Tech IT Easy » advertising

Microsoft blocks ads. what?

Georgia Psyllidou — Fri, 29 Aug 2008 08:57:44 +0000

Hey there, planet mainstream here, are you in for some blockbuster scenarios?

After 2 peaceful years of gardening new products and shopping (still checking if Yahoo comes in the right size) Microsoft has apparently decided to go extrovert and check out the competition. The new internet explorer, IE8, marketed as the “discrete one’ comes with features like ‘In Private Browsing’ that help you block away some aspects of commercial intrusion such as cookies, history lists, and ads.

Wait a minute, are ads angels or demons? It depends on whose side you are, ads are actually multifaceted like mood rings: their use and value are subject to the judge’s role, critical spirit, need of information.

Web ads are mostly seen as angels: they do no evil, they function more elegantly than on other media, probably that’s why people put up with them and other people have based business and state funding models on them.

Demonizing web ads is not part of the ‘InPrivate Blocking’ goals, free will rules. But with privacy on internet becoming a hot topic for regulation, InPrivateBrowsing is actually a do-no-evil, democratic timebomb.

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4fMqJWoOjE4]

So, this is my scenario.

(late this summer, honey I’m home)

Microsoft is risking committing twice the same antitrust crime, expecting the ad-allergy to spread like a demon-ex-machina by means of ambient buzz (autumn leaves and dust).

(later this year, in the city)

In the same way we’ve rapidly become eco-aware, we begin paying more attention to our privacy.

(you’re just too good to be true)

As Google’s adwords becomes better and Google’s search engine becomes more personalized the results of these two tend to look alike. At some point, our contextual aesthetics react to the lack of difference in the typology of service. Allergy. (atsum)

(in the meantime, the trial)

Then, the second antitrust trial for Microsoft magnetizes ambient dynamics towards privacy awareness.

(whose side are we?)

People are mostly concerned with the direct impact of this issue on their lives rather than the health of the economic competition. This aspect works for Microsoft.

(in the spring, jingle bells blossom/ after the trial…)

As time goes by, behavioral reflexes are built on this awareness.

By highlighting that do-no-evil doesn’t equal do-good, the trial triggers the attitude of systematically using the ad-blocking features in IE or elsewhere (Firefox, Safari…)

(is the trial just a bad dream?)

Google on the other side is still our clean cut hero, our Brandon Walsh.. Fighting for free airwaves, for openness, for us, has chosen an original model of B2C partnership. Beyond a company it acts as a web NGO.

So what is the best path to protect its core business? The legal, the educational, the crowdsourcing or the self-transformational?

Will Brandon

a) complain to the highschool director ?

b) organize an ad-contest for the beach-club kids to campaign for homeless veterans ?

c) run for highschool president ?

d) or study hard to access UCLA?

…to be continued

Well, I also have some legal questions:

If InPrivateBlocking is banned, is the same feature declared non grata for other browsers as well ? What about other add-on programs-is size(impact) shaping legality?

How is the applicable legal domain chosen? Is it an issue of commercial or civil law and how is EU regulation restrictive in each case?

Piss o’ cake?

Georgia

Unlike

Is the internet recession-proof?

Vincent van Wylick — Wed, 23 Jul 2008 08:32:30 +0000

Premise: A while ago, Fred Wilson, a (possibly biased) tech-investor, wrote that he was bullish on the tech-industry. Recently, the New York Times reports that e-commerce is up because people want to travel less (fuel costs). And previous stories reported on the migration of advertising revenues from traditional media to online media.

A note: I don’t know that there will be a recession. I know that the real-estate bust in the US is a pretty big deal, and that banks from Europe and Asia have been pretty heavily invested in that supposed goldmine. And any fall-out in the US, i.e. banks shutting down or otherwise, will likely have global repercussions on the banking-sector, and affect other industries also.

With that out of the way, three problems/phenomena I associate with these times are:

A lack of accountability in investments (e.g. currently real estate and previously startups & Enron), also accompanied by emotions like fear & greed.
Rising input-costs (the market should normally adjust for that, but the explosive growth in demand from emerging countries + the lack of an alternative for, in this case, fuel, make this a pretty big uncertainty)
Changing paradigms, such as the rise of webware, the (expected) fall of hardware-prices, the possible fall of software-sales, the continuing displacement of brick & mortar business models, businesses being forced to go & think green, and much, much more.

