Communications and Technology Blog - Tehrani.com - Search Archives

Google Co-Founder Complains About Facebook, Apple and Splinternet

2012-04-17T16:01:31Z

Google co-founder Sergey Brin recently explained that if the web was dominated by Apple and Facebook, his company wouldn’t have access to enough information to start its search engine. The idea is that the restrictive policies of Facebook make crawling its pages challenging if not impossible while Apple’s iPod, iPhone and iPad apps are generally not searchable.

He further explained the challenge to the internet from governments like Saudi Arabia, China, Iran and even the US where internet access is either limited or threatened to be limited very soon via regulation which is the case with proposed legislation like Sopa and Pipa.

In January of 2008 I discussed the rise of the splinternet – or a splintering of the homogenous internet we once were accustomed to using. At the time I said:

In the good old days having a website was good enough... This was your portal to the world -- your customers and everyone else. But slowly but surely a wealth of new communities are being created and if you aren't part of them, you could risk losing tremendous market share. In other words, a single homogeneous Internet is no longer what marketers can count on.

Just yesterday in fact, Hasbro Inc. "woke up" to the fact that over 600,000 daily users utilize a Facebook application called Scrabulous which is a Scrabble clone. Scrabble -- the popular word-based board game is owned by Hasbro, the company which launched a lawsuit hoping to shut Scrabulous down.

In September of 2010 I surmised that HTML5 will slow the growth of the Splinternet and while I still believe this is the case, the growth of apps in app stores and governments looking to “clamp down” on open communications has only grown. Here is an excerpt from that piece:

In January of 2008 I used a term Splinternet to describe the growing number of areas content providers need to focus on when delivering their services. It seems according to Forrester Research I coined the term as it refers to a splintering of the traditional Internet. At the time I used Facebook as an example of this splintering but over the years, app stores too have also become a major splintered area as media companies and others as they look to optimize their presence in each disparate splinterverse.

More recently, Wired declared the Web dead which reinforces for me that as a society we are going in the wrong direction - one of exponentially more splintered communities. Of course Apple and Facebook have every reason in the world to continue to promote apps which are dependent on their platforms and/or approval process but is this good for users or bad?

My sense is as concerned as I am about the Splinternet becoming the Internet - and you can argue the transformation has already taken place, there is tremendous hope that HTML5 will force developers to first write apps for the web and worry about the app stores later.

The only thing we need now is an open HTML5 store which handles the billing for developers who want the widest audience possible as their creative work is monetized.

My optimism was shattered when I wrote a piece about Facebook becoming the internet back in March of 2011 in response to a newspaper moving all its content to the world’s most popular social networking service. Here is an excerpt:

But as Facebook has grown in power and influence, it is becoming a more important slice of the pie and as such developers are looking to it as a platform to start developing on first. Certainly Zynga - the company behind Facebook games such as FarmVille and CityVille being worth about $10B hasn't put a dent in this idea.

But it isn't just the developers moving to Facebook, one newspaper, Rockville Central has decided to move all of its content to the social networking site and it will cease putting fresh content on its own site entirely.

But Google doesn’t own the rights to content on Facebook, or iOS apps. Moreover, Google is perhaps the most powerful company on earth as it can instantly demote a website so it is no longer found when a relevant query is made. How do we feel concern or pity for a company which most human beings rely on daily?

So should we be concerned that the internet is spintering? Yes. Especially when it comes to foreign countries – but Apple, Facebook and other companies have no obligation to improve the quality of Google’s search engine.

In closing, I agree the world would be a better place if search engines had easy access to all information in the form of the internet not splinternet. However, it is really tough to feel sorry for one of the most powerful companies on the web – once which routinely puts sites who are potential competitors out of business through search engine changes which come with no warning or recourse to websites who are eliminated from results.

Goodbye Android, we hardly Knew You

2012-04-02T20:23:37Z

New research is showing that Android has some real problems. Obviously Google knows this and it’s part of the reason they purchased Motorola and as Henry Blodget points out are opening an online tablet store. David Beckemeyer too weighs in with a chart showing just how dominant Apple is becoming.

