In a recent New York Times article, John Markoff discussed improved technology that will allow you to do a Google search on your on your cell phone just by speaking into it. He says in the article that you should speak into your phone to search just like you would type the entry into Google. I can’t believe that this technology is available to us today. It’s amazing to see the improvements that have been made to it as well because now it is 95 percent accurate.
While I think that the article is interesting, Markoff should have focused more on individuals using as testing the product instead of focusing on his opinions and use of the phone. He went into the fact that he has been following research on the phone and the history of speech recognition technology.
These pieces of information felt me asking questions like why should I care? I felt that the middle of the piece was boring, dry and just rambled about research and history that really were not necessary to include. I wish he would have focused more on how it works, what the perks of using it are, and how much the feature costs. That would have made the article a much more interesting read.
Find the full article at: http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/11/18/google-iphone-machine/
Thursday, November 20, 2008
Thursday, November 13, 2008
YouTube to Sell Advertising on Pages of Search Results
This article ran in the New York Times yesterday. In the article, Clifford discusses Google’s recent announcement that it would begin to sell space on YouTube search results pages to advertisers in order to generate more revenue.
After an initial read, the article left me confused and puzzled. What kind of ads are they selling? Are these ads promoting peoples videos or are the promoting products? Are these advertisements next to the video, before it plays, or are they the video itself?
I read the article again, and from what I can understand Google is actually selling key words to individual video makers to promote their own videos. I can’t understand why. People will find your video and since no one is buying it and you are not trying to sell it, what’s the difference if it tops up first or last.
I feel like buying key words to get your video to pop up first in a search for “How to bake cookies” on YouTube is absurd.
However, later in the article if finally all made sense. If major advertising companies buy key words like McDonalds then they can have the advertisements that their company has worked on pop up first. Or if Pepsi buys the words soda commercial, then all you will see are Pepsi advertisements.
I think the idea is still kind of weak seeing that I am majoring in advertising. Some company executives share my view as well. They say that there are mostly kids on YouTube and it lacks professionalism.
Overall, I think that Google and YouTube are going to be surprised when this “advertising” strategy fails because they can’t control a niche market of their normal consumers. They could have come up with a better idea.
To read the whole article, follow this link:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/13/technology/internet/13youtube.html?partner=rss&emc=rss
After an initial read, the article left me confused and puzzled. What kind of ads are they selling? Are these ads promoting peoples videos or are the promoting products? Are these advertisements next to the video, before it plays, or are they the video itself?
I read the article again, and from what I can understand Google is actually selling key words to individual video makers to promote their own videos. I can’t understand why. People will find your video and since no one is buying it and you are not trying to sell it, what’s the difference if it tops up first or last.
I feel like buying key words to get your video to pop up first in a search for “How to bake cookies” on YouTube is absurd.
However, later in the article if finally all made sense. If major advertising companies buy key words like McDonalds then they can have the advertisements that their company has worked on pop up first. Or if Pepsi buys the words soda commercial, then all you will see are Pepsi advertisements.
I think the idea is still kind of weak seeing that I am majoring in advertising. Some company executives share my view as well. They say that there are mostly kids on YouTube and it lacks professionalism.
Overall, I think that Google and YouTube are going to be surprised when this “advertising” strategy fails because they can’t control a niche market of their normal consumers. They could have come up with a better idea.
To read the whole article, follow this link:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/13/technology/internet/13youtube.html?partner=rss&emc=rss
Thursday, November 6, 2008
Shazam! A Projector Is Shrunk
This article from the New York Times, discusses the latest development in technology. It is a projector screen that is the size of an iPod. It functions just as a regular projector would but is very portable and light weight. This projector is projected to change the way we live when it comes out in two weeks. It can transform the wall of a tent into a movie theater.
But, as with all things these days, convenience and innovation come with a catch: cost. Each of these small units will run consumers about 430 dollars. Despite the price, this device is forecasted to do very well. It has many bells and whistles as to what kind of features and functions it can perform as well. With this device, any location can instantly become a movie theater. Whether it is on a plane or a wall in a roommate’s dorm room, people will be able to project anything from a round of Wii to a lecture on quantum physics at U of I.
I thought this article was very informative and interesting to read. I’m always excited to hear about knew technology and how it is projected to affect the world. I believe this product poses several questions. First, will this become the new choice of lecture structure for professors or will it be what is projected on the ceiling from a student in the audience on one of these projectors that is distracting all the students. Will this device become the next texting? Will students be able to get away with watching movies in class or projecting answers to a quiz in the kids back in front of him?
I would have loved to see how consumers have reacted to this projector even though it hasn’t been released yet. I am interested to know what people will use it for and how the technological world as we know it will change because of this small device.
To find the whole article go to:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/05/technology/personaltech/05pogue.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1
But, as with all things these days, convenience and innovation come with a catch: cost. Each of these small units will run consumers about 430 dollars. Despite the price, this device is forecasted to do very well. It has many bells and whistles as to what kind of features and functions it can perform as well. With this device, any location can instantly become a movie theater. Whether it is on a plane or a wall in a roommate’s dorm room, people will be able to project anything from a round of Wii to a lecture on quantum physics at U of I.
I thought this article was very informative and interesting to read. I’m always excited to hear about knew technology and how it is projected to affect the world. I believe this product poses several questions. First, will this become the new choice of lecture structure for professors or will it be what is projected on the ceiling from a student in the audience on one of these projectors that is distracting all the students. Will this device become the next texting? Will students be able to get away with watching movies in class or projecting answers to a quiz in the kids back in front of him?
I would have loved to see how consumers have reacted to this projector even though it hasn’t been released yet. I am interested to know what people will use it for and how the technological world as we know it will change because of this small device.
To find the whole article go to:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/05/technology/personaltech/05pogue.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1
Sunday, November 2, 2008
In addition...
I want to add something to my last post.
I feel that people should be content with the current start up speed of computers because we have made great strides with the quickness of not only start up speeds but also with the connection time on the internet.
People need to slow down and not get so worked up over their computer taking 40 seconds to start up when some people are not even luckly enough to have one.
I feel that people should be content with the current start up speed of computers because we have made great strides with the quickness of not only start up speeds but also with the connection time on the internet.
People need to slow down and not get so worked up over their computer taking 40 seconds to start up when some people are not even luckly enough to have one.
30 Seconds to Boot Up? That’s 29 Too Many
In Randal Stross’s piece, he discusses how slow laptop start up times are and how many consumers are impatient with their computers due to this fact. In this fast paced world, consumers expect their technological devices to work almost instantly when they need them.
In the article, Stross talks about his frustrations with his own computer and compares it to a smartphone’s much quicker accessibility.
He also talks about many new devices that are currently in development to fix this problem but they are about 2,000 dollars and there are some glitches in them still. I liked the information he present about the new types of systems and features that are currently being developed in Taiwan.
While I think the piece was informative, I think he could have made this piece better by including quotes from consumers as to what start up features they would like to see on computers as well as less information about personal choices that made this piece a little dry and boring at times. The piece got me thinking, “Why do I care about what you want in a PC or if your going to wait for a better one?” I would have like to hear quotes and opinions from people other them himself.
To read the article clicks this link:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/02/business/02digi.html?_r=1&ref=technology&oref=slogin
In the article, Stross talks about his frustrations with his own computer and compares it to a smartphone’s much quicker accessibility.
He also talks about many new devices that are currently in development to fix this problem but they are about 2,000 dollars and there are some glitches in them still. I liked the information he present about the new types of systems and features that are currently being developed in Taiwan.
While I think the piece was informative, I think he could have made this piece better by including quotes from consumers as to what start up features they would like to see on computers as well as less information about personal choices that made this piece a little dry and boring at times. The piece got me thinking, “Why do I care about what you want in a PC or if your going to wait for a better one?” I would have like to hear quotes and opinions from people other them himself.
To read the article clicks this link:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/02/business/02digi.html?_r=1&ref=technology&oref=slogin
Saturday, October 25, 2008
Facebook in a Crowd
This article from the New York Times was not as interesting of a read as I had expected it to be. The whole article talks about how one man, Hal Niedzviecki, invites 700 of his facebook friends to a party because he believes that it would be fun to socialize in person with all these people he is supposedly friends with. He wants to actually meet them.
I think that this article was focused around an idea that was a little unrealistic. These days it’s hard enough to get your close circle of friends together. Therefore, to me anyway, it seems impossible for someone to be able to get 700 people they don’t know to come to a party with 699 other people they don’t know well. In the end, only one person ended up showing up to the party and the conversation with her was forced and boring.
However, I agree with a few ideas that were presented. One was the idea that when you grow up people lose contact with their personal lives. I wish that this article would have focused more on Hal trying to get his close friends together rather than trying to figure out how popular he was by inviting all 700 “friends”. I think more people might have come if it was a more personal group of people that had known each other previously.
I also think that Hal was right about the fact that when you make a facebook event most of the time, people that say they are coming will maybe show up and if they say maybe they will most likely not show up.
From this article I think that Facebook overall is a good tool to maintain contact with people that live far away from you but it shouldn’t be used to see how many friends you have because most people that are your “friends” really are people you might not even know or met once and will never see again.
I think that this article was focused around an idea that was a little unrealistic. These days it’s hard enough to get your close circle of friends together. Therefore, to me anyway, it seems impossible for someone to be able to get 700 people they don’t know to come to a party with 699 other people they don’t know well. In the end, only one person ended up showing up to the party and the conversation with her was forced and boring.
