I don't like to just re-post others' content here, but you should really check this out. I think Peter did a really nice job covering the roll out of Virgin Galactic's White Knight II yesterday.
I saw Neil Armstrong walk on the Moon, I saw the Space Shuttle go up for the first time, and I can't wait to watch this one fly!
Showing posts with label Technology. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Technology. Show all posts
Tuesday, July 29, 2008
Sunday, April 20, 2008
Twitterpated!
An overused title, perhaps, but one that is apropos for my perspective on Twitter.
Having gone from barely noticing it to casual user to "Twooshing!" all over the place these last 5 months, I think I'm hooked.
And - I'm eager to explore new ways to leverage the platform - look for more updates in future columns. In the meantime, enjoy this one...
Having gone from barely noticing it to casual user to "Twooshing!" all over the place these last 5 months, I think I'm hooked.
And - I'm eager to explore new ways to leverage the platform - look for more updates in future columns. In the meantime, enjoy this one...
Wednesday, March 19, 2008
Quick GDC Review Published in "The National Networker"
I had my first article published this week for The National Networker, giving a brief review the Game Developer's Conference (GDC), and the networking aspects to the event. I'll be posting a more detailed series of blogs over the next few days, but thought you might enjoy this high-level recap in the mean time.
The National Networker is a Monthly Publication that focuses on many different aspects of networking (geographic, profession, general interest, etc.) . It pretty much has something for everyone. The magazine tries to convey networking strategies beyond the usual tactics. I'm the Technology Editor for this magazine, and it gives me a chance to talk about Technology with a different crowd than my usual Geeks and Tech Heads!
(and yes, it's a little shameless self-promotion, but if you don't toot your own horn every now-and-then, others will use it as a spitoon! :) )
Let me know what you think, and what you might like to see in the column. Over the next few months I will be profiling certain technologies and uses for technology in the networking and online / Social Media / Social Computing space. Stay tuned...
The National Networker is a Monthly Publication that focuses on many different aspects of networking (geographic, profession, general interest, etc.) . It pretty much has something for everyone. The magazine tries to convey networking strategies beyond the usual tactics. I'm the Technology Editor for this magazine, and it gives me a chance to talk about Technology with a different crowd than my usual Geeks and Tech Heads!
(and yes, it's a little shameless self-promotion, but if you don't toot your own horn every now-and-then, others will use it as a spitoon! :) )
Let me know what you think, and what you might like to see in the column. Over the next few months I will be profiling certain technologies and uses for technology in the networking and online / Social Media / Social Computing space. Stay tuned...
Tuesday, March 18, 2008
Help Me! Help Me! (best said in a very tiny, sqeaky voice, laying on a spider web, at the end of a 1950's movie)
This is the coolest thing I've seen on the web in a LOOOOONG time. Why?
- it looks cool!
- imagine (and appreciate) the engineering the mechanical / electrical / computer engineering that went into making this. Now, contrast that with an average human's biological & computational engineering - realizing that many of us might not do so well.
Can't wait to see the next version!
- it looks cool!
- imagine (and appreciate) the engineering the mechanical / electrical / computer engineering that went into making this. Now, contrast that with an average human's biological & computational engineering - realizing that many of us might not do so well.
Can't wait to see the next version!
Monday, March 17, 2008
The Good Folks Over At Common Craft
I really like what these guys do - very quick, easy & simple.
This is something my Grandmother would be able to understand!
PS - GDC review coming soon...!
Tuesday, March 11, 2008
Open the pod bay doors, HAL!
I'm writing this blog entry using Dragon NaturallySpeaking version 9. Because I can.
I first purchased the NaturallySpeaking software about any 10 years ago and didn't like it. After putting together the content for an upcoming webinar, and having it take six hours of typing, I decided to try something different. Now that webinar would only take me about an hour or two.
I is still working out the nuances of the software (pun intended).for example, I am still learning all of the formatting commands, and I am finding that because my computer is slow. There is a very slight delay in the response of the software. However, I am noticing that the program is "learning" as I go. If you do a lot of typing out, you should definitely check it out.
I first purchased the NaturallySpeaking software about any 10 years ago and didn't like it. After putting together the content for an upcoming webinar, and having it take six hours of typing, I decided to try something different. Now that webinar would only take me about an hour or two.
I is still working out the nuances of the software (pun intended).for example, I am still learning all of the formatting commands, and I am finding that because my computer is slow. There is a very slight delay in the response of the software. However, I am noticing that the program is "learning" as I go. If you do a lot of typing out, you should definitely check it out.
Friday, March 07, 2008
This Is A Great Book – Read It!
I bought The Elephant and The Dragon: The Rise of India and China and What It Means for All of Us watching Author Robyn Meredith on a Charlie Rose interview last summer. It was a great interview and the next day I went to the bookstore 2 days later to buy it – and all the copies in the local surrounding bookstore were literally sold out (I asked the store manager check around for me).
Well researched, organized and written, Ms. Meredith has taken a complex topic and added just a little-more-than-sufficient detail into the historical context, that provides a great foundation for understanding contemporary realities. Her review of China strongly correlated with what I knew, and her review of India was enlightening.
I think it's a great introductory / intermediate text on the subject of outsourcing in general, and with respect to these two nations in particular. For more on Outsourcing and the role that India has created for itself in this industry, I still strongly recommend Bangalore Tiger by Steve Hamm. These are good companion texts - enjoy!
Wednesday, February 27, 2008
Cracking Open the Commodore 64
I'm not a total geek, but I do find this series from TechRepublic interesting. The Commodore 64, along with the "Trash 80" (TRS-80) was one of the first computers I played around with. My friend had one and I was instantly enthralled with what the technology could do.
Anyway, it's interesting seeing the guts of these old machines - especially in comparison to today's technology.
Anyway, it's interesting seeing the guts of these old machines - especially in comparison to today's technology.
Tuesday, January 22, 2008
Shameless Self Promotion - GDC08 - Check It Out!!!
If you have ANYTHING to do w/the gaming industry, you've got to check out and attend GDC! it is THE place to be (E3 and it's ilk are SOOO over-rated).
