In Memoriam: My Last Desktop PC
I have always loved my desktop computer. Regardless of improvements in the computing power, graphics or RAM of the various laptops I’ve owned, my trusty desktop has always been a bit cheaper, a bit faster, a bit better than its portable kin. But last month it happened. Moore’s Law, which always seemed to side with my desktop, broke completely down on the side of the information super-highway. The speed of the CPU, the size of the hard drive, the clarity of the screen just didn’t make much of a difference anymore for a user looking to stream some TV, surf the Internet, take part in some social media, play music and use all of the usual suspect office software products.
Am I alone? Hardly. iSuppli recently noted that desktop sales are expected to fall 18.1 percent this year to 124.4 million from 151.9 million in 2008.
Perhaps you just need a netbook you say? Perhaps. I like the concept of the netbook, and I really like the all-in-all lightweight approach to its hardware and software. However, I have an iPhone that meets my ultra-portable needs, and with a large HD screen, HDMI, ample ram, huge hard drive and all the other expected current-gen goodies, a powerful laptop covers me perfectly.
I admit I will strangely miss the ever present sound of the desktop fan whirring near my knees, and the comforting of knowing that if I ever need that retro feel I could still add a 3.5-inch disc drive from eBay into any of the desktop’s vacant drive bays. However, innovation marches forward and in this replacement cycle the desktop is simply being left behind.
Ad Invasion: What’s the Next New Media Channel?
At lunch the other day, I picked up a couple of slices of pizza and noticed a Dasani ad actually printed on the pizza box. The company responsible was called Pizza Adz, a division of DoMedia, which specializes in advertising in alternative media channels, an idea I have always been intrigued by. What is the next vehicle for advertising that we haven’t thought of yet?
I first started noticing this trend when ads on movie theater screens started popping up years ago. Then brands and their agencies started getting creative: the top of UPS trucks (targeting office workers in skyscrapers), subway turnstyles, the liners of dry cleaning hangers. Where does it stop? I think this is just the beginning, but I also don’t think it’s a bad thing. While some people get really annoyed by all of these new ways that brands try and get their messages out there, I’m always looking for the next new channel. Maybe part of me just wants to be the one to discover it. …
Creative corporate sponsorships are also on the rise. Professional sports teams have been selling stadium rights for years. Critics say the owners are selling out, but hey, if my favorite team can sign better players due to the extra revenue coming in, I say go for it.
The next wave of corporate sponsorships could be your local subway station. In June, The New York Times reported that the subway stop that connects Atlantic Avenue, Pacific Street and Flatbush Avenue in Brooklyn is being sponsored by Barclays. Barclays is based in London, you ask? Sure is, and while it has offices in Manhattan, the Barclays Center is the Brooklyn-based sports arena for the New Jersey Nets that is part of the Atlantic Yards project planned to open in 2011. Seems like a logical fit and we know that the cashed-strapped Metropolitan Transportation Authority needs the money, but as my colleague legitimately asked me the other day, does this mean that the Atlantic Avenue subway station will be cleaner if a corporate name is attached to it?
I don’t see the problem in these type of ads or sponsorships, because they often lead to better products and services for consumers, whether it’s a more competitive baseball team or a more enjoyable subway ride. Like it or hate it, it seems like we are marching to the inevitable future that is portrayed in movies like “The Running Man” where everything you can think of has an ad attached to it.
Think you have the next big alternative media channel? Let us know.
The Important Intersection of Technology and Design
Despite the daunting look of motherboards, routers and memory cards, technology – like architecture – is an incredible way to experience the duality of function and design. From Bose speakers to Sony VAIO, customizing your Gmail theme to choosing applications for an iPhone, there are limitless examples of these converging worlds.
I first became aware of this when I got my very own cell phone, a Nokia, which I must confess, was customized to the fullest extent – with pink buttons and a zebra snap-on cover (don’t judge). Since then, I have come to appreciate the design of the technology I own and the interfaces I use on a daily basis.
Luckily, I have grown past pink accessories and have stumbled on bigger and better examples of the mash-up between form and function. One that has been on my radar this past year is Cooliris. Formerly known as PicLens, Cooliris transforms your Internet searches into a cinematic wall of images, allowing for an interactive, visual experience built right into your web browser. Cooliris shines when searching through photos and video, with a black background and seemingly endless expanse of images, suddenly, the mundane task of Internet research morphs into an artistic, space-aged experience. But not only is your information presented in an artistic way, it makes the process of searching faster and more dynamic. Cooliris currently works on several sites including Facebook, MySpace, Hulu, Picasa and Flickr
.
download Addams Family, The They also offer CoolPreviews, which let you preview links instantly – something I always thought Google fell short on. Now, all you have to do is mouse over a link to preview content on that page. If you are an iPhone user, they have a client that allows you to search via their 3D wall as well as Tweet about your content finds directly through the Cooliris application.
