousands of people signed up for the University of Toronto’s online computer science course Learn to Program: The Fundamentals, there are a lot of unconventional students. There are 30-somethings who never went to university and never earned a degree, and are searching for skills that might lead to a job. There is an octogenarian with a curious streak and a stable of retirees looking for a chance to buck the stereotypes of a generation that grew up without computers. And there is a student from Malaysia.
EDUCATION Can Canada's schools pass the next great intelligence test?
Our Time to Lead Editor's note: Education needs a course correction
Education Innovator Daphne Koller: Education as a right
Paul Gries, one of the course’s two instructors, does not know if that student is male or female, but he knows it is someone whose education stopped at high school, and who badly wanted to learn programming but couldn’t find a viable local option.
“These are people I’d never, ever have imagined teaching,” Prof. Gries said. “This is a big rush.”
These students are online learners, a few of the 100,000 who have enrolled so far in three courses the Toronto school just launched. They hail from Indonesia and Tunisia, Lithuania, Sudan and Kyrgyzstan – and the United States, the United Kingdom, China and Canada too.
The classes are the University of Toronto’s first through U.S.-based Coursera, one of several new ventures in massive open online courses, or MOOCs, the not-for-credit courses available for free to anyone with an Internet connection. (The University of B.C. is also offering a small slate of courses.)
Of late, MOOCs have dominated the conversation around online learning. They drastically change distance learning, breaking down the barriers of geography and fees, while connecting students across the globe with each other and with some of the world’s top teaching talents. Through Coursera, Princeton is offering Spanish civilization professor Jeremy Adelman’s A History of the World since 1300, while Wesleyan has its president, Michael S. Roth, teaching The Modern and the Postmodern.
Armed with millions of dollars from venture capitalists and university coffers, and fuelled by universities eager to brand themselves as innovators, three American MOOC providers – Coursera, edX and Udacity – have launched in the last nine months alone. Yet despite excitement over this apparent democratization of higher learning, skeptics are multiplying. They argue the medium hasn’t fixed the message: Many MOOCs simply take traditional classes that were small, closed and expensive, and amplify them to be huge, open and free. The learning may be multiplied, but so are the classroom’s existing limitations.
“These ways of teaching don’t adapt to diversity, to different learning styles,” said Sara Diamond, president of OCAD University in Toronto. “The learning experience is absolutely uniform.”
The Canadian answer to how much MOOCs can contribute to learning will have to rely largely on the American experience. But it didn’t have to be this way – Canada had a chance to lead.
In 2008, two University of Manitoba teachers prepared a course for 25 paying students exploring ways to make learning more social and less hierarchical. In a nod to the subject matter, UManitoba’s George Siemens and Stephen Downes of the National Research Council decided to throw open the virtual doors and let anyone join in for free.
“We just said, it costs us nothing to do what we do in a regular classroom and reduce the walls and open it up,” said Dr. Siemens, who now teaches at Alberta’s fully-online Athabasca University.
They expected a couple of hundred responses at best. But soon 2,300 people from 60 countries delved digitally into blogging assignments, discussion forums and “synchronous” online get-togethers, unconcerned that they would receive no credit – not even the certificates of completion offered in some newer MOOCs.
The UManitoba course, widely acknowledged as the first MOOC, took early inspiration from an idea that is only now gaining momentum in the U.K., Finland and Spain: that universities should be less protective of their newest ideas and brightest minds, allowing them to mingle more freely online.
“We used to think that when you hold on tightly to your ideas, you’re going to get better recognition, but the reverse [is now true]: If you put things out there, people look at you,” said Alec Couros, an educational technology professor at the University of Regina who has similarly experimented with opening for-credit online courses to a wider community.
Looking back on the UManitoba course, Dr. Siemens wishes Canadian schools would band together and build their own open learning platform.
MOOCs are not a cure-all for higher education’s challenges, he says. Even fervent e-advocates caution online classes are not a substitute for in-person instruction. But they offer a low-risk testing ground for ways to engage students in remote locations using video, new learning software and social media.
“It would give Canadian university leaders an opportunity to experiment and to really have their finger on the pulse,” he said.
