Happy 15th B-Day World Wide Web!

Light those 15 candles! Now close your eyes and make a wish. The World Wide Web has many birthdays. March 1989, when Tim Berners-Lee handed his boss a short document entitled Information Management: a Proposal, is one.

Christmas of the following year, when the Web was up and running on two computers, is another. But perhaps the most important Web anniversary of all is 30 April 1993.

That's the day that Cern put the web in the public domain, thereby ensuring that the world would have a single system for accessing the Internet, instead of a Microsoft Web, a Macintosh Web and who knows, perhaps even an Amstrad Web.

Today, it is hard to imagine a world without the web, yet well into the 1990s, internet access was the reserve of the privileged few, mainly academics.

Although the internet had been around since the 1970s, accessing documents on remote computers required the mastery of complex protocols. Scientists had been doing that for years, and at Cern, the European laboratory for particle physics in Geneva, they were particularly adept.

Research centres

To most at Cern, complex protocols were just fine, but to Berners-Lee, there was clearly a need to manage better the digital information available in various databases and distributed across a plethora of computers at Cern and its collaborating universities and research centres around the globe.

Hence the web's March 1989 birthday. "Vague, but exciting" were the words that Berners-Lee's boss, Mike Sendall, scrawled across the top of the proposal document as he encouraged his protégé to continue.

The following year a less vague, but equally exciting, proposal ensued, and Sendall was persuaded to buy two shiny new NeXT computers for Berners-Lee to work on.

In September 1990, they arrived, and by Christmas, the World Wide Web as we know it was up and running with its defining features of the URL, the hypertext mark-up language (html) and the hypertext transfer protocol (HTTP) all fully defined. Birthday number two.

Berners-Lee's first browser was every bit as powerful as any modern day product, more so in some ways since the web was originally conceived as a two-way medium: Berners-Lee's browser was also an editor.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/7375703.stm

No Break in the Microsoft and Yahoo Standoff

Who’s going to blink first? The deadline that Microsoft imposed on Yahoo to reach a negotiated merger agreement passed three days ago, and the two companies are still not talking.

At a conference at Microsoft’s headquarters in Redmond, Wash., its general counsel, Bradford L. Smith, said no meetings had been scheduled between the two companies.

Now all eyes are focused on Microsoft’s next move. The company warned this month that if its April 26 deadline was not met, it would seek to oust Yahoo’s board and take its offer directly to shareholders, perhaps at a lower price. The deadline passed Saturday with no sign that the two sides were negotiating.

Last Wednesday, Steven A. Ballmer, Microsoft’s CEO, raised the possibility that his company would walk away from its offer. A day later, Christopher P. Liddell, the chief financial officer, said Microsoft was not inclined to increase its offer for Yahoo and would decide this week how to proceed. A Microsoft spokesman said Monday evening that no decision had been made.

If Microsoft abandons its pursuit of Yahoo, that company’s shares would probably fall. This would not preclude Microsoft from trying to reach a negotiated deal at a later date.

But many analysts say the most likely step is that Microsoft will initiate a proxy fight, a move that could bring Yahoo to the negotiating table.

A Yahoo spokesman declined to comment. The company has twice rejected Microsoft’s bid, originally valued at $44.6 billion, or $31 a share, calling it too low. But Jerry Yang, Yahoo’s chief executive, said Yahoo was not opposed to a sale to Microsoft at a higher price.

The value of Microsoft’s stock-and-cash offer has fallen to $42.1 billion, with a decline in the company’s share price.

And nobody's said a word about whether or not regulators will let this merger pass.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/29/technology/29soft.html?ref=technology

When Is a Downgrade a Good Thing?

Microsoft has spoken. Windows XP's days are numbered, and the clock runs out on June 30, 2008… or does it?

It turns out that creative thinkers at Dell and Lenovo – and reportedly HP – have figured out a way that some customers can continue to get new PCs configured with XP Professional through January 31, 2009.

The key is in what's called "downgrade rights." That is, you can purchase a new PC with Windows Vista Business or Vista Ultimate, and have it downgraded to XP Professional. This option is not available if you buy a PC with Vista Home Basic or Home Premium, however.

Both Dell and Lenovo clearly describe the downgrade options on their Web sites.

Microsoft is scheduled to release XP Service Pack 3 to the public on Tuesday, April 29.

The moves are apparently independent of Microsoft's own initiatives to keep XP alive a little while longer. For instance, Microsoft recently announced it will make XP available as an operating system for so-called ultra low-cost PCs (ULCPC).

Additionally, Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer told attendees at its Most Valuable Professionals Summit in Seattle two weeks ago that the company will do what customers demand when it comes to XP.

"We have some customers, a lot of customers using Vista … and we have a lot of customers that are choosing to stay with Windows XP, and as long as those are both important options, we will be sensitive, and we will listen, and we will hear that," Ballmer said. In fact, the company has already extended that cutoff period by five months from January 30, 2008 – the first anniversary of Vista's consumer launch.

