Now, as the lion’s share of the social giant’s user base accesses the site via mobile devices, Facebook has undergone a major internal organizational shift, retooling product workflows to better focus on the phone.

Engineering teams are morphing. Software cycles are being rejiggered. It’s a materialization of the company’s newest mantra: “Mobile first.“

The Old Days

Facebook has taken flak for its mobile strategy for some time. Its smartphone apps, for example, were sluggish and underperforming compared to others like Twitter.

Some of the blame for these deficiencies is placed on a technology bet Facebook made years ago, making HTML5 a key component of its mobile strategy. Put simply, HTML5 is a coding language that can handle some of today’s more taxing Web features. And Facebook’s apps were built with heavy use of HTML5.

Using a language like HTML5 has its benefits. For one, it let Facebook spread much faster. Any phone with a Web browser can access Facebook’s mobile site, which the company spent much of its effort refining early on.

Not to mention that many of today’s engineers grew up using Web-based languages back in the early dot-com days. That makes it much easier to recruit talent for Facebook’s ever-growing engineering team.

But as we’ve moved toward a “native” world of smartphone app development, the classic Web-centric engineering emphasis is harder to maintain. “Pushing” a piece of new code live to the desktop and mobile Web is a much faster process than making changes to a native iOS or Android application. For native apps, there is a mandatory review of app changes from Apple’s App Store. And with every change made to an app, that means users need to download a new update to the app.

Previously, Facebook split dealing with these problems in two. Desktop coders were part of one group, while the mobile apps teams were separate. In fact, as product manager Dirk Stoop told me, the native iOS and Android apps were so small in the early days, only a handful of people were responsible for maintaining the iOS and Android applications — two of the most-downloaded apps in the entire world.

This wasn’t enough. Facebook’s Web-centric culture didn’t translate over to native app development the same way. Something had to change.

A Different Framework

The Facebook product structure of today looks very different than it did before. Teams are separated across the company by product rather than platform.

So, for example, the Facebook Messenger group, led by Facebook veteran Peter Deng, is one team composed of desktop, mobile and native engineers who create features for every place that this product appears. This is the same for Photos, the team which Stoop leads.

Both of those teams, you may recall, produce standalone apps outside of the proper “Facebook” native application. This, Deng tells me, is part of a strategy focusing on improving these products faster, essentially making each app a “testing ground” for the main Facebook app. If the team sees increased use in a specific feature in the standalone app, for example, that feature could be integrated into the main app.

Timing is also a focus. To shift the “push-whenever” mentality of a Web-focused coder, Facebook has put all new code updates into staggered release cycles.

Deng’s team, for instance, updates the iOS Messenger app every six weeks, like clockwork. This gives the team a better sense of deadlines and timing, while minimizing the amount of updates users need to download. Desktop coders still push more frequently, but are now relegated to doing so twice a day.

Perhaps the most drastic change is philosophical. Product managers want teams to “own their code,” to put more intention and responsibility behind any changes they make.

“This is about understanding that there is some level of permanence in the code you ship,” product manager Michael Sharon told me. “This is educating our people about quality.”

End Game

Facebook talks a big game. But is this shift actually going to benefit users?

Deng and his fellow product managers believe so. In a recent update, two of the most popular features from Messenger and Camera were integrated into the Facebook main iOS app. The idea is, Facebook’s app will get better, faster and stronger with the modular approach.

Not every timed release will be groundbreaking. Most have included bug fixes and optimizations, while others include better feature additions. It’s less about revamping the application and more about getting into a timing groove.

Ultimately, Facebook hopes the shift will pay off in the masses being happier with their mobile experience, unlike the old days when the native apps were built heavily with HTML5. Ideally, that makes for a more engaged, more active Facebook user.

That’ll let the engineering team rest a bit easier. At least until the next product cycle begins.

Called Serve, it is competing head-on with eBay’s own PayPal, as American Express attempts to expand its audience beyond briefcase-toting corporate users.

At eBay, Sample was the CTO of X.commerce, the open commerce platform the company unveiled late last year that gives technology tools to retailers at no cost. Prior to eBay, Sample was a senior executive at Yahoo, where he led the open, social and participation platforms. He left Yahoo in August 2010.

Sample’s technical expertise is focused on developing and building platforms and products for emerging technologies.

Serve is a complex platform that allows consumers to make purchases, take cash withdrawals from ATMs and make person-to-person payments from their computer or their phone.

The offering is fairly complex because it can be funded by a user’s bank account or credit or debit card — even from one of the company’s major competitors, like Visa or MasterCard.

In the future, American Express envisions expanding the platform to mobile phones, using near field communication or other technology.

Given eBay and PayPal’s extensive knowledge in the digital payments arena, many of its executives have left the company to explore the endless number of opportunities sprouting up.

Recently, Alyssa Cutright, a 12-year veteran of PayPal, left to join Square, a payments company in San Francisco; and of course, PayPal President Scott Thompson left at the end of last year to join Yahoo as CEO. Last week, eBay named David Marcus as his replacement.

Yesterday, in a major policy speech in Washington, D.C., Secretary of State Hillary Clinton jumped on the Internet bandwagon again, unveiling a $25 million government investment for entrepreneurs to allow dissidents to thwart “thugs, hackers and censors.”

Since that’s about the amount a third-string social photo-sharing site gets while walking down University Avenue in Palo Alto, Calif., from venture capitalists with bags of money to spend, let me just say the money is, well, underwhelming.

Luckily, Clinton’s speech–the latest chapter of the Obama administration’s “Internet Freedom Agenda”–was much better.

In fact, it was a sobering look at the situation, replete with all its conflicts and compromises, including some related to the State Department of late (hello, WikiLeaks!).

While more of a gimmick, Clinton outlined what she called a “venture capital-style approach” to stopping governments from closing down digital communications platforms.

In Egypt, that has included the whole dang Internet after times got tough and protesters tweeted too much.

Even still, said Clinton, such efforts–however effective now–were ultimately useless.

“Those who clamp down on Internet freedom may be able to hold back the full expression of their people’s yearnings for a while, but not forever,” she said.

Still, even though Facebook and Twitter have been lauded as critical tools in the reform protests in the Mideast, those Luddite strongmen did manage to put up a very good fight in shutting them down.

But Clinton advocated pressing on. Along with the seed funding for firewall-piercing and evading technologies, she also announced the creation of a new coordinator for cyber issues and the fact that the State Department had just begun to tweet in Arabic and Farsi and would soon be doing so in Chinese, Hindi and Russian.

All very nice steps, but the overall arrival of the long-promised global “strategy for cyberspace,” which has gotten bogged down in politics, is still to come.

In fact, a GOP-fueled criticism of the State Department was also released yesterday, designed to muck up Clinton’s speech, about how another $30 million in digital investments was being spent or, more precisely, being spent badly.

Clinton answered critics:

“Some have criticized us for not pouring funding into a single technology–but there is no silver bullet in the struggle against Internet repression. There’s no ‘app’ for that.”

Well, actually, since there is an app that turns your Apple iPhone into a hand massager, there certainly should be.

Speaking of that, Clinton was deft at dealing with the obvious delta between pressing for Internet freedom, even as U.S. government lawyers were whacking away at WikiLeaks–and, by association, Twitter itself.

Clinton noted the release of a mass of classified State Department documents “began with an act of theft,” arguing that this was the real issue.

She went on to further argue:

“I said that the WikiLeaks incident began with a theft, just as if it had been executed by smuggling papers in a briefcase. The fact that WikiLeaks used the Internet is not the reason we criticized its actions. WikiLeaks does not challenge our commitment to Internet freedom.”

Actually, the issue is that the Internet, once it really gets going, doesn’t really want to be controlled by anyone.

Kind of like humanity.

Or as Clinton so correctly noted about the various protests taking place abroad:

“In each case, people protested because of deep frustrations with the political and economic conditions of their lives. They stood and marched and chanted and the authorities tracked and blocked and arrested them. The Internet did not do any of those things; people did.”

In any case, judge for yourself: Here’s the video of the speech at George Washington University from the State Department’s Web site, as well as the full text below:

Thank you all very much and good afternoon. It is a pleasure, once again, to be back on the campus of the George Washington University, a place that I have spent quite a bit of time in all different settings over the last now nearly 20 years. I’d like especially to thank President Knapp and Provost Lerman, because this is a great opportunity for me to address such a significant issue, and one which deserves the attention of citizens, governments, and I know is drawing that attention. And perhaps today in my remarks, we can begin a much more vigorous debate that will respond to the needs that we have been watching in real time on our television sets.

A few minutes after midnight on January 28th, the Internet went dark across Egypt. During the previous four days, hundreds of thousands of Egyptians had marched to demand a new government. And the world, on TVs, laptops, cell phones, and smart phones, had followed every single step. Pictures and videos from Egypt flooded the web. On Facebook and Twitter, journalists posted on-the-spot reports. Protestors coordinated their next moves. And citizens of all stripes shared their hopes and fears about this pivotal moment in the history of their country.

Millions worldwide answered in real time, “You are not alone and we are with you.” Then the government pulled the plug. Cell phone service was cut off, TV satellite signals were jammed, and Internet access was blocked for nearly the entire population. The government did not want the people to communicate with each other and it did not want the press to communicate with the public. It certainly did not want the world to watch.

The events in Egypt recalled another protest movement 18 months earlier in Iran, when thousands marched after disputed elections. Their protestors also used websites to organize. A video taken by cell phone showed a young woman named Neda killed by a member of the paramilitary forces, and within hours, that video was being watched by people everywhere.

The Iranian authorities used technology as well. The Revolutionary Guard stalked members of the Green Movement by tracking their online profiles. And like Egypt, for a time, the government shut down the internet and mobile networks altogether. After the authorities raided homes, attacked university dorms, made mass arrests, tortured and fired shots into crowds, the protests ended.

In Egypt, however, the story ended differently. The protests continued despite the internet shutdown. People organized marches through flyers and word of mouth and used dial-up modems and fax machines to communicate with the world. After five days, the government relented and Egypt came back online. The authorities then sought to use the Internet to control the protests by ordering mobile companies to send out pro-government text messages, and by arresting bloggers and those who organized the protests online. But 18 days after the protests began, the government failed and the president resigned.

What happened in Egypt and what happened in Iran, which this week is once again using violence against protestors seeking basic freedoms, was about a great deal more than the internet. In each case, people protested because of deep frustrations with the political and economic conditions of their lives. They stood and marched and chanted and the authorities tracked and blocked and arrested them. The Internet did not do any of those things; people did. In both of these countries, the ways that citizens and the authorities used the Internet reflected the power of connection technologies on the one hand as an accelerant of political, social, and economic change, and on the other hand as a means to stifle or extinguish that change.

There is a debate currently underway in some circles about whether the Internet is a force for liberation or repression. But I think that debate is largely beside the point. Egypt isn’t inspiring people because they communicated using Twitter. It is inspiring because people came together and persisted in demanding a better future. Iran isn’t awful because the authorities used Facebook to shadow and capture members of the opposition. Iran is awful because it is a government that routinely violates the rights of its people.

So it is our values that cause these actions to inspire or outrage us, our sense of human dignity, the rights that flow from it, and the principles that ground it. And it is these values that ought to drive us to think about the road ahead. Two billion people are now online, nearly a third of humankind. We hail from every corner of the world, live under every form of government, and subscribe to every system of beliefs. And increasingly, we are turning to the Internet to conduct important aspects of our lives.

