Life As It Goes By

IT or Information Technology is something we are no longer unfamiliar with nowadays. There might be minority of people who pride themselves on not being caught in some crazy trends but I believe this number is coming down. I just hook my father up to the Internet more than half a year as his faithful service (Teletext giving “real time” stock prices) from the local broadcaster suddenly stopped. Instead, calling busy brokers to ask for price information, he approached me for help. So, I threw together a decent laptop loaded with SUSE Linux and then, it began… Amazingly, my dad survives till today, making only complaints about the inability to install some Window applications recommended by my sister.

Even though things seem still to be growing, the industry is shrinking as the IT giants began to cross one another’s path. Take the G-M-Y, M-G-Y or Y-M-G for example, Microsoft (M) has been aggressively pushing for market share in the search engine business. Partnering with Yahoo (Y) and Wolfram Alpha (if you don’t know what it is, see this),and at the same time, (close to) bribing News Corporation, Microsoft is really putting up a good fight for something they have missed out in the beginning despite being ahead with the Internet technologies. They focused too much on the web browser technology and neglected the true potential of web services or portal. They followed up with the purchase of Hotmail and tried to build a community around the MSN portal but they are still way behind Yahoo and Google (G). Just imagine how fast Google builds up its email service, brushing Hotmail and Yahoo! Mail aside. As for the portal, Google tries to do it in a different way (typical of Google) while they take cautious measures to protect their most valuable assets: search engine.  Though they also try to imitate services such as Yahoo! Finance and Yahoo! News, they should receive credit in exploring in other areas such as Google Maps, Google book and Google Docs.

Google Docs could be the trigger point for the war between Microsoft and Google. Challenging Microsoft’s 2nd prized product with features (free and collaborative) it lacks of, Google presents itself as quite a competitor in this arena. Thanks to the many acquisitions before and the maturity of the Office technologies, Microsoft is able to stand off such challenges (not the first time since Sun Microsystems and IBM have been in the competition for quite some time. Not to forget other Office products built for Linux and Mac OS). But things might change in the future as Google seems to have taken the right step. Microsoft should learn from the lessons it had with GNU tools (free software tools). While Linux did make a big impact on the server software business, its success with consumer is not as measurable. But GNU tools and free tools such as Eclipse have seriously challenged Microsoft’s compiler tools’ business. When it tries to release the product for free a few years ago, it is a sign of things changing. Seriously, collaborative software for unlimited users (and of course, for zero license fee) is very attractive for multinational companies and international community. If the Google Doc is able to match up with Microsoft Office or somewhere close to OpenOffice or IBM Lotus Symphony, it would be my default choice (rather than preferred one).

This probably explains why Microsoft is fighting so hard in this business of searching. So far, these wonderful services from Google have a common issue. They may not be as outstanding as its search engine service, particularly in terms of popularity and technological edge. We have used Google search engine for more than 10 years now and will continue to do so, just as we will use Microsoft Windows. Google Maps looks promising until Bing Maps and Yahoo! Maps can be seen on some websites. Google books remain a black horse. Having cleared recently a barrier with publishers, it still faces an uphill task especially in the face of Amazon.com. This is always the case when you are changing the landscape of the industry. See what MP3 or digital audio has done to the music industry. Anyway, the great benefits of the technology are becoming visible in national libraries. Another reason why Microsoft is in this battle could be the attacks incoming (Google Chrome in both web browser and Operating System). It just can’t sit there and take the hits.

With the Google Chrome OS, Google prepares to make a paradigm shift in the industry landscape again. Already running in mobile phones in the Android version, the OS is tagged with what Google is famous for: search, and its other services. In this move, Google tries to spread over a wide range of platform, building on its currently available services or technologies. They might be over stretched but it definitely worth a try. But by completing this step, Google has set stage for direct confrontation with Microsoft across the horizon. Next, it would just need to push forward (vertically) for all technologies and head for a showdown.

