Criminals, who have a powerful incentive to remain anonymous, learned long ago to thwart cookies–small text files associated with their Web browser. So anti-fraud companies began searching for more persistent identifiers.

Some firms hide other small files in several places on a person’s machine. The technology is known as a “supercookie” or “evercookie,” a term popularized by programmer Samy Kamkar this fall when he created a program that stores more than 10 such identifiers.

One anti-fraud company, California-based ThreatMetrix Inc., touts its “evercookie” approach in detecting criminals. The company does not disclose every place that it stores identifiers but says it uses browser cookies, files associated with Adobe Systems Inc.’s Flash player and local storage in HTML5, the newest version of the language used to code Web pages, said ThreatMetrix CEO Reed Taussig.

Read the rest of this post on the original site

Seeking to be a leader in protecting online privacy, the European Union last year passed a law requiring companies to obtain consent from Web users when tracking files such as cookies are placed on users’ computers. Enactment awaits action by member countries.
Now, Internet companies, advertisers, lawmakers, privacy advocates and EU member nations can’t agree on the law’s meaning. Is it sufficient if users agree to cookies when setting up Web browsers? Is an industry-backed plan acceptable that would let users see—and opt out of—data collected about them? Must placing cookies on a machine depend on the user checking a box each time?

The answers are mired in bickering.
“We’re now in a sort of no man’s land,” says Bridget Treacy, head of the U.K. privacy practice at law firm Hunton & Williams LLP.

Read the rest of this post on the original site

So here’s a Web ad campaign that cuts to the chase, and simply tells you up front that it’s stalking you.

And the chances are very, very high that you’re not going to care.

That’s because the ads come from AdExchanger.com, a very niche (and very good) trade publication that focuses exclusively on ad technology. And the only way you’re going to see the ads will be if you’ve visited AdExchanger.

And that means that you’re almost certain to understand and embrace concepts like “retargeting”–following a prospective customer from site to site using electronic tracking signals.

Which is why AdExchanger’s campaign comes right out and tells you that it’s using retargeting to serve up the banner ads–its an in-joke.

Again, anyone who’s seen the ads in their natural habitat understands what’s going on here, but to spell it out:

• AdExchanger’s John Ebbert–he’s the publisher, editor, janitor, etc. for the one-man operation–sets an electronic “cookie” on his site.
• That allows Google’s AdWords service to find browsers (it isn’t actually able to identify people, a fact that’s important for Ebbert and everyone else in ad tech right now) that have visited the site. Then it serves those browsers ads when they visit other sites.
• The ad campaign is designed to remind people to come back to AdExchanger, and/or visit its Facebook page.

“It was an interesting opportunity to use retargeting to have a conversation about a conversation,” Ebbert says. And to use one of the oldest marketing techniques in the book–get people to give you free advertising by talking about your advertising.

Meanwhile, a side note for “content creators” trying to figure out how to make a living: Consider thinking small.

That’s what Ebbert has done here, and it’s working very well for him. AdExchanger is microscopic by Web publishing standards–it attracts a mere 35,000 unique visitors per month–but that’s all he needs to make a living in Manhattan.

That’s because that audience of 35,000 includes every single person in the ad technology industry, more or less. And because that industry is so red-hot right now–VCs are pouring money into the business, and start-ups are vying for the attention of potential acquirers like Google, Yahoo and AOL–he’s able to do just fine selling sponorships at rates much bigger sites could never land.

In August, the Worcester, Mass., paper put up a Times-style pay wall: Visitors can read 10 “local” articles a month for free, but after that they need to pay up. It’s not a coincidence that the Telegram is using the same idea that the Times will try in a few months–the paper is one of several local titles owned by the Times itself.

So. How’s that Telegram doing since the wall went up?

Just great, Times CEO Janet Robinson said during the paper’s earnings call today: The Telegram’s metrics are “on plan,” and traffic hasn’t suffered.

In fact, Robinson said, the Times was pleasantly surprised to see that the Telegram’s unique visitors number had increased since the wall went up.

What’s that? I asked the Times for numbers to flesh that one out, but it declined. ComScore, though, does back Robinson up: The Web traffic counter says 281,000 U.S. unique visitors came by the Telegram in August, and that number crept up to 294,000 in September.

That’s a tiny bump, though comScore often has a difficult time measuring smaller sites. For comparison’s sake, note that the Telegram tells advertisers it reaches 700,000 uniques a month.

Still, a bump is a bump. And it’s certainly not the plummet that many people would expect. When the London Times put up a pay wall this summer, for instance, it saw traffic drop a reported 90 percent. (News Corp. owns both the London Times and this site.)

So how do we explain the Telegram’s increase? In the absence of input from the Times or the Telegram (I’ve asked both for comment), we have to speculate. Feel free to add your own in, but I can start with a few theories:

• Maybe the Telegram had some particularly blog-friendly, Facebook-friendly or Google-friendly stories in September. If that’s the case, the metered model would work well for the site, since it encourages casual visitors to show up via referral, without having to pay up. For a relatively modest site like the Telegram, you wouldn’t need many high-traffic stories to push up its base number.
• Or maybe it’s just as simple as a seasonal spike: Traffic numbers often droop in the summer, when people have better things to do than sit in front of their browsers, and then spike back up in the fall.