The Internet has become the public space of the 21st century–the world’s town square, classroom, marketplace, coffeehouse, and nightclub. We all shape and are shaped by what happens there, all 2 billion of us and counting. And that presents a challenge. To maintain an Internet that delivers the greatest possible benefits to the world, we need to have a serious conversation about the principles that will guide us, what rules exist and should not exist and why, what behaviors should be encouraged or discouraged and how.

The goal is not to tell people how to use the Internet any more than we ought to tell people how to use any public square, whether it’s Tahrir Square or Times Square. The value of these spaces derives from the variety of activities people can pursue in them, from holding a rally to selling their vegetables, to having a private conversation. These spaces provide an open platform, and so does the Internet. It does not serve any particular agenda, and it never should. But if people around the world are going come together every day online and have a safe and productive experience, we need a shared vision to guide us.

One year ago, I offered a starting point for that vision by calling for a global commitment to Internet freedom, to protect human rights online as we do offline. The rights of individuals to express their views freely, petition their leaders, worship according to their beliefs–these rights are universal, whether they are exercised in a public square or on an individual blog. The freedoms to assemble and associate also apply in cyberspace. In our time, people are as likely to come together to pursue common interests online as in a church or a labor hall.

Together, the freedoms of expression, assembly, and association online comprise what I’ve called the freedom to connect. The United States supports this freedom for people everywhere, and we have called on other nations to do the same. Because we want people to have the chance to exercise this freedom. We also support expanding the number of people who have access to the Internet. And because the Internet must work evenly and reliably for it to have value, we support the multi-stakeholder system that governs the internet today, which has consistently kept it up and running through all manner of interruptions across networks, borders, and regions.

In the year since my speech, people worldwide have continued to use the Internet to solve shared problems and expose public corruption, from the people in Russia who tracked wildfires online and organized a volunteer firefighting squad, to the children in Syria who used Facebook to reveal abuse by their teachers, to the Internet campaign in China that helps parents find their missing children.

At the same time, the Internet continues to be restrained in a myriad of ways. In China, the government censors content and redirects search requests to error pages. In Burma, independent news sites have been taken down with distributed denial of service attacks. In Cuba, the government is trying to create a national intranet, while not allowing their citizens to access the global internet. In Vietnam, bloggers who criticize the government are arrested and abused. In Iran, the authorities block opposition and media websites, target social media, and steal identifying information about their own people in order to hunt them down.

These actions reflect a landscape that is complex and combustible, and sure to become more so in the coming years as billions of more people connect to the Internet. The choices we make today will determine what the Internet looks like in the future. Businesses have to choose whether and how to enter markets where internet freedom is limited. People have to choose how to act online, what information to share and with whom, which ideas to voice and how to voice them. Governments have to choose to live up to their commitments to protect free expression, assembly, and association.

For the United States, the choice is clear. On the spectrum of Internet freedom, we place ourselves on the side of openness. Now, we recognize that an open Internet comes with challenges. It calls for ground rules to protect against wrongdoing and harm. And Internet freedom raises tensions, like all freedoms do. But we believe the benefits far exceed the costs.

And today, I’d like to discuss several of the challenges we must confront as we seek to protect and defend a free and open Internet. Now, I’m the first to say that neither I nor the United States Government has all the answers. We’re not sure we have all the questions. But we are committed to asking the questions, to helping lead a conversation, and to defending not just universal principles but the interests of our people and our partners.

The first challenge is achieving both liberty and security. Liberty and security are often presented as equal and opposite; the more you have of one, the less you have of the other. In fact, I believe they make it each other possible. Without security, liberty is fragile. Without liberty, security is oppressive. The challenge is finding the proper measure: enough security to enable our freedoms, but not so much or so little as to endanger them.

Finding this proper measure for the Internet is critical because the qualities that make the internet a force for unprecedented progress–its openness, its leveling effect, its reach and speed–also enable wrongdoing on an unprecedented scale. Terrorists and extremist groups use the Internet to recruit members, and plot and carry out attacks. Human traffickers use the Internet to find and lure new victims into modern-day slavery. Child pornographers use the Internet to exploit children. Hackers break into financial institutions, cell phone networks, and personal email accounts.

So we need successful strategies for combating these threats and more without constricting the openness that is the Internet’s greatest attribute. The United States is aggressively tracking and deterring criminals and terrorists online. We are investing in our nation’s cyber-security, both to prevent cyber-incidents and to lessen their impact. We are cooperating with other countries to fight transnational crime in cyberspace. The United States Government invests in helping other nations build their own law enforcement capacity. We have also ratified the Budapest Cybercrime Convention, which sets out the steps countries must take to ensure that the internet is not misused by criminals and terrorists while still protecting the liberties of our own citizens.

In our vigorous effort to prevent attacks or apprehend criminals, we retain a commitment to human rights and fundamental freedoms. The United States is determined to stop terrorism and criminal activity online and offline, and in both spheres we are committed to pursuing these goals in accordance with our laws and values.

Now, others have taken a different approach. Security is often invoked as a justification for harsh crackdowns on freedom. Now, this tactic is not new to the digital age, but it has new resonance as the internet has given governments new capacities for tracking and punishing human rights advocates and political dissidents. Governments that arrest bloggers, pry into the peaceful activities of their citizens, and limit their access to the Internet may claim to be seeking security. In fact, they may even mean it as they define it. But they are taking the wrong path. Those who clamp down on Internet freedom may be able to hold back the full expression of their people’s yearnings for a while, but not forever.

The second challenge is protecting both transparency and confidentiality. The Internet’s strong culture of transparency derives from its power to make information of all kinds available instantly. But in addition to being a public space, the Internet is also a channel for private communications. And for that to continue, there must be protection for confidential communication online. Think of all the ways in which people and organizations rely on confidential communications to do their jobs. Businesses hold confidential conversations when they’re developing new products to stay ahead of their competitors. Journalists keep the details of some sources confidential to protect them from exposure or retribution. And governments also rely on confidential communication online as well as offline. The existence of connection technologies may make it harder to maintain confidentiality, but it does not alter the need for it.

Now, I know that government confidentiality has been a topic of debate during the past few months because of WikiLeaks, but it’s been a false debate in many ways. Fundamentally, the WikiLeaks incident began with an act of theft. Government documents were stolen, just the same as if they had been smuggled out in a briefcase. Some have suggested that this theft was justified because governments have a responsibility to conduct all of our work out in the open in the full view of our citizens. I respectfully disagree. The United States could neither provide for our citizens’ security nor promote the cause of human rights and democracy around the world if we had to make public every step of our efforts. Confidential communication gives our government the opportunity to do work that could not be done otherwise.

Consider our work with former Soviet states to secure loose nuclear material. By keeping the details confidential, we make it less likely that terrorists or criminals will find the nuclear material and steal it for their own purposes. Or consider the content of the documents that WikiLeaks made public. Without commenting on the authenticity of any particular documents, we can observe that many of the cables released by WikiLeaks relate to human rights work carried on around the world. Our diplomats closely collaborate with activists, journalists, and citizens to challenge the misdeeds of oppressive governments. It is dangerous work. By publishing diplomatic cables, WikiLeaks exposed people to even greater risk.

For operations like these, confidentiality is essential, especially in the Internet age when dangerous information can be sent around the world with the click of a keystroke. But of course, governments also have a duty to be transparent. We govern with the consent of the people, and that consent must be informed to be meaningful. So we must be judicious about when we close off our work to the public, and we must review our standards frequently to make sure they are rigorous. In the United States, we have laws designed to ensure that the government makes its work open to the people, and the Obama Administration has also launched an unprecedented initiative to put government data online, to encourage citizen participation, and to generally increase the openness of government.

The U.S. Government’s ability to protect America, to secure the liberties of our people, and to support the rights and freedoms of others around the world depends on maintaining a balance between what’s public and what should and must remain out of the public domain. The scale should and will always be tipped in favor of openness, but tipping the scale over completely serves no one’s interests. Let me be clear. I said that the WikiLeaks incident began with a theft, just as if it had been executed by smuggling papers in a briefcase. The fact that WikiLeaks used the Internet is not the reason we criticized its actions. WikiLeaks does not challenge our commitment to Internet freedom.

And one final word on this matter: There were reports in the days following these leaks that the United States Government intervened to coerce private companies to deny service to WikiLeaks. That is not the case. Now, some politicians and pundits publicly called for companies to disassociate from WikiLeaks, while others criticized them for doing so. Public officials are part of our country’s public debates, but there is a line between expressing views and coercing conduct. Business decisions that private companies may have taken to enforce their own values or policies regarding WikiLeaks were not at the direction of the Obama Administration.

A third challenge is protecting free expression while fostering tolerance and civility. I don’t need to tell this audience that the Internet is home to every kind of speech–false, offensive, incendiary, innovative, truthful, and beautiful.

The multitude of opinions and ideas that crowd the Internet is both a result of its openness and a reflection of our human diversity. Online, everyone has a voice. And the Universal Declaration of Human Rights protects the freedom of expression for all. But what we say has consequences. Hateful or defamatory words can inflame hostilities, deepen divisions, and provoke violence. On the Internet, this power is heightened. Intolerant speech is often amplified and impossible to retract. Of course, the Internet also provides a unique space for people to bridge their differences and build trust and understanding.

Some take the view that, to encourage tolerance, some hateful ideas must be silenced by governments. We believe that efforts to curb the content of speech rarely succeed and often become an excuse to violate freedom of expression. Instead, as it has historically been proven time and time again, the better answer to offensive speech is more speech. People can and should speak out against intolerance and hatred. By exposing ideas to debate, those with merit tend to be strengthened, while weak and false ideas tend to fade away; perhaps not instantly, but eventually.

Now, this approach does not immediately discredit every hateful idea or convince every bigot to reverse his thinking. But we have determined as a society that it is far more effective than any other alternative approach. Deleting writing, blocking content, arresting speakers–these actions suppress words, but they do not touch the underlying ideas. They simply drive people with those ideas to the fringes, where their convictions can deepen, unchallenged.

Last summer, Hannah Rosenthal, the U.S. Special Envoy to Monitor and Combat Anti-Semitism, made a trip to Dachau and Auschwitz with a delegation of American imams and Muslim leaders. Many of them had previously denied the Holocaust, and none of them had ever denounced Holocaust denial. But by visiting the concentration camps, they displayed a willingness to consider a different view. And the trip had a real impact. They prayed together, and they signed messages of peace, and many of those messages in the visitors books were written in Arabic. At the end of the trip, they read a statement that they wrote and signed together condemning without reservation Holocaust denial and all other forms of anti-Semitism.

The marketplace of ideas worked. Now, these leaders had not been arrested for their previous stance or ordered to remain silent. Their mosques were not shut down. The state did not compel them with force. Others appealed to them with facts. And their speech was dealt with through the speech of others.

The United States does restrict certain kinds of speech in accordance with the rule of law and our international obligations. We have rules about libel and slander, defamation, and speech that incites imminent violence. But we enforce these rules transparently, and citizens have the right to appeal how they are applied. And we don’t restrict speech even if the majority of people find it offensive. History, after all, is full of examples of ideas that were banned for reasons that we now see as wrong. People were punished for denying the divine right of kings, or suggesting that people should be treated equally regardless of race, gender, or religion. These restrictions might have reflected the dominant view at the time, and variations on these restrictions are still in force in places around the world.

