Tech News » Can Yahoo Escape the Valley of the Dulls?

Carol Bartz has been fired from her role as CEO of Yahoo, but the company itself remains face-to-face with an identity crisis. Its collection of Web properties is large and in some cases well-loved, but the pieces rarely fit together as well as those of rivals like Google. Meanwhile, AT&T mulls its options, Groupon thinks long and hard about its IPO, and a judge adds a new chapter to the Oracle-SAP feud.

When the end of her stint as Yahoo (Nasdaq: YHOO) CEO came for Carol Bartz, it arrived via a phone call from the company's chairman. That's what she told employees in a profanity-free, company-wide email when she learned the news.

Bartz was fired after nearly three years as Yahoo's chief executive, having failed to turn around the once-great Internet company, which has been declining for years while rivals like Google (Nasdaq: GOOG) have been on a decade-long tear.

Following a string of ineffective leaders and a nasty fight with Microsoft (Nasdaq: MSFT) that almost resulted in a hostile takeover, Yahoo signed on Bartz to revive the company's revenue stream. Months after taking office back in January of 2009, she landed a search engine deal with Microsoft. It was a much smaller deal than the wholesale buyout Microsoft had been gunning for the previous year, and even though it promised long-term benefits for Yahoo, it initially made shareholders gag.

Since then, the company's had an AOL-like identity crisis. Yahoo's still a giant email provider, it owns some popular sites like Flickr, and it's still a contender in search market share, even though Bing seems to be edging it out lately. But over the past few years, Yahoo has looked sluggish and unwilling to take risks. Its deals and maneuvers just don't seem to make much noise at all, whereas competitors like Google have been busy building new online services -- and even entire operating systems in major growth areas like smartphones.

Google's lately proven it's very comfortable slaughtering its own innovations, but at least it's making them in the first place.

Listen to the podcast (11:38 minutes).

That's not to say Bartz's inability to restore Yahoo's youthful vigor in less than three years necessarily makes her a particularly bad CEO. Even the company's cofounder, Jerry Yang, who served as CEO immediately before Bartz, couldn't get much going in his time behind the wheel. Same with the guy before that, Terry Semel. Bartz didn't blow an easy job; she was just the most recent in a chain of CEOs who couldn't get the company's broad mishmash of properties and services to align into something exciting and innovative.

Now, Yahoo's board is reportedly looking into all options -- buy, sell, partner or even a combination of all three. Maybe lop off the search arm and sell it to Microsoft completely? Or maybe it can do something with that 40 percent of Alibaba it owns.

Yahoo CFO Tim Morse will take the wheel as interim CEO, but whoever Yahoo hires as a full-time replacement might need to be a little crazy. This person may need to make some kind of extraordinary cut, or a huge acquisition. There could be a lot of lost jobs, spent money and huge fights with the board and shareholders before anything remarkable happens with Yahoo.

And "remarkable" doesn't necessary mean "good," either. Whoever's next in line could stand out only for guiding Yahoo into a failure the likes of which we've never seen before. Or not. Maybe there's a rare visionary out there whose gamble will pay off. But the alternative -- to just keep walking and breathing and blinking while the rest of the Internet world speeds on by and crashes and burns and sometimes takes off into sky -- that sounds like it could be the strategy most likely make Yahoo fade into nothing.
One at Your Door ...

AT&T (NYSE: T) still thinks it has a shot at saving its proposed deal to buy out rival wireless carrier T-Mobile, despite the lawsuit the U.S. Department of Justice has filed to prevent the merger on antitrust grounds.

And even though that suit apparently took AT&T totally by surprise, the DoJ isn't completely hell-bent on stopping the deal cold -- maybe. At a news conference, a DoJ official remarked that the department's door is open, and that there's a possibility its concerns can be resolved. So maybe a settlement can be reached.

So what can AT&T do to keep the dream alive? Well, many of the DoJ's concerns have to do with consumer choice and pricing for wireless services. T-Mobile sometimes offers lower-priced plans than AT&T or its other big rival, Verizon, so perhaps AT&T can promise to keep the brand's price points intact for a certain amount of time.

Or it could promise to offload some T-Mobile stock.

Or get the public on its side -- figure out a way to convince consumers that a combined AT&T and T-Mobile would make for a happier, shinier world with better wireless prices and greater investment in services. It might even dust off that job-creation angle it was trying to stir up last week, though that one might be a little counterproductive. Telling the world that a merger of two gigantic companies will result in a net increase in jobs tends to nauseate anyone who's ever been laid off following a buyout.

Or AT&T could just go for the bloodbath and fight out the DoJ's lawsuit in court. That might cost a lot of time and pain, but a victory would mean the deal would go down AT&T's way, with no uncomfortable compromises. And even though DoJ has a valid case against the buyout, it's by no means an easy win.
... and Another Around the Corner

If AT&T somehow manages to solve its DoJ problem, one way or another, it's still going to have to deal with another lawsuit, this one filed by rival carrier Sprint (NYSE: S).

