I found the article below on the bloomberg terminal.  Based on the last free write (#7), SAP is expanding its software to stay competitive in the cloud computing market.  However, they have found themselves in trouble with Oracle, a leading software company.  Oracle has sued SAP for infringement on licences they would have had to obtained from Oracle in order to use their new software.  SAP was forced to pay Oracle $777 million, which will certainly eat into their already shrinking profits.



Oracle Claims $777 Million Damages in SAP Infringement Case (1)


2012-05-02 20:17:12.746 GMT





(Updates with SAP damages estimate in fifth paragraph.)



By Joel Rosenblatt

May 2 (Bloomberg) -- Oracle Corp. said it will claim

damages of $776.7 million in its retrial of a copyright-

infringement lawsuit against SAP AG, the biggest maker of

business-management software.

Oracle decided in February to pursue a new trial rather

than accept U.S. District Judge Phyllis Hamilton’s reduction of

a 2010 jury verdict the company won from $1.3 billion to

$272 million. The retrial is scheduled for June 18 in Oakland,

California.

Oracle said in a court filing that it has a right to pursue

actual damages measured by the “fair market value of the rights

infringed.” To do so, the company has asked Hamilton, to let it

present evidence of a “hypothetical license” that would

establish that value. If not, Oracle said, it will pursue

damages based on $656 million in SAP’s profits and $120.7

million in Oracle’s lost profits, according to the April 26

filing.

Oracle said its damages claim will be supported at trial by

an “updated analysis and additional evidence to support the

infringers’ profits and lost profit amounts.”

“We think Oracle’s damage estimate is overstated,” Jim

Dever, a spokesman for Walldorf, Germany-based SAP, said in an

e-mail. SAP estimates damages at $28 million, he said.



Downloaded and Copied



Oracle, based in Redwood City, California, sued in 2007

after discovering that SAP’s software-maintenance unit had

downloaded and copied its software. SAP didn’t contest that it

was liable for the infringement by its TomorrowNow unit, which

the company closed in 2008.

The jury award of $1.3 billion was based on the value of a

hypothetical license that SAP would have needed to use Oracle’s

software. Hamilton threw out the verdict, calling it “grossly

excessive” and not supported by the evidence.

TomorrowNow pleaded guilty in September to U.S. charges of

unauthorized computer access and SAP paid the unit’s

$20 million fine.

The civil case is Oracle Corp. v. SAP AG, 07-1658, U.S.

District Court, Northern District of California (Oakland).



For Related News and Information:

Oracle news: ORCL US CN

SAP news: SAP GR CN

Top legal news: TLAW

Legal functions: BLAW



--With assistance from Karen Gullo in San Francisco. Editors:

Peter Blumberg, Michael Hytha



To contact the reporter on this story:

Joel Rosenblatt in San Francisco at +1-415-617-7129 or

jrosenblatt@bloomberg.net



To contact the editor responsible for this story:

Michael Hytha at +1-415-617-7137 or

mhytha@bloomberg.net

Consumer Power

As consumer power goes viral, company branding quakes

22-year old DC activist takes on Verizon

By Chris Taylor

Fri Jan 6, 2012 1:02pm EST

(Reuters) - Corporate America's worst nightmare lives in a tiny one-bedroom apartment, loves browsing in flea markets and has a lop-eared brown and white pet rabbit named Crackers.

 

Meet Molly Katchpole. The 22-year-old Washington, D.C. resident has recently tangled with a couple of billion-dollar corporations, and cowed them into submission, without breaking a sweat.

Take Verizon Wireless, which had planned a $2 "convenience" charge for the privilege of paying a bill by phone or online. Katchpole, a Verizon user for eight years, was offended by the very idea that loyal customers could be penalized for paying what they owed. So she went on the website Change.org - organized a petition - and watched as it quickly racked up more than 165,000 signatures. As consumer outrage went viral, Verizon backpedaled within hours.

And how about Bank of America's infamous $5 monthly usage fee for debit cards? It too was kiboshed, partly thanks to another Katchpole petition and 300,000 of her outraged brethren, at a time when the Occupy Wall Street movement had been pressuring banks.

"I'm not exactly sure what these companies are thinking," says Katchpole, who only graduated last spring from Roger Williams University in Rhode Island and now works as a fellow at the nonprofit Rebuild the Dream, an organization that lobbies against income inequality (her petitions are personal ventures, unrelated to her job).

"It's so out of touch with reality and what their customers are going through. My Verizon petition was only up for about eight hours before they backed down."

Also forced into a recent and embarrassing climb-down was video-streaming company Netflix, which had planned to spin off DVD rentals into a stand-alone service called Qwikster. User objections became so deafening that the notion was killed before launch.

"The Internet is the great equalizer, and that's a beautiful thing - even if it's not positive for us," said Netflix spokesman Steve Swasey. "We made mistakes that hurt our brand, consumers let us know about it, and now we're rebuilding step by step."

Such is the growing power of social media, which can make consumer complaints go viral and cause serious brand damage within days or even hours. While one person can't topple a company, if that person is able to assemble an army of hundreds of thousands behind them, they become a force to be reckoned with.

Thanks to the increasingly savvy use of tools like Facebook and Twitter, the power balance between company and customer has been tilting in the latter's favor.

"Consumers have always had a voice, but now it's louder and it spreads so quickly because of social media," says Laura Ries, president of branding firm Ries & Ries in Atlanta. "Companies used to have a lot of time to think about strategy, to have meetings and studies, and to take time to respond. They don't have that time anymore. Now it's all about rapid response."

Consider the introduction of New Coke, one of the great marketing disasters of all time, which took almost three months to get reversed back in 1985. The Bank of America debit-card charge plan withstood a month of public fury before it was killed.

"Our customers' voices are most important to us," Bank of America co-COO David Darnell said in a written statement (the firm declined comment for this article). "As a result, we are not currently charging the fee and will not be moving forward with any additional plans to do so."

This time around, with Verizon Wireless, reaction was even faster. CEO Dan Mead scrambled to issue this statement: "At Verizon, we take great care to listen to our customers. Based on their input, we believe the best path forward is to encourage customers to take advantage of the best and most efficient options, eliminating the need to institute the fee at this time." Translation: Verizon executives (who also declined comment for this article) witnessed the venomous public reaction, and backtracked within a day.