But when it comes to online speech, the United States has chosen not to depart from our time-tested principles. We urge our people to speak with civility, to recognize the power and reach that their words can have online. We’ve seen in our own country tragic examples of how online bullying can have terrible consequences. Those of us in government should lead by example, in the tone we set and the ideas we champion. But leadership also means empowering people to make their own choices, rather than intervening and taking those choices away. We protect free speech with the force of law, and we appeal to the force of reason to win out over hate.

Now, these three large principles are not always easy to advance at once. They raise tensions, and they pose challenges. But we do not have to choose among them. Liberty and security, transparency and confidentiality, freedom of expression and tolerance–these all make up the foundation of a free, open, and secure society as well as a free, open, and secure internet where universal human rights are respected, and which provides a space for greater progress and prosperity over the long run.

Now, some countries are trying a different approach, abridging rights online and working to erect permanent walls between different activities–economic exchanges, political discussions, religious expressions, and social interactions. They want to keep what they like and suppress what they don’t. But this is no easy task. Search engines connect businesses to new customers, and they also attract users because they deliver and organize news and information. Social networking sites aren’t only places where friends share photos; they also share political views and build support for social causes or reach out to professional contacts to collaborate on new business opportunities.

Walls that divide the Internet, that block political content, or ban broad categories of expression, or allow certain forms of peaceful assembly but prohibit others, or intimidate people from expressing their ideas are far easier to erect than to maintain. Not just because people using human ingenuity find ways around them and through them but because there isn’t an economic Internet and a social Internet and a political Internet; there’s just the Internet. And maintaining barriers that attempt to change this reality entails a variety of costs–moral, political, and economic. Countries may be able to absorb these costs for a time, but we believe they are unsustainable in the long run. There are opportunity costs for trying to be open for business but closed for free expression–costs to a nation’s education system, its political stability, its social mobility, and its economic potential.

When countries curtail Internet freedom, they place limits on their economic future. Their young people don’t have full access to the conversations and debates happening in the world or exposure to the kind of free inquiry that spurs people to question old ways of doing and invent new ones. And barring criticism of officials makes governments more susceptible to corruption, which create economic distortions with long-term effects. Freedom of thought and the level playing field made possible by the rule of law are part of what fuels innovation economies.

So it;s not surprising that the European-American Business Council, a group of more than 70 companies, made a strong public support statement last week for Internet freedom. If you invest in countries with aggressive censorship and surveillance policies, your website could be shut down without warning, your servers hacked by the government, your designs stolen, or your staff threatened with arrest or expulsion for failing to comply with a politically motivated order. The risks to your bottom line and to your integrity will at some point outweigh the potential rewards, especially if there are market opportunities elsewhere.

Now, some have pointed to a few countries, particularly China, that appears to stand out as an exception, a place where Internet censorship is high and economic growth is strong. Clearly, many businesses are willing to endure restrictive internet policies to gain access to those markets, and in the short term, even perhaps in the medium term, those governments may succeed in maintaining a segmented internet. But those restrictions will have long-term costs that threaten one day to become a noose that restrains growth and development.

There are political costs as well. Consider Tunisia, where online economic activity was an important part of the country’s ties with Europe while online censorship was on par with China and Iran, the effort to divide the economic internet from the “everything else” Internet in Tunisia could not be sustained. People, especially young people, found ways to use connection technologies to organize and share grievances, which, as we know, helped fuel a movement that led to revolutionary change. In Syria, too, the government is trying to negotiate a non-negotiable contradiction. Just last week, it lifted a ban on Facebook and YouTube for the first time in three years, and yesterday they convicted a teenage girl of espionage and sentenced her to five years in prison for the political opinions she expressed on her blog.

This, too, is unsustainable. The demand for access to platforms of expression cannot be satisfied when using them lands you in prison. We believe that governments who have erected barriers to Internet freedom, whether they’re technical filters or censorship regimes or attacks on those who exercise their rights to expression and assembly online, will eventually find themselves boxed in. They will face a dictator’s dilemma and will have to choose between letting the walls fall or paying the price to keep them standing, which means both doubling down on a losing hand by resorting to greater oppression and enduring the escalating opportunity cost of missing out on the ideas that have been blocked and people who have been disappeared.

I urge countries everywhere instead to join us in the bet we have made, a bet that an open internet will lead to stronger, more prosperous countries. At its core, it’s an extension of the bet that the United States has been making for more than 200 years, that open societies give rise to the most lasting progress, that the rule of law is the firmest foundation for justice and peace, and that innovation thrives where ideas of all kinds are aired and explored. This is not a bet on computers or mobile phones. It’s a bet on people. We’re confident that together with those partners in government and people around the world who are making the same bet by hewing to universal rights that underpin open societies, we’ll preserve the internet as an open space for all. And that will pay long-term gains for our shared progress and prosperity. The United States will continue to promote an Internet where people’s rights are protected and that it is open to innovation, interoperable all over the world, secure enough to hold people’s trust, and reliable enough to support their work.

In the past year, we have welcomed the emergence of a global coalition of countries, businesses, civil society groups, and digital activists seeking to advance these goals. We have found strong partners in several governments worldwide, and we’ve been encouraged by the work of the Global Network Initiative, which brings together companies, academics, and NGOs to work together to solve the challenges we are facing, like how to handle government requests for censorship or how to decide whether to sell technologies that could be used to violate rights or how to handle privacy issues in the context of cloud computing. We need strong corporate partners that have made principled, meaningful commitments to internet freedom as we work together to advance this common cause.

We realize that in order to be meaningful, online freedoms must carry over into real-world activism. That’s why we are working through our Civil Society 2.0 initiative to connect NGOs and advocates with technology and training that will magnify their impact. We are also committed to continuing our conversation with people everywhere around the world. Last week, you may have heard, we launched Twitter feeds in Arabic and Farsi, adding to the ones we already have in French and Spanish. We’ll start similar ones in Chinese, Russian, and Hindi. This is enabling us to have real-time, two-way conversations with people wherever there is a connection that governments do not block.

Our commitment to internet freedom is a commitment to the rights of people, and we are matching that with our actions. Monitoring and responding to threats to internet freedom has become part of the daily work of our diplomats and development experts. They are working to advance internet freedom on the ground at our embassies and missions around the world. The United States continues to help people in oppressive internet environments get around filters, stay one step ahead of the censors, the hackers, and the thugs who beat them up or imprison them for what they say online.

While the rights we seek to protect and support are clear, the various ways that these rights are violated are increasingly complex. I know some have criticized us for not pouring funding into a single technology, but we believe there is no silver bullet in the struggle against internet repression. There’s no app for that. Start working, those of you out there. And accordingly, we are taking a comprehensive and innovative approach, one that matches our diplomacy with technology, secure distribution networks for tools, and direct support for those on the front lines.

In the last three years, we have awarded more than $20 million in competitive grants through an open process, including interagency evaluation by technical and policy experts to support a burgeoning group of technologists and activists working at the cutting edge of the fight against internet repression. This year, we will award more than $25 million in additional funding. We are taking a venture capital-style approach, supporting a portfolio of technologies, tools, and training, and adapting as more users shift to mobile devices. We have our ear to the ground, talking to digital activists about where they need help, and our diversified approach means we’re able to adapt the range of threats that they face. We support multiple tools, so if repressive governments figure out how to target one, others are available. And we invest in the cutting edge because we know that repressive governments are constantly innovating their methods of oppression and we intend to stay ahead of them.

Likewise, we are leading the push to strengthen cyber security and online innovation, building capacity in developing countries, championing open and interoperable standards and enhancing international cooperation to respond to cyber threats. Deputy Secretary of Defense Lynn gave a speech on this issue just yesterday. All these efforts build on a decade of work to sustain an Internet that is open, secure, and reliable. And in the coming year, the Administration will complete an international strategy for cyberspace, charting the course to continue this work into the future.

This is a foreign policy priority for us, one that will only increase in importance in the coming years. That’s why I’ve created the Office of the Coordinator for Cyber Issues, to enhance our work on cyber security and other issues and facilitate cooperation across the State Department and with other government agencies. I’ve named Christopher Painter, formerly senior director for cyber security at the National Security Council and a leader in the field for 20 years, to head this new office.

The dramatic increase in internet users during the past 10 years has been remarkable to witness. But that was just the opening act. In the next 20 years, nearly 5 billion people will join the network. It is those users who will decide the future.

So we are playing for the long game. Unlike much of what happens online, progress on this front will be measured in years, not seconds. The course we chart today will determine whether those who follow us will get the chance to experience the freedom, security, and prosperity of an open Internet.

As we look ahead, let us remember that Internet freedom isn’t about any one particular activity online. It’s about ensuring that the Internet remains a space where activities of all kinds can take place, from grand, ground-breaking, historic campaigns to the small, ordinary acts that people engage in every day.

We want to keep the Iternet open for the protestor using social media to organize a march in Egypt; the college student emailing her family photos of her semester abroad; the lawyer in Vietnam blogging to expose corruption; the teenager in the United States who is bullied and finds words of support online; for the small business owner in Kenya using mobile banking to manage her profits; the philosopher in China reading academic journals for her dissertation; the scientist in Brazil sharing data in real time with colleagues overseas; and the billions and billions of interactions with the Internet every single day as people communicate with loved ones, follow the news, do their jobs, and participate in the debates shaping their world.

Internet freedom is about defending the space in which all these things occur so that it remains not just for the students here today, but your successors and all who come after you. This is one of the grand challenges of our time. We are engaged in a vigorous effort against those who we have always stood against, who wish to stifle and repress, to come forward with their version of reality and to accept none other. We enlist your help on behalf of this struggle. It’s a struggle for human rights, it’s a struggle for human freedom, and it’s a struggle for human dignity.

Thank you all very much.

Conduit president Adam Boyden said in an interview that small publishers and even plenty of larger ones are having trouble keeping pace as the number of mobile platforms grows.

“it gets really complex really quickly,” Boyden said, noting that publishers need not only to develop their apps, but also keep them fresh and updated, and find ways to promote them. Given how similar that is to the Web app business–and the growing power of HTML5 and Web apps in general–Boyden said he sees a huge opportunity in mobile. Conduit’s apps, Boyden said, will meet the standards to be included in Apple’s App Store and Google’s Android Market.

Less clear, though, is how the company will make money. It plans to make development of the Web apps free, but will look to find ways to generate revenue as apps are successful.

“We are going to examine and experiment with lots of different models,” Boyden said. “We will work out a model where we can get remunerated in a way that makes sense for everyone.”

Currently, Conduit makes its money through its eponymous Web app site and as a big maker of custom toolbars. The company made some headlines last year when it switched from Google to Bing. About half of Conduit’s revenue comes from toolbars, with the other half coming from the Web app part of the business. The 200-person company is profitable, Boyden said.

Although the company has a lot of big-name publishers on the Web side, including companies like Univision and Major League Baseball, it is starting with a more modest list on the mobile side. Soccer team Liverpool and game makers Bigpoint and Exent are among its early mobile customers.

The company will be in Barcelona next week (as will Mobilized) for the big Mobile World Congress trade show, where it hopes to formally kick off the mobile push.

Nokia spends about five times as much on mobile R&D as Apple. In fact, Nokia has nearly as many engineers working on its smartphone software platforms as Apple does for its entire product line. Says Dediu, “Symbian alone may cost twice as much to develop than the iPhone (including the hardware).”