In fact, one analyst thinks the new options may be in Microsoft's best interests.

"It does underline that there are customers looking to skip versions of the operating system and it may be an indicator that some may wait for Windows 7," Rob Helm, director of research at Directions on Microsoft, told InternetNews.com. "That puts pressure on Microsoft to get Windows 7 out quicker."

Microsoft has said repeatedly that Windows 7, the next release of Windows after Vista, will ship around three years after Vista shipped – which was January 30, 2007. If the company stays roughly on schedule, that would put Windows 7 out in early 2010.

The company doesn't have a good record of meeting Windows ship dates, however. Vista itself was delayed several times and came out after the crucial Christmas 2006 sales season. So the pressure may be good for both users and Microsoft.

http://www.internetnews.com/bus-news/article.php/3743446/
When+Is+a+Downgrade+a+Good+Thing.htm

Ballmer to Yahoo: OK You Don’t Want Us? We’ll Buy Someone Else

Microsoft made one thing clear on its conference call with investors this afternoon: We tech bloggers don’t have to work this weekend.

Otherwise, it offered a cliffhanger. Next week Microsoft will announce whether it will take its bid for Yahoo to its shareholders or drop it entirely.

The company had set a deadline of this Saturday for Yahoo to respond to its offer. So far, despite a few sessions of small talk between executives of the two companies, Yahoo does not appear to be in any sort of mood to get more serious.

On a European trip over the last few days, Steven A. Ballmer, Microsoft’s chief executive, has made a series of comments that the company might well abandon its bid. And Christopher P. Liddell, Microsoft’s chief financial officer, repeated the threat.

“We will provide updates, as appropriate next week,” he said, saying the company’s options “could include taking an offer to Yahoo shareholders or to withdraw our proposal and focus on other alternatives, both organic and inorganic.” (More on Microsoft’s inorganic chemistry in a minute.)

Mr. Liddell complained that Yahoo is losing value as it dithers about the deal.

“We have been clear, as evidenced by the size of our offer premium, that speed is of the essence,” he said. “Unfortunately, the transaction has been anything but speedy.”

He expressly rejected Yahoo’s arguments that it is worth more than the $31-a-share Microsoft bid.

“The strongest argument I’ve heard as to why we should increase our bid, which is that we can afford to, is not one I favor,” the chief financial officer said.

All this is to be expected, of course. Microsoft certainly has no need to hint it will pay more in absence of other bidders. And it is trying to marshal as many threats to motivate Yahoo as possible, including the prospect of a shareholder revolt when Microsoft pulls away and the possibility that Microsoft might pursue a deal with another company.

That could mean buying AOL from Time Warner, or Ask.com from IAC/Interactive. Or it could try to work out some venture with News Corporation to blend MySpace with its own properties.

All of these companies have been talking to Microsoft and Yahoo over the last three months. So it is certainly possible that a deal may emerge that doesn’t involve Yahoo at all.

http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/04/24/microsofts-new-threat-to-yahoo-
well-buy-someone-else/

How Apple Is Preparing for an iPod Slump

Jobs has a minor little iPod problem. And he is doing an amazing job of rising above it.

O.K., we should all have this sort of problem. Apple sold 10.6 million iPods in the first three months of 2008. It has a 73 percent share of the music player market in the United States and a growing share abroad.

Still, the number of iPods sold in the quarter grew only 1 percent from the same quarter a year ago. And sales of the low-end iPod Shuffle have been falling sharply. In response, Apple lowered the price of the 1-gigabyte shuffle from $79 to $49, helping to stanch the decline. Apple executives speaking on a conference call Wednesday afternoon gave few details, as is their custom.

For some companies, a mature market and downward pressure on prices could lead to a nasty death spiral. But Apple has used its amazing six-year run with the iPod to nurture enough new business lines that it will be able to withstand a collapse in the MP3-player market as well as can be imagined.

First of all, it has a continuing revenue stream from the iPods that have already been sold because of the iTunes Store. Apple sold $881 million worth of music and accessories in the last quarter. That figure rose 35 percent from a year ago. And the NPD Group now counts Apple as the largest seller of music in the country, ahead of Wal-Mart. Apple, in fact, is on track to have greater revenue from selling music (and accessories) this year than the entire revenue estimated for the Warner Music Group.

Second, Apple has created product upgrades that are so different that they may well appeal to a significant number of iPod users. The iPhone, of course, is a product bundle that –- if you want it — is completely different from a standalone iPod.

Apple is also now putting a lot of emphasis as well on the iPod Touch, which is being touted as much as a platform for pocket Internet access and mobile computing as it is for playing music and videos. Already, sales of the Touch helped Apple increase its revenue from iPods by 8 percent to $1.8 billion in the quarter, compared to that 1 percent increase in unit sales.

The company didn’t say much about iPhone sales on the call, but it did say that the shortage of iPhones in the United States in March resulted from higher-than-anticipated demand. A “significant” number of the 1.7 million iPhones Apple sold in the quarter, the company said, were to people who unlocked them and shipped them to countries in which Apple does not have deals with local carriers. (No news on any new iPhone models, but it did say inventory continues to be tight, a good way to manage things if you are about to introduce a new model.)

