Recently in Internet Category

CNN.com had an article today that, while in no way dispensing any new information, is something that could be pretty useful for people who a) are brand new to social networking sites or b) have kids who are on or want to be on one.

"I don't want to have to worry about all the different online scandals and problems," says Brown, an education major at St. Joseph College in Connecticut. She'd like to control her personal information and keep it out of the hands of identity thieves or snooping future employers. "It's just common sense."

It sounds like her info is locked down and airtight. But is it?

Turns out, even the privacy-conscious Sarah Browns of the world freely hand over personal information to perfect strangers. They do so every time they download and install what's known as an "application," one of thousands of mini-programs on a growing number of social networking sites that are designed by third-party developers for anything from games and sports teams to trivia quizzes and virtual gifts.

The rest of the article is here, and if you fall into either of the categories I mentioned, you should totally check it out.

I feel the need, again, to make the point that nothing is free.  Not entirely.  If you want the neat applications and you don't want to pay for them they need to be supported by ads.  The ads are more effective and therefor more profitable if they are targeted based upon assumed interests and patterns of behavior.

So should you be careful?  Sure.  Should you whine and moan because your online activity is being tracked?  No, you should just stay away from sites and applications that do the tracking.

I saw this at mocoNews.net and was blown away.  It's the kind of simple, common sense stuff that gets so easily lost in the bureaucracy and over analyzing of a big corporation.

Guy Talmi is a Senior Marketing Director at Pontis, an Israel-based company that works with wireless and cable operators to help determine the most relevant marketing approaches based on a user's profile, preferences and behavior. Talmi has compiled a list of the top 10 most common marketing mistakes he sees made by the operator.

Here I'll just list the actual top 10, but you can click here to see the explanation of each over at mocoNews.

1.  Operators fail to target the right products to the right customers
2.  Free trial offers fail because of poor follow-up
3.  Introductory offers for new customers alienate existing customers
4.  Non-targeted offers look like spam
5.  Operators address churn too late
6.  Marketing campaigns may fail if not tested before launch
7.  Operators use the wrong medium to market to users
8.  Value the customer
9.  Operators miss marketing opportunities
10.  Success breeds success - if you can recognize it

When you get into the explanations it makes even more sense.
What he says in his summary, praising online retailers like Amazon for marketing based on past searches and purchases, is something that has been a little controversial.

There's growing concern among (mostly older) web surfers and purchasers that companies are keeping too much information about them.  I tend to shoot down these concerns, more vocally when referring to sites that are trying to monetize a free service, because there is a reason behind targeted advertising.  I think that Talmi would agree with me that targeted advertising and marketing, regardless of industry, can help companies save money and hopefully pass those savings onto their customers in the form of more competitively priced goods and services.

First, here's a little bit of the story that ran at CNN.com today

James Karl Buck helped free himself from an Egyptian jail with a one-word blog post from his cell phone.

...

Buck, a graduate student from the University of California-Berkeley, was in Mahalla, Egypt, covering an anti-government protest when he and his translator, Mohammed Maree, were arrested April 10.

On his way to the police station, Buck took out his cell phone and sent a message to his friends and contacts using the micro-blogging site Twitter.

The message only had one word. "Arrested."

After that one-word message was sent out James' followers started Tweeting and blogging about their friend's precarious situation.  One friend even got on the ball and hired a lawyer on James' behalf.  James was freed.

Less than 24 hours after he was arrested.

This is exactly the kind of thing that needs to be given the spotlight, and I'm super excited about seeing it on CNN.com.  It's the sort of thing that can further help to spread awareness of how Twitter can function as more than just a fun tool or even a professional one, both of which are hats it wears quite well.

The only failing I see is that it can only benefit Twitter.  If, as we rant about ad nauseum,  this good press could have benefited the entire social networking/blogging community.  We're always saying that Web 2.0 (And I'm caught playing Buzzword Bingo) companies, and those that are involved in social networking especially, should and need to form an industry organization to keep themselves safe from potential regulation hell.

Let's face it - Like it or not, a negative story will wash over an entire medium like wildfire.  Did Janet Jackson's nipple focus the ire of over-reacting, zero-responsibility, whack-job, non-parents on CBS and the NFL?  I think that we all know what the answer is there. As I've said about on-topic examples and as was discussed in our interview with Dr. Patrick Moore, it's true that forming an industry organization means working with your competitors.  But it's working with your competitors so that you can be allowed to compete and to keep your own set of rules.