"Someone at Verizon thought this was a reasonable way to add millions to the bottom line, and they were wrong," says Seth Godin, author of marketing classics like "Purple Cow" and "Unleashing the Ideavirus." "Consumers are speaking up more loudly and with more vehemence than ever before, and they're doing it in public."

Make no mistake, corporations are taking note of this sea change - and are often capitalizing on their rivals' foibles.

The credit union Mission Federal, for instance, responded to the bank fee controversy by offering to reward customers up to $5 a month for using its debit cards, said the credit union's CEO Debra Schwartz.

"Companies are now saying, 'Wow, we have to be careful about how we do this,' " says Jean-Manuel Izaret, a partner and pricing expert with management consultants Boston Consulting Group. "Clearly Netflix, Bank of America and Verizon didn't apply best practices, and had their pricing moves rejected by the market. It used to be just the press putting pressure on corporations, but now we're way beyond that."

So now that consumers are realizing the power of the social-media megaphone, how are they going to wield it - and how are embattled companies going to respond? Here are a few predictions from the experts:

* Companies need to act at warp speed. Mistakes are made in the business world. But companies can limit any lasting damage to their brands by recognizing potentially devastating memes, and acting quickly to contain them, with their own equivalent of political 'War Rooms'. "If you don't respond to a fire on the Internet, it only tends to get bigger," says Ries. "But even though word can spread rapidly these days, if you stay on top of it, it can be forgotten just as rapidly."

* Rollouts will become more thoughtful. To avoid such out-of-control wildfires, companies should act preemptively and consider consumer reaction to boardroom decisions before the public does it for them. If charges are new and not shared by a firm's competitors, for instance, a backlash is entirely predictable. Focus groups and regional test rollouts could help companies gauge reaction before a casual decision morphs into a full-fledged disaster.

* Consumers should pick their fights. Activists like Katchpole have certainly notched some high-profile victories, but if everybody starts complaining about every little thing, then collective outrage could lose some of its power. As a result, make sure to focus on the meaningful instead of the petty.

* Get ready for more. Consumers still make up something of an archipelago, each pushing his or her own issue with an online petition here, a Twitter hashtag there. While some issues like the Bank of America debit-card charge catch fire in the public imagination, many don't. But if consumers do manage to get truly organized, watch out.

"What would happen if all pricing was shared by all consumers, or if everyone stood up for the person who was being thrown out of their house, or if at the very moment you're choosing a wireless carrier, you could see an updated chart of customer-service wait times?" asks Godin. "If the volume of consumer outcry gets even louder, and the coordination gets even better, it will forever change what we do as marketers."

At least, that's what Molly Katchpole hopes. She's not sure which corporate decision she'll be targeting next, in between her trips to the laundry and the grocery store, but no doubt another one will be coming along soon.

"You used to have to make phone calls and write letters," she says. "But companies can't hide this stuff anymore; just take a look at their Facebook walls and all the angry comments. I really hope they take these lessons to heart."

New York Times - E-Commerce Wrapped in a Music Video

April 23, 2012, 9:50 am

 

 

Just another way that e-commerce is changing and where business strategies are being integrated

E-Commerce Wrapped in a Music Video

By ERIC WILSON

Popdust, a music news site, where you can also purchase the looks.

“Fashion Star” on NBC is probably the extreme example of the possibilities of merging content and commerce with pop stars, designers and even top-tier retailers. But those lines have been blurring for some time, as magazines adopt e-commerce strategies (expect a big push from Harper’s Bazaar this fall) and retailers continue to delve into the medium of social commerce.
One good example, or at least an innovative one, of where this all may be heading can be found this week over at Popdust, a music news site. A new video introduced on Monday shows Amy Heidemann and Nick Noonan, the excessively chirpy pop duo known as Karmin (who are themselves the product of a viral video sensation on the Internet), trying on a variety of clothes. If you like what they are wearing, you can buy it right from the site. And Karmin gets a cut of the sales.

What’s also interesting is that the Popdust project has tie-ins with a number of other partners: Look TV, a new fashion channel from the creators of “Project Runway,” which is connected to YouTube; Lucky magazine, which is featuring some of the Karmin-curated collection on its Web site; and a number of designers whose products are being sold.
In the video, Ms. Heidemann and Mr. Noonan try on a few outfits while looking cutesy and then model them with enough enthusiasm to qualify as an audition tape for HSN. Their song “Brokenhearted” plays in the background.
“I’ll tell you why I like this outfit,” Ms. Heidemann says at one point, wearing a Jack by BB Dakota striped skirt and a floral-print top from Topshop. “Because summertime is coming, and everybody needs a cute skirt with pockets.”
Given that Karmin’s breakthrough was a cover of Chris Brown’s “Look at Me Now” that was viewed millions of times on YouTube, Hugh Panero, the chief executive of Popdust, said the potential reach of the video could be quite large. And further projects are in the works as Popdust develops its e-commerce.
“There is a whole evolution of commerce going on,” Mr. Panero said. “How that takes shape, where you are integrating commerce into editorial into music, is all coming together in different ways. We’re just one of the ways that it is coming together.”

Samsung introduces SMART TV 2012

Samsung's new SMART TV allows consumers to acess the internet with a flick of a finger in the air. They are also able to do this from the comfort of their living room couch. We talked about making online payments in class and I believe the new SMART TV is going to change online e-commerce. Customers may be more willing to make purchases while moving their hands in the air, rather than having to click a mouse sitting at their desk.




Samsung introduces SMART TV 2012


Posted on 19 April 2012 - 04:52pm

Last updated on 19 April 2012 - 05:23pm

KUALA LUMPUR (April 19, 2012): Samsung Electronics Co Ltd, a leading name in digital media and convergence, today launched its latest range of products.



These included its SMART television series, Plasma television, SMART Blu-ray home entertainment system and Blu-ray player.



"Samsung is working across its home entertainment product portfolio, and it has removed the barriers that exist between devices and content to deliver a smarter, simpler and more connected life for consumers," Chong Xu Jenn, product marketing leader of AV business unit, told a press conference here today.



"Samsung's range of SMART TV 2012 offers consumers the SMART Interaction, SMART Content and SMART Evolution," Chong added.



He said the SMART TV, already available in the market, was expected to increase Samsung's market share this year.



