Real Time: Fad or Foundation
May 11, 2009
Ben Parr wrote “Is Real Time the Future of the Web?” I had not considered this question because moving one mode of communication from a traditional telephone to a mobile device with a keyboard is part of the hybridization and diffusion of technology that characterizes “cut and paste” innovation. Mr. Parr raises some interesting questions in his article here. The one that intrigued me was, “Is it [real time information] sustainable?” On the surface, the answer is, “Yes.” After some reflection, I think that the emergence of text mining, predictive analytics, and comprehensive surveillance may have a significant impact on certain types of real time information flows. The Hawthorne Effect may have a side and backspin which causes certain changes in information behavior. The examples I am thinking about include:
- Bad guys using non monitored channels in order to remain outside the real time flow; for example, hire a person to deliver a coded message
- Teens using F2F (face to face) communication for important information such as the kid with parents away for the weekend
- Executives discussing deals by walking down a noisy sidewalk in a metro area.
Check out Mr. Parr’s approach. I will keep thinking about how certain communication methods may make real time online communications unattractive.
Stephen Arnold, May 10, 2009
Microsoft and Two Rip Tides
May 4, 2009
Jason Hiner’s “The Two Trends That Are Conspiring against Microsoft” here is a so-so title for a pretty good analysis of the rip tides sucking at Microsoft’s revenue. The two points are browser-based applications which blur the distinction between the desktop and the cloud, and mobile devices, which make the traditional desktop computer a boat anchor. The essay is hard hitting, and I think it makes some excellent points.
Stephen Arnold, May 4, 2009
Twitter Bashing
May 1, 2009
Short honk: If you hate Twitter, you will love this criticism of Twitter. It appeared on the MadAtoms.com Web log here. The author of “The Devolution of the Internet” by Farley Elliott is entertaining and insightful. Among the weaknesses of Twitter, Mr. Elliott highlighted:
… perhaps the most disgusting part of Twitter is it’s most basic: it is a chatroom. A quick check of the calendar reveals that it’s not 1995. Yet twitter allows in the same riffraff that early chatrooms attracted, but without any of the moderation, or the ability to spend more than 140 characters wording up trolls and goons.
A keeper for sure.
Stephen Arnold, April 30, 2009
Bandwidth Cost
April 29, 2009
A happy quack to the reader who wrote, asking me to comment on the cost of bandwidth. His point of reference was the New York Times’s article “In Developing Countries, Web Grows Without Profit” here.
“I believe in free, open communications,” Dmitry Shapiro, the company’s chief executive, said. “But these people are so hungry for this content. They sit and they watch and watch and watch. The problem is they are eating up bandwidth, and it’s very difficult to derive revenue from it.”
My views on this issue are well documented in my books and studies. Let me recap three ideas and invite feedback on these.
First, most users and content centric outfits make errors when estimating the costs of online access. Unexpected spikes in telco fees are even today in my experience greeted with surprise and indignation. I hesitate to suggest that bandwidth is assumed to be cheap, readily available, and without much technical interest. As the New York Times’s article points out, bandwidth is an issue, and it can be a deal breaker financially and technically.
Second, in theory bandwidth is unlimited. The “unlimited” comes with two trap doors. One is the money available to apply to the problem. Bandwidth, even today, is not free. Someone has to build the plumbing, pay for infrastructure, hire the technical staff, and work the back office procedures. The second trap door is time. It is possible in Kentucky to make a call and get more bandwidth. But within the last two months, we found that making this call did not result in immediate bandwidth. The vendor said, “We can reprovision you within 72 hours. Take it or leave it.” The reason the vendor made the statement I learned was a result of tightening financial noose around the vendor’s neck. The vendor in turn told me to wait.
Third, user expectations are now being shaped in a direction that makes bandwidth, infrastructure, and technical resources increasingly fragile. Here’s an example. Last night in a restaurant, a young man at a table next to mine watched a YouTube.com video on a mobile device. That young man in Boston and young people throughout the world see the Internet (wireless or wireline) as a broadcast channel. In my experience, this shift to rich media will put financial and technical pressure on infrastructure needed for this use of the Internet.
In short, I think there’s a cost problem looming. Will it arrive before the technical problem? Pick your poison.
Stephen Arnold, April 29, 2009
Twitter Quitter
April 28, 2009
Short honk: I heard quite a bit about how lousy Twitter.com is at the Boston Search Engine Meeting. Now those Twitter bashers have some ammo for their argument. Mashable, the bible of the real time mash up sector, reported 60% of Twitter Users Quit Within the First Month. Click here to check out the stats.
Stephen Arnold, April 29, 2009
Mobile Versus Netbooks as Google Goes Slow
April 27, 2009
In my Google tutorial today (April 26, 2009), I ran through some of Google’s innovations in mobile search and services. One person in the session pointed out that Android 1.5 was immature. I agreed. Nevertheless, Google is plodding forward slowly. The slow motion approach of Google is not an indication of technical ineptitude. My research suggests that Google uses slow movement as a tactic. Android 1.5 will be improved, just not quickly or as quickly as some want a giant software company to react.
