Internet » The gTLD Metamorphosis

How fast will this cocoon hatch? How soon will gTLD spread its wings and show off its real colors? It all depends on the fast-track orientation that's now in the spotlight and, most importantly, on when gTLD-based models are able to demonstrate real global cyberbranding and image-expansion opportunities.

The cocooned gTLD has started to spread its wings, and soon it will show its colors and become a butterfly. Its well-guarded fuzzy and slow progress has finally propelled it to a much-anticipated metamorphosis, but the world still waits for some flying maneuvers. Mother ICANN has worked very hard to coax it along to this stage.

It seems that mainstream global brands, their leading ad agencies, major law firms protecting their complex intellectual property portfolios, and creative services need to come forward. So far the coy debates and borderline fear mongering have been mostly about floods of squatters and trademark defense posturing. Such mythical notions are destined for a head-on collision with factual issues of name identity marketability and suitability by gTLDs. The markets need point-by-point clarity to settle the confusion.

The conference events on gTLD have started, and that's excellent -- but they have to build momentum and higher frequency. The world is a very large stage, and few gatherings of often the same people and same topics will not make a dent. After the big announcement by ICANN in June, followed by a few thousand news items, the excitement has quieted down, leaving corporations and senior management worldwide wondering what just happened.

Corporate World Doesn't Get gTLD

A quick survey of top senior marketing executives in North America by AARM points to a mere 2 percent of executives "having some very limited or somewhat confusing ideas without any reasonable understanding of what a gTLD is all about."

The other current buzz in the Internet columns, blogs and media is that it's a US$187K money grab, a threat to mega trademarks, and an invitation for a flood of cybersquatters. How wrong.

On the legal front, IBLS also did some research and found that legal practitioners have been trying hard to find a simple approach to connect potential customers with highly suitable gTLD opportunities, but they haven't been getting any serious response. On the global naming complexities of branding, AZNA is also providing executive intelligence briefings on such matters.

The main problem is a lack of corporate world understanding as to what a gTLD is. By and large, domainers -- a very small group of Internet technocrats familiar with ICANN-related services -- are all positively engaged. They are playing with domain aftermarkets and domain name registries that deal with highly competitive pricing for basic domain name registrations.

Beware of Unhappy Surprises

The sum total of all these people, if measured in tens of thousands, is still an insignificant number. This is a serious global marketing issue poised to get the attention of hundreds of millions of businesses out there.

How fast will this cocoon hatch? How soon will gTLD spread its wings and show off its real colors? It all depends on the fast-track orientation that's now in the spotlight and, most importantly, on when gTLD-based models are able to demonstrate real global cyberbranding and image-expansion opportunities.

The biggest surprise for the corporate world will be the sudden realization that there is no more room to file -- or their dream names have been already taken -- as the window in the first round closes. For major players with the right combinations, these will be the biggest shocks, as well as very major marketing setbacks.

Internet » The Best Protector of Privacy Online: Market Competition

For at least the past two years, Facebook has been hammered from nearly every direction -- by consumer advocacy groups, the media and Congress -- about its seemingly cavalier attitude toward protecting user privacy. That was before Google+ debuted. After watching Google+ attract 20 million members in its first two months of operation, Facebook is now addressing many longstanding complaints regarding the lack of privacy on its network.

Online privacy was in the news again this week -- and Facebook, not surprisingly, figured prominently in many of the stories.

What was surprising, however, was that Facebook wasn't being castigated for implementing some new policy that made it appear the social networking giant was trampling users' privacy rights in its rush to tap new revenue streams.

The role of privacy-robbing villain was being played -- at least this week -- by comScore, a Web information broker. ComScore collects data on Web-browsing habits by getting users to agree to let the firm track their activity in exchange for free software or sweepstakes entries.

ComScore sells the data it collects to some of the world's largest businesses -- including high-tech companies like Microsoft (Nasdaq: MSFT), Yahoo (Nasdaq: YHOO) and Facebook.

On its site, comScore acknowledges that it monitors all Internet activity of consumers who agree to participate in its data-collection programs -- including the acts of filling online shopping carts, completing application forms and checking online accounts.

Data-Collection Lawsuit

In the process of tracking this activity, a user's credit card or other account numbers may be collected, the firms warns, adding that "when this happens, we make commercially viable efforts to purge our database of such information."

Now, a lawsuit filed by Edelson McGuire alleges comScore is routinely collecting much more personal information that it admits to on its site, and maintains it does nothing to purge this information from its files. The suit, at least to my knowledge, does not say what comScore is doing with all this highly personal data.

For its part, comScore says the lawsuit is without merit and rife with factual errors in regard to its business, and that it intends to aggressively defend itself against this action.

ComScore -- as its customer list suggests -- is a highly regarded source of information on how the general public uses the Internet and related technology. I've relied on ComScore data on several occasions when doing research for articles related to social media usage, and I've never had reason to doubt the veracity of its findings.

I have no knowledge of the inner workings of ComScore, however. So, I have no way of knowing exactly what data it collects from users -- or what it does with the data it obtains.

An Ongoing Issue

I'm inclined to believe ComScore ultimately will be vindicated in this matter. But that won't stop us from hearing more about the issue of online privacy.

In fact, the subject of online privacy figures to become more contentious as the competition to identify and secure new sources of online revenue intensifies over time.

The good news for consumers is that marketplace competition -- not government regulation -- is the only thing that will offer users any sort of protection from truly abusive privacy practices on the part of Web companies.

If you doubt that, consider what Facebook did this week.

While ComScore was being accused of dirty data-collection tactics, Facebook was unveiling a host of new features that give its users more control over what information appears in their Facebook profiles.

Google+ on the Scene

For at least the past two years, Facebook has been hammered from nearly every direction -- by consumer advocacy groups, the media and Congress -- about its seemingly cavalier attitude toward protecting user privacy. It was obvious that Facebook needed its users to share as much information as possible so it could sell that information to potential advertisers. It also was evident that since Facebook had no real competition, it had no need to heed the calls for protecting user privacy.

That was before Google+ debuted. This new social network is geared toward allowing users to control exactly what information they share with specific individuals. By creating "circles" on Google+, users can separate their personal lives from their professional lives -- and even create tighter, private groups within those segments. Social networking no longer means automatically sharing your entire life with the global village.

After watching Google+ attract 20 million members in its first two months of operation, Facebook is now addressing many longstanding complaints regarding the lack of privacy on its network.

Your Home on the Web

"Your profile should feel like your home on the web -- you should never feel like stuff appears there that you don't want, and you should never wonder who sees what's there," said Richard Cox, Facebook's director of product, in a blog introducing new features the company started rolling out Tuesday.

"The profile is getting some new tools that give you clearer, more consistent controls over how photos and posts get added to it, and who can see everything that lives there," Cox added, before listing the new features, which mimic much of what's in Google+.

The major changes involve allowing users to set privacy settings as they are posting items on the site, rather than having to go to a separate page, as well as being able to change those settings after an item has been posted.

With the new features, for instance, a user can determine exactly who in their network can view a post rather than have it automatically go out to the world. Even more important, from a privacy standpoint, is a host of features that give users at least some control over what information other users are allowed to post about them.

These Should Be Standard Features

As I reviewed the new features, many of them struck me as no-brainers that should have been standard in the first place -- such as the ability to see how something you post appears on the actual Facebook site. Then again, there was no reason for Facebook to help users' manage their online image.

With only 20 million users, Google+ has a long way to go to offer any real competitive challenge to Facebook. Still, we're seeing how powerful even the threat of competition can be in changing a company's behavior.

Anyone who's concerned about online privacy should hope that Google+ can become a real social networking force.

Internet » SAS Social Media Analytics Keeps an Album of Performance Snapshots

"Consider how many people are generating tweets. The notion of compiling people who tweet about your brand in an A to Z directory has been difficult to develop," said SAS product marketing manager John Bastone. However, the SAS Social Media Analytics application does that, and also lets users rank the authors in terms of how influential they are, on what topic they tend to post, and so on.

SAS is beefing up its SAS Social Media Analytics application with new features that give users a better handle on their social media effectiveness: improved tracking of past versus present performance, and benchmarks to assess competitors' performance.

"A lot of this functionality seems as though it would be routine, but few companies on the market actually offer it," John Bastone, global product marketing manager for SAS Customer Intelligence, told CRM Buyer.

Keeping Social Progress Score

For example, the company's new social scorecard module lets managers view channel activity over a period time on such sites as Facebook, Twitter, YouTube and Flickr.

Essentially, it provides a snapshot of how a company did on, say, Facebook at a particular time.

SAS screen shot

"We find when we ask clients how many Facebook fans they have at the moment, they can answer," Bastone said, "but they cannot answer how many they had in, say, June or this time last year."

If a company can answer those questions, he continued, it is usually because there is a social media intern or employee manually logging in the data every day.

"That is what our application does now - it programmatically snaps every KPI (key performance indicator) that a firm may want for social media outreach," he said.

With this information in hand, a company has the necessary foundation to develop longer-term strategies.

"You can start to do things like correlate campaigns or certain actions, cross-reference them, and so on, to understand what is most effective," said Bastone.

