Tuesday, July 19, 2005
Tech News
Leo Laporte: Apple would be a bigger monopolist than Microsoft
During a 7/20 interview with the Linux Link Tech Show, Leo discussed operating systems and was very candid about his views on Apple. While he is certianly a fan of Apple, ascribing to the "best tool for the job" mentality - even if that means Windows, Leo was very candid in saying that if Apple ever got the market share Microsoft had, they would be an even worse monopoly. Looking at their grasp on the iPod, I can hardly disagree. He indicated that Microsoft's persistence in trying to support most legacy software has hamstrung them in the innovation department, forcing them to scrap many of the anticipated features of Longhorn, but that continued support has also led to their unprecedented market share. Contrasting that with Apple, which has not had significant market share for almost 20+ years now, but is both more innovative and secure with their OS's because they can continually scrap the old OS and move onto something new. That being said, I think it's about time I finally bite the bullet and pickup that Mac.
iTunes Podcast Top 10 Rankings Explained
According to Adam Curry's 7/23 Daily Source Code, the iTunes Podcast top 10 is not based on the number of subscriptions a podcast has, but rather on the number of new subscribers in the past 24 hours. This explains why podcasts such as our favorites Diggnation and TWiT can rocket to the top of the charts, while more established podcasts, such as Curry's Daily Source Code, one of the longest runing podcasts, is not in the top 10. While this seems like a great method to see what new and popular podcasts are out there, it can skew listeners who might be looking for truely the "most popular" podcasts, and not just the most en vogue (or begged for). I would propose that Apple maintained two lists, one being a "true" top 10 which lists the 10 most subscribed-to podcasts and a "daily" top 10 listsing the most subscribed to podcasts within the last 24 hours.
Is Google the Ultimate Spyware/Adware?
Though I am an avid user of Google and their various products, I find it intriguing that in the current computing environment where adware and spyware are despised and certainly considered "evil", that consumers continue to let Google get away with using their corporate mission of "Do No Evil." While most spyware programs are insidious and often get installed without the end user's knowledge, Google has circumvented that traditional delivery method by getting consumers to come to them, essentially making every web browser thier personal adware delivery tool. It is no secret that every search term entered into Google gets sent to and stored on Google servers with the IP address of the user and time entered, unbeknownst to them. While this may seem benign, it is really no different than what traditional spyware does, other than nothing is installed on your computer (and yes, I realize this is a big difference).
But so what, that is just the price that we all have to pay for using Google's kick-ass search engine. Enter Gmail. Now Gmail is a great service, and I personally have never once clicked on an ad (really, I don't even notice them anymore), but from Google's perspective Gmail should be viewed for what it is - yet another means for Google to collect as much information about you as they can. Sure, perhaps Google might only the scanning of your emails to deliver up ads, but what is to stop them from selling that information to outside companies? With the rapidly expanding user base of Gmail, Google now almost has access every marketers dream - knowing what people are thinking and writing about in the now, regardless of the subject. It really is astounding the amount of potential marketing information Google as access to, if you think about it.
I guess what confound me is that in an era when targeted advertising is frowned upon, how has a company that makes its money almost exclusively by serving up advertisements become the darling of the internet crowd? I guess if you make something people can't get enough of, they will quickly abandon any sense of good judgement they claim to have. Now I have to get back to my Gmail.
During a 7/20 interview with the Linux Link Tech Show, Leo discussed operating systems and was very candid about his views on Apple. While he is certianly a fan of Apple, ascribing to the "best tool for the job" mentality - even if that means Windows, Leo was very candid in saying that if Apple ever got the market share Microsoft had, they would be an even worse monopoly. Looking at their grasp on the iPod, I can hardly disagree. He indicated that Microsoft's persistence in trying to support most legacy software has hamstrung them in the innovation department, forcing them to scrap many of the anticipated features of Longhorn, but that continued support has also led to their unprecedented market share. Contrasting that with Apple, which has not had significant market share for almost 20+ years now, but is both more innovative and secure with their OS's because they can continually scrap the old OS and move onto something new. That being said, I think it's about time I finally bite the bullet and pickup that Mac.
iTunes Podcast Top 10 Rankings Explained
According to Adam Curry's 7/23 Daily Source Code, the iTunes Podcast top 10 is not based on the number of subscriptions a podcast has, but rather on the number of new subscribers in the past 24 hours. This explains why podcasts such as our favorites Diggnation and TWiT can rocket to the top of the charts, while more established podcasts, such as Curry's Daily Source Code, one of the longest runing podcasts, is not in the top 10. While this seems like a great method to see what new and popular podcasts are out there, it can skew listeners who might be looking for truely the "most popular" podcasts, and not just the most en vogue (or begged for). I would propose that Apple maintained two lists, one being a "true" top 10 which lists the 10 most subscribed-to podcasts and a "daily" top 10 listsing the most subscribed to podcasts within the last 24 hours.
Is Google the Ultimate Spyware/Adware?
Though I am an avid user of Google and their various products, I find it intriguing that in the current computing environment where adware and spyware are despised and certainly considered "evil", that consumers continue to let Google get away with using their corporate mission of "Do No Evil." While most spyware programs are insidious and often get installed without the end user's knowledge, Google has circumvented that traditional delivery method by getting consumers to come to them, essentially making every web browser thier personal adware delivery tool. It is no secret that every search term entered into Google gets sent to and stored on Google servers with the IP address of the user and time entered, unbeknownst to them. While this may seem benign, it is really no different than what traditional spyware does, other than nothing is installed on your computer (and yes, I realize this is a big difference).
But so what, that is just the price that we all have to pay for using Google's kick-ass search engine. Enter Gmail. Now Gmail is a great service, and I personally have never once clicked on an ad (really, I don't even notice them anymore), but from Google's perspective Gmail should be viewed for what it is - yet another means for Google to collect as much information about you as they can. Sure, perhaps Google might only the scanning of your emails to deliver up ads, but what is to stop them from selling that information to outside companies? With the rapidly expanding user base of Gmail, Google now almost has access every marketers dream - knowing what people are thinking and writing about in the now, regardless of the subject. It really is astounding the amount of potential marketing information Google as access to, if you think about it.
I guess what confound me is that in an era when targeted advertising is frowned upon, how has a company that makes its money almost exclusively by serving up advertisements become the darling of the internet crowd? I guess if you make something people can't get enough of, they will quickly abandon any sense of good judgement they claim to have. Now I have to get back to my Gmail.
