Wednesday, May 27, 2009
Friday, March 20, 2009
Wall Street's Economic Crimes Against Humanity
By refusing to consider the consequences of their actions, those who created the financial crisis exemplify the banality of evil, writes Shoshana Zuboff
read more | digg story
read more | digg story
Tuesday, February 24, 2009
Gmail down - oh stop whining
Remember the saying "you get what you pay for." Well, Gmail (and Google) have trashed that. I've been using the service for years, and can only remember 2 outages that lasted more than a couple minutes, which is one heck of a lot better than most providers, free or otherwise.
So all y'all (yeah, this transplanted Yankee called you "y'all" - you got a problem with that?) that are giving Google crap over this latest outage (which, btw, is over for me at 9:14 EST) maybe you just need to simmer down. Everyone loves to laugh when the giant stumbles, but any reasonable look at Google's service availability puts them at the top of the heap. AND it's free - so please callate.
So all y'all (yeah, this transplanted Yankee called you "y'all" - you got a problem with that?) that are giving Google crap over this latest outage (which, btw, is over for me at 9:14 EST) maybe you just need to simmer down. Everyone loves to laugh when the giant stumbles, but any reasonable look at Google's service availability puts them at the top of the heap. AND it's free - so please callate.
Thursday, February 12, 2009
Thursday, January 1, 2009
Thursday, December 25, 2008
Friday, December 19, 2008
The Power of Openness - New Media Case Study
Why does openness matter? Perhaps no industry can help us understand the answer better than new media - defined roughly as information and entertainment, including video, delivered over IP networks, especially the Internet.
The new media market is still at a nascent stage, with large media companies like Turner and Disney reporting that their new media revenue comprises just 5-10% of total. However, it is growing rapidly and analysts predict that within 5 years the advertising revenue for all new media will be somewhere in the $5-10 billion range (NewTeeVee). This growth of advertising in online video echoes people's shifting viewing habits. ABI research recently reported that the percent of American households that watch video online doubled from 32% in 2007 to 64% this year. So, it is natural for advertisers to follow the eyeballs to online. Recently, eMarketer.com provided a comprehensive look at global growth of online video viewing and how this is translating into network traffic, as shown in Tables 1 and 2 below.
But what's driving the growth in online viewing when there seems to be a lot of negatives? Computer screens are smaller than TVs, the resolution is typically inferior and the sound is often poor. Research indicates a couple things are the primary motivators for online viewing: people like the flexibility to watch whenever and wherever they want, and they really like the immersive, social aspect of web watching.
The Internet Began as a Social Network
I am probably not the first person to observe that the Internet began as a social network. It was a way for researchers at different government bodies and universities across the US and then the globe to easily share information and collaborate on projects. What the Internet then evolved into during the late 1990s and earlier in this decade - what we might call the corporate Web 1.0, or the read-only web - really should be thought of as an aberration. Just as every business in the pre-Internet era had to be listed in the white pages, and some took out ads in the yellow pages, as the Internet became the way for buyers to find offers, every business needed to essentially list themselves on the Internet with a web page, and then a site. For those of us still needing proof, this week's news that newspaper advertising fell 18% year-over-year in Q3 should be convincing evidence of the power of openness (See Editor and Publisher ).
Unlike phonebooks, however, which were closed systems controlled by the publishers and constrained by print economics, the openness of the corporate Web 1.0 led to an explosion in the number of web sites, which can be seen in Figure 1.
Figure 1: Total Sites Across All Domains August 1995 - October 2008
Source: Netcraft
The emergence of the current generation of Social Networks, then, can best be thought of as the Internet coming full circle, back to its social roots. Of course, in the 30 plus years since the original ARPANET was launched, the types of things people can share across the Internet has exploded. The original Internet was bandwidth constrained and the computers it connected relatively weak and expensive, and so the Net was consequently reserved for collaboration on only the most serious pursuits. Today, though, the combination of ubiquitous broadband network connections, powerful and cheap computers (and other devices), advances in technology to IP-enable everything, and amazing pieces of code called Web APIs
TV 2.0
The same forces that boosted the number of web sites seen in Figure 1 are today drawing video viewers online. Internet video opens up a new set of opportunities for viewers to engage in the content in ways that were previously impossible – they can do things like choose different camera angles, delve into interactive stats and, depending on the business model, share the viewing experience with friends online. Ultimately, online video gives the audience a different, and a potentially richer, experience than television.