A shocking metric, if correct. And a pretty dismal return on investment–unless there’s another version of Symbian in the pipeline that will best iOS.

PREVIOUSLY:

• Not Seeing Much Return on That Massive R&D Spend, Are You, Nokia?
• Nokia: Big and Slow

Hamstrung by institutional inefficiencies and the complexity of its legacy platforms, Nokia is spending a lot of money to gain traction in markets in which its handset lineup is clearly uncompetitive, and with little success. Instead it’s suffering steeper share losses at the high end of the market and margin erosion across its entire portfolio. And it’s spending about 4 times as much on R&D as Apple, which has recast the smartphone space from its own vision.

As Bernstein analyst Pierre Ferragu observes, Nokia’s business appears to be melting like an ice cube. “At this stage, we believe that even a good success of Symbian^3 would barely stabilize the business,” he says. “A real comeback will need much more effort … and a lot more time, unlikely to happen in the next couple of years, in our view.”

So what can be done? Though some observers argue Nokia should scrap Symbian, Ferragu says that’s impossible given the number of assets the company has that depend on it. The company can’t really make a big move to Android, either. That would undermine its current service strategy and alienate partners, European carriers looking for an alternative to iOS and Android, and Nokia’s developer community.

What it should do, he says, is redouble its efforts on MeeGo and make it a viable competitor to Android and iOS in markets like North America, while continuing to push Symbian to the rest of the world. And then it should integrate the two through QT, its cross-platform application and UI framework. Says Ferragu, “By migrating all UI developments of Symbian on QT, the company can generate significant cost savings, progressively drive the platform towards a single UI between MeeGo and Symbian and a single development environment for applications.”

What’s left to do after that?

Hope for the best.

As CEO Stephen Elop said during the company’s last earnings call, “Nokia must compete on ecosystem to ecosystem basis. In addition to great device experiences we must build, catalyse or join a competitive ecosystem. And the ecosystem approach we select must be comprehensive and cover a wide range of utilities and services that customers expect today and anticipate in the future.”

“Whatever the strategy is we outline on Feb. 11, we very clearly ensuring that it will give us the opportunity to reopen markets such as the U.S. and some others, where we have not recently been present.”

“It’s hard to say,” he said. “We’ve put our best foot forward. Now it’s up to the ecosystem to make it flourish.”

However, he noted that hardware makers are eager to have a more competitive product to counter Apple’s tablet. “We think that (device makers) are incredibly motivated,” he said.

Motorola, which worked closely with Google on the development of Honeycomb, is due to be the first out with the Xoom, which will ship later in the first quarter. T-Mobile hopes to have its first Honeycomb tablet, the 3-D-capable G-Slate, out later this spring.

On the topic of the Android market, Barra said that the combination of a new Web-based store and the addition of in-app purchasing were key moves in improving Google’s app sales experience–a process that even Google has had trouble executing. The Web store, he said, will work on any modern computer browser and allows developers to much better highlight products and users to much more easily find what they are looking for.

“We think this is a significant step toward a better market experience,” Barra said. “There’s more to do to make it a frictionless discovery and purchase experience.” He noted that the company is also working to add carrier billing more broadly, among other payment options. The in-app buying option, in particular, is a great addition that allows for more types of business models, he said. (Not to mention it’s something that Apple has had for a while now).

However, Barra added that, unlike with Apple, Google is not going to mandate that developers use its in-app buying option. “Android is an open platform,” he said. Developers can do whatever they want. That’s the beauty of an open platform.”

Of course, one of the downsides of openness is the potential for fragmentation, a concern frequently raised with Android. That issue was heightened somewhat with the release of Honeycomb, since it introduced features that, for now anyway, are only available on tablets and not on phones.

Barra said that some of those features would be making their way back to the phone, but wouldn’t offer specifics on timing.

“A lot of the things we have created for Honeycomb will make their way back into phones as well–things like the visual themes, some of the thinking on notifications, for example.”

Just how that re-integration will occur is unclear, though. Honeycomb is Android 3.0, but for now it is going to run only on tablets and other big-screen devices. Asked whether there will be a version 3.-something for phones, and when those features would come to the phone, Barra said it’s too soon to say. “We really don’t know,” he said. “That’s a conversation we are just beginning to have right now internally with the team.”

In any case, developers seemed largely pleased with Wednesday’s developments.

“We’re very excited about the ability to do in-app purchases in Honeycomb,” said William Hurley, CTO of mobile developer Chaotic Moon Studios. “It opens a whole new world of possibilites from both a design and revenue perspective.”

Casual-game maker Zynga, which counts on in-app sales of virtual goods in its business model, also praised the move as a huge win for the Android platform.

“It’s massive for us,” Zynga’s Paul Bettner told Mobilized on Wednesday.

As for what Google showed off with Honeycomb, Hurley said it should help Google and Android app developers close the gap with the experience on Apple’s products. “Many of the features announced today will empower the development community to produce apps that are better positioned to compete with apps available on other platforms,” he said.

Here’s a very brief video of Bettner and a colleague showing off Words With Friends, as customized for Honeycomb.

]]> http://allthingsd.com/20110202/drippings-from-the-honeycomb-googles-barra-on-the-ipad-android-in-app-purchasing-and-more/feed/ 0 http://allthingsd.com/20110202/live-from-the-dailys-debut/ http://allthingsd.com/20110202/live-from-the-dailys-debut/#comments Wed, 02 Feb 2011 15:40:14 +0000 Peter Kafka http://mediamemo.allthingsd.com/?p=29109 It’s time, finally, for News Corp. to show off the Daily, the iPad newspaper it has been building for some six months.

This debut was supposed to happen a few weeks ago in San Francisco, with Rupert Murdoch and Steve Jobs sharing stage time. Instead, Murdoch will show off his new publication at the Guggenheim in New York, with Apple content boss Eddy Cue stepping in for Jobs.

We’ve got a very good idea of what to expect: A newspaper that’s both old-fashioned and cutting-edge, which will sell for 99 cents a week or $40 a year. And the best way to experience the new publication will be on an iPad, not at a museum.

Still, it will be interesting to hear News Corp. pitch this one in real time, and to see how it leverages all of its resources and a very rare Apple endorsement. (This Web site, we should note, is owned by News Corp. as well.)

10:40 am: Greetings! So excited to be in the Guggenheim that I’m starting this one a few minutes early.

10:44 am: And here’s Jon Miller, who has been shepherding this thing at News Corp. Here’s some fresh scoop! The Daily will be be live onstage for the demo, he says, but won’t appear at the app store until noon.

[Note: The Daily can be found here at the Apple App Store]

10:47 am: Miller is working the room very well; now chatting up Reuters’ Ken Li.

10:48 And Steve Rubenstein, who has been handling PR for the Daily launch. He semi-taunts me by noting that there were tasty canapés at Rupert Murdoch’s private party Tuesday night.

10:49 am: If you’d simply like to watch a livestream of the event, minus my commentary, head to thedaily.com at 11 ET.

10:50 am: That sound you hear is the rustle of departing page views.

10:51 am: Cunning of the News Corp./Rubenstein/event-planning crew to split up the press by species. Gives us something to talk about.

10:52 am: BREAKING NEWS! Jon Miller says Wi-Fi here at the Guggenheim has been working “intermittently.”

10:52 am: WAAAAAAY More interesting is that Engadget’s Joanna Stern being hassled for daring to take out a camera during a press conference. She is being moved three seats back. Where that’s OK, apparently.

10:56 am: Pre-launch music, btw: Some kinda samba thing going on. Festive and, dare I say, a smidge bit sexy. Rowr!

10:58 am: Slightly curious is that registration staff told media that they’ll have “review units” available after presser. But everyone in media has an iPad, right? It’s required, no?

Perhaps the notion is that the presser will end before noon, and the Daily won’t be available until then, so if you want to get hands-on in the meantime, that’s the way to go. Which would be smart!

On the other hand, if they’re simply handing out free “review” units to the press, well, that’s kinda smart too. Because the press likes free stuff.

11:03 am: Our crack tech guy Adam Tow tells me TheDaily.com site is now saying that the app will be available at noon ET. I can’t see that on my screen, but I’ll take his word for it.

Especially because that’s what Jon Miller said a few minutes ago.

11:05 am: Given News Corp. pub WSJ’s focus on privacy, and Apple’s, interesting to review the Daily’s:

When you use the Services, we may collect certain non-personally identifiable information about that use. For example, in order to permit your connection to the Services via the Internet, our servers receive and record information about your computer and browser, including potentially your IP address, browser type, and other software or hardware information. If you access the Services from a mobile or other device, we may also collect transactional information such as a unique device identifier assigned to that device (“UDID”), your geolocation, or other transactional information for the device in order to serve content to it. We also may use cookies and other tracking technologies (including browser cookies, pixels, beacons, and Adobe Flash technology including cookies), which are comprised of small bits of data that often include an anonymous unique identifier. Websites send this data to your browser when you first request a web page and then store the data on your computer so the web site can access information when you make subsequent requests for pages from that site. We may use these technologies to collect and store information about your use of the Services, such as pages you have visited, search queries you have run, and advertisements you have seen.

11:06 am: And we’re live. Here’s Rupert Murdoch, iPad in hand.

“Good morning. I’m Rupert Murdoch.”

Thanks for the “amazing Steve Jobs,” a man who has “single-handedly changed the world” of technology and media.

“Steve has been a champion of the Daily from day 1.”

“New times demand new journalism.” [hrm]

Trying to take best of traditional journalism, including “shoe-leather reporting” editing, “a skeptical eye” [hrm!] and combine them with awesome tech.

“”Simply put, the iPad demands that we completely re-imagine our craft”

Shooting for audience that is sophisticated and reads a lot, but not print.

We have that, but it’s niche. No “true news discovery.” The magic of newspapers “and great blog” lies in “serendipity.”
True!

Similarly, we must make the business of news-gathering viable again.

Goal is to be indispensable source for news and entertainment. “A robust new voice.”

Shout-outs to Jesse Angelo and Greg Clayman, who run editorial and business, respectively, for the new pub.

Daily will be 14 cents a day–99 cents a week–because no printing, delivery costs, etc.

More superlatives for the Daily, including a “sense of fun.”

Target audience is “tablet” audience–[note emphasis on tablet, not iPad].

And a shout-out to Jon Miller, too.

[Unless I misheard and it was News Corp. CTO John McKinley.]

“We believe the Daily will be the model for how stories are told and how they’re consumed.”

And another shout-out to “all our friends at Apple”

Okay. Here are Miller, Angelo, Clayman.

11:13 am: Miller starting off. Not a demo–this is live production.

Trying to figure out how to produce new news for tablet era. “We think we’ve developed that.”

Angelo shows off home screen of the Daily, with Egypt as main headline. Applause.

Have been doing live production for about six weeks.

11:14 am: They have a reporter on the ground in Cairo right now. Josh Hirsch [sp?].

Lots of big pictures, video embedded in text.

And here’s one of the 360-degree photos. Which look cool!

Can put audio behind them, etc.

HD video–here’s a clip about prisoners making toys in Angola prison. Note the bluesy background music. ’Cause it’s about a prison, duh.

11:16 am: Back to Miller. Have rethought navigation.

11:17 am: Back to Angelo, showing off swipey carousel. Sorta silly to describe this to you in a liveblog, but there’s a “play” function and a “shuffle function,” and a video anchor who will discuss the main stories of the day.

