Tag Archives: CEO

Facebook revisited: do we really need another email system?

Tim Conneally at Beta news (http://www.betanews.com/author/tim) reports that “[…] Popular social networking site Facebook today announced it is rolling out a whole new messaging system over the next few months that “isn’t just e-mail,” but integrates four common ways users communicate: email, Facebook messages and chat, and SMS, and archives it all in a single thread. [….]” (full article at http://www.betanews.com/article/Facebooks-new-messaging-system-handles-email-chat-SMS-Office-Web-apps-all-in-one/1289847427).

Same thing is done by Sharon Gaudin at Computerworld (full article at http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9196618/Facebook_messaging_throws_a_blow_at_Google), Jacqui Cheng at Ars technica (full article at http://arstechnica.com/web/news/2010/11/facebooks-new-messaging-system-mashes-up-sms-e-mail-im.ars), John Brownlee at geek.com (http://www.geek.com/users/jbrownlee/ and full article at http://www.geek.com/articles/news/facebook-introduces-new-messaging-system-e-mail-sms-and-im-all-in-one-place-20101116/), Om Malik at Giga OM (http://gigaom.com/author/om/ and full article at http://gigaom.com/2010/11/15/meet-the-new-new-facebook) and Adam Dachis at Lifehacker (http://lifehacker.com/5690721/why-you-should-embrace-the-new-facebook-modern-messaging-system).

In some ways it reminds me Google wave, but I wish for Facebook it doesn’t follow the same path.

I agree with Google CEO that this new Facebook features aren’t a threat to Google activities, because the target is different (Google is a quite serious email provider and most of all is more secure than Facebook) and though messaging is integrated with Facebook, IMHO Google is more usable.

Again, I understand FB need to cover a gap and use his vast “installed base” (or addressable market),  but it would have better consolidate and strengthen his features before getting into a such complex addon, with no (substanntial) innovations and more risks for privacy.

This post as a comment also at http://www.betanews.com/article/Facebooks-new-messaging-system-handles-email-chat-SMS-Office-Web-apps-all-in-one/1289847427, at http://www.computerworld.com/comments/node/9196618#comment-708663, at http://arstechnica.com/web/news/2010/11/facebooks-new-messaging-system-mashes-up-sms-e-mail-im.ars?comments=1&p=21020590#comment-21020590, at http://www.geek.com/articles/news/facebook-introduces-new-messaging-system-e-mail-sms-and-im-all-in-one-place-20101116/comment-page-1/#comment-3924221, at http://gigaom.com/2010/11/15/meet-the-new-new-facebook/?go_commented=1#comment-513643 and at http://lifehacker.com/5690721/why-you-should-embrace-the-new-facebook-modern-messaging-system


Time management gone serious

Celestine Chua at Stepcase Lifehack (http://celestinechua.com/blog) writes a good article dealing on successful Time management hints (full article at http://www.lifehack.org/articles/lifehack/20-quick-tips-for-better-time-management.htm).

What follow are my comments:

  1. Create a daily plan. True, but leave you a little flexibility in order to deal with unexpected  requests. Managing time doesn’t necessarily mean havin no contingency at all.
  2. Peg a time limit to each task. Ok on this, but it assumes you can have a correct estimate on time needed.
  3. Use a calendar. I agree is fundamental, but for a successfull use you need also other people use it (means that if you have people not updating/using the calendar, is not so effective to have it on your own…and yes! exist people at all levels that refuse to use a calendar)
  4. Use an organizer. Be sure to use an electronic one only if you’re confident in using it, otherwise a plain good old paper one is still ok
  5. Know your deadlines. And accept less those giving you too much or concurrent due dates
  6. Learn to say “No”. But evaluate to who you’re saying no: is sad but saying no to colleagues is easier than saying it to your CEO 🙂
  7. Target to be early. Challenging but achievable due dates are a good way of getting things done in time 
  8. Time box your activities. Is desirable, but depands a loto on the kind of work and level of responsibility you have.
  9. Have a clock visibly placed before you. A true one, not a digital one, because gives immediate perception of passing time.
  10. Set reminders 15 minutes before. And try to avoid using “snooze” button.
  11. Focus. The elephant is eaten one spoon at a time, and so do activities.
  12. Block out distractions. Work is an exclusive activity, so don’t try to chat or do other things.
  13. Track your time spent. True! I’m surprised how often people avoid tracking what they do.
  14. Don’t fuss about unimportant details. This is quite tricky, since I prefer a good content in time, other than having non-perfect content late, but there are persons that want to release things the nearest to perfection they can, despite time taken (but of course tehy don’t pay for them 🙂 )
  15. Prioritize. True. This is the real key.
  16. Delegate. And remember to have time scheduld for checking the work at different levels.
  17. Batch similar tasks together. This is true but I think can change form person to person.
  18. Eliminate your time wasters. I agree on this, but is very linked to you attitude towards work
  19. Cut off when you need to. This is also a sign of your ability to manage time. 
  20. Leave buffer time in-between. Cool off and then go ahead.

