Mac Sales Bonanza?

Great op-ed piece from e-Week on the upcoming bonanza for Mac sales, and why.

It makes basically the point that I've always made; a $500 computer is exactly that, and extremely limiting. Because what people forget is you're going to spend hundreds in software to get you doing what you want to do; Appleworks and iWork are only $79. Office is what - $300 to $400? You want to edit videos? Spend more money. Want a good graphics card? Spend more money. In the end, the real cost of owning a mac over time is much less than a Windows PC.

The great thing about OSX (and Windows has great things too) is that when I use it every day, everything seamlessly integrates. It's like the Lexus of computing; smooth, efficient, fast, and will get you out of any traffic.

To me, Windows is like driving a Ford Taurus. Good computer, will get you where you need to go, but, if given the choice, based on the complete experience, would you rather drive a Taurus or a Lexus?

p.s.- I am proficient on all of the big three- Windows, Mac, and Linux. There are tasks Windows works very well for, and it is not a horrible platform, useless or anything like that. It's quite useful and I use it every single day. I just prefer Mac OS X.

My iPod just got more useful

Amazingly, my iPod just got better, and just with a simple workflow change to take advantage of what is already there.

I am switching over to iCal for my calendars, and Mail for my email (Goodbye Thunderbird - it was great working with you, and I may return. But the seamless integration of Mail makes it so much better when you're a mac user).

So how have I made my iPod Nano better? Now, it's also my PDA, which is a great deal for $149. I now sync my calendars, addresses and notes with it and so I have an extremely light PDA that meets my needs. The only missing link is that, although it would be clunky, I would love some sort of interface to add events on the fly without syncing to the machine.

This is important because the last thing I want to do is carry ANOTHER large gadget around. If I am going to a meeting, I either take my laptop or I don't. Adding on some PDA like a Treo or something is just too big - my nano is slim and I don't even notice it in my pocket; and with what I do, a PDA is useless to me.

That investment is really paying off - I am more than happy with my Nano, but now, I can actually use it for work the way I want to, as I said, with a little workflow change.

p.s. Don't think you Windows folks can do this unfortunately.

Thanks 313Digital

Thank you 313Digital for a wonderful event last nite at "The Bosco" (beware - site with mystery meat navigation, remember to click the trees! Click the trees!)

Made a lot of contacts and I think some new friends. And, CBS Digital, thanks for the free drinks. Erik and I enjoyed those as well.

More to write later. Clients need things now.

Money will ruin Web 2.0 utopia

I've been reading a host of articles about this whole Digg/Netscape thing (and I mentioned it in a recent post). And I think I've come to a pretty strong realization, although the exchange between the two is going through advanced de-evolution (as it so often does online).

All utopian, great, wonderful, democratic ideas do well in a very pure sense. However, now money has been added to this equation. And, honestly, there is a good, long-standing argument for paying and rewarding the people who put in hours to make you succeed (in fact, I believe it myself).

Every time I've been involved in a non-monetary, non-profit from the start project that was awesome, the second money got involved it went FUBAR - whether it be the competition, or the group I was collaborating with, the pattern is exactly the same. Awesome project pre-cash, everyone has fun, everyone produces great work; and then money gets involved and it all goes to h-e-double-hockey sticks. It's why now, I outline and deal with the money first. Then, there are no obstructions, misconstructions, or hurt feelings.

Jason Calacanis has introduced money into the Web 2.0 equation. The playing field HAS changed. People do have real responsibilities, and can't truly afford to do something four to eight hours a day without compensation; so taking the money is understandable. Patrick Norton said it best on TWIT this week - it's great to be amateur champion, but even better to make a living doing what you love to do.

It's only a matter of time that $1,000 a month turns into more. Netscape/Calacanis may not raise their price, but now that it's on the table, someone else will, as in the big scheme of things it's a very small amount of investment capitol. And if a startup has some cash to burn, that number is going to go to 2k or 3k, and then those people can make somewhat of a living off of aggregating. And if there is a market for their content and services, I do not have a problem with that. I cannot begrudge someone for wanting to make an honest living.

Digg won't die, and may get stronger; but Web 2.0 just became Web 2.1. We've moved versions and I don't think we're going back.

Resources:
PBS Mediashift: Should Community-Edited News Sites Pay Top Editors?
Digg CEO Jay Adelson says that monetary compensation out of the question
Jason Calacanis' Blog (specifically "Kevin Rose Cracks")
Kevin Rose response telling Jason to "clone on"

Intellitext Gets In Users' Way

It's a beautiful Saturday morning. A beautiful one that unfortunately, has been taken by annoyance.

I preface this by saying ads are necessary and good for sites. They help pay the bills. But don't have them annoy users, or masquerade as actual links, violating usability principles.

Intellitext, a service that populates pages with ads but as inline links in the content as opposed to an ad bar, might just be one of the biggest user annoyances.

I was on Softpedia (I linked to a page with these ads in it) looking for widgets (I need an alarm clock, and found one I like in Flip Clock) and what do I see but a page with a sea of links. And when I roll over them, these annoying ad boxes pop up (and in general don't go away). I look, and it's Intellitext.

I've seen them on other sites; I see them more and more now. And all I have to say is, yuck. It crowds the page, shouts ads on me if I make one mistake of mousing over it, doesn't go away when I mouse away, and is generally annoying.

Verizon network gone wonky?

So, I use a Verizon cellphone, and so does everyone in the organization.

Today, what has happened is that when I call Verizon cellphone numbers, I get voicemails and people who the number is completely wrong for. I.E. I call Bill, and I get someone named Lisa.

I tried from landlines calling my phone, me calling out - it seems as if the entire network I know to test has gone wonky.

Sincerest apologies for anyone trying to get ahold of me; apparently, Verizon has forgot my phone number.

(p.s. Numerous calls to customer service are disconnected, routed as busy, and or tell me that I've called the wrong number).

Anyone else having issues?

Yahoo! Gets It

I've railed against DRM before. Now, the big boys are starting to way in.

Yahoo in a recent blog post has publicly stated their want to just do plain mp3s without DRM because it takes up alot of resources and hurts the end user experience.

They, like I, believe that people will still pay for the material without Digital Rights Management on it. In fact, people do currently at sites like eMusic.

Hearing this is music to my ears :-)

It's not 80/20 - its 99/1

It used to be conventional wisdom, that online, 20 percent of the people created content and 80 percent just browsed. Well, this is turning out to be completely wrong; sort of turning on it's head the idea of Web 2.0 to the fact that although there is more interactivity than before, it's still a slight minority who actually create, and only 10 percent interact.

Right now, most of us still like to be passively entertained.

More in the Guardian

Calacanis and AOL throw money at the problem

Found an interesting article on social bookmarking - especially considering it talks about Jason Calacanis.

Jason is very controversial in the online world, and since he launched the new version of "netscape" homepage that is basically, in my opinion, a let us say "interpretation" of the digg model, he's come under even more fire from some circles. This move I shall mention is going to add to it in the online community; AOL is pinning their hopes on people like Jason to diversify their revenue stream as they leave the ISP business (as you may know).

What I do know is that I just flipped over to netscape and I'm hard pressed to find anything over 100 votes - these things always take time to ramp up, though.

The new plan Jason has cooked up is to pay the top users to come over to netscape $12k a year. I'm of two minds about this - part of me is like, hey, where you can get the money, take it, and why not - and the other side of me is that really my view as a user of netscape is going down even farther as a social site because of the fact they hire guns (which, arguably, is the same as hiring a writer or a journalist - and I read tons of material every day by paid writers, so I admit the irony).

The rub is not that they're getting paid, it's that it sort of against the whole social bookmarking/organic model. Time will tell if the market cares about this. They very well may not.

Of course, my warning for anyone who takes the deal is that when you get paid, someone always wants something in return at some point. Not saying you shouldn't (and if I were in this category, I can't say what I'd do), but as a business owner, I never pay someone and expect nothing back. At that point, it's a gift.

http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/calacanis_offer.php

The Lowest TV Ratings EVER

That's right... the fourth of July week was the lowest TV ratings ever.

Now, July is always slow, but, these levels are the lowest in recorded history. Some in the industry, of course are saying it's a blip. Others, though, blame poor content.

My thought is, could it be a minor harbinger of the "Long Tail?"

What is the Long Tail? It's the idea that there is a very large market in niche publications; publications that don't sell millions, but thousands - and through online channels, its' extremely profitable as opposed to retail where you need to make X dollars on every square foot of space you have.

I have to be honest, I am now buying print-on-demand and books online more and more because I find that the Borders and the Barnes and Nobles do not carry the material that I am looking for at the depth I am looking for. I love the bookstore experience; but save for best-sellers, my expertise has graduated beyond almost material that is available in my field and in most non-fiction pursuits.

Also, for me personally, I don't listen to the radio as much or watch TV as much - there are a few IPTV shows that I do listen or watch now that replaced previous content; especially radio. I now only listen to the terrestrial radio for NPR/WDET Morning/Evening (and I used to listen to WWJ, but now, I can find much better traffic at local.live.com as WWJ continually misses backups and traffic problems; and this site gives me real-time, accurate traffic), but I listen to KFI Tech Guy in Los Angeles, and NPR New York, and BBC World Service (as far as talk goes), all online.

The content quality is better online; it's just as easy for me to get the content; so why not listen to exactly what I want to and experiment with all kinds of content that I would never have the ability to? (To boot, the ads are not intrusive and actually, I find myself taking action on those ads more than over-the-air radio).

p.s.- Also, according to Nielsen, podcasting is more popular than blogging. Seems like that media evolution is getting traction, eh?