Does anyone have any further information regarding what grade of GPS is being used? Based on the price point, I would have to guess that it is Mapping grade GPS equipment, but the problem would be that in order for Mapping grade GPS to update, the person (or mount) holding it, must be moving to get the corrections from the satellite. Survey grade may work, but it wouldn't be under $10k per receiver.
You're right. Patents do suck. People are in no way entitled to whats theirs, and everyone should have access to profit from other peoples ideas. Moreoever, I should be allowed to open a restaurant called McDonald and use a big yellow M as my logo. But I'll sell uncooked chicken there, so when people get sick, the headline will read: "McDonald's sells uncooked chicken" and then the OTHER guys will get the bad press too. I'll also create an OS and call it Windows. And it wont work most of the time. Well, ok, so that wouldn't be that different. Anyways, my point is that patents do suck, unless its your idea they're protecting.
The recording industry looked at actual frequecies within hit songs to find patterns to determine the best notes and the octives of those notes to use in hopeful hits. One of the reasons you see some many tunes in the same key (Key of G, chords G, C, D on a guitar come to mind...) is because the North American ear likes the tones created in that range of sounds.
Will it be based on looks or on acting ability? There would be some serious issues if they used acting abilities. There are some horid actors/actresses that sell boatloads because they look great, and then there are some...well...less visually pleasing folks, that are fantastic actors/actresses.
They're missing a key factor here. These people are all great musicians. Im not saying you have to like them (I dont like Neil Diamond, Jimmy Buffet or Kenny Chesney) but they are talented as singer songwriters. (If you have never attempted to write a song, then please do not post something flaming this comment, because you don't know a damned thing about it.) Moreover, these artists have something that the pop-explosion artists do not: staying power. Paul McCartney has been playing music a long freaking time. Do you honestly believe that in 40 years, any of the teens of that era will be listening to Britney Spears? What about Ashley Simpson? Jessica Simpson? The issue is exactly quality control, the quality of music from most new artists is crap (major exception right now, John Mayer Trio...if you didnt like "You're Body is a Wonderland" and you like the blues, check this out).
PS: Im not sure who "the next guy is" but if he hates the Eagles, then he obviously has taste in music as poor as yours. *spank*
Nice to see someone else with the intelligence to see how the record labels dropped the ball. There are not nearly enough comments such as this one when it comes to this topic. The pop-explosion would have been ten fold if they had marketed the product properly (as would the new pop-punk explosion). Think of all the burnt CDs that are/were kicking around that revenue could have been earned on...I'd hate to guess how much it would be.
Not a shot at the parent, just a note in general about competitive advantage...
A competitive advantage is a result of a company implementing a value-creating strategy that is currently not being implemented by a competitor, or the result of implementing such a strategy more effectively than a competitor. Money is not a competitive advantage.
Moreover, what companies should truly seek is a sustainable competitive advantage, which is one that cannot be (easily) duplicated by a competitor. This is a technology site, not a business theory site, but the reality is that the question posed regarding competitve advantage is a great example of someone using a business buzz word to create the illusion of business intellect. You cannot create either a competitve advantage, or, more importantly, a sustainable competitive advantage by using this technology(before responding to that statement, please keep in mind that, as far as I know, no one knows precisely how the algorithm works, and thus, cannot based a strategy around the technology).
As long as you've left on a good note (given proper notice - two weeks typically, no screaming matches with old managers, etc etc) then I wouldn't worry too too much.
While the article has a point that touch-activated LCDs would indeed increase the usability of custom aps, Im not sure how it implies "...easy-to-use Linux-based product for consumers..." that would be a benefit solely to Linux. The operating system is really irrelevant, it's the LCDs that are the key technology.
Nifty project if you have the time on your hands I suppose.
How the HELL is "No. Next?" insightful in ANY way?
It makes no references to the article or the issue at hand whatsoever, and requires no thought at all. Thus, this comment I am making must ALSO be "Insightful" (although I would disagree:P)
I love anti-MS and pro-open standard discussions. It results in a great showing of the lack of business sense held by many IT professionals (Note: I did not say "all" or "most", I said many IT professionals). The reason a public company is in business is increase the value of shareholder wealth. Period. For-profit entities do not exist to save the trees, develop world peace, or make computer geeks happy. Moreoever, MS, like every company with a proper strategy, shouldn't want 100% market share. One hundred precent market share will lead to an industry that is easily entered by new competitors due to a lack of competition.
"As for protecting the company's own information, it should be pretty easy to show the cost of losing the data versus the cost of implementing a security feature."
It may be easy to show on paper, but it will still be a cost/benefit question, including the probability that something "bad" will happen. Seems like a job for the salespeople of the security products more than the internal employees. Some companies are also willing to take on the risk, in place of spending the money.