I won't go into much more detail, because I'd basically be reposting old info (more than I have already).

I'll close by giving big ups to Twitter, of which Andrew and I are big old fanboys.  This kind of story is what can help to elevate a technology from "fun" to "professional" to that next level where it can be used for very serious situations.  The same way that text messages and mobile phones in general have, the latter over the past decade and the former over the past 4-5 years.

Twitter, great job!  Social Networking/Web 2.0 execs - Celebrate the good but team up and protect yourselves from the bad.

As anyone who has a mobile phone will know, kidz cnt wrt well whn txtng all the time.

I think that now, the morning after, just about everyone knows that Microsoft debuted Live Mesh last night.  To very briefly sum it up, Mesh let's you sync information and files to multiple devices (Windows-only for now) via the web so that you can have access to your information from any device.

 

Rather than try and break it down myself, here is a link to Robert Scoble's rundown.

Also included are the links that he mentions in his post to even more Live Mesh-y goodness.

 

Here is Robert's write-up on Live Mesh.

Here is the link to Mary Jo Foley's "10 Things You Need to Know About Mesh."

Here is the link to Mesh on TechMeme.

Here is the link to the Mesh Team blog.

The Senate Commerce Committee will hold a star-studded hearing tomorrow on "The Future of the Internet." Witnesses include:

Opening Remarks

Witnesses

Opening Remarks

Panel 1

The Honorable Kevin J. Martin Chairman Federal Communications Commission

Panel 2

Ms. Michele Combs Vice President of Communications Christian Coalition of America

Dr. Robert Hahn Executive Director, Center for Regulatory and Market Studies American Enterprise Institute

Mr. Patric Verrone President Writers Guild of America, West

Ms. Justine Bateman Actress / Writer / Producer

Mr. Kyle McSlarrow President and CEO National Cable & Telecommunications Association

Professor Lawrence Lessig Stanford Law School

That's right, peeps! K-Mart is testifying! K-Mart! and Lessig! and McSlarrow! Oh, My!

I'm getting in line early, that's for sure. Those line standers ain't got nothin on me. Bring it.

If I can get into the room, we'll see some fun live bloggin'

Right now, across the river from me in Virginia, there is a conference on the future of Internet 2 taking place.

I'm not there. I'm not covering it, and I don't plan to. Why?

It's all academic. Seriously. There is no serious use of Internet2 technology going on that affects the general public, aka those who don't have tenured professorships or use scientific applications, in any meaningful way.

Internet2 has been languishing for years as a backwater of pocket-protector academia with all the problems and strings attached that kept the general Internet out of the public eye until the 1990s, but the difference is the stakeholders seem to like it that way. They enjoy their high-speed videoconferencing and authentication and feeling of superiority that they get from being on the "academic research" Internet2 "next generaiton" network when the real next generation is IPv6, and that the physical reach of Internet2 is only to a few college campuses. I can't get Internet2 to my home, and neither can you.

They're spending 4 days talking about something only they care about, thinking it will benefit the public when in reality it's just a huge financial sinkhole.

Even smart people get obsessed over stupid things that don't matter.

Here's a public policy question: why does DARPA still fund something that hasn't even gotten a single real use for real people or the defense of the nation? Who cares that people can have high-speed videoconferencing because there aren't P2P applications on Internet2?

That's because THERE ARE NO REAL PEOPLE ON IT. ONLY GREYBEARD ACADEMICS DREAMING OF A NEXT GENERATION THAT PASSED THEM BY.

Internet2 is DOA. Instead we've got DOCSIS 3.0, FIOS, 700mHz as a 3rd pipe and 3G, and sooner or later IPv6 will take off.

Give up and put that Internet2 government waste towards rural broadband, where people who need it could use it.

This is exactly the kind of thing that I like to point out any time someone says that Web 2.0 technologies aren't good for anything more than fun.  Tom Hadfield, who at 17 sold soccer.net to ESPN for a cool $40 Million, is designing a site that will do more "...than putting up soccer scores."

