Exodus 19:23: And the Lord said unto Moses: "Commandment XI: Thou shalt not post unto Slashdot, for they shall mark thy words as flamebait, and corrupt thine eyes with goatse, and shall turn thee to worship idols of pants."
This sounds like a standard concept test. I work with market research for a large CPG company. Let me tell you what a concept test is.
Marketing Manager: "We have a bunch of ideas for things we can do in the future. Let's put out a survey and find out how many people like it. Then we'll measure purchase intent and find out what people would pay more for, and measure the costs of doing each concept vs the potential sales and do the one that makes us the most moneys."
Let's be clear: just because someone saw it on a survey from Microsoft, doesn't necessarily mean it will ever see the light of day, let alone be incorporated into Windows 7. They may be using it (along with many other concepts they are likely testing) to try and shape what Windows 8 or 9 might look like. Most concepts I have tested, when weighed with costs, haven't reached the "let's go do this" threshold.
Holy cow, it's been a long time since I've seen someone actually refer to the computer line as "Macintosh" as opposed to just a Mac. My first impression when I read the stub was "Apple has increased its sales of Monochrome IIGS systems? How?!"
Back on topic, Apple has been smart to diversify a little, but even the article mentions that the new features of iPods (eg, Touch) are meant to appeal to existing iPod owners, meaning they want existing customers to buy even more iPods. It also worked with the iPhone and the Shuffle, where fashion-conscious current iPod owners went out and bought "the next thing," but is this strategy really sustainable? How much longer can Apple really keep selling to the same hardcore user group before enough of them say "I have enough trendy mp3 players."
I don't really consider marginal improvements and marginal innovations that appeal to the same core group to be really sustainable over the long term. What they need to do is find the next "trendy gadget" line. That isn't mp3 players. Until they find out what the next "big thing" is and trend-itize that, their investment in other revenue streams (at least the ones that are still dependent upon popularity growth in mp3, like iTunes) is still susceptible to market growth deceleration. Bravo for making your computers popular again with all that iPod money though.
Does that mean I can finally get a robotic prehensile tail installed? Or will they only work on installing "replacement" parts that are "supposed" to be there?
China wants Taiwan. We like Taiwan. We could give or take China (love their cheap crap, hate their social structure that allows said cheap crap, afraid of billion-man Armageddon-sized army). How do we prop up Taiwan without pissing off China? "Accidentally" help make them a nuclear power by "oops!" letting them hold on to vital nuke bomb parts to study for a year or two!
Would they spend $300, or anything close to it, for special edition releases of albums from all the other artists they like? Probably not No, maybe not them, but maybe 750 of the biggest fans of that other band that didn't like NIN would. In fact, maybe some of the NIN 750 would too, you'd be surprised.
The point is, with all these different pricing schemes, NIN is doing what marketers would call segmenting the market to attain better pricing discrimination, getting the most out of consumers by getting them to pay more for the album if they value it more. Bigger fans will pay more, while most people are more price sensitive, etc. This means that NIN is getting more money overall than if they had released the album at just $10.
While doing something like this at a retail store is very hard logistically because brick-and-mortar store would need to keep multiple SKU's in stock for each item (and the rare few $750 fans would be few and far between, so the package might sit for a very long time before being discounted or sent back), in a central online retail store this is a lot more practical. Not only is NIN cutting out the RIAA middleman, they're also cutting out the retail middleman, while setting up different price points so that they get the most value out of each customer. Clever, Trent.
Trinitron? Speaking of obsolete quality brands, I still have my old Proscan TV. My wife says we can upgrade to a nice big HD set when this old one dies... I'll been waiting for a very loooooong time, I think.
Why is it that the old Quality sub-brands (Sony -> Trinitron, RCA -> Proscan) seem to be dying? Is replacement by planned obsolescence/short lifespan really that much of an important factor in consumer a electronics business model that the quality brands aren't nearly as profitable?
Glad to know that I wasn't the only one concerned with the fact that they have no idea why it works. Can we assume this isn't ready for clinical trial outside of a low-makeup-budget zombie movie cast call?
I think the term you're looking for is "managing expectations." Here's a little article about it from the IT side. It's something that Microsoft and teleco's have become so good at. If you keep expectations low and give them a little better, they'll be more than happy. If you give the same, but you promised the world, you get a bunch of unsatisfied customers.
I had hoped that "using gravity" would be sort of a cheat to get around making a perpetual motion device, but in reality it's powered by a human moving the weight. Instead, its just another clever way to capture gravity that still needs substantial human assistance, similar to a pendulum.
I kinda want these toys (to pose under the feet of my Transformers toys on my desk), but it seems to be open to MSDN developer subscribers only. In fact, only "the First 5000 MSDN Developers" to complete their Webcasts of Doom get the toys. My guess is that if MS employees knew too, external customers would be crowded out, and fewer subscribers would feel the pride of collecting them all by buying their services.