Let’s not leave Yahoo! out of the picture. Its portal services or business is still amazingly strong, thanks to the first-mover advantage. It just needs to re-discover the magic that brings them to where they are today. Amidst the commotion of selling the company, Yahoo! shows signs of seeing the light at the end of the tunnel. Abandoning the search engine business (which might already have been a lost cause), partnering with cash rich Microsoft and extending on the email service (to include facilities to social networking and so on), Yahoo! is making the right moves. It is also a key player in online advertising but this is also the most intense competition would be. Being more focused now, Yahoo! can be a force and relive its past glorious moments. Strategy should be simple: kept out from the battle between the 2 Goliaths and stay afloat as there will be tremors created by the two from time to time for sure.

Not long ago I had attended a conference on Web 2.0 and in one of the talks, I was introduced to the concept of Web 3.0. It was the first time I acquainted myself with the latest technology on Internet. Obviously, my mouth was wide open when the speaker threw all these new terms to my life. For a moment, I felt so backward and then, I re-assured myself that being there has made me one of the pioneers in this knowledge (let’s not compare with others…). My first thought of Web 3.0, “is it a marketing gimmick?” Someone must be wanting to outrun others and jump the ship from 2.0 to 3.0 by introducing some funny ideas. I mean it’s normal when people have already started populating words with 2.0 behind (good money for dictionaries though). It’s sooner or later that all the words we know will have numerals at the back…

So what’s Web 3.0? Is there really such a thing? Well, it turn out to be true. It always difficult to accept things that you rarely are in contact with. Web 3.0 is related to the semantic Web. In fact, based on Wikipedia’s explanation, semantic web is a component of Web 3.0 (quoted from the Sir Tim Berners-Lee, creator of WWW).

What semantic web means is this: a more “meaningful” web that can link to one another through “meaningful” relationships (in my very own words, please “comms” me if I am wrong). In Web 1.0, the websites provide static information which people just read from them. In Web 2.0, these information becomes alive. You can now directly communicate with websites and use their services like yours. However, the whole wide web is still in a mess. For example, when you do a search on “Television”, you will see 301 million results. But you are looking for, is probably the television programme for tonight, or prices of television (LCD, Plasma or LED). A word can have many specific meanings or different applications. So if the web is more structured (i.e. categorized nicely), you may find what you want in a faster manner, compared to going through the millions of results.

For a quick demonstration, click on this.

If you think Google is the only one equipped with this, then you are wrong. Try clicking on an article on Washington Post’s website (sorry, it used to be free access without membership login). You will see at the bottom and below the article, a box with a number of circles with names of the key people or organisations in them. Click on any one of them, you will see a few more circles linking to the one that you have clicked. This shows the related items and it is a perfect application of semantic web.

When I tried to pitch this new finding to my colleagues, they gave me the same reply, “So?”. I could only say that this is still in the early stage of development. The killer application is yet to be found. How many people have really heard of MPEG-7 or MPEG-21? How about 4G and 7G? All these take time to develop, mature and apply broadly and deeply. I know you are going to ask me, “so what’s in for me then?”. I am sure you are like me: I am not going to spend time linking up whole the web and try to make meaning out of them. I would rather wait and make use of the outcome.

I would like to think in this way. This new web should give an experience, much alike to that of Amazon’s. While you browse its catalog, it studies you and your actions. It remembers and tries to recommend you the related items. The deeper you follow their recommendations, the more advanced or specialized the recommendations would be. What’s even more amaz(on)ing is that it can package a nice deal for you instantly. Or it can create tailored promotions for you on your next visit or in your newsletter. The temptation to spend is high as you are getting things that you are at least interested in.

Now, imagine the web only gives you information that you are only interested in. It also remembers what you looked for previously and when you are back to this search again. It gives more in-depth information and other alternatives that are very close to what you are finding. It draws you to look further and find more than what you intend to. What would you say of this experience? Satisfied user, you must be. It completes you.

If this is too abstract, let me try again. For instance, you are looking for a recipe. You run the dish name on the search engine, and it returns the exact recipe. Not only that, it also provide some links to videos showing the steps, cheap prices of the ingredients and where to get them, different varieties of the recipe for different taste buds (the search engine probably remembers yours!) and cooking lessons that will help you in this dish. Not only your search is a fruitful one, it’s also a very instant one. Why waste time looking through the results one by one? This is what we call, “Personalization”. It’s all about you, the user of the WWW.

And how’s that for you?

Searching for the right tool to “search” what you want from the Internet? You might think that search was already over long time ago. Sorry that I have gotten you all confused over this busines of searching. You can’t blame me really. Blame those search engines.