Third, and perhaps most significantly, Apple’s entire adventure with the iPod is helping it sell computers, although the magnitude is impossible to calculate. Apple sold 2.3 million Macs in the quarter for $3.5 billion. That is an increase of 51 percent by units and 54 percent by dollars. Not so bad when the economy is more than a little shaky.

Apple’s computer sales have been growing 2 to 3 times as fast as the overall market. But this quarter the company says it grew 3.5 times faster than the PC market overall. What’s going on? Don’t rush to tell me how much easier, safer and more powerful a Mac is than a Windows PC. All that was true a year ago as well, and Mac sales are accelerating.

Microsoft, of course, has fumbled the launch of Windows Vista. But what the analysts call the “halo effect” from the iPod is clearly helping to sell Macs too.

Apple’s retail stores are part of this success story, and they sold 458,000 Macs in the quarter. I don’t think these stores would be as mobbed with tourists and other gawkers if they just sold computers and not iPods and iPhones as well.

When we look at all the companies that have stagnated along with the products that made them successful — from AOL to Microsoft — Apple stands out as one company that has been able to flip its business forward so well that it is in a great position to thrive, even if its iPod problems become more than little.

http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/04/23/how-apple-is-preparing-for-an-ipod-
slump/index.html?ref=technology

Is Microsoft's Ballmer one lame dealmaker? You have to ask?

What has he been smoking? The bid for Yahoo that helped sink the market value of Microsoft by more than $20 billion in one day in early February is one of the latest in a string of brilliant acquisitions and major investment stakes Microsoft has initiated since CEO Steve Ballmer took over in 2000 that have been punished by the stock market as misjudgments.

"Some learn more quickly than others. It doesn't look like Mr. Ballmer is learning that quickly," says UCLA Anderson School of Management professor Richard Roll, lead author of a study that analyzed 11 years of merger and acquisition announcements by 2,589 CEOs at 1,740 U.S. companies.

Ballmer said Wednesday that Microsoft — which has given Yahoo's board a Saturday deadline to respond to its offer — is standing by its $44.6 billion bid and will "move forward" if Yahoo rejects it, Reuters reported. The original stock-and-cash offer was a 62% premium to where Yahoo had been trading. That is far above the average premium of about 20% for all deals, Roll says, although tech takeovers often carry fat premiums. Microsoft made the generous offer in anticipation of Yahoo's resistance, but when shareholders responded with sticker shock and bid Microsoft's stock price down, it continued a Ballmer pattern.

Of course, market responses can be wrong at predicting the expediency of acquisitions — and this deal is far from over. But studies have found that stock market reaction to an announced deal has a statistical correlation with the eventual operating cash flow, Roll says. Acquiring Yahoo could prove to be a brilliant move by Ballmer, but investors' reaction shows that, at this price, they believe otherwise.

'A very rational move'

Ballmer has his defenders regarding Yahoo. Saikat Chaudhuri, management professor at the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania, says Microsoft has been criticized for not taking more aggressive steps to compete with Google. "It's a very rational move. Yahoo and Microsoft combined could actually be some force against Google on the Internet," he says.

Roll's study looked at data from 1992-2002. Ballmer, 52, replaced Bill Gates, also 52, as CEO in 2000. At USA TODAY's request, Roll examined Microsoft's acquisitions to the present. Roll has been a leading expert on mergers and acquisitions since he published an influential study 22 years ago, The Hubris Hypothesis of Corporate Takeovers. His data are adjusted using what is known as cumulative abnormal return (CAR). CAR, in this case, is a statistical look at how much a stock price went up or down at the time of the M&A announcement, factoring out other influences such as action in the broader market.

Many CEOs make rookie acquisition mistakes, and the 11-year examination of 2,589 CEOs shows that those who do tend to learn and sharpen their skills because subsequent acquisitions were on average treated by the market as wiser.

Ballmer's first acquisition was software company VerticalNet, and the deal had a negative CAR of 11%, Roll says. His worst decision, as judged by market response, came several months later with the acquisition announcement of Great Plains Software. It had a negative CAR of 23%. The Yahoo deal had an immediate negative CAR of 8%, Roll says. Overall, Ballmer's CAR has been negative 4.6% vs. a positive 2.5% for the average of all CEOs. Ballmer's dealmaking has been improving, albeit gradually, Roll says. From 2003 until the Yahoo deal, he averaged a negative 2.8%.

"He's learned something because he's slowing down the pace of getting hammered," Roll says

http://www.usatoday.com/tech/techinvestor/corporatenews/2008-04-23-ballmer_N.htm

Google (re-)branded world's greatest brand

Better than pigs' feet

At least one Strategy Boutique believes that Google is the most powerful brand on the planet.

On Monday, Millward Brown released its annual list (PDF) of the world's top 100 brands, and for the second year running, it's convinced that Google is the best of the best.

