AFP - Internet giant Google is testing a new television programming search service with Dish Network Corp., The Wall Street Journal reported on Monday.
Google is testing a new television programming search service in conjunction with Dish Network, according to The Wall Street Journal.
The service, which appears to be very much in a limited testing phase, runs on a special set-top box and apparently searches content from both the Dish programming guide, as well as web video services like YouTube.
Without any details about the specific implementation, it’s unclear how similar this venture is to the new upcoming TiVo Premiere service that was announced last week.
Perhaps the most interesting aspect of The Wall Street Journal’s report dealt less with the service itself and more with the technology that powers the set-top box. Apparently, portions of Google’s Android OS power the Google-enabled device. While Android has been spotted on other devices like tablets and netbooks (or, so-called smartbooks), a move to the embedded device space could be huge.
As consumer electronics rapidly shift toward connectivity (hey, it might have taken us 15 years, but now everything is moving at a rapid pace), there are huge opportunities for embedded systems developers. As it stands, most embedded devices use either a custom-built kernel or a modified version of BusyBox, but Google could theoretically offer a framework that would be both free and value-rich for device makers, while also offering opportunities that impact Google’s core business.
Of course, this isn’t Google’s first foray into television. Back in 2008, Google AdWords launched Google TV Ads as a platform for companies to buy airtime in various markets. That project hasn’t been as successful as other Google ventures, but perhaps a more direct way of tying search to television would have better results.
What do you think about the possibility of having Google on your TV? Let us know!
Tags: dish network, embedded devices, google search, google tv, iptv
A new report by ITDatabase that examines tech coverage over the last six months from eight top business news publications raises some questions, in particular: Does the business press factor companies' revenue and profits into their tech editorial agenda?
The report shows that Apple and Google dominate, while Twitter and Facebook are far more discussed in the business press than Intel, Dell, IBM, or even HP (the largest tech company in the world).
The eight publications surveyed are: The Wall Street Journal, The New York Times, Forbes, Fortune, BusinessWeek, The Economist, Financial Times, and USA Today. Over a period of six months, ITDatabase measured coverage by the number of times a tech company was mentioned in print and online in these publications, including blogs such as All Things Digital, which is affiliated with the Journal. (Disclosure: I am an adviser to ITDatabase.)
- They are new industries, which usually tend to be unprofitable because they are giving away value to get market share (and/or have yet to find a business model)
- They are established and still sexy, in which case people will work for them for much less money than for less enjoyable industries
Social Media profits (if you exclude the purchases of sites by the Dumb Money) drive the current "biggest $0 billion industry" going.
One of Sallie Mae's corporate jets: Model IAI-1125A Astra SPX, registration #N188AK
Two noted shills for the banking industry - Republican Lamar Alexander and Rupert Murdoch's Wall Street Journal - just trotted out the "socialism" boogeyman, so here we go again: another lie, another con, another ripoff. "School loan socialism" is the new Death Panel.
Alexander's op-ed for the Washington Post is a buzzword symphony, a scare-tactic sonata, a cascading chorus of Pavlovian terminology designed to elicit the predictable autonomic response. "Starting in July," he writes, "all 19 million students who want government-backed loans will (cue scary music here) line up at offices designated by the U. S. Education Department." (It's more likely they'll go online to make their selection. But that "lining up" sounds so Stalinist, doesn't it?)
Alexander hammers home the Russian Constructivist imagery: " ...(G)etting your student loan will become about as enjoyable as going to the Department of Motor Vehicles." Leaving aside for a moment the absurd idea that students find loan applications "enjoyable, " here's an editorial note for conservatives: You really need to stop using the DMV as a scary image. I went there recently, and even here in depression-wracked California it works fine. Computerization and modernization have made it easy and convenient. So whenever you guys say "DMV! Scary! Whoo-ooo!" it just confirms the suspicion that you're rich guys who haven't done your own errands for decades.
Not that scare tactics are all Alexander's got to offer. There's also the quasi-pastoral vision of a disappearing nation, to be lamented as freedom dies under the Red fist. "Gone are the days," he writes, "when students and their colleges picked picked the lender that best fit their needs; instead, a federal bureaucrat will make that choice ..."
I recently helped my son choose an institution for his student loan and, trust me: It's a rat's nest of confusing information, different loan models with no tools for side-by-side comparison, and runaway hucksterism. And my daughter's loan has been passed along from bank to bank at least once and maybe more.
"Picked the lender that best fit their needs"? Most students close their eyes and pray, and then wonder if the lender they choose will still be their lender next year. And how do colleges "pick the lender that best fits their needs"? Greed and graft have played their part on more than one occasion.
Alexander complains about the 4% difference in interest rates between what the Treasury will charge the Education Department and the Department will charge students. He ignores the fact that the President's proposal reduces the maximum amount for repayment from 15% to 10% of income. And his outrage over 4% for the underprivileged doesn't extend to the billions skimmed by bankers without financial risk.
In other words, "socialism" for the rich is fine, but helping middle-class and lower-income kids improve their lives is an outrage. Alexander's position may seem irrational until you consider the fact that, like a number of like-minded Senators, he's received campaign contributions from the very private bankers who interests he so devotedly serves.
Sallie Mae's the poster child for the moral and operational bankruptcy of the 90's privatization craze. Created and funded entirely by the taxpayer, it went private in the late 90's and immediately went on a greed binge. It started throwing mad money at Presidential and Congressional candidates, then kicked in the maximum allowable amount - $250,000 - to George W. Bush's inauguration.
About those jets: We learned that Sallie Mae had at least one when stories came out about Sen. Boehner's golfing trips to Florida on it. (His daughter works there, too; no conflict there.) After some Internet digging, I can confirm Internet rumors: It appears Sallie Mae has owned at least two different private jets, as reflected in this summary of corporate flights for Phoenix Airport .