 

Tom has been instrumental in founding www.MalariaEngage.org, a site designed to spread awareness of malaria in Africa and raise money to fight and prevent its spread.  I'm not going to get into the details of MalariaEngage.  Reuters, where I found the article, does a way better job than I would anyway.

 

The article reminds me of three major things -

 

• Social Networking Sites are About More Than Just Fun

Facebook and MySpace are primarily, nowadays at least, regarded as "fun."  They're a new way to keep in touch, but not always respected as being as innovative in how we keep in touch as they really are.  There are also sites liked LinkedIn that allow you to form professional bonds.  Hadfield's new project is a very logical step in that progression.  We've seen a similar usage shift in other technologies.  Look at text messaging - In its earliest incarnation it was very much a "fun" feature that was usually used by kids.  Then it expanded to notify people of sports scores and stock quotes.  Now the FCC has announced its plan for a nationwide SMS (text message) alert system to let citizens know about things like terrorist threats.  It's the same evolution - from fun to professional to public service/safety.  Tom Hadfield is helping to do the same for social networking.  Big, big ups to Tom, and I hope that MalariaEngage.org is a huge success.

 

• Stress the Positive

Sometimes, the "positive" may seem to be "business as usual."  Like MySpace helping two people get back in touch after years and years.  To an employee at MySpace it might seem like it's no big deal, but to skeptics...it's something that could turn their head and make them think "Hey, MySpace actually helped these people do more than share photos of a frat party."  So, if social networking sites like MalariaEngage promote their successes and how they're helping it will help remind people that for every Megan Meirs that there are literally millions of people using social networks uneventfully and that there are even social networking sites that help people.  As for the latter, why does MariaEngage care about MySpace?  Well, if they would...

 

• Form an Industry Organization

As was stated by Dr. Patrick Moore in our interview with him last month, members of any industry organization are competitors.  The reason for the formation of the organization is so that these competitors can band together against common foes (like potentially restrictive legislation) so that they can focus on competing with each other to eventually drive down prices and improve the quality of their products. With a Social Networking/Media organization in place a lobbying firm could handle things in Washington ans watch out for the entire organization so that the individual members can focus on business rather than worrying about how to handle a bill that might shut them down.  Heck, I can even take us out of the realm of the serious and into comic book territory.  Sometimes the hero and the villain team up against something that would destroy the entire planet.  That way, thanks to their team-up, they survive so that they can go about competing against each other.

 

I'm sorry to sound like a broken record, especially on the last point, but it's true.  Do you think that the tobacco industry would wield the power that it does if R.J. Reynolds and Philip Morris lobbied Congress individually?  I doubt it. 

 

Ranting aside, I'm really excited to see social networking make the leap leap that text messaging has just started to make.  Moving from nice to mainstream to public service is a surefire way to help ensure the longevity of a technology.

 

Here is the full article about MalariaEngage, at the Reuters.

...that sentence pretty much sums up the candidates' attitude towards technology policy.

On one hand, we have a candidate who has made great use of social media to allow his message to spread, and another who, through surrogates, uses email to send out untraceable smears and pictures of his or her opponent in funny hats. They clearly understand that the Internet is more than a series of tubes.

But, when I looked at the witness list and live-blogging from yesterday's FCC hearing on Net Neutrality, I noticed that this is a niche issue when it should be affecting all Americans. We spend more time at the computer and less on TV. Those computers bring us more and more media using new and different formats. Audio, video, blogs, text, email, social networking. These require bandwidth.

So does the exchange of information in general. Why, then has not a single candidate made broadband penetration and competitiveness a part of their campaign? I mean a major part. Seriously, folks. If Obama is the candidate of the "Internet Generation" why isn't he making it a point to push for us to be competitive with Scandanavia and South Korea in terms of the quality of our 'net connections and usage?

Where is DARPA? Are we so invested in building toys to control the Middle East and spy on each other that we're no longer interested in our great universities collaborating and communicating? If we're doing such a bad job with the DTV transition, what do you think will happen with IPV6?

Instead of concern over the quality of connection, we get shock-value news stories about MySpace or gee-whiz non-stories about how great Google is even though many of their engineers aren't even U.S. Citizens, and as many execs said at last month's Tech Policy Summit, the dearth of H1-B Visas is killing our economy and we really are losing out to other countries. There is a brain drain.