Millward Brown also says that brands are important. "This year's brand ranking demonstrates the importance of investing in brands, especially in times of market turmoil. Strong brands generate superior returns and protect businesses from risk," said Joanna Seddon, CEO of Millward Brown Optimor, a Sub-Boutique of the Strategy Boutique. "Our data shows that strong brands continue to outperform weak ones in terms of market share and share price during recessions."

With the help of a whalesong CD and a few joss sticks, you too can have a strong brand. But not as strong as Google's. According to the Millard Brown study, based on financial data and interviews with people, the Google brand is now worth $86.1bn. That's a 30 per cent increase from last year. Or at least, a thirty per cent increase from last year's report.

GE grabs the second spot at $71.4bn, with Microsoft just behind at $70.8bn. The top ten also includes IBM ($55.3bn), Apple (up 123 per cent to $55.2bn), and Nokia ($43.9bn). It does not include Miss Ida's Pickled Pigs' Feet.

With "brand value growth" of $187.5bn, the tech industry outperformed all other industries. Twenty-eight tech outfits made the top 100, including HP, Cisco, Oracle, Intel, Verizon, Dell, and BlackBerry.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/04/22/google_is_worlds_greatest_brand/

Warning sounded on Microsoft and Google's health records landgrab

Dr Ballmer will market you now

Two leading proponents of electronic health records have urged regulators and governments to wake up to Microsoft and Google's growing interest in storing medical information.

Dr Kenneth Mandl and Dr Isaac Kohane write in the New England Journal of Medicine that the entry of tech behemoths to the healthcare market will bring "seismic change". Pooling vast amounts of sensitive patient information will have a huge impact on research and privacy that is not properly appreciated, they argue.

For example, Microsoft and Google's web-based patient data services aren't covered by the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, and don't want to be. A Microsoft health VP told The New York Times: "Philosophically and politically, I am skeptical of the concept of paternalism."

The Act places restrictions and demands checks on companies that hold and share medical data. It was passed in 1996, however, when lawmakers didn't consider that people might turn their most private information over to web advertising brokers.

Microsoft and Google both assert that their service will give people greater control over their own healthcare. It's already happening at pace at some big hospitals, Mandl and Kohane note. At New York Presbyterian, authorities are committed to allowing patients to transfer information to the Microsoft HealthVault.

The pair called on regulators to consider extending oversight to cover their rush into the market, but saw the potential for people to participate more in research

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/04/18/google_microsoft_health_record/

Switch paves way for super iPods

The largest iPod currently available can hold about 40,000 songs

A breakthrough in technology could see the memory capacity of devices such as the iPod increase by 150,000 times, Glasgow University researchers claimed.

Two experts said they had developed a molecule-sized switch which means that data storage could be boosted without having to increase the size of devices.

The biggest iPod MP3 player currently available can hold about 40,000 songs.

However, new nanotechnology could theoretically allow users to store millions of video and music tracks. Professor Lee Cronin and Dr Malcolm Kadodwala, from the university's chemistry department, said their work could see 500,000 gigabytes squeezed into a microchip no bigger than a two pence piece.

They increased the storage capacity without enlarging the size of the device by developing a new molecule sized switch.

The microscopic switch - made up of two clusters of molecules positioned just 0.32 nanometres apart - allows scientists to easily manipulate an electrical field.

Professor Cronin said the technology could be used in other devices

The nanotechnology experts said that by placing these switches on a gold or carbon surface, they could fit up to 1bn transistors - the fundamental building blocks of computers and electrical devices - on to a single chip.

This is more than five times the current limit.

The technology could also be used in other electrical devices, such as DVD players, to increase their memory and performance, the scientists claimed.

Professor Cronin said: "What we have done is find a way to potentially increase the data storage capabilities in a radical way.

"This is unprecedented and provides a route to produce new a molecule-based switch that can be easily manipulated using an electric field.

"The fact these switches work on carbon means that they could be embedded in plastic chips so silicon is not needed and the system becomes much more flexible both physically and technologically."

The work was undertaken with colleagues at Daresbury Laboratory in Warrington, using its giant X-ray machine (Synchrotron Radiation Source).

Details of the research are published in the journal Nature Nanotechnology.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/scotland/glasgow_and_west/7350281.stm

Microsoft Swallows Sidekick-Maker Danger, Buries It Deep In Org Chart Hell

Microsoft has closed its acquisition of mobile software/platform maker Danger, for which it reportedly spent $500 million.

Danger co-founders Matt Hershenson and Joe Britt, two of the guys behind the Sidekick, might want to print a copy of Microsoft's press release to keep track of the org chart they're about to join: Hershenson and Britt report to Roz Ho, corporate vice president of Microsoft's new Premium Mobile Experiences team. Ho reports to Andy Lees, senior vice president of the Mobile Communications Business. That's a group within Microsoft's Entertainment and Devices Division, headed by Robbie Bach. Bach's boss is Steve Ballmer.