Jets. Campaign contributions. A quarter of a million dollars for the Bush inauguration. And think of it: All of that came from money intended for student loans.
Alexander tells the story of Edsouth, a nonprofit lender in Tennessee - a touching story, except that nonprofits in the student loan industry are a rarity. In fact, the vast majority of lending takes place through for-profit lenders, of whom Sallie Mae is far and away the largest. And since it is the largest, you'd think its executives - who receive big money and fly around in those corporate jets - must be good at what they do. Instead, mismanagement runs rampant. The company branched out into the hedge fund and derivatives business, as well as some add-on loans for students, and proceeded to lose its shirt. So it's back to basics for Sallie Mae: funding politicians who'll help them keep on milking the American treasury.
Worse, in what amounts to virtual redlining,Sallie Mae used the "subprime" excuse to walk away from the students at traditionally low-income and minority schools - the ones who need loans the most.
The Wall Street Journal echoes Alexander's deceptions and scare tactics in an editorial entitled "That Other Government Takeover," and throws that new four-letter word "reconciliation" for good measure. The WSJ shows a particular tone-deafness in characterizing the government loan system as a "public option," since polls show the public option's popular. And it manages the near-impossible task of making Alexander look subtle, by referring to the government program as a "Soviet-style takeover."
Here's another editorial note: In polite circles the Communists-under-the-bed message is supposed to be more, well, subliminal. Instead the WSJ comes off sounding like a Tea Party bull session on amphetamines. Democrats want to "concentrate power in Washington," it screams, "while they still can"!
Lamar Alexander and Journal owner Rupert Murdoch, on the other hand, want to concentrate power in places where they're more comfortable -- in private jets and corporate suites funded by taxpayer money. And what do they call this high-rolling lifestyle on the taxpayer's dime?
Why, the free market, of course.
___________________________
Richard (RJ) Eskow, a consultant and writer, is a Senior Fellow with the Campaign for America's Future. This post was produced as part of the Curbing Wall Street project. Richard blogs at:
No Middle Class Health Tax
A Night Light
Website: Eskow and Associates
Two noted political shills for the banking industry -- Republican Lamar Alexander and Rupert Murdoch's Wall Street Journal -- just trotted out the "socialism" boogeyman, so here we go again: another lie, another con, another ripoff. "School loan socialism" is the new Death Panel. But, hey, somebody's gotta keep Sallie Mae's corporate jets flying.
Alexander's op-ed for the Washington Post is a buzzword symphony, a scare-tactic sonata, a cascading chorus of Pavlovian terminology designed to elicit the predictable autonomic response. "Starting in July," he writes, "all 19 million students who want government-backed loans will (cue scary music here) line up at offices designated by the U. S. Education Department." (It's more likely they'll go online to make their selection. But that "lining up" sounds so Stalinist, doesn't it?)
Alexander hammers home the Russian Constructivist imagery: " ...(G)etting your student loan will become about as enjoyable as going to the Department of Motor Vehicles." Leaving aside for a moment the absurd idea that students find loan applications "enjoyable, " here's an editorial note for conservatives: You really need to stop using the DMV as a scary image. I went there recently, and even here in depression-wracked California it works fine. Computerization and modernization have made it easy and convenient. So whenever you guys say "DMV! Scary! Whoo-ooo!" it just confirms the suspicion that you're rich guys who haven't done your own errands for decades.
Not that scare tactics are all Alexander's got to offer. There's also the quasi-pastoral vision of a disappearing nation, to be lamented as freedom dies under the Red fist. "Gone are the days," he writes, "when students and their colleges picked picked the lender that best fit their needs; instead, a federal bureaucrat will make that choice ..."
I recently helped my son choose an institution for his student loan and, trust me: It's a rat's nest of confusing information, different loan models with no tools for side-by-side comparison, and runaway hucksterism. And my daughter's loan has been passed along from bank to bank at least once and maybe more.
"Picked the lender that best fit their needs"? Most students close their eyes and pray, and then wonder if the lender they choose will still be their lender next year. And how do colleges "pick the lender that best fits their needs"? Greed and graft have played their part on more than one occasion.
Alexander complains about the 4% difference in interest rates between what the Treasury will charge the Education Department and the Department will charge students. He ignores the fact that the President's proposal reduces the maximum amount for repayment from 15% to 10% of income. And his outrage over 4% for the underprivileged doesn't extend to the billions skimmed by bankers without financial risk.
In other words, "socialism" for the rich is fine, but helping middle-class and lower-income kids improve their lives is an outrage. Alexander's position may seem irrational until you consider the fact that, like a number of like-minded Senators, he's received campaign contributions from the very private bankers who interests he so devotedly serves.
Sallie Mae's the poster child for the moral and operational bankruptcy of the 90's privatization craze. Created and funded entirely by the taxpayer, it went private in the late 90's and immediately went on a greed binge. It started throwing mad money at Presidential and Congressional candidates, then kicked in the maximum allowable amount - $250,000 - to George W. Bush's inauguration.
About those jets: We learned that Sallie Mae had at least one when stories came out about Sen. Boehner's golfing trips to Florida on it. (His daughter works there, too; hey, no conflict there, right?) After some Internet digging, I can confirm Internet rumors: It appears Sallie Mae has owned at least two different private jets, as reflected in this summary of corporate flights for Phoenix Airport .
Jets. Campaign contributions. A quarter of a million dollars for the Bush inauguration. And think of it: All of that came from money intended for student loans.