In any case, this should give the Times a bit of confidence about its strategy for the flagship paper, which it promises to tell us more about soon.

UPDATE: Some readers are having a hard time accepting Robinson’s assertions and comScore’s numbers.

I have no reason to think that Robinson, the Times or the Telegram made the data up. If you’re a conspiracist who thinks otherwise, you should note that the NYT wasn’t boasting about the data during the call, though Robinson did take time to read off a whole laundry list of digital accomplishments. It only came up in response to a question about the Telegram’s performance.

But different third-party analytics companies often reach different conclusions. So if you do want to look at a different data set, here’s one from Compete, via Jonathan Mendez. As you can see, it tells a very different story–a 20 percent drop from August to September (click to enlarge):

That’s an unprecedented move in the ongoing fight between cable providers, broadcasters and networks over programming fees. And the news was a big deal for the digerati and people contemplating the future of video.

But it doesn’t seem to have registered in the broader world, and you have to work hard to find any mention of the story in old-media news outlets. And even Cablevision, which uses any ammo it can in the PR fight against Fox and News Corp. (which also owns this site), hasn’t said much about it.

Here, for instance, is Cablevision’s newest message to its customers. If you fast forward to the 1:35 mark, you’ll find a two-sentence description of the Web blackout. But hard to believe many Cablevision customers will be sticking around to hear this one:

At the very least, blacking out part of the Web sounds scary. So why is Cablevision so (relatively) quiet on this?

Two theories, which are not mutually exclusive:

• It’s not worth complaining about because this stuff doesn’t really resonate with consumers–at least, not in the way that losing access to NFL games and play-off baseball does. No one spent Saturday evening or Sunday afternoon in a bar because they couldn’t watch “Glee” on Hulu.
• It’s not worth complaining about because Cablevision and News Corp. are actually on the same ideological page when it comes to this stuff. Neither side is really that happy about free TV shows on the Web. The only real difference the two sides have is about money: News Corp. wants to get more of it for its programming, while Cablevision wants to pay less.

On a related note: I still don’t understand why News Corp./Fox backed off so quickly on Saturday, once news of the blackout got out.

There’s no official reason, but there were mutterings about the technical difficulty of cutting off access to Cablevision TV subscribers while leaving Cablevision’s Internet-only subs alone. But hard to believe that News Corp. didn’t think that one through in advance. Same goes for any “optics”-related reason–the whole point of a move like this was to generate publicity, right?

Evidently, clicking on a contentious query more than a few times invites a block that requires users to restart their browsers in order to regain access to the site. So Google.com.hk, the uncensored site to which Google (GOOG) has been redirecting Chinese searchers, is still available in China, but it’s usefulness has obviously been undermined. Oddly, Google’s Mainland China Service Availability page doesn’t seem to have noticed this yet.

Meanwhile, Tom.com stopped using Google to power its searches, and rumors are beginning to circulate that some of the country’s mobile operators are reconsidering plans to launch new phones running on Google’s Android OS.

Reached for comment, Google didn’t have much to offer: “It seems that certain sensitive queries are being blocked,” a spokesperson told me. “However, the Google.com.hk site is not currently being blocked.”

Yep.

Schmidt added a bit of nuance to that message today, noting that the company had been surprised to see its European business bounce back as quickly as it has. Here’s my transcript of his opening statement.

We are clearly seeing aspects of recovery, and what is notable is that we’re seeing aspects of recovery not just in the United States but in Europe. I had been in error in assuming that there would be a lag, that it would the U.S. first and Europe second. Asia, of course, was never significantly hit in the first place.

So that means from a Google perspective that…we never stopped hiring, but we told our team internally and again, we’ve said to many other people that we are increasing our hiring rate and our investment rate in anticipation of a recovery.

Schmidt and Google co-founder Sergey Brin covered a lot of ground in the hour-plus press conference, and I’ll try to go back and break out out some of the other highlights. A few items worth noting in summary:

• Brin expressed contrition over recent Gmail outages and said the company was working both to prevent future failures and to react more quickly if and when they do happen. But he reiterated the argument, common among cloud-computing fans, that conventional email systems fail much more frequently.
• Schmidt repeatedly defended the proposed settlement Google had reached with authors and publishers regarding its book archive. Recurring theme: It’s not a perfect settlement, but it’s workable.
• Schmidt stressed the importance of porting Google’s Chrome browser to Apple’s Mac platform and said this would happen within months.
• Schmidt said Google was working on ways to help publishers sell their work on the Web (via one-offs or subscription). But he said he had no interest in promoting one publisher’s results over another, as Associated Press officials had recently suggested: “We have to be very very careful not to favor one media organization over another, with regard to speed or latency.”
• Schmidt, who’d previously noted that he expected Google to start making an acquisition per month, said that these would likely be small, five-to-ten-person companies. He added that it was unlikely the company would be in the market for something the size of a YouTube acquisition, which cost Google $1.65 billion. Translation: Don’t expect us to pony up billions for Twitter.

Earlier: My live coverage of the press conference:

Google (GOOG) co-founder Sergey Brin is sitting down with about a dozen reporters in Google’s New York City headquarters for a Q&A session. Tune in for live coverage. This should be a wide-ranging conversation, which I’ll attempt to cover live as well as I can. Please consider everything below to be a paraphrase unless it’s in quotes.

Brin is joined by Google CEO Eric Schmidt. Brin gives an unofficial intro.

Schmidt adds his own informal introduction.

Schmidt: We’re here because we have a global sales meeting in New York, and we’re winding that up right now. A series of internal talks, and the mood was “very, very positive.” We told them that “the worst is behind us” (which Schmidt has said before). We’re seeing recovery not just in the U.S., but in Europe as well. I had been in error in thinking it would be U.S. first, then Europe second. Asia is less important, obviously. We’re increasing our hiring rate and investment rate in an anticipation of a recovery.

Brin discusses some tweaks to search. Do you feel that Microsoft’s innovations with Bing will cause you to accelerate your innovations?

Brin: Competition is healthy. Microsoft (MSFT) has made its contributions. So has Cuill. Many of the tweaks in Bing we’d already seen from Microsoft Live earlier in the year.

Schmidt: I agree!

But do you think Bing is really different? Or just a rebranding.

Brin: [Demurs]

Schmidt: You guys should judge us and our competitors. We’ve been criticized for having a self-referential view of the world. But I’d argue that our success so far proves that’s been a good strategy.

Please talk about Android and other mobile plans.

Brin: We started with Android because it was a problem for us, as an end-user and a developer, that phones lacked powerful browsers and the ability to install powerful apps. I think Android has addressed this very well, but it has also pushed the market. It has pushed Apple (AAPL) with the iPhone and RIM (RIMM) and Windows Mobile. I’m pretty excited about the future; they’re getting increasingly capable browsers, and you can now write native applications across five platforms that will cover most smart phones. I think that having the software platform has freed the hardware makers from spending time on that, and they can rejuvenate their efforts on hardware.

Please talk about enterprise efforts.

Brin: We started in enterprise, like mobile, to address our own needs. When we started with mail in ’04, Web email was like a toy. We really focused on something that would work in an enterprise and then made it available to consumers. We feel we’re farther ahead (than competitors) both in email and in collaborative document-editing. We’re moving toward eventually having everything (all our applications) available everywhere. “I just think the cloud model is a better model….I do think this install-less model of a cloud is better….It’s definitely made me more productive.”

More on enterprise from Brin: We’ve been successful with both SMB [small and medium business] and increasingly with enterprise. We’ve got a big implementation with Genetech (DNA), and in Washington D.C. We’re specifically adding features for enterprise. That’s part of the Postini acquisition–to add some of those email features for enterprises. You’d be surprised to hear some of the things businesses ask for.

Please talk about recent Gmail outages.

Brin: Certainly we’re not happy with any outages. With those outages we’re at the “three nines” level, which is not where we want to be. Targeting “four nines” by end of quarter. We’ll let you know how we do. Focusing not only on outages, which we don’t like, but recovery time. Second outage could have been resolved in five or ten minutes, but we made errors in handling it, and it extended over an hour. But if you look at a typical enterprise today, those outages tend to add up to more than even these kinds of outages that we had in Q3. Also, we’re working on the number of people affected by outages. Trying to group people into pods so that if one goes down it doesn’t affect others.

You’re adding more complexity to search. It’s more confusing than it ever was. Same thing with site links. Is that an issue (it is for Danny Sullivan)?

Brin: I’d like to see all the options, available in all the corpuses. We don’t have all the same options in each offering. In terms of the links and snippets that we’re offering, we’re trying to experiment with that.

On Google book deal: If the judge asked you why he shouldn’t be concerned by the concentration of Google’s power, what would you say?

Schmidt: It’s an error to answer a theoretical question from a journalist. But anyway, we won’t get that kind of question. With respect to book search, we were doing something that we thought was appropriate. We were sued, and after three years of discussion, we’ve come to a settlement. This is perfectly normal. From our perspective, this is a settlement we like, it’s a settlement we think they’ll like, and we’ll hear what the court says, within minutes. Let me reframe your question: There’s nothing particularly exclusive about what we’re doing. The rights registry we’re doing is for the benefit of orphan works. “It’s not a particularly good business for us. We’re going it because we think it’s the right thing to do.” We don’t think the settlement is perfect, but we think it’s good.

What are plans to expand book search?

Schmidt: We’re already huge. There are millions of books that have never been read, and we’re going to deliver readers to those books.

Brin: We want as many works as possible in some form, because that’s of tremendous value.

Schmidt: This doesn’t cover all international books, all books in the world. [Some disagreement about this between Brin and Schmidt]. It will take time to get the registry up and running, so for the near future I think that’s all we can achieve.

Back to the economy, please.

Schmidt: We’ve tried for a while to figure out if Google is an accurate predictor of the economy, and we can’t prove it. If we could, we’d brag about it. Last early in the year we saw a decline in U.K., which surprised us. From our perspective, the low point was somewhere in the spring. Which is why I said worst was behind us in May, June. We noticed a recovery “June-ish.” The conventional wisdom is that U.S. recessions are 18-24 months. Bernanke sees a recovery too, which we agree with. Conventional wisdom was that Europe would lag by three-five months, which we’re not seeing. Europe is not one country, and it varies a great deal depending on which country we’re in. I won’t go in to specifics but it’s the obvious stuff–the countries that didn’t have a big bump did not have a big fall. More on being a leading indicator: Obviously we’re a leading indicator in advertising.

Brin: And we’re good indicator for consumer spending, and you can see for yourself by looking at Google trends.

It seems as if Chrome isn’t having the impact with consumers that you would like.

Brin: [Starts, then stopped by Schmidt]

Schmidt: Some of your premise about Chrome is incorrect, in terms of adoption, and we’re going to get that message out.

Brin: It’s actually exceeding our benchmarks.

Schmidt: I see a lot of Macs in this room, and a lot of very sophisticated people are using Macs now and we need to get a version of Chrome out for that, which we’ll have in a couple of months. Key to browser strength is speed. In general, we announced Chrome OS and Chromium product. Everything is linked together: Cloud, chrome, etc.

At one point do Android and the Chrome OS come together or not come together?

Schmidt: Current definition of use platforms has to do with use patterns. Android for mobile, delivered via telecom store, heavily integrated with telco offerings, like our Verizon (VZ) deal, which we’re enormously excited about. The analog for Chrome is that it’s designed for a 10, 12-inch form factor. They both use Linux, etc. But they’re designed for different uses. [Netbooks?] May be some overlap there.

Is Google being too nice? Is there a rethinking of relationships with aggrieved groups?

Schmidt: In many ways we’ve always wanted to be this Google as opposed to the way we were perceived a few years ago. We’re particularly proud of the way we’re working with advertising agencies, which is very important to us. With the media industry, we’re having success with YouTube and YouTube monetization, and we’ll have more on that coming forward….”We have always wanted to have these partnerships….We’re learning how to do them in a way that they win, too.”

Brin: People can now differentiate between us and the Internet.

Schmidt: Google is an innovator. The Internet is causing collisions. Innovation plus collisions equals opportunity. For instance, the fact that Verizon has embraced most of the open principles that we put forth five years ago is shocking. “It’s pretty amazing. This is Verizon. It’s not some itty-bitty telecom start-up.”

Are you uncomfortable with Google employees’ sense of entitlement? [Per new Ken Auletta book]

Brin: [Refers to layoffs--Schmidt corrects him: "We did not have layoffs."] [Addendum: Schmidt was talking about Google closing engineering offices in Phoenix and other locations; Google did have layoffs last winter.] You’re right:

What do you think about publishers requiring pay walls, and how will you help surface that.

Schmidt: We’re starting with that YouTube. Overall, “there’s clearly a market for free content, and that market is the size of the Internet.” Also a market for subscription/paid. The analogy I would offer is TV. We all grew up with “free” TV. Now almost everyone pays for cable, and some people pay for pay-per-view, “which is ridiculously expensive,” but people will pay for particular events, like boxing. I think all three of those uses will emerge. We’re working on payment models, subscriptions, to enable that.

But what about surfacing paid content in search [this comes from WSJ.com editor Alan Murray]? Will you factor the desire of someone to pay for content into results?

Schmidt: We’re not going to use the price you use as our ranking in results. That’s not going to be our signal. But we’ll incorporate the price people are paying for your content into results. But I’m not going to answer this precisely because I don’t want to discuss how we produce results. The most interesting improvement you could make is that to the degree that we have more of the marketplace data available, we could take that information and reflect some of that in our rankings.

The AP CEO said Google or Microsoft might be willing to pay a premium for an advance look at the news.

Schmidt: We have a deal with the AP, and I don’t want to talk about any specifics of any deal. I don’t think that’s proper. “We have to be very very careful not to favor one media organization over another, with regard to speed or latency.” We are staying out of the media business. “You guys are very good at it, and we’re not.”

[Apologies for tech error; I missed the specific question and part of the following exchange, but the subject is entitlement.]

Brin: We cut down on snacks, etc. to “reset expectations” regarding entitlement.

Schmidt: “Google pays very well. Google is clearly a growth company. People at Google don’t work for those reasons at Google. We don’t want them to come to work for Google for those reasons. We want people to come to Google to change the world. Life is short.” The tightening in the last year has been good for this, by the way, the controls put into place by Patrick Pichette, who is our hero, have been very helpful.

Please talk about M&A plans and goal of one acquisition per month.

Schmidt: That’s been our historic pattern. I think we will be buying small companies–five, ten people. That’s where some of our best stuff has been. One day Larry and Sergey bought Android, and I didn’t even notice. Think about the strategic opportunities that has created. Sergey found Google Earth one day while he was surfing on the Web. And then he walked into my office and told me he bought them. “And I said, ‘for how much, Sergey?’ And it turned out to be a few million.”

Would you buy a YouTube?

Schmidt: Is there another one to buy? The problem with that size of acquisition is that you have to make your money back. I think that DoubleClick and YouTube will be two of our best acquisitions. DoubleClick is already close to paying back, and YouTube will get there soon. But bear in mind that any major acquisition now will involve a regulatory review, because of our size and because our competitors will make sure of that.

[Sorry, missed another question]

Do you anticipate making large upfront commitments for new or renewed search deals [as you did with MySpace and AOL]?

Schmidt: I’d rather not comment on search deals. We are in discussions with both of those companies. “Some of our best friends are in those companies.”

[Missed yet another one]

What will new tablet machines [like Apple's] mean for you? And to content producers?

Brin: Hardware is getting amazing with regard to cost. Used to be that display was expensive. Now that’s cheap, and so are chips, etc. Now, the main cost is broadband connection, or cellular, or however you get to the Internet. That’s why wide broadband availability is important to us. Think about how much you spend on access costs compared to the amount you spend on your handset. The phone cost is negligible.

Schmidt: Not sure how to answer question. We provide the infrastructure below what you’re talking about [touch interfaces, etc.]. Kindle is a good example. Don’t think about current one, think about one two or three years out. I think there will be many kinds of things like Kindles, and that’s a material change in the way people will interact with hardware, media.

Brin: I think it’s better if hardware isn’t locked down to specific platforms.

[Long exchange between Schmidt and Danny Sullivan that I'll have to pick up later]

Should Google be required to lease servers and access to Google checkout numbers to deal with “lock-in” issues that broke up the telcos?

Schmidt: Google Checkout isn’t interesting. But I think your analogy is wrong and that there are no data to support your theses.

[I missed the next question on the book settlement about orphan works, etc.]

Schmidt: A lot of these complaints are being made by people who don’t want a solution.

What are the reasonable book settlement proposals you’ve seen?

Schmidt: Goal is to get all the books to everyone and to get all the authors compensated properly. Some of the proposals make sense to me, but I don’t want to characterize them. Not a perfect solution, but the best one we can do.

How will book settlement affect international users?

Brin: It won’t. We’d love settlements that work across a range of countries.

Why won’t you be like Microsoft with regard to antitrust?

Schmidt: Many reasons. Culture, for one. Another reason is that majority of users are one click away from moving away from us. Third: If we went into an “evil room” and had an “evil light” shined on us, and we then behaved in an “evil way” we would be destroyed….There is a fundamental trust between Google and its users.”

Schmidt walks through “ludicrous” thought experiment whereby Chrome takes 80 percent of market share and then tries to lock consumers in, noting that it wouldn’t work due to open source.

Do you think you’ll take another stab at moving into radio, print?

Brin: We are quite optimistic on the TV front. Radio and print didn’t pan out as well as we thought initially. One of the reasons is that those mediums are moving online and consumers are moving online and the publishers/producers want to work with us there. “We were kind of at the dock where the ship had already left.” But TV is quite similar to the Web in terms, potentially, of measurability, so we’re excited about those prospects.

Is page rank broken? People are gaming it, etc.

Brin: No. We have to continually develop. Part of the issue is span, but the main issue is that everything changes. We’re doing a much better job of ranking than we did a decade ago. If we just rested on our laurels with what we wrote in paper from 1998, we’d be in big trouble.

Google’s first device, called the T-Mobile G1, came out in October and was less than a sensation. The phone had a touch screen and a handy slide-out physical keyboard, but it was bulky and unattractive. It came with just one gigabyte of memory and lacked important features like compatibility with Microsoft Exchange for use with work email. Its app store, called the Android Market, offered only about 50 applications. The G1 launched with surprisingly few accessories.

The $200 (with two-year contract) T-Mobile myTouch 3G (t-mobilemytouch.com) available Aug. 5, has fixed many of these problems. Its new design uses an on-screen keyboard, which gives it a thinner, more stylish build that feels great in the hand. It now comes with four gigabytes of memory, works with Microsoft Exchange and can record and play back video footage. The Android Market has increased its number of apps to about 6,300, and the myTouch will hit stores with accessories like designer shells and docking stations. Its combined voice and data plans are at least $25 less per month than what AT&T’s (T) plans cost for users of Apple’s competing iPhone.

But while using it, I couldn’t help thinking that the myTouch felt less like a new device and more like what the G1 should have been in the first place.

The myTouch, which is built by HTC of Taiwan, runs on an improved version of Google’s operating system, that performs tasks faster has a more streamlined look and supports stereo Bluetooth connections. But it carries on many traits of its predecessor. It still synchronizes over the air with Google account information including email, calendar and contacts. Swiping a finger to the left or right on the myTouch’s home screen will still open other screens, with space for icons representing apps. And its handy window-shade-like Notifications menu can still be pulled down onto the screen at any time to show a list of new messages.

The most dramatic difference on the myTouch is its on-screen keyboard, which may frustrate some people who liked the G1 for its because it had a physical keyboard and a touch screen. Like on Apple’s (AAPL) iPhone, the myTouch keyboard corrects words as you type, recognizing you’ll make more mistakes on it than you would on a physical keyboard. The keyboard suggests words in a horizontal bar that appears above the keyboard and below the text area. You need only type “Washi” and the word “Washington” appears in this bar for you to select. These shortcuts speed up the otherwise frustrating process of on-screen typing.

Unlike on the iPhone, the myTouch keyboard’s keys don’t get larger as your finger hovers over them so as to help you touch the right key. Nor does a word become magnified when you’re trying to place the cursor at a certain spot. The myTouch’s trackball can be used to pinpoint a specific letter but I usually forgot all about the trackball, opting to use the responsive touch screen for navigation.

T-Mobile offers much less expensive monthly plans for the myTouch than AT&T offers for the iPhone. The cheapest voice and data plan from T-Mobile costs $55 compared with AT&T’s $70. Unlimited data and messaging plus minimum voice plans total $65 for T-Mobile and $90 for AT&T. And AT&T’s messaging is currently limited to text, while T-Mobile messaging includes text, picture and video.

On the other hand, T-Mobile offers 3G coverage in far fewer cities than AT&T. The myTouch comes with only a fourth of the built-in memory of the same-priced the 3GS iPhone, and half the memory of the 3G iPhone model, which is costs half the price. And myTouch offers only about a tenth of the apps the iPhone offers, and has a smaller screen.

T-Mobile wants myTouch users to understand apps and download them, starting with the AppPack: a package of eight to 10 apps that T-Mobile will send to myTouch customers via an SMS with a link. Customers can peruse this list of apps and download just the ones they choose. While some people may not appreciate receiving apps suggestions, it could also introduce apps to people who didn’t know how they worked.

The Android Market, where all apps for Google’s phones can be found and purchased,still isn’t as well organized as it should be. It separates games from other applications and organizes them by popularity and date, but doesn’t separate those that are free and those that must be bought. I downloaded several free apps including WordGame, Facebook, Twitter, Sketch-a-Etch and Sherpa. But I was especially irked by the way some of the apps I downloaded kept trying to get me to download additional apps every time I opened them. The Twitter app, which was listed as one of the most popular, displayed prompts to download browsers and RSS readers—even six days after I first used the app. An on-screen message gave me the option to “Ignore Forever,” but this apparently didn’t include prompts to download other programs. Any user would be confused and irritated by these unsolicited messages. Google said that was what the developer chose to do—a major downside to the Android’s open model.

The myTouch’s 3.2-megapixel camera and video camera worked well and started up quickly. An icon labeled Gallery neatly holds still images and videos. And the myTouch has simple ways to upload photos to Picasa or videos to YouTube.

A built-in tool for Google Web searches using voice commands worked remarkably well, even when I tried to trip it up by saying four words at once. It didn’t recognize my last name, but I’ll let it off the hook since it’s spelled differently than it sounds.

The T-Mobile myTouch 3G costs $50 more than the G1, but its extra features are worthwhile. Be ready for a frustrating first-time experience with the on-screen keyboard and try to read user comments in the Android Market to figure out which apps prompt you to download additional programs.

The myTouch is what we expected from Google the first time around. Time will tell if people are ready to give it a second chance.

—Edited by Walter S. Mossberg.

Write to
Katherine Boehret at mossbergsolution@wsj.com

]]> http://allthingsd.com/20090721/second-chances-t-mobile-tries-again/feed/ 0 http://allthingsd.com/20090630/here-comes-the-video-shakeout-joost-scales-down-ceo-mike-volpi-steps-out/ http://allthingsd.com/20090630/here-comes-the-video-shakeout-joost-scales-down-ceo-mike-volpi-steps-out/#comments Tue, 30 Jun 2009 15:49:51 +0000 Peter Kafka http://mediamemo.allthingsd.com/?p=8803 Here’s the beginning of the inevitable online video shakeout: Joost, the once-hyped video service that was supposed to rival Google’s (GOOG) YouTube, is restructuring to focus on “white label” services, i.e., a back end for other video players.

The service is laying off the majority of its employees, and CEO Mike Volpi (pictured right) is out, replaced by Matt Zelesko, who had been SVP of engineering. The Joost.com portal site will stay open, but best to think of it as an ad for the company’s hosting and distribution services, which it will try to sell to cable companies and the like.

A Joost spokesperson declined to say how deep the layoffs will be; but I’m told that the company, which had more than 100 employees last fall, will be down to a couple dozen after the cuts are done. In a post on Joost’s Web site, Volpi said the company “will say goodbye to many of our colleagues and friends.”

This isn’t a shock: Joost’s fate has been the subject of whisper and rumors for the last year or more. The service made an initial splash in 2007 by raising $45 million from the founders of Skype and an array of high-profile investors and media companies, including Sequoia Capital and Viacom (VIA), and was initially supposed to deliver copyrighted content via a peer-to-peer distribution system and a player that users downloaded to their desktops.

But YouTube, and later Hulu, conditioned users to watch video via their browsers, and Joost’s software never caught on. By last fall, the company had retooled and began offering video via the browser like everyone else, but it has never been able to generate a significant audience. In November, a month after the company launched its Web browser, it said it was attracting 2.1 million unique users world-wide, a fraction of YouTube’s audience, and well behind rivals like Hulu, MetaCafe, Veoh and DailyMotion.

Here’s the service’s unique visitor count, per Comscore (SCOR); Joost’s unique viewer count, which is the more relevant metric for video sites, is considerably smaller (click to enlarge):

Joost has been a frequent candidate for buyout rumors, and the company hasn’t gone out of its way to deny them. The supposed buyers would be cable companies like Comcast (CMCSA) Time Warner Cable (TWC) or telcos like AT&T (T) and Verizon (VZ), which would presumably use Joost’s technical team to help build out their own Web video plays.

But some of the cable guys and telcos insist that they’re fine with the people they have. And if they do want to buy a video player, they have plenty of options: Just about all of Joost’s peers have been on the block, formally or informally, for the past few months.

JOOST TO PROVIDE WHITE LABEL ONLINE VIDEO PLATFORM

NEW YORK AND LONDON – June 30, 2009 – Joost, the online video startup, announced today that, along with Joost.com, it will focus on providing white label online video platforms for media companies, including cable and satellite providers, broadcasters and video aggregators. This technology and service offering will support content owners’ efforts to build comprehensive branded environments online.

Media companies around the world are embracing internet-based video portals as a key path to distribute their premium video, but building a world-class video portal is increasingly difficult and expensive. Joost will focus on this issue and provide the market with a cost-effective, end-to-end solution for media companies to publish video under their own brands.

As a part of this new direction, Joost will reorganize and restructure its business. A core team in New York and London will work on providing these solutions, as well as operating and supporting Joost.com and its associated video applications. Joost also will wind down operations in its Leiden development center.

Matt Zelesko, currently SVP of Engineering at Joost, will take over as CEO while continuing to lead the engineering organization. Stacey Seltzer, currently SVP of international business development and content acquisition at Joost, will run the business operations. Mike Volpi has stepped down as CEO of Joost but will remain actively involved as Chairman of the Board.

Joost plans to make its white label video platform commercially available to media companies around the world. This offering will provide a solution for companies looking to build a branded experience for their content on their own site as well as other sites and platforms in their distribution networks.

]]> http://allthingsd.com/20090630/here-comes-the-video-shakeout-joost-scales-down-ceo-mike-volpi-steps-out/feed/ 0 http://allthingsd.com/20090318/9564/ http://allthingsd.com/20090318/9564/#comments Wed, 18 Mar 2009 14:20:05 +0000 Nick Wingfield http://voices.allthingsd.com/?p=9564 Microsoft (MSFT) is about to face a test of whether it can finally put the brakes on its loss of market-share in Web browsers.

The company is expected to release a final version of Internet Explorer 8 this week, a new Web browser that consists mostly of small improvements designed to make surfing the Internet more productive, rather than radical overhauls. For example, a new feature called “accelerators” eliminates extra mouse clicks by letting users highlight text on a Web page and automatically search for the terms on Facebook, eBay (EBAY) and various map Web sites.

Microsoft needs Internet Explorer 8 to reverse or halt its market-share slide. Between February of this year and last year, Internet Explorer lost nearly 7.5 percentage points of browser market-share to competitors, according to Net Applications, a company that monitors the types of browsers people are running when they visit Web sites. IE fell to 67.4 percent of the market in February from 74.9 percent a year earlier, while Mozilla’s Firefox jumped to 21.8 percent from 17.27 percent, and Apple’s (AAPL) Safari rose to eight percent from 5.7 percent, Net Applications estimates.

Read the rest of this post

]]> http://allthingsd.com/20090318/9564/feed/ 0 http://allthingsd.com/20090207/weekend-update-020709/ http://allthingsd.com/20090207/weekend-update-020709/#comments Sun, 08 Feb 2009 00:24:24 +0000 Beth Callaghan http://digitaldaily.allthingsd.com/?p=12673 What spreads faster than economic gloom and doom and is more infectious than professional anxiety? That phenomenon known as “25 Things.” Just in time for Facebook’s fifth birthday, the record-breaking waste of time may have reached critical mass this week. It’s certainly been the topic of much conversation, including on BoomTown. Elsewhere this week:

BoomTown provided continuing coverage of the Yahoo (YHOO) merry-go-round. This time, PR head Jill Nash announced her departure. As the company’s chief communications officer, she’s had a challenging two-year run. New CEO Carol Bartz definitely has some PR ideas of her own, including offering cash prizes to employees who provide info on their colleagues who leak information to the press. Not a huge deterrent yet, apparently–it didn’t take long for BoomTown to get info on both Nash’s farewell memo and Bartz’s bounty system. Next, New Networks, the publisher behind BarelyPolitical and its hugely viral Obama Girl videos, has widened its purview to include the tech sector with BarelyDigital, which the online network has envisioned to include regular shows, tech news remixes and the like. It’s rumored that Obama Girl will be making a cameo appearance or two. If the first two features are any indication, the future looks pretty funny. In another round of executive musical chairs, Time Warner’s (TWX) AOL ad head Lynda Clarizio will be leaving the online service, to be replaced by former Yahoo ad exec Greg Coleman. Microsoft (MSFT) is launching a slick new celebrity site on MSN called Wonderwall, created, designed and produced by BermanBraun Interactive, a Hollywood company run by former Yahoo media chief Lloyd Braun. And speaking of musical chairs, MSN is clearly upping its content ante–earlier this week, it hired Yahoo’s recent media head Scott Moore, who used to work at Microsoft.

MediaMemo asked: What happens when one of the world’s richest men lets loose a swarm (a small swarm) of mosquitoes at a high-end conference? Nothing too exciting, really, but when you consider that the stunt was the publicity-generating part of Bill Gates’s talk at TED, which was a discussion of malaria and some of the problems the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation is facing head-on, it gets pretty compelling. Kindle 2.0, the new generation of the device dubbed the “iPod of the book world” will be unveiled Monday at a New York press event, but how many of the devices have been sold thus far? Amazon’s (AMZN) not telling, but Citigroup analyst Mark Mahaney estimates the number at 500,000–and believes that the Kindle will be a $1.2 billion business next year. Obviously, a lot will depend on Monday and the new device’s reception. MediaMemo also took some time out this week to wish Facebook a happy fifth birthday, and to stack its track record next to Google’s at the same age, with interesting results. Even the pros are getting hit hard these days–in its quarterly earnings report this week, News Corp. (NWS) missed its estimates, recorded an $8.4 billion write-off and lowered its guidance. CEO Rupert Murdoch admitted that the downturn is worse than he thought. He also admitted that he spent $2.8 billion too much for Dow Jones. (News Corp. is the owner of Dow Jones and this Web site.)

Digital Daily followed the trial of four Google executives this week on criminal charges of defamation and breach of privacy after a much-publicized two-year investigation. Google (GOOG) insists the charges are unwarranted and “akin to prosecuting mail service employees for hate speech letters sent in the post.” Clearly, the ultimate outcome will have a huge impact on the future of a free, open Internet. MySpace said this week that it has identified and ousted 90,000 registered sex offenders–and those are just the ones brilliant enough to use their real names. There’s no way of knowing how many are actually using the service or how to prevent them from re-registering once they’re deleted. A free an open Internet, indeed. DD also pondered the future (or lack thereof) of the Motorola (MOT) handset division. Co-CEO Sanjay Jha says the company is committed to making the business work, but its products are looking boring and outdated, and a turnaround would be prohibitively expensive to execute. In the words of one analyst, the company’s problems are “gruesome.” On the other end of the spectrum, Microsoft continues to vehemently deny reports that it’ll be producing its own smartphone. In a report this week, analysts from Broadpoint.AmTech speculated that the device could be uncrated later this month at the Mobile World Congress in Barcelona. Meanwhile, it’s been up in the air for two years whether or not iPhones will ever be uncrated in historic Georgetown. Apple (AAPL) has been around the table a few times now with preservationists wary of the architectural impact of an Apple store, no matter how much the business traffic is needed in the neighborhood. Looks like perseverance may have finally paid off, though–Georgetown’s Apple store could open later this year.

In Personal Technology this week, Walt Mossberg took a look at a program called Foxmarks, which sets out to synchronize bookmarks among all of your browsers and all of your machines. Sound a little too handy to actually work well? Walt found it does a pretty good job, with a few caveats. In Mossberg’s Mailbox, Walt responds to readers who want to know more about doing “techie” maintenance on their PCs to keep them running well, whether or not to buy a 15-inch MacBook Pro, and options for email within Windows 7, which won’t ship with a built-in email program. In the Mossberg Solution, Katherine Boehret tests Google Latitude, an opt-in program that lets users track one another’s movements on their smartphones using GPS, Wi-Fi, and cell towers. Kind of like Gawker Stalker, only with permission and without Lindsay Lohan (unless you happen to be Lindsay Lohan).

Last but not least, Silicon Valley lost one of its own this week. The widely admired and much loved Mike Homer, whose rare, severe illness was a rallying point for many over the past months, passed away last weekend and was laid to rest on Thursday.

More next week.

]]> http://allthingsd.com/20090207/weekend-update-020709/feed/ 0 http://allthingsd.com/20081216/blogger-to-guns-n-roses-sorry-i-shared-your-album-best-buy-to-guns-n-roses-sorry-we-bought-your-album-axl-rose-to-internet-look-at-me/ http://allthingsd.com/20081216/blogger-to-guns-n-roses-sorry-i-shared-your-album-best-buy-to-guns-n-roses-sorry-we-bought-your-album-axl-rose-to-internet-look-at-me/#comments Tue, 16 Dec 2008 19:40:21 +0000 Peter Kafka http://mediamemo.allthingsd.com/?p=2172

The blogger who leaked most of ”Chinese Democracy,” the sort-of long-awaited album from Gun N’ Roses, has pleaded guilty to copyright infringement and will cooperate with the Feds in order to stay out of jail.

But he isn’t the only one who’s in hot water over the album. Someone at Best Buy (BBY) has to explain why they thought it was a good idea to buy 1.3 million nonreturnable copies of the album, most of which look destined to become drink coasters.

Before anyone gets tempted to put two and two together here and blame the Internet for poor music sales, be warned: The music that is most popular among file sharers is the music that is most popular among buyers. In retrospect, it was easy to tell that this album would stiff, based on the reactions of MySpace browsers who came to check out a legal stream of the album–they listened to one track and bailed out.

The Wall Street Journal floats another theory: That Axl Rose, who is the only person left from the original band and whose cloistered neuroticism/paranoia became legendary during the gazillion years it took for the album to come out, didn’t work hard enough to sell the album. He shunned interviews, didn’t make a video for the album, etc.

But just because Axl Rose is turning down a chance to chat with the likes of the New York Times doesn’t mean you can’t find him online. He’s been dropping by fan sites to leave message on bulletin boards, and this weekend did a lengthy Q&A with his followers, who seem to have lots of patience. If you’ve got a similar amount of time, the entire transcript is here via Idolator.

]]> http://allthingsd.com/20081216/blogger-to-guns-n-roses-sorry-i-shared-your-album-best-buy-to-guns-n-roses-sorry-we-bought-your-album-axl-rose-to-internet-look-at-me/feed/ 0