Sprint's lawsuit articulates most of the same arguments the company's been talking about ever since the deal was announced: higher prices, duopoly, harm to other carriers and so on.

Sprint's in a particularly uncomfortable situation right now with the possibility of this merger hanging over its head, and it seems it felt the urge to hedge its bets in case AT&T should win or settle the DoJ suit.

If the deal goes through, AT&T is the big winner, T-Mobile more or less ceases to exist, and Verizon loses its position as the biggest carrier in the U.S. but probably doesn't feel very much pain.

Sprint's the one that will feel the pinch. It's tiny compared to the top two rivals now, and it'll be even tinier if one of them swallows a competitor. Sprint's argument is that AT&T's move would be like an elephant, a rhinoceros and a chihuahua trying to share a studio apartment.
On Second Thought ...

Last Spring, when companies like LinkedIn and Pandora were pulling the trigger on their IPOs, there was a lot of talk about who was going to be next. Social game-maker Zynga is on the road to public trading already, and for a while there was some very excited talk about Twitter and eventually Facebook.

Groupon wasn't left out of the conversation either, especially since it had the sass to turn down Google's offer to buy it out for $6 billion late last year.

Sure enough, Groupon filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for an initial public offering, but what's happened since then has reportedly caused Groupon to reconsider whether it really wants to jump into the public realm right now.

First of all, the market's been seriously shaken over the last few weeks. For a while, problems in Europe and the U.S. debt ceiling showdown sent Wall Street into an almost daily cycle of boom and bust. It's calmed down now, but nerves are still frayed, and some potential investors may feel it's not an ideal time to bring a new public company into the world.

Secondly, Groupon's own actions have caused some anxiety as well. It's reportedly struggled with the SEC over the method of accounting it used when filing its S1 statement, a document companies need to hand over to the commission when they're prepping to go public.

Then there was the matter of the memo Groupon CEO Andrew Mason wrote to his employees over some of the flack the company's taken lately. He expressed in great detail all the reasons he's very confident in Groupon's success. Officially, the memo was intended only for Groupon's employees, which doesn't violate the obligatory quiet period companies must undergo before they go public. During that time, a company's highly restricted in what it can publicly state. Mason's memo would have been a direct violation of that rule, except for the fact that it was only sent to Groupon employees. Of course, the reason everyone knows about it is because AllThingsD published it after it was leaked ... somehow.

That letter was actually written in response to some pretty biting criticism of Groupon's business model, which the company's endured for a long time, but even more so since it announced its intentions to go public. The basis for that criticism still stands, and that may be one of the biggest factors contributing to Groupon's reported IPO delay.

Specifically, Groupon's business is really easy to copy. It doesn't take a great deal of resources to launch your own online coupon company, and already competitors are coming out of the woodwork. Living Social has been around for a relatively long time, Facebook does it, Amazon (Nasdaq: AMZN) does it, and Google whipped up something of its own just months after Groupon turned it down. Some focus entirely on one town, some are all about a specific kind of product. Groupon's more general, it has wide reach and a certain amount of brand recognition -- but without profits or a unique approach to the business, going public right now might end in disaster.
Shall We Go Another Round?

The bad blood between Oracle (Nasdaq: ORCL) and SAP (NYSE: SAP) just got badder, if such a thing were possible. A judge has overturned the record $1.3 billion penalty that SAP was ordered to pay Oracle last year. At the time, it was the largest amount of damages ever awarded to a plaintiff in a single copyright case.

SAP is still considered guilty of copyright infringement for its little TomorrowNow fiasco -- it's already admitted to wrongdoing in court. But Judge Phyllis Hamilton ruled that there's no way Oracle suffered $1.3 billion worth of pain due to the SAP subsidiary's theft. She knocked the amount SAP must pay all the way down to the much more manageable sum of $272 million. That's still a big chunk of money, but it no doubt comes as a relief to SAP.

The Oracle and SAP family feud goes way back, and the trial that initially led to that $1.3 billion penalty was a bitter and tense ordeal. HP (NYSE: HPQ) was even pulled into the mess when Oracle insisted that HP's newly installed CEO, Leo Apotheker, should take the stand and testify about the TomorrowNow incident, considering he was once the head of SAP. But Apotheker was apparently nowhere to be found. He was in hiding, which is an odd place to be for a guy who was just named captain of one of the biggest hardware makers in the world.

Incidentally, Apotheker came to HP to replace Mark Hurd, who'd been squeezed out following a scandal involving a female contractor and bogus expense claims. Just as soon as he was out, though, Hurd found employment in the open arms of Oracle.