Author Hubs

The author hub is another new module. It provides insight into online authors -- or people who post comments, in other words. The point is to give customer care departments information about who their biggest fans are and, conversely, who hates them the most.

It is another capability that is not easy to build in social applications, Bastone said.

"Consider how many people are generating tweets. The notion of compiling people who tweet about your brand in an A to Z directory has been difficult to develop," he noted.

However, this feature does that, Bastone continued, and also lets users rank the authors in terms of how influential they are, on what topic they tend to post, and so on.

In short, "it helps a company see who has the most influence on its brands," he said.

Comparing by Industry

The upgrade app also has new competitive intelligence functionality that compares what people are saying about your company in social media to what they're saying about a competitor. It serves as a microscope to examine how your brand and its competitors are perceived, Bastone said.

It can compare many different functions, such as public relations or research and development, he said. It can also delve into industry-specific issues, such as style and handling in the automotive sector.

The application has added industry-specific sentiment engines in several industries, in fact, including retail, telecommunications, hospitality, gaming, banking and automotive.

"Those taxonomies are essentially prefabricated environments," said Bastone.

Internet » Investors Dance to Pandora's Q2, but How Long Will the Music Last?

Pandora has reported on its first quarter as a public company, showing big year-over-year gains in revenue and listener hours. Wall Street responded possitively, but doubts remain about the Internet radio providers long-term viability. Meanwhile, other sites wait in the wings with IPO plans of their own.

Internet radio service Pandora announced its first results as a publicly traded company on Thursday.

Quarterly revenues totaled US$67 million, 117 percent up year over year (YoY), and listener hours hit a new high of 1.8 billion, up 125 percent YoY, Pandora said.

Advertising revenue more than doubled, from about $27 million to more than $58 million.

However, net losses also increased year over year, from $1.6 million in Q2, 2010, to $1.8 million in Q2, 2011.

Pandora's earnings figures are unaudited.

Investors seemed pleased -- the company's stock was up by 10 percent Friday afternoon. But with losses growing as revenue grows, could Pandora be selling its way to bankruptcy?

Pandora spokesperson Deborah Roth pointed the E-Commerce Times to the webcast of the earnings call when asked for comment.

And what about other companies in what's often been categorized as a group of social-oriented websites that have either gone public or may do so soon -- LinkedIn, Zynga and Groupon, for example? How are they faring?

Is Reaction to Pandora Overblown?

"There seems to have been a mildly euphoric reaction in the market because Pandora seems to be closer to profitability," Rick Summer, an analyst at Morningstar, told the E-Commerce Times.

"We would encourage folks to take a bit of a step back and look at this company," he added.

The cost of acquiring content, lack of support from the music industry, and the behemoths entering the music business -- Google (Nasdaq: GOOG), Apple (Nasdaq: AAPL) and Yahoo (Nasdaq: YHOO) -- are all threats to Pandora's survival, Summer said.

Rising Costs

Over the course of the next four years, Pandora's content costs are going to rise, Summer warned.

At the end of 2010, Pandora's content costs were 49 percent of revenue; in Q2, 2011, they were 58 percent. If Pandora had to pay 2015 licensing rates for content, the cost of content would be 79 percent of revenue, Summer said.

"We have a business model that's only going to experience accelerating costs, so they're going to have to be able to get greater yield and utilization out of their existing advertising inventory," Summer pointed out.

However, moving more to mobile may not be that helpful, because "generally CPMs in the mobile world are less than in the Web world," Summer said.

CPM is the cost per 1,000 impressions, meaning how much advertisers will pay per 1,000 people accessing an ad.

With Apple, Google and Amazon (Nasdaq: AMZN) all offering music in the cloud, the squeeze on Pandora will intensify, Summer predicted.

"Simply saying you have a different model from them, as Pandora does, isn't enough," Summer said. "We have an unproven business model for Pandora."

Lack of support from the music industry may be the hardest obstacle for Pandora to overcome.

"The owners of the licensing rights want to ensure they get the best rates for their content, and it's not clear that they have an interest in supporting Pandora," Summer said.

The Other Social Bubble Babies

Like some others in the field, Summer considers shares of LinkedIn, a social network that also went public recently, as overpriced.

"LinkedIn is a great company, but we think it's overvalued," Summer said. "We're currently reevaluating where its value should lie."

Investors should keep a close eye on how LinkedIn spends money, Summer suggested.

"If it spends heavily in being a news and destination site, that would give us heartburn," Summer stated.

Zynga, which publishes social games such as "Farmville," filed in July for an IPO, and it's widely believed it will be valued at up to $20 billion, barring any unforeseen circumstances. However, the company's valuation could also take a beating after the IPO if investors begin to see it as a one-trick pony.

Groupon, which offers online coupons, has already seen its luster fade. In March, there were rumblings that it would seek a $2 billion IPO, but by June, analysts were questioning that valuation as well.

"We don't say Groupon has a bad business model, but we say it has an unproven and challenged business model," Summer said.

"We're not altogether thrilled at where the company is, and we tell our investors that this is not investing in anything that's proven yet," Summers added.

Internet » Slide CEO Slips Away as Google Pulls the Plug

A year after it purchased social media app and game maker Slide for a reported $200 million, Google has shut the company down. Meanwhile, Slide's CEO Max Levchin is walking out the door. Whatever the reasons, the developments suggest Google feels it has its social media sea legs and is now willing to bet on a single product: Google+.

After two months of basking in the accolades Google+ has received, Google's (Nasdaq: GOOG) social media strategy is again the cause of some head-scratching.

The search engine has decided to shut down Slide, a social media app and game maker that it bought about a year ago. Even more eyebrow-raising: Its founder and chief executive Max Levchin is leaving.

Levchin is pursuing other opportunities, Google said. Meanwhile, most of Slide's staff is remaining at Google to work on other ventures. Google did not return the E-Commerce Times' request for further comment in time for publication.

In a blog post, Slide warned its customers that a number of its products and applications will be retired, including its flagship Slideshow and SuperPoke Pets, as well as more recent products such as Photovine, Video Inbox and Pool Party.

A Sudden Decision

The decision to shutter Slide reportedly came on rather suddenly. Google reportedly paid US$200 million for Slide when it purchased the company. With Google and Slide silent on the matter, the rumor mill has gone into overdrive regarding the circumstances behind the move.

For instance, some believe that Slide's decision to release its more recent apps first on iOS instead of Android was the reason behind the move.

Another school of thought advocates the position that Levchin was the true target for Google when it acquired Slide, as it was floundering in its own attempts to roll out a viable social media strategy. As cofounder of PayPal, Levchin has significant cred in this area.

Then, Levchin was pushed out when Google+, headed by other executives at Google, proved to be the winning formula.

The news has also given rise to speculation that Levchin didn't fit in with the new Google as defined by recently anointed CEO Larry Page -- that is, a more focused Google less inclined to experiment and incubate new projects and technologies.

Of course, there is also the possibility that Levchin is, in fact, simply leaving to pursue other opportunities.

Wither Google+?

Whatever the reasons, the developments suggest Google feels it has its social media sea legs and is now willing to bet on a single product.

"Google has decided to place all of its social media efforts behind the development of Google+," William Weaver, a professor of Integrated Science, Business and Technology at La Salle University, told the E-Commerce Times.

"Technology and software elements from previous Google projects such as Google Buzz and Google Wave have been incorporated into Google+, and it is possible that various elements designed by Slide may find their way into Google+ as well," he said.

Also, Slide was not built solely on Levchin's expertise, he said.

"In addition to the code assets acquired with the purchase of Slide are the programmers experienced in the design of social applications such as FunWall, Fortune Cookie and SuperPoke, designed for use with Facebook," he noted. "It is expected that a majority of the former Slide employees will continue as Google employees assigned to projects throughout the company."

Barely a Blip?

In all likelihood, the shuttering of Slide won't rock Google's boat, according to Lawrence Knorr, a faculty member at Harrisburg University of Science and Technology.

"The closing of Slide will be met with questions like "What was Slide?", he told the E-Commerce Times.

"Google purchased Slide in order to tap the social media applications engineering expertise of its key people," he said. "Now Google is focused on rolling out Google+."

Internet » iTunes TV Show Rentals Canceled for Low Ratings

Ninety-nine-cent TV show rentals from iTunes are no more. Apple has pulled the offering from its online entertainment store, reportedly due to a lack of user interest. TV shows are still available for purchase on iTunes, and movies can still be rented through the service. This and the emergence of iCloud will likely further reshape Apple's approach to entertainment.

Apple (Nasdaq: AAPL) has stopped offering 99-cent TV show rentals from iTunes. The decision comes about a year after the option debuted.

Movie rentals are still available. TV shows may still be purchased for download, usually for the price of US$1.99 to $2.99.

The move appears to be in response to user demand for owning a show rather than just using it for a short period of time. Apple did respond to MacNewsWorld's request for further comment, but in a statement to All Things D, the company confirmed customer demand for downloads over rentals was the reason for the switch.

"Experts were wrong. The consumer wants to own, not rent," Laura Martin, senior media analyst at Needham & Company, told MacNewsWorld.