Got it? Now get back to work figuring out how to beat Apple's iPhone, RIM's BlackBerry Pearl, and whatever your old friend Andy Rubin (Danger co-founder/former CEO) is cooking up at Google with Android.

http://www.alleyinsider.com/2008/4/microsoft_swallows_up_danger_
reveals_organizational_complexity

Holy sh*t! New York lawmakers approve 'Amazon tax'

The New York legislature has approved an ingenious new law that would force Amazon and other big-name online retailers to collect sales tax on all goods shipped to the Empire State.

Last week, the State Legislature approved a $122bn budget, and $50m of that would come from e-tailers who don't maintain New York warehouses or offices.

In accordance with a 1992 Supreme Court case involving an old-school mail order business, American e-tailers are required to collect sales tax only if they have a "physical presence" in the state where a customer resides. Otherwise, the onus is on the customer to declare the purchase on his next tax return - though few remember/choose to do so.

First proposed by former New York Governor Eliot Spitzer - who resigned last month after a federal wiretap caught him with a $1000-a-hour call girl - the new law argues that an e-tailer's physical presence includes "affiliate marketers."

Amazon - which has a rather large affiliate program - has argued that this law "would be a radical departure from anything currently being done in the U.S." And Amazon is right. Nonetheless, Spitzer's replacement, David Paterson, is expected to approve it.

Like Amazon, many customer advocate groups have badmouthed the plan. It would mean customers forking over more tax dollars. But as we've said before: A state has a right to its own taxes.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/04/14/new_york_legislature_approves_amazon_tax/

All's Well at Intel

Whew! You could hear Tech sector's sigh of relief all over the land.

Any slowdown in the semiconductor industry due to a weak economic climate appears to be isolated to Advanced Micro Devices so far.

Intel, the biggest chipmaker, reported first-quarter results that were largely in line with analysts' expectations, and it offered a strong outlook for the second quarter as well. It earned $1.4 billion, or 25 cents per share, on revenue of $9.7 billion. Sales were up 9 percent, while net income dropped by 12 percent due to restructuring charges.

"Our first-quarter results demonstrate a strengthening core business and a solid global market environment," said Intel chief executive Paul Otellini in a statement. "We saw healthy demand for our leading-edge processors and chipsets across all segments."

Plenty of technology analysts were worried that current recessionary pressure would hurt computer sales and orders for new chips. Those concerns were underscored last week, when the No. 2 chipmaker, A.M.D., said that its first-quarter sales would fall short of expectations.

"People might now say maybe it's safe to put your feet in the water here,'' Raymond James equity analyst Hans Mosesmann told Bloomberg of Intel. "They have a super product lineup, and A.M.D. is in a death spiral.''

Investors were certainly pleased with the news. Shares of Intel jumped 7 percent in after-hours trading.

http://www.portfolio.com/news-markets/top-5/2008/04/15/Intel-Earnings

Don't Be Evil or don't lose value?

Funny thing, as Google comes under ever increasing scrutiny for the power it has over our lives, the web giant is tiptoeing back from its long-held corporate motto, Don't Be Evil.

Dominating internet advertising and search have allowed the company to embark on a seemingly endless expansion into all manner of internet products, including email, video sharing, online mapping, mobile phone software, social networking and office productivity.

But while Google's revenues in 2007 were 37 times greater than in 2002 and its headcount has ballooned to well over 16,000 employees, the quest to provide ever-increasing returns to shareholders - the primary objective of any public company - has at times conflicted with its perceived core values.

Some have interpreted the ceaseless criticisms of Google's privacy policies and its co-operation with totalitarian regimes as a sign the Don't Be Evil goal is unattainable for a profit-driven company. At the very least, the corporate motto has encouraged the public and the press to hold Google to a higher standard.

"It really wasn't like an elected, ordained motto," Google's vice-president and 20th employee, Marissa Mayer, said in an interview during her trip to Sydney last week.

"I think that 'Don't Be Evil' is a very easy thing to point at when you see Google doing something that you personally don't like; it's a very easy thing to point out so it does get targeted a lot."

Janis Wardrop, associate lecturer in organisation and management at the University of NSW, said that, regardless of Google's stated motto, companies are always set up to look after their shareholders and not other stakeholders.

"It [the motto] is good PR but really it's empty because it's questionable whether shareholders will care [whether Google is evil or not]," she said.

The most recent Google product to raise the ire of privacy activists is the Street View feature of Google Maps, already launched for over 40 US cities and expected to be unveiled for Australia this year..

Privacy groups are up in arms because Google has not made a firm commitment to obscure faces and number plates, and there have been no assurances that Google's drivers won't accidentally head down private roads.

http://www.smh.com.au/news/biztech/dont-be-evil/2008/04/15/1208025168177.html

Don't Be Evil: Did you sign Google's noncompete? Good, you're fired

A recently departed DoubleClicker tells us that Google managers asked employees at the online ad company it acquired last month to sign one-year noncompete agreements. Most agreed, thinking that it would spare their jobs — but then layoffs came a week later. They were "pretty pissed" over the bait-and-switch and were forced to find jobs outside their industry. The text of the noncompete is below.