We're not training enough engineers, either. At my Alma Mater,it actually costs MORE to get a degree in engineering, but sociology is a great bargain. Why aren't there incentives for more engineers, or computer scientists? What about all these Iraq vets? Bush has stalled on Sen. Jim Webb (D-VA)'s new GI Bill because it would "hurt retention rates in the military." What about retention of intelligence (I mean the real kind, not the CIA kind) in this country?

Tech policy is national security policy.

Just a morning rant.

Great story at Reuters, filling us in on the details of a study by The Internet Watch Foundation regarding the pervasiveness of online child abuse, primarily child pornography.

Here are some key excerpts

Its researchers found about 3,000 sites, with more than three-quarters run as commercial operations, typically by criminal gangs trying to make money out of the images.
...
Computer networks in Russia and the United States host the most child abuse images, although many other countries are involved, a watchdog spokeswoman said.
...
Since 2003, less than one percent of child abuse content has been hosted on UK computers, down from 18 percent in 1997, the report says. Sites hosted in Britain are closed within hours.

Additionally, Chief Executive Peter Robbins had this to say

"A coordinated global attack on these Web sites could get these horrific images removed from the Web...."

It's pretty clear, from the numbers, that what The IWF is doing works.  Their innovative partnership with the government (in their home of the UK), police and ISPs has allowed them to nearly eradicate  child abuse content from their neck of the Internet woods.  If other countries adopted similar practices the amount of content could, and probably would, go down significantly.  The problem is that offenders would still have the ability to jump to a hosting company or ISP in a different country, wait to get shut down there, and then move again.  And again.  And again.  See where I'm going?  With international cooperation the number of potential (unintentional) safe harbors for distributors of this content would nearly disappear.  Obviously there are concerns that different countries have different views on what is or isn't obscene, but I think that it's pretty internationally agreed upon that child abuse and pornography are absolutely intolerable.

Last month Andrew covered a talk at Google's DC offices, centered around Jonathan Zittrain's book The Future of the Internet and How to Stop It.

Vint Cerf also spoke, specifically about how to stop and prevent abuse on and of the internet.  He also noted that because of the borderless nature of the internet that local and even national sanctions and laws aren't effective.  He says that international-level agreements and treaties are what it will take to effectively remove abusive content from the internet.

The Internet is wide open, allowing anyone with a connection to produce and distribute content (like what you're reading right now).  That openness brings along with it the potential for abuse.  Unless international standards for what constitutes abusive content or behavior, information sharing and prosecution can be agreed upon it would be very easy to see the Internet become like Television and radio, where a few corporations under strict strict strict FCC guidelines decide what content we get to see.

Vint Cerf and The IWF are on the right track.  Now they just need more people to listen.

We got this super-cool email from Comcast today.  It outlines their plans, in partnership with Pando Networks to create a Bill of Rights and Responsibilities for P2P users.  P2P users are the people who got their bandwidth throttled when they used "too much."  This announcement is really exciting because it moves towards something that I'm pretty vocal about - giving consumers all the info about a product or service so that they can make the decision that's best for them.  Comcast and Pando are both deserving of a big big BIG "Way to go!"

 

Here it is, right from Comcast.

 

For Immediate Release

 

Comcast and Pando Networks To Lead Creation of "P2P Bill of Rights and Responsibilities" for Peer-to-Peer Users and Internet Service Providers

 

Companies also announce plans to test Pando Network Aware? P2P technology on Comcast's network to identify faster and more efficient ways to deliver legal P2P content

 

Philadelphia, PA and New York, NY - April 15, 2008 - Comcast Corporation and Pando Networks, Inc. announced today they will lead an industry-wide effort to create a "P2P Bill of Rights and Responsibilities" (BRR) for peer-to-peer (P2P) users and Internet Service Providers (ISPs).  The two companies plan to collaborate and engage with industry experts, other ISPs and P2P companies, content providers and others to set a framework for the BRR that can serve as a best practice.  The purpose would be to clarify what choices and controls consumers should have when using P2P applications as well as what processes and practices ISPs should use to manage P2P applications running on their networks.  For example, P2P users should have the right to control their computers' resources when using P2P applications.