The ability to offer a richer experience is due in large part to the open nature of the Internet. The Internet’s openness invites innovation in the user experience because it transforms video content from a siloed piece of media into a social and contextual piece of media.
The new media market is still at a nascent stage, with large media companies like Turner and Disney reporting that their new media revenue comprises just 5-10% of total. However, it is growing rapidly and analysts predict that within 5 years the advertising revenue for all new media will be somewhere in the $5-10 billion range (
The Internet Began as a Social Network
I am probably not the first person to observe that the Internet began as a social network. It was a way for researchers at different government bodies and universities across the US and then the globe to easily share information and collaborate on projects. What the Internet then evolved into during the late 1990s and earlier in this decade - what we might call the corporate Web 1.0, or the read-only web - really should be thought of as an aberration. Just as every business in the pre-Internet era had to be listed in the white pages, and some took out ads in the yellow pages, as the Internet became the way for buyers to find offers, every business needed to essentially list themselves on the Internet with a web page, and then a site. For those of us still needing proof, this week's news that newspaper advertising fell 18% year-over-year in Q3 should be convincing evidence of the power of openness (See Editor and Publisher ).Unlike phonebooks, however, which were closed systems controlled by the publishers and constrained by print economics, the openness of the corporate Web 1.0 led to an explosion in the number of web sites, which can be seen in Figure 1.
Figure 1: Total Sites Across All Domains August 1995 - October 2008
Source: Netcraft
The emergence of the current generation of Social Networks, then, can best be thought of as the Internet coming full circle, back to its social roots. Of course, in the 30 plus years since the original ARPANET was launched, the types of things people can share across the Internet has exploded. The original Internet was bandwidth constrained and the computers it connected relatively weak and expensive, and so the Net was consequently reserved for collaboration on only the most serious pursuits. Today, though, the combination of ubiquitous broadband network connections, powerful and cheap computers (and other devices), advances in technology to IP-enable everything, and amazing pieces of code called Web APIs
TV 2.0
The same forces that boosted the number of web sites seen in Figure 1 are today drawing video viewers online. Internet video opens up a new set of opportunities for viewers to engage in the content in ways that were previously impossible – they can do things like choose different camera angles, delve into interactive stats and, depending on the business model, share the viewing experience with friends online. Ultimately, online video gives the audience a different, and a potentially richer, experience than television. The ability to offer a richer experience is due in large part to the open nature of the Internet. The Internet’s openness invites innovation in the user experience because it transforms video content from a siloed piece of media into a social and contextual piece of media.
Consider MySpace, where 2/3 of videos are viewed from user profiles. This marriage of video and social networks portends radical changes to video discoverability and monetization. Imagine the power to offer brands the ability to target their advertising based on the meta data from the video and extensive details of the user profiles. This is just one example of the power of the Internet to reinvent TV. As more and more video content goes online, the openness of the Internet will reveal new consumption patterns, which will in turn drive new business models
Saturday, November 1, 2008
too long away
Hi All,
I knew I'd been neglecting this space, but I didn't realize I hadn't written since July. Wow - what a severe breach of netiquette. Mea culpa mi amigos.
I've been really busy at work - in April I took a position at a very cool new media start up as their director of marketing. i've been enjoying it quite a bit.
I've also been very excited by the prospect of a democrat taking the white house. I admi, I've got Obama fever. Hey - if you are of the same ilk, my suggestion is don't wait till monday or tuesday to buy your champagne - might sell out.
In 2004 I volunteered on the kerry campaign - went door to door in wake forest and raleigh trying to get out the vote. I can't tell you how disappointed I was when we lost. first reaction was to move to canadia. once over this, I couldn't help but be very disappointed in the lack of ideas and inspiraion from democrats - just totally uninspiraitonal.
Man, what a difference 4 years can make!! finally someone who can bring this country together, end this stupid war in Iraq and get the economy on track.