8. Covenant Regarding Competition. I agree that for a period of one (1) year after my employment with the Company terminates, I shall not (a) engage in any employment, business or activity that is competitive with the Company's businesses; or (b) solicit business from, do business with or render services to, in any capacity, directly or indirectly, any entity that is or was a Company client or customer within the last twelve months of my employment with the Company, for a purpose or in a manner that is in any way competitive with the Company's business. If, during or after my employment with the Company, I seek work elsewhere, I agree to provide a copy of this Agreement to any person or entities seeking to hire me before accepting employment with or engagement by any such person or entity.

9. Solicitation of Employees. I agree that for a period of twelve (12) months immediately following the

termination of my relationship with the Company for any reason, whether with or without cause, I shall not either directly or indirectly solicit, induce, recruit or encourage any of the Company's employees to leave their employment, or take away such employees, or attempt to solicit, induce, recruit, encourage or take away employees of the Company, either for myself or for any other person or entity

http://valleywag.com/378444/did-you-sign-googles-noncompete-good-youre-fired

Is the Windows ecosystem over yet? Would Redmond even know?

Last year, in a blog post and a subsequent Computing column, I wrote that the Windows ecosystem is broken. Microsoft's attempts to make Windows backwards compatible with all previous versions, combined with the ballooning number of devices for which developers must write new drivers to work with Windows, is causing the operating system to become bloated and users to become frustrated.

This scenario makes it harder for Microsoft to build new Windows versions, as the OS grows ever more complex. The best evidence: Windows Vista.

Now Gartner, a tech-oriented market research firm, has come to the same conclusion. In a report that's garnered lots of attention the last few days, Analysts Michael Silver and Neil MacDonald told a Gartner-sponsored conference in Las Vegas that Windows is "collapsing".

From Computerworld:

"For Microsoft, its ecosystem and its customers, the situation is untenable," said Silver and MacDonald in their prepared presentation, titled "Windows Is Collapsing: How What Comes Next Will Improve."

Among Microsoft's problems, the pair said, is Windows' rapidly-expanding code base, which makes it virtually impossible to quickly craft a new version with meaningful changes. That was proved by Vista, they said, when Microsoft -- frustrated by lack of progress during the five-year development effort on the new operating -- hit the "reset" button and dropped back to the more stable code of Windows Server 2003 as the foundation of Vista.

"This is a large part of the reason [why] Windows Vista delivered primarily incremental improvements," they said. In turn, that became one of the reasons why businesses pushed back Vista deployment plans. "Most users do not understand the benefits of Windows Vista or do not see Vista as being better enough than Windows XP to make incurring the cost and pain of migration worthwhile."

I suggested that Microsoft needs to start over from scratch, with a brand new operating system, something Apple periodically has done. While it may sacrifice compatibility -- something that could be addressed through virtualization -- it will ultimately result in a faster, more modern, more stable operating system.

The Gartner analysts come to the same conclusion:

Users want a smaller Windows that can run on low-priced -- and low-powered -- hardware. And increasingly, users work with "OS-agnostic applications," the two analysts said in their presentation. It takes too long for Microsoft to build the next version, the company is being beaten by others in the innovation arena, and in the future -- perhaps as soon as the next three years -- it's going to have trouble competing with Web applications and small, specialized devices.

"Apple introduced its iPhone running OS X, but Microsoft requires a different product on handhelds because Windows Vista is too large, which makes application development, support and the user experience all more difficult," according to Silver and MacDonald.

"Windows as we know it must be replaced," they said in their presentation.

Backward compatibility with older applications should also be supported via virtualization. "Backward compatibility is a losing proposition for Microsoft; while it keeps people locked into Windows, it also often keeps them from upgrading," said the analysts. "[But] using built-in virtualization, compatibility modules could be layered atop Win32, or not, as needed."

I'd love to be a fly on the wall in Microsoft executive committee meetings, as Steve Ballmer et al chew over reports such as this. Do they even get it? Or will projects such as Singularity, which could be the answer, remain confined to the labs at Microsoft Research?

Does Microsoft really understand the issues that threaten it? Or is pride, and the always-fatal notion of "we've always done it this way" the real threat to the company? I'm hoping Microsoft is moving quickly to address what's becoming increasingly obvious to everyone else.

http://blogs.chron.com/techblog/archives/2008/04/gartner_figures_out_that
_the_windows_ecosyste_1.html

Yahoo Goes Scorched Earth

What a day. I can’t say neither side is throwing punches any longer in the epic fight over what’s left of Yahoo. Microsoft and Yahoo are done, for the most part, with sternly worded letters.

Yesterday Yahoo made two announcements/leaks. First, that they were very close to agreeing to terms that would combine Yahoo and AOL as an alternative to the Microsoft deal. And second, that they will run, ahem, a two week test of Google Adsense on 3% of their Yahoo search results page, instead of their own ads.