Yes, it’s a new search engine online and yes, it’s from a familiar name. Welcome, Bing.com from Microsoft! Other than visual appeal, it’s a bit tough to tell the difference from Google.com. I did a test by entering the same text on both websites. Great, the results are different. Different algorithm must be in use. The question is, why another?

From the business point of view (purely Microsoft’s), it makes sense to have what everyone is having. With Microsoft’s marketing muscle, it won’t find it difficult to create some revenue from online advertising from this portal (oh yes, the magic word that we used to relate it with Yahoo or AOL, just like search with Yahoo, Excite and Lycos etc). Not ony that, it also helps to weaken Google command on the price. It’s direct retaliation from Microsoft after Google crossed the boundaries by creating its own web browser and operating systems (so far limited to handheld devices). Well, that’s not all to it. It also represents an attack on the sinking Yahoo and whatever there remains.

Of course, it won’t be straightforward victory. The portals are built around communities or loyal customers. They won’t be gone in a day or even a few years. As Microsoft should already know, search engines are now more than just what they do. They themselves are a brand. Customers remember the logo and vaguely what the search engine actually excels in. As Google pampers its users with more freebies and convenience, its users stay closer with it. This is why Yahoo is still a force these days. It’s really about value creation. At the end of the day, I ,as a user, don’t truly bother who gives me a better search result. So long as I can find what I am looking for. I am a satisfied customer and a repeated one too.

In a market where brands are important, one should focus on differentiation. Yes, Google is unique indeed. Now that it’s a big boy. It can perform and create challenges that a few can match. So, it’s essential for each to target a specific market segment. Wikipedia.org is a good example. It helps to search for specific term or words too. It is more just than a list of results. It’s educational and encourages more collaboration and sharing from the larger group out there. Another example is wolframalpha.com (don’t ask me what it means). Try typing names of 3 companies (max is 4) of the same industry and voila! You can see an executive summary of current prices, fundamentals, price history and performance etc. You can even download the report in pdf (but limited information). Though it’s not as comprehensive as Google, it stands out for what it does best. It’s still in its infancy and I expect more from this tool.

To sum it up, the Internet works much like the TV or media. Whatever tool or program that receives the most airtime from its users or viewers will always command a better price for the advertisements. It’s also unlikely that all viewers will switch channel at one time. There might be trends that they follow. So, it’s back to the same, old theory of “the best wins it all”. Even so, there will still be viewers for news program or sports, discovery, science and on on. The program may forget the mass and still survive (that’s why there are so many magazine titles around the world) these days. Though users like to have choices, they would stick to what they like most. As such, it doesn’t matter how many search engines are out there. Unless there is an outstanding one, I would be less likely to change that bookmark or search toolbar of mine.

Today we take a snapshot of another industry moving to mature stage.

Cameras make up a special part of our lives. The photos they produce help to keep our memory space free for other usage. Everyone likes photos. Every photo tells a story that only the owner of the photo knows best. Even when a photo is only black and white, people were still amazed by what the technology offered them. Satisfaction is the key. It doesn’t really matter whether the size of the photo is large or small. It’s the memories that are attached with the photo.

Film camera though not exactly the first camera invented dominates for a couple of decades before giving way to digital camera. It’s the film camera era when the users departed ways. There were the so-called consumer cameras (from instant camera to Polaroid camera) and the professional cameras. Differences were the size of the camera, lens and number of functions/features.

What has changed since (I always like to talk about this to others) is the evolution to “digital” cameras. Another real world story tells how technology advances shape an industry. To be specific, the dimensions of the camera, particularly the thickness, has changed. The storage for the image has changed. Yes, you don’t have to worry about hiding your film in complete darkness and protecting it in dry, vacuum cabinet. You use something called a storage media. What’s more amazing is this media (regardless of which format) allows you to use it on various devices. So, it’s for multi-purpose usage.

Thirdly, you don’t have to squeeze your eye through the viewfinder to see what the camera sees. In fact, you distance yourself away from the camera to have a good look at 2-4″ LCD screen. Finally, what got be an unforgettable experience is the process of taking the photo. You no longer need to wait outside the 1-hour photo express outlets to collect the results of your photoshooting. In less than few seconds (even faster than the polaroid camera), you have an instant feedback. And you don’t have to go back to the same location some other time to get that second chance to take a better one. Or even better, you can snap 5-10 shots to take home to judge later. To top it up, you can even edit those that are slightly off. You just have to love the digital cameras.