Despite the judge's billion-dollar reduction in SAP's penalty, Oracle doesn't have to take the judgment lying down. If it thinks it's owed more than the new $272 million figure, it can take SAP to trial again, and there's a good chance it'll go ahead and do just that. It's already established that SAP's defunct TomorrowNow division did something wrong, and it could come back with a more detailed explanation of how much it suffered.

Also, Oracle just seems to get a kick out of causing misery for SAP whenever possible.

Tech News » Scan: A Neat Way to Solve the Mysteries of QR Codes

Even if you don't know what they are, you probably see a few QR codes every time you leave home. They're those pixelated boxes that look like overgrown bar codes, and with the right reader -- typically a smartphone app -- they can take to you websites, send you messages, or just clue you in on your surroundings. There are lots of QR readers for iPhone out there, but one of the better of the bunch is called "Scan."

Scan, an app from QR Code City, is available for free at the App Store.
As you are out and about, walking around the world, if you ever bother to look up from the screen on your iPhone, you've probably seen a QR code -- a black and white square with three ringed black squares in the corners and a bunch of seemingly random white and black pixels scattered all over it. They look like pixelated bar codes almost.


QR stands for quick response, and the senseless little black picture is a code that can store a Web page URL or short text message. If you have a scanning app on your smartphone, you can point it at a QR code and instantly launch yourself into a website or view the secret message.

You can find QR codes in special marketing mailings, on posters in or flyers in stores, and you can even find them on baseball caps and t-shirts. I've been checking out QR readers lately, mostly out of curiosity than any real need or interest in getting a special deal on a dinner or some percentage off of a product that I probably don't need anyway. For me, QR codes are about potential because some day, I might run into a QR code in a situation where I do want that marketing message, the special deal, or to just figure out why guys are laughing at the goofy dude with the QR code tattooed on his forehead.

Point and Scan

If you search the Apple (Nasdaq: AAPL) App Store for "QR reader," you'll get a lot of results. There are plenty of apps to choose from. Personally, I like the basic, no-frills interface of Scan by QR Code City, which is free. Basically, when you launch the app, you'll see that the main screen shows a view from the camera on your iPhone, and if you have an iPhone 4, you can use a button to turn on your LCD flash to help illuminate a QR code in dim light -- quite handy if you're in a bar or restaurant at night.

To get the QR code to scan, point your camera at the code and try to line up the box within the obvious "frame" on your screen. In my experience, Scan was able to quickly read the QR code, usually well before I had the code lined up particularly well. In fact, Scan was able to read some codes even at odd compound angles.

So Many Possibilities

I mentioned that QR codes can show you textual content and lead you to websites, but they are even smarter than that. Marketers can create QR codes that get your phone ready to send a text message, email message, or allow you to import contact details for those guys who think QR codes on business cards are cool.

You can even create a location on a map, and once someone scans the QR code, they can launch into that location in Google (Nasdaq: GOOG) Maps.

And by "you," I truly mean that you can use QR codes, too. There are several websites online that let you generate QR codes on the fly via simple Web browser. QRStuff.com lets you create more than a dozen kinds of QR codes -- and then have them printed out on a t-shirt or coffee mug, if you so desire. Or you can play with their online tool and use your iPhone to scan instantly created codes directly from your computer screen. It's a good way to familiarize yourself with the sorts of QR codes that you might run into.

There's another site called SmartyTags.com that lets you create QR codes, and if you pay attention, you'll realize that if you create an account, you can "track" your QR code. The create a code page notes, "A free account allows you to track when users scan your code, what kind if device they used, and even where they were when they scanned it."

What? You can track how codes are used? Interesting. Now you know why QR codes are getting such play as a new marketing mechanism for advertisers.

Of course, QR codes aren't just for advertisers. Some magazine publishers give readers quick access to special content, and sometimes the QR codes you run into people wearing are just special quotations or jokes. I would imagine that some guys use them as quirky pickup lines for geek-savvy girls while they are hanging out at local Apple Stores. (Note to self: This might not be such a bad idea, though we'll probably see it happen as a scene in some movie or TV show soon.)

What About Security?

QR codes are not inherently secure, and they can be created by hackers. Consequently, you'll want to think before you scan. Can you trust the source? Is scanning the code worth any potential risk? Is the QR code actually a sticker? If it's a paper sticker stuck on the surface of something, maybe it's not the original QR code at all, but an impostor code. This happens. Wikipedia.org has an entry about QR codes, and the bottom, it talks a bit about the security risks. Check it out.

Meanwhile, there's a feature built into Scan that you'll want to enable: In Settings, under Websites there is an "Ask Before Opening" toggle switch. Slide it to On. Next time you scan a website, Scan will show you the destination URL. If it looks fishy, you can decide not to automatically load the Web page.

Other features include the ability to create a login so you can maintain a big history or your scans. It might be handy if you go crazy and start scanning everything you see.