I ran through my newsreader items when I returned to my hotel room and spotted an article from New Zealand with this title: “Are Kids Becoming Phone Addicts?” here. For me, the important comment in the write up was:
“There are certainly teenagers who we are seeing that have an over-reliance on their mobiles and who become anxious at the prospect of going without their phone. “They worry that they’ll run out of battery or credit and they’ll be forced to go without this way of communicating with their network of friends. It’s a big fear for them and it illustrates just how important they see the phone as being to their lives.”
I was thinking about my observation that Google was not in a particular hurry with some of its mobile initiatives. This article triggered in my mind the idea of Google’s patience. The company is improving Android and other of its mobile services fast enough. The idea is that as young mobile users grow older, Google will improve a ratchet click at a time. When today’s middle school and high school student are ready, Google’s mobile services will be ready as well.
Will the competitors see Google improving? Yes, but the incremental approach makes it difficult to discern what Google is doing on a larger scale. When the pieces click into place, the customers will be ready.
There’s a risk with this strategy of slow but sure improvement, which is different from Microsoft’s set a ship date and start the death march. The GOOG wanders forward. The approach opens the door for some competitors to move into sectors and capture them as Amazon and Twitter have done in the last six to 12 months. On the other hand, Google has the advantage of deciding what differentiators to release and when.
Will Google’s slow time strategy work? Judging from the “addiction” rate among young mobile users, the Google will have a product that will tempt younger cohorts. If Google fails, it still has mobile services to offer to users through third parties. I am not sure how much of this analysis will play out in reality, but the idea of fast cycle versus slow cycle seems ideal for Google to target specific demographics and then let the aging process carry Google into some markets where mobile will be the primary computing platform, not a netbook or other large form factor device.
Stephen Arnold, April 27, 2009
Twitter: Now a Thought Leader Gets It
April 16, 2009
I was delighted to read Steve Espinosa’s “How Twitter Will Win Local Search” here. The story appeared in Silicon Alley Insider. I have been reluctant to post my specific views of Twitter because I sell these addled ideas to even more addled clients. But when something runs in the pulsing “blogosphere”, I want to call attention to the information. One useful function of Twitter is providing very timely, quite specific information about local activities. At lunch, one of the goslings monitors Tweets flowing in real time from Twitter users in the Louisville area. (We don’t get many Tweets in Harrod’s Creek. Ground hogs and possums have yet to acquire iPhones.) Why is this important? The young goslings at ArnoldIT.com use it to locate lunch specials. One of the perks of putting up with the addled goose is a company provided meal at a sit down restaurant every work day. The Twitter thing works like a champ, and it gave me the confidence in my new Google: The Digital Gutenberg to assert that the Google may find itself on the outside looking in with regard to real time search.
Mr. Espinosa said:
You actually have a profitable revenue source that may not be the end all be all model, but will be a huge chuck of revenue that does not interrupt the user experience but actually makes it better.
I think he may be on the trail leading toward a business model. A happy quack to him for posting this analysis. The trick to understanding real time search is to think in terms of the utility of lots of eyeballs and users who may have an answer to a particular, location-centric query. The next step is to think about monetization options as Mr. Espinosa has. Will Twitter be the winner in this space? Who knows. Will some company emerge as an oxygen hog? Absolutely.
Stephen Arnold, April 16, 2009
Twitter Amazon, Amazon Twitter
April 8, 2009
Twitter has not been the winner of the uptime Derby at least in Kentucky. One of my readers reported Twitter issues in Israel yesterday. What is interesting is that TechFlash reported that some folks are pointing a finger at Amazon.com, the back end for Tweets. Amazon, according to TechFlash, asserted here “Don’t Blame Us for Twitter Problems.” TechFlash’s story reported:
In addition to being a user of Amazon’s S3, Twitter has a relationship with Amazon.com CEO Jeff Bezos, who is a personal investor in the microblogging service.
Twitter seems to be getting quite a bit of buzz. One hopes the Amazon Twitter or the Twitter Amazon issues can be happily resolved.
Stephen Arnold, April 8, 2009
Twitter Downsides for Business
April 8, 2009
Short honk: If you want to get ammunition to cool the Twitter fever in your organization, you will want to read “Top 10 Reasons Your Company Should Not Tweet” here. I don’t feel comfortable summarizing the 10 tips, but I can mention one of them and offer a comment. Tip Number 9 is about analytics. The What’s Next Blog posting points to two services that can provide some Twitter-ific data: www.budurl.com and www.bit.ly. Useful article.
Stephen Arnold, April 8, 2009
Google Local Search: Bad News for Yellow Pages
April 7, 2009
I loathe clumsy printed telephone directories. The information is stale, and I probably consult my Yellow Pages twice, maybe three times a year. When I want a phone number or I need to find a vendor, I look in Google’s directories. Search Engine Journal’s Arnold Zafra wrote “Google Expands Local Search here.” When I read the headline, I thought, “Good.” He provides a summary of an item that appeared earlier today on the ArnoldIT.com Overflight service here, but I don’t do news in this Web log. I point to useful write ups and offer observations. The run down of new features is clear, better than Google’s own happy face style of writing in my opinion. The big news is that Google uses discerned context to refine the search results. Access the local search here. I know it looks like Google Maps but run a query with a zip code to get started here.
Stephen Arnold, April 7, 2009
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