But before we get into that I was at my accountant last week and while he was crunching numbers I decided to tell my wife it was time to get my oldest daughter a refurbished laptop because her netbook takes longer to boot than the time it takes for us to assemble all the documents for the IRS. Without skipping a beat the accountant looked up and said, “Why don’t you get her a Macbook?”

Now mind you, I like my accountant and all but I didn’t ask him for his advice and/or perspective. Worse yet, I think I may actually be getting billed for a discussion I didn’t go there to have.

But putting that aside (I really hope he doesn’t read my blog) it shows just how loyal people are to Apple. Again, unsolicited testimonials and suggestions on what to purchase are pretty much the realm of only Apple these days. Eight years ago you would hear similar things about the Blackberry keyboard and fantastic email capabilities but can you imagine anyone telling you to go out and get a Windows laptop? It is just counter to everything we know about consumers and the PC relationship; in fact most relationships with consumers and computer companies are devoid of the passion Apple seems to exude.

Part of the challenge has to do with the ease of use factor – many women I know and men above a certain age seem to hate Android while techies love it. I guarantee that science fiction aficionados (also known affectionately as geeks) strongly gravitate towards Android.

Back to Beckemeyer whose above chart detailing how people access the web shows that for all the talk of Android dominance, in the future we will live increasingly in an Apple-dominated world.

Part of the reason has to do with the fact that iPhones and iPads are still easier to use. I know many people who purchased an Android device because it was all Verizon offered and can’t wait to get an Apple. Moreover, the words of Roger McNamee below seem to be ringing truer by the day:

What if Apple doesn't get 10-15% market-share in tablets but instead 60-70%? Then Apple will be the largest hardware company out there by a mile.

If this trend continues and I am not sure what can stop it, it will be an about-face for how the tech market has traditionally worked. Remember, that with computers and laptops, the PC won the war because the price/performance curve favored open ecosystems where hardware vendors were forced to compete on an open, level playing field. The Macs too in the eighties and much of the nineties weren’t so special from a design perspective so everyone competed to provide the most computing power for the least dollars.

But Apple has turned the computing market into fashion– meaning iPhones are more like personal statements of character than merely consumer electronics. You wonder why Apple doesn’t event show up at the CES show? Well maybe because they consider their products to be fashion statements which just happen to need a power cord.

And even their flaws somehow turn into selling points. Witness Siri, which doesn’t work that well and people love it. Jim Cramer rants about it on CNBC – so much so that I believe they must have optimized it for his voice.

As I have said in the past, Samsung and perhaps Sony are in the best position to put up a fight against Apple in terms of making gadgets which look great. But let’s face it, the clock is ticking and at a certain point, Android will take a back seat to iOS when it comes to competing for developer time and attention. And once that happens it will be very tough for Android to once again gain share.

So yes, the new Google tablet store and coming out with Google branded tablets which are likely to be given away at a loss are the only ways to blunt the iOS onslaught. So it may be a bit premature to declare Android dead but it is clear that Google seems to be panicking.

Disclosure: I own Apple shares.

Google+ Growth, Dropbox Killer: Google IS the Tech News

2012-02-09T16:04:09Z

Google has entrenched itself is so many areas of tech they have become the technology news of the day. First off, Google+ growth has been nothing short of fantastic, in part because the company has altered search results to put more emphasis on this social network. Every SEO/SEM professional has had no choice in the past few months to get up to speed on the latest social network from the search giant. And this in part is the reason why it has half the unique visitors of Twitter according to web traffic tracking site Compete.

In other unrelated news in the mobile market – hey wait, it isn’t unrelated at all – once again it features Google whose Motorola Mobility acquisition is about to get OKed – perhaps as early as next week.

The bad news now for those companies selling products with technology covered by Motorola/Google patents – you’re on the hook for 2.25% of every sale. This includes iPhones and even cars which utilize H.264 or UMTS. Think that one through – that is $2,250 for a $100,000 BMW or Mercedes. Of course if you don’t agree to these terms, you get thrown off Google’s search home page – just kidding – you actually just get sued by Google’s ever-expanding army of lawyers. It may be preferable to just get booted from the first SERP.

It is worth mentioning this is the same standard set by Motorola – many in the industry hoped Google would ease up on these requirements.