Samsung currently has a 33% share of the Plasma television market. – Bernama

EBay posts higher quarterly profits because of higher e-commerce

Although the strength of the consumer economy is still uncertain, ebay posts higher profits for the most recent quarter.  E-commerce has allowed the consumer to get cheaper prices on goods they want through ebay's second-price style auction business model.   

Startup makes competition of data mining

2:23 PM, Apr. 16, 2012 | 

Kaggle president and chief scientist Jeremy Howard shields his eyes in front of a NASA hanger in Mountain View, Calif. / Paul Sakuma, AP

By Marcus Wohlsen, Associated Press

SAN FRANCISCO (AP) — Strange secrets hide in numbers. For instance, an orange used car is least likely to be a lemon.
This particular unexpected finding came to light courtesy of a data jockey who goes by the Internet alias SirGuessalot, who in fact wasn't guessing at all. Instead, he and his partner, PlanetThanet, relied on the hard math skills that make them top contenders in a sport tailor-made for the 21st century: competitive number-crunching.
The used car defect prediction contest is one of dozens hosted by San Francisco online startup Kaggle, whose creators believe they can tap the global geek population's instinct for one-upmanship to mine better answers faster from the world's ever-rising mountain of data.
"Competitions bring together a wide variety of people into a wide variety of problems," said Jeremy Howard, who became Kaggle's president and chief scientist after winning multiple competitions himself. "You get people looking at stuff they'd never look at otherwise."
While the used car contest was fun, Kaggle has its eye on weightier scientific problems. In one contest, an English major who trained himself in data science built a model for predicting the progress of HIV infections in individual patients. In another, a scientist who studies glaciers for a living won a NASA-backed Kaggle competition to measure the shapes of galaxies by mapping the universe's dark matter.
The data problems that need solving are so important that those who find the solutions should be paid like professional athletes, said Kaggle founder Anthony Goldbloom. By turning data-mining into a crowdsourced contest, he hopes he's created a way to make that happen. Already one of Kaggle's contests offers a multimillion dollar prize.
"We want to see the best data scientists earning more than Tiger Woods," said Goldbloom, who started the company in his native Australia and recently came to San Francisco's South of Market startup haven.
The job market for mathematicians and statisticians has become hot as the sheer volume of data generated by ever faster, cheaper computing resources explodes.
Data storage has become so inexpensive that a 2011 McKinsey and Co. report estimated that a disk drive capable of storing all the world's music would cost about $600. Walmart stores 10 times more data on customer transactions and other parts of its operation than is contained in the entire Library of Congress, according to the same report.
Analyzing the so-called "big data" deluge has become a key task for businesses in an effort to divine everything from which ads online customers will click to how much inventory they need to maintain. Political candidates analyze data to predict voting patterns. Dating websites try to predict ideal mates.
Kaggle competitions focus on creating and testing formulas that can be used to make predictions based on the contents of giant datasets.
The more accurate the formula, the better the chances it will accurately provide answers to complex questions, such as the orange used car being the least likely to break down.
Goldbloom argues that no matter how many data scientists companies hire, relying on in-house data talent means companies can't know if they're getting the best solution.
In a Kaggle contest, competitors find out as soon as they submit their solutions how they stack up against fellow contestants. They can keep trying for the duration of the typically three-month contests, which are highlighted on the company web site.
As the first entries come in, the accuracy of competing models improves by leaps, Goldbloom said. As the contests progress, the improvement curve flattens out. Goldbloom and Howard believe that shows the competitive approach pushes data scientists toward the best solutions within human reach.
"Crowdsourcing allows you to squeeze data dry," Goldbloom said.
Not all competitions are open to all comers, however. About 33,000 contestants have taken part in Kaggle's public competitions, where prize money tends to top out at around $10,000. Winners can get invited to participate in elite private contests, which may include access to sensitive private data sets.
Kaggle's business model depends on deep-pocketed contest sponsors like banks seeking to outdo each other with more lucrative prize purses to attract the best competitors, who themselves in theory could then make their livings off Kaggle competitions alone.
The biggest prize by far open to the public is $3 million offered by the California-based Heritage Provider Network medical group to the data scientist best able to use hospital admission records to predict the profiles of people most likely to end up in the hospital. The next-biggest purse is $100,000 in prizes put up by the Hewlett Foundation for algorithms that can automatically grade student essays.
In its grandest vision of itself, the 11-person company backed by PayPal co-founder Max Levchin will have tens of thousands of competitions running simultaneously. Guilds of data gurus will band together to unleash software that enters competitions automatically. Kaggle becomes not just a way to push humans to perform at their best but to make machines themselves smarter as code-based contestants battle and "learn" from their mistakes.
In this way, Howard said, data competitions become steps along the development of artificial intelligence systems such as self-driving cars.
As for why orange used cars are most likely to be in good shape, the numbers did not hold the answer. One notion was that such a flashy color would only attract car fanatics who would be more likely to take care of their vehicles. That didn't pan out, however, since the least well-kept used cars turned out to be purple.


Copyright 2012 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

CarrierCompare: The iPhone app your carrier doesn't want you to see

By David Goldman @CNNMoneyTech April 13, 2012: 11:03 AM ET

A screenshot of CarrierCompare, which measures the network quality of Verizon, Sprint and AT&T systems

NEW YORK (CNNMoney) -- A new app hit the iTunes store Friday morning that your carrier probably isn't too thrilled about.

It's called CarrierCompare. Developed by Boston-based startup SwayMarkets, it allows you to see which carrier offers the best service for your iPhone in any given location.

The crowd-sourced app is simple to use. After you touch the start screen, the app takes about 15 seconds to analyze your network for signal strength, response time and speed. It then compares your result with other nearby results on the other two national carriers' networks.

The display is intuitive, telling you where your carrier ranks compared to the competition.

Sounds pretty simple, right? But iPhone carriers Verizon (VZ, Fortune 500), AT&T (T, Fortune 500) and Sprint (S, Fortune 500) have successfully kept that information out of the public's view -- until now.

Carriers rigorously test their networks and their rivals' networks, hiring third-party surveyors to perform comparisons. However, those surveys are almost always performed under non-disclosure agreements.

Each carrier provides its own coverage map to customers, and some even offer a street-level view. (Here are the maps for Sprint, Verizon and AT&T.)

But that still doesn't give users the kind of precise detail that CarrierCompare provides -- and the carriers certainly don't offer up direct, pinpoint comparisons against the competition.