I'm planning a party as soon as the results are in at our house in Raleigh - lmk if you want to come
I knew I'd been neglecting this space, but I didn't realize I hadn't written since July. Wow - what a severe breach of netiquette. Mea culpa mi amigos.
I've been really busy at work - in April I took a position at a very cool new media start up as their director of marketing. i've been enjoying it quite a bit.
I've also been very excited by the prospect of a democrat taking the white house. I admi, I've got Obama fever. Hey - if you are of the same ilk, my suggestion is don't wait till monday or tuesday to buy your champagne - might sell out.
In 2004 I volunteered on the kerry campaign - went door to door in wake forest and raleigh trying to get out the vote. I can't tell you how disappointed I was when we lost. first reaction was to move to canadia. once over this, I couldn't help but be very disappointed in the lack of ideas and inspiraion from democrats - just totally uninspiraitonal.
Man, what a difference 4 years can make!! finally someone who can bring this country together, end this stupid war in Iraq and get the economy on track.
I'm planning a party as soon as the results are in at our house in Raleigh - lmk if you want to come
Friday, July 4, 2008
To GUI or not to GUI
there's been an excellent discussion going on on the Ubuntu Server List recently that reveals the multi-dimensional complexity of this topic
as I see it, this question - to GUI or not to GUI - has at least the following 3 dimensions:
1. It has a user dimension - does a user need/want a GUI (the Windows admin converting to Linux or the new admin)? or does a GUI limit the admin (the *nix expert)?
2. It has an IT department dimension - if I have Windows admins and I want to deploy Linux, I need to retrain, rehire, or give them a GUI they are comfortable with. If I am a Linux shop, and my company merges with a company that is a windows shop, how do I reconcile these two departments and their systems?
3. and it has an enterprise dimension - if I don't have some centralized system that automates change and configuration management (ccm), then I am very reliant on the sysadmins that know the complexities of the config files, that know scripting, cron, etc., and that follow revision control procedures (back up all .confs before making changes...). And if these admins leave, or don't follow procedure, the business is hurting. So enterprises have a strong business continuity motivation to implement a system that takes some of the complexity out of the ccm process.
therefore, the trick, IMO, to implementing a CCM system is to provide enough of what the noobs need, without limiting the experts too much and, at the same time, giving the enterprise more visibility and control.
These market requirements drive the design specs:
1. the system needs to be modular and flexible, with GUI and cli/scripting options
2. it needs to be functionally segregated (role based access control) so that different users can access different functions depending on their expertise
3. it needs to be scalable - client/server, many as one changes even with the GUI
4. It needs to be secure - ssl-encrypted, built-in revision control
5. it needs to be multi-platform, preferably covering *nix and windows
6. of course, it needs to be open source ;) seriously, an open source and open standards approach greatly enhances the ability to integrate with other lifecycle management tools like patching, monitoring, reporting, etc.
the problem with most open source ccm options is that they address one or a small subset of the needs to the exclusion of the others. Oliver mentions func, which I agree is a very nice improvement over scripting for medium to large fedora shops and soon probably other distros as well. But it doesn't help the Linux noob, and it doesn't give the enterprise any greater visibility or control. Is it a far better way for the *nix expert to do what they already do today with scripts and such? Yes. will it help Linux penetrate windows accounts, doubtful (and, in fairness, I don't think it was ever intended to do so). eBox and Webmin, on the other hand, simplify things for the newby, but they don't scale, they don't provide enterprise security or control (rbac, revision control, etc.) and they do handicap the expert.
So, my question to the Ubuntu server team, is, if you buy the above framework and rationale, what are their goals for a future Ubuntu server management system? who's the intended audience? Personally, I think they ought to cast as wide a net as the universe of existing systems will allow.
as I see it, this question - to GUI or not to GUI - has at least the following 3 dimensions:
1. It has a user dimension - does a user need/want a GUI (the Windows admin converting to Linux or the new admin)? or does a GUI limit the admin (the *nix expert)?
2. It has an IT department dimension - if I have Windows admins and I want to deploy Linux, I need to retrain, rehire, or give them a GUI they are comfortable with. If I am a Linux shop, and my company merges with a company that is a windows shop, how do I reconcile these two departments and their systems?