Rather than investing in their own technological platforms, however, Canadian and U.S. administrators have felt it “safer to contract out,” said American instructional technologist Jim Groom, of the University of Mary Washington. Universities settled into secure but limited learning-management systems such as Blackboard or Moodle, creating “a decade of lost innovation.”
For Canadian innovators, spreading change is difficult in a university system that that has been averse to taking risks. The collaborative, egalitarian spirit of the online world demands a different style of teaching than a professor delivering a lecture. Students say professors in good online courses have allowed them to alter the course outline by adding their own sources and materials.
“[Universities] don’t want to fail. They don’t want to get a black eye,” Dr. Siemens said.
A few schools have created administrative roles dedicated to teaching innovation, but most are “not really pushing limits,” said Valerie Irvine, a professor of educational technology and co-director of the University of Victoria’s Technology Integration and Evaluation (TIE) Lab.
At UVic, Dr. Irvine has piloted a teacher-education course that joined 10 students in a classroom with 17 tuned in from afar by live video stream, which she now calls “multi-access learning.” She also applied to a corporate foundation for a $1.75-million grant, hoping to develop a pan-Canadian open online program that faculty from numerous universities could join. Despite the huge enrolment in MOOCs, Canadian and U.S. surveys show students and educators are still lukewarm toward online learning, though research also suggests the more exposure they have to online classes, the more positively they react to them.
Alison Seaman is a convert. At age 34, she has two bachelor’s degrees, a college certificate, and will soon finish a master’s – and until last fall, she hadn’t taken a single online course. She was dubious of e-learning after hearing tales of heavy readings, scarce support from professors, and superficial message-board discussions.
But a friend prodded her to sign up as one of 20 paying students in Social Media and Open Education, a URegina online course taught by Dr. Couros, who invited another 200 people from several countries – many of them professors and experts – to join less formally as participants and mentors. They blogged assignments, met once a week through a live video stream, and traded ideas on Twitter at all hours, across continents, and even after the course ended.
It was a “transformative experience” Ms. Seaman said. “The structure of the class really lends itself to collaboration.”
As digital prophets and classroom traditionalists polarize the debate over online education’s future, Dr. Couros’s mini-MOOC hints at the potential to harness the technology’s unlimited reach to enrich more traditional, for-credit classes. “Instead of the ratio being one instructor to 20 students, it ended up being 10 mentors to every student, which was sort of amazing,” he said.
But more broadly, it may signal the start of a new, more open university culture that could change the way Canadian knowledge moves and grows around the world.
“When you take those Nobel Prize winners, those Canada Research Chairs, those excellent minds from a research angle, and you actually open access to them, I think that’s where we can really blow the future of higher-ed in a different way,” Dr. Irvine said. “I think a lot of these bricks-and-mortar institutions are kind of like sleeping giants. And I think they’re about to wake up.”
Klout. Read on.
Your Klout score must be greater than 35 to read this
By Ben Popper 1 Hour Ago
Microsoft recently invested in Klout, the first time the tech giant has funded a social startup since it put money into Facebook back in 2007. The company is part of an emerging class of startups like PeerIndex and Kred that aim to measure your online "influence": a statistical take on how many people you reach through social media, how much they trust you, and on what topics. Klout, the largest of these startups, will get a big push into the mainstream through a new partnership with Bing, which will feature Klout scores as part of its search results. As Google’s Pagerank defined the last decade, the thinking goes, "people rank" will define the next.
Despite its growing business success, you would be hard pressed to find a more loathed startup. In the "criticism" section of its Wikipedia page the company is described as a "evil" form of "internet herpes" that preys on user’s social anxiety. There are clearly still a few kinks in the system. On Klout, where my score is 65, I’m cited as influential on the topics of Forbes, Branding, Boats and Manhattan. In reality I write for The Verge about technology, was born and raised in Brooklyn, and couldn’t tell the difference between a sloop and schooner to save my life.
You too can be a digital pitchman in 140 characters or less!