Plus, as an added bonus...I've finally succumbed to all of the requests & peer pressure - I'll be speaking this year on Outsourcing in the gaming industry, with several of my colleagues. It'll be awesome and great fun, to be sure.
(I think this is the first time I've given a presentation that was BEFORE lunch, and not after...my, the natives will be restless. At least I'm not the last presentation before the bar opens...)
Come learn what to avoid in your next outsourcing situation. Trust me - these lessons can be learned and applied REGARDLESS of what industry in which you happen to find yourself.
Plus, there's lots of weird people here and they're a BLAST to hang out with!
CHECK IT OUT!!!!!!!!
Plus, as an added bonus...I've finally succumbed to all of the requests & peer pressure - I'll be speaking this year on Outsourcing in the gaming industry, with several of my colleagues. It'll be awesome and great fun, to be sure.
(I think this is the first time I've given a presentation that was BEFORE lunch, and not after...my, the natives will be restless. At least I'm not the last presentation before the bar opens...)
Come learn what to avoid in your next outsourcing situation. Trust me - these lessons can be learned and applied REGARDLESS of what industry in which you happen to find yourself.
Plus, there's lots of weird people here and they're a BLAST to hang out with!
CHECK IT OUT!!!!!!!!
Tuesday, October 30, 2007
Cmuoniactoin
This is cool. check this out...this works ok w/human-to-human communication; I don't think it would work so well (yet) in creating computer programs (unless you had some good AI involved)...
fi yuo cna raed tihs, yuo hvae a sgtrane mnid too
Cna yuo raed tihs? Olny 55 plepoe out of 100 can.
i cdnuolt blveiee taht I cluod aulaclty uesdnatnrd waht I was rdanieg. The phaonmneal pweor of the hmuan mnid, aoccdrnig to a rscheearch at Cmabrigde Uinervtisy, it dseno't mtaetr in waht oerdr the ltteres in a wrod are, the olny iproamtnt tihng is taht the frsit and lsat ltteer be in the rghit pclae. The rset can be a taotl mses and you can sitll raed it whotuit a pboerlm. Tihs is bcuseae the huamn mnid deos not raed ervey lteter by istlef, but the wrod as a wlohe. Azanmig huh? yaeh and I awlyas tghuhot slpeling was ipmorantt! if you can raed tihs forwrad it
(...and yet, while I can comprehend this, I'd still feel bad if I sent somethign out that was missspelled...)
:P
fi yuo cna raed tihs, yuo hvae a sgtrane mnid too
Cna yuo raed tihs? Olny 55 plepoe out of 100 can.
i cdnuolt blveiee taht I cluod aulaclty uesdnatnrd waht I was rdanieg. The phaonmneal pweor of the hmuan mnid, aoccdrnig to a rscheearch at Cmabrigde Uinervtisy, it dseno't mtaetr in waht oerdr the ltteres in a wrod are, the olny iproamtnt tihng is taht the frsit and lsat ltteer be in the rghit pclae. The rset can be a taotl mses and you can sitll raed it whotuit a pboerlm. Tihs is bcuseae the huamn mnid deos not raed ervey lteter by istlef, but the wrod as a wlohe. Azanmig huh? yaeh and I awlyas tghuhot slpeling was ipmorantt! if you can raed tihs forwrad it
(...and yet, while I can comprehend this, I'd still feel bad if I sent somethign out that was missspelled...)
:P
Saturday, June 16, 2007
Technology's Unintended Consequences
I recently had a conversation with a consultant the other day, who (about 6 weeks ago) had to immediately drop everything he was working on and temporarily relocate from New York to San Diego. to take care of his sick mother. Her condition required her to have constant care and family attention. Because of how he used technology, not only was he able to do this, but he began to look at his current approach to work in a different light.
The technologies he took advantage of were:
* laptop computer
* wireless Internet connection
* cell phone
* Skype
* office productivity suite
When I spoke w/him, he was sitting on the deck of his mother's house, over looking the pacific ocean. And he sounded pretty happy.
Other than Skype, everything I listed above has been available and people have been using them for a number of years. Technology becomes interesting to me when I look at how people and process interact w/technology. You start to see new possibilities that didn't exist before. Take my friend from above, for example, and let's go back 10 - 20 years:
20 years ago:
* laptop computers were concepts and the 386 desktop was leading edge
* wireless Internet connections did not exist for the mass market; Internet connectivity was still largely limited to academics, Geeks posting on a cryptic BBS somewhere...and then there was DARPA and the Department of Defense...
* cell phone technology existed, but only for a limited market and it was very expensive to use
* IP telephony was not available for the mass market
* office productivity suites largely didn't exist. Apple had some word processing and graphics capabilities available; Lotus Notes was the standard spreadsheet program for PCs, and Word Perfect (remember that one???) was one of the larger players int eh word processing space
Bottom line: he would not have been able to support his mother and maintain / increase his business; one or both would have had to materially suffer
10 years ago:
* laptop computers were becoming more widely available, but they were pretty homogeneous offerings, with a small set of features relative to desktop PCs; most laptops did not have the same "horsepower" (in terms of graphics acceleration, chip speeds, hard drive capacity, monitor visual acuity, etc.). Laptops were for "road warriors" who couldn't afford to be away from their computers
* the Internet was starting to move into the mainstream. America Online (now known a "AOL"
* see Trout & Ries' work on Positioning for some thoughts on that name change...). Netscape was a fledgling browser and not an Alliance w/anyone. America Online was going to bring the Internet to the masses
* cell phone technology became more wide spread; car phones (phones actually built into the arm rests or dashboards of cars) were a status symbol available only in high-end vehicles,m and as an expensive option. In my view, pagers were still more ubiquitous & cheaper than cell phones. So, your boss could push a button on your "electronic leash" but you still had to find a phone to respond back
* IP telephony was experimental technology, and only among the Geek inner-sanctum. Most of the people I knew who were using it were Chinese and Indian ex-pats who wanted to call their loved ones back in their home country
* office productivity suites were really starting to come into their own, as was the notion of bundling different software packages together in general. Microsoft Office had really established itself at this point, and along with some of their other products (do you remember Microsoft Works?), started defining the space and what the market would eventually demand / accept as "the Standard".