As entertainment and content providers put together the first online media outlets, there was an overwhelming belief that since a tech-savvy generation had so many options -- everything from mainstream channels like Netflix (Nasdaq: NFLX) and Hulu to illegal streaming websites, -- users would be content with simply streaming a TV show, or renting it on a temporary basis. iTunes rentals automatically delete themselves after a set time period.

Based on demand, however, it seems that if users are going to pay for a show, they prefer having it backed up to watch whenever they please, rather than just rent it.

"It didn't seem like the demand was really there for rentals. They tried it, but obviously the economics really weren't there," Michael Corty, an analyst at Morningstar, told MacNewsWorld.

"It seems to be a big point going against the prevailing content wisdom, and it seems as though a premier digital content player is going to be an ownership model," said Martin.

As the Interenet becomes a more mainstream way to watch television, content providers are jumping on board.

"Content companies are more than happy to provide their content online because the way they get paid now is through the TV ecosystem. They're doing everything they can to make it available, and from a content side they want you to be paying for a subscription, or getting advertising dollars," said Corty.

Apple TV Future

There is also speculation that Apple's move could be the first of many in another revamp of Apple TV, probably backed by the much-anticipated iCloud online service. The system would make it possible, among other things, for a TV show or movie to be downloaded on one device like an iPad and then stopped or started later on any other device, such as a PC or an iPhone.

As content providers come to believe that users want to watch TV on a variety of platforms anytime, anywhere, they may be more eager to jump on board with a company that can promise a streamlined digital experience.

"There is a definite trend for people wanting their content on multiple devices. All these companies are jockeying for that," said Corty.

Anyone's Game

The upcoming iCloud service is a way that Apple could have a leg up on companies like Netflix and Hulu, despite their large user bases of loyal, paying subscribers.

The hype about iCloud in tech circles is also an indication that the online entertainment business is still lacking a clear leader and could be anyone's for the taking.

"We're in the first inning of figuring out what the digital business model is for this," said Martin.

Even though the rental model didn't work for Apple, it's changed its approach in hopes of being a leader in digital entertainment as well.

"Netflix is going to have something like $3 billion in sales this year, but Apple has a balance sheet with over 70 billion in cash. They've got the means and wherewithal and the technology to compete in this business," said Corty.

Computing » On Slashdot's Lost Taco and Apple's Big Turnover

"One valid criticism [of FOSS] is that too many projects are 'me-too,'" suggested Slashdot blogger Barbara Hudson. "'Me-too' means you're playing in their home field, and conceding that they are the reference by which you will be measured. FOSS should not be competing by being 'just as good.' 'Think different' worked for Jobs and Apple; maybe it can work for FOSS."

There may not be enough tequila in this world to see the tech community all the way through to the end of August 2011.

We've had Googlerola; we've had the ever-escalating software patent storm. We've had HP's (NYSE: HPQ) lily-livered maneuvers regarding webOS and PCs.

Did we need more than that? No, we did not. Yet more is just what we got last week in the form of a one-two punch: First Steve Jobs's resignation as Apple (Nasdaq: AAPL) CEO, then similar news from Slashdot's Rob Malda, or CmdrTaco.

'Please Help Me'

Now, longtime readers of the Linux Blog Safari column may remember that Malda contributed more than a few insightful comments over the years.

Linux Girl, in fact, still considers him a good personal friend, and understands completely that he's been too busy to comment for the past (*cough*) three years.

She'll never forget, though, a few of his wittier gems. When asked if Linux geeks tend to need help with the romantic side of life, for instance, Malda replied, "I hate to make broad generalizations about hundreds of thousands of people, but yes. Yes we do. Please help me."

Of the compatibility between Linux and women? "I'd ask my wife if she'd let me out of my box," Malda said.

Malda's farewell letter drew well more than 1,400 comments in about 24 hours on Slashdot, with plenty more dispersed across the rest of the Web.

We'll miss you, CmdrTaco!

The Ripple Effect

The departure of Apple's icon, of course, made a similarly big splash in the rest of the computing world, where the retrospectives and analyses are still coming fast and furious.

Linux Girl has never been a big iGadget fan, but the news will clearly have a profound effect on the industry in general.

The big question down at the blogosphere's Punchy Penguin was, will it affect Linux? Bloggers, as per their wont, had no shortage of reactions.

'A Terrible Business Plan'

"Good riddance!" was the opinion of blogger Robert Pogson. "Maybe Apple will quit suing the world and making enemies with a new guy in charge."

Apple has already "ticked off Samsung, one of its suppliers, all the users of Android/Linux products who number in the millions, all the developers of software for Android/Linux, all the suppliers of parts for Android/Linux systems, Google (Nasdaq: GOOG), and me for unleashing software patents on the world," Pogson explained.

"That is a terrible business plan and suppresses initiative," he added. "Carried to its logical conclusion, all smartphones and tablets will be excluded from USA/Europe because everyone will violate everyone else's patents. Is that what Apple wants? They are insane."

'It Will All Be on Cook'

For Slashdot blogger hairyfeet, the real question is, "Can Cook come up with new products like Jobs could?

"Like his style or hate it, the man had a vision and a way of finding new markets," hairyfeet opined. "There are probably three to four more iDevices left in the pipe. After that? It will all be on Cook."

Indeed, "no matter how you cut it this is a blow for Apple," consultant and Slashdot blogger Gerhard Mack agreed, "but they should be able to coast on their current lineup for at least a decade."

No Friend to FOSS

Chris Travers, a Slashdot blogger who works on the LedgerSMB project, didn't see any big implications for Linux.

"While Apple is involved in the FOSS community, I really don't see a major impact there," Travers told Linux Girl. "I have never really seen Steve Jobs as a friend to Free/Open Source Software. I don't see Apple becoming more or less of a friend after his departure."

Barbara Hudson, however, drew out some lessons for FOSS.

'We're Just as Good'

"Think of it -- if Steve Jobs hadn't asked John Sculley, 'Do you want to sell sugar water for the rest of your life or come with me and change the world?' Apple's board of directors wouldn't have replaced Jobs with Sculley less than 2 years later," began Hudson, a blogger on Slashdot who goes by "Tom" on the site.

In competing with commodity PCs, Sculley "basically undermined Apple's premium value, saying, 'We're just as good,'" she pointed out.

"It's true that during Sculley's tenure, sales rose by a factor of 10 before the crunch and Apple's near-death experience, but those were boom years for anyone who could assemble anything resembling a computer," Hudson asserted. "His handling of Apple brands, by creating too many different products with too much overlap, created confusion."

That, in turn, "made it much easier for Jobs, when he came back, to say, 'No, we're going to have only a few products, and they're going to be GREAT!'" Hudson explained.

'Think Different'

So, "in a way, Jobs' biggest mistake set the stage for his biggest success," she opined. "What sets Jobs above other leaders is that he was able to embrace it and reshape the company, which will forever be identified with him."

What lessons are there here for FOSS projects?

"One valid criticism is that too many projects are 'me-too,'" Hudson suggested. "'Me-too' means you're playing in their home field, and conceding that they are the reference by which you will be measured.

"FOSS should not be competing by being 'just as good,'" she concluded. "'Think different' worked for Jobs and Apple; maybe it can work for FOSS."

Computing » Steve Jobs' Exit: The Day the Magic Died

Sun Tzu has been dead for thousands of years, and he is still required reading in military and business courses. People, products, companies and countries pass, but knowledge is often sustained. Steve Jobs' unique approach to product strategy -- and it really is product strategy -- could outlast the country, let alone Apple. And I think it should, because it is that brilliant.

It is amazing to me the number of people I know who are basically saying Steve Jobs (some wonderful quotes from him here) leaving Apple (Nasdaq: AAPL) will not change Apple. Most saw what Apple was like with Jobs, have seen that no similar company has been able to repeat what Apple has done over the last decade, and have seen both Microsoft (Nasdaq: MSFT) after Gates and Disney (NYSE: DIS) after Walt. They even saw what happened to Dell (Nasdaq: DELL) during the short time Michael stepped down. But Jobs, who is even more hands on than the most-micro manager any of us know, will pass without a ripple. Wow -- now that is a reality distortion field.

The song that is going through my head goes, "Bye, bye, Miss American Pie, took my Chevy ...," and it is titled, "The Day the Music Died." I'll share what I think Steve's truly lasting legacy is for life in general. I'll close with my product of the week, an offering from Sony (NYSE: SNE) that shows the unique difference that Jobs brought to his products.

Apple Is Changed

You take out of the mix a guy who is a known micromanager and who rules a company largely using fear, and the firm is changed. Arguing it isn't is like, well, taking a leg off a chair that is wobbling and arguing the three legged chair is as good as new. Except with Steve Jobs, given how much he touched, it would be more like two legs.

For instance, take a look at the patents that Jobs personally touched. There are 313 of them on critical Apple products, most having to do with the look and feel of the offering. Whether or not they would have existed could be argued; whether they would have been the same can't, because he touched and changed every one, and his was the vote that counted at the table.

He isn't a guy that offers up a suggestion as an option -- he is the guy who says "this is the way it will be." If he truly touched each of these products, he had a significant impact on what the outcome was.