Alexander tells the story of Edsouth, a nonprofit lender in Tennessee - a touching story, except that nonprofits in the student loan industry are a rarity. In fact, the vast majority of lending takes place through for-profit lenders, of whom Sallie Mae is far and away the largest. And since it is the largest, you'd think its executives - who receive big money and fly around in those corporate jets - must be good at what they do. Instead, mismanagement runs rampant. The company branched out into the hedge fund and derivatives business, as well as some add-on loans for students, and proceeded to lose its shirt. So it's back to basics for Sallie Mae: funding politicians who'll help them keep on milking the American treasury.
Worse, in what amounts to virtual redlining, Sallie Mae used the "subprime" excuse to walk away from the students at traditionally low-income and minority schools - the ones who need loans the most.
The Wall Street Journal echoes Alexander's deceptions and scare tactics in an editorial entitled "That Other Government Takeover," and throws that new four-letter word "reconciliation" for good measure. The WSJ shows a particular tone-deafness in characterizing the government loan system as a "public option," since polls show the public option's popular. And it manages the near-impossible task of making Alexander look subtle, by referring to the government program as a "Soviet-style takeover."
Here's another editorial note: In polite circles the Communists-under-the-bed message is supposed to be more, well, subliminal. Instead the WSJ comes off sounding like a Tea Party bull session on amphetamines. Democrats want to "concentrate power in Washington," it screams, "while they still can"!
Lamar Alexander and Journal owner Rupert Murdoch, on the other hand, want to concentrate power in places where they're more comfortable -- in private jets and corporate suites funded by taxpayer money. And what do they call this high-rolling lifestyle on the taxpayer's dime?
Why, the free market, of course.
___________________________
Richard (RJ) Eskow, a consultant and writer, is a Senior Fellow with the Campaign for America's Future. This post was produced as part of the Curbing Wall Street project. Richard blogs at:
No Middle Class Health Tax
A Night Light
Website: Eskow and Associates
Two noted political shills for the banking industry -- Republican Lamar Alexander and Rupert Murdoch's Wall Street Journal -- just trotted out the "socialism" boogeyman, so here we go again: another lie, another con, another ripoff. "School loan socialism" is the new Death Panel. But, hey, somebody's gotta keep Sallie Mae's corporate jets flying.
Alexander's op-ed for the Washington Post is a buzzword symphony, a scare-tactic sonata, a cascading chorus of Pavlovian terminology designed to elicit the predictable autonomic response. "Starting in July," he writes, "all 19 million students who want government-backed loans will (cue scary music here) line up at offices designated by the U. S. Education Department." (It's more likely they'll go online to make their selection. But that "lining up" sounds so Stalinist, doesn't it?)
Alexander hammers home the Russian Constructivist imagery: " ...(G)etting your student loan will become about as enjoyable as going to the Department of Motor Vehicles." Leaving aside for a moment the absurd idea that students find loan applications "enjoyable, " here's an editorial note for conservatives: You really need to stop using the DMV as a scary image. I went there recently, and even here in depression-wracked California it works fine. Computerization and modernization have made it easy and convenient. So whenever you guys say "DMV! Scary! Whoo-ooo!" it just confirms the suspicion that you're rich guys who haven't done your own errands for decades.
Not that scare tactics are all Alexander's got to offer. There's also the quasi-pastoral vision of a disappearing nation, to be lamented as freedom dies under the Red fist. "Gone are the days," he writes, "when students and their colleges picked picked the lender that best fit their needs; instead, a federal bureaucrat will make that choice ..."
I recently helped my son choose an institution for his student loan and, trust me: It's a rat's nest of confusing information, different loan models with no tools for side-by-side comparison, and runaway hucksterism. And my daughter's loan has been passed along from bank to bank at least once and maybe more.
"Picked the lender that best fit their needs"? Most students close their eyes and pray, and then wonder if the lender they choose will still be their lender next year. And how do colleges "pick the lender that best fits their needs"? Greed and graft have played their part on more than one occasion.
Alexander complains about the 4% difference in interest rates between what the Treasury will charge the Education Department and the Department will charge students. He ignores the fact that the President's proposal reduces the maximum amount for repayment from 15% to 10% of income. And his outrage over 4% for the underprivileged doesn't extend to the billions skimmed by bankers without financial risk.
In other words, "socialism" for the rich is fine, but helping middle-class and lower-income kids improve their lives is an outrage. Alexander's position may seem irrational until you consider the fact that, like a number of like-minded Senators, he's received campaign contributions from the very private bankers who interests he so devotedly serves.
Sallie Mae's the poster child for the moral and operational bankruptcy of the 90's privatization craze. Created and funded entirely by the taxpayer, it went private in the late 90's and immediately went on a greed binge. It started throwing mad money at Presidential and Congressional candidates, then kicked in the maximum allowable amount - $250,000 - to George W. Bush's inauguration.
About those jets: We learned that Sallie Mae had at least one when stories came out about Sen. Boehner's golfing trips to Florida on it. (His daughter works there, too; hey, no conflict there, right?) After some Internet digging, I can confirm Internet rumors: It appears Sallie Mae has owned at least two different private jets, as reflected in this summary of corporate flights for Phoenix Airport .
Jets. Campaign contributions. A quarter of a million dollars for the Bush inauguration. And think of it: All of that came from money intended for student loans.
Alexander tells the story of Edsouth, a nonprofit lender in Tennessee - a touching story, except that nonprofits in the student loan industry are a rarity. In fact, the vast majority of lending takes place through for-profit lenders, of whom Sallie Mae is far and away the largest. And since it is the largest, you'd think its executives - who receive big money and fly around in those corporate jets - must be good at what they do. Instead, mismanagement runs rampant. The company branched out into the hedge fund and derivatives business, as well as some add-on loans for students, and proceeded to lose its shirt. So it's back to basics for Sallie Mae: funding politicians who'll help them keep on milking the American treasury.