"There is an imbalance of information out there," said Amos Epstein, founder of SwayMarkets. "Each carrier knows its own network and hires people to drive around in trucks to measure its rivals' service as well. But they haven't gone as far to release data that's tangible and useful to the consumer.

Carriers also get that data from apps they make handset manufacturers install on their devices. Sprint and AT&T use an app called CarrierIQ, which sends that kind of information -- and more -- back to the carriers.

After landing in the crossfire of a giant controversy around the secrecy of that data, CarrierIQ urged its carrier customers to release that information to consumers. So far, none have done it.

Calling CarrierIQ "a cautionary tale," Epstein said CarrierCompare is designed to make visible metrics that are typically hidden from consumers' view.

The app tracks three data points.

"Signal" represents a granular, numerical interpretation of service bars, which gives a more accurate reading than a one-through-five bar graph representation.

"Response" measures how long it takes for the network to respond to a request. It's an important metric for Internet use, such as Web browsing, posting pictures to Facebook and downloading apps. A lower response time indicates a better result.

"Speed" is in indicator of how much information the network allows your phone to download in a second. Good 3G service can be as fast as 2 Megabits per second during non-peak hours, and 4G service can be more than five times faster than that.

Here's the catch: The app is only as good as its crowd-sourced data. SwayMarkets has a starting data set pulled in from its previously released NetSnaps app, but CarrierCompare will only become really useful if a critical mass of people adopt it.

Right now, the app only performs the one function -- touch and compare. But within a few weeks, the SwayMarkets team said CarrierCompare will become much more dynamic.

When the second version is released, the app will allow users to collect network comparison data in the background, while other apps are in use. That will let the app detect network information throughout a user's day and produce an analysis on the best carrier for that specific users, factoring in things like their typical commute route and work location.

That "set it and forget it" capability will also allow users to check in every once in a while and see how their their network is holding up

CarrierCompare is on sale for $1.99, and an ad-supported version is available for free. The app is only available on the iPhone for now, but the SwayMarkets team said Android versions are in the works.

Mobile Websites Top Mobile Apps in Battle for mCommerce Supremacy

By Michael Essany, Daily Deal MediaMarch 13, 2012

inShare9

If singer Pat Benatar thought love was a battlefield, she could fill one album after the next with tales of the eCommcerce battlefield – an arena in which retailers large and small are perpetually striving to obtain a bigger share of this increasingly lucrative market.

As any battle-tested digital retailer would tell you, your success often depends on how well you use the tools of contemporary eCommerce. And, today, there are no weapons in the arsenal of digital retail more valuable than mobile websites and mobile apps.

But a raging argument regarding which is more conducive to mCommerce has already sparked another contentious battle. Fortunately, on Monday, Nielsen looked to cool the heated debate by settling the matter with the findings from its latest report.

For the time being, Nielsen’s analysis of smartphone usage reveals that retailer mobile websites are more popular than retailer mobile apps.

The Mobile Website Reins Supreme

“The majority of smartphone owners used their devices for shopping this past holiday season,” says John Burbank, President of Strategic Initiatives at Nielsen. “Mobile shopping has reached scale and is only going to grow as smartphone penetration continues to rise.”

The study’s data was derived from the participation of 5,000 smartphone users (Android and iOS devices) who consented to the survey in late 2011.

Burbank says Nielsen’s data finds that smartphone owners of both genders prefer retailers’ mobile websites over mobile apps, with men slightly more likely to try retailers’ mobile apps than women.

“However,” the report reads, “consumers who use retailers’ mobile apps tend to spend more time on them.” But during the height of the holiday shopping season, all five of the top mobile retail websites – Amazon, Best Buy, eBay, Target and Walmart – experienced a traffic and session length “bump” that helped narrow the gap between mobile app and mobile website loyalists.

During the 2011 holiday season, the preeminent five online retailers listed above reached nearly 60 percent of smartphone owners.

Two Platforms Are Better Than One

No shortage of mobile app developers and retail industry analysts believe that, in the long term, mobile apps will be a better friend to mobile shoppers than a retailer’s mobile website. For now, the fact remains that a quality app is more difficult – and more expensive – to build than a website optimized for mobile. While Nielsen didn’t speak to any disparity in quality between mobile apps and mobile websites, there remains a clear difference. But as retailer-made mobile apps improve in functionality and utility, mobile websites might eventually see some stiffer competition.

So although the relative value of mobile apps and mobile websites will continue to be debated in the retail space, the resounding popularity of each (regardless of which is preferential to most smartphone owners) illustrates why retailers are wise to deploy both a mobile app and a mobile website as part of their strategy today.

“Retailers need to think of their business as a multi-channel environment that can potentially include mobile, online, and bricks and mortar stores,” Burbank concludes. “Winning with shoppers requires a consistent experience across channels that reinforces the values you represent as a retail brand, whether it be price, service, reviews, selection, style, or other key attributes.”

Source: Nielsen Wire

Windows 8 first impressions: It's a game changer

By David Goldman @CNNMoneyTech March 16, 2012: 5:31 AM ET

• 
  

NEW YORK (CNNMoney) -- The PC needs saving. With Windows 8, Microsoft believes it has the magic cure.

It just might. I've been testing a consumer preview version of Windows 8 for the past week, and it's unlike anything I've ever seen in a PC operating system.

The stunning "Metro" interface just begs you to touch and interact with it. Beautifully designed apps, ultra-simple navigation, and instinctive commands make it hard to believe Metro came from the same company that brought us Windows Vista. Interactive, "live" tiles and an intuitive app store simplify the PC. Windows 8 is as easy to use as the iPad.

That's exactly what Microsoft intended. As PC sales slump amid a surge in tablets (okay, iPads), Microsoft (MSFT, Fortune 500) is creating an operating system that lets hardware makers reimagine the PC for a tablet world. The software is slated to go on sale later this year.

But let's be clear: Under the veneer of its redesign, Windows 8 is still very much a PC operating system. It features the familiar desktop and taskbar you've learned to love -- or hate -- over the years, and it works just as well with a keyboard and mouse as it does with a touchscreen.

That's the key difference between Apple's (AAPL, Fortune 500) iPad strategy and Microsoft's Windows 8 approach. Apple made a complementary gadget, while Microsoft's software is designed for a catch-all device.

