Bad journalism. This guy thinks he's a "journalist" by putting Hello Kitty in the headline. Well sure, he is because someone here fell for it and thought this was interesting, but look, how surprising, everyone is talking about Hello Kitty and not about what the article is about: Video Email isn't selling! WOW. Yesterday's news. Big woop. Hiphip huraaaah.
This guy just made news out of no news! Happens everyday!
As for 3G, it is too expensive, and no, we don't want mpegs in our mailbox. Also they are bigger, and batteries don't last very long. So people just get the cheap, lasts forever, flat and folding Docomos with still digital cameras. That was a hit actually. Yes, we like to talk and take photos. Not everyone likes to smile for more than half a second.
Just a bunch of common sense. The only thing that amazes me is this guy actually bothered to put it all together and try to sell it. I mean, even you could write a book like this. er..
1. Be prepared 2. Study hard 3. Don't break the law 4. Talk clearly 5. You are biased towards your own work
a..ehem. I mean, if this guy was a bit more humble, or would just admit all he is doing is "helping out" by putting some common sense in a binding, then I'd praise the guy. But when the last section reads:
Conclusion: Creating the Future
It depresses me. It should read:
Conclusion: Catching up to YESTERDAY
If anyone thinks this will help them with their analytical skills, then this should only be the beginning of their to-read list. IMHO.
I wouldn't be so harsh if this didn't remind me so much of those sad self-help books..:(
I have no idea where this article is coming from, but I must second Oyume's point. Microsoft has a monopoly with PCs. Every businessman with a PC, or rather, a Laptop (and we're primitive?!), has Windows running and has Office. I assume this article is only talking about the software consulting industry and the slower detatchment to mainframes... but to say Microsoft has no presence is like saying Sony doesn't sell computers. Every sony computer has Windows, just as all the other PCs. Macs are popular with graphics use as usual, but businesses that buy laptops buy PCs, and they come with Windows. And there are many large successful software houses, and there are millions of shareware and freeware programmers. Yes, the software industry as a whole is smaller than the states. And one major reason is because Japanese software doesn't get ported to foreign countries as easily as US software does. And most Japanese products are tailored for Japanese users. The companies that produce them aren't interested in exporting. So this article is either false, or just misguiding.
Japan is usually ahead once they know what to make. Why? Because people pay money for aesthetics, and the remaining 20% extra performance or whatever... In the US, even if it looks worse, if it is 10 dollars cheaper, it will sell more. And that has been the standard for so long. Of course, some may argue that the iMac was different, but heck, that looked good AND was cheap.
This is totally misleading. First, Japan's main line of PCs are $2000+. Why? because they come with an LCD monitor, are small, aesthetic, come with tons of software, TV tuner, a remote, and some even with a slot for your MDs. They have plenty of "US" type 500 dollar computers but they just don't sell them where they sell the mainstream PCs. Secondly, Japanese are just as afraid of PCs as Americans. That isn't the problem. Japanese computers have more keys, and require sophisticated input sequences to type like you write. Imagine if you couldn't even type to begin with... an heck, did you know that Japanese Windows crashes MORE than English Windows? I know that is unbelievable, but indeed, we Japanese have to live with MORE crashes. So maybe its just MS' fault.
Hey, if you want your work to be put up in galleries etc, then listen to the critics. They're the ones who will pay you and who decide. If your tastes don't match the tastes of the modern rich, then maybe you should be making money doing album covers instead.
the company's proprietary business model was a more effective way to support industry standards than the open-source approach, which he said could lead to a "forking" of the software base resulting in the development of multiple incompatible versions of standard programs.
Simply wrong. Proprietary software causes forking for the sake of competition because vendors cannot use one another's work. Microsoft has no competition, so obviously monopolies can regulate forking by simply saying no. But if you are talking about proprietary vs oss, prioprietary models are the ones that encourage forking. With OSS, if there is something out there that does the job, you get to use it. With PS, you need to fork no matter what.
So in other words, I view the fact that Phil hasn't sued them for this as evidence that the claim isn't true.
Just because he didn't do something doesn't make him a liar. Maybe he doesn't think the way you do. ie. if you see the chance, sue your colleages.
A) Say "Well, I guess that's it" and give up and go home.
B) Defend the corporation with personal funds.
C) Defend the corporation with corporate funds.
This isn't the whole story. First of all, Phil was trying to work things out. He wasn't there to cover his ass or get away with murder. All he ever wanted was to help the company. And he was the one who built the damn company in the first place... so from his perspective, or anyone who would have any idea, the lawsuit is a real slap in the face. Not only are the VCs trying to NOT work things out, they are spending a huge amount of money and a ton of time and labor doing it. If you had any feelings for the company, ie, you didn't have another 9.8 billion dollars to fall back on, then maybe you would call a truce and get on with business before you started whupping each others ass.