Bottom line: he probably could have made it work, it would have been very expensive, and he would have increased mobility relative to his predecessor of 10 years earlier.
Today, all of these technologies are taken for granted. Here's an interesting thought:
One of the next 5 presidents of the United States will most likely have played a Nintendo or Atari game system.
But that's for another blog...
The technologies he took advantage of were:
* laptop computer
* wireless Internet connection
* cell phone
* Skype
* office productivity suite
When I spoke w/him, he was sitting on the deck of his mother's house, over looking the pacific ocean. And he sounded pretty happy.
Other than Skype, everything I listed above has been available and people have been using them for a number of years. Technology becomes interesting to me when I look at how people and process interact w/technology. You start to see new possibilities that didn't exist before. Take my friend from above, for example, and let's go back 10 - 20 years:
20 years ago:
* laptop computers were concepts and the 386 desktop was leading edge
* wireless Internet connections did not exist for the mass market; Internet connectivity was still largely limited to academics, Geeks posting on a cryptic BBS somewhere...and then there was DARPA and the Department of Defense...
* cell phone technology existed, but only for a limited market and it was very expensive to use
* IP telephony was not available for the mass market
* office productivity suites largely didn't exist. Apple had some word processing and graphics capabilities available; Lotus Notes was the standard spreadsheet program for PCs, and Word Perfect (remember that one???) was one of the larger players int eh word processing space
Bottom line: he would not have been able to support his mother and maintain / increase his business; one or both would have had to materially suffer
10 years ago:
* laptop computers were becoming more widely available, but they were pretty homogeneous offerings, with a small set of features relative to desktop PCs; most laptops did not have the same "horsepower" (in terms of graphics acceleration, chip speeds, hard drive capacity, monitor visual acuity, etc.). Laptops were for "road warriors" who couldn't afford to be away from their computers
* the Internet was starting to move into the mainstream. America Online (now known a "AOL"
* see Trout & Ries' work on Positioning for some thoughts on that name change...). Netscape was a fledgling browser and not an Alliance w/anyone. America Online was going to bring the Internet to the masses
* cell phone technology became more wide spread; car phones (phones actually built into the arm rests or dashboards of cars) were a status symbol available only in high-end vehicles,m and as an expensive option. In my view, pagers were still more ubiquitous & cheaper than cell phones. So, your boss could push a button on your "electronic leash" but you still had to find a phone to respond back
* IP telephony was experimental technology, and only among the Geek inner-sanctum. Most of the people I knew who were using it were Chinese and Indian ex-pats who wanted to call their loved ones back in their home country
* office productivity suites were really starting to come into their own, as was the notion of bundling different software packages together in general. Microsoft Office had really established itself at this point, and along with some of their other products (do you remember Microsoft Works?), started defining the space and what the market would eventually demand / accept as "the Standard".
Bottom line: he probably could have made it work, it would have been very expensive, and he would have increased mobility relative to his predecessor of 10 years earlier.
Today, all of these technologies are taken for granted. Here's an interesting thought:
One of the next 5 presidents of the United States will most likely have played a Nintendo or Atari game system.
But that's for another blog...
Wednesday, November 08, 2006
Convergence is NOT bullshit
Let me just say, for the record, that Chris and I see eye-to-eye on a lot of things, but I've got to disagree with him on this one. We've even gone back and forth on this topic over several months. And even though I've wanted to I just haven't been able to blog about this one until now.
As with most general platitudes (which sound great to say, but upon further examination don't always hold water), one needs to first set the context of the remark. Seamus Blackley (one of the original creators of the Microsoft Xbox) was correct when he made his statement – in the context of what he was talking about.
The Xbox would NOT be a good all-in-one home media device (at least, not right out of the gate, when they had the conversation many years ago). I still don't think it's ready for prime time. Will Microsoft get there? Probably? Will the Xbox be the vehicle? Don't know. But, that converged functionality is coming; people want it and companies want to figure out how to deliver it. (In fact, I've got a few ideas of my own on how to do this...but that's a blog for another day...)
Here are some good examples of convergence (which I am summarizing to mean a successful combination of functionality and delivery vehicle):
- secure fax machine
- recent versions of smart phones & Blackberries (Treo 700P/W, the HTCs, etc.)
- SkyNet service (which got renamed to Flynet...hmmm) on Lufthansa (no, I'm not talking about this one; I'm talking about this one)
- roller skates and Heelies
- Reese's Peanut Butter Cups
- cable industry converging with the telephone industry into something new (i.e. - Comcast, SBC, Qwest, etc.)
- Youtube.com
- Amazon.com (internet, book store, supply chain and logistics expertise)
- (and yes, the swiss army knife)
...and there are more. The point is, by bringing together different functionality and vehicles with which to deliver it to defined markets, certain companies will gain advantages over their rivals, for some period of time. So, while I think this is also a good and cool example of convergence, ultimately market acceptance and business execution will determine how long that advantage remains.
The graphic that Chris posted depicting a toaster / coffee maker / bread baker is an example of “Convergence of Convenience”. The question is not, "Could you eat at The Palm with a Swiss Army knife and enjoy the experience (well, I could, but that's just me)?" Rather, the quesstion is, "Would you eat at The Palm with a Swiss Army knife and enjoy the experience"? Most people (the Contrarians among us aside) would say "No" to that experience.
Currently, I think most “smart cameras” and cell phones would fall into this category. Honestly, I see this type of innovation as "educational" more than anything else. "Let's show people what this technology can do, let's give it to them, and then let's step back. Many people knew they wanted a Walkman before Sony came out with one. And so you havethings like this and this.
No, most of these examples of convergence are not mind-blowingly earth shattering – but for a short period of time, they are market differentiating. And that is really the point. If a company can execute well with that tactic then they will have an advantage for some period of time. Other companies will try to copy them. Consumers / Markets will then vote with their dollars. They will also find unintended ways to leverage the new technology in ways the creators (probably) hadn't even considered when they created the original specifications. Of note:
- music sampling in rap and rock music
- tire swings
- coke bottle bird feeders
- camera phone to take picture of the license plates and damage to cars in a car crash
- other --> who knows?