"It’s a tough challenge," said Marissa Campise, a tech investor at Venrock who helped lead the last two funding rounds in Klout. "How do you put a number next to somebody’s name and not piss them off? But 'influence' is the reality of the increasingly social paradigm on the web. Klout's goal is to help consumers master that, even if that means showing them some tough love." The company could easily keep its rankings private, sharing them only with marketing departments interested in appealing to influencers. But CEO Joe Fernandez insists that is not the point. "We have always been about the consumer, first and foremost. The internet has democratized influence, and we want to help everyone share in the rewards." Somesh Dash, a tech investor with IVP who backed Klout, says the two parts of the business model are developing at different rates. "For a company with around seventy employees, Klout's impact on the web is very impressive. The value for advertisers is very clear. For consumers, it's still developing."
It’s important to acknowledge this isn’t just some Silicon Valley pipe dream. Rod Sterling, the VP of emerging technologies at IBM, spends most of his days thinking about big data and sentiment analysis. He has no doubt that the kind of work Klout is doing will be big business. "I hear over and over from the small, medium and big sized businesses who are clients of ours, ‘How can we find the most important people who are talking about our products or services?’ They want to understand reputation and influence." It’s not just the sheer number of followers a person has, an easy metric to inflate. What really matters is how far across the echo chamber of the internet your voice can carry, and whether your audience trusts what you say. "This is a very important problem that I think every big company is pondering," said Sterling. Even Google, which held search so sacrosanct, has introduced social results around topical authorities.
In an ideal world this would create a virtuous back and forth between brands and consumers. The Fancy, an e-commerce startup, pays users cold hard cash every time their tweets and status updates lead to a sale. "We’re making it simple for our users to transform their online influence into real money," said Fancy founder Joe Einhorn. "That’s something that anyone, no matter how web savvy, can see the value in." Klout and its peers have a similar system for distributing "perks". PeerIndex makes this compact explicit. "We give you exclusive access to products from your favourite brands," reads the website. "The more active you are on social media, the more stuff you will receive." You too can be a digital pitchman in 140 characters or less!
"How do you put a number next to somebody’s name and not piss them off?"
The drawback, of course, is that this kind of practice encourages users to artificially inflate their own rankings. Klout users can gain status when people give them "+K" in certain topics. I found Klout user Kathy McCrae while searching for people influential on the topic of food. On her Twitter feed, McCrae doesn’t discuss many recipes. Instead there is an endless stream of +K posting as McCrae and other shower one another with digital compliments, inflating their appearance as "influencers".
Marshall Kirkpatrick, a former tech journalist, announced on Friday that he had raised $1 million from Mark Cuban and others to build Little Bird, an influence tracker that helps users find the most trusted experts in certain topics. "We're working hard to try and avoid building a douchebag machine that encourages users to engage in self-promotion in order to earn rewards," Kirkpatrick told The Verge. "The only way to become more relevant on Little Bird is to win the trust of your most influential peers." Social capital will become an increasingly important part of running a business or brand, says Kirkpatrick, but he sees little value in measuring raw popularity, as Klout and Kred do. "We think its much more valuable to tell you, 'These are the biggest names in cloud computing, and these are the twenty people they follow who nobody has ever heard of.'"
When online influence becomes something that can be quantified, boiled down to a two digit number like a Klout score, it inevitably turns into a double-edged sword. The press reacted with outrage recently when Joe Fernandez tweeted about a Salesforce posting that said it would only consider job seekers for a position who had a Klout score of 35 or more. Students were up in arms when Todd Bacile, who teaches marketing at Florida State University, decided to start grading his class based on their Klout score, after it was cited by multiple hiring managers as part of the interview process. "If my marketing students are going to use these tools in the workplace, they should have firsthand experience doing so with their personal brands," said Bacile. It’s this element of Klout that disturbs many. Do we really want another number, along with our blood pressure and our credit score, that we need to worry about improving?
Over time, says IBM’s Sterling, measures of our influence or reputation will become an accepted facet of our digital lives. "No one is surprised anymore that you need to think about what happens when a potential employer Googles your name. Just as we curate that information, people will work on their social scores." Hiring and firing right now, however, based on something like a Klout score, would not be wise. "Klout is one of the leaders in building this technology, but its far too loosey goosey to be making business decisions with today," says Sterling.