I agree. Most users just want email. And if you can automate that, then everyone saves time.
you don't want a CP that has features that users don't know much about or that they really don't need. You are just asking for more phone calls and emails.
Also, most hosting companies don't realize how scarcly people access the CP. Most people just setup email accounts once and they're done. So spending a hundred thousand dollars on all those cool features is really a waste. You probably should keep the prices down and spend more on marketing instead. As long as you have a good email control panel.
the last time I saw it you couldn't add pops from their. CIHost is really disorganized. THey had a POP request page, and after no replies, I sent them an email, and after a week or so I get a reply asking for the URL to the page.
If you don't know already, most hosting companies suck and/or are in debt.
Unlike TV where you just sit and munch with a greecy remote, the internet is an active medium in which users actually *have to* navigate. Unless every single news site has 20 second ads, people will just go somewhere else. How different are Fox, MSNBC and CNN anyway? Not that I even go to any of them, but really, if one site pisses you off, you are likely to find 100 others that will give you the same thing. You'll probably end up finding something better if you take the time to search.
It is this kind of old thinking (refering to the article) that shows how new and primitive the current web is. Not even the smartest guys have figured anything out.
What I would suggest is making more effective use of the space. Do people realize that most banner ads take up twice the space of the banner itself? Like look at the banner at the top of Slashdot. Whoever came up with this stupid standard? banners could be at least 600 pixels wide. Or you coule make them a bit TALLER so that you can actually fit an ad in the damn thing. Ya, make them 300 by 100 and put two next to each other. At least that is better than the current standard.
Then you have news.com that has these huge flash ads. You would think they would have pictures of the new iPaq the story is about, or the new IBM laptop. But no. They're all ads. What a turn off. And of course, most of the articles are ads in themselves. The media is just a huge fad. The faster we get over it the better.
But if you are a smart company you realize that ads don't do much. It is awareness. Not direct sales. How do you get people to use your product? EASY. You don't give them a choice.
Free market? Competition? Any company that actually competes with others is already in trouble. The whole key to success is how not to compete, and how to get people to use your product without giving them a choice. One reason why it is so hard to do business on the web is that there is too much competition you can't get rid of. No matter what you do. Absolutely anybody can sell dog food online.
Anyway, ads never do much other than raise awareness at a huge price. They are also much of an ad to you as they are to potential investors. The more ads an investor sees, the more they are led to believe the company is doing well.
They should just make ads illegal. Civilization will probably move twice as fast, would be 100 times cleaner, and we wouldn't have to deal with so much disinformation. TV can just go away if ads are the only way to support it. In fact, that might be the true revolution that could turn this mess around. If it really is worth watching, we will pay for it.
And TV isn't free to begin with. We all pay for cable. It is amazing how many of us forget that.
Just to add to the advice people have posted, here is some stuff I know:
Good journalists often read local and minor newspapers for leads. So try get a really good article in a local paper. Campus papers are also good.
The web is empowered by individuals, and many of them like to talk. Try and become gossip worthy, and also try and get your name on as many forums, newsgroups, bbs, and mailing lists as possible even if you are not the one mentioning your company.
Make sure you have a unique keyword for your identity. It doesn't help when your product is named after animals or planets. When you enter your identity in a search engine you want all the pages to be relevant to you.
Do both online and offline PR. If you are an offline company, then get a domain name and put up a friendly informative PR page. Put your URL in your letterheads, b cards, brochures, cars, etc. If you are an online company, then make sure you give away t-shirts, mugs, pencils... and everything else.
Remember what the internet can do for you. If you have a product, put up a forum. Let people say bad things about you. As long as you follow it up immediately and are very polite, you will find that that is one of the best ways to win people over. And, what is better than learning what people don't like about you for free.
Take care of your fans. Pop music artists all learn this by experience. But even with a business, fans are a great asset, and you should treat them well. They will talk good about you, buy all your new products, and refer lots of friends.
footnote: It seems like a lot of the quick posters tend to be the geekier type who already get enough spam (probably since they get over 300 emails/day!!). About half way down, some PR people started to talking =)
XML is just another data format
on
Inside XML
·
· Score: 1
With XML, all what the new device will have to support is the XML communication protocol and no more.
... is a quote from a believer. But hey, how does the device know what context the XML document is written in?
Whether it is binary, Ascii, or XML, you still need to decide on the rules of expressing the data. XML allows for a nested, highly versatile way of defining data, but if the tags are not in context with what the device is expecting, then the information is useless. And that is why we already have the different XML document "standards" by Microsoft and their rivals.