The Nature of the Change

Looking back at Microsoft, Disney and even IBM (NYSE: IBM), the first-year changes were typically rather subtle. Disney and IBM were a bit more sudden, because Walt died and Thomas Watson Jr. stepped sharply away from the company. Bill still showed up a few times to speak on behalf of the firm. However, inside the companies, the changes were far more noticeable far earlier, as the new management took control.

At Disney, it was a massive influx of MBAs and outflow of undegreed founding employees. At IBM, it was a hard shift to financial controls and a sharp move away from hands-on employee management. At Microsoft, it was the evaporation of a driving vision.

What typically happens when a micromanager leaves is an increasing degree of rebellion against that now-absent micromanager. Micromanagers rarely explain the why behind their decisions, and Jobs isn't exactly famous for explanations. They just demand they be followed, and that means skills don't transfer. In fact, micromanagers, by their nature, don't really want skills to transfer because they equate control with status -- and if you can do it yourself, they see that as a lack of control.

While this only ensures that Apple will be different, think for a moment -- how many firms are doing as well as Apple is? If you are into sports -- I'm not, really -- and recall the 49ers football team used to be unbeatable and now is anything but, do you recall what changed? Ownership of the team passed between brother and sister in 1999, and the team was pretty much done from then on. That's the same as changing the CEO but leaving the employees in place -- and we are talking siblings.

Clearly, this idea of Apple suddenly going into printers as the new growth market is farfetched, and intended to be, but the firm is unlikely to be able to maintain its status at the top of tech -- let alone where it is today, which is almost over every other company in any market.

Certainly anything is possible, but looking at other firms that have had a transition like this, only IBM held on for a long time and only because it was designed by two generations of founders to outlast both.

Wrapping Up: Steve Jobs' Legacy

A lot of us have different views about what Jobs legacy will be. It won't be the ads, though some are clearly iconic. I don't think it is the products. Did you know that IBM used to make cheese cutters, for instance? How many people even remember the first product that put Apple on the map, the Apple II? It isn't really the company either, given it was created by a number of people; while redesigned around Jobs, it will undoubtedly change a lot over the next decade and might either do major acquisitions or become acquired at some future point. The point is that Jobs' fingerprint on something that is largely based on a lot of changing employees is likely already disappearing with every post-Jobs hire, in any case.

I think it is the content in the Apple University (note the info-graphic clearly shows a change in Apple stock performance when Jobs isn't there), which is overseen by Jobs, led by people who understand him, and attempts to pass on Steve's process to future generations.

If successful -- and note that Jobs is in the loop for consistency/compliance and doesn't really have a replacement -- this could limit, much like the IBM University does, how much of what Steve Jobs provides in terms of process is lost. It could cause a core part of Jobs' unique capabilities to continue after he is gone -- perhaps for generations.

Sun Tzu has been dead for thousands of years, and he is still required reading in military and business courses. People, products, companies and countries pass, but knowledge is often sustained. Steve Jobs' unique approach to product strategy -- and it really is product strategy -- could outlast the country, let alone Apple. And I think it should, because it is that brilliant.

Product of the Week: Sony Vaio Z

Product of the Week Steve Jobs historically has talked about two companies he modeled Apple after: Porsche in terms of product design, and Sony in terms of consumer focus and product strategy. To me, that means if any company could beat Apple in its core market, Sony should be able to, because it was a big part of Apple's successful redesign.

Currently, the closest thing Sony has to a current generation MacBook is the Vaio Z. It is light, it is sexy, in many ways (on spec) it is truly better than a MacBook -- particularly if you are, like me, a Windows user.



Sony Vaio Z Series

This Vaio compares to the 13" aluminum MacBook Pro, and it stands out with many more choices. That asset is where its problem lies, though, because that likely drove up cost and limited its market.

But let me give you the high points. Instead of aluminum alone, it is built up of graphite and aluminum. Instead of just a built-in battery you can't replace, it has an optional external battery (up to 16 hours of battery life vs. a good 7) that can be hot swapped and charged alone (this last is really unusual, even in Windows boxes). Instead of 1280x800 native resolution it has 1600x900 or an upgrade to 1920x1080 resolution. Instead of one hard drive, it can have twin SSDs. It has an optional dock and a built-in fingerprint based security system the MacBooks lack, and instead of 4.5 pounds, it comes in (without the slice) at an amazing 2.5 pounds (even with the slice it is about a full pound lighter).

However, all of this doesn't come without a cost. This little puppy will set you back between US$1,799 and $2,200 (retail), while the MacBook is between $1,200 and $1,500. Both products would be considered premium offerings, and clearly the Sony would be more exclusive. For the extra $700, you get what is likely a far more useful result, but you are in nosebleed pricing territory, and you can't get to high volumes there.

The Sony would appeal to folks who like to mess with things and represent about 5 percent of the market. The Mac would appeal to folks who just want to get things done -- or more like the other 95 percent -- and both are priced out of the mainstream. Apple forces people to buy higher in the market; Sony would suggest a different lower-priced product for most (like the $625 VPC-S135X/B). The end result is Apple has fewer SKUs and higher margins, while Sony has more products.

As a customer who favors this product, I like Sony's approach; as an investor, I'd prefer Apple's. These two products showcase, more than any other thing I can think of, what makes Apple different. It builds a product that is aspirational for most people and focuses on maximizing margin. Others, like Sony, try to maximize total volume by trying to meet existing and very diverse product needs.

In the end, I can't think of any other product in the market that is likely to give a new Mac owner a little product envy, I certainly have a bit of lust in my heart for this puppy. Because of that -- and mostly because it drives home the point of just why Apple is different -- the Sony Vaio Z is my product of the week.

One final thought: Ultrabooks, the platform Intel (Nasdaq: INTC) will be bringing to market later this year, are very similar to the System Z and will likely highlight Windows 8 next year. They will also price on top of the MacBooks. That will make things more interesting shortly. You know, the biggest change may be that without Jobs, Apple just doesn't seem unbeatable anymore.

Computing » IBM to Build Super-Storage Phenom

In order to keep working when disks fail, the system reportedly not only stores multiple copies of data on different disks, but also pulls data from other drives when one goes down, and writes that data to a replacement drive slowly so the computer the array serves has enough capacity to continue working. If more disks nearby fail, the rebuilding process speeds up.

IBM (NYSE: IBM) is working on a 120-petabyte storage array that will consist of 200,000 disk drives, according to the MIT Technology Review.

The array is expected to store about 1 trillion files.

It's being developed for a client that needs a new supercomputer for detailed simulations of real-world phenomena.

Storing the metadata about the information in the array -- the names, types and other attributes of the files in the system -- will require about 2 PB.

The largest arrays available today are reported to be about 15 PB.

IBM spokesperson Ari Entin confirmed the existence of the superstorage project, but researchers were not available to provide comment in time for the publication of this article.

Issues With Big Storage

Building an array of this size requires solving several technical issues, and it could pose unique problems to users.

"Much of what has been learned in the data center over the past 30 years is only partially relevant to answering the question of whether it makes sense to put 100 petabytes into a single basket," Jay Heiser, a research vice president at the Gartner (NYSE: IT) Group, told TechNewsWorld.

"The bigger the drive, the harder your data falls," Heiser said.

For example, a problem with an EMC (NYSE: EMC) DMX-3 storage array in a data center outsourced to Northrop Grumman (NYSE: NOC) brought down the systems of 27 agencies in the State of Virginia earlier this month.

"While there are advantages to putting a lot of eggs into bigger baskets, eventually a point is reached at which further increases in basket size are counterproductive," Heiser warned.

Making It Work

IBM's engineers reportedly developed a series of new hardware and software techniques for the hypermassive storage array, including wider storage racks and a water-cooling system.

Using water instead of air to cool the storage array is a reasonable approach because IBM "has a lot of experience" with water-cooling systems for mainframes, David Hill, principal at the Mesabi Group, told TechNewsWorld.

In order to keep working when disks fail, the system reportedly not only stores multiple copies of data on different disks, but also pulls data from other drives when one goes down, and writes that data to a replacement drive slowly so the computer the array serves has enough capacity to continue working.

If more disks nearby fail, the rebuilding process speeds up.

The super-array uses IBM's General Parallel File System (GPFS), a highly scalable clustered parallel file system that spreads individual files across multiple disks so the computer can read or write multiple parts of a file simultaneously.

In July, IBM researchers used the GPFS system running on a cluster of 10 eight-core systems and using solid state storage to scan 10 billion files on one system in 43 minutes. The previous record, set by IBM researchers in 2007, saw 1 billion files scanned in three hours.

Million-Year Guarantee

"IBM's built some of the highest-end supercomputers in the industry, so it knows how to do this stuff," Joe Clabby, president of Clabby Analytics, told TechNewsWorld.

What about disk failure, the perennial bugbear of storage arrays?

"I don't see how there can be any sort of storage system that doesn't sometimes become corrupted, and require not just restoration, but sometimes reconstruction," Gartner's Heiser remarked.

"IBM has developed techniques, which it has employed on at least one existing storage system, to compensate for the fact that individual drives will be failing on a more or less continuous basis," Hill said.

"That is why it can claim that a million years can go by without loss of data and no compromise in performance," Hill added.