3. and it has an enterprise dimension - if I don't have some centralized system that automates change and configuration management (ccm), then I am very reliant on the sysadmins that know the complexities of the config files, that know scripting, cron, etc., and that follow revision control procedures (back up all .confs before making changes...). And if these admins leave, or don't follow procedure, the business is hurting. So enterprises have a strong business continuity motivation to implement a system that takes some of the complexity out of the ccm process.
therefore, the trick, IMO, to implementing a CCM system is to provide enough of what the noobs need, without limiting the experts too much and, at the same time, giving the enterprise more visibility and control.
These market requirements drive the design specs:
1. the system needs to be modular and flexible, with GUI and cli/scripting options
2. it needs to be functionally segregated (role based access control) so that different users can access different functions depending on their expertise
3. it needs to be scalable - client/server, many as one changes even with the GUI
4. It needs to be secure - ssl-encrypted, built-in revision control
5. it needs to be multi-platform, preferably covering *nix and windows
6. of course, it needs to be open source ;) seriously, an open source and open standards approach greatly enhances the ability to integrate with other lifecycle management tools like patching, monitoring, reporting, etc.
the problem with most open source ccm options is that they address one or a small subset of the needs to the exclusion of the others. Oliver mentions func, which I agree is a very nice improvement over scripting for medium to large fedora shops and soon probably other distros as well. But it doesn't help the Linux noob, and it doesn't give the enterprise any greater visibility or control. Is it a far better way for the *nix expert to do what they already do today with scripts and such? Yes. will it help Linux penetrate windows accounts, doubtful (and, in fairness, I don't think it was ever intended to do so). eBox and Webmin, on the other hand, simplify things for the newby, but they don't scale, they don't provide enterprise security or control (rbac, revision control, etc.) and they do handicap the expert.
So, my question to the Ubuntu server team, is, if you buy the above framework and rationale, what are their goals for a future Ubuntu server management system? who's the intended audience? Personally, I think they ought to cast as wide a net as the universe of existing systems will allow.
Thursday, May 22, 2008
Trying to be Viral
Have you noticed how hard everyone is trying to be viral these days? It's almost oxymoronic to be deliberately viral. Do you agree?
Or maybe the annoying attempts that I've noticed recently are just bad, and it wouldn't matter if they were attempting to be traditional campaigns, they'd still be bad.
One that I found particularly annoying was a hand-written card that I received at my office with a url written on it: www.whatsthisfor.com/gregwallace
No context, no nothing - like I've got that much time and I'm that curious to go to this web site. STUPID!!
And I see all kinds of companies doing this - putting some little tease out there, but not indicating what it's about and suggesting that people go to a web site to discover the big secret.
If you have connections on madison ave, can you please pass the word along that these campaigns suck?
thanks!
Or maybe the annoying attempts that I've noticed recently are just bad, and it wouldn't matter if they were attempting to be traditional campaigns, they'd still be bad.
One that I found particularly annoying was a hand-written card that I received at my office with a url written on it: www.whatsthisfor.com/gregwallace
No context, no nothing - like I've got that much time and I'm that curious to go to this web site. STUPID!!
And I see all kinds of companies doing this - putting some little tease out there, but not indicating what it's about and suggesting that people go to a web site to discover the big secret.
If you have connections on madison ave, can you please pass the word along that these campaigns suck?
thanks!
Spamalot
I was in New York this week and on my way to lunch asked a colleague to snap this shot of me with the actors in Monty Python's broadway play Spamalot.
Friday, April 18, 2008
‘Customer Affinity’ New Measure of B2B Mktng Effectiveness
Great article summarizing research by the CMO Council on the importance of transparency and trust between B2B technology vendors and their customers.
read more | digg story
read more | digg story
Wednesday, April 2, 2008
CA-Sponsored Study Finds Data Center Automation Will Grow
study surveyed 300 CIOs and other top IT executives at companies in the U.S., EMEA and APAC with more than $250 million in annual revenue. It found the top three goals companies are hoping to achieve with data center automation efforts are uptime/business continuity, performance management, and enabling dynamic response to changes in business demand
More interesting than what this study "found" (didn't we all already know this?) is who sposnosred the research - CA....best of my knowledge, they don't really have a DCA solution now, do they? Comments?