For example, you may want to define a resume using XML. The name, age, experience, etc, are all defined using XML tags so that they can be extracted and manipulated. But the device or program reading the resume still needs to know what tags were used for which pieces of information, and if they don't match, neither does the interpretation. 100 different resume's maybe submitted, and all of them may be in XML, but they will still be incompatible unless they all agree to use the same exact tags for the same pieces of information.
So XML solves a syntax problem. At last we have agreed on a syntax! But we still haven't agreed on the data formats or the different XML templates.
because I am used to it, it's fast, stable, efficient, and does everything I need. The developer base for Linux is huge, all my company machines now use it, and it's what I'm used to.
You were sounding like a Windows user for a second there.... "that is why I don't/can't switch to 'linux.'"
Re:The customer is always right!
on
Freshmeat II
·
· Score: 1
Yes. Successful companies are all about kissing the consumers ass, even if it is just an illusion. Just like music artists kissing their fans' ass. That is the whole bottomline and you can't ignore it.
Open Source has a bad trend when it comes to end-user respect and prioritization. "It's free. So if you don't like it kiss my ass. Or edit the source yourself" - kinda attitude is exactly the problem. You are ditching wide acceptance. And sure, your software might be "better" than the rest, but what do you know? If you want a large audience, you have to listen to what they say, and give them what THEY want.
Re:Ranting Users and site design
on
Freshmeat II
·
· Score: 1
great. that attitude is really going to attract good designers to open source.
Congradulations to those who have cable. Television is not free. You pay to get distracted. And so many people think it's so cheap. Heck, I think cable is more expensive than internet access for many people!!!!
Of course, we do all realize that eventhough IE4 and NN4 are 90+ percent compatible, companies and designers still choose to DETECT THE BROWSER AND CREATE DIFFERENT VERSIONS.
So just because HTML becomes "compatible" with different devices, everyone is still going to create tailored versions for each device anyway.
I thought they were recommending this for a while now. Like anything over there. No one really listens.
But heck, HTML + Javascript + StyleSheets and now we are adding more closing tags and more tags. Oh, and don't forget the cross browser crap, browser and OS version compatibility, and oh, must add FLASH. Wait, we could even parse this stuff with CGI, ASP, or PHP. And don't forget your MySQL database and MIDI soundtracks. I guess we will leave Java out this time.
So someone tell me. Is this just all fvcked up or what.
The problem with that theory is that patent law was developed explicitly to solve problems in 18th century England caused by companies keeping the results of their work secret. We have already seen the problems, and cured them. No reason to go back down that road.
Exactly my point. It is no longer 18th century England. Now there are computers, software, the internet, and a incomparable amount of creative people trying to solve problems.
The entire environment is different. We are not longer playing with the same cards we had back then. And the same it will be for tomorrow. We need to stop basing laws on outdated paradigms, or at least restrict those laws to those paradigms.
companies will always find ways to make money. And they will also always find ways of spending it.
The only difference would be that they would no longer *invest* in IP. But if it is for the good of the industry and their business, they would still invest in the advancement of technology, and would probably still have R&D departments but won't make things that public.
But I say this is still okay because: 1) the guys who invest in IP are usually the guys who are filthy rich such as the large corporations - startups never benefit from the "corporately fundedness", and 2) even if R&D is kept more secret, there are enough people out there and enough open research, that useful things would most likely be invented in more places than one, and there would also be no need for judging "novelty" or "prior art".
And finally, if patents are done away with all together, then things would most likely be done differently than today, so it isn't too accurate to assume we only have a fixed set of cards to deal with.
Slashdot Mirror
ya... surely isn't talking about security of the user or of user info.
sure hope hotmail and the internet aren't part of this platform..
oh wait.
doomsday for computing is coming. fo sho!
Bad journalism. This guy thinks he's a "journalist" by putting Hello Kitty in the headline. Well sure, he is because someone here fell for it and thought this was interesting, but look, how surprising, everyone is talking about Hello Kitty and not about what the article is about: Video Email isn't selling! WOW. Yesterday's news. Big woop. Hiphip huraaaah.
This guy just made news out of no news! Happens everyday!
As for 3G, it is too expensive, and no, we don't want mpegs in our mailbox. Also they are bigger, and batteries don't last very long. So people just get the cheap, lasts forever, flat and folding Docomos with still digital cameras. That was a hit actually. Yes, we like to talk and take photos. Not everyone likes to smile for more than half a second.
Just a bunch of common sense. The only thing that amazes me is this guy actually bothered to put it all together and try to sell it. I mean, even you could write a book like this. er..