By now you have followed the trend – we will move on to yet another unrelated space – cloud storage where Google is set to release a Dropbox killer – its new Drive service. Really though this move was necessary as Google has to have an iCloud competitor as well if it plans of allowing Android to copy all the cool functions and features of iOS.

Google is into so many things and as a result you have two groups of people. First are the users who are happy to see the company expand because they rely on Google’s free services for everything from email to RSS reading. And then there is the second group – competitors and investors who worry Google is suffocating the rest of the tech space with its ever-expanding growth into new and perhaps unrelated spaces. This latter group includes privacy advocates who worry that these moves coupled with Google’s new “shared data” privacy policy allows Google unprecedented access to personal information.

But whatever your feelings, you’ll be happy to know that Google has even more news which will allow you to voice your thoughts in person to a Google employee. You see, the search leader is said to be opening a new retail store in Dublin. And I am sure your Android device will have no problems giving you step-by-step directions on how to get there once it’s built.

Trends and Surprises Regarding Google's 2011 Advertisers

2012-01-25T14:16:05Z

Google’s 2011 revenues were $37.9 billion last year and 96% of that money came from ads. Now I know what you are thinking. Where is all that money coming from? Well thankfully, the people at Wired put together an infographic that explains it all. Here are some highlights – a piece of the infographic and a link for the full graphic.

Finance and insurance totaled at $4B while retail and general merchandise was $2.8B and travel and tourism came in at $2.4B. Computers and consumer electronics came in at $2B.

Regarding individual companies the leading web retailer Amazon spent $55.3M followed by eBay at $42.8M and Macy’s at $35.6M.

On the education front, University of Phoenix spent $46.9M while ITT spent $29.9M.

On the telecom front AT&T was the leader at $40.8M while Verizon followed up at $22.9M. Go Daddy on the domain name front came in at $21.7M.

Another bit of information which is interesting has to do with the price per click for some of the top keywords. For example “Self-employed health insurance” costs a whopping $43.39 per click – that tells you a bit about how profitable that business is. A good basis for comparison may be “Barbie doll” which costs $1.30. It is worth mentioning that a typical Barbie Doll costs about $15-$20 meaning Google takes 5% or more of the total cost for this item - not for a sale but just a click.

Another highly priced term is “online video conferencing software” at $35.53. Seems like a lot of money but software is high-margin so this isn’t too surprising. I did a search on the term and the advertisers at the top were Nefsis, Arkadin, Gotomeeting, fuzebox, Cisco, Webex and Siemens Enterprise.

Perhaps most surprising is the term “custom business cards” which costs $13.83 per click. Since not all the people who click a link purchase it should come as a surprise that the company Vistaprint says in its ad that they will sell you 250 business cards for $10. To me the math doesn’t add up. – Perhaps they make it up in volume . I really hope so because Vistaprint spent $26.9M on Google last year.

The data clearly reminds us of something which may be forgotten – Google is not so much a tech company as a company which is feeding off of budgets which used to be dedicated to direct mail, coupons and newspaper circulars. Many of the companies spending the most money also spend a lot on billboard and TV advertising making Google just another mainstream outlet but with obviously increased measurability.

Going forward we can expect Google to try to push more of these advertisers from search click ads to YouTube – this is happening already but with Google’s recent announcement that they server 4B videos per day there is a massive amount of inventory to sell ads on. This is a natural progression for the company and explains why they have invested in new custom content video channels.

Google Holiday Promo For Your New Gadgets

2011-12-27T18:13:20Z

Google is holding back nothing in its desire to promote all its top products and services this holiday season. Sure they have massive amount of advertising space they can utilize on their search and AdSense ad network but they also own the real estate on he Google home page. And although they like to keep things simple, this holiday season there is a new marketing message which graces the search page.

And that message is:

New gadget? Get your new phone, tablet, computer, or spaceship outfitted with Google

And by injecting humor they make it less offensive to purists who don't like overt marketing messages.

What sorts of things are they promoting?

In order they are Chrome, Search/Make Google Your Home Page, Android Market and Google+.

With so many services to promote it is always interesting to see what Google pushes to determine their own internal importance levels. For example, what about Apps, Gmail and Reader? I would bet they made the short list.