So, there’s probably a few more symptoms (throw them out in the comments!), but it seems to me that the internet is pretty well placed to deal with some of these problems.

Let’s start with accountability. The strength of the web is that everything on it is digital and, in theory, nearly (*) everything can be measured (*: I am quite sceptical about the measurability of video & audio, though arguable the serious data is still in text). Added to this, there are technology-shifts, like digital television, mobile computing, and E-Ink, which make it easier to have a wider reach as a data-gatherer, not to mention that business are increasingly placing their data online, again facilitating data-exchange in partnerships. This should make it easier for businesses to base their expense on actual data, the same for investors and advertisers. Together with the consequences of the last internet-bust, I think that everyone is pretty careful to base their decisions on information, not hopes and dreams (well, I’m still sceptical about Twitter).

Next, rising input prices. Having blogged on the topic of food and retail for about a year, I’ve obviously had to follow this trend/reality quite a bit. The NYTimes heading I linked to above summarises my feelings quite well, customers are looking at the opportunity cost of fuel (as well as the cost of being green) and alternatives like e-commerce may seem much more attractive. In the long-term, people like James Howard Kunstler are calling for more and more “locality,” i.e. that people will be willing to migrate less for work and, I guess, shopping, which opens up opportunities for e-commerce and ways of working across a distance.

Finally (?), changing paradigms. Well, whatever the new world looks like, a pretty warm place is reserved for the web. Web-apps and -services are maturing, offering more and better features, and providing individuals and businesses with a comfortable ecosystem to operate in. The OLPC, the Asus EEE, and other cheaper systems (when Dell comes in, it will be mass), may be less powerful, but they will be optimised to use the web most of all. Societally, it may eventually become the logical choice for the mainstream to spend less than $500 for a laptop, in which case hardware-makers and, possibly, software-makers will suffer. But the web won’t. Similarly, while I don’t yet see brick & mortar disappearing, it is clear that eventually 99% of B&M businesses will have to have an online presence. About the world going green, I can’t sell everything, perhaps someone else can give the answer to that.

Is the internet recession-proof? My guess is as good as the next guy. But, more efficient use of computing, datamining, search, advertising, e-commerce, and logistics are all technologies I am extremely bullish on these coming years.

What do you think?

Vincent

Unlike

Auction 73 : Multi Play Multi Win

Georgia Psyllidou — Sat, 22 Mar 2008 04:20:25 +0000

Uf!

My faith has been restored: we live in a civilized business world where everybody can be a winner, sky is the limit etc.

More specifically, as far as the 700Mhz part of the sky is concerned, the breaking news are that there are no breaking news and no disruptive solutions:

Winners

US government has won

~ 20 billions of declining US $.

AT&T has won

the C-block and the pride of carriers being carriers.

AT&T’s lawyers have won

significant fees and gem experience from lawsuits concerning the Openness clause.

Google has won

the right to patch their apps on (carter)mobiles,
access to the mobile advertising market (~ 3 billions d.US $)
and saved ~ 5b.d.US $ to invest on their core business and on P&L communication (partnerships and lobbying)

Consumers have won

a stable thus fitter-happier-more productive market
having the actors empowered and doing their best to focus on client satisfaction with the cease of this corporate battle
a monetization of their mobile clicking
federal income

(others)

… you’re welcome to brainstorm.

Geometry: Symmetry and a 3D market that moves in balance.

The equilibrium of this auction is a piece of art.

The main financial flows are organized symmetrically, in analogy of size.

This is my oversimplified prism:

Big still pay the Big (B to B) : AT&T pays FCC
MicroPlayers AKA “consumers” pay attention that pays Google (MP to G)

The notorious interoperability in telecommunications could actually apply to business models as well , since each one has found its place in this multidimensional world.

As you can see above the 700 MHz space has been defined in 3D :

Little red axe: MP to G

Big red axe: B to B

The long red tail: their future interactions.

I commit to review my proposition to do away with auctions as sales procedures, taking off my hat to these infamous Google game theorists.

Hey guys, would you care to take a look into tougher games once you’ve finished with business peace?

Georgia

Unlike