And people in companies will have to innovate again. And the cycle will continue...and that's why Convergence is not Bullshit. Some additional food for thought...
As with most general platitudes (which sound great to say, but upon further examination don't always hold water), one needs to first set the context of the remark. Seamus Blackley (one of the original creators of the Microsoft Xbox) was correct when he made his statement – in the context of what he was talking about.
The Xbox would NOT be a good all-in-one home media device (at least, not right out of the gate, when they had the conversation many years ago). I still don't think it's ready for prime time. Will Microsoft get there? Probably? Will the Xbox be the vehicle? Don't know. But, that converged functionality is coming; people want it and companies want to figure out how to deliver it. (In fact, I've got a few ideas of my own on how to do this...but that's a blog for another day...)
Here are some good examples of convergence (which I am summarizing to mean a successful combination of functionality and delivery vehicle):
- secure fax machine
- recent versions of smart phones & Blackberries (Treo 700P/W, the HTCs, etc.)
- SkyNet service (which got renamed to Flynet...hmmm) on Lufthansa (no, I'm not talking about this one; I'm talking about this one)
- roller skates and Heelies
- Reese's Peanut Butter Cups
- cable industry converging with the telephone industry into something new (i.e. - Comcast, SBC, Qwest, etc.)
- Youtube.com
- Amazon.com (internet, book store, supply chain and logistics expertise)
- (and yes, the swiss army knife)
...and there are more. The point is, by bringing together different functionality and vehicles with which to deliver it to defined markets, certain companies will gain advantages over their rivals, for some period of time. So, while I think this is also a good and cool example of convergence, ultimately market acceptance and business execution will determine how long that advantage remains.
The graphic that Chris posted depicting a toaster / coffee maker / bread baker is an example of “Convergence of Convenience”. The question is not, "Could you eat at The Palm with a Swiss Army knife and enjoy the experience (well, I could, but that's just me)?" Rather, the quesstion is, "Would you eat at The Palm with a Swiss Army knife and enjoy the experience"? Most people (the Contrarians among us aside) would say "No" to that experience.
Currently, I think most “smart cameras” and cell phones would fall into this category. Honestly, I see this type of innovation as "educational" more than anything else. "Let's show people what this technology can do, let's give it to them, and then let's step back. Many people knew they wanted a Walkman before Sony came out with one. And so you havethings like this and this.
No, most of these examples of convergence are not mind-blowingly earth shattering – but for a short period of time, they are market differentiating. And that is really the point. If a company can execute well with that tactic then they will have an advantage for some period of time. Other companies will try to copy them. Consumers / Markets will then vote with their dollars. They will also find unintended ways to leverage the new technology in ways the creators (probably) hadn't even considered when they created the original specifications. Of note:
- music sampling in rap and rock music
- tire swings
- coke bottle bird feeders
- camera phone to take picture of the license plates and damage to cars in a car crash
- other --> who knows?
And people in companies will have to innovate again. And the cycle will continue...and that's why Convergence is not Bullshit. Some additional food for thought...
Tuesday, November 07, 2006
Creative and Profitable
Why begrudge someone else's success just because they took of an advantage of a creative idea before you? I'm not sure why some people feel this need; to me, that's just "my bad" and it means I need to take some action!
What am I referring to? These interesting business ideas are just a few examples:
- Million Dollar Web Page (http://www.milliondollarhomepage.com/); the ones I like the most are the single-pixel ones - some of which are either reserved for someone, have an order pending, or are just plan silly (see if you can find the "Pimp My Pixel - the Wave of the Future" one!)
- One Red Paper Clip (http://oneredpaperclip.blogspot.com/) tells of one man's journey from one red paper clip to owning a house in Saskatchewan
- Pixledoodle (http://www.pixeloodle.com/) - another knock-off or will this one work too? The owner is almost half way to their goal...
and more...
While these might just seem like gimmicky internet ideas, the reality is that they:
- created attention around a particular theme
- the creator was able to create tangible value from an intangible idea
- someone else saw enough value in what was going on that they gave the creator money, time, etc.
Nothing wrong with that. Does that mean that this is the forefront of some new business model we all need to start worrying about? I don't think so; not at this stage, anyway.
I think that it's a good experiment that shows the possibilities of making technology accessible to people, and letting them see where their creativity takes them. And that's where businesses need to show more courage. I tried to get my old company interested in web blogs (6 years ago), just for internal uses. I used examples of car companies letting their employees blog about all sorts of things - gardening, the company, etc. - and showed how it actually helped the company overall. It was over ruled as a "potential security issue". Now, the CEO blogs and is talking with the SEC about disseminating financial information to the world via a blog.
Companies, industries, organizations...if they've been around for a bit they have a vested interested in the status quo. After all, that's a large part of what got them where they are in the first place. I understand why governments might think that way. I have a harder time supporting this notion for the marketplace. Sticking with what you know will usually just get you more of what you've already got.
Now, what are you going to do with it?
What am I referring to? These interesting business ideas are just a few examples:
- Million Dollar Web Page (http://www.milliondollarhomepage.com/); the ones I like the most are the single-pixel ones - some of which are either reserved for someone, have an order pending, or are just plan silly (see if you can find the "Pimp My Pixel - the Wave of the Future" one!)
- One Red Paper Clip (http://oneredpaperclip.blogspot.com/) tells of one man's journey from one red paper clip to owning a house in Saskatchewan
- Pixledoodle (http://www.pixeloodle.com/) - another knock-off or will this one work too? The owner is almost half way to their goal...
and more...
While these might just seem like gimmicky internet ideas, the reality is that they:
- created attention around a particular theme
- the creator was able to create tangible value from an intangible idea
- someone else saw enough value in what was going on that they gave the creator money, time, etc.
Nothing wrong with that. Does that mean that this is the forefront of some new business model we all need to start worrying about? I don't think so; not at this stage, anyway.
I think that it's a good experiment that shows the possibilities of making technology accessible to people, and letting them see where their creativity takes them. And that's where businesses need to show more courage. I tried to get my old company interested in web blogs (6 years ago), just for internal uses. I used examples of car companies letting their employees blog about all sorts of things - gardening, the company, etc. - and showed how it actually helped the company overall. It was over ruled as a "potential security issue". Now, the CEO blogs and is talking with the SEC about disseminating financial information to the world via a blog.
Companies, industries, organizations...if they've been around for a bit they have a vested interested in the status quo. After all, that's a large part of what got them where they are in the first place. I understand why governments might think that way. I have a harder time supporting this notion for the marketplace. Sticking with what you know will usually just get you more of what you've already got.
Now, what are you going to do with it?
Monday, November 06, 2006
Communication
"I believe companies should be as transparent as possible with information."
Okay, that's a nice platitude...but what does it really mean? It's benign-sounding enough so that it will be difficult to disagree with the statement. It's ambiguous enough that one can't really hold the speaker accountable without more specific information. Much is left up to the speaker to define the terms for themselves, ex post facto.
We're not quite at this point yet, but soon one will begin to argue that without a strong, fully diversified online presence, companies will not be doing all they can to communicate to their various constituents.
Here are several recent examples (and there are more I can share) of what I am talking about:
1. Look at what Sun Microsystems is doing
2. Look at what Toyota and Adidas are doing; even The Economist is taking note
3. Listen to what National Public Radio (NPR) had to say about it this morning
No, this isn't a plug for Second Life or it's non-virtual company, Linden Lab.
It's about being flexible enough to adjust your approach to reach your existing markets in new ways. It's about being courageous enough to let go or test firmly held opinions about "how things should be done".
That's a challenge in any world, with or without any kind of intervention - from government, the marketplace or otherwise.
What are you doing about it for your company and it's brand? What are you doing about it for you and your own brand? And how are you involving those important to your success - your customers, peers, etc. - versus just "going it alone?"
Okay, that's a nice platitude...but what does it really mean? It's benign-sounding enough so that it will be difficult to disagree with the statement. It's ambiguous enough that one can't really hold the speaker accountable without more specific information. Much is left up to the speaker to define the terms for themselves, ex post facto.
We're not quite at this point yet, but soon one will begin to argue that without a strong, fully diversified online presence, companies will not be doing all they can to communicate to their various constituents.
Here are several recent examples (and there are more I can share) of what I am talking about:
1. Look at what Sun Microsystems is doing
2. Look at what Toyota and Adidas are doing; even The Economist is taking note
3. Listen to what National Public Radio (NPR) had to say about it this morning
No, this isn't a plug for Second Life or it's non-virtual company, Linden Lab.
It's about being flexible enough to adjust your approach to reach your existing markets in new ways. It's about being courageous enough to let go or test firmly held opinions about "how things should be done".
That's a challenge in any world, with or without any kind of intervention - from government, the marketplace or otherwise.
What are you doing about it for your company and it's brand? What are you doing about it for you and your own brand? And how are you involving those important to your success - your customers, peers, etc. - versus just "going it alone?"
Tuesday, October 03, 2006
"Disintermediation" brought to you by You Tube, Google Video, etc.
Check this out...
When I was in the 6th. grade, I remember reading a story depicting a day-in-the-life of a student of similar age, only at some point "in the future".. They lived in houses where the beds were essentially built-in cushions in the floor, the showers were cubes with omni-directional jets of water and warm air (to wash and dry you off), and they wore spray-on clothing.
One of the things that I thought was really cool was the idea of going to school without leaving my house, which showed the student sitting in a room in their house with a television monitor showing their teacher and classmates.
We've had some form of interactive televised knowledge transmission for over 10 years now, with both the education and the medical fields leveraging the technology. But there's another reason why I find this new feature from Google interesting...
Disintermediation.
If ("when", actually) this gets coupled with better two-way, rather than one-way, knowledge transmission, Google has the ability to establish a great position for itself. MySpace is already filled with most of the demographic that want to get (or are already pursuing) college degrees. It's no great leap in logic for them to "naturally" look to the web for their course lectures (in fact, college students are citing Wikipedia references in scholarly papers, over the protests of their professors and the founder / editor of Wikipedia!). Professors can leave their entire lecture "on reserve" rather than just their written notes (which never convey the nuances of an idea).
This will also have an impact the pricing associated with getting a degree ("Eventually", anyway...). Will there be sufficient cachet associated with a degree earned this way? Yes, but it will take some time for the Majority to endorse the idea - at least in the U.S. Baby Boomers are going back to school in record numbers, for a variety of reasons. Other nations who don't have the infrastructure of estbalished universities, however, can now take advantage of this right now.
And so can anyone who has an internet connection.
Think about that for a moment...
True, they won't get the college credits for attending the class, nor the degree to "certify" their "knowledge acquisition". But they will gain the information that they can use.
And isn't that what learning's all about, anyway???
When I was in the 6th. grade, I remember reading a story depicting a day-in-the-life of a student of similar age, only at some point "in the future".. They lived in houses where the beds were essentially built-in cushions in the floor, the showers were cubes with omni-directional jets of water and warm air (to wash and dry you off), and they wore spray-on clothing.
One of the things that I thought was really cool was the idea of going to school without leaving my house, which showed the student sitting in a room in their house with a television monitor showing their teacher and classmates.
We've had some form of interactive televised knowledge transmission for over 10 years now, with both the education and the medical fields leveraging the technology. But there's another reason why I find this new feature from Google interesting...
Disintermediation.
If ("when", actually) this gets coupled with better two-way, rather than one-way, knowledge transmission, Google has the ability to establish a great position for itself. MySpace is already filled with most of the demographic that want to get (or are already pursuing) college degrees. It's no great leap in logic for them to "naturally" look to the web for their course lectures (in fact, college students are citing Wikipedia references in scholarly papers, over the protests of their professors and the founder / editor of Wikipedia!). Professors can leave their entire lecture "on reserve" rather than just their written notes (which never convey the nuances of an idea).
This will also have an impact the pricing associated with getting a degree ("Eventually", anyway...). Will there be sufficient cachet associated with a degree earned this way? Yes, but it will take some time for the Majority to endorse the idea - at least in the U.S. Baby Boomers are going back to school in record numbers, for a variety of reasons. Other nations who don't have the infrastructure of estbalished universities, however, can now take advantage of this right now.
And so can anyone who has an internet connection.
Think about that for a moment...
True, they won't get the college credits for attending the class, nor the degree to "certify" their "knowledge acquisition". But they will gain the information that they can use.
And isn't that what learning's all about, anyway???
Monday, October 02, 2006
Why Do We Have / Need Quad-core Processors?
"For gaming and video rendering." So says Intel (and I agree - AMD will be making their own announcements in this arena soon). For now, check this out.
And this (the audio quality's poor, but the implications are cool). And, last but not least, some additional (marketing fluff ?) from Intel.
With the dev kits in the ISVs' hands, all the industry has to do now is to deliver...
And this (the audio quality's poor, but the implications are cool). And, last but not least, some additional (marketing fluff ?) from Intel.
With the dev kits in the ISVs' hands, all the industry has to do now is to deliver...
Sunday, September 10, 2006
Opening The Xbox
“The revolution will come in fits and starts. It probably won't come from giving hardcore gamers more of what they already like. Doing a fighting game with better graphics isn't really a new invention. Yet much of the industry is currently afflicted with the illusion that it is. About 60 percent of the successful games now are either sequels or extensions of brands that exist in another medium. There is a real risk of what the IDSA'a Doug Lowenstein calls “creative ennui.”...The gaming industry has produced cultural icons before, from Pac Man to Pong, and it will do so again. As every gamer believes, the ideal game isn't here yet. It's just around the corner.” (p. 346 – 347).
I just got done reading Opening The Xbox. I found it to be a very readable book, with a very comfortable writing style. The descriptions of the what the project team went through, however, seemed very reminiscent of many other professional projects I have been involved with in my career, and not necessarily unique to Microsoft or the tech. industry. What was enjoyable and enlightening, however, was the detail which Mr. Takahashi provided. Liberally spiced with information that was outside of the inner mechanics at Microsoft (like the challenges with Nvidia, Flextronics' manufacturing capacity, the marketing and sales performance of competing platforms, etc.), provided the perfect backdrop to the whole story.
In the end, I found it to be an easy and enjoyable read. It provides great insight into Microsoft's launch of the Xbox, and an interesting perspective on the video games industry as a whole. I also appreciated the “personal face” Mr. Takhashi gave the story by providing interesting tidbits of the personalities and their lives, throughout the story. That technique not only made it very readable, but it also helped me relate to the story in a much more fulfilling way.
However, it's this blog's opening paragraph (which I quoted from the end of the book) that I think is really at the heart of the issue I think the video game industry faces, and this book didn't really address:
Take me for example. I don't consider myself a “true gamer” necessarily, because I don't spend more than 20 hours a week playing video games, like some people I know; it's more like 10 – 15 hours per week (but who's really counting? :) ).
But do you know what I would spend 20 or more hours a week on? Creating new business ideas! I LOVE IT! I absolutely LOVE THAT! I love being able to take different ideas and putting them together in new ways. The by-product of that is interesting, and I and others have benefited in a number of different ways – non-profits I work with, to my current employer, and (I'm sure) to employers and customers whom I have yet to meet. So, while guys like Jonathan “Seamus” Blackley and Kevin Bachus got the lions share of the spotlight in the book (and rightly so), I related more to guys like Ted Hase, Rick Thompson, Ed Fries and Robbie Bach (the “business” / management folks). That is just fun for me!
Even at Sun Microsystems (where I've worked for a LONG time – it'll be 7 years this December...wow, that really IS a long time...), the things that have always drawn my interest and sparked my creativity the most have been new businesses and new business models, like our foray into Utility Computing and Managed Services. Project Darkstar is my latest muse (here is the “historic mugshot” that I found on my camera, from a few months ago; okay, shameless plug time – check out more details on this ground-breaking technology here and here).
The difference, though, between what I read in this book and what I see at companies like Sun and others, can be tied to two things:
If you want to move mountains and change the landscape, you can do it a spoonful at a time (which takes a while by yourself, but you gain speed the more people who pickup spoons) or with explosives (which is the equivalent to what Microsoft did). The latter is quicker, but it will still take a lot of time for people to join together in that new landscape and figure out what to do with it.
At E3 this year, I was over-whelmed by the presentation and volume of titles, and under-whelmed by the dearth of unique content. For the most part, it's all the same. In the four years since this book was published, not much has changed to hit that grand vision of new cultural icons and “games as art”. I don't see “Destroy All Humans” being reviewed by the New York Times' art critics. This is even a year in which we are seeing new console releases by Sony and Nintendo (although Sony just announced that they will again delay their launch – as seems to be typical with console launch announcements), but where are the new Space Invaders and Tetris (which were hits on multiple platforms)?
Still waiting for Aunt Bea's Quilting Smackdown! That would be a great one to see – have The Rock and Aunt Bea duking it out! Maybe someday...in the meantime, we'll just have to make do with more of the same.
I just got done reading Opening The Xbox. I found it to be a very readable book, with a very comfortable writing style. The descriptions of the what the project team went through, however, seemed very reminiscent of many other professional projects I have been involved with in my career, and not necessarily unique to Microsoft or the tech. industry. What was enjoyable and enlightening, however, was the detail which Mr. Takahashi provided. Liberally spiced with information that was outside of the inner mechanics at Microsoft (like the challenges with Nvidia, Flextronics' manufacturing capacity, the marketing and sales performance of competing platforms, etc.), provided the perfect backdrop to the whole story.
In the end, I found it to be an easy and enjoyable read. It provides great insight into Microsoft's launch of the Xbox, and an interesting perspective on the video games industry as a whole. I also appreciated the “personal face” Mr. Takhashi gave the story by providing interesting tidbits of the personalities and their lives, throughout the story. That technique not only made it very readable, but it also helped me relate to the story in a much more fulfilling way.