Worse, in what amounts to virtual redlining, Sallie Mae used the "subprime" excuse to walk away from the students at traditionally low-income and minority schools - the ones who need loans the most.
The Wall Street Journal echoes Alexander's deceptions and scare tactics in an editorial entitled "That Other Government Takeover," and throws that new four-letter word "reconciliation" for good measure. The WSJ shows a particular tone-deafness in characterizing the government loan system as a "public option," since polls show the public option's popular. And it manages the near-impossible task of making Alexander look subtle, by referring to the government program as a "Soviet-style takeover."
Here's another editorial note: In polite circles the Communists-under-the-bed message is supposed to be more, well, subliminal. Instead the WSJ comes off sounding like a Tea Party bull session on amphetamines. Democrats want to "concentrate power in Washington," it screams, "while they still can"!
Lamar Alexander and Journal owner Rupert Murdoch, on the other hand, want to concentrate power in places where they're more comfortable -- in private jets and corporate suites funded by taxpayer money. And what do they call this high-rolling lifestyle on the taxpayer's dime?
Why, the free market, of course.
___________________________
Richard (RJ) Eskow, a consultant and writer, is a Senior Fellow with the Campaign for America's Future. This post was produced as part of the Curbing Wall Street project. Richard blogs at:
No Middle Class Health Tax
A Night Light
Website: Eskow and Associates
By Mary Pilon, Reporter, The Wall Street Journal
When times get tough, complain. If the newest numbers from the Better Business Bureau for company complaints are any indication, that’s exactly what consumers are doing. Overall, complaints at the Better Business Bureau were up 10% in 2009 with nearly one million complaints filed. Banks have seen a whopping 42% increase in complaints in 2009, further helping to explain the ire toward Wall Street, with complaints spanning from credit cards to checking accounts to mortgages. But even with the surge in financial complaints, the cellphone industry was the most complained industry of last year, with 37,477 total complaints.
Two Americans claim they were tortured by US officials after making bribery allegations
A federal judge in Chicago ruled on Friday that a lawsuit against former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, brought by two Americans who had worked for an Iraqi contractor, can be allowed to proceed.
In his ruling (PDF), US District Judge Wayne R. Andersen said the plaintiffs had provided enough concrete evidence of torture to allow the suit to go forward. The judge dismissed Rumsfeld's arguments that his position near the top of the executive branch immunized him from lawsuits involving the authorization of torture, the Associated Press reported.
According to court documents, Nathan Ertel and Donald Vance went to Iraq in 2005 to work for an Iraqi contractor, Shield Group Security. Once there, they say they witnessed SGS employees handing money over to "Iraqi sheikhs." After they notified two FBI agents in Baghdad and one in Chicago of what they say, they say their employer cut off their access pass to Baghdad's Green Zone and were struck in the city's dangerous "Red Zone."
But the lawsuit claims things got really bad once they were "rescued" from the Red Zone by US authorities. Instead of being treated as witnesses to potential crimes, the two plaintiffs say they were told they could be classified as "enemy combatants" for working for a company suspected of shipping weapons to insurgents.
The duo say they were "subjected to sleep deprivation, long hours of interrogation, hunger and a practice known as 'walling' in which subjects are blindfolded and walked into walls," the Wall Street Journal reports.
Judge Andersen's preliminary ruling describes the duo's allegations:
Plaintiffs allege that they then were taken by United States forces to the United States Embassy. Plaintiffs allege that military personnel seized all of their personal property, including their laptop computers, cellular phones, and cameras. ... Following these interviews, plaintiffs claim they were escorted to a trailer to sleep for two to three hours.
Next, plaintiffs claim they were awakened by several armed guards who placed them under arrest and then handcuffed and blindfolded them and pushed them into a humvee. Plaintiffs contend that they were labeled as “security internees” affiliated with SGS, some of whose members were suspected of supplying weapons to insurgents. According to plaintiffs, that information alone was sufficient, under the policies enacted by Rumsfeld and others, for the indefinite, incommunicado detention of plaintiffs without due process or access to an attorney.
Plaintiffs claim to have been taken to Camp Prosperity, a United States military compound in Baghdad. There they allege they were placed in a cage, strip searched, and fingerprinted. Plaintiffs assert that they were taken to separate cells and held in solitary confinement 24 hours per day. After approximately two days, plaintiffs claim they were shackled, blindfolded, and placed in separate humvees which took them to Camp Cropper. Again, plaintiffs allege they were strip searched and placed in solitary confinement. ... All requests for an attorney allegedly were denied.
In ruling that the lawsuit can go forward, Judge Andersen said the decision "represents a recognition that federal officials may not strip citizens of well settled constitutional protections against mistreatment simply because they are located in a tumultuous foreign setting."
A Justice Department spokesperson told AP that officials are "reviewing the court's decision."
'GITMO-IZING IRAQ'
At the core of Ertel and Vance's case is their allegations that "in August 2003 Rumsfeld sent Major Geoffrey Miller to Iraq to review the United States prison system.
"Plaintiffs claim that Rumsfeld informed Major Miller that his mission was to 'gitmo-ize' Camp Cropper [the site where Ertel and Vance were held], a task that required recommendations on how to more effectively obtain actionable intelligence from detainees and “authorized Major Miller to apply in Iraq the techniques that Rumsfeld had approved for use at Guantanamo and elsewhere. At Rumsfeld’s direction, Major Miller did just that," court documents state.
The next hearing in the case is scheduled for March 25.
Toyota is in a huge amount of trouble with the government for its cover-up of safety issues. But based on a dozen recent conversations with friends and family members, Toyota appears to be rapidly losing credibility with the public just as quickly. That will not be helped when, according to the Wall Street Journal, Toyota plans to attack an ex-employee that was handing over documents to the government and claim he had mental problems.