Honestly, if you're signing up for these webinars and labs, shouldn't you be motivated by the learning? If you're motivated by toys, its a waste for you. It's also a sign that MS is getting desperate to increase their numbers by any cheap means possible.
But for direct mail, most companies create algorithms so that their ad/catalog only goes to those most likely to respond. Many companies (and most banner ads) do "carpet bombing," mailing to any and all households, in which 6% response is extraordinary, and numbers are closer to 1/100th that. Common relatively successful carpet bombing ads are groceries and pizza, which anyone buys.
This is not what this article is saying. It's saying that 50% of clickers are the same 6% of people, not that web banners get 6% clickthrough...
You mean, someone would actually want Vista so much they'd pirate it?! These allegations surely come from M$'s PR department! If there's someone out there that really wants a copy that badly, I'll trade my Vista Home Premium that was bundled with my new system for your XP serial number...
You could also argue that if WoW hadn't taken off, they'd be a much poorer brand without the resources to continue to tweak its niche game years after it was released. The question is, does success lead to dedication, or does dedication lead to success?
You mean, you don't already have to sign for it? In Indiana, we already have to show an ID to get pseudoephedrine (not that phenylephrine crap that doesn't do anything). If the police suspected someone of buying a lot of the stuff to make meth, they'd go around and check the local registry's for names. When it started, records were done on paper, but now in some drug stores its digitized and put into a database to proactively track purchases and alert the police. Not a government database, national drug store chain's databases.
On a side note, Pharmacists I talk to when I sign for my decongestants say that usually the Meth makers get around the ID thing by buying over the internet from other places, but at least signing for it has cut down on the shoplifting of it, which used to be a huge problem.
One of the most famous April Fool's day jokes was when the "New Mexicans for Science and Reason" printed an article claiming that Alabama had legislated the value of pi to "the biblical number of 3.0" (scroll down to #7). I can't believe the Indiana bill was real. It was prolly an I grad that testified for the 3.2 side, Hail Purdue!
They probably ran the numbers and found that Launch was costing more money than it was bringing in ($6/mo too low?), so they sold their customers to a service that had a price point that could make money. Maybe it could have made money with more subscribers, but subscription rates must have fallen off, so they made the decision to bail out.
Slashdot Mirror
Exodus 19:23: And the Lord said unto Moses: "Commandment XI: Thou shalt not post unto Slashdot, for they shall mark thy words as flamebait, and corrupt thine eyes with goatse, and shall turn thee to worship idols of pants."
This sounds like a standard concept test. I work with market research for a large CPG company. Let me tell you what a concept test is.
Marketing Manager: "We have a bunch of ideas for things we can do in the future. Let's put out a survey and find out how many people like it. Then we'll measure purchase intent and find out what people would pay more for, and measure the costs of doing each concept vs the potential sales and do the one that makes us the most moneys."
Let's be clear: just because someone saw it on a survey from Microsoft, doesn't necessarily mean it will ever see the light of day, let alone be incorporated into Windows 7. They may be using it (along with many other concepts they are likely testing) to try and shape what Windows 8 or 9 might look like. Most concepts I have tested, when weighed with costs, haven't reached the "let's go do this" threshold.
Holy cow, it's been a long time since I've seen someone actually refer to the computer line as "Macintosh" as opposed to just a Mac. My first impression when I read the stub was "Apple has increased its sales of Monochrome IIGS systems? How?!"
Back on topic, Apple has been smart to diversify a little, but even the article mentions that the new features of iPods (eg, Touch) are meant to appeal to existing iPod owners, meaning they want existing customers to buy even more iPods. It also worked with the iPhone and the Shuffle, where fashion-conscious current iPod owners went out and bought "the next thing," but is this strategy really sustainable? How much longer can Apple really keep selling to the same hardcore user group before enough of them say "I have enough trendy mp3 players."
I don't really consider marginal improvements and marginal innovations that appeal to the same core group to be really sustainable over the long term. What they need to do is find the next "trendy gadget" line. That isn't mp3 players. Until they find out what the next "big thing" is and trend-itize that, their investment in other revenue streams (at least the ones that are still dependent upon popularity growth in mp3, like iTunes) is still susceptible to market growth deceleration. Bravo for making your computers popular again with all that iPod money though.
And while you're regrowing my metal claws, I want you to regrow my prehensile tail. I swear I lost it in the war.
Does that mean I can finally get a robotic prehensile tail installed? Or will they only work on installing "replacement" parts that are "supposed" to be there?
I for one would like to welcome our traffic-monitoring overlord... James.
** ...and we define "common webpage" as anything hosted on billing.comcast.com
You're not the only crazy one. Who the HELL caffeinates RABBITS?! I own rabbits, and all of my "drug test" ideas usually involve tranquilizers...
China wants Taiwan. We like Taiwan. We could give or take China (love their cheap crap, hate their social structure that allows said cheap crap, afraid of billion-man Armageddon-sized army). How do we prop up Taiwan without pissing off China? "Accidentally" help make them a nuclear power by "oops!" letting them hold on to vital nuke bomb parts to study for a year or two!