:(
1. Be prepared
2. Study hard
3. Don't break the law
4. Talk clearly
5. You are biased towards your own work
a..ehem. I mean, if this guy was a bit more humble, or would just admit all he is doing is "helping out" by putting some common sense in a binding, then I'd praise the guy. But when the last section reads:
Conclusion: Creating the Future
It depresses me. It should read:
Conclusion: Catching up to YESTERDAY
If anyone thinks this will help them with their analytical skills, then this should only be the beginning of their to-read list. IMHO.
I wouldn't be so harsh if this didn't remind me so much of those sad self-help books..
I have no idea where this article is coming from, but I must second Oyume's point. Microsoft has a monopoly with PCs. Every businessman with a PC, or rather, a Laptop (and we're primitive?!), has Windows running and has Office. I assume this article is only talking about the software consulting industry and the slower detatchment to mainframes... but to say Microsoft has no presence is like saying Sony doesn't sell computers. Every sony computer has Windows, just as all the other PCs. Macs are popular with graphics use as usual, but businesses that buy laptops buy PCs, and they come with Windows. And there are many large successful software houses, and there are millions of shareware and freeware programmers. Yes, the software industry as a whole is smaller than the states. And one major reason is because Japanese software doesn't get ported to foreign countries as easily as US software does. And most Japanese products are tailored for Japanese users. The companies that produce them aren't interested in exporting. So this article is either false, or just misguiding.
Japan is usually ahead once they know what to make. Why? Because people pay money for aesthetics, and the remaining 20% extra performance or whatever... In the US, even if it looks worse, if it is 10 dollars cheaper, it will sell more. And that has been the standard for so long. Of course, some may argue that the iMac was different, but heck, that looked good AND was cheap.
This is totally misleading. First, Japan's main line of PCs are $2000+. Why? because they come with an LCD monitor, are small, aesthetic, come with tons of software, TV tuner, a remote, and some even with a slot for your MDs. They have plenty of "US" type 500 dollar computers but they just don't sell them where they sell the mainstream PCs. Secondly, Japanese are just as afraid of PCs as Americans. That isn't the problem. Japanese computers have more keys, and require sophisticated input sequences to type like you write. Imagine if you couldn't even type to begin with... an heck, did you know that Japanese Windows crashes MORE than English Windows? I know that is unbelievable, but indeed, we Japanese have to live with MORE crashes. So maybe its just MS' fault.
Hey, if you want your work to be put up in galleries etc, then listen to the critics. They're the ones who will pay you and who decide. If your tastes don't match the tastes of the modern rich, then maybe you should be making money doing album covers instead.
Simply wrong. Proprietary software causes forking for the sake of competition because vendors cannot use one another's work. Microsoft has no competition, so obviously monopolies can regulate forking by simply saying no. But if you are talking about proprietary vs oss, prioprietary models are the ones that encourage forking. With OSS, if there is something out there that does the job, you get to use it. With PS, you need to fork no matter what.
Just because he didn't do something doesn't make him a liar. Maybe he doesn't think the way you do. ie. if you see the chance, sue your colleages.
A) Say "Well, I guess that's it" and give up and go home. B) Defend the corporation with personal funds. C) Defend the corporation with corporate funds.
This isn't the whole story. First of all, Phil was trying to work things out. He wasn't there to cover his ass or get away with murder. All he ever wanted was to help the company. And he was the one who built the damn company in the first place... so from his perspective, or anyone who would have any idea, the lawsuit is a real slap in the face. Not only are the VCs trying to NOT work things out, they are spending a huge amount of money and a ton of time and labor doing it. If you had any feelings for the company, ie, you didn't have another 9.8 billion dollars to fall back on, then maybe you would call a truce and get on with business before you started whupping each others ass.
you don't want a CP that has features that users don't know much about or that they really don't need. You are just asking for more phone calls and emails.
Also, most hosting companies don't realize how scarcly people access the CP. Most people just setup email accounts once and they're done. So spending a hundred thousand dollars on all those cool features is really a waste. You probably should keep the prices down and spend more on marketing instead. As long as you have a good email control panel.
why would we give away our proprietary control panel after spending countless of dollars and man hours working on it.
There is something wrong.
If you don't know already, most hosting companies suck and/or are in debt.
As if this is going to last.
It is this kind of old thinking (refering to the article) that shows how new and primitive the current web is. Not even the smartest guys have figured anything out.
What I would suggest is making more effective use of the space. Do people realize that most banner ads take up twice the space of the banner itself? Like look at the banner at the top of Slashdot. Whoever came up with this stupid standard? banners could be at least 600 pixels wide. Or you coule make them a bit TALLER so that you can actually fit an ad in the damn thing. Ya, make them 300 by 100 and put two next to each other. At least that is better than the current standard.