The iPad is the simplest entry point to what Apple calls the "post-PC" world, but PCs haven't outlived their usefulness just yet. Most people still go to their PCs for tools like Microsoft Office and more complex content creation tasks

That's where Microsoft sees uncharted territory. It wants Windows 8 to power each user's primary device, which can be as portable and intuitive as the iPad but also be able to perform all the intricate tasks that today's tablet users flock to their PCs for.

Microsoft does that by making the desktop itself into an app. The PC boots to the Metro interface, which serves as the "start screen" and main backdrop for Windows 8.

Metro is ideal for everyday tasks like Web browsing, e-mail, photo sharing, social networking, and casual gaming. But when you need to manage files, edit a document, or do anything else you wouldn't typically try on an iPad, a tap or click on the desktop app launches what looks and feels like the Windows 7 interface.

Is Windows 8 a perfect solution? Not quite, but it's getting closer.

What I liked: Windows 8 meets Microsoft's goal of producing a "fast and fluid" operating system. It's so lightweight, in fact, that even on a five-year-old, battered Dell laptop with a puny Intel (INTC, Fortune 500) Centrino processor, Windows 8 booted up in 16 seconds. By contrast, my iPhone 4S takes 27 seconds to start up.

The app store is well designed, and the Metro apps are of the same quality you'd expect from the iPad.

There were some bugs, as you'd anticipate from a preview version of the software, but getting out of a stalled program has never been easier. Just tap the Windows key, and you're back to the start screen.

My favorite feature was the built-in search mechanism, which allows you to just type to find and launch a program or file. Adios, Ctrl-R!

What I didn't like: My main gripe is a design oddity: The word "Start" is permanently displayed in the upper left hand corner.

It wouldn't be as irksome if "Start" did anything, but you can't click on it, tap it, swipe it or interact with in in any way. It just sits there, staring at you.

To actually launch the Start menu options, you have to swipe from the right of the screen or hit Windows Key-C. That's the only way to bring up the clock, Wi-Fi status or battery life. Maybe those things could be displayed at the top of the screen instead of "Start."

But if that's my biggest quibble so far, Microsoft might be onto something big.

Bottom line: Windows 8 won't kill the iPad. It's not trying to. It's trying to save the PC.

Anyone 25 or older probably remembers the way Windows 95 reimagined what a PC could do. Windows 8 does that again, to a much greater degree.

It's not hard to envision waking up to your alarm in the morning, reading a book on the train, creating spreadsheets at work, playing Angry Birds on your ride home, and watching Netflix in bed -- all on the same Windows 8 device.

AT&T Restricts Unlimited Data Usage

This Article was on the front cover of today's WSJ. I think it relates to what we are talking about with networks and data communication.  It also deals with the business side of operating high-traffic networks.

Customers Howl Over AT&T Data-Use Curbs

By ANTON TROIANOVSKI And GREG BENSINGER

Joe Philipson had such a bad customer-service experience with Sprint about six years ago that he distributed flyers bashing the wireless carrier and started a blog called "I Hate Sprint."
On Friday, the 27-year-old freelance photographer in Rochester, N.Y., was considering becoming a Sprint Nextel Corp. customer again.
"I might have to go make a deal with the devil," he said.

The reason: AT&T Inc.'s new policy limiting high-speed wireless data usage for its 17 million customers who still subscribe to unlimited data plans. The change has drawn a furious response from some AT&T customers who say the carrier is changing the rules for some of its most loyal customers.
It could also be a boost for Sprint, the nation's third-largest carrier, which is trying to compete with larger rivals AT&T and Verizon Wireless by being the only national carrier still selling an unlimited data plan. Sprint struggled for years with a reputation for poor service, but has won much better reviews recently, evidenced by a sharp drop in the percentage of customers leaving the carrier each quarter.
Mr. Philipson's comments echoed those of many disgruntled consumers who criticized AT&T on Facebook and Twitter on Friday. Some, however, were more conciliatory, arguing that customers in the smartphone age should no longer expect to be able to get as much wireless data as they want without paying for it.
Some commentators saw AT&T's new policy as more generous than its previous policy, under which it slowed Internet use for the top 5% of unlimited data users in individual markets. That vague limit sometimes resulted in users seeing their Web-surfing slowed after they had only used around 2 gigabytes of data.
"We're hearing from customers that they appreciate the clarity that only those who use 3GB or more of data—less than 5% of smartphone customers—are impacted," AT&T spokesman Brad Burns said.
Three gigabytes is well more than typical smartphone users consume – enough to stream about 10 hours of high-definition video or about 100 hours of music. AT&T says the limit will only affect a small percentage of its unlimited-plan subscribers. Technology analysts, however, expect mobile data use to continue growing quickly, meaning the cap could eventually start to feel more restrictive.
AT&T says it needs to limit the data use of its most voracious customers, because the popularity of data-guzzling smartphones is straining the No. 2 U.S. carrier's network. In January, AT&T Chief Executive Randall Stephenson suggested that the government's successful effort to block AT&T from buying smaller rival T-Mobile USA, a $39 billion deal that AT&T said would have helped it address its network congestion, would hurt consumers.
"In a capacity-constrained environment, usage-based data plans, increased pricing, managing the speeds of the highest volume users—these are all logical and necessary steps to manage utilization," Mr. Stephenson said in a January conference call with analysts.
Jordan Hackworth, who switched to AT&T from Sprint in 2010 to get the iPhone and an unlimited data plan that costs him $30 a month, learned those unlimited days were coming to an end via text message on Thursday evening.
"Your data usage has reached 3GB this month," the message from AT&T said. "Using more than 3GB in future billing cycles will result in reduced speeds."
The 24-year-old school computer technician in Salem, Ore., streams music from Pandora and Spotify on his drive to work and uploads photos to Facebook and Instagram. Mr. Hackworth now says he, too, wants to switch back.
"I pay for unlimited usage, and I'm not getting it," Mr. Hackworth said. "Why would I stay with a carrier that doesn't respect that?"
Mr. Hackworth's data usage hit 4.7 gigabytes in December and stayed above 3 gigabytes the last two months. To be able to use that much data at full speeds now, Mr. Hackworth will need to move from his unlimited plan to a 5-gigabyte plan that costs at least an extra $20 a month.

iPad3

Apple sets iPad 3 launch event for March 7

Invite hints the next tablet will lack a physical home button, offer higher-res screen

By Gregg Keizer

February 28, 2012 01:18 PM ET

Computerworld - As expected, Apple today issued invitations to the media for an event next Wednesday, March 7, where it's expected to launch the next iPad.