11:18 am: Back to MIller. “The Daily is not an island” can share to Facebook, Twitter, email.

11:18 am: Angelo: We can also pull HTML5 pages into device. Can also link out. [Subtext--we are TOTALLY NOT ignoring the Web, you dummies. We're not idiots.]

Bringing Twitter feeds directly into app. So you can see what Lily Allen (used to be semi-famous a couple of years ago) has to say about something.

11:19 am: Miller: We have apps and games section, with a link directly to Apple Store.

And we have an awesome sports section [sounds familiar!].

11:20 am: Angelo: Yes, check out our awesome sports section. Troy Polamalu talking about Clay Matthews’s hair.

“For sports fans, we really think this is the showstopper”–customizable sports filter by team/sport, brings in scores, tweets, etc.

11:21 am: Miller: Publishing once a day, with updates throughout the day “as the news warrants.”

Verizon sponsoring first two weeks of free subscriptions.

11:22 am: The art in this liveblog, by the way, is coming directly from livestream. Nice job, Adam Tow.

11:22 am: Here’s Eddy Cue. Never seen him before. A very, very, very big deal in media circles.

Running through iPad, iOs success. iPad customers are huge news eaters. 200 million news apps downloaded so far.

I’ve been using the Daily for the last two weeks. “It’s amazing.” Amazing that it’s done every single day. More superlatives, etc.

Basically, a repeat of what Miller et al just said.

Okay. Here are the new details on push subscriptions. First time Apple has used this tech. 99 cents a day, $40 a year. [ahem].

11:26 am: And now, oddly, press conference comes to a halt for a photo opp.

11:26 am: Waiting for them to set up chairs for Q&A.

Questions and Answers

How will back issues be handled? Where will old copies be stored?

Angelo: Best thing to do is to save articles you care about. And it will also be archived on the Web. Internal archiving not there for 1.0.

Q: When will other pubs start using subscription option?

Announcement “very soon for other news publications.”

Q: How will you measure impressions, etc. for advertising?

Miller: Will have tech built into app for that. I should have mentioned during presentation that we love advertisers.

Q: For Rupe: How will you measure success?

A: We want to sell millions. But keep costs low. We have spent $30 million so far, “all of which has been written off in figures we’ll announce today.” But overall costs $500,000 a week going forward.

Q: Another question about subscriptions.

A: A non-answer from Cue.

Q: Who/what does Daily compete with? And how will other News Corp. properties be integrated?

A: Miller: Gotta compete with everything. “you’re competing with Angry Birds at some level.” [Hey that's my line!]

Murdoch: In NY, for example, we already have multiple outlets competing with each other. This is another.

Q: What about breaking news? How will that work?

A: Angelo talking up twitter feeds, sports scores, but “we can drop in a new page if we want to, and we will.” BUT! As a conusmer, I don’t like Web sites that change constantly. It’s not a great experience. [THAT IS: This is a newspaper, not a Web site.]

Q: What’s the political tone of this thing. Centrist, right?

A: Murdoch: “The editorial position will be in the hands of the editor.” Cue Angelo, who sorta hedges. On op-ed page, “We’re patriotic.”

Q: Someone wants to know if Rupert is really into this. Also, will there be an Australian version?

Murdoch. Duh.

(An Australian version “always a possibility.”)

Q: Why do this with the Daily instead of existing brands. Also, what’s up with your phone hacking newspapers in the U.K.?

A: Murdoch: Existing tablet apps are what got me excited about launching a new one. No comment on “the other matter.”

Q: You’ll be working with other tablets besides iPad, right?

A: Murdoch. Yes. And “we’ve been quite honest with Apple about that.” We’ll defnintely be on all platforms. But Apple will be the dominant one this year, in my opinion.

[Sorry, missed a Q. Seems to be about what apps Murdoch likes.]

Q: More about the editorial voice, please.

A: Angelo: Thinking it through. We know that people spend a lot of time with these apps–35 minutes, 40 minutes. “It’s unbelievable.” So how do you create content rich enough to keep people there?

Q: What did Steve Jobs say about this in the last couple of days?

A: Murdoch: “He did call me last week” and told me app was “really terrific. He was extremely flattering.”

Q: How will people find this stuff, since it’s not on the Web?

A: Cue: We’ve downloaded 10 billion apps. People can find this stuff.

Miller: We feel really good about this. We didn’t want to make compromises.

Q: I ask about what’s available on the Web.

A: Some of it will be mirrored on the Web, when it can be done technically. [Sorry, hard to type and write.]

[Sorry, now even more confused about what's available on the Web and what isn't. Going to have to follow up with the gang later.]

[Where's Greg Clayman, by the way?]

11:47 am: Q: How do you balance a subscription model with a large audience that advertisers want?

Murdoch: “They’d pay a much lower rate per thousand if it was free. They realize it’s something that people want.” And we can tell them more about who sees it. “It’s not just scattered out there….We’ll draw a better class of advertiser, and a better rate.”

11:48 am: Q: What’s the split between ad and subscription revenue?

Miller: Subscription will be larger at start, and then eventually 50-50, “which is the magic number.”

And we’re done. Will try to follow up, may have more answers/comments here, or in a separate post. Thanks for checking in!

---

Here is the press release announcing the Daily:

Introducing The Daily

First National Daily News Publication Created for iPad Launches today in the Apple App Store

New York, NY, February 2, 2011 – Today Rupert Murdoch, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of News Corporation, unveiled The Daily — the industry’s first national daily news publication created from the ground up for iPad.

“New times demand new journalism,” said Mr. Murdoch. “So we built The Daily completely from scratch — on the most innovative device to come about in my time — the iPad.”

“The magic of great newspapers — and great blogs — lies in their serendipity and surprise, and the touch of a good editor,” continued Mr. Murdoch. “We’re going to bring that magic to The Daily — to inform people, to make them think, to help themengage in the great issues of the day. And as we continue to improve and evolve, we are going to use the best in new technology to push the boundaries of reporting.”

The Daily’s unique mix of text, photography, audio, video, information graphics, touch interactivity and real-time data and social feeds provides its editors with the ability to decide not only which stories are most important — but also the best format to deliver these stories to their readers.

“News Corp. is redefining the news experience with The Daily,” says Steve Jobs, Apple’s CEO. “We think it is terrific and iPad users are really going to embrace it.”

Led by Editor-in-Chief Jesse Angelo and Publisher Greg Clayman, The Daily is the first application made available on the App Store as a subscription — which will be billed directly to an iTunes account. And because this paperless paper requires no multi-million dollar presses or delivery trucks, it will be priced at just 99 cents a week (or $39.99 for an annual subscription).

“The Daily launches at a moment when advances in technology are changing the job of the modern editor,” says Mr. Angelo. “These advances are giving us new ways to tell stories. We intend to take advantage of all of them, and make The Daily the new voice for a new era.”

Each day The Daily will publish up to 100 pages focused on six key areas: news, sports, gossip and celebrity, opinion, arts and life, and apps and games. It will offer views from across the political spectrum. They will come from across cultures and generations, across America and the world.

The Daily will feature Sudoku and crossword puzzles, localized weather reports, and a customizablesports package that captures news on the user’s favorite teams. Subscribers will also be able to leave comments on Daily stories in either written or audio form — as well as bookmark them in-app to read later.

As readers move through The Daily’s content, they will be helped by several highly intuitive navigation tools. And while The Daily lives on the iPad, most of its articles can be easily shared via Facebook, Twitter and email. The Daily will link out to the web, as well as bring the web into the app.

“In short, says Mr. Murdoch, “we believe The Daily will be the model for how stories are told and consumed in this digital age.”

The Daily has bureaus in New York and Los Angeles, as well as stringers across the country. Full companybios are available at TheDaily.com/about. Executive staff includes:

John Kilpatrick – Executive Creative Director
Steve Alperin – Managing Editor
Mike Nizza – Managing Editor, News
Richard Johnson – LA Bureau Chief
Sasha Frere-Jones – Editor, Arts & Life
Chris D’Amico – Editor, Sports
Elisabeth Eaves – Editor, Opinion
Peter Ha – Editor, Apps, Games and Technology

The Daily is also changing the way advertising is offered and consumed within a news publication. Full-page ad units are completely interactive, customizable, and offer a rich mix of branding and direct response opportunities. Launch advertisers include HBO,Macy’s, Paramount, Pepsi Max, Range Rover, Verizon, and Virgin Atlantic Airways.

“With The Daily, Rupert Murdoch has given us the chance to rethink the entire experience of news delivery and consumption,” said Mr. Clayman. “The ability to actively listen to and engage with our audience means we can continually provide an experiencethat consumers value in this fast-evolving tablet space. Together with our customers, our advertising partners, and the team at The Daily, we are excited to create a new form of media.”

About The Daily
The Daily is a first-of-its-kind daily national news publication built exclusively as an application for tablet computing. It provides readers the engaging experience of a magazine combined with the immediacy of the web and the need-to-know content of a newspaper, all while elevating user experience beyond the printed word. The Daily is a subscription-based news product, published 365 days a year, at the cost of $0.99 cents a week or $39.99 a year. For more information on The Daily go to: www.thedaily.com.

Finally, here are screenshots from The Daily’s listing in the App Store:

]]> http://allthingsd.com/20110202/live-from-the-dailys-debut/feed/ 5 http://allthingsd.com/20110201/google-latitude-adds-check-ins-how-2009/ http://allthingsd.com/20110201/google-latitude-adds-check-ins-how-2009/#comments Tue, 01 Feb 2011 18:13:14 +0000 Liz Gannes http://networkeffect.allthingsd.com/?p=3084 Today Google Latitude will give users the ability to share their location with friends and strangers by “checking in” to a particular establishment.

Many of the major location-based social networks launched in early 2009, including Latitude. But Latitude was different: Instead of asking users to manually check in, it continuously displayed their locations on a map in real time. The specificity of that information meant Latitude was primarily used for location-sharing with close friends and family.

Due in part to Google’s heft, the service is relatively popular; now available on all the big smartphone platforms, it has 10 million users who participate each month, compared with six million registered users for Foursquare.

Still, in the past year, just about every local-social pundit and competitor has announced a desire to go “beyond the check-in.” In that context, Latitude’s move to catch up seems oddly timed.

Ken Norton, senior PM for Latitude, justified today’s change by saying Latitude users have been asking for check-ins. Plus (and this is no small thing), Google is associating check-ins with its Google Places project, which means Latitude now has a business model: Connecting its users to local merchants.

Google is not facilitating Latitude-specific deals yet (as companies like Facebook and Foursquare already do), but Norton said there’s nothing stopping merchants from giving a discount to people who check in frequently.

What’s different about Latitude’s version of check-ins? There are a few innovative tweaks that some users may prefer. Google will automatically detect when users are stationary in a place it considers a business, and send them a notification asking if they want to check in.

Also, (with user permission) Latitude supports automatic check-ins for common venues, as well as supporting “checking out” of a place when the users’ location indicates they’ve left the building.

However, users cannot add locations; so, for instance, they can’t check into their homes (unless their homes are already businesses with Place pages).

And while Latitude is hopping on the trend, how about a sprinkle of gamification! Based on their participation, users can qualify to be a “Regular,” “VIP” or “Guru” of a specific establishment. However, there is no leaderboard or public acknowledgment of such users, yet.