Fiendishly clever, I say.
The point is, with all these different pricing schemes, NIN is doing what marketers would call segmenting the market to attain better pricing discrimination, getting the most out of consumers by getting them to pay more for the album if they value it more. Bigger fans will pay more, while most people are more price sensitive, etc. This means that NIN is getting more money overall than if they had released the album at just $10.
While doing something like this at a retail store is very hard logistically because brick-and-mortar store would need to keep multiple SKU's in stock for each item (and the rare few $750 fans would be few and far between, so the package might sit for a very long time before being discounted or sent back), in a central online retail store this is a lot more practical. Not only is NIN cutting out the RIAA middleman, they're also cutting out the retail middleman, while setting up different price points so that they get the most value out of each customer. Clever, Trent.
Trinitron? Speaking of obsolete quality brands, I still have my old Proscan TV. My wife says we can upgrade to a nice big HD set when this old one dies... I'll been waiting for a very loooooong time, I think.
Why is it that the old Quality sub-brands (Sony -> Trinitron, RCA -> Proscan) seem to be dying? Is replacement by planned obsolescence/short lifespan really that much of an important factor in consumer a electronics business model that the quality brands aren't nearly as profitable?
Glad to know that I wasn't the only one concerned with the fact that they have no idea why it works. Can we assume this isn't ready for clinical trial outside of a low-makeup-budget zombie movie cast call?
I think the term you're looking for is "managing expectations." Here's a little article about it from the IT side. It's something that Microsoft and teleco's have become so good at. If you keep expectations low and give them a little better, they'll be more than happy. If you give the same, but you promised the world, you get a bunch of unsatisfied customers.
Maybe it uses one of those energy efficient bulbs. Those cut energy use by over half.
Factor of 2 accounted or, only 500 to go...
I had hoped that "using gravity" would be sort of a cheat to get around making a perpetual motion device, but in reality it's powered by a human moving the weight. Instead, its just another clever way to capture gravity that still needs substantial human assistance, similar to a pendulum.
I kinda want these toys (to pose under the feet of my Transformers toys on my desk), but it seems to be open to MSDN developer subscribers only. In fact, only "the First 5000 MSDN Developers" to complete their Webcasts of Doom get the toys. My guess is that if MS employees knew too, external customers would be crowded out, and fewer subscribers would feel the pride of collecting them all by buying their services.
Honestly, if you're signing up for these webinars and labs, shouldn't you be motivated by the learning? If you're motivated by toys, its a waste for you. It's also a sign that MS is getting desperate to increase their numbers by any cheap means possible.
Next site to hit the list:
http://yro.slashdot.org/
But for direct mail, most companies create algorithms so that their ad/catalog only goes to those most likely to respond. Many companies (and most banner ads) do "carpet bombing," mailing to any and all households, in which 6% response is extraordinary, and numbers are closer to 1/100th that. Common relatively successful carpet bombing ads are groceries and pizza, which anyone buys.
This is not what this article is saying. It's saying that 50% of clickers are the same 6% of people, not that web banners get 6% clickthrough...
You mean, someone would actually want Vista so much they'd pirate it?! These allegations surely come from M$'s PR department! If there's someone out there that really wants a copy that badly, I'll trade my Vista Home Premium that was bundled with my new system for your XP serial number...
You could also argue that if WoW hadn't taken off, they'd be a much poorer brand without the resources to continue to tweak its niche game years after it was released. The question is, does success lead to dedication, or does dedication lead to success?
Forget that, I just wanna download the latest episode of "I Dream of Djini."
Why can I picture George Dubbya Bush in a scuba suit, holding a giant pair of sheers and screaming "I'll cut off the terrorist's interweb tubes!"
You mean, you don't already have to sign for it? In Indiana, we already have to show an ID to get pseudoephedrine (not that phenylephrine crap that doesn't do anything). If the police suspected someone of buying a lot of the stuff to make meth, they'd go around and check the local registry's for names. When it started, records were done on paper, but now in some drug stores its digitized and put into a database to proactively track purchases and alert the police. Not a government database, national drug store chain's databases.
On a side note, Pharmacists I talk to when I sign for my decongestants say that usually the Meth makers get around the ID thing by buying over the internet from other places, but at least signing for it has cut down on the shoplifting of it, which used to be a huge problem.
One of the most famous April Fool's day jokes was when the "New Mexicans for Science and Reason" printed an article claiming that Alabama had legislated the value of pi to "the biblical number of 3.0" (scroll down to #7). I can't believe the Indiana bill was real. It was prolly an I grad that testified for the 3.2 side, Hail Purdue!
They probably ran the numbers and found that Launch was costing more money than it was bringing in ($6/mo too low?), so they sold their customers to a service that had a price point that could make money. Maybe it could have made money with more subscribers, but subscription rates must have fallen off, so they made the decision to bail out.