 

In addition, Comcast and Pando plan to conduct a test of Pando Network Aware? P2P technology on Comcast's fiber-optic network.  The purpose of the test will be to capture and analyze the data flow associated with downloading a file using Pando's P2P application.  These tests, along with tests Pando will conduct on a variety of other ISP networks, including cable, DSL, fiber and wireless, will measure things like performance, speed, distance and geography as well as the bandwidth consumption impact to the ISP.  Comcast, Pando and the P4P Working Group plan to publish the results of these tests so other ISPs can benefit from understanding how P2P applications might be optimized for traveling over different types of networks in different environments and geographies.

 

Today's announcement builds on Comcast's March 27^th announcement to collaborate with BitTorrent and the broader Internet and ISP community to more effectively address issues associated with rich media content and network capacity management.  It also builds on Pando's recent announcements of its P4P test results which demonstrated Pando's ability to reduce network congestion and speed content delivery by routing P2P traffic more effectively across cable, DSL, and fiber broadband networks.

 

The Pando test will provide additional data to help Comcast migrate to a protocol-agnostic network management technique by the end of this year.  The arrangement is yet another example of how these technical issues can be worked out through private business discussions and without the need for government intervention.

 

"Working together, Comcast and Pando can help lead the discussion about what consumers should expect in terms of a 'P2P Bill of Rights and Responsibilities' for P2P users and ISPs," said Tony Werner, Comcast Cable's Chief Technology Officer.  "Doing so is in the best interest of everyone involved - ISPs, P2P companies and consumers.  We hope to get other industry experts, ISPs and P2P companies together this spring and publish the 'P2P Bill of Rights and Responsibilities' later this year.  By having this framework in place, we will help P2P companies, ISPs and content owners find common ground to support consumers who want to use P2P applications to deliver legal content."

 

- MORE -

Comcast and Pando announcement PAGE 2

 

"At Pando, we have always believed that good P2P applications give users control.  Now we are committing to lead the industry in codifying that," said Robert Levitan, CEO of Pando Networks.  "In addition, we need more data and analysis of how P2P applications deliver content over a variety of different networks.  By sharing the test methodology and results, all P2P companies and ISPs can learn how to more efficiently deliver legal content.  This will ultimately benefit consumers who are relying on P2P programs as well as content providers who are interested in delivering their content to consumers where and how they want it."

 

 

IE 7 was loaded onto my machine at work last week.  Currently, when compared to both IE 6 and Firefox 2.x there are things that I like and dislike.

 

First, here are some nice new things that we have in Microsoft Internet Explorer 7

 

• Tabbed browsing!  Everyone ( I think) loves tabbed browsing and it is great to see it in Internet Explorer.  I do not like that you have to select a tab in order to close it.  Firefox has the ability to kill a tab regardless of whether or not it is the active tab.  I have, however, fallen head-over-heels in love with the Quick Tabs feature.  Either by clicking an icon or using Ctrl+Q you can pull up a thumbnails of all of your active tabs.  You can actually see what's going on on each tab and then click on the one you want.  It's pretty useful if you have a lot of tabs, causing the names to get truncated.  Also, it's just pretty darned cool.
• Favorites - There are 2 little stars to the left of your tabs. One is just a star, and this will open up your favorities list.  Once it's open there are a few new things.  First, you have a regular scroll bar on the side to move up and down through your list.  Second, there are more options than just your faves.  You can click on an icon to see all of your feeds and another for your history.  There's also a pin fnction that will create a frame off to the left to keep the content on display.  Next to the plain star is a star with a plus sign.  Not only will it give you the ability to add the active page as a favorite, but you can add the entire group of tabs that you have open as a favorite.  Really cool if you have a group of sites that you need open at all times, like for work.
• The feeds button is kind of cool.  It will scan the site and see if there are any feeds available.
• Placement of Refresh and Stop bug the heck out of me, but I think that's because I'm a robot and am terrified of change.  In older versions of IE you have, across the top Back, Forward, Refresh, Stop, Address Bar.  Now?  Back, Fowards, Address Bar, Refresh, Stop.  I'm still getting a little lost when I want to refresh the screen.