Microsoft responded that the Google deal is a precursor to handing over de facto monopoly power of the search advertising space. And they threw their own curve ball as well: News Corp. has switched teams and is now in Microsoft’s camp.

The formal entry of AOL into the discussions suggests Time Warner wants to offload the asset soon. If a Microsoft/Yahoo deal goes through, the only realistic suitor for AOL is Google, and that gives them little negotiating leverage.

The News Corp news is more interesting. In a move reminiscent of the Italians switching sides in World War II, they’ve abandoned their Yahoo soul mate for a more compliant Microsoft. They put in a bid for Yahoo in February (more), which was reportedly countered just a couple of weeks ago. My guess is the counter offer wasn’t very interesting, so they switched sides. You gotta love News Corp., they’re always there for you when they need you.

But by far the most interesting news is the Yahoo/Google alliance. Industry insiders still question whether regulators would allow the deal, but Yahoo’s been whispering around Silicon Valley that a business partnership with Google, as opposed to a merger, would stand a much higher likelihood of getting approved.

What Is Yahoo’s Strategy - Scorched Earth, Or Knife To The Nose?

Yahoo has put costly severance plans in place to both retain employees and make themselves a less attractive acquisition candidate. But top talent has left anyway, and just about everyone at Yahoo seems to be looking for a job (even execs I’ve spoken with). Meanwhile, the Google deal shows they would rather give up the search marketing game, their biggest asset, than become part of Microsoft.

Their actions, which appear to be based on destroying their market value as a counter to the Microsoft bid, benefit neither their stockholders nor their employees. And by setting up Google as the only real option in search marketing, they are disrupting what little market balance and competition exists in that space today.

I can’t decide if nose knifing or scorched earth is the best way of describing what they’re doing, but I have to ask: If Yahoo “wins” this epic battle with Microsoft, will there be anything left at the end to celebrate over?

It’s time to end this thing before Yahoo ends itself. I don’t care if they throw AOL, MySpace, and half the rest of the Internet into the deal along with Yahoo. But the health of the Internet demands a counter balance to Google. Yahoo-Microsoft, given the current state of things, is the only reasonable outcome.

http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/04/10/yahoo-goes-scorched-earth/

Yahoo! to Microsoft: Surrender? Never

Why does this deal sound more like the Friends of Dorothy versus the Wicked Witch every day?

Yahoo! has replied promptly to an open letter sent to them by Microsoft's chief executive Steve Ballmer on Saturday.

Ballmer's letter set Yahoo! a three-week deadline to conclude an agreement or Microsoft would take its $44bn offer directly to shareholders.

In response, Yahoo's chief exec Jerry Yang said the board of directors has not changed its mind since it rejected the offer 11 February. He said that Yahoo!'s outlook had not changed its forecast for earnings since then and continued to believe the offer "substantially undervalues Yahoo!".

Yahoo! said Ballmer's letter "mischaracterizes the nature of our discussions with you".

Ballmer said Yahoo! had chosen "not to enter into substantive negotiations with us [Yahoo]".

On the contrary Yahoo's Yang said: "We have had constructive conversations together regarding a variety of topics, including integration and regulatory issues... Moreover, Steve, you personally attended two of these meetings and could have advanced discussions in any way you saw fit."

Yahoo!'s letter also said that Microsoft had failed to respond to questions sent 28 March relating to possible anti-trust and other regulatory matters.

Yang's letter, signed off "Very truly yours", ends: "We are open to all alternatives that maximize stockholder value. To be clear, this includes a transaction with Microsoft if it represents a price that fully recognizes the value of Yahoo! on a standalone basis and to Microsoft, is superior to our other alternatives, and provides certainty of value and certainty of closing. Lastly, we are steadfast in our commitment to choosing a path that maximizes stockholder value and we will not allow you or anyone else to acquire the company for anything less than its full value."

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/04/07/yahoo_microsoft_love_letters/

Online Sales to Soar 17 Percent in '08

Online spending is expected to rise a robust 17 percent this year, despite a sluggish economy that has bruised many brick-based retailers, according to an annual survey to be released Tuesday.

Retail sales online, excluding travel purchases, are set to grow to $204 billion in 2008 from $174.5 billion last year, fueled by sales of apparel, computers and autos, according to a survey conducted by Internet analysis firm Forrester Research for Shop.org, the online arm of the National Retail Federation trade group. That projection is below the 21 percent increase seen in the prior year, but industry officials attribute it to the maturing of the business, not the sluggish economy.

E-commerce ''is clearly the bright spot in retailing,'' said Scott Silverman, executive director of Shop.org.

The upbeat report contrasts with the outlook for many traditional retailers, which have been paring down store growth and closing shops as they struggle with consumers who don't feel like spending amid higher gas and food costs, a housing slump and a weaker job market. The exceptions are discounters and wholesale clubs, as shoppers turn to less expensive stores.