One friend, an engineer who has owned Toyotas since they were first sold in the United States, said he would never purchase another because of the company's behavior. He cited Toyota's refusal to share black box data that's recorded in each car during an accident, saying, "As an engineer, they must think they have something to hide."
Public opinion among my friends is going from "Toyota makes the best cars and these problems happen with all makes" to "What is Toyota afraid of?" My wife, who loves her one-year old Toyota Highlander Hybrid, surprised me and reversed her opinion about buying one again, and now says she probably would not buy a Toyota if she had to do it all over again.
One marketing professor friend thought Toyota's performance will make it the subject of one of the biggest business school cases of all time, about how Toyota fell so far so fast. He says he's never seen such inept crises management and "Everything they do seems to makes matters worse." He thinks once owners start losing their lives in cars that have been recalled and repaired, NHTSA may actually ban some models from being sold.
All of my anecdotal experience indicates Toyota is rapidly losing the confidence of the public, and its president's testimony before Congress did nothing to slow that down.
By Geoffrey A. Fowler, Reporter, The Wall Street Journal
Shopping continues to shift to the Web, but the years of torrid growth are coming to an end. In 2009, e-commerce in the U.S. managed to buck the recession that dragged down the rest of retail, growing 11 percent to reach $155.2 billion, according to Forrester Research. The research firm is predicting in a report out Monday that e-commerce in America will grow another 11 percent this year.
We're all used to a certain level of dishonesty from politicians, but the sheer volume and depth of duplicity coming from Mitt Romney lately on health care reform is nothing short of staggering.
In recent public appearances, he's been railing against President Obama's proposal as "a big government takeover of health care" and an entirely ineffective approach. It's not that he's alone, it's that just a few years ago Romney supported and signed into law an extremely similar health care bill for his state as governor of Massachusetts.
Like President Obama's plan now, the Romney plan relied solely on private insurers to cover the uninsured. Both comprise a three-fold combination of insurance regulations to prevent the exclusion or denial of care to sick people, subsidies for low-income individuals and an individual mandate to bring younger and healthier people into the risk pool. Both are conservative, market-based ideas that don't expand government-run health insurance.
Don't take my word for it. The conservative Wall Street Journal editorial board proclaimed that "commonwealth's 2006 program" -- as "championed by former GOP Governor Mitt Romney" -- "closely resembles what Democrats are trying to do in Washington." Still not convinced? Here's the conservative/libertarian Cato Institute: "In 2006, the Bay State enacted a slate of reforms that almost perfectly mirror the plan of Obama and congressional Democrats."
Yet Romney hailed his bill as the "ultimate conservative plan" that's "working well" on Fox News Sunday, while insisting the difference between his and Obama's plan was "the difference between a racehorse and a donkey." It would be one thing for Romney to admit he changed stances and denounce his 2006 bill as he's now denouncing Obama's, but instead he's pretending that's not the case -- and making a fool of himself in the process.
Probed by Fox's Chris Wallace, Romney claimed the "big difference" is that Obama's plan is on a federal level while his was on a state level. This clearly manufactured gripe might even have a little more sway if Romney's plan was a state-funded endeavor. It's not -- it has relied on millions of federal dollars.
The other differences Romney pointed to was that his plan, unlike Obama's, had "no new taxes" and "no controls over insurance premiums, price controls, cost controls." Firstly, neither of those is significant to the functioning of the plans. Second, Romney's lack of cost control wasn't a good thing; it has led to avoidable cost increases for health insurance in Massachusetts. As for the taxes, that's what makes Obama's proposal paid-for and more fiscally responsible.
It didn't stop there. Romney also hailed his plan as the "ultimate pro-life effort" Sunday, when the facts say the exact opposite. The state of Massachusetts notes that "[a]ll Commonwealth Care health plans include" coverage for, among other things, "abortion."
Then there's the issue of the individual mandate, which both the Romney and Obama plans include (as is necessary for them to work). But Romney refused to even defend its constitutionality when Think Progress inquired recently. Get that? Romney wouldn't say whether his own health care bill was constitutional. Of course, that's no coincidence, because in December Republicans voted unanimously to declare the mandate in the Democratic Senate bill unconstitutional, and have since maintained that claim.
The reason all this is relevant is that Mitt Romney is the odds-on favorite to win the Republican nomination in 2012. During his 2008 campaign he conveniently flip-flopped on abortion and couldn't keep his stances straight on a host of other issues, while flagrantly lying about some of his own stances. Clearly, he hasn't become any more honest since. And he may have a real shot at the presidency regardless, especially if Democrats continue to founder as they have been.
Fellow Massachusetts politician Barney Frank summed him up: "The real Romney is clearly an extraordinarily ambitious man with no perceivable political principle whatsoever," he said. "He is the most intellectually dishonest human being in the history of politics."
RT @jasonhiner: Good read. @HarryMcCracken asks 28 thought leaders what Microsoft needs to do with Windows: http://bit.ly/cTmRj4
In 1985, almost all PCs sat on desktops, the Internet was a Defense Department research project, and the cell phone revolution had barely gotten underway. It was also the year that Microsoft launched a DOS front-end called Windows 1.0.
Over the past quarter century, Windows has evolved many times, and it will change again in light of Microsoft’s investments in cloud services, mobile platforms, and other new technologies. And as the way people compute and communicate morphs faster than ever, the challenges ahead for Windows are huge.
With that in mind, Technologizer asked some of the industry’s big brains about what Microsoft needs to do to keep its operating system relevant in the years to come. Their opinions range from merely simplifying the interface to borrowing ideas from other Microsoft products such as the Xbox to giving the OS a complete reboot. Here’s what they (and us) have to say.
–David Worthington, story editor
What to keep Windows relevant? Well, a more liberal policy on Windex, I suppose. Wait, you mean the software?
Ok, I will be honest and say I now mostly use Apple computers and have not used Windows on a constant daily basis in years, since when it was on the computer I used at work. That computer was kind of grimy and could have used some Windex too. But I digress.
I think the point is that to get me back Microsoft needs to really make Windows very different than it is now. I would switch if it nailed a touchscreen version, if I could easily use my top applications in the cloud, if it worked exactly the same across a range of devices. I would also like to see better integration with the devices Windows is on, which is to say, more Apple-like. Trust me, I am not wedded to Apple for life and could be enticed away a lot easier than you might imagine.
Try me.
Kara Swisher reports on technology at All Things Digital’s Boomtown, and co-hosts and co-produces the Wall Street Journal’s D conference. Photo by Ken Yeung (TheLetterTwo.com).
Government interference has effectively put a stop to upward integration of Windows, so I think all we’ll see is continued adaptation to new hardware and networking technologies. The next huge shift in home computing is the transition from the cable box to the streaming video player, saving the end user a large monthly subscription fee. Microsoft has known this for years, producing Media Center Editions of Windows way ahead of the curve.
With early innovators now using dedicated hardware such as Roku and Microsoft’s own Xbox to stream videos to their TVs, the time is ripe for Windows to reenter the fray and attempt to become the de-facto standard for home video viewing, either through embedded integration with HDTVs themselves or easy wireless connection to TVs. Home wireless networks are fast enough now that the Windows PC can be located anywhere in the house as long as the TV has a wireless input.
As to the threat from open source software, the problem remains the same as always. With no revenue, there is no money for marketing, sales, or support. All three of those, despite the pipe dreams of software engineers, are required for a product to be successful. Windows in particular requires a huge amount of pre-release testing because it attempts to work with such a wide variety of third-party hardware. That’s expensive.
Richard Brodie, employee #77 at Microsoft, the principal author of Microsoft Word, and once the company’s chief software designer, is also the author of Virus of the Mind: The New Science of the Meme.
Some things I’d like to see in Windows 8, or future versions:
1. Far better understanding that our computing devices play different roles. I’d love to click a button on the bottom and have my computer switch between an entertainment mode (like Media Center) to a work mode (with Outlook/Gmail/Spreadsheets up) to a collaboration mode (working with Google Wave or Zoho, etc). Right now switching between these various modes is very difficult.
2. I want everything I touch to be socialized. Why doesn’t Outlook know anything about Facebook? Why don’t my photos automatically get pushed to Flickr? Why don’t I have a news app on my desktop that brings in Tweets from Twitter? Why aren’t notifications built into the system at a deep level?
3. We are collecting digital crap like photos, videos, and documents at a dizzying rate. But how do you organize it better? Or, worse yet, once you get it organized into folders etc how do you back it up? Remember, my HD video files are many gigabytes and pushing them around is difficult, not to mention that I lose track of which hard drive has which files and there isn’t an easy way to upload some of these megafiles to online storage.
4. Cross-device working is pretty difficult. I’m going to have computers in my car, in my pocket, on my coffee table, and hooked up to my TV soon. Moving back and forth between all of these different screens isn’t easy, and if it’s doable each screen isn’t used appropriately in many cases (fonts don’t switch to bigger sizes for TV playing, and documents don’t get simpler for small screen viewing the way they should in all cases).
5. Why can’t my Xbox be a Windows 7 PC and vice versa? Does the world really need separate devices for all these features?
6. The world is moving to touch screens, yet the UI in Windows is still pretty heavily mouse-centric.
Anyway, these are some of the areas I hope to see Microsoft work on in the future of Windows.
Robert Scoble is an author, blogger, and technical evangelist. He is a former Microsoft evangelist and presently works for Rackspace on Building 43. Photo by Ken Yeung (TheLetterTwo.com)
Microsoft is already doing some things to keep Windows relevant. It is making Windows available in the cloud. (That’s what Windows Azure is). And it is researching how to make Windows — or whatever its ultimate successor is called — a concurrent, distributed OS. (That’s what the incubation codenamed “Midori” is.)
But what the majority of people think about and see when it comes to Windows is whatever ships on new PCs. On that front, Microsoft is making fairly incremental changes to Windows. Under the covers, Windows 7 is built on top of the Windows NT kernel Microsoft has been using for the past decade or so. Microsoft is making efforts to better organize the guts of Windows, reducing its footprint and improving its stability. (That’s what “MinWin” is.) The company also is investigating how to improve the Windows Update process, making it less intrusive and cumbersome, while still providing users with improvements in between Windows OS delivery cycles. And the Redmondians are investigating ways to insure compatibility of older legacy apps with next-gen Windows releases. All this stuff is goodness.
But what Microsoft really needs to do to insure Windows’ continued relevance is to be unafraid of introducing a whole new operating system at some point. At some point, in the not-too-distant future, Windows is going to need to be supplanted by “the next big thing.” Because Microsoft has an installed base of over 1 billion, company brass (rightly) give backward compatibility a huge amount of importance. But Microsoft needs to find a way to offer customers a choice of operating systems–Windows and Doors (meaning whatever follows Windows — probably some microkernel-based, developed-from-scratch thing, which may or may not have any relation to Midori). Maybe Windows and Doors will dual-boot; maybe they will just co-exist. Maybe Doors will be some kind of variant of the evolving Windows Phone OS or an offshoot of its Mashup OS/Gazelle research project that is somewhat like Google’s Chrome OS.
In any case, some time in the next five-plus years, Microsoft is going to need find the courage (and the correct marketing message) to cut the existing Windows cash-cow cord to stay relevant.