 

My only other concern is speed.  I'd like it if IE 7 were a little quicker.  I'm not going to lament any shortcomings too much, because IE 8 is close on its heels.  I'm looking forward to the mapping capability of IE 8 and would like to see if it addresses any other issues.  From the articles I've read, it seems like IE 8 is more of a "Here's what IE 7 should've been" as opposed to being an entirely different animal. 

AOL's Platform-A advertising unit will be handling all of Verizon's online advertising.  If ever there was something to catapult Platform-A to another level, this is it.  It should be noted that we're talking about Verizon Communications, Inc, not Verizon Wireless.  This means that all of Verizon's online advertising, for any of their services, will be managed by Platform-A.  Seeing as Verizon offers internet services, which would compete with that same department within AOL, this announcement would lend weight to the rumors that AOL will be spinning off or selling its United States ISP operations (which they've already done in Germany and the U.K.).

 

Platform-A is AOL's revamped advertising unit.

 

Details on the deal at Reuters.

So I was looking at the Reuters this morning and saw an article that kind of annoyed me.  Not because of the reporting (top-notch) but because the article highlighted a lack of personal responsibility and a certain sense of entitlement that really bugs me.

Many people are uncomfortable with Web sites customizing content to people's personal profiles, according to a new survey.

"There's a creepy factor and a fear of the unknown that people don't want to deal with," said Michelle Warren, senior research analyst at Info-Tech Research Group in London, Ontario.

"The notion that there's a privacy issue in someone's email account hits a little too close to home for some," she added.

Nearly 60 percent of 2,513 people in the United States questioned in a Harris Interactive poll said they were uneasy when Web sites use information about personal online activity to tailor advertisements or content.

 

In a nutshell, the story related how a lot of people are uncomfortable with websites tracking their activity for the purposes of targeted advertising.  I understand that some people find it creepy, but it's nothing new. 

I've written some of my best articles on flights home. Now I realize why:

Four weeks ago I had 5,250 emails in my inbox. Today? 10.

What's the difference? I've been on lots of airplanes in the past month. Why is that important? Because in airplanes there's no Internet. Nothing to distract you. I find I can answer about 10x more email in a plane than I can on the ground when the Internet is there to distract me.

That taught me an important lesson.

Want to get something done? Turn off Twitter. Turn off Facebook. Turn off blog comments. Turn off FriendFeed. Turn off Flickr. Turn off YouTube. Turn off Dave Winer's blog and Huffington Post. Turn off TechMeme.

Turn off the distractions.

Wow. That's blunt. On the other hand, maybe Congress would get more done if cable news didn't generate another outrage to be handled every few days. Think about it. How many "action alerts" generate tons of constituent spam from people who are barely interest in a cause? Just enough to fill out a form, not enough to call. What if Congress only listened to those who cared enough to do more than click a few buttons? Is E-Government really the answer, or do we need to slow down and pay attention to the most intense voices instead of the ones that repeat the same message over and over again? 

24 hour news cycle. Email. Twitter. RSS feeds. Click to complain forms. Nancy Grace. Turn it all off. 

Good advice.

Microsoft announced its new Clearflow technology.  Clearflow will allow for web-based driving directions that can create a route designed to avoid traffic.  That's great.  That's fantastic.

 

Here's my problem - It's accessed through their live.com website.  If you select Maps and then Traffic, a map of the U.S. will pop up with icons over the 72 cities currently supported.  Very cool.  But where's the mobile support?

 

On my BlackBerry, which handles the web pretty darned well, I couldn't pull up the traffic options.  I tried it with my browser emulation set to BlackBerry, Pocket IE and even regular Microsoft IE and none of them would display the traffic options.  The first 2 displayed the incredibly neutered mobile version of the live.com site and the last one displayed a fuller, albeit format-challenged, site that still didn't have the traffic option.

 

I think that being able to see traffic on a map or have it factored in when you get a set of directions is great.  Needing to access it from a computer as opposed to a mobile device neuters it.  Sure, I can pull up my directions and print them out before I go, but that isn't the same.  Traffic changes far too quickly for that to be effective.

 

Here's your route, determined to be the fastest based on traffic...from 20 minutes ago when you were getting ready to leave the house.

 

See the problem?  I'm not out to bash MS or anything, but at the same time, I'm not going to get excited about Clearflow until there's mobile compatibility.  And I won't be really excited if the only compatibility is for Pocket IE and no other browsers. 