All-in-One Options

In addition to dedicated QR code reader apps, some apps do double-duty or have been upgraded to now include the ability to scan QR codes. I've used RedLaser, for example, to scan barcodes from product packages while I've been in retail stores. Most recently I scanned the barcode on a fan to see what it might cost online as well as to see if I could find any customer reviews on it. I learned immediately that my local price, right in front of me, was only a dollar more than my preferred online retail outlet and that reviews were generally good. Nice.

The point is two-fold: 1) Pick a QR reader and download it to your iPhone. I like Scan, but there are others. 2) Next time you run into a what might be a cool QR code, you'll have the app you need to scan it.

Tech News » Linux and the Giant Breach

"Cause for concern? Yes, but there's no reason to believe that kernel sources were compromised; such a change would be easily detected with diff," said Hyperlogos blogger Martin Espinoza. "I'd sure like someone to show me a 100 percent secure, internet-connected computer... ."

Security scares are so commonplace in the tech industry today that it's virtually impossible to keep track of them all. Security scares in the Linux world, however, are still rare enough as to cause at least a small collective gasp of consternation.

That, indeed, is just what happened recently when it was discovered that the Kernel.org site had been breached last month.

"Earlier this month, a number of servers in the kernel.org infrastructure were compromised," read the note that was later posted on Kernel.org. "We discovered this August 28th. While we currently believe that the source code repositories were unaffected, we are in the process of verifying this and taking steps to enhance security across the kernel.org infrastructure."

It's since become pretty clear that the site's source code repositories remained intact, thanks largely to Linus Torvalds' Git distributed revision control system. Nevertheless, Torvalds himself last week temporarily moved Linux development to GitHub, and Linux fans around the globe are still shaking off the slight chill that resulted from the scare.

'Not That Big a Deal'

"Seriously people, this is big," wrote Mensa Babe on one of several Slashdot threads on the topic. "I really mean totally freaking big. Thanks to the open source nature of the kernel it is trivial to add a rootkit and make a new tarball. If the attackers were worth their salt then they should do exactly that."

On the other hand, "this security breach is not that big a deal," countered bzipitidoo. "Yes, it is embarrassing for kernel.org, but the damage is not that great. Sure, we'd all like to prevent security breaches from ever happening in the first place, but I have always thought detection and recovery is more important than prevention. Kernel.org has that covered in spades."

Indeed, according to another Slashdot post, the kernel attackers apparently didn't even really "know what they had."

Whatever the case, however, discussion of the event has extended to blogs and forums around the globe; Linux Girl's Quick Quotes Quill has never been so tired.

'Not the End of Linux by Any Means'

"Cause for concern? Yes, but there's no reason to believe that kernel sources were compromised; such a change would be easily detected with diff," Hyperlogos blogger Martin Espinoza asserted, for example.

"I'd sure like someone to show me a 100 percent secure, internet-connected computer...," Espinoza added.

Similarly, "of course this is a serious concern but it's not the end of Linux by any means," agreed blogger Robert Pogson.

"I expect procedures on the servers will be tightened up to prevent/detect a recurrence," Pogson added. "Sometimes it takes a failure to provoke positive changes."

Meanwhile, "the ability of Linus to switch to GitHub running software that he wrote shows the tremendous adaptability of FLOSS," Pogson said.

'This Should Improve Confidence'

Barbara Hudson, a blogger on Slashdot who goes by "Tom" on the site, took a similar view.

"A developer's remote machine co-located on the same network was compromised, their password sniffed, and used to do some monkey business on the kernel servers," Hudson told Linux Girl. "In the end, it looks like no permanent damage was done, and that the existing people, procedures and infrastructure are robust enough to recover cleanly."

In fact, "this should improve, not reduce, confidence in the Linux development process," Hudson opined.

'All Security Is a Balancing Act'

While some are "using the occasion to go into histrionics by characterizing this as a 'surprising failure,' it's not surprising," Hudson added. "It's the nature of networks, and especially of the Internet."

The fact is that "all security is a balancing act, not an absolute," she explained. "The only way to completely avoid these sorts of things is to implement so many security measures that nothing else ever gets done.

"Or unplug the computers ... which defeats the whole purpose of using computers in the first place, unless you like owning an expensive doorstop," Hudson concluded.

'Security Is About Risk Management'

"Perfect security is impossible," agreed Chris Travers, a Slashdot blogger who works on the LedgerSMB project. "A determined attacker who is knowledgeable and capable cannot be stopped by any sorts of defenses."

Security, then, "is about risk management, not about preventing all conceivable attacks," Travers explained. "The fact that this has happened is a big deal but it is also to some extent something that will happen from time to time. The downloads need to be checked, etc., and this may be ongoing."

Ultimately, "what is important here is that there are layered defenses against the source code repos themselves being tampered with," he added. "Linux has good multilayered defenses here, and so this is not a major issue for Git-based projects.

"So, without knowing more, I don't see a reason to be concerned at present," Travers concluded.