And the question worth asking in 2012 is how do you compete against a monster like Google that owns so many eyeballs worldwide and gets massive exposure for whatever they decide to promote in an instant.

Carol Bartz Fired From Yahoo! What's Needed Now

2011-09-07T12:35:42Z

Without ever meeting Carol Bartz, I realized pretty quickly that her hiring was a CEO gamble as her experience was not in line with what was needed at a media company. I outlined my thinking in January of 2009. When you have one of the most-visited websites in the world, you don’t hire someone with no web experience to run it. Yet, that is what the Yahoo! board did. It is stupefying and part of the reason I said it was time for Bartz to go this past June.

But even worse than the hiring of Bartz was the firing – she was let go on the phone which is understandable as she was traveling and the company didn’t want to deal with leaks. But what is unfathomable is that there is no replacement.

I suppose this is understandable as well because news of the CEO search would leak back to Bartz and if she wasn’t let go first this could cause even larger problems. But then again if they promoted from within then this wouldn’t be as big of an issue. Isn’t it amazing that with such a massive staff, there doesn’t seem to be an insider who the board believes can permanently run things? Talk about a shallow bench.

Yahoo! stock performance under Bartz (click to enlarge)

When people complain about the large amount of CEO pay they should realize that the stock appreciation-based wealth creation for employees and shareholders is directly tied to effective CEO performance. And the beneficiaries are often pension funds and 401K holders. And as we can see from Yahoo!’s stock performance, there hasn’t been positive change while Carol Bartz was at the helm.

Moreover, Yahoo! has hopefully learned that it competes with Google and they need a leader who can go toe to toe with the search giant on apps, mobile and in the numerous areas such as video where Google has left the company in the dust.

Bartz was tasked with increasing the stock price of the company and she hasn’t been too successful in this regard. Moreover, strained relations with Alibaba which many blame on Bartz didn’t help boost her longevity.

So now that she is out, CFO Tim Morse is acting CEO and a management team of vice presidents and the executive counsel are helping to run things.

What the company needs more than anything is someone with amazing vision and execution ability – a person who can rebuild the corporate culture of the company and get the whole organization excited about the future and make them competitive. The problem is I don’t recall Yahoo! ever being competitive so this is a tall order. And that is the sad part – one of the best assets in the world might not ever see its revenue maximized.

NYTIMES: This is the Innovation I Was Hoping for

2011-08-08T21:02:46Z

You may remember when I trashed newspapers for not innovating and then looking for taxpayer handouts? Well I did – and many weren’t happy with the fact that I pointed out Obamanomics were in part responsible for the problems the newspapers were facing and moreover, I showed how the newspapers themselves were in-part responsible for the election of President Obama.

Interestingly, the New York Times with its massive circulation and influence has been perhaps the most influential cheerleader for our president and rather than rely on subsidies the company is innovating and has a new site called Beta620 – a play on their street address, which will showcase the company’s latest innovations.

Bravo New York Times, Bravo.

What sort of exciting new things might we enjoy if we visit this new site?

The Buzz, which shows how much traction Times articles are getting on social media
Times Companion, which lets you summon information on topics in the article you're reading without taking you away from the page
TimesInstant, a search page that shows results as you type
Smart Search Bar, which sorts results and displays them without taking you away from the page you're on
NYTimes Crossword Web App, an HTML 5 version of the puzzle's aging digital versions
Longitude, which plots the day's Times articles on an interactive Google map
Community Hub, a dashboard featuring stats on your comment history, a feed of comments on Times articles and, soon, Facebook friends' comments

It is staggering to see how media companies have an audience and massive amounts of web traffic yet they rely on a myriad of other companies to innovate so their content can be shared more efficiently. So hats off once again to the paper which may hopefully start a trend of “old world” companies who innovate – bringing web excitement to companies who some left for dead.

Keep Bing at Microsoft

2011-07-26T17:17:12Z

From a competitive position, it would be major trouble to remove Bing from the deep pockets of Microsoft. Talk of the business being potentially sold to Facebook when that company needs to focus on fighting Google+ makes little sense. There are few other strong software companies beyond Oracle and Salesforce who I think could do a better job with Bing than Microsoft.

