Microsoft Sees Google as No Threat
April 4, 2010
I am not sure if the story “Microsoft Won’t Make Office for IPad, Says Google No Threat” is an April Fools’ joke or not. Google has a real threat in Facebook. And, April Fool or not, Microsoft has a real threat in Google. Companies that once looked unassailable are increasingly vulnerable, and that’s no joke. There is a big push for finding simple explanations for the complexities of information, organizational methods, and human motives. The reality is that if you look at a map of Venice in the 16th century, the trickiness of the street layout is evident. If you visit modern day Venice, you have the old passageways plus the wackiness of high speed boats taking you places that you have a tough time locating in your mental map. As hard as it is to believe, the complexity of the physical layout of Venice is greater today than it was in the 16th century. The old Venice looks positively streamlined compared to the modern day set up.
Source: http://historic-cities.huji.ac.il/italy/venice/maps/pinargenti_1573_venice_b.jpg
Just look at what the modern maps omit to make some type of orientation practical for the first time visitor.
And Venice is 159 square miles, which is about half the size of Chicago.
If we assume that the Bloomberg article is true, then Microsoft is engaging in the very popular sport of simplification. According to the news story, a Microsoft executive, Stephen Elop, allegedly said:
“We haven’t heard anything about Google making inroads against Office, because they’re not,” Elop said today in an interview. Office includes word-processing, spreadsheet and other business-productivity programs.
The article then points out that Microsoft will not make a version of its popular, feature rich program, Office, for the Apple iPad.
My take is that if the story is true, Microsoft is simplifying the action of two competitors who themselves are working quite hard to avoid marginalization. I know that the idea of Apple and Google finding themselves on the periphery of today’s booming markets is silly, but I think that the fragility makes these co9mpanies vulnerable.
Google has not mounted a response to Facebook and the shift from search to just asking members of a community a question. The other aspects of the social media boom that Facebook to some degree represents is foreign to the math club.
Apple has its own problems looming. First, the company has to find a way to maintain its proprietary ecosystem in the expanding open movement. At some point, the Apple value may run into mass market realities for commoditization. Commodities require low cost, and if a closed system costs more, the commoditizers may start slow but gain momentum. Elite is good, but it may not scale. And Apple may find that it triggers as much fear and loathing as Google in the rich content game. Apple has the upper hand right now, but a revolt is certainly possible. If Apple experiences a change in leadership, some real dislocation can take place and fast.
In the midst of this, Microsoft is keeping its message simple. Google is trying to put cats back in the bag, but I don’t think the steamed red herring with vegetables will do the job. Apple is the master of PR but a backlash is something about which one might want to think.
To sum up, simplify if you want. But the complexities within, among, and across these companies is a characteristic of human interaction. Human behavior has been simplified to self interest but, like the passageways in Venice, it is easy to get lost. Simple, right?
Stephen E Arnold, April 4, 2010
Storage Report Predictions
April 3, 2010
Lots of “expects” and “estimates” in a report published by Coughlin Associates.I scanned a summary of some of the findings reported in “2010 Digital Storage for Media and Entertainment Report Released”. You can fill out a somewhat tedious form and get a copy of the full document by pointing your browser here. I found these three “factoids” interesting:
- Total revenue for storage media will increase about 4X from 2009 through 2015 ($415 M to $1,642 M)
- About 93% of the total storage capacity will be used for content archiving and preservation in 2009. (Good news for search I think.)
- Digital storage requirements are exploding due to use of higher resolution and stereoscopic content in the media and entertainment industry. (Maybe, maybe not).
Stephen E Arnold, April 3, 2010
No one paid me to write this.
Google Beyond Text Video Available
March 26, 2010
Stephen E Arnold’s fourth Google monograph Google Beyond Text will be available in May 2010. ArnoldIT.com released a three minute video highlighting the themes of the groundbreaking study. Google Beyond Text focuses on firm’s technical innovations in the field of rich media. One of the findings from the research conducted by the ArnoldIT.com team is that Google may have the systems and methods in place to allow motion picture and television production companies to reinvent themselves. You can access the video on YouTube.com. A free, sample chapter draft from the forthcoming study is available via Seed2020. The first three monographs are available from Infonortics Ltd. in Tetbury, Glos. The fourth study will be published by the Intellas Press.
Stuart Schram IV, March 26, 2010
This is a promotional message paid for by Stephen E Arnold.