Users can publish their locations to their public-facing Google Profile, if they want to share beyond their Latitude friend network. It’s expected that Google will increasingly include these public profiles in new social product launches.

The capability to check in on Latitude is only available on Android to start (through the new Google Maps 5.1 app), but should be coming to the BlackBerry, Symbian and iPhone, said Norton.

]]> http://allthingsd.com/20110201/google-latitude-adds-check-ins-how-2009/feed/ 4 http://allthingsd.com/20110131/paypal-hires-vp-of-global-design-from-apple/ http://allthingsd.com/20110131/paypal-hires-vp-of-global-design-from-apple/#comments Mon, 31 Jan 2011 20:30:16 +0000 Tricia Duryee http://emoney.allthingsd.com/?p=2177 PayPal has hired Sarah Brody, a seven-year veteran of Apple, for the position of VP of Global design.

The company confirmed the appointment to us after we got wind of an internal memo sent out to employees today.

In her new position at eBay-owned PayPal, Brody will focus on improving the PayPal user experience and making sure that its payment platform is easy to use.

Brody was previously at Apple, where she worked on the first iPhone and an early version of the iPod Nano. Some of her more recent design work can be seen on the homepages of Final Cut Studio, Logic Studio and Pro.

Picking up a design guru from Apple, which is known for its simple, yet exquisite, designs (and preference for as few buttons as possible), is a coup for PayPal.

However, just last week the company announced it had lost Osama Bedier, who took a job at Google after working for PayPal for eight years, and most recently oversaw the company’s global payments platform, including mobile.

Correction: In a previous version of the story, we wrote that the memo also said PayPal was still on the hunt for a new leader for its global product and experience leadership team. However, Sam Shrauger was promoted internally into the position.

UPDATE 2: We also learned today that PayPal’s parent company, eBay, has hired two new search experts from Facebook and Microsoft.

]]> http://allthingsd.com/20110131/paypal-hires-vp-of-global-design-from-apple/feed/ 1 http://allthingsd.com/20110126/paypal-loses-top-payment-exec-to-google-appoints-new-head/ http://allthingsd.com/20110126/paypal-loses-top-payment-exec-to-google-appoints-new-head/#comments Wed, 26 Jan 2011 22:02:55 +0000 Tricia Duryee http://emoney.allthingsd.com/?p=2022 PayPal’s Osama Bedier has resigned after eight years at the eBay-owned company and will take a job across town at Google.

In a blog post, Scott Guilfoyle, PayPal’s CTO, made the announcement and introduced the new head of the platform team, Matthew Mengerink.

But the departure of Bedier to Google is a big blow to PayPal, considering that both companies are racing to build next-generation payment platforms with a strong mobile component.

Bedier held the title of VP of platform and oversaw PayPal’s global payments platform, including mobile.

Mengerink is an internal replacement for the position, having worked at PayPal for 10 years. He previously led the PayPal architecture, infrastructure, payments development, core technologies, international development, customer quality and engineering services teams.

I will update when I hear more on what Bedier will be doing at Google.

]]> http://allthingsd.com/20110126/paypal-loses-top-payment-exec-to-google-appoints-new-head/feed/ 4 http://allthingsd.com/20110125/facebook-sets-mobile-sights-on-html5/ http://allthingsd.com/20110125/facebook-sets-mobile-sights-on-html5/#comments Tue, 25 Jan 2011 20:15:09 +0000 Liz Gannes http://networkeffect.allthingsd.com/?p=2752 “Mobile is our primary focus for our platform this year,” Facebook CTO Bret Taylor told an audience of developers at the Inside Social Apps conference in San Francisco today.

Taylor said Facebook will emphasize HTML5 development in order to have maximum impact across fragmented mobile platforms for both his company and those who build on the Facebook platform.

HTML5–which is the new browser standard that gives Web applications capabilities on par with native applications–Taylor said, “might be a little ahead of that curve, but that’s where we’re putting a huge amount of investment in the next year.”

Already, said Taylor, 125 million of Facebook’s 200 million-plus mobile users are using HTML5-capable devices like the iPhone and Android.

Even so, when Facebook introduces a new feature, it has to implement it across seven different versions: facebook.com, m.facebook.com, touch.facebook.com, its iPhone app, Android app, BlackBerry app and custom integrations for other handset OSs.

Facebook wants to reduce that friction for its own sake and its developers’ as well. The company’s first step toward this goal was its single sign-on for mobile apps introduced last year, which has already had significant impact on developers like Flixster, Taylor said.

Facebook’s HTML5 push brings it into step with Google, which has put a major emphasis on Web apps despite its own Android mobile OS. But even so, the two companies have had major success with native apps, when they’ve chosen to build them. Facebook has the No. 1 free iPhone app of all time, while Google Mobile for iPhone is No. 3. (Coming in second is Pandora’s streaming radio.)

“Mobile devices are inherently social,” said Taylor, noting that he feels that the combination of mobile, social and location will be an especially fruitful area for products like Facebook Places and Foursquare.

Taylor said Facebook is likely to create its own “high-quality location database”–which would compete with start-ups like SimpleGeo–though it’s not something the company has specific plans for yet.

Addressing start-ups wary of Facebook competing with their products by making them a part of its platform, Taylor said, “Our philosophy has always been to build products into Facebook that are generally useful, which is why we built location into the platform. We felt like it would have a really big impact for developers if they could all leverage a common location infrastructure.”

Facebook’s platform focus in 2010 was about improving user experience, Taylor said, and he considers that effort a success. He said Facebook reduced spam (a.k.a. unwanted posts about games like FarmVille and other applications) by 95 percent last year through policy simplifications.

Though it shut down ways for applications to recruit users, it wasn’t like Facebook prevented games from growing, said Taylor, citing the fantastic ascent of Zynga’s CityVille, which grew to 100 million users in 40 days, compared with the four years it took Facebook itself to reach that number.

Please see the disclosure about Facebook in my ethics statement.

]]> http://allthingsd.com/20110125/facebook-sets-mobile-sights-on-html5/feed/ 0 http://allthingsd.com/20110119/nintendos-3ds-on-sale-march-27-for-250-boasting-iphone-like-features/ http://allthingsd.com/20110119/nintendos-3ds-on-sale-march-27-for-250-boasting-iphone-like-features/#comments Wed, 19 Jan 2011 16:56:32 +0000 Tricia Duryee http://emoney.allthingsd.com/?p=1743 Nintendo announced the pricing and release date today for the 3DS, which it hopes will rejuvenate sales as its other hardware platforms start aging.

The 3DS will be available in the U.S. on March 27 for a competitively priced $249.99. The handheld game player’s big selling point is that it offers 3-D without the need for special glasses. The device will come in Cosmo Black or Aqua Blue. Prices will vary outside the U.S.

At an event today in New York, Nintendo revealed more of the device’s capabilities, and many of them sound like features found on the iPhone and many other smartphones.

Apple’s ability to turn its MP3 players and phones into portable gaming devices has been a competitive threat to Nintendo, which with the 3DS release looks like it is willing to recognize.

For example, the new 3DS has an online store, called the eShop, where users will be able to download games. It also has three cameras and a built-in gyro, so the device can be tilted and turned to affect game play. It will also have location-based features, where users can elect to receive new content from Nintendo or other 3DS users as they travel around. The feature can connect to Wi-Fi hotspots when in sleep mode to collect this content or to function as a pedometer, which counts a user’s steps.

Additionally, users can take pictures with the camera, or listen to music and surf the Web on an Internet browser, which will come soon in a system upgrade. Users will also be able to play with one another by exchanging a simple code. About 30 games are expected to be available by June for the device.

It’s some of these more nuanced features that could make the device more competitive, but it’s the 3-D interactivity that Nintendo is really pushing, and so far consumers have not gravitated to 3-D as a reason to upgrade a TV, so it’s unclear whether it will be a draw for the 3DS.

Nintendo’s enthusiasm for 3-D also suffered a blow when it issued a warning that it is not healthy for kids under the age of 6 to view 3-D images. Nintendo says the impact from that should be minimal because the 3-D effect can be ratcheted up or down, and even turned off completely.

]]> http://allthingsd.com/20110119/nintendos-3ds-on-sale-march-27-for-250-boasting-iphone-like-features/feed/ 4 http://allthingsd.com/20110118/microsoft-brings-the-first-piece-of-office-to-the-iphone-onenote/ http://allthingsd.com/20110118/microsoft-brings-the-first-piece-of-office-to-the-iphone-onenote/#comments Tue, 18 Jan 2011 17:49:16 +0000 Ina Fried http://mobilized.allthingsd.com/?p=2574 While Microsoft still hopes to one day rival the iPhone, the company’s Office unit is the latest part of Redmond to acknowledge that, for now at least, the iPhone reigns supreme.

Microsoft is releasing on Tuesday a version of its OneNote note-taking application for the iPhone. The program will be free for a limited time, Microsoft said, adding that notes taken on the iPhone will automatically be synchronized and backed up to the Web using Microsoft’s Windows Live SkyDrive.

“We know people care more about what they do than where they do it,” Microsoft Office unit Vice President Takeshi Numoto said in a blog post published on Tuesday. “Whether it’s on a PC or Mac, a mobile phone or online through the Web Apps on multiple browsers, we continue to bring Office to the devices, platforms, and operating systems our customers are using. It should be about the ideas and information, not the device, right?”

Of course, OneNote is just one piece of Office–and one of the newer and least used of the main components at that. It’s also an interesting choice, since OneNote isn’t available natively for the Mac. But Microsoft seems to be leaving the door open to bring other pieces of Office to the iPhone.

In an interview, Microsoft senior director Jason Bunge said that the company had been working on OneNote for the iPhone for the past 18 months. Bunge wouldn’t say whether other Office components are also in the works, saying only that the company had no other apps to announce at this time.

“You can absolutely expect Office to expand its presence across other platforms,” Bunge said.

As for whether Microsoft plans to eventually charge for OneNote or other iPhone apps, Bunge said he didn’t know how long OneNote would remain free and had no other details on Microsoft’s pricing plans.

The goal in bringing OneNote to the iPhone, he said, is to allow those who do use the program on the PC to have it with them wherever they are. Rival programs, such as Evernote, have already been available on the iPhone.

Bunge did put in a bit of a plug for Windows and Windows Phone, saying, “We want Office on our Windows devices to be the best productivity experience that’s possible.”

OneNote is not Microsoft’s first app for the iPhone. Redmond already offers a Bing app, as well as Windows Live Messenger and the Microsoft Tag barcode reader, among other programs.

Update, 12:15 pm PT: Some people, including Mobilized, are getting an error message when they try to log in with their Windows Live ID. Since OneNote for the iPhone requires a Windows Live account, it effectively means those encountering the bug can’t use OneNote for the iPhone at all for now.

Microsoft says it is aware of the issue and is investigating.

1:45 pm PT: Microsoft has posted a blog noting the issues and says they are appearing intermittently as a result of high demand, with the recommended approach as “just keep trying.”

]]> http://allthingsd.com/20110118/microsoft-brings-the-first-piece-of-office-to-the-iphone-onenote/feed/ 0 http://allthingsd.com/20110113/video-game-sales-lagged-in-2010-despite-xboxs-high-scores/ http://allthingsd.com/20110113/video-game-sales-lagged-in-2010-despite-xboxs-high-scores/#comments Fri, 14 Jan 2011 00:44:58 +0000 Tricia Duryee http://emoney.allthingsd.com/?p=1639 Microsoft’s Xbox dominated the charts at the end of 2010, despite year-over-year revenue declines for both videogame hardware and software.