Invitations were received by bloggers and reporters, including those with the IDG News Service, which is operated by IDG, the parent company of Computerworld.

The news confirmed earlier speculation that Apple would debut the newest iPad -- which most have labeled iPad 3 -- in early March, which later settled on March 7, the same day of the week Apple used to launch the original tablet in 2010 and last year's iPad 2.

"We have something you really have to see. And touch," read the invitation, which continues Apple's tradition of keeping its invitation text cryptic.

The background shows part of an iPad screen, with a finger poised over the Calendar app, which is set to March 7. If the background is a photograph of the iPad 3 and not digitally manipulated, it hints that the tablet will not sport a physical home button, as have earlier iPads.

Some bloggers argued that the photo also showed a higher-resolution, or so-called "Retina," display.

Apple will host the launch event at the Yerba Buena Center for the Arts in San Francisco, a regular venue for the company's press-only announcements and where former CEO Steve Jobs introduced the iPad 2 on March 2, 2011.

This will be the first time that Jobs, who died last October after a long battle with pancreatic cancer, will not host an iPad launch.

The event will kick off at 10 a.m. PT, and wrap up an hour or so later.

Most experts believe the iPad 3 will feature a higher-resolution screen, a faster processor -- perhaps Apple's first quad-core -- and more internal memory. They have been split on whether the new tablet will support the faster LTE data networks like those now being deployed in the U.S. by Verizon and AT&T.

In an interview two weeks ago, Aaron Vronko, CEO of Rapid Repair, a repair shop and do-it-yourself parts supplier for the iPhone, iPod and iPad, said, "I'd be extremely surprised if the iPad 3 didn't support LTE," adding that because tablet users consume even more data than smartphone users, the faster speeds will be important as Apple faces competition from Android-powered tablets.

Verizon offers LTE in 195 U.S. markets, while AT&T boasts coverage in just 26 cities.

Apple has not said anything about the price of the new iPad -- some recent rumors have claimed it will cost about $80 more than current models -- when it will go on sale or even the official name of the tablet.

Prices, on-sale dates and naming are likely to be disclosed March 7.

• FEBRUARY 17, 2012, 7:28 P.M. ET

Groupon Acquires Start-Up Hyperpublic

By JOHN LETZING

Groupon Inc. has acquired Hyperpublic Inc., snapping up the two-year-old location-based technology start-up amid a growth spurt at the daily deals service.

"It's a great outcome for everybody," Hyperpublic CEO and co-founder Jordan Cooper said in an interview on Friday. "We built our relationship with Groupon over a number of months and it just continued to strengthen."

Mr. Cooper declined to comment on terms of the deal. Hyperpublic has raised $1.15 million from a number of investors.

The New York-based start-up provides data technology to websites that enable users to post their locations such as restaurants and bars online, and search for other things nearby.

Hyperpublic will now not provide technology to sites outside of Groupon, Mr. Cooper said. "Select" members of his ten-person team will join Groupon as employees, he said.

Chicago-based Groupon has become the established leader in the daily deals market, with a business model that involves serving up daily coupons to users, and then splitting the resulting proceeds with merchants.

Groupon has been focused on developing the mobile aspect of its business as a means to further expand, which Hyperpublic could contribute to with its expertise in local data.

A Groupon spokeswoman didn't immediately respond to a request for comment.

Groupon went public in November in a $700 million IPO. The company recently posted a fourth-quarter loss, even as revenue more than doubled to $506.5 million.

Write to John Letzing at john.letzing@dowjones.com

Groupon and Its 'Weird' CEO

By SHAYNDI RAICE (From Wall Street Journal)

Groupon Inc. Chief Executive Andrew Mason wants to prove his company is worth the fuss after its roller-coaster ride to an initial public offering last year.

CEO Andrew Mason on Groupon's long-term prospects and what people got wrong during the company's Nov. 2011 IPO.

The 31-year-old founder took his Chicago-based daily deals site public in November at a valuation of $13 billion, well below the $15 billion to $20 billion price tag Groupon once thought it could command. The IPO also brought on questions about another bubble in the Internet sector and the viability of the daily-deals business model.

Critics pointed out that Groupon was unprofitable and was spending heavily to acquire new subscribers amid a flood of competition from daily-deal clones. The company also raised eyebrows at the Securities and Exchange Commission over an unusual accounting metric called Adjusted Consolidated Segment Operating Income, which showed the company's revenue minus certain marketing costs.

Groupon's stock soared 31% above its $20 IPO price on its first day of trading, but withered in following weeks. Shares closed at $19.63, down 2.1%, in 4 p.m. trading Monday. The company is set to report its first quarterly results as a public company next week.

Mr. Mason, who sometimes posts online videos of himself in his underwear doing yoga or dancing, sat down for a recent interview in his Chicago office to discuss challenges facing the company and his ability to handle them. Edited excerpts:

WSJ: Do you think you're mature enough to be the CEO of a multi-billion dollar company?

Mr. Mason: I got the company this far. To the degree I was weird, I was weird before we were a public company and managed to get it worth whatever it's worth. I'm going to continue doing my thing and work my butt off to add value for shareholders and as long as they and the board see fit to keep me in this role, I feel enormously privileged to serve.
[GROUPON]

WSJ: Groupon has been criticized by analysts and investors for not being profitable. How important is profitability?

Mr. Mason: We believe that the most important thing for us to be focused on is growing the business, building something that our consumers and our merchant partners love. And when you focus on those inputs, revenue and profitability is the output and it follows naturally.

WSJ: Some critics say the daily deal model is too easy to replicate.

Mr. Mason: There's proof. There are over 2,000 direct clones of the Groupon business model. However, there's an equal amount of proof that the barriers to success are enormous. In spite of all those competitors, only a handful are remotely relevant.

WSJ: Why?

Mr. Mason: People overlook the operational complexity. We have 10,000 employees across 46 countries. We have thousands of salespeople talking to tens of thousands of merchants every single day. It's not an easy thing to build.

WSJ: You had a rough IPO. What was the hardest part?