"If you notify your boss in writing of the consequences, then if data is breached, he/she will be accountable."
Depending on the organization, that may or may not matter. Paper trails do not always lead to accountability. Moreover, using the same logic, if you show he/she that you can end these costs by implementing the recommended tools and something "bad" DOES happen, you will be accountable, whether or not it is your fault.
Blame the voters all right, you guys did elect BUSH after all. The rest of the world just shook their heads, but you did it anyways...hehe. A perfect representative for your nation, indeed.
My premise is based on four years of experience selling home theatre and computer equipment to the demographic you are talking about. Moreover, there is extensive evidence to show that older demographics are less willing to adopt new technologies. Will this "media free" world eventually exist? Absolutely. My point is we are not at that juncture yet.
PS: There is a big difference between "fewer than expected DVD sales" and an increase in the number of people purchasing DVDs.
PPS: I mentioned my reasons for using the HP example in my orignal post, and should have qualified it then, since I forsaw someone coming back on the HP point. Typical response.
I see many comments to this effect on this subject. You have to remember that the people who are tech savvy will go this route. Baby boomers and older, however, are far less likely to adopt this. They use their computers for work and school, not for viewing/listening to entertainment media.
As companies such as HP continue to introduce solutions such as their DEC (firstly, HP is a company that this potential market recognizes, and secondly it doesn't appear to be a computer, nor is it to be sold as one as per HP's selling tips, which in turn won't scare this group of potential customers as much) there will be some migration by these "older" generations to the idea of streaming media. However, keep in mind that Blockbuster still makes boatloads of money renting films (of which people are accustomed to), and many people (as was mentioned earlier) enjoy having the tangible disc/media in their hands.
The market saturation on whatever the next media will be is likely to be the same and possibly increase as the number of people purchasing movies vs. renting them is increasing. Also keep in mind that while technology is the focus of the conversations on this site, the focus for the companies in question is profit. They learn from historical failures. Beta's fall was due to poor brand management by Sony (not licensing the product to other manufacturers) and to JVC doing the opposite with VHS.
I don't think that "Circle of Life" is a fair representation of Elton John's quality of work. You're talking about one of the best artists from the 70s here, not a guy who just happened to write a bad (horrible, terrible, putrid) tune for a Disney movie. There are much worse possible musicians that could potentially be involved (Hello, Britney? We're doing a musical Star Wars...)
As far as Andrew Lloyd Webber is concerned, Im not sure there are a heck of alot of people out there who haven't at least heard the title of one of his many hit shows.
Moreoever, if examples of non-feelgood music are needed, Im pretty sure you could check out something from Phantom of the Opera by Webber, or a song along the lines of "The Bitch is Back" by Elton John.
Once they have delisted, yes it will become harder to raise more capital. The bigger issue I think though is that the analysts do not look fondly on a stock that drops off of an exchange. The investing public's opinion will fall drastically and, as a result, the confidence in them will be basically gone. The ability to raise any form of capital (through equity or debt) will be very restricted and there is a likelihood that other companies with receivables out with them will come knocking for their money.
A few years back, there was this group of artists (we'll call them musicians) who got really upset because their stuff was being made available on this thing called the Internet. Since these artists were pure, land-loving, do-gooders (translation: hippies), they didn't see the opportunity that lay before them. Instead of embracing this new technology and using to increase album sales (of which they make little money off of), increase merchandise sales (of which they can make alot of money off of - see Kiss for an example), and increase their fan base (and thus ticket sales) by expanding their exposure exponentially in a way that was previously impossible, they sat around and complained.
Now, we have a new set of artists who are again failing to see the opportunity presented to them. If they were smart, they would work with Google, to develop strategies to increase sales through this new medium.
Just another group of people that do not understand the true marketing power of the Internet and what can be achieved by putting information at the finger tips of the general public.
This is a ridiculous statement. Those executives are the ones who decide how to market the products, how to price the products and are the ones who make the decisions that SELL the products that those engineers make. The "actual work" as you say, is irrelevant if no one markets it (and thus no one buys it).
As far as a good executive not getting in the way; there are many engineers that have to be managed (which should be done properly, I admit) to ensure that projects stay on task and include the specifications that are required. While not always communicated to all employees, executives quite often are working to ensure that projects are inline with corporate strategies that have been defined. The strategies are in place because they have been identified as opportunities to increase shareholder wealth, which is the point of any organization (other than an NPO).
Canada has run into a similar issue with our government's demand for greater wiretaps for phone, email and Internet communications. (From a few weeks ago.)
Slashdot Mirror
Damned US/CAD exchange cost :P
You are looking at about $50k to put together a survey grade site up here in Canada (East Coast), which is why I ask the question.