It's likely that users won't be allowed to replace totally dead drives, and rebuilds of failed drives will be done on spare drives, Hill said. Also, IBM will probably use disk grooming techniques -- deleting old and unnecessary files on disks.

"As long as not too large a percentage of disks fail, there is really no need to physically replace them," Hill pointed out. "Few disk systems are fully utilized anyway, so a percentage or two of failed disks should not be a problem."

Computing » VMware Floats a Global Cloud

As VMware kicks off its 2011 VMworld confab, the company has announced several new offerings. Among them is a global cloud offering that links clouds from multiple service providers in varios countries around the world. The idea behind Global Connect is to provide multinational enterprises highly available cloud computing services locally in the various countries where they operate.

VMware (NYSE: VMW) made a number of announcements at VMworld 2011 in Las Vegas on Monday. Among its new projects is a global cloud offering.

This is, so to speak, a network of clouds from multiple services in various countries. Customers will work with their local vCloud Datacenter service provider to get into the global cloud.

Other interesting product announcements from VMware were vCloud Connector 1.5, which provides data transfer between public and private clouds; and vCenter Site Recovery Manager, which will let enterprises failover their applications to a service provider's site.

Whether or not global cloud access a good thing remains to be seen. Security in the cloud is not necessarily ironclad, and there's the possibility of data leaks, among other risks.

VMware did not respond to requests for comment by press time.

Cosmic Consciousness?

The idea behind Global Connect is to provide multinational enterprises highly available cloud computing services locally in the various countries where they operate.

The enterprises will go through their local vCloud Datacenter service provider, who will orchestrate service delivery internationally with Global Connect.

VMware's vCloud Datacenter services are built on VMware secure cloud infrastructure, including VMware vSphere, vCloud Director and VMware vShield. They provide globally consistent cloud infrastructure, management and security, and are offered by VMware certified providers.

Global Connect customers will only have to sign a single contract and will get a unified management console across the clouds they use with vCloud Connector.

Enterprises can find a local vCloud services provider by going here.

The Cloud Connection

VMware announced vCloud Connector in February. This is a free plugin that lets VMware vSphere administrators immediately begin deploying and managing virtual machines across VMware vCloud services from within the VMware vSphere client,

Version 1.5 of vCloud Connector was announced at VMworld 2011.

VMware vCloud Connector 1.5 will automatically retry and resume transfers interrupted by network problems. It will be accessible from any compatible Web browser and will also be available as a plugin for the vCenter Console.

Picking Up the Pieces

Disaster recovery has always been an issue for IT, and four VMware service provider partners Monday announced plans to introduce cloud-based disaster recovery services built on vCenter Site Recovery Manager 5.

They are FusionStorm, Hosting.com, Iland and VeriStor. The four will offer their services on a pay-per-use model.

Site Recovery Manager 5 includes built-in hypervisor-based replication for VMware vSphere environments and lets customers use heterogeneous storage across sites, cutting their storage costs.

Further, vCenter Site Recovery Manager 5 automates the entire site recovery and migration process. It also includes an automatic fallback capability that can automatically reverse replication and execute recovery plans so data is sent back automatically to the production site.

The Cloud and Safety

The security and reliability of the cloud has been called into question repeatedly, what with the hacking of Google's (Nasdaq: GOOG) infrastructure last year, a recent failure involving Amazon.com's (Nasdaq: AMZN) servers, and the Anonymous hacks into Sony's (NYSE: SNE) PlayStation cloud network.

Can enterprises feel safe putting their data in the cloud? And what about government mandates that certain data can't be stored in servers outside the borders of the data's country of origin?

Security "is more an issue around how the VMware infrastructure is implemented in a company's IT infrastructure than a weakness in the technology itself," Charles King, principal at Pund-IT, told the E-Commerce Times.

"You can have the most expensive and high-security locks in the world in your house, but if you forget to lock the door, somebody can walk right in," King added.

As corporations move toward the internal/external hybrid cloud, they are "going to have to start thinking about these issues in a way they never thought of before," King pointed out.

However, some businesses, such as companies in the defense industry, may not be able to use VMware's global cloud because the risk of a mistake would be too high, Rob Enderle, principal analyst at the Enderle Group, warned.

It's likely to be safe to use the cloud for disaster recovery and failover, Enderle said.

"It's unlikely that both a local and an international cloud service would fail as a result of the same disaster," Enderle told the E-Commerce Times. "If they did, you might argue the disaster would be of global proportions and that would be the bigger issue anyway."

Mobile Tech » Sony Looks Into the Mirror to Boost Its DSLR Cred

Sony's new line of SLT digital cameras pack on the megapixels. But it might be the mirrors that set the DSLRs apart from the pack. The cameras use translucent mirror technology and electronic viewfinders. "We do not expect Canon or Nikon to adopt these any time soon, as they're more conservative in this aspect of product design," said IDC's Chris Chute.

Sony (NYSE: SNE) has announced two new additions to its SLT-A family of cameras: the A77 and A65.

They offer 24.3MP effective resolution and have what Sony says is the world's first XGA OLED electronic viewfinder.

Both cameras use the translucent mirror technology common to Sony's SLT-A family and offer progressive full HD video recording.

"No other DSLR offers full HD recording in 60p, 50p, 25p, and 24p," digital photographer and film director Preston Kanak told TechNewsWorld.

Sony is unique in using translucent mirrors, remarked Chris Chute, a research manager at IDC.

"We do not expect Canon (NYSE: CAJ) or Nikon to adopt these any time soon, as they're more conservative in this aspect of product design," Chute told TechNewsWorld.

Sony did not respond to requests for comment by press time.

Tech Specs for the SLT-A Family Additions

The SLT-A77 can capture full-resolution images in bursts at 12 frames per second with full-time phase-detection autofocus. The A65's speed for this is 10 frames a second.

Both cameras use cross sensors with multipoint autofocus systems for precision tracking. The A77 has a 19-point autofocus system with 11 cross sensors, and the A65 a 15-point autofocus system with three cross-sensors.

This lets cameras maintain their focus lock on a designated moving object even if another object blocks it temporarily from view.

"It's not so much the sensors, but the logic that connects them," Rob Enderle, principal analyst at the Enderle Group, told TechNewsWorld.

"The result is supposed to be better focus on complex subjects with subject material dispersed both front and back, and side to side, and the resolution's very high, which should allow for better editing," Enderle elaborated.

The new cameras use Sony's newly developed Exmor APS HD CMOS sensor, which gives them that effective resolution of 24.3MP.

Exmor sensors combine the speed of CMOS sensors with advanced-quality image sensor technologies to provide enhanced resolution for more detailed images.

"With massive improvements in editing tools, the quantity of good data is more important than the quality of any one shot," Enderle said.

The Exmor sensors are teamed with the latest version of Sony's BIONZ image processing engine. This speeds up the conversion of raw image data from the Exmor sensors into the format stored on the camera's memory card.

Sony uses the BIONZ engine in several of its cameras, including those in the DSC family. This video explains the advantages of BIONZ.

Both cameras use what Sony says is the world's first XGA OLED Tru-Finder. This electronic viewfinder has an XGA resolution of 2,360 dots and offers a high-contrast image with 100 percent frame coverage, Sony claims.

The cameras have a Smart Teleconverter feature that lets users see compositions on the Tru-Finder so they don't have to look away from the viewfinder, and capture them as 12MP images.

"One thing that's great about the technology is the new OLED," Kanak said. "We couldn't use the viewfinder to see our compositions with previous technology."

The A77 has a three-way adjustable screen that Sony claims is another world's first.

Other technical details are available here).

Mirror, Mirror on the Wall

The latest developments in Sony's translucent mirror technology make the A77 and A65 the quickest and most responsive interchangeable lens cameras in their class, the company claims.

"This is a brilliant move by Sony to use translucent mirror technology this way, providing weight and speed advantages to its cameras," Enderle said.

Translucent mirror technology replaces optical pentaprisms used in DSLRs with electronic viewfinders, making digital cameras smaller and lighter. Introduced in the 1960s, it was used in specialized high-speed cameras such as the Canon Pelix QL but it was too expensive for mainstream use, Enderle stated.

Competitors to the A77 and A65 are the Panasonic Lumix and the Canon 60D and 7D, Kanak said.

The question now is whether consumers will bite.

"With the A77, Sony is now offering cameras that compete quite effectively against cameras such as the Canon 7D," Carl Howe, director of anywhere consumer research at the Yankee Group, told TechNewsWorld.

"Its only challenge is convincing high-end buyers to switch brands," Howe added.

Mobile Tech » iPhone Could Bring Agony and Ecstasy to Sprint

A report this week that Sprint will soon offer the Apple iPhone on its network has excited the carrier's investors -- Sprint's stock rose about 10 percent on the news. Offering the phone would allow the carrier to better compete with its rivals' device portfolios; however, questions have arisen regarding network strain and how Sprint will handle factors like the phone's high subsidy cost.

It looks like Sprint (NYSE: S) is about to join Club iPhone.