However, I agree with a few ideas that were presented. One was the idea that when you grow up people lose contact with their personal lives. I wish that this article would have focused more on Hal trying to get his close friends together rather than trying to figure out how popular he was by inviting all 700 “friends”. I think more people might have come if it was a more personal group of people that had known each other previously.
I also think that Hal was right about the fact that when you make a facebook event most of the time, people that say they are coming will maybe show up and if they say maybe they will most likely not show up.
From this article I think that Facebook overall is a good tool to maintain contact with people that live far away from you but it shouldn’t be used to see how many friends you have because most people that are your “friends” really are people you might not even know or met once and will never see again.
Sunday, October 19, 2008
Will Nothing Slow Wii?
This article is from the New York Times and compares video game system selling within the past few years to this year. The Nintendo Wii is ahead of all of its competitors outselling Sony Playstation. Halo 3 made the PlayStation outsell other stations a for few years.
Upon completion of reading this article, I felt that it was informative but boring. It provided great facts and statistics but it was not very intriguing to read. I wish that it would have looked at consumer preferences more and added more facts to support why people would be playing more video games. I also would have liked to know why consumers would be buying more systems and why technology becomes more popular during the bad state of the economy.
I thought the quote that was used supported their point but they could have interviewed other sources to strengthen the point about game sales rising when the economy is bad. They also could have clarified the point more.
I wish they would have focused more on consumer preferences and interviewed more on that instead of just regurgitating facts.
I think that the Wii will continue out selling the other systems based on the fact that they have introduced the Wii fit and other fun games to play that allow consumers to get exercise while they areplaying them. Due to that fact I believe that for the next few years Wii will be at the top of the market.
The find the whole article go to:
http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/10/17/will-nothing-slow-wii/
Upon completion of reading this article, I felt that it was informative but boring. It provided great facts and statistics but it was not very intriguing to read. I wish that it would have looked at consumer preferences more and added more facts to support why people would be playing more video games. I also would have liked to know why consumers would be buying more systems and why technology becomes more popular during the bad state of the economy.
I thought the quote that was used supported their point but they could have interviewed other sources to strengthen the point about game sales rising when the economy is bad. They also could have clarified the point more.
I wish they would have focused more on consumer preferences and interviewed more on that instead of just regurgitating facts.
I think that the Wii will continue out selling the other systems based on the fact that they have introduced the Wii fit and other fun games to play that allow consumers to get exercise while they areplaying them. Due to that fact I believe that for the next few years Wii will be at the top of the market.
The find the whole article go to:
http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/10/17/will-nothing-slow-wii/
Sunday, October 12, 2008
YouTube to Offer TV Shows With Ads Strewn Through
This article from Sept. 10 reveals that YouTube is changing up the content of its Web site and is now allowing longer videos to be viewed. The reasons for this is primarily because users are becoming more and more used to watching television shows online.
Many television shows are available for viewing through their home stations Web site and viewers watch them religiously if they miss a show. YouTube is looking to offer these programs on their Web site for viewing with limited interruption in order to keep up with the competition that these sites have presented.
Jordan Hoffner, the director of content partnerships for YouTube recognizes that to keep up with these other sites YouTube will have to start offering longer videos. “This is what the users want,” Hoffner said.
Offering full length videos not only gives YouTube a way to keep up with competition, but it also allows them to see longer commercial advertising spots in between shows. This will allow the company to make a lot of revenue due to the fact that they can place an advertisement before, during and after each long show.
Right now the only thing preventing them from hitting the ground full force seems to be copyright issues. Major media companies such as Viacom, are already suing the company for a copyright violation.
Despite that, YouTube added the loner video component to their Web Site last week. I think this was a smart choice for the company. They should rebuttal the major corporation’s accusations about copyright laws with the fact that before YouTube and the internet people would TIVO or record all the programs they knew they would miss anyway. There is a copyright issue there too.
Find the full article at: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/11/technology/internet/11tube.html?_r=1&ref=technology&oref=slogin
Many television shows are available for viewing through their home stations Web site and viewers watch them religiously if they miss a show. YouTube is looking to offer these programs on their Web site for viewing with limited interruption in order to keep up with the competition that these sites have presented.
Jordan Hoffner, the director of content partnerships for YouTube recognizes that to keep up with these other sites YouTube will have to start offering longer videos. “This is what the users want,” Hoffner said.
Offering full length videos not only gives YouTube a way to keep up with competition, but it also allows them to see longer commercial advertising spots in between shows. This will allow the company to make a lot of revenue due to the fact that they can place an advertisement before, during and after each long show.
Right now the only thing preventing them from hitting the ground full force seems to be copyright issues. Major media companies such as Viacom, are already suing the company for a copyright violation.