But like I said in May, Microsoft is doing as much as can be expected with Bing.

We know Marc Benioff loves Google so count them out of such a purchase - and Oracle, no fan of Microsoft or Google probably doesn't need the headache or the money-losing business as it is doing fine right now, thank you.

Microsoft has to continue to make Bing better while simultaneously forging stronger relationships with companies who are competing with Google. Facebook and Twitter are two obvious ones - perhaps LinkedIn is another company to work very closely with.

You see as long as Google is a dominant player in so many spaces, Microsoft can play the underdog position and work with all the companies they want. And US and EU regulators won't be able to say much about these deals.

This is more or less what Oracle did - it rolled up the CRM and other corporate software markets under the cover of competing with the Microsoft monopoly.

Search Marketing: Where it Pays to be Young

2011-07-05T14:45:42Z

There is a crisis of unemployment in the US and those aged 16 to 19 are being hit with unemployment rates of 24% or almost three times the rate of adults. Worse yet, minority teens are seeing rates of unemployment as high as 41%.

There are a number of factors at play here - burst bubbles in credit and housing as well as margin compression due to price discovery on the Internet. The trend has gotten even worse as price discovery is now taking place via bar codes read by cellphones allowing consumers to buy from Amazon instead of the brick and mortar shop where they happen to be shopping and doing product comparisons.

Even worse, the Internet allows jobs to be outsourced with a mouse click and IP communications allows call center agents and other BPO jobs to be anywhere in the world. And these jobs are flowing to where there is less regulation and lower costs.

The good news is where the Internet takes away it also gives back. Sometimes anyway.

A hidden silver lining in a report on search marketer salaries dropping shows that companies are looking to younger, more eager people who also cost less than their more experienced counterparts.

So the good news here is young people who are tech and social networking savvy can potentially find a lucrative career in search marketing. And you thought your kids were wasting their lives on Facebook.

Where Google is Vulnerable to the FTC Probe

2011-06-24T18:25:54Z

Google has responded to the FTC probe regarding its potential monopolist practice of directing users to its network of sites and in a blog post from Amit Singhal, a Google fellow they explain that their focus is primarily on users. A salient excerpt follows:

It’s still unclear exactly what the FTC’s concerns are, but we’re clear about where we stand. Since the beginning, we have been guided by the idea that, if we focus on the user, all else will follow. No matter what you’re looking for—buying a movie ticket, finding the best burger nearby, or watching a royal wedding—we want to get you the information you want as quickly as possible. Sometimes the best result is a link to another website. Other times it’s a news article, sports score, stock quote, a video or a map.

Further in the post they say the following:

Today, when you type “weather in Chicago” or “how many feet in a mile” into our search box, you get the answers directly—often before you hit “enter”.

So I did google weather in Chicago and not surprisingly I did see the weather forecast. I remember when Google decided to allow users to see the weather instantly – before they even hit enter and from the moment I saw them do this I thought about how many jobs could be lost by websites who provide weather news.

Of course the counter-argument is Google sends the weather sites lots of traffic but still, if you have a website which just surpassed a billion users in a month giving away information you provide it has to hurt your company.

The argument can be made Google is helping users as a result of slowly disintermediating site after site and slowly choking industry after industry which provides somewhat-generic information. But if the consumer wins the FTC may not have the ability to win a lawsuit against the search giant. After all Wal-Wart has put retailer after retailer out of business but in doing so it has consistently been lowering prices and as a result consumers win and Wal-Mart is able to grow unabated.

Section 2 of the Sherman Antitrust Act says “Every person who shall monopolize, or attempt to monopolize, or combine or conspire with any other person or persons, to monopolize any part of the trade or commerce among the several States, or with foreign nations, shall be deemed guilty of a felony.” The obvious point is Google does have competition and is not a monopoly in that competitors can launch search engines and compete. Obviously they have dominant share and no one has been able to do take much share but holding marketshare in a market where others are free to compete isn’t a crime.

Some analysts believe Google is vulnerable if its advertisers are deemed its customers. And if Google unfairly directs traffic to its own network of sites which in-effect reduces the traffic to competing sites, then Google’s prices could be increased and as a result customers are harmed. But the challenge here is if Google is able to generate many new page views to its own site and its auction-based advertising model is truly fair, it could conceivably provide lower prices per click to its advertisers based on supply-and-demand. But over time if competing sites are drowned out of the market then Google becomes the sole destination to run ads in a specific area and subsequently will see its prices rise – thus hurting its advertising consumers.

Some experts believe Google is vulnerable to Section 5 of the FTC Act which prohibits companies from engaging in unfair & deceptive act in interstate commerce. Unfair is described as follows: (1) it causes or is likely to cause substantial injury to consumers; (2) the harm to consumers is not outweighed by any countervailing benefits; and (3) the harm is not reasonably avoidable by consumers.

Obviously this is a complex case but you can make the argument that Google is becoming the Internet and as they help put companies out of business #3 applies to its advertisers. Moreover, there is the Google Panda update – designed to ensure sites like eHow are reduced in rank via algorithmic changes. Last I checked, eHow competes with Google – is this the intentional targeting of a competitor while hiding behind the algorithmic defense of improving search quality?

Sure Google argues it has hundreds of algorithm changes per year but when a single one is estimated to arbitrarily shift a billion dollars of revenue to large publishers from small ones, is that fair?

And then there is the white list of exemptions Google has. I wonder what is on this list, what has been on it historically and why Eric Schmidt was able to assume he could alter it for his own personal benefit. I raised the alarm bells on this matter on April 1^st of this year predicting teams of lawyers were getting ready to act.

This case could be mighty interesting and as someone who uses Google for so much, I love it and couldn’t live without it. Still, I applaud the FTC for getting involved and ensuring there is a level and fair playing field. As my loyal readers know, I am not a fan of government intervention in so many areas but allowing free and open competition where capitalism can thrive benefits consumers most.

New Google Antitrust Probe and the Obama Connection

2011-06-23T15:44:39Z

I asked in January of 2009 if Eric Schmidt was intentionally cozying up to candidate and then president Obama to protect a Google monopoly. The same year I brought the question up again as a response to an article in the Chicago Tribune on the matter.

We may or may not ever find out if my theory on this relationship are accurate what we do know is that today the FTC has served Google with civil subpoenas related to how the search engine directs searchers to its own growing network of sites like YouTube, shopping, local, and numerous others.

There is absolutely no question Google is massively powerful and can destroy companies and industries by directing users to its services. There is no way the company can deny this. The interesting arguments we will likely hear as a result of this case are whether Google is a force of good or bad in the market. Google will obviously argue it is providing new services which help customers while competitors will argue they are locked out of the market because Google is unfairly competing - using its massively powerful search position to direct customers to sites which are owned by the company.

This case could mark a huge change in how Google does business and it is worth watching closely as the ramifications across the tech space could be huge.

Webinar: Smarter SEO Techniques

2011-06-16T17:46:37Z

TMC, the company where I am CEO will be hosting a webinar titled:

Rank Higher:
How to Practice Smarter SEO Techniques Through Your Online Community

This is the third part of our webinar series which has resulted from the frequent questions we get from companies about how to build communities, boost organic SEO, show up on news search and improve branding and thought leadership.

The next webinar takes place on July 12th, 2011 at 2:00pm EST. You can register here and as the presenter, I look forward to seeing you online in July.

An Honest Critique of Microsoft and Steve Ballmer

2011-05-26T19:27:55Z

For the last five years there have been calls for Steve Ballmer to step down from Microsoft and I have refrained from comment until today because a confluence of news and events has made commentary necessary. Specifically, David Einhorn, an influential hedge fund manager – whose firm Greenlight Capital owns almost 9M shares of Microsoft, said (video) Ballmer is stuck in the past and is ruining Microsoft’s stock.

Technologist Vs. Businessperson: One compliant about Steve Ballmer is that he is more a businessperson than a technologist and as a result, new and innovative products have been developed much more slowly. This point is very tough to argue with and more importantly, what is Ballmer’s vision for Microsoft? From the outside looking in – it seems to be in lots of different markets and make as much money as possible.