The wireless network could become the Apple (Nasdaq: AAPL) smartphone's third U.S. wireless carrier in October, just in time for the holiday season, according to a recent Wall Street Journal report. That's also the time frame in which Apple is expected to release the fifth generation of iPhone, though the company has not officially announced a date.

Sprint's stock rose 10 percent on the news Tuesday.

AT&T (NYSE: T) offered the iPhone exclusively in the U.S. from the device's introduction in 2007 until Apple added Verizon earlier this year.

Despite Sprint's stock gain, though, the news has prompted some doubts about the value of the deal for Sprint. The iPhone reportedly comes with a subsidy price tag that is larger than other smartphones. Those subsidies could cut into Sprint's margins.

On the plus side, the addition of the iPhone would put Sprint closer to an equal footing with AT&T and Verizon, much larger competitors. Verizon has roughly 106 million subscribers. AT&T has an estimated 99 million, and Sprint has 52 million. For Apple, the move is an unambiguous plus.

Sprint declined to speak with MacNewsWorld, noting the company does not comment on speculation. Apple did not respond to a MacNewsWorld's request for comments by press time.

Good for Apple - So-So for Sprint

Question have arisen regarding whether the iPhone will put strain on Sprint's network. There has also been speculation that Sprint will have to drop its unlimited data plan to protect its network.

"I don't think it's going to kill the network," Kevin Burden, VP of mobile device research at ABI Research, told MacNewsWorld. "We're at a point now where most mobile operating networks are tuned to handle volume without bringing things down. Maybe four or five years ago it would have been a problem."

The deal will most likely happen, Burden said, and he believes it will be a strong subscriber grab for Apple. "Apple needs to get as many subscribers as it can," said Burden. "They're looking at strong competition from Androids and the upcoming BlackBerry 7. They don't have the commanding lead anymore. The phones are all getting really similar. In the U.S. market, the last big thing they can do is get Sprint."

As for the question about whether the "Apple tax" in high subsidy costs will hurt Sprint, Burden believes Sprint is accustomed to subsidies. "The subsidies won't kill Sprint. It's not like they're not used to subsidies," said Burden. "It's not a new business model."

The timing of the deal is likely scheduled for October, when Apple is widely expected to release its next iPhone version to coincide with the beginning of the holiday season.

"The introduction of iPhone 5 seems like the logical moment for Sprint to launch iPhones," said Burden. "Coming out with the iPhone 4 would be silly. It wouldn't be a big deal. So you can predict when it will have it -- they'll have it with the introduction of the iPhone 5."

The Phone for the Big League

Adding the iPhone clearly ups the ante for Sprint, giving it equal footing with AT&T and Verizon in its line of devices.

"Sprint talks about how important the device portfolio is," William A. Stofega, program director, mobile device technology and trends at IDC, told MacNewsWorld. "Sprint has had some decent devices. They've done well with HTC, which runs on Android. Even so, Sprint would like to have the iPhone. Questions about the iPhone come up on their earnings calls all the time. Having the iPhone shows they're a player. In overall numbers, they may not be in the same league as AT&T and Verizon, but they're sill a player."

On the other hand, after its second-quarter earnings report, Sprint was criticized for the high costs associated with adding and retaining customers. Adding the iPhone ratchets up those expenses. "The iPhone subsidy costs hurt margins even with Verizon," said Stofega. "The iPhone is that special case all by itself. The carrier has to subsidize at a higher rate to drive and retain customers."

A Sprint move would also come at a time when Android devices are getting the cool-factor nod from consumers.

"The world is changing. Droid is getting mindshare. It's a juggernaut," said Stofega. "It can't be slowed down by anything. The Motorola acquisition could help. There has been a need for an Android platform that shows off its full capabilities and is much more integrated between hardware and software. Motorola could make that happen."

IT Management » Federal CIO Prods Agencies to Revamp Websites

The website reform plan is part of a larger federal program to improve customer relations with the public through various means, including the use of innovative technologies. "The federal government has a responsibility to streamline and make more efficient its service delivery to better serve the public," President Barack Obama said in kicking off the customer service initiative earlier this year.

The U.S. government's new chief information officer wasted little time in directing federal agencies to significantly improve the way they manage information technology resources. Steven VanRoekel, who took over the federal CIO post on Aug. 4, quickly issued a directive designed to push agencies to meet an Obama administration goal for operating federal websites more efficiently.

While VanRoekel's directive was actually mandated by an Office of Management and Budget (OMB) memo issued last June, the tight deadline he set for compliance by federal agencies indicates the importance he attaches to the administration's federal online reform initiative.

The goal of the federal website reform program is "to improve online services and eliminate wasteful spending by developing a comprehensive and consistent strategy for efficiently managing web resources and assuring that valuable content is readily accessible and available online," VanRoekel says in the directive.

The first step in the program is an OMB order "freezing" the creation of new federal websites. VanRoekel extended the freeze through Dec. 31 "to reinforce the importance of curtailing the proliferation of stand-alone government web sites and infrastructure."

Targeting 1,000 Domains

The U.S. government maintains 2,000 Web addresses (URLs) that support 24,000 sites. The reform initiative sets a goal of reducing the URLs by half by mid-year 2012.

In his directive, VanRoekel sets some ambitious targets for meeting the website reform goal. Agencies must either reduce or redirect to existing sites the number of federal executive branch domains by 25 percent by the end of September. Also, by Sept. 6, agencies must provide an interim progress report with a list of government website domains that are outdated, redundant or underperforming, as well as a list of "redirects" that no longer provide value, or domains that are nonfunctioning and no longer in use.

By Oct. 11, federal agencies must provide a report with an inventory and analysis of all registered dot-gov domain names and an assessment of "web governance." The report must include a list of candidate sites for merger or elimination, a list of sites that provide high value to the public and can serve as models, and a plan for managing websites more efficiently.

A panel of government IT specialists known as the ".Gov Reform Task Force" has been established to assist agencies in meeting the Wweb improvement program goals.

The website reform plan is part of a larger federal program to improve customer relations with the public through various means, including the use of innovative technologies.

"The federal government has a responsibility to streamline and make more efficient its service delivery to better serve the public," President Barack Obama said in kicking off the customer service initiative earlier this year.

The General Services Administration (GSA), which has taken a lead role in improving the use of information technology at the federal level, is taking an active part in the website reform program, partly through its support of the Federal Web Managers Council.

"The Council is very supportive of the website reform effort. We've been calling for agencies to clean up the clutter for many years now," Rachel Flagg, deputy director of the Center for Excellence in Digital Government at GSA, told CRM Buyer. Flagg also serves as a cochair of the Council.

"Streamlining and consolidating websites ... will help the public to more easily find the information and services they need and enable agencies to more effectively manage their online information. It should also save money, if agencies take advantage of their existing Web infrastructure to host their content instead of creating new, stand-alone sites which often require additional servers, content management systems and design services," Flagg said.

GSA already has adopted some of the reforms on its own Web sites. The agency recently deleted redirects for dot-gov domains that yielded fewer than 300 referrals annually. However, GSA kept redirects such as firstgov.gov, a legacy domain that refers hundreds of thousands of users annually to the current domain, USA.gov.

Public and Private Sector Lessons

"Our definition of transparency is that information should be easy to find, it should be available quickly, and it should be easily accessible," Larry Freed, president and CEO of ForeSee, told CRM Buyer. "If anything, the larger aims of the government reform task force will greatly improve transparency because it will address those three core issues." ForeSee is a customer experience analytics firm that works with more than 200 federal government websites.

"This task force won't get us all of the way there, but it is a definite move in the right direction," Freed said.

While the goal of the reform effort is to improve communication, the initiative does pose some challenges.

"The temporary freeze on the issue of new dot-gov domains is unlikely to have much effect on transparency or public access to information," said Daniel Schuman, director of the Advisory Committee on Transparency for the Sunlight Foundation.

"There's a bigger concern with the consolidation of domains, if the consolidation means that information is taken off the Web or becomes more difficult to find," he told CRM Buyer.

"It's generally not the number of websites, but rather their internal structure and the way information is described that's confusing to the public," Schulman explained. "The government needs to make more use of websites like data.gov to share data sets and other types of information that power private sector innovation. The public needs to be empowered to reuse information gathered by the government. All too often, government information is made publicly available in difficult-to-use formats."

The program will not only improve customer contact mechanisms, but also should provide substantial savings.

"Stand-alone domains can cost hundreds of thousands or millions of dollars to maintain," notes VanRoekel's Aug. 4 reform memo. "Although migrating a stand-alone web site to another domain requires an initial investment, consolidating infrastructure and operations can provide significant long-term cost savings."

The website improvement panel is composed of federal Web managers, but the group is open to help from the private sector.

"The Task Force has, in fact, already consulted with some industry experts," said Flagg, "and there are plans to open a public dialogue on this topic very soon. We welcome input and feedback from both industry experts and the general public."

Internet » New Facebook Privacy Tweaks Have a Googley Aftertaste

Facebook has given its users a new set of privacy controls, allowing them greater powers to select who sees what and approve tagged posts. The new features appear somewhat similar to those found in Google+, the social network that could prove to become a major Facebook rival. Facebook's changes have received a nod of approval from some privacy advocates.

In a nod to users who have complained about Facebook's privacy settings for years, the social network announced new, simplified settings Tuesday that allow users to exercise greater control over what information is shared across the network.

Going forward, users can choose a feature called "Profile Tag Review," which would allow them to approve a photo or post in which they're tagged before it hits their profile, or they could simply remove the tag.

The upgrades also make it easier to share tagged photos or posts with specific individuals or groups, much like the Circles feature in rival network Google+.

Those controls, and other privacy settings such as the option to see how a particular individual views your profile, will now appear in a drop-down menu next to the photos and posts for easier access to the security features.

Although users now have the option to refuse a tag, they may have to do so more often -- Facebook also announced that users can now tag anyone, even non-friends, in photos or posts. Early critics worried that option could be used in unintended ways, such as by advertisers or spammers looking for a new way to recruit customers, but Facebook doesn't think that's a concern.

"Something to note is that whenever you're tagged by a non-friend, it will always go into your Pending Posts section of your profile [regardless of whether you've turned on the Profile Tag Review or not]" Meredith Chin, product communications spokesperson at Facebook, told TechNewsWorld.

Facebook also expanded the location-based technology aspect of the site. Now, users will have the option to tag themselves from anywhere, not just a mobile device.

The changes will begin gradually rolling out on Thursday, and once it hits one's profile, the user can be guided through a tour to get a better feel for the updates.

Privacy Report Card

Due to the number of complaints and public relations headaches Facebook's privacy policies have caused it in the past, the company worked with technology privacy advocates to make sure the new settings would receive a warm welcome, and so far they seem to have made a positive impression.

"On the big picture we think these changes look very good. Facebook has been working to develop these for a while and made a real effort to make sure these are intuitive changes for users, that users understand how they work and don't accidentally overshare," Erica Newland, policy analyst at the Center for Democracy & Technology told TechNewsWorld.

One initial concern was the new ability to tag non-friends in photos. Facebook touted the feature as helpful when tagging a photo of a group of co-workers, for example, or acquaintances who may not necessarily be Facebook friends, though there was concern it would become just another way for spammers to work their way into the ecosystem. Since those photos or posts must be approved, though, the user is given a measure of control.

"I think there is some sense to allowing people to tag non-friends. It's Facebook's decision on how to optimize that experience for users, but it's important they're giving users the option to exercise control. That's something users have asked for a while and it's absolutely a step in the right direction," said Newland.

It's a direction many social networks are taking. Since the lines between what is appropriate to share online blur between generations, professions and lifestyles, networks are leaving it up to users to decide just how much of their info they want out there.

"We're happy Facebook is creating a forced choice. That's a very good model for privacy controls, rather than assuming you know what the user wants," said Newland.

Pressure From Plus?

Facebook's new controls are entering the scene around the same time as Google+, the search engine's attempt at a competitor to challenge Mark Zuckerberg's far-and-away leader in social networking 6 Ways to Use Social Media for Business. Free Guide..

After its debut in July, Google+ saw an unprecedented, almost immediate surge of users, and there was speculation it was because of the network's more personalized, controlled sense of privacy and security. In Google+, contacts are divided more naturally into groups, or what the site calls "Circles." Users choose from the onset who is a friend, family member, or co-worker, for instance, and with each post or photo must decide with which Circle they'll share.

The concept is similar to Facebook's changes, but the social network leader says it wasn't modeled after anything in particular.

"We've been working on these changes for the last several months. We're excited to be introducing a lot of changes that people have been requesting," Chin told TechNewsWorld.

The bigger question is not if this was a competitive response, but if all networks treat user information with the concern it deserves as online sharing becomes an inevitable part of the social scene.

"I can't speculate on how the two may have been connected, but what is really clear is that social networks see that privacy is a value for users. In order to attract and retain users, they have to offer controls. It's kind of a maturing of the social networking ecosystem," said Newland.

Computing » It's a Roll of the Dice for Linux Game Makers

The big problem with Linux users is their aversion to paying for anything, said tech analyst Rob Enderle -- so for Humble Bumble's developers to get customers to voluntarily pay for Linux games is in itself pretty amazing. ... The Linux derivative OS, Android, might well be the platform for change when it comes to Linux gamers parting with their cash.

If you had the option to pick your own price for a computer game that only runs on your Linux rig, would you pay to play? Not if you are a typical Linux gamer. At least, that's the popular perception of fans of free and open source software. Linux is available freely. So why pay for a game -- or any other Linux app -- when the FOSS mantra is based on a no-cost buy-in?

The team behind the Humble Bundle set of computer games is trying to buck the notion that Linux users are cheapskates. That company allowed its customers to name their own prices to purchase and download their software. Then they parsed the results by what OS the downloaders used.

Linux users were the most generous when compared to Windows and Mac game players. In fact, Linux users were often willing to pay more than Mac or Windows users when given the chance to name their own price for the for-purchase game software.

"For each of our Humble Bundle promotions, we have seen that on average Linux users are twice as generous -- if not more -- than Windows users, with Mac users falling in the middle. Linux users have also accounted for nearly a quarter of Humble Bundle's revenue," John Graham, cofounder of Humble Bundle, told LinuxInsider.

Vapor Market or Growing Trend?

Humble Bundle's marketing 6 Ways to Use Social Media for Business. Free Guide. success with its pay-what-you-like pricing strategy may be nothing more than an anomaly. But with the rapidly growing popularity of Android, Linux users looking for a unique gaming challenge might be on the vanguard of a new pay-for-Linux marketing trend.

"Despite traditional arguments to the contrary, it is clear to us that there is a serious Linux gaming market out there, and we will continue to support Linux in the future," said Graham.

Some industry insiders who ponder buying and usage trends do not see Graham's pay-for-Linux games' success as anything but a passing fancy.

"Well, pure FOSS PC Linux on the desktop is a pretty small share of the [U.S.] market as far as I can tell, so I think that limits the upside even if it's possible that users would pay more in some cases," said Lewis Ward, IDC's research manager for consumer markets: gaming.

Want to Share?

In a survey conducted in the third quarter of 2010, Ward found only 1 percent of gamers used the Linux platform. That compared to more than 75 percent for the Windows platform and 4 percent for Apple (Nasdaq: AAPL) machines, he told LinuxInsider.

For a game developer who needs a base of users from which to operate, it does not matter how wonderful the platform is, he concluded. "It is just not a large enough base to say, 'I'm going to devote x amount of budget' to develop for a market that is less than 1 percent of the total."

Linux Players Don't Talk Money

Unlike other marketing strategies such as shareware, Linux users are less accepting of paying for software. Open source programs are expected to be free. Free is part and parcel of using Linux. Paying for technical support for a free operating system, however, is different.

"Right now, it looks like Linux users don't really like to pay for anything, and there isn't a vendor doing a general consumer package, which is significantly the potential market anyway," Rob Enderle, principal analyst for the Enderle Group, told LinuxInsider.

The big problem with Linux users is their aversion to paying for anything, he added -- so for Humble Bumble's developers to get customers to pay for Linux games is in itself pretty amazing.

Android Antithesis

That said, a trend in paying for preferred gaming apps might be more productive on Linux-related portable devices. And the Linux derivative OS, Android, might well be the platform for change when it comes to Linux gamers parting with their cash.

"Gaming is all about numbers, and the developers are already building for Windows, iOS and Android," said Enderle.

Even programmers developing games and other apps for Android devices are not assured of having a large paying market, though. And since Android does not run on Linux desktops and laptops, game players might be willing to pay for an Android game but still be tightwads when it comes to a Linux distro equivalent.

Unfortunately, the Android platform, which is closest to Linux, is only providing a return for those who have figured out how to get advertising revenue. Android users do not appear to want to pay for apps, according to Enderle.

Show Me the Money

Unless they are willing to take a gamble, game developers have little incentive to enter the Linux game market. The market needs a strong scent of money for developers to make significant dollars and cents from Linux gamers.

"Until someone can do a Linux-based product that can demonstrate a sustainable revenue model for a game developer," said Enderle, "it is unlikely that it will get much interest by game developers who are already overcommitted and not that happy with the closest derivative, Android."

Who knows? If Linux players show they are willing to pay for games not available anywhere else, it might take off. So far, however, there is no track record for Linux users being willing to pay for games, he maintained.

A Place to Market

A major complaint about the lack of sales among Android app developers, in general, is volume. They can only make about one tenth of what they draw in the App Store. That should not be a big surprise, however. The Android Market is built around the advertising model, according to Enderle.

Still, despite Android's comparatively better market potential for game developers, a Linux-only outlet might pose an attractive opportunity for the right type of game. That advantage could be for those game developers who target Linux users, suggested IDC's Ward.

Still, it just doesn't have enough volume to warrant the necessary expenditures for most game developers, he said.

Roll the Dice

The Linux game market is not lucrative for a major player like an Atari or Activision, but a smaller game company might stumble on a title that will sell a million more than it would have sold otherwise, Enderle noted.

A company could hit the right combination of game and market to provide enough revenue. You have to pick the target market for what it is you want to do, he said.

"I certainly wouldn't recommend tying the state of your company to pure free and open source software on the Linux desktop," said Ward. "If it's inside a browser, or if it has some Java platform so it's completely agnostic in terms of the operating system, then it doesn't matter."

Computing » New Phones, New Carriers, New Lines: Apple's Future Is Wild

As Apple fanatics wait with bated breath for an iPhone 5 announcement, vague reports of a completely new Apple product line bubbled to the surface. Elsewhere, Apple asked iOS developers to give users a little more privacy, and the iPhone may take on yet another U.S. wireless carrier soon.

As the summer draws to a close, Cupertino-watchers grow increasingly anxious for the big announcement proclaiming the iPhone 5's release date. New hardware is almost certainly on the menu, and a new U.S. carrier may join the iPhone family as well. Sprint (NYSE: S) will soon start carrying Apple's (Nasdaq: AAPL) smartphone, according to a report in The Wall Street Journal, which cited unnamed sources.

However, it may still be several weeks before rumors and unconfirmed reports turn into solid dates and product details.

Some Apple hounds were so anxious for news from the company this week that they contemplated vague reports from Asian suppliers that the tech giant could be introducing a gadget line so innovative and ahead of the curve that it could represent and entirely new product line. Reports didn't provide many details but speculated it could be a line of touch-enabled desktop-like computers.

"They're at a point, and a size and scale, where there always seems to be something coming, and the competition always seems to have something coming so they've got to stay ahead," Edward Zabitsky, principal and CEO of ACI Research, told MacNewsWorld.

Financial soothsayers, though, seem more focused on the company's future in areas like cloud offerings and its existing mobile lines.

"What's really happening is that we're moving toward light computing and these OSes that have been optimized and developed for mobile are really OSes for interface with the cloud. So over a long period of time they'll be migrating these light OSes -- that's the direction the industry is moving," said Zabitsky.

With the focus on the cloud, in particular its upcoming iCloud offering, Apple can really dig into its loyal, core user base to generate revenue and a truly streamlined product and consumer foundation.

"Apple is really focusing on the iCloud and Apple Me products. Apple can offer a free e-mail system, and I think people would rush up to have @me.com addresses. This is where it's headed, and it can be a pretty big thing," Hendi Susanto, analyst at Gabelli, told MacNewsWorld.

Apple did not respond to a request for comment.

Privacy, Please

As for iPhones, Apple hasn't revealed when customers can start lining up for their upgrades, but it did make one announcement regarding changes to the iOS platform when it debuts. Apple asked developers to refrain from using a Unique Device Identifier (UDID) when creating iOS 5 apps.

The UDID is used in multiple apps, usually involving ads and gaming, and can allow a developer or a third party to collect personal data about the user. That data can be helpful for developers as they broaden their apps and personalize ads or games for certain demographics, but many users have voiced their opposition to what they see as a personal invasion.

That access to information has led to PR headaches that apparently just aren't worth it moving forward, so it's asked developers not to include the data in upcoming apps.

As consumers become more focused on online security and preventing data theft, that practice may become the industry standard.

"Once you put GPS on a device and you build a platform to use the GPS, there are always people who will misuse it. We're becoming more sophisticated, not just the market but the handset vendors. It's just something that needs to be corrected. It's not an Apple-specific problem, but providing an interface with GPS is a dangerous kind of thing with a few developers," said Zabitsky.

Since privacy concerns exist across the board, this probably won't lead to an exodus of developers flocking to different platforms.

"I don't think it's going to result in any dent because I do think that other companies like Google (Nasdaq: GOOG) will also follow suit and this will still be an equal playing field," Susanto said.

Product Rumors

Whispers about the iPhone 5's release date remain focused on October. Since networks' high-speed 4G LTE technology started making its way onto the scene, the idea has been tossed around that the iPhone 5 will be the first Apple phone with 4G connectivity. Some reports have indicated that suppliers confirmed the company was testing with 4G networks, but as the release date draws closer, it seems less likely the iPhone 5 will come equipped with LTE.

"Apple always wants to be leading edge, but not bleeding edge. Their standard of quality is that you need 10 hours of battery life, and obviously those radios could cause a power drain. Apple, for now, it appears, have sought to side with caution making sure that the technology is up to their standards. It's a tradeoff," said Zabitsky.

Another product that is likely being held off so as not to compromise quality is the iPad 3. A while back, rumors suggested Apple's next tablet would be on shelves for the holidays, and although there were rumors it entered production this week, it probably won't be available for consumers until after the holiday rush.

"I think that the current Apple supply chains still couldn't meet a high production yield, specifically for displays, because Apple wants to provide a much higher resolution for its new iPad. It might be pushed to early next year," said Susanto.

Computing » Fighting the Good Global Cybercrime Fight: Q&A With Security Guru Mikko Hypponen, Part 2

"First, back up! It should be off-site, whether in the cloud or in a removable disk that you take to your grandmother's house. It doesn't have to be daily, either -- for most home users, a backup from last month is good enough. Failing that, though, if something happens, you'll lose a part of your life."

Mikko Hypponen has spent the past 20-plus years studying malicious software, including everything from "Brain" -- the first PC virus, dating back to 1986 -- all the way up to Stuxnet and today's most sophisticated global malware.

He's widely considered one of the world's foremost experts on information security, and he's played a key role in taking down numerous international rings of cybercriminals.

TechNewsWorld recently had a chance to speak with Hypponen about his views on the need for a new model of law enforcement in order to fight global cybercrime effectively. That discussion is presented in Part 1 of this two-part series.

Given the ongoing debate about the relative merits of the various operating systems and platforms when it comes to security, however, we asked him to share his thoughts on that topic as well.

TechNewsWorld: It seems the majority of malware targets Windows. Do you think that's just because of its ubiquity, or is there also something about the technology that's weaker?

Mikko Hypponen: It's a complicated issue. If we separate computers and smartphones, we have computers running Windows, OS X and Linux on one side, and we see much the same spread on the smartphone side with Windows Phone, iOS and Android.

On the computer side, Windows gets almost all the attacks, but on the smartphone side, it's Android that is getting hammered. Windows, meanwhile, doesn't get targeted at all on the phone side.

It's really not a fair comparison, though, because it's mostly about market share. We find more computer malware every day, but it's unfair to consider Windows as one group. In fact, we really have Windows XP, Vista and Windows 7.

Of the three different versions of Windows, OS X and Linux, Windows XP is definitely the least safe. It's 11 years old, and it also has the biggest market share, with 50 percent globally -- Win 7 has just 20 to 23 percent.

Attackers have never had it so good. Not only is XP the weakest, but it's also the most popular. Attackers have low-hanging fruit to enjoy as long as there is such a huge target.

TNW: How would you compare Mac vs. Linux vs. Windows for their ability to prevent or mitigate attacks? Which would you recommend?

Hypponen: For the average beginner user, I'd recommend a Mac. It's easy -- easier to maintain than Linux, and the likelihood of getting infected is much lower than with Windows. Macs represent just three to four percent of the market globally.

But any feeling of superiority for Mac or Linux users is not the right attitude. They also have problems with phishing and spam -- those target everyone.

TNW: How would you compare open source vs. proprietary software in general in this context?

Hypponen: The truth is that pretty much nobody looks at source code and tries to find bugs. In that way, the 'theory of many eyes' doesn't work.

What is the big difference with open source software, however, is that when any vulnerabilities are found, anybody can fix it. When the code is closed, on the other hand, only the vendor can fix it.

We see open source apps getting targeted all the time, such as Firefox and Chrome. So do Flash plug-ins, etc. The practical differences aren't that large, but with open source, the fixes are generally available much faster.

TNW: For greatest security, which operating system should a person use?

Hypponen: For beginners, I'd recommend a Mac, as I said. For expert users, though, I'd say some Linux distribution, or if you prefer Windows, 64-bit Win 7. There is a big difference between the 32-bit model and 64-bit Windows, such as in loading drivers.

Of course, if you really want to split hairs, you could argue that the version of Windows inside the Microsoft (Nasdaq: MSFT) Xbox 360 is the most secure. The only networking is encrypted IP6, for example.

Of course, it's not really a fair comparison, since it's inside a console. Win Phone is also very secure, but it's also much more closed.

TNW: What other steps do you recommend to keep users' computers and data safe?

Hypponen: First, back up! It should be off-site, whether in the cloud or in a removable disk that you take to your grandmother's house. It doesn't have to be daily, either -- for most home users, a backup from last month is good enough. Failing that, though, if something happens, you'll lose a part of your life.

Also, make sure you're up to date with the latest version of the software, regardless of the operating system you use.

If you're on Windows, run an antivirus and use a separate firewall. If you're on a laptop and use WiFi hotspots, make sure you have some kind of VPN.

Say you're working at Starbucks (Nasdaq: SBUX). I recommend using VPN even if you're just using Facebook, simply for the encryption. Then it doesn't matter if someone else in the coffee shop is snooping. Home users, especially, tend to ignore this completely.

Finally, especially if you're on Windows, make sure you're really running an antivirus, and don't just think you are. It's become a standard feature for malware, if it manages to bypass your antivirus one time, to uninstall it and replace it with something else.

So, just because you installed some antivirus software half a year ago, don't assume it's still working. Double-check to make sure it works and that it's still updating.