Thanks,
Matt
Does anyone have any further information regarding what grade of GPS is being used? Based on the price point, I would have to guess that it is Mapping grade GPS equipment, but the problem would be that in order for Mapping grade GPS to update, the person (or mount) holding it, must be moving to get the corrections from the satellite. Survey grade may work, but it wouldn't be under $10k per receiver.
Any help?
You're right. Patents do suck. People are in no way entitled to whats theirs, and everyone should have access to profit from other peoples ideas. Moreoever, I should be allowed to open a restaurant called McDonald and use a big yellow M as my logo. But I'll sell uncooked chicken there, so when people get sick, the headline will read: "McDonald's sells uncooked chicken" and then the OTHER guys will get the bad press too. I'll also create an OS and call it Windows. And it wont work most of the time. Well, ok, so that wouldn't be that different. Anyways, my point is that patents do suck, unless its your idea they're protecting.
The recording industry looked at actual frequecies within hit songs to find patterns to determine the best notes and the octives of those notes to use in hopeful hits. One of the reasons you see some many tunes in the same key (Key of G, chords G, C, D on a guitar come to mind...) is because the North American ear likes the tones created in that range of sounds.
"...strength of the cast..."
Will it be based on looks or on acting ability? There would be some serious issues if they used acting abilities. There are some horid actors/actresses that sell boatloads because they look great, and then there are some...well...less visually pleasing folks, that are fantastic actors/actresses.
They're missing a key factor here. These people are all great musicians. Im not saying you have to like them (I dont like Neil Diamond, Jimmy Buffet or Kenny Chesney) but they are talented as singer songwriters. (If you have never attempted to write a song, then please do not post something flaming this comment, because you don't know a damned thing about it.) Moreover, these artists have something that the pop-explosion artists do not: staying power. Paul McCartney has been playing music a long freaking time. Do you honestly believe that in 40 years, any of the teens of that era will be listening to Britney Spears? What about Ashley Simpson? Jessica Simpson? The issue is exactly quality control, the quality of music from most new artists is crap (major exception right now, John Mayer Trio...if you didnt like "You're Body is a Wonderland" and you like the blues, check this out).
PS: Im not sure who "the next guy is" but if he hates the Eagles, then he obviously has taste in music as poor as yours. *spank*
Nice to see someone else with the intelligence to see how the record labels dropped the ball. There are not nearly enough comments such as this one when it comes to this topic. The pop-explosion would have been ten fold if they had marketed the product properly (as would the new pop-punk explosion). Think of all the burnt CDs that are/were kicking around that revenue could have been earned on...I'd hate to guess how much it would be.
Not a shot at the parent, just a note in general about competitive advantage...
A competitive advantage is a result of a company implementing a value-creating strategy that is currently not being implemented by a competitor, or the result of implementing such a strategy more effectively than a competitor. Money is not a competitive advantage.
Moreover, what companies should truly seek is a sustainable competitive advantage, which is one that cannot be (easily) duplicated by a competitor. This is a technology site, not a business theory site, but the reality is that the question posed regarding competitve advantage is a great example of someone using a business buzz word to create the illusion of business intellect. You cannot create either a competitve advantage, or, more importantly, a sustainable competitive advantage by using this technology(before responding to that statement, please keep in mind that, as far as I know, no one knows precisely how the algorithm works, and thus, cannot based a strategy around the technology).
Ouch...kinda harsh.
As long as you've left on a good note (given proper notice - two weeks typically, no screaming matches with old managers, etc etc) then I wouldn't worry too too much.
to Linux really.
While the article has a point that touch-activated LCDs would indeed increase the usability of custom aps, Im not sure how it implies "...easy-to-use Linux-based product for consumers..." that would be a benefit solely to Linux. The operating system is really irrelevant, it's the LCDs that are the key technology.
Nifty project if you have the time on your hands I suppose.
How the HELL is "No. Next?" insightful in ANY way?
:P)
It makes no references to the article or the issue at hand whatsoever, and requires no thought at all. Thus, this comment I am making must ALSO be "Insightful" (although I would disagree
Very true. Also interesting is that 95% of men like to use statistics to seem more intelligent...
Result of suggested plan: Less money.
I love anti-MS and pro-open standard discussions. It results in a great showing of the lack of business sense held by many IT professionals (Note: I did not say "all" or "most", I said many IT professionals). The reason a public company is in business is increase the value of shareholder wealth. Period. For-profit entities do not exist to save the trees, develop world peace, or make computer geeks happy. Moreoever, MS, like every company with a proper strategy, shouldn't want 100% market share. One hundred precent market share will lead to an industry that is easily entered by new competitors due to a lack of competition.
"As for protecting the company's own information, it should be pretty easy to show the cost of losing the data versus the cost of implementing a security feature."
It may be easy to show on paper, but it will still be a cost/benefit question, including the probability that something "bad" will happen. Seems like a job for the salespeople of the security products more than the internal employees. Some companies are also willing to take on the risk, in place of spending the money.