Despite that, YouTube added the loner video component to their Web Site last week. I think this was a smart choice for the company. They should rebuttal the major corporation’s accusations about copyright laws with the fact that before YouTube and the internet people would TIVO or record all the programs they knew they would miss anyway. There is a copyright issue there too.
Find the full article at: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/11/technology/internet/11tube.html?_r=1&ref=technology&oref=slogin
Sunday, October 5, 2008
Can’t Open Your E-Mailbox? Good Luck
Today’s top technology story in the New York Times covers the Gmail email log-in crisis.
In his article, Randal Stross dug deep beneath the surface to figure out why Gmail consumers weren’t able to access their accounts. He found that the root of the problem lies in the costumer service department who seem virtually unreachable to struggling consumers.
Tom Lynch is one such consumer. He was locked out of both his Gmail accounts for about a month. When he tried to contact the company for support, “He received boilerplate instructions for recovering his accounts that did not apply to his particular circumstances, which included his failing to maintain a non-Gmail e-mail account as a back-up. He said it took him four weeks, including the use of a business directory and talking with anyone he could find at Google, before he succeeded in having service restored” Stross reported.
Gmail needs to realize that people expect that important information, such as daily company or personal mail, needs to work whenever it is accessed. It is a vital part of everyday life for most professionals and college students. Instead of taking the blame and fixing their customer service problem Gmail blamed the consumer.
The article states, “Google spokesman placed the blame on Mr. Lynch, saying he did not follow Google’s guidelines. The spokesman characterized Mr. Lynch’s ordeal as a praiseworthy illustration of Google’s tough security: “We have had no cases of falsely recovered accounts.”
Upon my completion of reading this article, I have to say that technological companies such as Yahoo, Google, Dell, and Motorola care more about how many consumers buy and use their products rather than caring about the costumer service they provide. Most often, the companies don’t care if they hire enough people to handle the volume of phone calls that they will receive.
Like Gmail, they are only willing to offer you the services if you are willing to pay for them. This idea exposes their main motive: making and saving money of course.
After reading about Mr. Lynch’s hardships with Gmail and his troubles recovering his account, I couldn’t help but wonder if I would have the same problem ever with my account. I’m glad I have my U of I account incase my Gmail ever fails.
Find the full article at:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/05/business/05digi.html?_r=1&ref=technology&oref=slogin
In his article, Randal Stross dug deep beneath the surface to figure out why Gmail consumers weren’t able to access their accounts. He found that the root of the problem lies in the costumer service department who seem virtually unreachable to struggling consumers.
Tom Lynch is one such consumer. He was locked out of both his Gmail accounts for about a month. When he tried to contact the company for support, “He received boilerplate instructions for recovering his accounts that did not apply to his particular circumstances, which included his failing to maintain a non-Gmail e-mail account as a back-up. He said it took him four weeks, including the use of a business directory and talking with anyone he could find at Google, before he succeeded in having service restored” Stross reported.
Gmail needs to realize that people expect that important information, such as daily company or personal mail, needs to work whenever it is accessed. It is a vital part of everyday life for most professionals and college students. Instead of taking the blame and fixing their customer service problem Gmail blamed the consumer.
The article states, “Google spokesman placed the blame on Mr. Lynch, saying he did not follow Google’s guidelines. The spokesman characterized Mr. Lynch’s ordeal as a praiseworthy illustration of Google’s tough security: “We have had no cases of falsely recovered accounts.”
Upon my completion of reading this article, I have to say that technological companies such as Yahoo, Google, Dell, and Motorola care more about how many consumers buy and use their products rather than caring about the costumer service they provide. Most often, the companies don’t care if they hire enough people to handle the volume of phone calls that they will receive.
Like Gmail, they are only willing to offer you the services if you are willing to pay for them. This idea exposes their main motive: making and saving money of course.
After reading about Mr. Lynch’s hardships with Gmail and his troubles recovering his account, I couldn’t help but wonder if I would have the same problem ever with my account. I’m glad I have my U of I account incase my Gmail ever fails.
Find the full article at:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/05/business/05digi.html?_r=1&ref=technology&oref=slogin
Saturday, October 4, 2008
Let's get started!
For my initial blog, I wanted to give my readers information about the general focus of my blog and why I choose The New York Times as my source of information for this endeavor.
To begin, I have decided to report on global technology issues. My posts will cover a broad variety of topics in this genre ranging from advancements in technology to how it is being affected by the economic crisis. Whether you use a computer to check email or listen to your iPod, technology affects everyone in some way or another every day and it's important to stay up to date on the latest developments.
Therefore, in order to stay up to date with technology, I picked The New York Times to use as my source of information. The reason for this was because it is my favorite publication and it focuses on several general topics everyday which offers a good amount of variety. Some of these include; the environment, business, the election, and technology. When I saw technology on the list, I knew that was the topic I wanted to cover. I have found many interesting articles already and I am excited to start critiquing.
I hope you all enjoy!
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