Google Beyond Text Sample Chapter
March 23, 2010
Stephen E Arnold’s new monograph about Google technology is just about complete. The study will be available in May 2010 from Intellas Press. The monograph focuses on Google non-text technical disclosures. Like Mr. Arnold’s previous three Google studies, the focus is on Google’s technical capabilities. Mr. Arnold’s 2009 study, Google: The Digital Gutenberg examined the company’s infrastructure as a digital River Rouge; that is, information goes in one end and complete content objects come out the other. Google Beyond Text tackles rich media, including images, audio, and video. The research has consumed more than one year and relies upon Google’s open source disclosures in technical papers, financial filings, and patent documents. You can get a sense of the type of information in this important new study by requesting a sample chapter from the monograph. The chapter that is available in draft form and without charge discusses the gap in Google’s non-text capabilities. Among the companies discussed are Catch Media, La La Media, and DoubleTwist. The book is intended from technically inclined individuals, investors, Google competitors, and those interested in a book that skips the “Sergey and Larry eat pizza” approach to Google’s technical systems and methods. You can request the sample chapter by navigating to http://www.theseed2020.com/gbt/. A PDF will be sent to you without charge. The hope is that you will either provide some constructive criticism and maybe order a copy of the monograph when it becomes available.
Ken Toth, March 23, 2010
This was a sponsored post supported by ArnoldIT.com. This is a marketing article.
Google Wants Independent Bands
March 18, 2010
Short honk: Ask yourself this question, “Why does Google want independent bands on YouTube?” Read the news story “YouTube Introduces Musicians Wanted for Indie Bands.” One piece of the answer appears in this comment:
To get on to Musicians Wanted, you need to apply through the site’s partner programme. If you are then selected by YouTube, you will have your own dedicated page where you can add gig listings, links to buying your music and your live videos and music. To get money from the site, you will get the ‘majority’ of advertising revenue. And you will also get a share of funds if your music video is embedded on to other sites.
For the full answer, you can read my forthcoming study which will be published by Intellas in mid 2010. In the meantime, watch for other Googley actions in the non text sectors.
Stephen E Arnold, March 18, 2010
Shameless marketing of my new study. I paid myself to write this stellar article.
The Math Club Wants Your TV
March 18, 2010
When I think of my high school math club, I remember comments about the oh-so-cool people on American Bandstand. Then it was dinner, homework, and reading under the watchful eye of mom and dad. TV was not the main event, and to this day, I don’t get too excited about information acquisition that is essentially sedentary and serial. The Google is more hip. I read “YouTube Is Huge: 24 Hours of Video Now Uploaded Every Minute,” and I realized that I am decidedly uncool. The article points out that the Google can suck in this content and “there’s no sign of it stopping.” Great.
Next I read the New York Times somewhat breathless write up “Google and Partners Seek a Television Foothold,” which recycles Google’s interest in pumping digital video from its content delivery network to televisions. For me, the most interesting comment was:
Google’s efforts to break into television advertising date back three years. Through a program called Google TV Ads, the company sells advertising on a small number of satellite and small cable television systems, as well as some cable networks. But interest in the program has been limited and the amount of revenue that Google has been able to generate from it has been small.
So that means that the NYT has determined that Google and TV has been in the works for 36 months. I am not so sure I agree. Perhaps the NYT researchers elected not to examine Google patent documents. The rich media locomotive has been in development for somewhat longer. The purchase of YouTube.com took place in 2006, and some of the technology referenced in the NYT write up dates back beyond that point in time.
What else is in the Google train yard? Lots more.
Stephen E Arnold, March 18, 2010
No one paid me to write this. My reference to a train means that I need to report non payment to Amtrak, a heck of an outfit.
Cisco Throw Down: Accelerating the Internet
March 11, 2010
I keep track of the network hardware folks, but I don’t write about them in Beyond Search. Most of my readers are interested in search, content processing, and electronic information. I am pretty confident about what my readers want because I only have two or three readers. One is my assistant and the other two people are actually Internet café terminals I hacked to get my RSS feed. So, I’m unpopular. No problem for the addled goose in rural Kentucky.
I read “Cisco Shows Off Super Router” and because the article gets close to what will be an interesting front in the traditional networking sector’s battle with Google. Yep, I know. Google is a search and advertising company. Save that for the search engine optimization crowd and the azure chip crowd.
The core of the story is the statement allegedly made by John Chambers, Cisco CEO:
“Video is the killer app,” Chambers said. “Video brings the Internet to life.”
The idea is that textual information is yesterday. He is right even though I hate to see the end of an era. I regret the loss of mainframes and the wonderful revenue stream those gizmos delivered to me, but time moves on.
What the article triggered in my thinking was that Hewlett Packard and Cisco had a love spat. Now Cisco is going to find itself going where the money is, and that means into traditional telco land. The problem is that the Google with its own home brew telecommunications capabilities, the stuff it has acquired, and the technology in which it invests is going to a much larger factor in Cisco’s future. I think that may be bad news for Cisco and for some telcos. The reason is that the Google is pushing toward efficient, automated, lower cost methods.
To learn about one of Google’s little adventures, check out my KMWorld column about a company with “wireless networks that simply work?. Who will win the next series of battle in this coming collision of Google and outfits allied with traditional telecommunications companies? I don’t know, but I wager that the “real” consultants, the poobahs, mavens, and self appointed experts will discover this skirmish soon enough.
Stephen E Arnold, March 11, 2010
I was paid for the KMWorld article, but I was not paid for this reference to the KMWorld article. So, this write falls into the category of shameless marketing and self promotion. I love it.