The score is just one part of what Klout offers, argues the company’s CEO and Founder Joe Fernandez. "People get hung up on the number, but we are also giving people a lot of context around your passions and areas of expertise. I think we’re still just at the tip of the iceberg. We’ve got a lot of work to do educating people about the value of understanding their online influence." His comments highlight the odd flavor to Klout’s success. The company is mainstream enough to be referenced in a New Yorker cartoon, but only as a punchline that mocks its score as meaningless in the real world. "I certainly never expected to be in the New Yorker," says the eternally optimistic Fernandez, when I mentioned the cartoon. "It feels good to be noticed."
By Ben Popper 1 Hour Ago
Microsoft recently invested in Klout, the first time the tech giant has funded a social startup since it put money into Facebook back in 2007. The company is part of an emerging class of startups like PeerIndex and Kred that aim to measure your online "influence": a statistical take on how many people you reach through social media, how much they trust you, and on what topics. Klout, the largest of these startups, will get a big push into the mainstream through a new partnership with Bing, which will feature Klout scores as part of its search results. As Google’s Pagerank defined the last decade, the thinking goes, "people rank" will define the next.
Despite its growing business success, you would be hard pressed to find a more loathed startup. In the "criticism" section of its Wikipedia page the company is described as a "evil" form of "internet herpes" that preys on user’s social anxiety. There are clearly still a few kinks in the system. On Klout, where my score is 65, I’m cited as influential on the topics of Forbes, Branding, Boats and Manhattan. In reality I write for The Verge about technology, was born and raised in Brooklyn, and couldn’t tell the difference between a sloop and schooner to save my life.
You too can be a digital pitchman in 140 characters or less!
"It’s a tough challenge," said Marissa Campise, a tech investor at Venrock who helped lead the last two funding rounds in Klout. "How do you put a number next to somebody’s name and not piss them off? But 'influence' is the reality of the increasingly social paradigm on the web. Klout's goal is to help consumers master that, even if that means showing them some tough love." The company could easily keep its rankings private, sharing them only with marketing departments interested in appealing to influencers. But CEO Joe Fernandez insists that is not the point. "We have always been about the consumer, first and foremost. The internet has democratized influence, and we want to help everyone share in the rewards." Somesh Dash, a tech investor with IVP who backed Klout, says the two parts of the business model are developing at different rates. "For a company with around seventy employees, Klout's impact on the web is very impressive. The value for advertisers is very clear. For consumers, it's still developing."
It’s important to acknowledge this isn’t just some Silicon Valley pipe dream. Rod Sterling, the VP of emerging technologies at IBM, spends most of his days thinking about big data and sentiment analysis. He has no doubt that the kind of work Klout is doing will be big business. "I hear over and over from the small, medium and big sized businesses who are clients of ours, ‘How can we find the most important people who are talking about our products or services?’ They want to understand reputation and influence." It’s not just the sheer number of followers a person has, an easy metric to inflate. What really matters is how far across the echo chamber of the internet your voice can carry, and whether your audience trusts what you say. "This is a very important problem that I think every big company is pondering," said Sterling. Even Google, which held search so sacrosanct, has introduced social results around topical authorities.
In an ideal world this would create a virtuous back and forth between brands and consumers. The Fancy, an e-commerce startup, pays users cold hard cash every time their tweets and status updates lead to a sale. "We’re making it simple for our users to transform their online influence into real money," said Fancy founder Joe Einhorn. "That’s something that anyone, no matter how web savvy, can see the value in." Klout and its peers have a similar system for distributing "perks". PeerIndex makes this compact explicit. "We give you exclusive access to products from your favourite brands," reads the website. "The more active you are on social media, the more stuff you will receive." You too can be a digital pitchman in 140 characters or less!
"How do you put a number next to somebody’s name and not piss them off?"
The drawback, of course, is that this kind of practice encourages users to artificially inflate their own rankings. Klout users can gain status when people give them "+K" in certain topics. I found Klout user Kathy McCrae while searching for people influential on the topic of food. On her Twitter feed, McCrae doesn’t discuss many recipes. Instead there is an endless stream of +K posting as McCrae and other shower one another with digital compliments, inflating their appearance as "influencers".