Note: As usually I tried to leave my comments on Stepcase Lifehack, but got deleted. They did not seem so offensive neither to Celestine nor to Stepcase. I would like to think is a tech problem…. 😦


Going deep into IPhone 4G

Joe Wilcox at Betanews (http://www.betanews.com/author/joewilcox) reports 5 things that should be known on Iphone 4G (full article at http://www.betanews.com/joewilcox/article/5-things-you-should-know-about-iPhone-4/1276015529).

What follows are my comments:

  • Job’s health is back: You’re true on this. Steve is the engine of Apple, driving strategy and innovation. And the key note given last monday is the demonstration of his thought and charisma
  • Jobs showed developers the money in iOS: Too many times this is a point where CEOs don’t go in deep. Steve showed the point to developers as the carrot for using iOS. And, again, he’s correct: IPhone is a great platform and Apps are the engine, the enabler and the differentiator of this Apple product. Giving the access to this potential money to developers is the key to make them going on on developing winning applications.
  • FaceTime won’t be big time — at least not anytime soon: another correct point, where IMHO we’ll also face the problem of networks not being capable of supporting all the induced traffic.
  • AT&T will hurt iPhone 4 in the United States: I have no basis for this
  • Apple’s approach to rights usage assures the iBookstore will succeed: Apple is one of the most safeguarding companies on IP rights, but I think that iBookstore will succeed if e-bookstores will get a step further (means a greater diffusion of kindle and nook like devices).

This post as a comment also at http://www.betanews.com/joewilcox/article/5-things-you-should-know-about-iPhone-4/1276015529


Bartz, Yahoo, bad habits

Matt Hartley at Lockergnome writes an article arguing that Carol Bartz, Yahoo CEO well known for having sold her stocks in last days, has no clear plan (or no plan at hall) for yahoo future (full article at http://www.lockergnome.com/web/2009/09/14/yahoo-has-a-plan-b/).

Is very sad, not only because Yahoo! was one of the first “icons” of the net in good old times, but mainly because is a sign that some people did not learn from problem passed in last year of suffering.

Companies are living (in the sense that are alive) places where people work, produce, earn (eventually a lot of money if they deserve this). Companies, unfortunately for some people are not cash cows to use or play with at their will risking to destroy them.

This post as a comment also at http://www.lockergnome.com/web/2009/09/14/yahoo-has-a-plan-b/#comment-155493


Investors vs Yahoo CEO

Matt Hartley at Lockergnome comes again over the fact anticipated by Ron Schenone a few days ago of Yahoo CEO selling stocks, while company (and investors) loose money (full article at http://www.lockergnome.com/web/2009/09/07/yahoo-investors-lose-while-bartz-wins/).

As I said before, is quite sad to see those that should be at the helm of the boat running as mices when boat sinks.

I thought that those time where ended with the financial crisis of which we hopefully are seeing some light at the end of the tunnel.

I’m wondering why this is not considered as market disruption.

This post as a comment at http://www.lockergnome.com/web/2009/09/07/yahoo-investors-lose-while-bartz-wins/#comment-154938


Microsoft and Yahoo!, much ado about nothing?

Ron Schenone at Lockergnome writes an article asking if Yahoo will fail also with Microsoft support (full article at http://www.lockergnome.com/blade/2009/09/07/will-yahoo-fail-even-with-microsoft-bailout/).

I think talking about Yahoo failure is a little bit too much, but is very similar to reality. Microsoft M&A is more likely to be a differed buy out, with Yahoo services, knowledge and expertise gradually migrated to Redmond’s platforms.

The sad thing is about management selling stocks and options: once upon a time captain was the last to leave the sinking ship…

This comment also at http://www.lockergnome.com/blade/2009/09/07/will-yahoo-fail-even-with-microsoft-bailout/#comment-190454


Yahoo is not a search company?

Ron Schenone at Lockergnome reports that Yahoo CEO  Ms Bartz doesn’t consider Yahoo as a search company  but a sort of evoluted news aggregator (full article at http://www.lockergnome.com/blade/2009/08/07/yahoo-ceo-%e2%80%98we-have-never-been-a-search-company%e2%80%99).

Seems to me a not so smart move from Yahoo: while is loosing market as a search company, tries to rebuild image as something different.

It’s a pity that there are more credible players also in the place Ms Bartz would like to occupy.