Mary Jo Foley blogs about Microsoft at ZDNet’s All About Microsoft and is the author of Microsoft 2.0. She has reported on technology for two decades.
For Windows to remain relevant, it will have to win and hold the world of low-end Web terminals–smart phones, netbooks, and notepads–just as it won and held the PC. That means offering a small footprint, strong power management, and well-designed packages of software and hardware that are less open and more secure than a typical PC. For Microsoft, that’s a technical challenge, but even more a business one, because it will have to work more closely with hardware and software developers than it ever has before.
Rob Helm is director of research at Directions on Microsoft.
The comparison is far from perfect. But as I think about the future of Windows, I actually believe the folks at Microsoft responsible for its ubiquitous computer operating system can take a lesson from their cousins in mobile. With the recently unveiled Windows Phone 7, Microsoft has more or less been willing to start from scratch and offer something that looks potentially very sweet. (I say this based on a demo, of course, and well aware that phones based on the new mobile operating system are still unproven and months away.) We’ll have to see, but what this may represent is a new way thinking out of Redmond: the realization that we as a company no longer have to do it a certain way because, well, that’s the way we’ve always done it before.
Now, I’m by no means suggesting that Microsoft has to start from scratch when it comes to the traditional Windows OS for computers, much less prescribing specific changes. Microsoft’s sagging fortunes in the highly competitive smartphone market hardly mirror its still-dominant position in the core operating systems arena. I happen to be a fan of Windows 7, certainly compared to the much-maligned Windows Vista. But what I am saying is that Microsoft shouldn’t be burdened by the shackles of legacy computing as it looks ahead.
To be sure, Windows has evolved through the years, and at a certain point Microsoft has (in other areas anyway) been willing to make a break with the past. Consider how the “ribbon interface” altered the status quo with Office a few years back. And yet when it comes to Windows, Microsoft seems reluctant to take the bold leaps that rival Apple has been willing to make when it feels its software has reached retirement age–OS 9 anyone?
Given Microsoft’s still monster-sized market share with Windows you can’t blame them. And I’m sure Microsoft’s corporate customers wouldn’t want to see anything too radical. But at a time in which so much more everyday computing is moving to the cloud, Microsoft may have to (to borrow an old Apple slogan) “think different.”
When to change is never an easy call to make. My belief is that Microsoft should ride Windows 7 as long as it can–it is generally a fine operating system. But a fresh emphasis on flexible thinking may ultimately open up rich new possibilities for Windows.
Edward C. Baig is the personal tech columnist for USA Today. Photo by Renee Blodgett (Magic Sauce Media).
This morning’s roundup of the latest venture capital news and analysis across the Web:
Art by Mike LucasDental floss and Listerine used to be hard to find in Chinese stores. But China’s rising middle class is paying more attention to their dental health, and one start-up hopes to capitalize by helping to straighten their teeth. As VentureWire reports today, EA Inc. has raised $6.6 million in a round of funding led by OrbiMed Advisors to establish itself as China’s clear leader in the market for invisible dental braces. “The culture didn’t pay a lot of attention to cosmetics of teeth, but now people are paying more attention to how they look, how they smile,” said Jonathan Wang, senior managing director of OrbiMed’s Asia practice. “When people get wealthier they start to spend money on these things.”….
Internet music company Pandora has had more ups and downs than Sandra Bullock’s acting career. But like Bullock, who won an Oscar last night, this could be Pandora’s year. Thanks to persistence and strong partnerships, Pandora is now being courted by investment bankers who believe the company could be on verge of going public, reports the New York Times….
Fresh from its third annual ECO:nomics conference, The Wall Street Journal has published today a special section called the Environment Report that includes an edited excerpt of a discussion between WSJ’s Alan Murray and three top clean technology investors, John Doerr, Paul Holland and Vinod Khosla. The three VCs talk about hot investment areas, disappointments and the government’s involvement in cleantech. Regarding how the government’s wallet affects investment decisions, Khosla said: “You never use that in the decision. And frankly, the last thing you want is somebody sitting in [the Department of Energy] to be deciding what’s a good investment or not.” WSJ also ranks the top 10 venture-backed cleantech companies, using special criteria from research firm VentureSource. At No. 1: Solyndra, the solar systems maker in IPO registration….
One of the investors in Solyndra is CMEA Capital, which in the world of cleantech investing is kicking gas and taking names. The firm is an investor in another IPO registrant, industrial biocatalysts developer Codexis, as well as in battery maker A123 Systems, which went public last year. CMEA’s Maurice Gunderson talks to earth2tech about the future of the cleantech industry and his portfolio….
The Startup Visa Act, a bill recently proposed by Sens. John Kerry (D., Mass.) and Richard Lugar (R., Ind.), has generated a ton of support from the VC community for its effort to bring in foreign entrepreneurs. But Robert E. Litan, a vice president of research and policy at the Kauffman Foundation, believes there’s room for improvement. In a WSJ op-ed piece, Litan says a $250,000 equity requirement in the Kerry-Lugar plan would exclude most entrepreneurs - perhaps the next Sergey Brin, a Russian immigrant who along with American Larry Page founded Google using their credit cards. “Why on earth would we want to create an entrepreneurs’ visa that couldn’t let in the future Sergey Brin?”….
You’d have to be a pretty big baby to complain about being a venture capitalist, says Mark Suster of GRP Partners. The former entrepreneur who has served as a VC for the past three years, sheds some light on what it’s like to be a VC….
In order to survive, start-ups must constantly make good first impressions, whether its with potential partners, investors or journalists. If this is true, then why, asks the Boston Globe’s Scott Kirsner, do so many start-ups not have receptionists to greet visitors? He notes one start-up that is doing it right: VistaPrint, whose receptionist’s title is “Director of First Impressions.”….