With a second round of venture capital funding under their belts and few competitors in sight, Cooliris may be the front runner in the race to change the way we browse, search, and stumble through the Web.
Check out their recent coverage in PC World, TechCrunch, VentureBeat and ReadWriteWeb. For their company blog, click here.
Technology and Access, Not Censorship and Oppression Will Eventually Win
This spring, I spent a semester studying in Europe. I didn’t have a phone along for the ride and the first few days I didn’t have an Internet connection – I felt my life had turned upside down without endless hours on Facebook and dozens of daily texts. My solution was simple: I found an Internet café and had immediate and uncensored access. I didn’t realize how lucky I was to have easy Web access that day, only at the cost of a cappuccino. If I were a student in Beijing or Tehran, I might not have that simple luxury.
Since I started my internship at LaunchSquad this summer, I became more aware of Internet injustices in other parts of the world, and censorship that I’ve never been affected by.
In China, the “Great Firewall” censors the country’s nearly 300 million Internet users daily, and tens of thousands of sites are blocked by the Communist government. The 20th anniversary of the June 4, 1989 Tiananmen Massacre, just a month ago, resulted in new levels of censorship with the artificial blocking of social networks including YouTube, Twitter, Flickr and WordPress. The Chinese government is also now attempting to require all PCs to be sold with Green Dam software, a supposed blocker of harmful sites, but the software is far from precise and remains highly controversial.
In Xinjiang province the past few weeks, the Chinese government attempted to block sites such as Facebook and Twitter to prevent the results of recent riots. The riots resulted in over 140 dead and 800 injured, facts that should be impossible for even the strongest censors to hide.
The Iranian government has played a similar censorship game after the presidential elections on June 12, though it’s more of a concerted effort to limit freedom of speech and anti-government resistance rather than censor specific Web sites. Despite the information blockade, amateur journalists and supporters within and outside of Iran have actively fought through the artificial barriers, and are fighting for free speech – and a change in Iran’s government.
I am part of the majority of the United States who struggles after mere moments without endless Internet access, a privilege people in other parts of the world have never known. It’s inspiring to know there are various tools to fight this oppression, so everyone can gain access to the Web I am all too familiar with, and often take for granted.
daybreakers ipod In fact, technology has a huge hand in fighting oppression and censorship. One of LaunchSquad’s clients, AnchorFree, has a product called Hotspot Shield, which is a free anti-censorship tool. Hotspot Shield is a free download that creates a tunnel between wireless routers and computers, making it so governments cannot track user locations, and therefore cannot filter Internet content. As a result, no matter where users are in the world, they can access Twitter, YouTube, Google and all Internet sites as if they were in the United States.
Hotspot Shield opens up the ability to take a political stand, like the Iranian election, or report on injustice, such as the hundreds of deaths and injuries from Xinjiang riots. For others it means the simple ability to send an e-mail to keep in touch. The implications of open and free communication are really priceless. Social media and viral tools such as Hotspot Shield, combined with the passion of individuals fighting censorship oppression (or just struggling without e-mail access), can hopefully be powerful enough to break down censorship and provide the freedom of the Web worldwide.
Is Google's Rigidity Its Fatal Flaw?
The past weeks’ events in Iran have shown us all the social importance of Twitter and Facebook. But even though these technologies are gaining widespread recognition and preeminence in the media, as well as the blogosphere, Google is still the undisputed king of the Internet. But, is Google’s position as the Web’s top dog being threatened?
The dramatic explosion in technology firms that specialize in creating applications for both Twitter and Facebook exposes a potential chink in Google’s armor. The applicability, adaptability and openness of push technology to both these social media titans is a dramatic departure from the in-house Google approach. It begs a question: Is Google’s technological rigidness a weakness that will threaten it in the future?
download blackwoods dvdrip What’s truly amazing in this discussion is that it’s Facebook, and to a lesser extent Twitter, which poses the greatest threat to Google’s dominance, rather than the companies traditional rivals Microsoft and Yahoo. Why? Well, the Web has changed. People have a much more intimate interaction with Facebook and Twitter then they do with Google, and that interaction is the new currency of the social Web. Users give their real names, share they personal contact details, talk openly with their friends, and expose personal information of the like they would never willingly share with Google. This gives these social media sites a distinct advantage when it comes to behavioral advertising, which many people see as the key to online monetization. But this is not the only the advantage that Facebook and Twitter have.
Google is a rigid software. It’s primarily a search engine, albeit the most advanced of all time. All of Google’s main features are in-house creations, from Gmail to Google Docs, to Google Maps to GChat. The opposite is true with Facebook and Twitter. Tweet Deck and iLike’s Facebook application for example, were created completely independent from their respective social networking sites. These technologies are very easily adaptable to all different applications and push technologies. In the future, as technology becomes more and more advanced these sites can encroach on Google’s massive market share by offering something Google does not, access.
New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman asserted that it’s better to have 1,000 entrepreneurs experimenting in their own garages then have the government create a Manhattan Project to solve a great challenge, and there’s an obvious parallel here between Google and Facebook or Twitter. Google being the Manhattan Project employing thousands of computer engineers in a central, top-down operation, while Facebook and Twitter are taking advantage of the 1,000 entrepreneurs experimenting on their own to find a way to better their technology.
The great challenge both are trying to solve is how to lure the major advertising campaigns to the Internet. Google has pioneered search-based advertising, but this only accounts for $50 billion of a $500 billion advertising industry. Whoever can lure the remaining chunk those ad dollars to the internet will be the dominant force of the future, thus Google’s growing anxiety about Twitter and especially Facebook.
Google’s future hinges on whether or not the company, with its incredible innovative and inventive capacity, will find a way to lure major advertising budgets to the Web. Or will the Facebook/Twitter approach of letting others come up with a solution that they can integrate into their site win the day? This question is, of course, unanswered as of yet, but if Google does lose this race to sustainable profitability it will be because they are too rigid. Google is great at designing technology to compliment their platform, but a more open and accessible approach would expose them up to greater innovation and invention in the future. I am astonished by the rapid growth of both Facebook and Twitter, but I am interested to see if in the future if either of these two companies who have up yet to turn a profit, can take down the biggest Internet giant of them all.
Dear Facebook: You're Not Twitter. Please Stop Trying To Be.
I think Mark Zuckerberg has an obsession – and it’s not Asian women, stealing ideas or koala meat. No, what the Facebook founder clearly covets is Twitter. Sure, Facebook is wildly successful, the most ubiquitous destination site on the Web, and has made Zuck rich beyond his wildest dreams. But, let’s be honest here, the poor guy obviously pines after his 140-character counterpart.
Why else would Facebook spend the past year doing everything in its power to become Twitter? From last year’s major redesign, which introduced the streaming news feed, to today’s new privacy controls which allow users to openly and publicly share information, Facebook has been moving more and more toward a platform where its information (your information) is basically public .
Problem is, Facebook users don’t want that – at least a good portion of them. Facebook is not Twitter. It’s not a platform for sharing everything with the world. It’s a platform for sharing things with friends – with great security walls built in. This is why Facebook was able to ultimately distinguish and separate itself from MySpace, and why Facebook has been able to establish trust with its users. We all feel comfortable knowing that we can share photos of that hilarious Friday night out with our friends – even if we have 350 of them – because of the built-in network protections and privacy settings. With the introduction of the new open settings – which will open people’s information up to everyone on Facebook, ala MySpace – that sense of privacy is going to quickly disappear.
Twitter is great at what it does, and I’m perfectly happy using it to share bite-sized pieces of information with the world. Facebook is also great at what it does, letting me share bigger pieces of information with people I know and trust (plus a few random old co-workers and people from high school, but whatever). The two, however, are very different services that serve completely different purposes.
Of course, this all comes down to money. A more public Facebook is a more search engine-indexed Facebook that sells more (and better targeted) search ads, based on conversations between you and friends that you thought were private.
Twitter envy is a powerful thing. Ev and Biz are everywhere, and Zuck … well, he’s sooo 2007. He hasn’t been on the cover of BusinessWeek in months, and I hear Sarah Lacy won’t even return his phone calls. But, it’s fine, Mark. To paraphrase Minnesota’s newly-crowned junior Senator, Facebook is good enough, smart enough, and gosh darn it, people like you. They also like Facebook how it is. So leave it alone. Thanks.