On Thursday, the nation's retailers are expected to report at best flat sales growth in March, according to the International Council of Shopping Centers. Same-stores sales are sales at stores opened at least a year and are considered a key indicator of a retailer's health.

Online retailers are not immune to the same economic challenges, but what has spearheaded e-commerce growth is a ''tale of two shoppers that visit the Web for different reasons,'' according to Sucharita Mulpuru, a Forrester Research analyst and lead author of the report.

There are the price-sensitive shoppers who appear to be buying more items online as they look for better prices. And then there are the more affluent customers, who have been increasing their online spending because of the convenience and vast offerings.

But those shoppers looking for a bevy of free online shipping deals may not find them as plentiful as they did last year. The study, which surveyed 125 online retailers in February and March, showed that merchants are less interested in using such promotions this year. While 85 percent of online retailers said they used some shipping incentive in the past year, just 35 percent said they would focus more on these types of deals in 2008.

Instead, retailers said they plan to invest more in advertising on social networking sites like myspace.com and facebook.com, according to the survey.

That may not be the best strategy, according to Mulpuru.

http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/technology/AP-Online-Sales.html?ref=technology

Mr. and Mrs. Boring sue Google over Street View pics

'Shit, no one’s gonna screw with our privacy but us'

A Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania couple has sued Google for invasion of privacy, accusing the world's largest search engine of photographing their swimming pool and posting it to the web.

Aaron and Christine Boring claim that in offering 360-degree panoramic pics of their private residence via Google Street View, the web giant has "caused them mental suffering and diminished the value of their property."

According to their suit - turned up by The Smoking Gun - the Borings purchased their Pittsburgh home in 2006 for "a considerable sum of money," and "a major component of their purchase decision was a desire for privacy". So they were annoyed when pan-and-zoom-able pics of the home, including its swimming pool, turned up on Street View.

These pics were acquired, the suit says, when a Google vehicle appeared on their private road without a privacy waiver or other authorization. Claiming this private road is marked with a "Private Road" sign, the suit calls Google's behavior "an intentional and/or grossly reckless invasion of...seclusion." The Borings' lawyer calls it "outlandish."

"Put yourself in their position," Dennis Moskal told us. "Say you and your wife are in your swimming pool, wearing whatever, and you see a Google vehicle taking photographs of you - and they're close enough to almost hand you a drink. That is a significant invasion of a person's privacy."

So Moskal has filed suit in Pennsylvania state court to get the Borings' privacy back - and a little extra. The suit seeks at least $25,000 in damages.

It appears that Google has now removed the offending pics from Street View. But that doesn't mean the Borings have recovered their privacy. Their lawsuit has also ensured that their house and swimming pool are pictured on all sorts of other sites across the web.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/04/05/google_street_view_suit/

Apple sued over 'inflated' iMac claims

Apple, the world's most successful brand, is being sued by a Los Angeles law firm for "deceptively" marketing the new 20-inch iMac

Kabateck Brown Kellner says the monitor is "vastly inferior to the previous generation it replaced", not that you would know it from Apple's "grossly inflated" claims.

According to the law firm, Apple told consumers both the 20-inch and 24-inch iMacs displayed "millions of colors at all resolutions":

Indeed, the new 24-inch iMacs display 16,777,216 colors on 8-bit, in-plane switching (IPS) screens, as did the previous generation of 20-inch iMacs. But the new 20-inch iMac monitors do not even come close, displaying 98% fewer colors (262,144).

While Apple describes the display of both the 24-inch and 20-inch iMacs as though they were interchangeable, the monitors in each are of radically different technology. The 20-inch iMacs feature 6-bit twisted nematic film (TN) LCD screens, the least expensive of its type.

The 20-inch iMac's TN screens have a narrower viewing angle, less color depth, less color accuracy and are more susceptible to washout across the screen.

Why does hundreds of thousands, rather than millions, of colors merit a class action? According to KBK, the new 20-inch iMac, the one launched in August 2007, is:

particularly ill-suited to editing photographs because of the display's limited color potential and the distorting effect of the color simulation processes.

KBK has filed suit in U.S. District Court, Northern District of California in San Jose - in Apple's home turf. Boy are these guys tough, riding shotgun into Silicon Valley, where Apple is a religion, and Steve Jobs is God.

http://www.channelregister.co.uk/2008/04/01/apple_imac_class_action/

Bill Gates and Steve Jobs are the same man!

Wonder why the two tech bigwigs never seen in a room together?

Apple CEO Steve Jobs and former head of Microsoft Bill Gates are actually the same man, it was revealed today.

The man, known as Steve Gates, made the announcement to a stunned crowd this morning. Taking his Apple form, he said "Just one more thing...", before pulling off a mask unveiling his Microsoft face.

The revelation will leave fanboys popping their corks.

One said: "I know Apple are known for making big announcements on a Tuesday, but this is ridiculous."

Some commentators were unsurprised, pointing out that the two formats' operating systems have been getting more alike year by year.

http://www.t3.com/news/bill-gates-and-steve-jobs-are-the-same-man?=35492