Mr. Mason: After filing the S-1, we entered a quiet period that greatly restricted our ability to have a conversation with the public. It was frustrating to not be able to directly address many of the concerns that people raised about the business.

WSJ: Including discussing "Adjusted Consolidated Segment Operating Income?" You were accused by critics of trying to hide your high marketing costs from investors.

Mr. Mason: Groupon spends money on marketing in a way that's different from traditional Internet and e-commerce companies. Our marketing spend is designed to drive subscribers to our daily mailing list. A traditional e-commerce company is driving transactions. Our own proprietary advertising network can continually advertise to our customers at virtually no additional cost. There's an upfront investment that we know pays off over the long-term.

WSJ: Was it a mistake to include that metric?

Mr. Mason: In retrospect, I think it was naive, and I wouldn't have included it. The list of companies that have added their own financial metrics is not a savory group. It created a distraction that wasn't worth the benefit.

WSJ: The SEC also took issue with a memo you wrote to employees during the quiet period that was leaked to the press.

Mr. Mason: I wrote the memo because 23-year-olds were coming into my office and asking how they should respond to their parents when they ask if Groupon is about to go bankrupt. The risks of not communicating to my employees were greater than the risks of doing otherwise.

If I knew it was going to leak, I would have been less bizarre, and I wouldn't have made a joke about my now-wife. She was upset. (He joked that his then-girlfriend asked him why he never said anything nice about her.)

WSJ: Groupon's stock price is trading below its IPO price of $20. Why?

Mr. Mason: Luckily there are people smarter than me in this world that know the answers to those kinds of questions. I leave that to the financial community.

I'm aware of it [stock price], but I think as a company we aren't driven by it. Even in our short time as a public company, we've seen enough examples of the stock shifting 5% or 10% based on nothing, that you're very quickly trained that it's a futile exercise to be responsive to the stock.

WSJ: What opportunities are you most excited about for Groupon?

Mr. Mason: The fundamental innovation of Groupon is that we've found a way to enhance local commerce using the Internet. We've used the discount to deliver more buying power for consumers, as well as solve better inventory management for merchants, delivering them more profits. The "daily deal" is the first incarnation of local e-commerce. We can turn Groupon into a daily habit for consumers, and something that enhances every transaction for merchants.

Copyright 2011 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved

Groupon and Its 'Weird' CEO

By SHAYNDI RAICE (From Wall Street Journal)

Groupon Inc. Chief Executive Andrew Mason wants to prove his company is worth the fuss after its roller-coaster ride to an initial public offering last year.

CEO Andrew Mason on Groupon's long-term prospects and what people got wrong during the company's Nov. 2011 IPO.

The 31-year-old founder took his Chicago-based daily deals site public in November at a valuation of $13 billion, well below the $15 billion to $20 billion price tag Groupon once thought it could command. The IPO also brought on questions about another bubble in the Internet sector and the viability of the daily-deals business model.

Critics pointed out that Groupon was unprofitable and was spending heavily to acquire new subscribers amid a flood of competition from daily-deal clones. The company also raised eyebrows at the Securities and Exchange Commission over an unusual accounting metric called Adjusted Consolidated Segment Operating Income, which showed the company's revenue minus certain marketing costs.

Groupon's stock soared 31% above its $20 IPO price on its first day of trading, but withered in following weeks. Shares closed at $19.63, down 2.1%, in 4 p.m. trading Monday. The company is set to report its first quarterly results as a public company next week.

Mr. Mason, who sometimes posts online videos of himself in his underwear doing yoga or dancing, sat down for a recent interview in his Chicago office to discuss challenges facing the company and his ability to handle them. Edited excerpts:

WSJ: Do you think you're mature enough to be the CEO of a multi-billion dollar company?

Mr. Mason: I got the company this far. To the degree I was weird, I was weird before we were a public company and managed to get it worth whatever it's worth. I'm going to continue doing my thing and work my butt off to add value for shareholders and as long as they and the board see fit to keep me in this role, I feel enormously privileged to serve.
[GROUPON]

WSJ: Groupon has been criticized by analysts and investors for not being profitable. How important is profitability?

Mr. Mason: We believe that the most important thing for us to be focused on is growing the business, building something that our consumers and our merchant partners love. And when you focus on those inputs, revenue and profitability is the output and it follows naturally.

WSJ: Some critics say the daily deal model is too easy to replicate.

Mr. Mason: There's proof. There are over 2,000 direct clones of the Groupon business model. However, there's an equal amount of proof that the barriers to success are enormous. In spite of all those competitors, only a handful are remotely relevant.

WSJ: Why?

Mr. Mason: People overlook the operational complexity. We have 10,000 employees across 46 countries. We have thousands of salespeople talking to tens of thousands of merchants every single day. It's not an easy thing to build.

WSJ: You had a rough IPO. What was the hardest part?

Mr. Mason: After filing the S-1, we entered a quiet period that greatly restricted our ability to have a conversation with the public. It was frustrating to not be able to directly address many of the concerns that people raised about the business.

WSJ: Including discussing "Adjusted Consolidated Segment Operating Income?" You were accused by critics of trying to hide your high marketing costs from investors.

Mr. Mason: Groupon spends money on marketing in a way that's different from traditional Internet and e-commerce companies. Our marketing spend is designed to drive subscribers to our daily mailing list. A traditional e-commerce company is driving transactions. Our own proprietary advertising network can continually advertise to our customers at virtually no additional cost. There's an upfront investment that we know pays off over the long-term.

WSJ: Was it a mistake to include that metric?

Mr. Mason: In retrospect, I think it was naive, and I wouldn't have included it. The list of companies that have added their own financial metrics is not a savory group. It created a distraction that wasn't worth the benefit.

WSJ: The SEC also took issue with a memo you wrote to employees during the quiet period that was leaked to the press.

Mr. Mason: I wrote the memo because 23-year-olds were coming into my office and asking how they should respond to their parents when they ask if Groupon is about to go bankrupt. The risks of not communicating to my employees were greater than the risks of doing otherwise.

If I knew it was going to leak, I would have been less bizarre, and I wouldn't have made a joke about my now-wife. She was upset. (He joked that his then-girlfriend asked him why he never said anything nice about her.)

WSJ: Groupon's stock price is trading below its IPO price of $20. Why?

Mr. Mason: Luckily there are people smarter than me in this world that know the answers to those kinds of questions. I leave that to the financial community.