And for this love, you pay the price . How many digital cameras, compared to film cameras do you own in your whole life? Let me see, a ratio of 3:1? If it’s more than that, you are probably one of those who are thrilled to hear big number such as “it’s 8 megapixels now…”. Suddenly, everyone, learning from their PC buying experience, values their digital cameras in terms of the number of megapixels (as if it is supposed to be a measurement of speed and accuracy). So the manufacturers gave what everybody wants.

Come to think about it. Are the product specifications really what the manufacturers think about everyday to give them a technological edge? It feels more like what the consumers are looking for. Please enlighten me on the ISO speed of the digital camera. Isn’t that something for films? I am sorry that I am not an expert or even a professional photographer. But it really makes me think hard about the technology behind the digital cameras. As far as I know, as an engineer, it uses a IC chip that takes in data from the sensor (to light, of course). There are two types of sensor: CCD (Charge-coupled Device) and CMOS (or the active pixel sensor). I don’t think the film we used before is made of any of these materials. So what the ISO speed…? To me, it’s simply the speed of the sensor for capturing the image from the light entering the shutter.  I believe the word compatible has to be inserted in such specifications one of these days (which are ending soon by the way).

Other electronics are mainly for processing, storing and displaying the image, as well as additional features for the cameras. Mechanical parts probably give better light and speed controls and more importantly, the aesthetics of the toy.

That’s pretty much what each maker can offer. That’s probably why there are now so many companies making digital cameras. So long as you have the right suppliers for your sensors and lens, the rest shall depends on your manufacturing capabilities.

So it’s sad to see some big camera companies dropping behind the scene. Brands such as Polaroid, Leica, Minolta and Pentax have suddenly vanished from the display shelves. Worse off are the film and related brands such as Konica and AgfaPhoto. The industry landscape has transformed itself almost completely. This, however, doesn’t mean a bad thing for all. New entrants such as Panasonic, Sony and even Casio (& HP) gained previously unthinkable market shares. Companies such as Kodak and Fujifilm are forced to reborn themselves as camera makers. The few legacy (Canon, Nikon and Olyumpus) that remain have its own fates. And indeed, the market for the digital cameras has grown by leaps and bounds these years. The pie is bigger now for everyone.

This is also where the problem lies today. Everyone wants a piece of the pie and they start making phones, laptops, PDAs and so on with cameras (maybe one day Casio will come up with watches and calculators, equipped with camera capabilities. Not sure for whatever reason though).  The rapid commodization has caused cannibalization of the camera market. The leading pack has lost its nose in the chase of higher megapixels (just like Intel). They begin to throw in features like face detection, sorting of photo albums with the use of object recognition and maybe even 3-D images. This brings everyone to wonder the real needs of such features.

Yes, these are signs: signs of saturation, signs of reaching the end or hitting the tope. It’s true that greater innovations are desired at this point of time but don’t forget, everything has its moments, just like the film cameras…

In Dec 2007, I posted an article “Personal Journalling” on this website. At that time, I had thought of how an individual can setup a website that does the same as what any big newspaper or media companies do for delivering the news and opinions in print.

I have since kept this thought aside (I am also having a hard time updating the content of this website). However, the recent news of failure in some media companies have brought me back to this frame of thinking. I knew I was right to say that personal journalism posed a threat to the media companies. What I would like to know is how big impact the would be and what is going to happen in the future.

Firstly, I would like to share my own experience for the past year. It was not easy for 1 person to man this website. Coming up with ideas is one thing. Finding time and energy to sit down and write an article is another. What turns out may not always be what is planned in the beginning. On top of that, I become aware that I am in need of an editor. Not only as someone who checks on my work but also filter the funny ideas I have in mind.

To sum it up, it’s not really easy. Setting up a website requires knowledge on Internet programming which I have picked up along the way. It’s fun but time-consuming too. Even today, I can’t say confidently that I am very comfortable with my skill levels. My true interest is really to create more interesting contents, not making website work functionally or as beautiful as one can imagine. There are also issues with the contents generated. Do they really suit the taste of everyone? Do they state the right facts or analysis? I have once read about some professor complaining about websites that provide contents of low standards, degrading the food of thought. Wrong sources of information are given and readers are being mis-led.