This post as a comment also at http://www.lockergnome.com/blade/2009/08/07/yahoo-ceo-%e2%80%98we-have-never-been-a-search-company%e2%80%99/#comment-187986


Apple and Google a sad end

Ron Schenone at Lockergnome writes an article on the exit of Google CEO from Apple Board (full story at http://www.lockergnome.com/blade/2009/08/04/apple-and-google-is-the-love-gone).

Yes Ron It’s the end of a love, because of money and power.

It’s the same old story: Apple and Google went in love because both were innovative and against (or at least not for) Microsoft monopoly.

But when both of them realized that there’s no second place in Mobile Economy (Mobile, Browsers, OS,…), then a love ended.

This post also at http://www.lockergnome.com/blade/2009/08/04/apple-and-google-is-the-love-gone/#comment-187614


Multi million salaries and market rule

oztech (http://www.lockergnome.com/oztech/author/oztech/) writes an article asking if CEOs or anyone else deserves a multi million dollar salary (full article at http://www.lockergnome.com/oztech/2009/05/23/do-executives-really-deserve-multi-million-dollar-salaries/).

He talks on an example of Sanjay Jha at Motorola paid 17.3 million Dollars in order to guide a struggling company (fulla article at http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/chi-sun-exec-paymay24,0,1338424.story)

On one side, my answer is “Yes”, because , in my opinion, they deserve this salaries for a couple of reason:

  • They respond of their actions toward stakeholders (and mostly, among them toward equity holders, who are, at the very end, they’re bosses). Stakeholders have the power to stop this so high salaries. If thet don’t do this they’re responsible for giving money to someone that doesn’t deserve this.
  • They’re salaries are mainly variable, so, theoretically speaking, “no results no money” axiom should be respected.

An this would assure some fairness in salaries.

But what makes me concern is that there’s no backup for this.

Because CEO respond to boards and “cross fertilization” among boards is widely applied, with people sitting in a board as controllers being controoled by same people in other board in a “win win” (or loose-loose, depending on the point of view 🙂 ) situation.

And if company does’t perform well or files for bankruptcy, no (or less) actions are taken against people responsible for the failure.

What’s wrong are not the very high salaries: one guy that has the responsibility of a multi-billion dollar company deserves to get any money he’s worth of (and in my opinion is much much money).

What’s wrong is the system that grants to companies the escamotage to get all the same people within different companies boards.

Another point is if a salary of 20 million is more motivating of a million one or if the two CEOs performances are so different.

I think they’re both motivating, performances are similar, but resposabilities are really different. And this makes sennse for a multi million salary.

As a last point, I’m wondering why anyone is questioning on CEOs salaries that are not “ethical” for this moment of crisis.

But do football or soccer or F1, or golf players stay under different conditions or should the same people question also on this many times bigger salaries?

Or maybe the whole world is just trying to find some people to put people rage for recession on?

Thi article as a comment at http://www.lockergnome.com/oztech/2009/05/23/do-executives-really-deserve-multi-million-dollar-salaries/#comment-7655


On information and the internet

Sony Pictures Entertainment CEO, Michael Lynton, said some days ago:

“I’m a guy who doesn’t see anything good having come from the Internet…(The Internet) created this notion that anyone can have whatever they want at any given time. It’s as if the stores on Madison Avenue were open 24 hours a day. They feel entitled. They say, ‘Give it to me now,’ and if you don’t give it to them for free, they’ll steal it.”

At first, seems to me like another famous sentence years ago, where someone (don’t perfectly remember who was), said that there will be room for 4 or 5 computers in the whole world, mainly in universities and military.

The statement that nothing good came out from the internet is so poor, so ridicuolous that doesn’t even deserve to be commented.

I hope that some how Mr. Lynton reminds that information access permitted, for example, to people in remote countries to study, and to start the allignement of knowledge between rich and poor countries or to save lifes or to the whole world progress in the last 20 years.

But what makes me think is the syllogysm he takes out: He states that a certain availability of information entitles people to ask for things and if they don’t get that they wanted, they feel entitled to steal it.

I’m not Sony’s CEO, but I’m a manager and I work for a big corporation.

I know how information, intellectual property and knowledge are crucial to any company.

But just because information (not  only Sony’s pictures or MP3s) is available to many people, this doesn’t entitle anyone to steal it.

Sony is big but isn’t all.

Information over the internet is a benefit and a growth for the whole world, that despite the ideas of Mr. Lynton, needs something a little bit more imprtant than Sony’s copirighted material.

A manager should be also recognized for his wiseness. Maybe this time Mr. Lynton lost a great opportunity to remain in silence.

This article also as a commento on Digg at http://digg.com/tech_news/Sony_Pictures_CEO_Hates_the_Internet_2?FC=dthr

and on Ars technica http://arstechnica.com/media/news/2009/05/sony-pictures-ceo-internet-needs-regulatory-guardrails.ars?comments=2&comment_id=748003388931


%d bloggers like this: