www.caledoneaststudios.com

An Ovum market research report suggests that those looking to get rich off Linux had best focus on the server. The market for Linux products and services (not including hardware) came in at $2.4 billion in 2007, according to the firm, but should hit $7.7 billion by 2012.

I doubt that Ovum will be off by that much, but if my own recent experiment with Ubuntu on the desktop is any indicator, the only thing restraining Linux’s desktop growth is antiquated notions of what one “needs” on the desktop. For 99.99999 percent of the world, Ubuntu Linux (and likely SUSE and Fedora, though I didn’t evaluate these) is already ready for prime time.

As more of our computing experience moves to services run on the Internet, the need for a truly “fat” Windows experience will dissipate. The only thing to hold back Linux desktop adoption at that point will be politics. We shouldn’t underestimate the power of politics, of course, but perhaps Microsoft’s attempts to shackle customers will finally backfire.

It does call into question, however, whether Canonical/Ubuntu’s focus on the desktop is misplaced, at least from a financial perspective. Is Red Hat right to single out the server for its plans?

Of course, Mark Shuttleworth and the Ubuntu crew are not mute followers of analyst numbers. Analysts are. Analysts try to follow the market, not lead it. We could therefore discover, come 2012, that Ovum was 100 percent wrong in its projections because it didn’t take into adequate consideration Ubuntu’s imprint on the desktop market.

commentary

That’s a nice bump, 81 percent of which will be services, with a corresponding 81 percent stemming from the server, not desktop. (Mobile/embedded was not included in the report.)

Gornick’s business, which designs and builds high-performance loudspeakers, would benefit from lifted non-tariff trade barriers in countries with large middle-class populations like South Korea. She said the efficiencies created by free trade would, counter to common belief, create new jobs.

The poll was conducted by Zogby International from August 12 to August 14 and has a margin of error of 1.7 percent. It surveyed 3,440 people, including more than 1,200 Democrats. Corresponding poll numbers on Republican perceptions about free trade will be released next week during the Republican convention.

The interests of the CEA are directly at odds with those of the major unions that heavily support the Democratic Party. Leo Gerard, international president of the United Steelworkers, has had a ubiquitous presence at the convention, urging state delegates to support Obama because he would protect American jobs from “rotten trade deals.” He spoke to bloggers on Tuesday in the Big Tent about “some misguided Democrats” who support free trade deals, “leading to a trade deficit.”

It is, in fact, a message that the Democrats’ new leadership could very well embrace. “There is no doubt that globalization has brought significant benefits to American consumers,” Barack Obama wrote in his memoir, The Audacity of Hope. “It’s lowered prices on goods once considered luxuries, from big-screen TVs to peaches in winter, and increased the purchasing power of low-income Americans.”

“There’s a saying that no two countries that support the golden arches have ever been at war,” said Kathy Gornick, president of Thiel Audio, which is represented by the CEA.

It’s a message that should resonate with politicians: The consumer price index (CPI) for imported electronic machinery and TV and sound equipment has dropped by 11 percent since 2000, even as the overall CPI has increased by 28 percent.

“From what I understand from CEA interactions in Denver, the interesting takeaway is the number of policy makers who say they agree on trade, but report how difficult the political environment is,” said Tom Galvin, a partner for 463 Communications, a consulting firm assisting the CEA in its efforts. “Hopefully, once the political season is over we’ll see a less charged environment and the trade agreements can be considered at that time.”

The technology platform provided on Obama’s Web site says that “Barack Obama supports a trade policy that ensures our goods and services are treated fairly in foreign markets. At the same time, trade policy must stay consistent with our commitment to demand improved labor and environmental practices worldwide.”

Interested in getting Democratic leadership to revive stalled trade agreements with Colombia, Panama, and Korea, the CEA unveiled poll numbers Monday indicating that Democrats are becoming more accepting of free trade: 62 percent of Democrats said they benefit from free trade, and 69 percent said it was a “good thing” that trade and global manufacturing have reduced the costs of consumer electronics sold in the United States.

The Consumer Electronics Association, a lobbying firm that represents 2,200 technology companies such as Microsoft, Sony, and Hitachi, brought its 28-state “America Wins with Trade” bus tour to Denver this week to convince Democrats that free trade benefits the tech industry, as well as consumers. Groups with opposing views are taking a high profile at the convention, however, and the conflicting interests in the party are apparent from its mixed messages on trade.

DENVER–Technology companies are here at the Democratic convention this week to highlight more than just their new products–they’re pushing an agenda as well.

Gornick of Thiel Audio demurred to say whether she favored an Obama or McCain presidency.

Meanwhile, Congress has given no indication it will approve any of the three trade deals in question.

The convention proceedings on Tuesday night included remarks from no less than five union members, including John Sweeney, president of the AFL-CIO. His union earlier in the year committed $53.4 million for pro-Democrat campaigns in battleground states–part of an unprecedented $200 million effort from various labor groups.

“Admittedly we are shifting in the kinds of jobs, but generally they are higher paying jobs,” she said. “The biggest reason jobs go away is not because of free trade but advances in technology that change the way we do things.”

“Traditionally Democrats would be less open to free trade, but these days it’s very hard to predict what a political party is going to do,” Gornick said. “I wish Ron Paul were running.”

“The expansion of trade and global supply chains has undoubtedly played a role” in dropping prices, said Dan Griswold, director of the Center for Trade Policy Studies at the Cato Institute in Washington, D.C.

The Microsoft representative mentioned the company’s online security and safety best practices for customers, including specific guidance on how to help protect your Windows Live ID account security. But when it comes to protecting your free Hotmail e-mail account, users appear to be without much recourse.

“I am in a hurry writing this mail. I had a trip to oxfordshire, United Kingdom for an urgent event . Unfortunately for me all my money got stolen at the hotel where i lodged from the attack of some armed robbers and since then i have been without any money i am even owing the hotel here,So i have only access to emails,my mobile phone can’t work here so i did not bring it along. Please can you lend me $1500 so i can return back and settle the hotel bills i would return it back to you as soon as i get home, I am so confused right now. You can have it sent through western union.”

That’s exactly what a second locked-out Hotmail user did in early May. Microsoft support staff responded with the following message: “Thank you for your message to MSN and Windows Live Privacy. I understand you are having difficulties accessing your MSN Hotmail account because you believe someone has gained unauthorized access to your account. For assistance with this issue, please contact the MSN Support staff using the (following) form.” The message is signed by Raktim from MSN and Windows Live Privacy.

“If a customer at any time suspects their account has been accessed by an unauthorized party, they should contact our customer support team, a Microsoft representative said.

The owner of the Hotmail account was confirmed to be at home, safe.

CNET is aware of a couple of Hotmail users who have recently gotten locked out of their accounts. In one case, someone who had hacked into an account sent a desperate-sounding e-mail asking for money under the account holder’s name.

Microsoft had no direct comment.

“Microsoft is committed to helping consumers have a safe, secure, and positive online experience,” a company representative said Thursday. In the case of the first e-mail, Microsoft worked with the owner to restore her access. In the case of the second, it’s still pending. “As always, we reiterate our general guidance to customers to help protect themselves and their accounts by exercising extreme caution when opening unsolicited attachments and links from both known and unknown sources, and that they install and regularly update antivirus software,” the representative said.

After filling out the form, several weeks passed, and the Hotmail account holder said he has still received no further response from Microsoft.

Imagine getting an e-mail from a friend or family member with the following subject line: “ITS IMPORTANT YOU GET BACK ME TODAY.”

Without addressing what might have occurred regarding the second person’s account, Microsoft appears to be blaming the user: if you had used more caution, you probably wouldn’t be in this situation.

The body of one of the e-mails, sent to a CNET reporter, reads:

We’re not saying we’ll never see a cheap, super-small PC that’s worth your time, but unlike all-in-ones, these tiny budget systems don’t compare well with their traditional PC counterparts. That goes for you, too, Dell Studio Hybrid. We want to like PCs like you, but so far you’re making it hard.

Review: Asus Eee Box

We understand that fast performance is not necessarily the point of the Asus Eee Box, but as we say in our review, which posted this morning, why pay $350 for a dog when you can spend $400 on a shockingly better budget midtower? If it’s the small size of the Eee Box that has your eye, we’d encourage you to go for the Eee PC or a similar small and cheap laptop instead. At least you can carry one of those with you, and with the same degree of environmental friendliness.

(Credit:
CNET)

It’s a simple service. It tracks the number of times items are shared in Google’s RSS Reader, and puts the most-recently popular stories (assuming sharing means popularity) at the top of the list. Commentary items also get linked in, Techmeme-like. To round things out, it also lets you access your Google Reader feed from within the Web site.

Sorry about that headline. It just seems that every medium is getting its own “what’s hot” feed these days. Even Twitterheads are getting in the act, with the new Twitlinks (review), which I find of dubious value. I mean, really, we’re talking about Twitter here, not the New York Times. But the newly relaunched ReadBurner looks like it could, possibly, become genuinely useful.

If you assume Google Reader speaks for blog article popularity, ReadBurner makes a lot of sense. Unfortunately, while Google Reader is a very strong RSS client, there are many smart people on the Web who have alternate methods for reading their feeds (I use Netvibes, although I’m not sure if that makes me a smart person or just different).

Currently, ReadBurner is a great way to track news about ReadBurner.

The data in the ReadBurner service seems a bit sparse right now, indicating that relying on Google Reader as an arbiter of what’s hot may not be the killer model in this space. However, ReadBurner does not suffer from the pile-on effect that you see in Techmeme, where articles get regurgitated in follow-up blog posts until there’s nothing left to say about the topic at all. So check out ReadBurner if you’re looking for another source of What’s Hotness.

Henry Blodget of the Silicon Alley Insider agreed that AOL buying Bebo is a risky move, considering the fact that Bebo really isn’t a household name in the U.S. “The potential home run here is if AOL can effectively combine AIM, ICQ, and Bebo and accelerate the growth of all three,” Blodget wrote. Whether or not they can do that is totally unclear. What the deal does clarify, apparently, is Blodget’s theory that Jeffrey Bewkes won’t sell AOL any time soon. “We think he’d hit a good bid, if one came along, but one is unlikely to. Our source suggested that Bewkes planned to give AOL until mid-year to prove that its turnaround can work. This acquisition suggests that he is, in fact, committed to doing that.”

Malik also categorized AOL parent Time Warner’s strategy as “schizophrenic,” citing simultaneous business decisions that don’t really seem to make sense. “Jeff Bewkes wants to get rid of AOL (and Time Warner Cable) and focus entirely on his old, Hollywood-style businesses. Earlier this week he was happy to talk about a deal with Yahoo and get rid of AOL, which is going through a major crisis,” Malik wrote. “And at the same time they are spending $850 million in cash on Bebo. Maybe it helps AOL become a more sexy acquisition, or a spin off candidate?”

Clint Boulton at eWeek also gave the deal a thumbs-up, saying that the acquisition will effectively “double” AOL’s reach by adding its 40 million members to the 40 million already using instant-messaging clients AIM and ICQ. Plus, there’s the technology. “Bebo’s gem is Open Media,” Boulton wrote in reference to the platform that allows big-media content producers to get their audio and video onto the social network. “Bebo could be what AOL needs to breathe life into its sluggish Platform-A ad platform, which has not paid the dividends the company officials expected since they launched it last year.”

So what it all comes down to, really, is whether you have any faith left in AOL.

Read more of News.com’s coverage: “What Bebo means to AOL”

Glancing at the many blog posts about AOL’s unexpected acquisition of social network Bebo, there’s no real consensus as to whether it’s a smart idea. If anything, the collective mood of the Web’s talking heads seems to be thus: if AOL can smoothly integrate Bebo with its AIM client and Platform-A ad network, great. Unfortunately, AOL doesn’t have that kind of track record.

GigaOm’s Om Malik called the acquisition “ballsy,” considering it’s putting so much stake into the uncharted territory of social-media advertising profits–everyone knows by now that MySpace’s display ad deal with Google hasn’t exactly been a gold mine. “It is even more brave considering how Platform-A has its own management problems…there are reports of AOL slashing half their sales force.”

TechCrunch’s Michael Arrington highlighted the fact that Bebo will be closely woven into AOL’s existing AIM client, one of the company’s most successful products. “AOL is clearly putting a massive effort into transforming the company from a dial up broadband provider into a company that has the competitive fire,” Arrington wrote without taking a clear stance on whether the acquisition was a dumb idea or not.

All Things D’s Kara Swisher wasn’t so upbeat, suggesting that AOL had purchased a company with “not a whole lot of revenue and negligible profits” and that perhaps the best part of the acquisition for AOL is Bebo president Joanna Shields: “AOL gets an experienced and savvy Web exec, which it desperately needs these days, given the flux there.”

Perhaps the most optimistic of the bunch was CenterNetworks blogger Allen Stern, who said that this really can’t be bad for AOL’s advertising arm. “It brings their ad inventory for Platform-A skyrocketing upwards with a youth and young adult demographic,” Stern said. “This is a good complement to their current AOL properties which tend to tick a bit further up the age chain.”

But he ended on an optimistic note: “The company has been releasing genuinely innovative new products and has also made a number of smaller strategic acquisitions over the last year or so. And there are lots more to come, apparently.”

But Stern also noted some potential snafus: “Yahoo currently serves ads on Bebo, so we will need to see what happens with this relationship.”

Ever since Viacom, parent company of MTV and Paramount Pictures, filed a $1 billion copyright suit against Google’s YouTube last year, Google has won kudos for championing the rights of Internet users. On the other side, Viacom was blasted by critics who accused it of trying to lock down information and block people from enjoying South Park and The Daily Show.

Responding to Solomon’s assertion, Ricardo Reyes, a Google spokesman, said Viacom’s ailing public image can be traced to another Google advantage.

And this week, Viacom’s supporters, such as Solomon, accused Google of helping to whip up controversy over the privacy issue.

The alternative to the Hulu-esque strategy is to follow in the footsteps of the Recording Industry Association of America and solve problems with lawsuits.

“I hope Viacom doesn’t use the (YouTube user) information to sue consumers,” Hachenburg said. “Clearly there is an underlying question: how much do you want to adapt your strategy to live in Web. 2.0? Hulu is embracing Web 2.0 ideas, and I think they are finding success.”

Google-Viacom deal in the offing?
On Monday evening, sources close to the discussions between Google and Viacom said they were close to reaching an agreement which would allow YouTube to redact IP addresses and usernames.

Did the bad PR affect Viacom’s decision? A company’s public image certainly can impact business.

Google is also savvy when it comes to public-relations scuffles, say critics. Not all of Viacom’s image problems are self inflicted, says Louis Solomon, an attorney representing a group of copyright holders who have sued YouTube for copyright infringement and are working with Viacom.

One way Viacom could instantly improve relations with Internet users is to simply drop the lawsuit, according to Erick Hachenburg, the CEO of Metacafe, a video-sharing rival of YouTube’s.

By then, the damage was done. Viacom was branded an enemy of the Internet and of privacy. This kind of public relations drubbing shouldn’t come as a surprise to anyone.

Hachenburg argues that content companies have to decide between one of two ways to handle copyright issues on the Web.

Despite winning an important legal victory against Google last week, Viacom’s public image is taking a beating.

A judge will be the one to determine that. What is more certain is that Google has been more willing than Viacom to debate the case in public.

Last year, Google CEO Eric Schmidt made news several times by suggesting that Viacom was overly litigious. At a conference in April, Schmidt said this about Viacom: “You’re either doing business with them or being sued by them.”

“The law is on our side,” he said.

Neither of these two perceptions is entirely accurate. But what is true is that there is little Viacom–or any other big media firm trying to enforce its copyright online–can do to avoid being saddled with the image of a corporate bully. Companies considering whether to follow Viacom’s lead should carefully weigh the risks of potentially alienating consumers.

Advantage: Google
Look at what Viacom is up against. Many Internet users have simply come to think of free Internet content as their right. Any attempt to restrict access is perceived as an attack on Web freedom. Google, which has a long history of facing down copyright owners, including book publishers, newspapers, and Hollywood studios, has earned respect from those who see content owners as money grubbers and many copyright laws as anti-consumer.

At a retreat for media and tech CEOs, Schmidt claimed Viacom was a company “built on lawsuits.”

Companies dueling it out in court often hire public relations firms to take their case to the masses. They may sense that their opponent is sensitive to negative press. A well-designed PR strategy can hurt the other guy’s bottom line, and possibly bring on a settlement.

He said the first way is the one chosen by Hulu, the video portal created by News Corp. and NBC Universal. Hulu allows users share videos and the company has syndicated content across the Web (Viacom has traditionally preferred to host its own content but has recently been boosting the number of syndication deals).

“I think there is little doubt that Google has been trying to be effective in its use of the press,” Solomon said. “How else do you explain why they have been collecting and using IP addresses to monetize their site (for a while now), yet only now, with great self righteousness, claim to be concerned about producing IP addresses?”

Last week, Viacom was widely criticized on the Web after a judge ordered Google to turn over information that included YouTube usernames, Internet Protocol addresses and the viewing histories of YouTube’s users. Viacom representatives denied that the company had ever requested any personally identifiable information.

(Credit:
Wes Bender)

Then Wes popped on Thom Yorke’s “Eraser” CD, and its sharp as a tack bass transients made me sit up in my chair, wow, the system was taut as a drum.

The Hansen speakers’ paint job also deserves special mention, it’s the only element of the design not handled directly by Hansen. It’s outsourced to a world famous luxury car manufacturer’s factory in Toronto. Painting a pair of speakers takes five days and is a sixteen step process.

Fellow Brooklynite Wes Bender, Hansen Audio’s Senior Director and National Sales Manager, had me over to audition the speakers. Too bad he didn’t have the top of the line King V2s that run $84K a pair, but if that’s too rich for you, the Elixirs will set you back a mere $18K. So you see high-end audio is not so different than high-end
cars… Lamborghini’s new supercar, the Reventon is fourteen times more expensive then the fastest Corvette, but only a little bit faster. That wasn’t a problem for Lamborghini, the entire production run sold out before the car was even built. Hansen Audio is likewise pushing the limits of what’s possible in speaker design, and that’s an inherently expensive proposition. Get over it.

The Prince V2s sounded great cranked way up loud, and guitarist Larry Coryell’s blistering fusion-jazz CD, “Traffic,” kicked butt. I could feel the bass and drums locking in, the musicians trying to out bash each other, which added to the gripping power of the tunes, like Jimi Hendrix’s “Manic Depression” and Thelonious Monk’s “Misterioso.” This CD was recorded in a church in New York City (I was present at the session). With the Prince V2s I could hear the sound of the cathedral’s acoustical space, the clarity and three-dimensional quality of the sound was that good.

Cat Power’s take on the tune I mostly associate with Frank Sinatra, “New York, New York,” powered by the biggest and baddest pounding drumkit and Keith Richards-ish guitar riffage were almost physical in their impact, I could as much feel the music as hear it. It was hard to sit still, but I didn’t want to get up and dance in front of Wes.

The Prince V2 has a rock and roll heart, a rare feat for a high-end speaker. Some of the best speakers deliver detail and resolution by the boatload, but don’t have much soul. The Prince V2, on the other hand, can get down and boogie like a real party animal. But at the same time somehow still satisfy my lust for audiophile sound. And that’s with the mid-line Hansen, I wonder what the King V2 sounds like? It’s good to be rich.

(Credit:
Wes Bender)

Sure, I’ve heard those claims before, but the proof is in the sound and Wes’ system totally knocked me out. I played a ton of recordings I know well, and the sound consistently surprised me.

The Audiophiliac gets down with the Prince V2

Like many of the best high-end systems I’ve heard this one sounds equally great at soft, medium and max-ed out volume levels. It was mid afternoon so I went for the gusto, luxuriating in the full boogie, high decibel range, thoroughly enjoying the sheer power of the system. If you’re into it, the Prince V2 can supply head hurting volume with ease.

The Hansen Audio Prince V2 speaker’s liquid curves and physical presence demands respect–it all but shouts “this is very serious audiophilia,” made for those with ears who appreciate the very best. Well, not just ears, but the means to indulge their vices. The 42 inch high speaker is small enough to fit in an apartment, at least an apartment with floors that can support the 540 pound weight of a pair of these $39,000 speakers.

Every aspect of these speakers’ design was conceived with performance in mind, so that means not only are most of the drivers designed, engineered, and built in Hansen’s Canadian factory; extraordinary efforts were expended on the speaker cabinets to better serve the sound. Which in the case of speakers, the best cabinet is the dead cabinet (acoustically inert), so the only sound you hear with Hansen speakers is the sound created by their drivers. Mass market speakers never get close to that ideal, their cabinets’ “sing along” with the drivers, substantially coloring the sound.

The “Hansen Composite Matrix” cabinet is a three-layer composite formulation (proprietary to Hansen) — each layer is a different thickness from the other. Hansen’s “Cloaking Device,” the forth and final layer and is applied by hand to the internal cabinet. This sort of no holds barred design fanaticism is what separates high-end from mass-market brands, the drive to make the very best at any cost.

This is a nice resolution to the situation. In his blog post, he presented Schwartz with 11 questions that had come from Twitter, along with the Sun CEO’s responses.

And in fact, this turned out to be a better outcome than if O’Reilly had taken a Twitter question or two because there were only a few minutes left in the keynote when he made the offer. This way, anyone interested in what Schwartz had to say got a much deeper set of responses from him.

(Credit:
O’Reilly Media)

Afterward, O’Reilly offered a mea culpa on CNET News.com and via his Twitter account, saying that he had inadvertently had his mobile phone set up to receive only Twitter posts from people he follows. That meant that he didn’t see any of the audience’s questions on his phone.

Better late than never, as the saying goes.

On Saturday, O’Reilly Media’s Tim O’Reilly put up a blog entry with a series of answers from Sun Microsystems CEO Jonathan Schwartz that were in response to Twittered questions from the audience at their Friday morning keynote address at the Web 2.0 Expo.

O’Reilly Media’s Tim O’Reilly posted a blog Saturday with a set of answers from Sun CEO Jonathan Schwartz to questions posed via Twitter by audience members at the Web 2.0 Expo keynote address on Friday morn.

So, kudos to O’Reilly for following up and to Schwartz for taking the extra time to respond to the questions. This all turned out to be a good example, after all, of incorporating the backchannel into conference proceedings and showed that everyone involved had the class and courtesy to take the situation seriously instead of just blowing it off to bad luck.

The post was a result of O’Reilly’s having offered the audience at the keynote address the ability to ask questions of Schwartz via Twitter, but subsequently not posing any of those questions.

Now Microsoft is fighting back hard with Internet Explorer 8, and Apple is spreading its Safari browser to Windows, the iPhone, and
iPod Touch. Even fourth-ranked Opera Software is determined to stay in the game.

(Via TechCrunch.)

The deal has been lucrative for the Mozilla Foundation, whose two subsidiaries create Firefox and the Thunderbird e-mail software. In 2006, Google supplied $56.8 million of Mozilla’s revenue–85 percent of the total for the foundation.

“We’ve just renewed our agreement with Google for an additional three years. This agreement now ends in November of 2011 rather than November of 2008, so we have stability in income,” Mozilla Foundation Chairman Mitchell Baker said in a blog post Wednesday. (Updated: there was a misleading timestamp on the post; a Mozilla representative told me it actually went live Wednesday evening.)

Mozilla hopes to release Firefox 3.1 by the end of the year with improvements to JavaScript execution speed, the ability to run JavaScript tasks in the background, and built-in video and audio support.

(Credit:
Mozilla/Google)

And the money will come in handy. Firefox grew to its current position as the second-ranked Web browser during a hiatus when Microsoft rested on its Internet Explorer laurels.

Mozilla and Google have extended a search deal through 2011, providing some financial security to the backer of the open-source
Firefox Web browser.

Google pays for prominent placement in Firefox, including the default home page and the default choice in the search box.

Google is the default search provider in the Firefox search bar.