Marshall Kirkpatrick, a former tech journalist, announced on Friday that he had raised $1 million from Mark Cuban and others to build Little Bird, an influence tracker that helps users find the most trusted experts in certain topics. "We're working hard to try and avoid building a douchebag machine that encourages users to engage in self-promotion in order to earn rewards," Kirkpatrick told The Verge. "The only way to become more relevant on Little Bird is to win the trust of your most influential peers." Social capital will become an increasingly important part of running a business or brand, says Kirkpatrick, but he sees little value in measuring raw popularity, as Klout and Kred do. "We think its much more valuable to tell you, 'These are the biggest names in cloud computing, and these are the twenty people they follow who nobody has ever heard of.'"
When online influence becomes something that can be quantified, boiled down to a two digit number like a Klout score, it inevitably turns into a double-edged sword. The press reacted with outrage recently when Joe Fernandez tweeted about a Salesforce posting that said it would only consider job seekers for a position who had a Klout score of 35 or more. Students were up in arms when Todd Bacile, who teaches marketing at Florida State University, decided to start grading his class based on their Klout score, after it was cited by multiple hiring managers as part of the interview process. "If my marketing students are going to use these tools in the workplace, they should have firsthand experience doing so with their personal brands," said Bacile. It’s this element of Klout that disturbs many. Do we really want another number, along with our blood pressure and our credit score, that we need to worry about improving?
Over time, says IBM’s Sterling, measures of our influence or reputation will become an accepted facet of our digital lives. "No one is surprised anymore that you need to think about what happens when a potential employer Googles your name. Just as we curate that information, people will work on their social scores." Hiring and firing right now, however, based on something like a Klout score, would not be wise. "Klout is one of the leaders in building this technology, but its far too loosey goosey to be making business decisions with today," says Sterling.
The score is just one part of what Klout offers, argues the company’s CEO and Founder Joe Fernandez. "People get hung up on the number, but we are also giving people a lot of context around your passions and areas of expertise. I think we’re still just at the tip of the iceberg. We’ve got a lot of work to do educating people about the value of understanding their online influence." His comments highlight the odd flavor to Klout’s success. The company is mainstream enough to be referenced in a New Yorker cartoon, but only as a punchline that mocks its score as meaningless in the real world. "I certainly never expected to be in the New Yorker," says the eternally optimistic Fernandez, when I mentioned the cartoon. "It feels good to be noticed."
Got a Chevy Volt? Better buy one...Chavez on a roll.
Chavez Contagion: The Growing Risk To Latin American Oil
Another election, another win for Hugo Chavez. Despite considerable speculation that President Chavez might finally loose his grip on power last weekend, the ‘Bolivar revolution’ clinched 54.4% of the vote (currently counted), equating to a 1.3m vote lead.
Chavez is going nowhere, but unfortunately for him, neither is the Venezuelan oil sector. This is going to be the same old disorderly management of hydrocarbon decline, but the problem is that the ailment might start spreading further afield across Latin American producers. ‘Chavez contagion?’ Don’t bet against it, even in Brazil.
Disorderly Decline
It’s no surprise that the market failed to react this morning to another six year Chavez term. If anything, El Presidente was a better bet for short term oil market stability than his opponent, Henrique Capriles, who’d been threatening to tear up some of Venezuela’s more ridiculous supply contracts amassed by Mr. Chavez. That obviously won’t now happen; the donkeys will keep nodding, tankers will keep being loaded.
But Chavez knows he’s on borrowed time (politically as well as physically) given that a core part of his electoral strategy was spending Venezuelan oil wealth to win electoral support. State spending increased by 30% this year, subsidising food, housing, fuel and healthcare, all while oil production dropped to 2.5mb/d. High prices helped to paper over the cracks given growth is rattling along at 5.4%, but when you consider PDVSA wasn’t paid in cash for almost half the crude it pumped last year, and that oil markets are set for a significant downside correction into 2013, it’s little wonder that analysts are already taking about a fire-sale on Venezuelan dollar denominated debt.