I'm aware of it [stock price], but I think as a company we aren't driven by it. Even in our short time as a public company, we've seen enough examples of the stock shifting 5% or 10% based on nothing, that you're very quickly trained that it's a futile exercise to be responsive to the stock.

WSJ: What opportunities are you most excited about for Groupon?

Mr. Mason: The fundamental innovation of Groupon is that we've found a way to enhance local commerce using the Internet. We've used the discount to deliver more buying power for consumers, as well as solve better inventory management for merchants, delivering them more profits. The "daily deal" is the first incarnation of local e-commerce. We can turn Groupon into a daily habit for consumers, and something that enhances every transaction for merchants.

How the iPhone Zapped Carriers

By ANTON TROIANOVSKI (from Wall Street Journal)

Americans are glued to their mobile devices, obsessively calling, texting, emailing and downloading applications. So why is the U.S. wireless industry in such straits, as shown by AT&T Inc.'s crucial but failed plan to buy T-Mobile USA?

A big reason is that carriers are losing power to the device and software makers riding the smartphone boom.
[appleiphone_dig] Tony Avelar/Bloomberg

An advertisement for Apple's iPhone 4S at a Sprint Nextel Corp. store in Palo Alto, Calif.

They're saddled with rising capital costs while much of the profit growth continues to accrue to Apple Inc., manufacturers using Google Inc.'s Android software, and companies making popular wireless apps. And carries haven't figured out the most profitable way to charge consumers for their greater use of data.

In short: Device makers and app developers are having the fun, while the carriers are doing the grunt work.

The wireless industry has always been capital intensive, but the recent move to build faster and more reliable networks to support a deluge of data has weighed on these carriers.

Now that AT&T's pursuit of T-Mobile is over, those two companies are expected to join the rest of the industry in mulling expensive deals for rights to the airwaves—a game that's become a lot more difficult in recent weeks after Verizon Wireless spent nearly $4 billion purchasing spectrum rights from four different cable companies.

The U.S. wireless industry spent $24.9 billion on capital investments like networks and infrastructure in 2010, the highest annual total since 2005, according to industry trade organization CTIA.

But in 2010, AT&T and Verizon Wireless were the only companies to earn a return on their wireless network investments greater than their cost of capital, according to Bernstein Research.
More

* Deutsche Telekom Hunts for a Plan B
* Heard: Trouble on the Verizon for AT&T

At the same time, the rapid rise of Apple's iPhone franchise reflects many of the challenges the telecom industry faces even as Americans' reliance on their phones grows.

Wall Street analysts have projected AT&T's wireless profit margins in the fourth quarter will be the worst in at least four years, despite AT&T saying it would sell more smartphones—including the iPhone 4S—than any other quarter.

That's because every time a new iPhone model comes out, it's the carriers—not consumers—that shell out the biggest bucks. Analysts estimate that carriers pay Apple a subsidy of about $400 each time a consumer buys an iPhone with a two-year contract.

AT&T and other wireless carriers say that subsidizing the iPhone heavily amounts to an investment that will make their customers more likely to stay and increase the amount of money they're willing to spend for the carrier's services. But some analysts say those benefits have yet to materialize.

At AT&T, Nomura Securities analyst Michael McCormack says, the profit margins on wireless service haven't meaningfully improved since the company started carrying the iPhone in 2007.

"For the most part, it's really been a wealth transfer from AT&T shareholders to Apple shareholders," said Mr. McCormack, who predicts AT&T's fourth-quarter profit margin will fall to 30% from 44% in the third quarter.

Apple missed financial expectations in its latest quarter due to a delay in the iPhone 4S launch, but sales of iPhones and iPads continue to surge, driving earnings up 54% over a year ago to $6.62 billion.

For the wireless carriers, average revenue per user has been falling in recent years despite increased smartphone adoption as the companies added more connections for lower-revenue devices like e-readers and tablet computers. In the third quarter, wireless carriers were being paid $46.09 a month by the average user, $2 less than a year before, according to UBS AG.

While carriers have to pay higher subsidies for smartphones such as the iPhone, such devices allow carriers to charge customers for data plans. Google's free Android software for smartphones also helped drive smartphone sales and boosted demand for wireless bandwidth even more.

Just in the last year, the amount of wireless data consumed monthly more than tripled among teens and doubled for just about every other age group, according to Nielsen.

Meanwhile, revenue from voice calls, which take up far less bandwidth than, say, watching a YouTube clip, has been declining for years. And even extremely profitable text messaging is threatened by new applications, like Apple's iMessage, that allow smartphone users to interact without racking up texting charges.

Now, carriers are seeking to forge a new pricing model that allows them to monetize surging data usage. Before the smartphone boom, many carriers sold data access on an unlimited basis, making it hard for them to profit.

Earlier this year, Verizon followed AT&T in implementing a tiered data plan, in which heavier users of data pay more.

In trying to buy T-Mobile, AT&T bet that government officials would see the wireless industry's difficulties amid the smartphone boom as a justification for allowing the second-largest industry player to buy the No. 4 player. Regulators didn't see it that way.

Now, analysts say AT&T will have to pull out its checkbook and spend billions more to acquire spectrum rights and invest in building capacity on its network.

For AT&T's smaller competitors, things are even tougher. AT&T and Verizon Wireless earn roughly 80% of the industry's profits and have fared better in adjusting to the smartphone boom than smaller competitors.

The giants are able to use their scale to provide broader coverage and land access, sometimes exclusive, to the hottest devices, such as the iPhone and choice Android phones from device makers like HTC Corp.

The third-largest carrier, Sprint Nextel Corp., decided this year that it needed to carry the iPhone as well. But to do it, Sprint had to commit to paying Apple $15.5 billion for the devices, whether or not it could find buyers for them. The company acknowledged that subsidizing a customer buying an iPhone would cost 40%, or about $200, more than another kind of phone, on average.

T-Mobile, meanwhile, is the only one of the top four carriers that isn't selling the iPhone, one reason for its customer losses. In the first nine months of the year, T-Mobile lost 850,000 contract customers.

Write to Anton Troianovski at anton.troianovski@wsj.com

Corrections & Amplifications
In the third quarter, wireless carriers were being paid $46.09 a month by the average user, according to UBS AG. An earlier version of this article incorrectly gave that as an annual figure.