'It All Comes Down to Time'

"There is NO SUCH THING as a perfectly secured site, period," echoed Slashdot blogger hairyfeet. "If you can get to it from the net it can be hacked; the only question is how much time will it take and will the admins notice the attempt before they get in."

The past year, in fact, has seen attacks on organizations "from governments to security firms," hairyfeet noted, so "what makes the kernel guys any better? Linux isn't magical, it is an OS. All OSes are extremely complex and nobody knows every inch of them."

The bottom line, then, is that "it all comes down to time, what software they are running, and a little luck," hairyfeet concluded. "It doesn't make them bad, or make the OS lousy, it is just a flaw, flaws get fixed. I'm sure they minimized the damage and restored from a good backup as is sound security practice."

Tech News » Passion Is the Thin Line Between Success and Failure

Passion is infectious. Passion drives folks like Jobs and Gates to ensure the product is successful. Passion overwhelms the desire to overfocus on containing budgets, and it guarantees that enough resources are provided to make success almost a foregone conclusion. Ballmer is clearly not a tech toy or PC guy; it isn't even clear if anyone at Yahoo, let alone Bartz, really knows what Yahoo's product is.

Carol Bartz got fired last week -- the Yahoo (Nasdaq: YHOO) Board handled it badly, and she went ugly. Steve Ballmer is also seen as a failure both inside and outside Microsoft (Nasdaq: MSFT), and it is widely held that the only reason he hasn't been fired is that he and his best friend, Bill Gates, own the Microsoft Board.

On an even larger scale, President Obama's approval ratings indicate that if the U.S. could "Bartz" (yes her name is now a verb meaning "to fire over the phone") him, we would. On the other hand, Steve Jobs left Apple (Nasdaq: AAPL) voluntarily and Apple's investors, employees and customers would do almost anything to get him to come back.

The Bartz-Jobs contrast is very sharp, but it showcases a choice that both Ballmer and Obama, or whoever eventually replaces them, could make to be successful -- a choice that AMD's (NYSE: AMD) board may have actually made correctly (I'll get to that at the end). It has a lot to do with that magic word "passion" and that's what I'll look at this week.

I'll close with my product of the week, one of my favorite software products, Corel (Nasdaq: CORL) PaintShop Pro X4.

Succeeding as CEO

You know, there are actually formal courses on how to be a CEO. The reason I know this is IBM (NYSE: IBM) put me through the program while I was there, and I'm sure other older firms have similar programs. I've since spent a lot of time studying both successful and failed CEOs while having the honor of advising a number of them.

What I find particularly fascinating is that boards, even when they are made up of experienced members, don't seem to really know what to look for in a CEO, and mistakes like those that were made with Bartz and Ballmer are common.

Ironically, on paper, both Bartz and Ballmer look better than Steve Jobs does. Were Jobs not an Apple founder, I'll bet even Apple's own board would have taken either over Jobs if given that choice back in the '90s. Remember, they hand-picked Gil Amelio before Jobs, and they only got Jobs because Amelio bought Jobs' company NeXT. Amelio looks very similar to a Bartz or a Ballmer on paper, but he didn't do well at Apple. He didn't do well at all -- there was no passion.

Compare that video to this one of Jobs when asked about going after market share. Here is another video that showcases Jobs' passion. Here is a video from an earlier time at Microsoft, and then today. This goes to the core of the problem. The very aspects of Steve Jobs that made him a legendary CEO -- aspects largely mirrored in Bill Gates himself ( who actually made a bigger impact) -- are not valued by the people selecting CEOs. This creates a problem not only in the selection, but also when it comes to growing the new CEO into the job.

Boards, often made up of experienced CEOs, are generally ineffective as well. Part of the problem is that folks like Jobs and Gates are exceptions on boards, and another part of the problem is that they often don't recognize the aspects of themselves that make them successful. Instead, they may feel somewhat inadequate because they don't have the degrees and breadth of experiences folks like Ballmer and Bartz have.

So what makes folks like Jobs and Gates Different? In a word: Passion!

Passion for Product

You see, most CEOs think the job is about meeting with investors, keeping subordinates on budget, and schmoozing with major customers. For most, it seems to be largely about maximizing their compensation while minimizing their commitment. As long as they can say product buzzwords and keep acronyms straight, they are good.

But folks like Bill Gates, and particularly Steve Jobs, have a passion for products. In fact, with Steve, you can see a huge difference between the products he cared a great deal about -- like the iPhone -- vs. those he really didn't, like Apple TV. Even for these stars, products that they don't have much interest in do poorly. Hired CEOs like Bartz and Ballmer tend to have more Apple TVs and few, if any, iPhones. Or put differently, if they were handed a billion dollars and told to start a company, the one they are running would be nowhere near the top of their list.