Given the underlying commodity at stake is ‘oil, oil, oil’, it’s pretty clear that Chavez needs to allow for far greater international investment to get the Orinoco belt going, a region that could increase Venezuelan production by up to 2mb/d according to some excited geologists. But the form book doesn’t bode well, especially if PDVSA retains 60% ownership of operations. It lacks technical expertise; lacks policy consistency from Caracas; and certainly lacks credible finances to do any heavy oil lifting as the statist cash cow of choice for Mr. Chavez.
President Chavez has actually overseen a 22% reduction in Venezuelan oil output since 1999. It would be surprising if Caracas manages to keep production above 2mb/d by 2018, especially when investors all know that Chavez opts for drastic (expropriation) measures when things get too tight for comfort.
Regional Ramifications
Venezuela’s plight will come as welcomed news to Middle East producers, and indeed those of a more moderate disposition in OPEC ranks, but there is a broader problem from a ‘Chavez win’ across the Americas: Rather than learning the lessons of how not to do effective resource management, they’ll go the other way, and start imitating many of his moves to tighten their grips over the resource sector. That’s not necessarily because they think that’s good for production, but because it makes for successful politics. Resource nationalism wins votes; showering the electorate with petrodollars works; being an international nuisance translates into domestic support.
Another election, another win for Hugo Chavez. Despite considerable speculation that President Chavez might finally loose his grip on power last weekend, the ‘Bolivar revolution’ clinched 54.4% of the vote (currently counted), equating to a 1.3m vote lead.
Chavez is going nowhere, but unfortunately for him, neither is the Venezuelan oil sector. This is going to be the same old disorderly management of hydrocarbon decline, but the problem is that the ailment might start spreading further afield across Latin American producers. ‘Chavez contagion?’ Don’t bet against it, even in Brazil.
Disorderly Decline
It’s no surprise that the market failed to react this morning to another six year Chavez term. If anything, El Presidente was a better bet for short term oil market stability than his opponent, Henrique Capriles, who’d been threatening to tear up some of Venezuela’s more ridiculous supply contracts amassed by Mr. Chavez. That obviously won’t now happen; the donkeys will keep nodding, tankers will keep being loaded.
But Chavez knows he’s on borrowed time (politically as well as physically) given that a core part of his electoral strategy was spending Venezuelan oil wealth to win electoral support. State spending increased by 30% this year, subsidising food, housing, fuel and healthcare, all while oil production dropped to 2.5mb/d. High prices helped to paper over the cracks given growth is rattling along at 5.4%, but when you consider PDVSA wasn’t paid in cash for almost half the crude it pumped last year, and that oil markets are set for a significant downside correction into 2013, it’s little wonder that analysts are already taking about a fire-sale on Venezuelan dollar denominated debt.
Given the underlying commodity at stake is ‘oil, oil, oil’, it’s pretty clear that Chavez needs to allow for far greater international investment to get the Orinoco belt going, a region that could increase Venezuelan production by up to 2mb/d according to some excited geologists. But the form book doesn’t bode well, especially if PDVSA retains 60% ownership of operations. It lacks technical expertise; lacks policy consistency from Caracas; and certainly lacks credible finances to do any heavy oil lifting as the statist cash cow of choice for Mr. Chavez.
President Chavez has actually overseen a 22% reduction in Venezuelan oil output since 1999. It would be surprising if Caracas manages to keep production above 2mb/d by 2018, especially when investors all know that Chavez opts for drastic (expropriation) measures when things get too tight for comfort.
Regional Ramifications
Venezuela’s plight will come as welcomed news to Middle East producers, and indeed those of a more moderate disposition in OPEC ranks, but there is a broader problem from a ‘Chavez win’ across the Americas: Rather than learning the lessons of how not to do effective resource management, they’ll go the other way, and start imitating many of his moves to tighten their grips over the resource sector. That’s not necessarily because they think that’s good for production, but because it makes for successful politics. Resource nationalism wins votes; showering the electorate with petrodollars works; being an international nuisance translates into domestic support.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)