However, it's this blog's opening paragraph (which I quoted from the end of the book) that I think is really at the heart of the issue I think the video game industry faces, and this book didn't really address:
self-confidence - quit believing and acting like you have to get “people” to take you “seriously”. Screw 'em! You're already a multi-billion dollar industry, so who really cares?
The Big Set-up - the notion of “the killer game” is a set-up for failure, and “it” being “right around the corner” is even worse! You need to have people really get off on the “technology”, and others who are as passionate about the “business”, and have them work together. The video games themselves (whether it's a console or a piece of technology or some game art or whatever) is the real common ground to unite the project. Entertainment, art, interactivity, immersion – how this is defined is changing, and will continue to change over time.
Take me for example. I don't consider myself a “true gamer” necessarily, because I don't spend more than 20 hours a week playing video games, like some people I know; it's more like 10 – 15 hours per week (but who's really counting? :) ).
But do you know what I would spend 20 or more hours a week on? Creating new business ideas! I LOVE IT! I absolutely LOVE THAT! I love being able to take different ideas and putting them together in new ways. The by-product of that is interesting, and I and others have benefited in a number of different ways – non-profits I work with, to my current employer, and (I'm sure) to employers and customers whom I have yet to meet. So, while guys like Jonathan “Seamus” Blackley and Kevin Bachus got the lions share of the spotlight in the book (and rightly so), I related more to guys like Ted Hase, Rick Thompson, Ed Fries and Robbie Bach (the “business” / management folks). That is just fun for me!
Even at Sun Microsystems (where I've worked for a LONG time – it'll be 7 years this December...wow, that really IS a long time...), the things that have always drawn my interest and sparked my creativity the most have been new businesses and new business models, like our foray into Utility Computing and Managed Services. Project Darkstar is my latest muse (here is the “historic mugshot” that I found on my camera, from a few months ago; okay, shameless plug time – check out more details on this ground-breaking technology here and here).
The difference, though, between what I read in this book and what I see at companies like Sun and others, can be tied to two things:
money – Microsoft had plenty and was willing to commit significant amounts of capital for long periods of time – not because they wanted to build a video game console, but rather because it was an integral part of a larger strategy. Microsoft wants to be the gateway to home mechanics (entertainment, finances, etc.), and they see the Xbox as a great way to enter and begin building on that vision
strategic commitment – building on the above bullet, while near-term unit sales of consoles and titles are important, it's not the only thing. Sony, for example, has a potentially much broader and more strategic reach with it's movie and music entertainment business lines, which seem to continue throwing off cash regardless of poor economic conditions in any single market or geography it finds itself in.
If you want to move mountains and change the landscape, you can do it a spoonful at a time (which takes a while by yourself, but you gain speed the more people who pickup spoons) or with explosives (which is the equivalent to what Microsoft did). The latter is quicker, but it will still take a lot of time for people to join together in that new landscape and figure out what to do with it.
At E3 this year, I was over-whelmed by the presentation and volume of titles, and under-whelmed by the dearth of unique content. For the most part, it's all the same. In the four years since this book was published, not much has changed to hit that grand vision of new cultural icons and “games as art”. I don't see “Destroy All Humans” being reviewed by the New York Times' art critics. This is even a year in which we are seeing new console releases by Sony and Nintendo (although Sony just announced that they will again delay their launch – as seems to be typical with console launch announcements), but where are the new Space Invaders and Tetris (which were hits on multiple platforms)?
Still waiting for Aunt Bea's Quilting Smackdown! That would be a great one to see – have The Rock and Aunt Bea duking it out! Maybe someday...in the meantime, we'll just have to make do with more of the same.
Saturday, August 26, 2006
The United States of America's Legacy
I met up with a friend of mine today, someone I hadn't seen in over 4 years. The last time we met, he and his business partner were trying to convince me to leave my employer and go with them to start a company, and they wanted me to be their CTO. It was a very attractive offer, but for a number of reasons I declined. And, except for an occasional email over the years, we kind of lost touch.
Well, I was in another meeting earlier this week, speaking with some people about working with Angel Investors in the start-up phase of a business, and someone pulled out an "example checklist" that they thought was a good evaluation guide that they used. The company name on the sheet? You guessed it - it was the company we were considering starting! So, of course I told my friend about it.
Anyway, as I was driving home from our meeting today, I came away with a number of different ideas. One of them was about the state of employment in the U.S.. For the last 80+ years, our society has nurtured the idea of a career working for a large corporation, through which we could have our financial security and other needs met. It worked well for a while, but it turned out that it's not a model that's sustainable over the long term. The engine of commerce has always had its roots in the small and medium sized enterprises.
With the growth of the technology sector, and some of the tools that are now freely available, the barriers to entry for an individual or even groups of individuals, to launch a new enterprise, have really fallen through the floor. Other than tangible inventory (if that's even relevant for your business), it is now possible to have a virtually "free" infrastructure for your startup:
- computers (most people have one; a pretty good one that could fit most of your needs can be acquired now for anywhere from $500 - $1500)
- phones (with a number of different Voice Over IP (VOIP) offerings now available, you actually have a choice of providers
- office productivity software (openoffice.org has a free word processing / spreadsheet / presentation software suite you can use; Google, Yahoo, etc. have free email and calendar applications you can use)
- office space (in most cases, you can literally work out of your home to get started)
So, if you ever wanted to start a business in the States, the minimum you have to do is to go and file your DBA with your local government, and your in business. Then, coupled with the above and your very own website, you can get your idea up and running. It's that simple.
So, if it's that simple, why don't more people do it?
Because it's not easy. It's very, very, very hard. For every 10 businesses that start, 9 will fail within their first two years of operation. But what's interesting is that for those individuals who start more than one business (generally 3 - 5), that statistic reverses itself - 9 out of 10 succeed into their fifth year! What's the difference?
Persistence.
Well, I was in another meeting earlier this week, speaking with some people about working with Angel Investors in the start-up phase of a business, and someone pulled out an "example checklist" that they thought was a good evaluation guide that they used. The company name on the sheet? You guessed it - it was the company we were considering starting! So, of course I told my friend about it.