Passion is infectious. Passion drives folks like Jobs and Gates to ensure the product is successful. Passion overwhelms the desire to overfocus on containing budgets, and it guarantees that enough resources are provided to make success almost a foregone conclusion. Ballmer is clearly not a tech toy or PC guy; it isn't even clear if anyone at Yahoo, let alone Bartz, really knows what Yahoo's product is. The Huffington Post is a good example of a Yahoo-like company that has passion at the top (at least before AOL bought it).

For folks like Jobs, Gates and even Huffington, it isn't being CEO that is important -- it is the pleasure of defining the product, and this passion drives the related CEOs to excellence. If you think about it, though, the best generals (Patton, for instance) love battles -- they don't love being generals. The best chefs don't love running kitchens -- they love cooking masterpieces. And the best presidents love driving their unique agenda -- they don't love the job.

Funny thing is, I predicted Obama would likely fail for this very reason back in 2009 and suggested he look to Steve Jobs for a lesson on passion.

Message to Bartz, Ballmer, Obama and Other Potential CEOs and Presidents

Here is the deal. Find something you have a passion for, and use that passion to drive success. If Ballmer had a passion for PCs, smartphones and tablets, they would have succeeded. If he wants to be a successful CEO, he needs to find -- or found (he is very wealthy) -- a company that creates something he is passionate about. Microsoft clearly isn't that company, and he'll continue to starve Microsoft to death, or continue to force folks who have passion out of the company (Bob Muglia now at Juniper Networks) because he'll see them as threats -- and they will be, because they'll see Ballmer as an obstacle.

Bartz should have never taken the job at Yahoo because she clearly had no interest in a Web property; bad mouthing the board (which also made a bad choice) doesn't fix that. She needs to take ownership and learn from her mistake.

Obama made a lot of passionate promises when he ran for president. It is clear that either his passion has significantly waned -- or he really didn't have it in the first place, which is why he is failing. If healthcare was important to him, he wouldn't have let Nancy Pelosi create the nightmare Obamacare has become. He will lose because he is increasingly seen as a gutless wonder now. In short, if he doesn't find his passion, he'll follow Jimmy Carter (not an uncommon comparison) as a one-term president. It may already be too late. Cutting taxes won't secure re-election, but giving a crap might.

Wrapping Up: Finding Passion

One final point: It was clear Bill Gates lost his passion in the late '90s, and he set an example by changing jobs to do something he is passionate about. He is happier, and he is more successful than he would have been had he not made the change. Perhaps it is his example -- not Jobs' -- which the others should emulate. People don't follow leaders who have no passion about where they are trying to lead, and folks who have a passion for something find failure unacceptable.

And that, my friends, is why folks who don't have passion often fail -- because they do find failure acceptable. They are just doing a job. I think that is why Obama will be a one-term president as well; he has lost his passion. The guy who ran isn't the guy holding the job.

In the end, that's the magic that I think separates a Carol Bartz from a Steve Jobs. If boards like Yahoo's take this passion message to heart, they'll likely find that they will be more successful with selecting their next CEO. And if they don't, well take a look at Yahoo's board for the likely outcome, and wish them good luck with their next job. You know, as I come to a close, AMD's board may have gotten it right. If you look at this rare video of their new CEO, Rory Read (whom I got a chance to chat with last month), you get an idea that passion might have been at the core of their selection criteria.

By the way, this is something to think about in your own job, if you don't love what you are doing, find something you do love. You'll be better at it and happier as well, and I know this from personal experience.

Product of the Week: Corel PaintShop Pro X4

Speaking of passion, PaintShop is one of those little known products that have a passionate user base. It is an amazing offering that has many of the features of Adobe (Nasdaq: ADBE) Photoshop, but it is nowhere near as expensive or as hard to use.

Corel PaintShop Pro X4

I was a professional photographer for a while, and it still is a bit of a secret passion, though not one I have the time to indulge in often. The nice thing about PaintShop, though, is if you take a day with this product, you can easily reach semi-pro skills and do some amazing things with pictures, the same level of competence with Photoshop might take a week or more.


That's why a lot of pros actually prefer PaintShop Pro; they want to be out taking pictures -- not taking technical classes to keep up on complex tools. The other thing about PaintShop, and the reason I picked the new 4th-generation product: The Corel group that makes it has a passion for the product. You can see this passion when they demo it. They can tie each new feature back to an actual customer request and the request actually makes sense, which is rather unusual in my line of work. Much more common are features that leave you wondering just what the vendor was thinking. Corel sent me a free demo to play with, and I'm impressed.

So, if you are into photos, check out PaintShop Pro X4. It is made by a group of folks who actually give a crap about their products -- and I know a few CEOs who could learn a thing or two from them.

Security » Can an Anti-Child Porn Bill Go Too Far?