read more
More interesting than what this study "found" (didn't we all already know this?) is who sposnosred the research - CA....best of my knowledge, they don't really have a DCA solution now, do they? Comments?
read more
Tuesday, April 1, 2008
Open source a no-brainer for SaaS providers
Open source will start to dominate software infrastructure for providers of SaaS (Software as a Service) within three years, according to Gartner analyst Yefim Natis. Lower cost and better flexibility, compared to closed source, or proprietary software, are key factors for the growing popularity of open source in this segment of the market.
read more
read more
Monday, March 31, 2008
Podcast with Syd Williams of Lyceum Associates
Just recorded this podcast with Syd Williams of Lyceum Associates
"Openness in Software"
Duration: 20 minutes (It takes a few moments to load)
Topics:
[1] With all the recent news on software openness, how are Microsoft and Google positioning themselves?
[2] To what extent is Microsoft playing catch-up?
[3] Does Microsoft suffer from brand deficiency, and is this affecting its bid for Yahoo!?
[4] How will worsening economic conditions affect IT spending? Which companies might benefit?
"Openness in Software"
Duration: 20 minutes (It takes a few moments to load)
Topics:
[1] With all the recent news on software openness, how are Microsoft and Google positioning themselves?
[2] To what extent is Microsoft playing catch-up?
[3] Does Microsoft suffer from brand deficiency, and is this affecting its bid for Yahoo!?
[4] How will worsening economic conditions affect IT spending? Which companies might benefit?
We Want It, and Waiting Is No Option
The Web empowers both groups and individuals as a place where choice is not only an option, but an imperative.
Awesome quote from this great article: “Storytelling is a hard problem that is cognitive rather than technological,” he said (while I breathed a heavy sigh of relief). “It requires a specific set of skills, and there are business models that enable storytelling, but maybe don’t require the whole manufacturing or broadcasting business that goes with them.”
read more |
Awesome quote from this great article: “Storytelling is a hard problem that is cognitive rather than technological,” he said (while I breathed a heavy sigh of relief). “It requires a specific set of skills, and there are business models that enable storytelling, but maybe don’t require the whole manufacturing or broadcasting business that goes with them.”
read more |
Tuesday, March 25, 2008
Yahoo, Google, MySpace form non-profit OpenSocial Foundation
Google, Yahoo, and MySpace forge a nonprofit foundation to ensure that OpenSocial stays a community-driven spec "in perpetuity".
read more
read more
Democrats - Just Say No to Clinton's Brand of Cynicism
Man, this takes the cake. Hilary's lie that she was threatened by sniper fire in Bosnia is just plain cynical and ugly.
This is what dodging sniper fire actually looks like, Hilary. [update - if anyone had really dodged sniper fire, I doubt it's something they would forget, as hard as they may try]
Shame on you - oh, wait a minute - you have no shame. You will do or say ANYTHING to get elected. You know what, though - beyond what this lie tells us about how untrustworthy she is, to lie about something like this, where so many real people - young, old, moms, dads and kids - died and suffered - a lie like this shows an utter lack of respect for the heroism, suffering and loss that Bosnian's experienced in that awful conflict. Hilary needs to drop out of the race right now before she does any more damage to Democrat's chances. I'm going on the record (as if anyone cares :) if she gets the Democratic nomination, I'm voting for McCain - no brainer. Hell, McCain could pick Cheney to be Veep and I'd still vote for him over Clinton.
This is what dodging sniper fire actually looks like, Hilary. [update - if anyone had really dodged sniper fire, I doubt it's something they would forget, as hard as they may try]
Shame on you - oh, wait a minute - you have no shame. You will do or say ANYTHING to get elected. You know what, though - beyond what this lie tells us about how untrustworthy she is, to lie about something like this, where so many real people - young, old, moms, dads and kids - died and suffered - a lie like this shows an utter lack of respect for the heroism, suffering and loss that Bosnian's experienced in that awful conflict. Hilary needs to drop out of the race right now before she does any more damage to Democrat's chances. I'm going on the record (as if anyone cares :) if she gets the Democratic nomination, I'm voting for McCain - no brainer. Hell, McCain could pick Cheney to be Veep and I'd still vote for him over Clinton.Wednesday, March 19, 2008
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
.jpg)