Perhaps personal journalism, which is something like a blog, doesn’t have a very high, direct impact on these companies. Web technologies are the ones with the most direct impact on them. Moving from print to web becomes a must in the media industry. While most media companies have already access to the worldwide network of newsstands, they can’t have them opened 24 hours. There are even no vending machines for magazines. Even if there was, there would still be a time when the news in the magazines and newspapers are out-dated. On top of that, these machines are dull-looking and a complete eye sore. Who cares about them when there is so much excitement and fun in the Web?

The news of troubled Tribune Co raised the alarm in my mind. Does this mean the change of an era? I definitely see more advertisement online. Though I have seen them more than once on the same website, I don’t find them bothering me too much. The graphics and presentation of these ads are comparable to those in TV and cinemas (and definitely better than those static ones in papers). Additionally, I can google immediately to find out more or simply click on the ad. This change did not happen two or three years ago. It was way long before that. Maybe it’s around when Bill Gates talked about business at the speed of thought…

Like the so-called airtime in the broadcasting world, media companies such as newspapers and magazine need to demand same type of attention from its readers. If readers are moving to the Web, then these companies would have to do the same way. Companies such as New York Times and BusinessWeek have been adapting well (relatively). It’s tough. Yes, we all know. The right business model hasn’t appeared yet. But survival is important too. Web presents a channel for innovation, something that some of these media companies have forgotten. I don’t mean coming up with eye-catching advertisments or headlines. I mean the way of communicating directly with the readers. When you read an interesting article in the paper, you just stop there. You can’t go further. You can’t point to the writer which part is so right or wrong. You can’t express your own way because it’s always in one direction. Not only this, to get some news out to a reader in the past, the media company needs to check the layout and colors of the pages before printing and once printed, it has to load up the trucks for distribution. It’s a long and expensive (in terms of resources involved) process. Everything is so much easier using the Web. If you don’t like at any time, you can retrieve it and upload an updated version. Everybody is cool about it. You can’t do so for the print version.

Finally, personal journalism, I think, would come one day. It’s about the ability to do so. There is little barrier to creating personal website. Anyone who loves to write should be encouraged to do so. He or she just need to enlist help from those Web savvy users and make sure there is a feedback channel installed on his or her website. Things will improve along the way. I believe we are all curious about all kinds of stuff whether they are true or not. It doesn’t matter who says or sees it first. News are meant to be spread and the Web provides the perfect medium. It’s impossible for a website to deliver news of great accuracy, just like a newscaster or reporter can’t guarantee that the piece of news on her or his hand is the absolute truth. We are in the Information Age where information exchange takes place not only in 2 ways but also multiple ways. The result of this is a better informed reader, as well as a writer. We all grew smarter by asking questions and finding answers to them. We may be fooled many times but we learn to judge each fact and myth. Ultimately, we are still given the choices.

List of Tribune Co. assets

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_assets_owned_by_Tribune_Company

Not long ago, BusinessWeek published an article on “How Low Can PC Prices Go?” This marked a turning point of the market. As former Intel’s boss, Andrew Grove, formulated that, in every ten years, there will be an “X” factor that can drive the business out of the industry. The so-called “strategic inflection point” began perhaps at the time when everyone is competing to build cheap computers for the less fortunate in African countries or others. It happened: $199 for 2 very basic laptops (See article “Laptop Giving”). Another contributing factor could be that of embedded systems especially that of mobile phone. As the demand for higher processing power grows, the cost of making a super computer in palm size dives.The third would be coming from the main drivers of this PC technology themselves. The 2 giants, Intel and AMD, had succeeded in putting 2 or even 4 cores into what used to be a single core chipset (getting much help from other rivals in the embedded systems: ARM, MIPS, Freescale and IBM). The result of this success is that the big gap that exists between the actual needs of people and the offers of the existing technology. Why a user (usually 1 of the 4 types: Internet user, gamer, office worker and scientist) requires such processing power? Probably, only the scientists would applaud, provided they are able to fully utilize all the core processors at all time.