The latest statistics released today from NPD Group estimated that consumer spending on game content totaled between $15.4 and $15.6 billion, which was flat to down 1 percent, compared to 2009. Meanwhile, sales of new physical videogame hardware, software and accessories were also down–6 percent, to end the year at $18.6 billion.

Microsoft was able to counteract those industry-wide trends through the successful launch of its Kinect hands-free controller and strong sales of the hit game Call of Duty: Black Ops.

Sales of the Xbox 360 jumped 42 percent year-over-year, and was the only platform to register an increase in unit sales. In fact, December 2010 was the best month ever for Xbox 360 sales after selling 1.9 million units.

After the figures were released today, Microsoft used the moment to toot its own horn: In a statement, it said it had pulled units from its January and February production to keep up with holiday demand for both Xbox and Kinect–and it still sold out in some circumstances. Now it’s scrambling to catch up.

At CES, Microsoft said that roughly eight million Kinects had been sold after being on the market for roughly two months, and that over 50 million Xbox 360s have been sold worldwide over the lifetime of the console.

The videogame industry is very cyclical, with software sales often trailing new hardware sales. Without new console introductions from the usual suspects, Microsoft has tried to increase sales by repositioning the Xbox as an entertainment hub, and relied on the Kinect to make the console appeal to a wider audience outside hard-core gamers.

Nintendo is hoping that its new 3DS gaming handheld will boost sales–however, it doesn’t come out for another couple of months, so it missed the critical holiday season and will face competition from smartphones.

NPD Group concluded that in December the Wii and the 360 platforms generated the greatest dollar sales of all platforms at 32 percent and 31 percent, respectively. That’s across all categories, including hardware, software and accessories.

Other than Xbox, there were some bright spots, but it wasn’t enough to offset overall declines. NPD Group said the highlights included digital downloads, mobile apps, social network games and non-digital stuff, like used games and PC games.

The numbers released today are early estimates. NPD Group said it will issue its final analysis in March.

]]> http://allthingsd.com/20110113/video-game-sales-lagged-in-2010-despite-xboxs-high-scores/feed/ 0 http://allthingsd.com/20110105/amazon-brings-the-kindle-app-to-windows-phone-7/ http://allthingsd.com/20110105/amazon-brings-the-kindle-app-to-windows-phone-7/#comments Wed, 05 Jan 2011 15:06:50 +0000 Tricia Duryee http://emoney.allthingsd.com/?p=1218 Amazon’s Kindle app now works on at least 11 different platforms with the addition of Microsoft’s Windows Phone 7 today. The apps allow you to start an e-book on one platform and then continue reading it where you left off on another. Features include the ability to synch bookmarks, notes and highlights. Yesterday, Amazon also confirmed that in addition to supporting the iPad, it will tailor the apps for upcoming Android and Windows-based tablet computers. At this point, it’s clear Amazon sees value in supporting all platforms. Rather than be discriminating, it’s trying to sell as many books as it can on as many platforms as a customer may want to read them.

]]> http://allthingsd.com/20110105/amazon-brings-the-kindle-app-to-windows-phone-7/feed/ 0 http://allthingsd.com/20110101/the-social-webs-big-new-theme-for-2011-multiple-identities-for-everyone/ http://allthingsd.com/20110101/the-social-webs-big-new-theme-for-2011-multiple-identities-for-everyone/#comments Sat, 01 Jan 2011 17:47:24 +0000 Liz Gannes http://networkeffect.allthingsd.com/?p=1697 Mark Zuckerberg famously said: “Having two identities for yourself is an example of a lack of integrity.”

Although he later clarified, “I wasn’t making a value judgment,” maintaining multiple identities, whether it’s as simple as publishing some photos to Picasa and others to Facebook, is becoming a big trend in online life.

Even as Zuckerberg’s Facebook extended its dominance in 2010 to the point where it seems to have a social Web monopoly, it was still a landmark year for social network competition.

Where in the past, tech industry watchers derided new start-ups for launching “yet another social network,” ever more users seem to be constructing multiple online presences that utilize the strengths of various platforms and networks.

And this splintered approach is only going to increase.

Internet users now have plenty of outlets for self-expression. They can prioritize individuality and choose to post on the highly customizable Tumblr, or instead value the comprehensiveness of a network and post on the blander Facebook.

A big part of this shift toward understanding the private online self versus the public online self has been the rise of Twitter. On Twitter, regular users make the sort of decisions celebrities do: What to share about their private lives with their public audience of followers.

Another shift has been the rise of smartphones, along with their quality broadband connections, good cameras and mobile apps.

As an early adopter of various social apps, I’ve recently been confronted with the choice of whether to post a picture taken with my Apple iPhone on-the-go to Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Path or Picplz.

Each of them has different audiences, different associations with my personal or professional identities, and different expectations for how people will view and interact with my snapshot. (And I suppose there’s also the option of keeping the pictures to myself on my phone storage.)

Although the people noisiest about privacy on Facebook have at times been the media, publicity of the company’s highly confusing privacy settings seems to have led to many more people being aware of them and perhaps even changing them.

Perhaps that’s why I see an increasing–but still quite small–portion of my Facebook friends using pseudonyms on the service. And when I asked them why, I heard a variety of reasons.

One is a teacher, another prefers to go by the moniker he uses artistically. Yet another is a college student who is applying for jobs and who wants to be more anonymous for a while. Like many of today’s young people, she has become highly conscious of balancing the freedom to be herself online with the way she is perceived by professional contacts.

(A representative for Facebook declined to comment on whether the company has recently been more permissive about allowing pseudonyms, something it has traditionally frowned on.)

Of course, very little of what’s posted online can be trusted to never get out or never be linked to its originator. If you really want to keep your thoughts private and impermanent, of course, keep them in your head.

But there are now many more options for more private communication, many of them having first come out in 2010. They include small-group coordination tools like GroupMe, Fast Society and Beluga. There’s also Path, a start-up from a former Facebooker that is perhaps too limited by design, but is exploring the world of more intimate and personal communications.

For many people, their Facebook network is far from a direct match with their real-world friends, so it will be increasingly important to use these tools to dice circles up and make them more accessible. (Facebook is also trying to address that need with its own Groups tool.)

To be sure, that Facebook map of connections is a highly valuable asset, one the company has fiercely protected, as Google reformulates its approach to the social Web.

Splitting your users into an entirely new social graph will certainly hamper growth. For instance, another early Facebooker launched Jumo, a social network for people connecting with nonprofits that seems to risk being redundant with, and isolated from, similar efforts on other platforms.

And Foursquare, despite its zeitgeisty innovation for sharing real-time location updates, has accumulated only about five million users in the last two years.

However, the speedy growth of new social networks like the addictive Instagram–which is like Twitter for pictures and got one million users in its first two months–shows that there’s still an opportunity to take an independent path.

What seems particularly notable about the current moment is that many people are evolving their approach to expressing themselves online, and they now have many tools and contexts to do so. And it’s up to them if these multiple identities will be unified anywhere except in their heads.

(Image collage at top of post courtesy Flickr user shannonkringen.)

Please see the disclosure about Facebook in my ethics statement.

]]> http://allthingsd.com/20110101/the-social-webs-big-new-theme-for-2011-multiple-identities-for-everyone/feed/ 11 http://allthingsd.com/20101228/mcafee-releases-annual-top-scary-reasons-to-buy-our-software-list/ http://allthingsd.com/20101228/mcafee-releases-annual-top-scary-reasons-to-buy-our-software-list/#comments Tue, 28 Dec 2010 19:33:16 +0000 Voices http://voices.allthingsd.com/?p=34421 Security outfit McAfee today unveiled its 2011 Threat Predictions report, and sure enough, the biggest threats are aimed at “2010′s most buzzed about platforms and services, including Google’s Android, Apple’s iPhone, foursquare, Google TV and the Mac OS X platform, which are all expected to become major targets for cybercriminals.” Another in a long list of non-shocking (but still sobering) predictions: “Politically motivated attacks will be on the rise, as more groups are expected to repeat the WikiLeaks paradigm.” The report’s bottom line: Anything you do online carries risks. Which is undeniably true.

]]> http://allthingsd.com/20101228/mcafee-releases-annual-top-scary-reasons-to-buy-our-software-list/feed/ 0 http://allthingsd.com/20101206/another-ebook-store-yep-but-this-ones-from-google/ http://allthingsd.com/20101206/another-ebook-store-yep-but-this-ones-from-google/#comments Mon, 06 Dec 2010 15:00:25 +0000 Peter Kafka http://mediamemo.allthingsd.com/?p=26638 Don’t want to buy your ebooks from Amazon, Apple, Barnes & Noble or Borders? Google is happy to help: The search giant has launched its own e-book store, along with its own ebook reader software.

Lots of today’s Google eBook launch has already been covered in the past (this Wall Street Journal piece from last week got a lot of it). And since I haven’t been able to actually take the store and software out for a run, I can’t vouch for any of it so far.

But here’s what you need to know at the start:

• Google is opening its own store, but the big goal is to set up an ecosystem and e-commerce channel that works across the Web.
• That means you can buy ebooks directly from Google, and you can also buy books from the sites of independent book shops, like Powell’s Books.
• That also means you can read the books on multiple platforms: There’s an Android app, of course. But there’s also an Apple-approved app in the iTunes store. And since the system is Web-based, you can read the books you buy on PCs and tablets, too. As well as e-readers from Sony, Barnes & Noble and Borders. The only place you can’t read Google-purchased titles–Amazon’s Kindle.
• Google says its catalog will be competitive with everyone else’s, though it’s hard to assess that without really digging in. It says it will have some three million books available in the store, “hundreds of thousands” of which which are commercial titles. Amazon, by comparison, boasts of 750,000 titles, but it’s including periodicals in that total.
• One distinct advantage Google has over a particular rival: Unlike Apple, it has access to Random House titles, which aren’t available on the iBooks platform due to a dispute about pricing.
• Speaking of pricing: Google says it supports both the traditional wholesale/retail model, as well as the new “agency” model that Apple has been pushing.
• Where’s all this going? Good question! Google executives argue that this is just a natural extension of its ongoing books project, which is supposed to make as many books available to as many people, period–it’s just that they happen to be selling some of them now. But view it from a different lens, and it looks like yet another attempt by Google to move from pointing to stuff, and selling ads along the way, to selling stuff, period. It hasn’t worked yet, but the company seems dead set on making a go of it.

]]> http://allthingsd.com/20101206/another-ebook-store-yep-but-this-ones-from-google/feed/ 4 http://allthingsd.com/20101117/zynga-chooses-facebook-yet-again-for-exclusive-launch-of-next-game-cityville/ http://allthingsd.com/20101117/zynga-chooses-facebook-yet-again-for-exclusive-launch-of-next-game-cityville/#comments Thu, 18 Nov 2010 02:00:20 +0000 Liz Gannes http://networkeffect.allthingsd.com/?p=510 Zynga may make “social games,” but they do not foster much in the way of complex or rewarding social interaction. The company is trying to change that, and today is announcing its next game, CityVille, which it calls its most social offering to date. CityVille (of course) is a cutesy simulation game in which users work to turn a small town into a big city.

What’s different is that rather than playing in their own siloed version of the game, friends can place businesses in each other’s cities, and benefit from the success of these franchises. CityVille also uses 3-D rendered buildings and characters and will be released in five languages, both things Zynga has never done before.