There isn’t anything necessarily wrong with this vision but if you are supposed to be the technology leader and passion is replaced by profit -seeking you end up losing the magic in your culture and pride in your work. Moreover when you couple these challenges with a stock which hasn’t moved in ten years, you see why so many high level execs are leaving the company.

Marketing: This is an area where Ballmer’s team is doing a great job – the company has solid messaging and is consistent – much more so than many other tech leaders. If you think Ballmer should go because he is a businessperson – at least you can’t fault his outward messaging – especially as it relates to specific product launches.

But this doesn’t mean the company is doing well in the PR race – Google seems to be in the news many times a day because they have a new data center cooled by the ocean or some other innovation which is unique and appealing to many people concerned about the environment.

Mobile: Under Ballmer’s watch, Microsoft’s mobile strategy emerged, flourished and crashed. We have known for years the mobile market will become more important to tech companies. I remember marveling at my last Windows Mobile device years back – it was an incredible achievement in functionality but never fun to use.

Consumerization of IT: And to miss the consumerization trend in IT is unforgivable – at some point Microsoft must have seen how fun consumer devices were gaining traction in the market. The Chumby for example – a cuddly web device gained an instant cult following. And then there was the iPod.

For the most part using Microsoft products is an exercise in cerebral masochism – they design user interfaces which only a dominatrix could be proud of. For example I recently had to enter the parental password on the Xbox to watch a DVD – I would rather write this article on an iPod Nano than enter 4-digits on an Xbox.

Is it really so difficult to have a master UI department outfitted with the latest Apple devices and not approve any UI until it as at least in the same ballpark in terms of ease of use?

Mobile Wallet: A decade ago a senior Microsoft exec made the prediction at a TMC trade show in Washington DC that soon we would use our cell phones as digital wallets. Not only did Microsoft not deliver on this promise it lost its position in the mobile space. Today Google launched what may be a very successful mobile wallet solution as it has a wide range of powerful partners from banks to carriers and retailers. And to be honest, in five years the credit card will be as useful to consumers as a standalone camera is today. In other words, some of us will carry one around for occasional use.

Search: Microsoft is pouring billions into search and partnerships with Yahoo, Facebook and others and although you cannot blame the company for missing the search market – almost everyone did – they aren’t lighting the search world on fire either. But I would say in the face of Google’s overwhelming dominance, Microsoft is doing as much as can be expected with Bing.

Piracy: Recently Steve Ballmer complained about piracy in China and the fact that billions in revenue are not being made because the Chinese for the most part aren’t paying for software. In fact, the software company makes more money in the Netherlands where only 17M people live than in China!

The challenge here is this isn’t a new problem and we should have worked to solve it sooner. How is it US tech companies haven’t banded together to force our government to get the Chinese and other countries to value our intellectual property? With so much to lose, Ballmer and Microsoft should have been way ahead of this.

The situation reminds me about my post on the Apple App Store being the OPEC of the west as at least it encourages more revenue to be made when software is acquired.

Cloud: Microsoft almost has to embrace the cloud defensively because of its potential to eat into current licensing revenue. There is no blame here.

Kinect: The Xbox Kinect is one of the best all-time products – kudos to Ballmer and the team for having the vision to bring such a leading-edge technology to the market. But with this success in its pocket does it have a follow-up interface which blends touch, voice and gestures? They better because you know Apple is.

Tablets: Microsoft has tried a few times to push tablets but somehow missed the mark. This is what I don’t get though – the iPad is nothing more than a large iPod – so why didn’t any tech company have the vision to design a larger iPod before Apple? Microsoft has had gesture-based demos in their labs – I have seen them years ago. Why was this tech never commercialized? We all know the story of PARC and how many leading-edge technologies were invented but never monetized properly. Does any company want to be known as PARC 2.0?

iPhone: We know that RIM was shaking in its boots when it saw the iPhone and now the company has a credible tablet competitor in the PlayBook – as well as a number of touchscreen smartphones which aren’t as spectacular in my opinion. Why has it taken Microsoft so much longer to respond? We all know mobile devices are the future of computing. Why is it Mango is just surfacing now while people are contemplating purchasing an iPhone 5?