Then you have news.com that has these huge flash ads. You would think they would have pictures of the new iPaq the story is about, or the new IBM laptop. But no. They're all ads. What a turn off. And of course, most of the articles are ads in themselves. The media is just a huge fad. The faster we get over it the better.
But if you are a smart company you realize that ads don't do much. It is awareness. Not direct sales. How do you get people to use your product? EASY. You don't give them a choice.
Free market? Competition? Any company that actually competes with others is already in trouble. The whole key to success is how not to compete, and how to get people to use your product without giving them a choice. One reason why it is so hard to do business on the web is that there is too much competition you can't get rid of. No matter what you do. Absolutely anybody can sell dog food online.
Anyway, ads never do much other than raise awareness at a huge price. They are also much of an ad to you as they are to potential investors. The more ads an investor sees, the more they are led to believe the company is doing well.
They should just make ads illegal. Civilization will probably move twice as fast, would be 100 times cleaner, and we wouldn't have to deal with so much disinformation. TV can just go away if ads are the only way to support it. In fact, that might be the true revolution that could turn this mess around. If it really is worth watching, we will pay for it.
And TV isn't free to begin with. We all pay for cable. It is amazing how many of us forget that.
Just to add to the advice people have posted, here is some stuff I know:
footnote: It seems like a lot of the quick posters tend to be the geekier type who already get enough spam (probably since they get over 300 emails/day!!). About half way down, some PR people started to talking =)
Whether it is binary, Ascii, or XML, you still need to decide on the rules of expressing the data. XML allows for a nested, highly versatile way of defining data, but if the tags are not in context with what the device is expecting, then the information is useless. And that is why we already have the different XML document "standards" by Microsoft and their rivals.
For example, you may want to define a resume using XML. The name, age, experience, etc, are all defined using XML tags so that they can be extracted and manipulated. But the device or program reading the resume still needs to know what tags were used for which pieces of information, and if they don't match, neither does the interpretation. 100 different resume's maybe submitted, and all of them may be in XML, but they will still be incompatible unless they all agree to use the same exact tags for the same pieces of information.
So XML solves a syntax problem. At last we have agreed on a syntax! But we still haven't agreed on the data formats or the different XML templates.
You were sounding like a Windows user for a second there.... "that is why I don't/can't switch to 'linux.'"
Yes. Successful companies are all about kissing the consumers ass, even if it is just an illusion. Just like music artists kissing their fans' ass. That is the whole bottomline and you can't ignore it. Open Source has a bad trend when it comes to end-user respect and prioritization. "It's free. So if you don't like it kiss my ass. Or edit the source yourself" - kinda attitude is exactly the problem. You are ditching wide acceptance. And sure, your software might be "better" than the rest, but what do you know? If you want a large audience, you have to listen to what they say, and give them what THEY want.
great. that attitude is really going to attract good designers to open source.
Congradulations to those who have cable. Television is not free. You pay to get distracted. And so many people think it's so cheap. Heck, I think cable is more expensive than internet access for many people!!!!
So just because HTML becomes "compatible" with different devices, everyone is still going to create tailored versions for each device anyway.
But heck, HTML + Javascript + StyleSheets and now we are adding more closing tags and more tags. Oh, and don't forget the cross browser crap, browser and OS version compatibility, and oh, must add FLASH. Wait, we could even parse this stuff with CGI, ASP, or PHP. And don't forget your MySQL database and MIDI soundtracks. I guess we will leave Java out this time.
So someone tell me. Is this just all fvcked up or what.
Exactly my point. It is no longer 18th century England. Now there are computers, software, the internet, and a incomparable amount of creative people trying to solve problems.
The entire environment is different. We are not longer playing with the same cards we had back then. And the same it will be for tomorrow. We need to stop basing laws on outdated paradigms, or at least restrict those laws to those paradigms.
exactly.
The only difference would be that they would no longer *invest* in IP. But if it is for the good of the industry and their business, they would still invest in the advancement of technology, and would probably still have R&D departments but won't make things that public.
But I say this is still okay because: 1) the guys who invest in IP are usually the guys who are filthy rich such as the large corporations - startups never benefit from the "corporately fundedness", and 2) even if R&D is kept more secret, there are enough people out there and enough open research, that useful things would most likely be invented in more places than one, and there would also be no need for judging "novelty" or "prior art".
And finally, if patents are done away with all together, then things would most likely be done differently than today, so it isn't too accurate to assume we only have a fixed set of cards to deal with.