 

Unless MS wants to send me a free HTC Touch.  Then I'll get over it.  Totally.

 

Details at Reuters.

So today is a big one for Yahoo!  Not only did they once again rebuff Miscrosoft's takeover bid as undervaluing their company (thanks to tumbling stock values the once $44.6 Billion offer is now valued at $42.2 Billion).  Additionally, perhaps in a move to show how strong it is as its own company, Yahoo! announced a new ad sales system.  The new system is called AMP! and will (hopefully) allow Yahoo! to compete with a post-DoubleClick Google and a post-aQuantive Miscrosoft.

 

So what makes AMP! so special?  It will allow customer who buy advertising from Yahoo! to spread those ads around over a variety of web sites and even newspapers.  AMP! makes sense to me, because we all know how much everyone loves bundled services.  Think about it in the consumer world as opposed to the corporate world for a second.  People love the Comcast Triple Play because it allows them to have TV, internet and telephone services all billed to the same account.

 

From the perspective of an ad purchaser, AMP! makes a ton of sense.  Do you want to (or are you able to) manage advertising buys across potentially hundreds of web sites and newspapers?  I'm no expert, but I think I'd lose it if I were tasked with that.  Additionally, AMP! will help companies reach customers they didn't know they had - AMP! can target much smaller, niche sites that might otherwise get missed.

 

In a way, Microsoft's bid for Yahoo! has helped the Sunnyvale internet phenom examine themselves and find ways to improve.  When your company is in trouble (or is at least perceived to be) it would be really tempting to say "$44.6 Billion?  Where do I sign, Ballmer?"  Instead, Yahoo! has been going crazy with innovations, AMP! being perhaps the biggest and best so far.

 

If the MS bid totally falls apart, the job situation may be better too.  We all know that ,ergers/buyouts lead to layoffs, especially at the top.  Would MicroHoo! really need, for example, 2 CFO's?  Anything that doesn't contribute to the number of unemployed is something I can get behind.

 

I know I've been saying it a lot, but once again I'm excited to see what happens next.

 

Details on the bid refusal at Reuters.

Details on AMP!, also at the Reuters.

The "27 hour" reference at the top of this page, is of course a reference to the fact that Alex and I live in two different time zones, but working with a partner across the country writing on technology and politics, which both move at incredible speeds these days, can take its toll. Now, the NYT says that blogging can kill.

Other bloggers complain of weight loss or gain, sleep disorders, exhaustion and other maladies born of the nonstop strain of producing for a news and information cycle that is as always-on as the Internet.

True, it's compulsive. I see things and post, even when I should be sleeping or working or whatever. The travel and the events take their toll. Even Michael Arrington realizes that "this is not sustainable"

Verizon Wireless announced that it plans to use it's block of the 700 Megahertz spectrum to build out its LTE (Long Term Evolution) network.  This is their next-generation wireless broadband answer as opposed to their CDMA competition (Sprint's) banking on WiMax.  AT&T said that they will use their 700MHz spectrum for LTE as well.  VZW's spectrum block is nation-wide as opposed to AT&T who won several regional licenses.

 

While I'm excited to see what VZW and AT&T can do with LTE there is something that is a little troubling to me - LTE is a GSM technology.  Verizon (and Sprint) use CDMA for their current networks.  It makes me wonder what VZW's move is going to be.  Will they have LTE data-only devices, like aircards, and still use CDMA/EVDO for phones?  Will it be like when AT&T/Cingular transitioned?  Are they going to maintain CDMA, but just until they can transition their customers to newer devices that will use the LTE network?

 

Verizon has marketed itself as being of the highest quality.  Although they're the number 2 carrier in the country, they're generally the highest-rated when it comes to quality and reliability.  I'm pretty confident that they'll figure out a way handle a transition (if it is a true transition as opposed to a dual-network scenario) with a minimal impact on service or call quality.

 

AT&T upset a lot of TDMA customers who they forced into GSM after their switch and Sprint still doesn't seem like they know what the heck they're doing as far as phasing out Nextel's iDEN network in favor of CDMA.  I guess now it's Verizon's turn.

 

Details at Verizon.

Details from AT&T.