Chris Arsenault of iNovia Capital explains why the Canadian venture capital model has never really worked:
Well that didn't take very long. In just under four years time, Twitter bolted past 10 billion tweets, serving up its 10 billionth message last week. So what did the milestone message say and who posted it? Nobody knows, as it belongs to a protected user.
Visible or not, the message underscores the continuing popularity of the microblogging service, which doesn't appear to be losing any steam (sorry Google Buzz). According to Mashable.com, Twitter posted its one billionth tweet back in November 2008, and five billion tweets only four months ago.
As it stands now, Twitter says its service pumps out about 50 million messages every day, up from 2.5 million about a year ago, the Wall Street Journal reports.
U.S consumers haven’t taken to 3D at the same rates as overseas customers and for that reason Panasonic is reportedly slashing U.S. 3D TV prices by 50% when they arrive to market.
According to the Wall Street Journal Panasonic will cut prices in an effort to push adoption of the new sets forward.
The WSJ reports that the 50% price cuts will be in comparison to Japanese TV sets, with the hope of selling one million 3D TVs worldwide in the first year of release, with over half of those sales coming from the U.S. market.
Eventually Panasonic plans on featuring the sets at all 1,000 Best Buy locations nationwide, with the 50 inch model selling for $2,500 in the United States.
U.S consumers haven’t taken to 3D at the same rates as overseas customers and for that reason Panasonic is reportedly slashing U.S. 3D TV prices by 50% when they arrive to market.
According to the Wall Street Journal Panasonic will cut prices in an effort to push adoption of the new sets forward.
The WSJ reports that the 50% price cuts will be in comparison to Japanese TV sets, with the hope of selling one million 3D TVs worldwide in the first year of release, with over half of those sales coming from the U.S. market.
Eventually Panasonic plans on featuring the sets at all 1,000 Best Buy locations nationwide, with the 50 inch model selling for $2,500 in the United States.
In need of an overhaul
• Today’s metaphor for America’s decline: The U.S. as LAX. Thomas Friedman makes a salient point. (Fresno Bee)
• An international incident over full body scanners: A parliamentary delegation of Pakistani officials refused to go through scanners at Washington’s Dulles Airport, instead electing to return to Pakistan. (Press TV)
• The U.S. DOT shut down Tierra Santa Inc., the bus company involved in a crash that killed six people in Arizona last week. The company had a number of shady dealings, including a poor safety record and improper authorization to transport passengers over state lines. (LATimes)
• The fits and starts of Philly’s urban regeneration (Philadelphia Inquirer)
• Time for New Deal 2.0? American mayors want a remake of the FDR-inspired plan to tackle unemployment and infrastructure problems. (Wall Street Journal)
• A random act of kindness is recognized by a Boston commuter. (Christian Science Monitor)
• If sustainable design wins out, tourists could enjoy a Central Asian Switzerland. (Eurasianet)
• While many in Africa go hungry, foreign countries are increasing their hold on the continent’s arable land for the benefit of their own populations. (Guardian UK)
• Kudos to Bloomington High School South for their “Calories to Kilowatts” program. The Panthers have a gym that’s absolutely electric. (AP)
Somebody's feeling a little jealous of Apple's success in the mobile space, and that somebody is Sony. Citing "people familiar with the matter," the Wall Street Journal reports that Sony is readying a plethora of handheld gadgets in an attempt to steal away some of Apple's market share.
Two of these upcoming gadgets include a smartphone capable of downloading and playing games, and a portable tablet-like device that combines elements of a netbook, e-book reader, and handheld gaming systems.
It's important to note that Apple's success has been the result of not only its hardware, but its software distribution model, and towards that end, both of Sony's aforementioned devices are expected to work with Sony's new online media platform, which launches later this month, the WSJ reports.
But can Sony truly tap into Apple's market share?
"That's the vision, but it's still not quite clear what specific steps Sony will take to achieve that, especially when iPad and other highly capable mobile devices are crowding the market," said Nobuo Kurahashi, a consumer-electronics analyst a Japanese brokerage Mizuho Investors Securities.
We have already heard the details of some of the Panasonic line of 3D TVs between CES and other announcements. Panasonic has offered up more details of its 3D TV push that is ready to start this year with the Wall Street Journal reporting that Panasonic will offer US consumers big discounts on its sets to push adoption.
The WSJ reports that Panasonic will discount its 3D TVs as much as 50% in the US compared to Japanese pricing when the sets land in Best Buy stores in America. Panasonic’s current fiscal year ends on March 31, and the electronics giant is looking to sell a million 3D TVs with half that amount in the US alone by that date.
Panasonic sets will be placed in only the largest Best Buy stores to start with TVs being offered in all 1,000 Best Buy locations at a later date. Panasonic’s 50-inch 3D model is expected to sell for about $2,500 in the US compared to about $4800 in Japan for the same model.
Relevant Entries on SlashGear
With its finger on the pulse of the industry, eagle-eyed Sony developers have uncovered secret knowledge that Apple has released a device that lets you talk on the phone, listen to music and download video games. And as a result, it has decided to give one of its next redesigned PSPs the ability to call, text and email, the Wall Street Journal reports.
This adds to the feature set of the previous PSP: collecting dust. From the WSJ story on the matter (subscription required to read the full story):
Threatened by Apple Inc.'s growing stable of portable devices, Sony Corp. is developing a new lineup of handheld products, including a smart phone capable of downloading and playing videogames, according to people familiar with the matter.The Japanese electronics giant also is developing a portable device that shares characteristics of netbooks, electronic-book readers and handheld-game machines. The device is designed to compete against multifunction products such as Apple's coming iPad tablet, these people said.
Would you go for a PSP Phone over an iPhone?
New Sony Gadgets Take Aim at Apple [The Wall Street Journal]