"If you notify your boss in writing of the consequences, then if data is breached, he/she will be accountable."
Depending on the organization, that may or may not matter. Paper trails do not always lead to accountability. Moreover, using the same logic, if you show he/she that you can end these costs by implementing the recommended tools and something "bad" DOES happen, you will be accountable, whether or not it is your fault.
Blame the voters all right, you guys did elect BUSH after all. The rest of the world just shook their heads, but you did it anyways...hehe. A perfect representative for your nation, indeed.
Different DEC, the one I posted about is a Digital Entertainment Center. Check HP's website.
"far less likely to adopt this"
I didn't say they wouldn't adopt it.
My premise is based on four years of experience selling home theatre and computer equipment to the demographic you are talking about. Moreover, there is extensive evidence to show that older demographics are less willing to adopt new technologies. Will this "media free" world eventually exist? Absolutely. My point is we are not at that juncture yet.
PS: There is a big difference between "fewer than expected DVD sales" and an increase in the number of people purchasing DVDs. PPS: I mentioned my reasons for using the HP example in my orignal post, and should have qualified it then, since I forsaw someone coming back on the HP point. Typical response.
A great example of why this machine will be a smashing success.
Microsoft has done a fabulous job of selling it as more than just a game machine.
I see many comments to this effect on this subject. You have to remember that the people who are tech savvy will go this route. Baby boomers and older, however, are far less likely to adopt this. They use their computers for work and school, not for viewing/listening to entertainment media.
As companies such as HP continue to introduce solutions such as their DEC (firstly, HP is a company that this potential market recognizes, and secondly it doesn't appear to be a computer, nor is it to be sold as one as per HP's selling tips, which in turn won't scare this group of potential customers as much) there will be some migration by these "older" generations to the idea of streaming media. However, keep in mind that Blockbuster still makes boatloads of money renting films (of which people are accustomed to), and many people (as was mentioned earlier) enjoy having the tangible disc/media in their hands.
The market saturation on whatever the next media will be is likely to be the same and possibly increase as the number of people purchasing movies vs. renting them is increasing. Also keep in mind that while technology is the focus of the conversations on this site, the focus for the companies in question is profit. They learn from historical failures. Beta's fall was due to poor brand management by Sony (not licensing the product to other manufacturers) and to JVC doing the opposite with VHS.
I don't think that "Circle of Life" is a fair representation of Elton John's quality of work. You're talking about one of the best artists from the 70s here, not a guy who just happened to write a bad (horrible, terrible, putrid) tune for a Disney movie. There are much worse possible musicians that could potentially be involved (Hello, Britney? We're doing a musical Star Wars...)
As far as Andrew Lloyd Webber is concerned, Im not sure there are a heck of alot of people out there who haven't at least heard the title of one of his many hit shows.
Moreoever, if examples of non-feelgood music are needed, Im pretty sure you could check out something from Phantom of the Opera by Webber, or a song along the lines of "The Bitch is Back" by Elton John.
average solution time of 15.10 seconds on a standard 3x3 cube
If I could move my hands that fast I'd never leave the house...
Once they have delisted, yes it will become harder to raise more capital. The bigger issue I think though is that the analysts do not look fondly on a stock that drops off of an exchange. The investing public's opinion will fall drastically and, as a result, the confidence in them will be basically gone. The ability to raise any form of capital (through equity or debt) will be very restricted and there is a likelihood that other companies with receivables out with them will come knocking for their money.
A few years back, there was this group of artists (we'll call them musicians) who got really upset because their stuff was being made available on this thing called the Internet. Since these artists were pure, land-loving, do-gooders (translation: hippies), they didn't see the opportunity that lay before them. Instead of embracing this new technology and using to increase album sales (of which they make little money off of), increase merchandise sales (of which they can make alot of money off of - see Kiss for an example), and increase their fan base (and thus ticket sales) by expanding their exposure exponentially in a way that was previously impossible, they sat around and complained.
Now, we have a new set of artists who are again failing to see the opportunity presented to them. If they were smart, they would work with Google, to develop strategies to increase sales through this new medium.
Just another group of people that do not understand the true marketing power of the Internet and what can be achieved by putting information at the finger tips of the general public.
As far as a good executive not getting in the way; there are many engineers that have to be managed (which should be done properly, I admit) to ensure that projects stay on task and include the specifications that are required. While not always communicated to all employees, executives quite often are working to ensure that projects are inline with corporate strategies that have been defined. The strategies are in place because they have been identified as opportunities to increase shareholder wealth, which is the point of any organization (other than an NPO).
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNew s/20051011/wiretapping_051011/20051011?hub=TopStor ies
It will be interesting to see how it all plays out in the public debate forum over "our nation's safety and security," or privacy.