MySpace is gearing up to launch a music retailing venture with Universal, Sony BMG and Warner Music Group.  While I know that Andrew gets cringey whenever MySpace is mentioned, I think that they have a really solid idea.

 

Ok, so MySpace is partnering with some labels, now what?  Well, aside from viewing artists' profile pages (of which they have 5 Million to choose from) MySpacers will be able to listen to ad-supported streaming music, download MP3's (not for free, but for purchase, a la iTunes), buy ringtones and even concert tickets and merchandise.  What sounds so brilliant about the plan is that MySpace isn't just creating another iTunes or Napster.  They're launching a one-stop shop where fans can get just about anything from their favorite artist.  Plus, they'll already be on MySpace and can let the artist know how cool they think the new single is or tell their friends how much they think it sucks.

 

The part that business folks really like is that MySpace's huge user base (about 30 Million) will allow it to jump into the digital music arena with a staggering number of potential customers.  iTunes makes up an enormous percentage of the marketplace for digital music and is the nation's number 2 music retailer (2nd only to Wal-Mart).  The kind of control of market that they have frightens some music professionals, so seeing a service launch with serious competitive potential is a welcome development.

 

So, say what you want about MySpace, but MySpace Music (as they're calling the new service) seems like a really well-planned product and I'm excited to see how it pans out.

 

Details at Reuters

 

 

UPDATE:

According to Valleywag, Apple has moved into the number 1 position among U.S Music retailers, beating out uber-seller Wal-Mart.  Either way, as number 1 or number 2 over-all, they're the number 1 seller of digital music in the country.

Nokia showed off its N810 WiMax Edition, a mobile computing device with slide-out keyboard and 4.13" screen.  The new WiMax Edition will come equipped with web browsing, powered by Mozilla, and will even support a number of VoIP services, such as Skype.

 

I don't quite know how to react.  Sure, the N810 WiMax Edition can make calls using a VoIP (Voice over Internet Provider) client, but it doesn't seem to have a dedicated phone function in the same way that a BlackBerry or an iPhone does.  Also, if the screen is 4.13" that seems like it would make the N810 a little, well, large to be comfortably used as a phone on a day-to-day basis.  As we, and the washington Post, have commented before, does anyone really have room for another device to carry around with them?

 

Personally, I see WiMax like any other type of wireless data.  I think that the implementation would make a lot more sense if it was treated like EVDO or EDGE - just a faster connection to embed in high-end phones (and eventually not-so-high-end ones) and aircards.  I'm sort of thinking that anyone who would really be enticed by the N810 is probably taking their laptop with them everywhere, and the N810 can't compete with that kind of power.  A WiMax aircard, however, would let the user take their laptop online on the go, without the need for a stand-alone unit fo rmobile browsing.

WiMax has a huge potential to revolutionize the way we look at a wireless internet connection and has the power to allow people to replace their wired internet with it.  I feel like having a device whose comrades have floundered in the States (yes, i'm bringing up the Mylo again) as the flagship ambassador of WiMax is a bad idea.  Why not talk to RIM about bowing a WiMax BB8800 series?  Or preview a BB9000 with WiMax?

 

Currently, Sprint has a soft-launch WiMax network running in Chicago, DC and Baltimore.  They'r eexpecting nationwide rollout this year and are, in cooperation with Clearwire, looking for outside funds from Comcast, Time Warner and Google, to name a few.

 

Full press release at Nokia.

Reuters (in an article devoid of links to scary websites) broke the news that Comcast is working with BitTorrent to rework its network management policies to be more neutral.  While it will still reserve its right to curb a super user's bandwidth if it starts to decrease the usability of the service for others, it won't take in to account what that super user is using the bandwidth for.

 

Here's a snippet from Reuters

 

Comcast's announcement on Thursday drew a tepid response from Martin.

The FCC chairman said in a statement he was "pleased that Comcast has reversed course." But he questioned why the company was not moving more quickly to end the practice of blocking some applications.

"While it may take time to implement its preferred new traffic management technique, it is not at all obvious why Comcast couldn't stop its current practice of arbitrarily blocking its broadband customers from using certain applications," Martin said.

 

In April the FCC will have a meeting at Stanford University (home of Professor Lessig) to try and define exactly what in the heck constitutes "resonable network management."

 

Finally.

 

 

Here's Comcast's official press release.