Social: Duh Social. Duh Facebook. Microsoft invested in Facebook early – was hammered by many who said they spent too much and it turns out they made a smart move. Nice going Steve!

Size: Is Microsoft too big? Well it certainly isn’t too small and if RIM and Google can respond to Apple with a slew of touchscreen smartphones years ahead of Microsoft – you have to wonder just how bloated the management at Microsoft has become.

Vision: What does Microsoft stand for besides a company trying desperately to maximize profits? If we are to assume that Apple is the biggest threat to Microsoft (we will leave Google out of it for now) and Apple’s products and retail stores are oozing with minimalistic elegance, what is the reason someone would choose Microsoft over Apple?

I have a brand new Dell laptop for example and the experience in lugging and using this mini-mainframe is not great and if I didn’t need the apps which aren’t on the iPad or Apple’s other OS – I am not sure I would carry the Dell at all. Moreover, why is it I can answer numerous emails on an iPad while I am waiting for the Dell to boot up?

In other words, why does the PC experience suck? Moreover, Why doesn’t Steve Ballmer know it sucks - and if he does know and can’t solve these problems, then what is the future for Microsoft’s desktop business?

What do we need to see? Well I suggest Steve get working on the Steve Ballmer Minimalist Manifesto which details soup to nuts, how the company needs to refocus on delighting customers – not with bloatware laden with infinite features but more exciting interfaces and designs. Moreover, they need to start working with hardware providers like Dell to make sure when a laptop or any other device carries a Microsoft OS and logo that it is up to some sort of design standard.

In other words – protect your customers Steve, not your profits. And believe me, in my experience protecting customers makes them more loyal and in the end you will see profits increase. Customers trust Steve Jobs to control the experience and make it awesome – when they feel the same about you, can retire in glory.

Poor CRM = Go Directly to Jail

2011-05-16T14:57:35Z

Remember a few months back when I wrote that providing poor CRM could dent your SEO? The story revolved around website Decormyeyes.com - and its owner Vitaly Borker who was generally rude and insulting to customers. He went so far as to send pictures of their homes to intimidate them. Not only did Google reduce his SEO as a result of an article in the New York Times, he is now going to prison. It's worth pointing out that The New York Times article led to increased scrutiny by law enforcement agencies and he is now in trouble for mail fraud among other crimes.

Before the Internet, it was widely believed that when you provide poor service, each customer tells ten others. Since the advent of the Internet, poor customer service can spread to thousands, potentially millions and in this case it led to an arrest.

If that isn't bad enough, check out the Alexa chart of page views to the Decormyeyes site - a brief spike relating to the popular coverage followed by a drop.

eBay Buys Where.com for Hyper-Local Deal Offers

2011-04-20T16:48:28Z

In the race to become a leader in the local deal market – companies seem to be tripping over one another. This includes Google who is working organically while making an unsuccessful bid for Groupon. Twitter and Facebook play in this market as well and eBay just acquired Where.com, a Boston-based local-deals and location-based services company for $135M.

PayPal’s Amanda Pires explains they plan to integrate PayPal into the WHERE mobile app to make it even easier for customers to take advantage of the local deals. She goes on to say:

Mobile and local are key areas for us. This announcement builds on the acquisition of Milo late last year, bringing even more great deals and value to consumers. Since we don’t compete with our merchants, we are in a unique position to partner with retailers of all sizes and help people shop and pay anytime, anywhere and in any way they want.

Last September, TMCnet reported Where.com purchased LocalGinger for its local group-buying strength in secondary markets.

Now we’ll get to see just how much local couponing and offers the public can take. Will the market replicate what is happening with news – meaning real-time offers and alerts will flash across your devices as often as news alerts pop up on you devices? Well, my devices anyway. Will this be too much for consumers to take or will local deal subsidization of devices and wireless make consumers more tolerant of this trend?

Moreover, as PayPal is becoming such a driver of value for eBay with new business units and acquisitions being rolled into it – will we see eBay spin out PayPal at some point? It seems to make sense as the company in some ways is weighed down by its parent and may return more shareholder value as a smaller standalone company which can become an ecommerce giant.

This is a smart move for eBay and now the hard part – integration is ahead of them. Hopefully this time they’ll do a much better job than they did with Skype.