What the latest trend reveal is “low price”. Saturation point has already been reached in most countries when PC penetration is already high. The sales of mobile PCs, i.e. laptop, notebook, tablet, UMPC or Netbook are catching up with those of desktop PCs. However, both are not totally complementary. The PC industry was the most envied by all for the past decades. Every year, regardless of the economic condition, users were busy upgrading their computers, components and accessories. It took a while for everyone to break off such addictions and remain faithful to their old PCs.

Though software problems continue to be a pain for all and total upgrade (both hardware and software) is always a viable option, take-up rate for replacement PCs would remain low for quite some time, especially for home users. Windows Vista hasn’t impressed many yet. Many companies have decided to jump ahead by adopting Windows 7. The question is how sure are they that Windows 7 would be a better choice? The problem with the relationship between software and hardware is that faster hardware doesn’t always mean faster software. Software exploited the great capabilities (in terms of memory or other data storage, graphics and network bandwidth) provided by the ever-evolving hardware. Coding doesn’t have to be stringent anymore. The hardware resources available are more than enough for all the basic tasks performed by users. So, why is there a need for a lean and fast software?

Back to Andy’s X factor, it doesn’t really have to be something you see on the headlines everyday. It could be a silent killer. Something that everyone knows about but choose to ignore it. Once in a while, critics come and go. And when it happens, everything seems to be too late. Netbooks do have the potential to become such a factor. Its immediate impact is the drastic drop in price of mobile PCs. The prices of desktop PCs have never crossed those of the mobile PC. Hence, the mobile PC can be considered as the premium sector of the market. But now, with Netbooks, the gap between desktop PCs and mobile PCs has, all of a sudden, vanished. Even Macbook Air, a cousin from the royal family, gives a laughing stock. Its price, being 4 times of a decent Netbook, is unthinkable for some technie guys. Using the same chipmaker, with less storage (disregard whether it’s solid state or rotating disk) and slightly more memory, Macbook Air only provides the main difference in the software used (let’s not talk about the graphics processor since the screen is too small to talk about HD…). Is MacOS X worth this much? XP is always well-liked by many users. If not, a friendlier Linux for Net-savvy users isn’t that bad as welll. As you can see, cost becomes the main driver of today’s PC market. And today’s technological trends have enabled this to take place. The ying and the yang has brought the harmony between the market and the technology driving behind it. PC commodization has already occurred. It’s not in everyday’s news. It’s in part of our lives. The next time you walk into the stores and look at the wide variety of PC solutions. You will realize that the decision comes slightly faster than before and you are more confident of the choice you would make.

This makes me dig through my electronic Concise Oxford English Dictionary (11th Ed) and most simply put, journal is a daily record of personal news and events; a diary. So, this means I foot the bill here, with I am trying to do.

I used to worry. When I create a website, what am I going to put in there. I mean I know content will be the key. But where I do find all these materials? And for how long I have to keep it going before I become successful. Why is it so easy for the many others out there.

I still don’t have an answer here yet. I am just getting a hint. A formula, I would say. If I am able to update this site every day with a little bit of content and keep it there. At the end of the year, I should have something really big. For any boring weekend, I can spend a few more hours of research and do up a little on the web site. Things should be manageable.

This brings to me realize why media companies such as newspapers and magazines are moving online so quickly. They are aware the power of online journalling. Imagine a person who used to spend an hour on the papers is now busy reading a blog or online journal like mine here. The papers and magazine will lose their readership soon. And it is so easy for individual like myself to create such a site and provides tons of personal information that can attract people of the same kind to spend a certain amount of time here. Soon, the advertising firms that really pay the media companies will come knocking on the door. Losing the bargaining power is for sure. This implies a shake-up of the industry as well.

Before I sign off for the day (job done :p), I would like to recommend a white paper. Yes, I know you know there are papers of all kinds of colour. So, what’s so special about a white paper? Ya… probably some of you already guess what a white paper really is, especially the geeks. Do you know that white papers are initially issued by government to enunciate government policy? Hee, do check your favourite encyclopedia for more clarification. Anyway, if you don’t have a minute, it would be interesting know some facts about writing a white paper. Here is the link to it (from your favourite encyclopedia online as well): http://www.stelzner.com/copy-HowTo-whitepapers.php.

(dated: 06/12/2007)