Anyway, as I was driving home from our meeting today, I came away with a number of different ideas. One of them was about the state of employment in the U.S.. For the last 80+ years, our society has nurtured the idea of a career working for a large corporation, through which we could have our financial security and other needs met. It worked well for a while, but it turned out that it's not a model that's sustainable over the long term. The engine of commerce has always had its roots in the small and medium sized enterprises.
With the growth of the technology sector, and some of the tools that are now freely available, the barriers to entry for an individual or even groups of individuals, to launch a new enterprise, have really fallen through the floor. Other than tangible inventory (if that's even relevant for your business), it is now possible to have a virtually "free" infrastructure for your startup:
- computers (most people have one; a pretty good one that could fit most of your needs can be acquired now for anywhere from $500 - $1500)
- phones (with a number of different Voice Over IP (VOIP) offerings now available, you actually have a choice of providers
- office productivity software (openoffice.org has a free word processing / spreadsheet / presentation software suite you can use; Google, Yahoo, etc. have free email and calendar applications you can use)
- office space (in most cases, you can literally work out of your home to get started)
So, if you ever wanted to start a business in the States, the minimum you have to do is to go and file your DBA with your local government, and your in business. Then, coupled with the above and your very own website, you can get your idea up and running. It's that simple.
So, if it's that simple, why don't more people do it?
Because it's not easy. It's very, very, very hard. For every 10 businesses that start, 9 will fail within their first two years of operation. But what's interesting is that for those individuals who start more than one business (generally 3 - 5), that statistic reverses itself - 9 out of 10 succeed into their fifth year! What's the difference?
Persistence.
Tuesday, August 15, 2006
Who's Sorry Now?
Apparently, the video game industry is. Still. And I'm not sure why.
It seems to me that most of the articles out there written about the video games industry generally have at least one of the following two themes present in the article:
“I'm sorry that video games seem so violent to you (a non-video game playing person or organization). They aren't to us (the video game industry), because we know that they are just made up worlds we've created to play in, and frankly we don't take ourselves that seriously anyway.”
“Hey everybody, we're a real industry and you should take us seriously!”
I think it's time to relinquish the second one. With video game budgets reaching the sizes of some feature film budgets, development cycles stretching out almost as long as feature films, and industry revenues in the same neighborhood as the motion pictures industry, I think the video game industry should admit that they have "grown up” somewhat and just get on with the business. I don't hear the likes of Youtube, Facebook or Myspace apologizing for a huge marketplace presence or multi-hundred million dollar valuations (after only a few months and a modest business model). Video games, as a genre, have been in existence for over 40 years (NOTE: for a brief, cool look at this, check out my friend's recent visit with a living legend – one of the, if not THE, industry founder – Ralph Baer).
The USA Today had two big stories today related to video games:
- one profiled the new Wii from Nintendo and a Q & A with Reginald Fils-Aime, Nintendo of Americas new President and Chief Operating Officer
- one profiled 4 video games as examples of how "games can be helpful"
See what I mean? I think these were pretty informative articles, but I don't hear similar undercurrents in articles about Ford, NTT Docomo, Pfizer, etc.
What I think is interesting about this, however, is that it seems to be ubiquitous; there isn't one particular writer, editor or publication taking this tack. It seems fairly prevalent.
So what's it going to to take to change this? I think the industry itself has to change and move itself forward. One of the things that struck me at E3 this year was not the ubiquitous Booth Babes. It was what I call the lack of originality in the content. Generally speaking, the new game releases broke out into the following categories:
1. Themes:
- "Dungeons and Dragons" genre (these would be the Worlds of Warcraft, etc.)
- "shooting games" (could be FPS' like Unreal Tournament, Call of Duty, the various vehicular combat simulations, etc.)
2. Line Extensions of Existing Franchises:
- almost any game that uses one or more of the following: Star Wars characters or story lines, Marvel comic heroes, Disney characters, any new movie or TV show release (Desperate Housewives??? Really? So "desperate housewives" are playing video games now, it's not just 13-year old kids in the basement?)
3. "Casual Games""
- in quotes because even though everyone in the industry seems to have a certain perception about it, it's coming across to me as "We know there's an undefiend market segment out there, and we think that it happens to be the bulk of our target market. However, since we can't quite define it very specifically, we're going to "throw a lot of stuff" at it (i.e. - subscription revenue models, ringtones, Bejeweled and "classic" game knock-offs (or re-published versions), etc.) and see what sticks". No risks here...these are all merely "investments in micro-markets."
One of the latest market perspectives to gain a lot of attention has been articulated by Chris Anderson, and his notion of long tail economics. With enabling technologies like the internet, I personally think this is the first era where we can actually see these dynamics play out in real-time. Examples:
Success - Cable TV. Bruce got it wrong when he said there were 57 channels with nuthin' on - there are literally over 500 channels (depending on your service provider and package) with nothing on - except those shows that are really of interest to you. And if you can find something unique enough for you, head over to Youtube or MySpace
(potential) Failure - Satellite Radio. What was supposed to be a great revolution to revitalize the medium is actually turning into a losing business venture (at least for the foreseeable future). What's great about satellite radio is the broader spectrum of offerings (literally). What's bad about it is getting it paid for - either through subscription revenue (which is another en vogue business concept these days, that shouldn't be applied as ubiquitously as people seem inclined to do so - but that's another blog I'm cooking up), or by charging advertisers higher rates to reach a more refined audience. The Wall Street Journal reported today that XM Satellite Radio and Sirius are losing significant amounts of money at a time when they forecasted to be making significant amounts of money.
What I object to, however, is this concept being applied "everywhere". The crisis isn't a lack of content, it's a dearth of creativity. It's imagination. The technology already exists. Stop apologizing and let's get on with the business already!
As I said to the panelists at E3, if I'm wrong and long tail economics apply here, then there really is a market for Aunt Bea's Quilting Smack-down!, and I will be here waiting to try it out, with virtual knitting needles on my cell phone...who's the Developer and Publisher willing to put their money where their mouth is?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