But for all those firsts, the game will only be released on Facebook. Zynga is of course working to diversify its platforms, adding iPhone, iPad, Android and Yahoo. But as a matter of priorities, said CityVille general manager Sean Kelly, “We feel like Facebook is the best partner to prove out.”

Kelly, who previously was GM of Zynga’s FishVille, declined to say how long Zynga had been developing CityVille, or how many people were on his team. However, he said this was the “first job ever” for half of his developers, and that his team also included game industry veterans from places like Blizzard, as well as longer-term employees of Zynga. Plus, one CityVille product manager came from Harvard Business School, so he helped the team create its in-game franchising arrangements. And an architect advised on how to properly build structures within the game.

This is only Zynga’s third game launch this year, after Treasure Isle and FrontierVille. The actual release of CityVille will be sometime over the next few days Update: weeks, based on the alignment of the stars and other factors.

]]> http://allthingsd.com/20101117/zynga-chooses-facebook-yet-again-for-exclusive-launch-of-next-game-cityville/feed/ 2 http://allthingsd.com/20101015/september-u-s-video-games-sales-down-eight-percent-npd-reports/ http://allthingsd.com/20101015/september-u-s-video-games-sales-down-eight-percent-npd-reports/#comments Fri, 15 Oct 2010 12:00:19 +0000 Eric Savitz http://voices.allthingsd.com/?p=31136 The trouble continues for the old school video game sector.

In September, retail sales of new video game gear was down eight percent from a year ago to $1.18 billion, according to market research firm NPD Group. Hardware sales were down 19 percent and software sales were down six percent, although accessory sales were up 13 percent. I would note that sales were up from $818.9 million in August.

NPD has revamped its monthly reports on the industry, in particular stressing that the report only includes sales of new goods at retail, and does not include sales of used games, rentals, mobile games, social networking games or digitally distributed games. NPD also has stopped breaking out sales data for the individual handheld and console platforms, and it has stopped providing unit sales information for software games.

Read the rest of this post on the original site

]]> http://allthingsd.com/20101015/september-u-s-video-games-sales-down-eight-percent-npd-reports/feed/ 0 http://allthingsd.com/20101013/qa-service-chacha-raises-20-million-more/ http://allthingsd.com/20101013/qa-service-chacha-raises-20-million-more/#comments Thu, 14 Oct 2010 00:53:23 +0000 Peter Kafka http://mediamemo.allthingsd.com/?p=24487 Q&A service ChaCha, which has already raised $52 million in funding, has added another $20 million. This round was led by Rho Ventures and VantagePoint, and sources familiar with the transaction insist that the money is for growth and not liquidity for early investors. ChaCha competes in a field chock-full of rivals, from Yahoo and Answers.com down to new entrants like Quora. The company last raised $7 million in an E round in December 2009; the company claims to reach 15 million unique users between its online and mobile platforms.

]]> http://allthingsd.com/20101013/qa-service-chacha-raises-20-million-more/feed/ 0 http://allthingsd.com/20100929/skype-and-avaya-sign-enterprise-deal/ http://allthingsd.com/20100929/skype-and-avaya-sign-enterprise-deal/#comments Wed, 29 Sep 2010 15:05:30 +0000 John Paczkowski http://digitaldaily.allthingsd.com/?p=49651 It’s taken about a year, but corporate phone equipment maker Avaya and consumer VoIP carrier Skype have finally inked their long-rumored partnership.

Announced moments ago, the two-phase deal will see Avaya customers first given access to Skype Connect, the company’s play at the IP-enabled PBX and Unified Communications (UC) market. Later, by the second half of 2011, the two companies will further integrate their communications platforms so that Avaya and Skype users can interact with one one another via presence, instant messaging, voice and video.

The deal will give Skype more access to the enterprise market through the sales and distributions channels of Avaya, and Skype says the integrated product will address corporate concerns about security and communication management. For Avaya, having Skype and its hundreds of millions of users is a nice way to differentiate itself from rival Cisco (CSCO).

Acting as middleman in the deal–private equity group Silver Lake Partners, which bought Avaya in 2007 for $8.2 billion and later bought a majority stake in Skype from eBay (EBAY) for $1.9 billion.

Avaya and Skype Sign Strategic Agreement for Business Communications and Collaboration Solutions

BASKING RIDGE, NJ and LUXEMBOURG–(Marketwire – September 29, 2010) – Avaya, a global leader in enterprise communications systems, software and services, and Skype today announced a strategic agreement to deliver innovative, real-time communications and collaboration solutions to businesses of all sizes. The multi-phase deal includes both go-to-market and an industry-first, joint technology integration that seeks to enable businesses to lower costs and expand how employees, customers, partners and suppliers communicate and collaborate with greater convenience and efficiency.

In the first phase of the agreement, Avaya customers in the U.S. market will have access to Skype Connect(TM), a product which adds Skype calling to IP-based enterprise communications systems, providing a Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) communications channel between Avaya communications systems and Skype. Customers with Avaya Aura(TM) Session Manager or Avaya Aura SIP Enablement Server, CS1000, Avaya IP Office, or BCM systems can use Skype Connect to place calls globally for increased reach, while aiming to save on international calling. Enterprise-level security and features such as tracking, recording, regulatory compliance, and more are provided by the Avaya system.

Skype reported 124 million average monthly connected users during the second quarter of 2010. Now, Skype users can make inbound calls to Avaya customers in the U.S. market for free or at a low cost. Calls will be treated with Avaya’s routing, conferencing, messaging, mobility and contact center capabilities, as well as other collaboration services. For example, businesses can:

Establish Skype Click & Call buttons for inbound calling from Web sites
Establish Skype Online Numbers for inbound calling from landline and mobile phones
Route inbound calls from a Skype user to an enterprise extension

Avaya customers in the U.S. market who are interested in Skype Connect can speak with their Avaya sales representative or an Avaya Connect channel partner contacts beginning in October.

In the second half of 2011, Avaya and Skype plan to deliver integrated unified communications and collaboration solutions for enterprises within the U.S. The integration is intended to establish federation between Avaya Aura and Skype communications platforms and both user communities, so that an Avaya end-user and Skype user can engage and interact via presence, instant messaging, voice and video. A business, for example, could use Skype to access an Avaya-based contact center in a simple and highly integrated way to quickly and efficiently resolve customer service issues. The integrated solutions will also allow enterprise IT managers to manage and control the inter-connectivity between end users to meet their corporate IT policies.

“Avaya and Skype have been working along parallel paths to offer innovative, scalable, low cost, SIP-based communications to our respective markets,” said Alan Baratz, senior vice president, Avaya and president, Avaya Global Communications Solutions. “Now, the two companies will work together, striving to improve collaboration and customer service by federating Avaya and Skype solutions for a common user experience that delivers unique benefits for businesses and their customers who are Skype users.”

“Our relationship with Avaya is expected to expand the footprint for Skype Connect into more enterprises in the U.S. market, while allowing us to help Avaya’s customers benefit from Skype’s cost savings and access to Skype’s global user base,” said David Gurle, vice president and general manager of Skype for Business. “We believe our integrated solution in the second half of 2011 is expected to offer the benefits of Skype to a growing number of businesses and open up new ways for people to communicate and collaborate.”

]]> http://allthingsd.com/20100929/skype-and-avaya-sign-enterprise-deal/feed/ 0 http://allthingsd.com/20100927/eu-regulators-decide-apple-has-been-scared-straight/ http://allthingsd.com/20100927/eu-regulators-decide-apple-has-been-scared-straight/#comments Mon, 27 Sep 2010 16:59:37 +0000 John Paczkowski http://digitaldaily.allthingsd.com/?p=49382 The easing of Apple’s restrictions on iOS development tools has won the company some good will abroad. In light of the change in policy, the European Union has closed its investigation into an Apple restriction on interpreted code that prevented developers from using tools that could easily make their apps available on multiple platforms.

The agency also closed a second investigation into Apple’s repair policies, which required iPhone warranty service to be performed in the country in which the device was purchased. Now that the company is offering cross-border iPhone warranty service, there’s no need to pursue that investigation any further, either.

]]> http://allthingsd.com/20100927/eu-regulators-decide-apple-has-been-scared-straight/feed/ 0 http://allthingsd.com/20100311/good-news-for-netflix-web-users-disney-reups-with-starz/ http://allthingsd.com/20100311/good-news-for-netflix-web-users-disney-reups-with-starz/#comments Thu, 11 Mar 2010 17:51:13 +0000 Peter Kafka http://mediamemo.allthingsd.com/?p=17290 Premium TV network Starz Entertainment has re-upped with Disney on its distribution deal, assuring access to the studio’s movies through 2015.

Why are you reading about this on a site that pays attention to digital media? Because the Starz renewal includes the rights to redistribute Disney’s movies on all platforms, including digital.

Meaning that Netflix (NFLX), which has been able to stream Disney (DIS) movies via its own Starz deal, will continue to do so.

This news will be a bit surprising to some observers, who expected that Disney would shut down that option sooner or later.

Here’s the release:

Disney and Starz Entertainment Extend Pay TV Output Agreement
 
Burbank, Calif. and Englewood, Colo. – March 11, 2010 – Starz Entertainment, LLC, and Disney-ABC Domestic Television, a division of The Walt Disney Company, announced today the signing of a new, exclusive long-term licensing agreement for theatrical releases from The Walt Disney Studios through 2015. The previous output agreement was set to run through 2012. Financial terms of the agreement were not disclosed.
 
The deal extension provides Starz with exclusive pay TV rights to exhibit theatrically released Walt Disney Studios ?live-action and animated feature films, including those from Marvel Entertainment, on its Starz, Encore and MoviePlex linear channels, and its related on-demand and IP-based services, both in standard and high definition. Walt Disney Studios theatrical releases in the agreement, in addition to Marvel, include pictures produced under the Walt Disney Pictures, Walt Disney Animation Studios, Disney-Pixar, Touchstone Pictures, and Hollywood Pictures labels. Theatrical releases from DreamWorks Studios and Miramax Films will not be licensed to Starz under the new agreement.
 
Janice Marinelli, president, Disney-ABC Domestic Television, and Bill Myers, Starz Entertainment president and chief operating officer, announced the agreement on behalf of the companies.?

“Disney and Starz have been partners since the launch of the flagship Starz premium channel back in 1994, and we are pleased to be able to extend our very successful relationship,” said Marinelli. “With this long-term extension, Starz’s subscribers will continue to experience the magic and excitement of our Walt Disney Studios motion pictures,” she continued.
 
Myers said, “Commercial-free movies from Disney have always been a cornerstone of our programming and will remain so for years to come even as we add original series to our movie mix.” Myers noted that Starz has been a leader in making use of new technology to allow subscribers to enjoy programming in more convenient ways. ”This agreement secures our ability to meet the needs of current and future subscribers in a fast-changing media landscape,” he said.
 
Walt Disney Studios animated movies and live-action feature films coming exclusively to Starz in 2010 include: Up, The Princess and the Frog, The Proposal (starring Sandra Bullock and Ryan Reynolds), G-Force, Old Dogs ?(starring Robin Williams and John Travolta), Hannah Montana: The Movie, Alice in Wonderland; and Race to Witch Mountain.

]]> http://allthingsd.com/20100311/good-news-for-netflix-web-users-disney-reups-with-starz/feed/ 0