YouTube.com Market Share
March 9, 2010
Fast Company ran a snippet in its March 8, 2010 “Today in Most Innovative Companies” column that provides some information about YouTube.com’s market share. Here are the highlights that I marked:
- 40 percent market share (comScore data)
- 12.8 billion videos “compared with Hulu’s 903 million”. (I know this is ambiguous but the delta is interesting)
- Viewers watch 93 videos per month on YouTube.com. Hulu viewers was 23 videos per month.
What’s with Google and video? Is it another missed opportunity like Google’s social media efforts? a similar theme appears in “Nexus One’s Biggest challenge Isn’t iPhone; It’s Google’s Online Only Sales Model?” Frisky stuff.
Stephen E Arnold, March 10, 2010
No one paid me to document these three items. Because I mention television, I think of Newton Minnow, so I will report this lack of payment to Fish & Wildlife. I wonder if Fish & Wildlife are responsible for “vast wastelands”?
Google and Rich Media Intent
March 1, 2010
Google’s YouTube.com has traffic, but it is not a revenue home run. In fact, Google provides no detailed numbers about YouTube.com’s financials. Clicking around YouTube.com, one of the traffic magnets on the Internet, ads are appearing but the Google overlays can be intrusive. The lion’s share of Google’s revenue comes from AdSense and AdWords. Neither YouTube.com nor Google’s enterprise services are revenue hat tricks yet.
As one of the top five Web sites on the Internet, Google seems to be at a loss to make YouTube.com a money machine like AdWords and AdSense.
Is Google indifferent to YouTube.com, its costs, and its lackluster advertising performance? The answer is a qualified “no.” Google’s been interested in video for years.
On February 23, 2010, the United States Patent & Trademark Office granted Google a patent for its smart software video segmenting invention. The patent’s title is clearer than some of Google’s patent documents. “Deconstructing Electronic Media Stream into Human Recognizable Portions” (US7668610) understates the Google invention.
Google’s smart software watches videos and listens to music. The system figures out segments that make sense to a human. The method indexes the video and tags it so each piece carries an identifier. These chunks can be dealt out to Google’s servers and then delivered via Google’s content delivery network to users.
The technology disclosed in this patent document is industrial strength, and it may be beyond the reach of companies with a more successful rich media business. The technology, which few companies can match today, was developed in 2005, maybe as early as 2004.
US7668610, filed on November 2005, operates at Google scale. Google’s smart software can chop up audio and video into logical segments, index them, and tag with unique identifiers. But the most impressive function in the patent is that as the system operates, it learns.
Google has dozens of patents and applications that bear directly on rich media. With the cost of research and legal fees, Google’s rich media inventions make clear that Google is serious about video.
With years of investment and the efforts of some of the world’s brightest engineers, why is Google making little apparent progress? The Sundance test allowed YouTube.com users a way to pay to view a handful of independent films, screened at the Sundance Festival earlier this year. Then nothing.
Our research reveals that Google has a rich media push underway. Like its earlier foray into telecommunications, Google moves slowly.
There are some interesting signals that Google’s activity in rich media is increasing. Vizio, a manufacturer of flat panel televisions, is now advertising that YouTube.com can be watched on Internet-capable Vizios. At the Computer Electronics Show, one company showed a Google set top box running Android (Google’s mobile operating system) with a personalized program guide. In Barcelona, tablets running Android were spotted by those with a nose for the novel gizmo.
Is Google going to be late to the rich media party? Google has mishandled its social media service, Orkut. The new Google Buzz triggered a landslide of criticism from those offended by Google’s exposing information without users’ permission. Now Google faces push back from the Department of Justice in the US about Google Books and possible antitrust trouble from the European Union.
Music and video are big business. Just look at Apple’s revenues from its integrated hardware, software, online retailing operation. Walmart paid $100 million for service that can stream HD videos.
Where’s Google? Visible but lacking the money-spinning angle like a theater owner who sells high-margin soft drinks and popcorn.
Stephen E Arnold, March 1, 2010
Nope, a freebie. No one paid me to write about video. I think that means I have to report non payment to the FCC. Consider it done.
SSN Minute about Facebook Available
February 25, 2010
The SSN Minute, which runs two minutes and four seconds this week is available on the Strategy Social Networking Web log. Just click on the SSN Minute logo. The topic is “Will Facebook Be Able to Stand the Legal Heat?’” SSN believes that Facebook may be the next big, successful company to come under increased legal scrutiny. The headlines are going to Google’s current legal troubles, but Facebook may find itself next in line. Can Facebook deal with this new business challenge. Tune in to find out the SSN team’s view. SSN provides readers with bite-sized information nuggets about the use of social networks to father one’s business, brand, or career. The information service features original stories and summaries of important contributions from other organizations. ArnoldIT.com owns the SSN Blog.
Donald Anderson, February 25, 2010
Mr. Anderson is paid to work on the SSN Minute.
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
