Matthew Humpries (http://www.geek.com/users/Matthew/) at Geek.com Matt Hartley at Lockergnome and Matt Buchanan at Gizmodo reports that Microsoft is going to give for free to its own employees mobile phones with Windows 7 installed (full article at http://www.geek.com/articles/mobile/microsoft-giving-90000-employees-windows-7-phone-20100722/ and at http://gizmodo.com/5593104/every-microsoft-employee-is-getting-a-windows-phone-7-uh-phone).
Distributing goods produced is a quite diffused practice in companies in order to push them (on marketing side) or to achieve results (e.g. emptying a wharehouse with unsold things, reaching a goal,…).
Having people using what they produce is something I find intelligent, because is an enabler for a lot of behaviours and processes.
What sounds strage to me is the number of 90.000 phones that risks to alter some (or most) of market results, if not in terms of money, at least in terms of volumes reporting.
This post as a comment also at http://www.geek.com/articles/mobile/microsoft-giving-90000-employees-windows-7-phone-20100722/comment-page-1/#comment-3847287 and at http://www.lockergnome.com/it/2010/07/22/windows-phone-7-units-for-everyone/comment-page-1/#comment-215336 and at http://gizmodo.com/5593104/every-microsoft-employee-is-getting-a-windows-phone-7-uh-phone).
Chris Foresman at Ars technica (http://arstechnica.com/author/chris-foresman/) and Jason Chen at Gizmodo (http://gizmodo.com/people/diskopo/posts/), reports a formal communication by Apple guru Steve Jobs on problems with reception and antenna. In extreme synthesis, the position is: holding the phone in that way could lead to signal attenuation, so to avoid the problem….just don’t hold it that way! (full articles at http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/2010/06/jobs-on-iphone-4-antenna-avoid-holding-it-in-this-way.ars and at http://gizmodo.com/5572279/apples-acknowledges-iphone-4-reception-issues-says-dont-hold-it-like-that. Steve Jobs letter at http://cache.gawkerassets.com/assets/images/4/2010/06/jobsmeail2.jpg).
Matt Hartley at Lockergnome adds that one solution, sponsored also by Steve Jobs BTW, is to have a case in order not to touch antenna (this article at http://www.lockergnome.com/it/2010/06/25/first-iphone-requiring-a-case/).
On one side I can understand that some problems may arise in any technological object, IPhone included.
On the other side I ask a couple of questions:
- When you buy every object (either phisical or “logical”) you want a functioning one. At most reason if you spend so much money (and time) on a gadget
- Do words like “testing” and “non regeression” make sense at Cupertino 🙂 ? Come on! Despite the appearance is a phone. The antenna and software related is worth a little bit intensive testing (which have been done for sure), also holding it in the left hand…
This post as a comment also at http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/2010/06/jobs-on-iphone-4-antenna-avoid-holding-it-in-this-way.ars?comments=1&p=20551714#comment-20551714 , at http://gizmodo.com/5572279/apples-acknowledges-iphone-4-reception-issues-says-dont-hold-it-like-that and at http://www.lockergnome.com/it/2010/06/25/first-iphone-requiring-a-case/comment-page-1/#comment-212751
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
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
Matt Hartley at Lockergnome writes an aricle on possible scenarios of Microsoft and Yahoo integration (full article at http://www.lockergnome.com/web/2009/08/24/doj-says-no-to-yahoosoft/).
Seems to me that an integration between the two companies will be more a financial and opportuinistic make up than a real “industrial” integration.
Microsoft will benefits achieving a search engine (which Yahoo has been and is, despite its CEO opinion) with some market and financial problems.
Yahoo will benefit by getting fresh new cash.
That will be drained by Microsoft.
And that’s why in my opinion, Dow Jones is scared.
This comment also as a post at http://www.lockergnome.com/web/2009/08/24/doj-says-no-to-yahoosoft/#comment-154037
Matt Hartley at Lockergnome asks the question if Google should be scared by Bing (full article at http://www.lockergnome.com/web/2009/08/13/bing-should-google-be-worried/).
In my opinion the answer tho this dilemma is no. Though I agree Google isn’t responding too quicky (or not responding at all), remains by far the most used search engine, with a market share quite similar to a monopoly.
The world is changing and is changing fast, but no more than a month ago we were discussing on Google monopoly and now we are discussing if Bing could represent a threat.
Bing is an opportunity (on consumer side) an investment (on Microsoft side) and a phenomena to watch in order to understand where market is going (on Google side).
But I won’t be surprised if Google won’t move for a while and then make a sudden disruptive move (remember Android…).
This post as a comment also at http://www.lockergnome.com/web/2009/08/13/bing-should-google-be-worried/#comment-153136
Matt Hartley at Lockergnome questions on use of url shorteners (full article at http://www.lockergnome.com/web/2009/08/10/4341/).
On a “marketing” and promotional point of view url shorteners are a good tool.
In my opinion, on the other side, they could be a possible threat to average internet user, because url shortening could disguise a redirecting activity that is not easily detectable.
This comment also at http://www.lockergnome.com/web/2009/08/10/4341/#comment-153029
Matt Hartely at Lockegnome reports an article in Techcrunch where are depicted some hipothesys on New York Times future (full articles at http://www.lockergnome.com/web/2009/08/04/newspapers-try-once-again/ and at http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/07/30/what-if-the-new-new-york-times/).
Though I agree on the fact that old school business model related to newspapers is over, I’m quite convinced that future of newspapers is somewhere else. As I said many times I think of something based on personalization vs clusterization and so on.
I don’t think that printed newspapers will die, though as now is happening they will be integrated with innovative media different from the web.
One last word on the concept of starting from scratch: is suggestive, but not feasible. We are talking of a big business and is not possible to “kill” to rebuild. Obviously NYT will go through a massive restructuring, but IMHO is not possibile to close and start again.
This post as a comment at http://www.lockergnome.com/web/2009/08/04/newspapers-try-once-again/#comment-152609
Matt Hartley at Lockergnome writes an article on possible Microsoft option to change the way they do things (full article at http://www.lockergnome.com/it/2009/07/23/does-microsoft-need-to-rethink-their-niche/).
In my opinion Microsoft approached the market by a monopolistic point of view.
Due to their position they were able to influence and in some way drive both technology and hardware changes.
Now market is changing and new players (see Google and Linux), are entering with a wider market share.
This, as an effect, brings a necessary shift in market and organization approach.
In my opinion Its’s not an option for Microsoft to take this challenge.
This post also at http://www.lockergnome.com/it/2009/07/23/does-microsoft-need-to-rethink-their-niche/#comment-178175