As written, the bill H.R. 1981 aims to stamp out child pornography with new penalties and enforcement powers. So how can anyone in their right mind oppose it? Civil liberties and privacy rights groups, however, say the bill's provisions go much too far in tracking and storing information about all Internet users. They also say child porn traders will respond to the law by simply using public WiFi networks.

H.R. 1981, a U.S. federal bill which apparently seeks to combat child pornography, has stirred up opposition from various lawmakers as well as civil rights groups.

The proposed law, introduced in May and now under consideration in Congress, is the joint creation of Rep. Lamar Smith, R-Texas, chairman of the Judiciary Committee; and Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, D-Fla., who chairs the Democratic National Committee. It has 24 sponsors.

The bill seeks to make it a federal crime to fund the sale, distribution and purchase of child pornography and to increase the maximum penalty for certain child pornography offenses.

It's supported by the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, the National Center for Victims of Crime, the National Sheriff's Association, the Major County Sheriff's Association, the International Union of Police Associations, and the Fraternal Order of Police.

The bill's title is "The Protecting Children From Internet Pornographers Act of 2011." Judging the bill by its cover, it's difficult to image who in the world would oppose such an idea. However, groups such as the Electronic Frontier Foundation, the Center for Democracy and Technology, the Electronic Privacy Information Center, and several members of Congress including Rep. Zoe Lofgren, D-Calif., have spoken out against certain aspects of the bill.

Other opponents include Republican Bob Barr, a former congressman from Georgia, and Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner, R-Wis., who is one of the authors of the REAL ID Act. That act establishes federal standards for state-issued drivers' licenses and other identification, among other things.

What H.R. 1981 Seeks to Do

The aims of H.R. 1981 include more tightly defining acts related to child pornography and increasing the punishment for those convicted of child porn.

For example, it proposes that whoever financially facilitates access to child porn will be fined or imprisoned for up to 20 years, or both.

The bill also seeks to provide greater protection to child witnesses against harassment and intimidation.

Further, it seeks to impose heavier penalties on the possession of child pornography.

Few would argue against these aims.

However, the issue attracting heavy debate concerns a provision in the bill that would require Internet service providers (ISPs) to retain the network addresses they temporarily assign to each account for, after amendment, a period of 18 months. They would also have to securely store those records to protect customer privacy and prevent data breaches.

Further, ISPs will not be legally liable for releasing the data they have stored under the provisions of this bill.

Wireless Internet access like the kind provided by cellphone networks is exempted.

Arguments for the Bill

"The bill is an attempt to come up with a reasonable compromise regarding an issue of great law enforcement concern for many years -- data retention," Ernie Allen, president of the National Center for Missing & Exploited Children (NCMEC), told TechNewsWorld.

H.R. 1981 only requires ISPs to retain information proving or establishing connectivity and doesn't require them to retain content, Allen said.

The biggest challenge in child pornography cases is connecting a real person to illegal content at the precise moment that content was accessed or distributed online, Allen stated.

"Most people do not understand that IP addresses are dynamic," Allen pointed out. Dynamic IP addresses can change at any time. "The bill is intended to capture the concept that IP addresses are assigned at time of log-in" because it uses the phrase "temporarily assigned network address," Allen said.

Last year alone, NCMEC received 223,000 reports of suspected child sexual exploitation crimes, more than 90 percent of which involved online child porn, Allen said. During that period, the Center's Child Victim Identification Program reviewed and analyzed 13.6 million child pornography images and videos to try and identify and rescue victims.

"The greatest challenge here is that there is a significant missing link," Allen said. "There can be no prosecution until law enforcement connects the data and time of that online activity to an actual person -- the type of information found in an ISP's connectivity log."

Those connectivity logs are analogous to the records United States federal law requires telephone companies to keep of the date and time that a phone number is dialed, Allen contends.

Why Some Fear H.R. 1981

Many of the arguments from members of Congress opposed to the bill can be summed up in Lofgren's stance: While child pornography is a very serious crime, the bill's provisions are much too sweeping, and it will let ISPs track every website Americans visit and make that information available to the federal government without a warrant.

They contend that H.R. 1981 will go way beyond fighting child porn.

That's a stance also taken by civil rights groups.

"Language in the bill strongly suggests that not only the IP address has to be retained but also information that identifies the customer who had that address at the time -- what credit card you use to pay for the service, what bank you write your checks on," pointed out Gregory Nojeim, a director at the Center for Democracy and Technology.

"What really concerns me is the data that will be retained will be used in investigations that are not the subject of the bill, which is protecting children from child pornography," Nojeim told TechNewsWorld.

Law enforcement already has the powers it needs to track criminals online, argued Richard Esguerra, a senior activist at the Electronic Frontier Foundation.

"With the correct permissions, law enforcement already has the ability to tell ISPs to track a subscriber suspected of a crime," Esguerra told TechNewsWorld. "This approach is more appropriate and allows law enforcement to focus on actual, useful data without forcing ISPs to manage mountains of data tied to Internet users' normal, legal Internet activities," he added.

The length of time that ISPs retain customer data varies.

"Some do retain this information and some don't, and it appears that the length of time that such information is stored -- if at all -- is as short as seven days," Esguerra said.

Maintaining IP addresses for 12 months or so may not be as effective as claimed, warned Darren Hayes, CIS Program chair at Pace University.

In fact, the law "will actually push more pedophiles to use a proxy service or go to a local library to mask their identity," Hayes told TechNewsWorld.

If law enforcement wants help with its investigations, Hayes wondered, why not access Google's (Nasdaq: GOOG) databases?

"Google can provide a great deal more information on a suspect than any ISP can," Hayes pointed out. "It's not a privacy issue because Google is already collecting a huge array of information about individuals and their online activity."

ISPs Verizon and AT&T (NYSE: T) did not respond to requests to comment for this story. The office of Rep. Schultz, one of the co-sponsors of the bill, also did not respond to requests for comment.

Mobile Tech » AT&T Plans Mango Feast

Microsoft's Windows Phone operating system barely has a toehold in the smartphone market, but AT&T is moving to change that with the announcement of three new handsets running the latest WinPho version, dubbed "Mango," as well as upgrades to Mango for existing WinPho devices. That might just keep Windows Phone on the radar until Nokia unleashes its expected slew of new products.

AT&T (NYSE: T) announced on Monday that it would add three new 4G smartphones running Windows Phone 7.5, aka "Mango," in the fourth quarter.

It also pledged to update existing WinPho7 devices to Mango this fall.

The three new devices are the HTC Titan, with a 4.7-inch screen; the Samsung Focus S, with a 4.3-inch display; and the Samsung Focus Flash, with a 3.7-inch screen.

HTC Titan

The announcement could be seen as AT&T's attempt to keep its Windows Phone operating system afloat until it gets a hoped-for boost next year, when Nokia's (NYSE: NOK) expected marketing push is expected to kick in.

"How I see this playing out is you want to keep Windows Phone 7 viable in the market," Ramon Llamas, a senior research analyst at IDC, told TechNewsWorld.

"Windows Phone 7 has got more apps than it used to," Michael Morgan, a senior research analyst at ABI Research, told TechNewsWorld. "It's now got the upgrade to Mango. People do enjoy using the user interface and, so long as the devices come out and execute properly, it should be able to remain on life support until we see what happens when Nokia finally puts all its cards behind the Windows Phone 7 devices and launches that huge marketing push it promised."

Alternatively, the focus on 4G could actually help Microsoft (Nasdaq: MSFT) stay ahead of the market until Nokia's support kicks in.

"It's important for Windows Phone 7 to be on the leading edge in order to capture market share," Rob Enderle, principal analyst at the Enderle Group, pointed out.

"4G is the next-generation network, and the vast majority of the smartphones in the market are 3G, so it looks like Microsoft will be ahead of the market," he told TechNewsWorld.

What's on the Way

The Samsung Focus S, one of the three new 4G phones AT&T has announced, leverages the success of its predecessor, the Samsung Focus, which AT&T claims is the highest-selling Windows Phone 7 smartphone in the United States.

This device has a 4.3-inch Super Amoled Plus display, a 1.4 GHz processor, and the standard front- and rear-facing cameras.

The other 4G smartphone that AT&T announced in its coming lineup is the Samsung Focus Flash.

This appears to be a device for the budget-minded, based on AT&T's description.

It will have a 3.7-inch Super Amoled screen; a 1.4 GHz processor; and the standard front- and rear-facing cameras.

The HTC Titan has a 4.7-inch display -- more than 30 percent larger than the 3.5-inch screen of the iPhone 4.

HTC began conducting focus group evaluations in London, Paris, Madrid and Berlin for the Titan and another Mango smartphone, the Radar, earlier this month.

The Titan has the standard front and rear cameras. It also has a dedicated hardware camera button. This lets users take photographs without unlocking the phones.

It comes with the HTC Watch video service, which provides access to the latest premium movies and TV shows.

The Titan also offers access to Microsoft's Zune music service, and lets owners access Microsoft Xbox Live in addition to the usual social networking services.

Planning Ahead to Be Fruitful

Unveiling the three new Mango smartphones and updating existing WinPho7 devices to run Mango will "keep the installed base happy and prove that Windows Phone 7 has a pulse," IDC's Llamas said.

This appears to be part of a long-term strategy to indicate that Windows Phone "is not just the operating system but also an ecosystem of players," Llamas added.

Both Microsoft and AT&T need to fly the flag. Sales of Windows Phone devices haven't exactly taken off so far.

"We're looking at one to 1.5 million devices sold per quarter since launch last year, which isn't taking over the market as Microsoft promised," ABI's Morgan pointed out.

AT&T did not respond to TechNewsWorld's request for comment by press time.