Share This

Friday, 8 January 2010

Charting the Real-Time Web

Charting the Real-Time Web
Now social media has the equivalent of the Times Square "deficit clock."
By David Talbot

Today the Web is bursting with social media content and a burgeoning supply of (and demand for) "real-time" information. This information is created as people open new Facebook and other social media accounts, churn out Tweets and other microblogs, post photos and videos, and tirelessly text one another. But getting a grip on exactly how much is happening--and what the primary sources are--is a slippery task, especially since web companies often jealously guard their metrics.
The new social media counter. Credit: Gary Hayes.

Now there's a social-media "clock" of sorts, which you can check out here. It charts the second-by-second accumulation of social-media accounts, blogs, Tweets, photo uploadings, status updates, and the like. Consider it the social-media equivalent of that national-deficit "clock" in Times Square.

The effort does require a reality check. It's not actually an accurate rendering of the real-time Web. Rather, it's a counter, created by an Australia-based virtual-world entepreneur named Gary Hayes. Hayes set the various rates of increase according to various estimates culled from disparate sources such as analysts, company blogs, and news media accounts. Some of the estimates are several months old and may not actually be accurate or complete.

But, while it may not provide any new primary information, or be accurate in all categories, Hayes' social-media clock is nevertheless an excellent visualization of where much of the Web's growth is coming from these days.

Tags: Facebook, social media, Web 2.0, twitter, virtual worlds

Are we ready for IBM's Smarter Planet?

Are we ready for IBM's Smarter Planet?
by John Webster

By now you've surely seen at least one of the IBM "Let's Build a Smarter Planet" TV ads. I like them. They talk about computing possibilities that are truly big-picture. I also believe in the message that IBM is fundamentally delivering in these ads: systems that harvest data from a variety of wired and wireless sources are capable of producing new types of information and solving some important problems. The technologies needed (RFID, pattern recognition, Complex Event Processing, etc.) to turn the vision into reality are here and now.

And while they may put a very new face on a venerable IBM, the ad campaign is very much in keeping with a marketing technique IBM has honed for decades. In the beginning IBM had computers but companies didn't know what to do with them. So IBM had to first show them how to compute. IBM had to sell computing first before it could sell computers. Over time, IBM lost sight of the need to sell computing, relied on just selling computers, and consequently lost its vision. Lou Gerstner brought IBM back to selling computing once again by creating IBM Global Services. Smarter Planet is yet another way to sell computing--one that encompasses a myriad of sensory devices and compute nodes all working within some big harmonious system. Indeed, IBM likes to use the word "orchestration" in this context and talks of systems of systems.

Recently, IBM reported to a gathering of analysts that the C-level people within enterprises worldwide were not only getting the Smarter Planet message, some were able to teach IBM a thing or two about smarter systems they had already built. On the other hand, IBM reported that it was also well aware of potential barriers like perceived cost, resistance to trying new things, and fear. Yes, fear.

Here's an experiment you can try. At your next cocktail party, talk to someone about a retail chain you had heard of that was testing the use of technical gadgetry to enhance customers' in-store shopping experience. Customers identify themselves to an in-store system upon entering the retail space that tracks their positions in the store, knows what they have selected as they move around the store, knows when they are physically close to a special promotion and alerts them to the promotion, and knows how much to charge their credit cards as they exit. There are a number of these but perhaps the one most well known is METRO's Future Store. After you've walked your conversation partner through the high-tech store experience, get a reaction. Is the technology helpful or intrusive? Comforting or in some ways frightening? I'd bet on at least a discomforted response.

In the aftermath of Northwest Flight 253, it is abundantly clear that we want systems that connect the dots when someone is threatening us. We want systems to sift though huge amounts of data that could well be 99.99999 percent noise but for the few data points that say "don't let this guy on the plane." But when systems are connecting our dots we sense that Big Brother is watching.

Personal privacy is more easily surrendered after trust is first established. IBM can only go so far in convincing people that Smarter Planet systems are not only beneficial but trustworthy. After that, we have to trust the people behind the systems. That's the hard part.
John, a senior partner at Evaluator Group, has 30 years of experience in enterprise IT storage, spanning mainframe and open systems environments. He has served as principal IT adviser at Illuminata and has held analyst positions at IDC and Yankee Group Research. He also co-authored the book "Inescapable Data Harnessing the Power of Convergence." John is a member of the CNET Blog Network and is not an employee of CNET.

Thursday, 7 January 2010

The Next Mobile Ad Merger

The Next Mobile Ad Merger
Elizabeth Woyke, 01.07.10, 06:00 PM EST
Google's AdMob purchase and Apple's Quattro deal will likely kick off a new wave of acquisitions.

First came Google, with its November acquisition of AdMob, then Apple with its recent purchase of Quattro Wireless. Now, a host of Internet firms, device makers and even wireless operators are expected to snap up their own mobile advertising networks in the coming months. The challenge? There are only a few--possibly just two--ad firms left that are widely viewed as attractive candidates.

A series of new deals would represent a second wave of merger and acquisition activity for the mobile ad market. The industry experienced an earlier burst of M&A in 2007, when Nokia ( NOK - news - people ) bought Enpocket, AOL acquired Third Screen Media and Microsoft ( MSFT - news - people ) absorbed ScreenTonic. Rajeev Chand, a managing director at Rutberg & Co., says there are three reasons for a resurgence of interest: the strategic growth of the mobile Internet, a renewed interest in making acquisitions as the economy improves, and a greater number of potential acquirers.
Article Controls

Google ( GOOG - news - people ), in particular, is driving the deal-making, says Karsten Weide, program director of digital media and entertainment at researcher IDC. He estimates Google and AdMob together would control 21% of the U.S. mobile ad market, a chunk large enough to give them a comfortable lead over competitors (one reason the U.S. Federal Trade Commission is investigating the purchase.) The disparity will force other tech companies with mobile advertising ambitions to follow suit, says Weide.

Apple ( AAPL - news - people ) was the first to counter Google, announcing its Quattro buyout Jan. 5. Insiders say Yahoo! ( YHOO - news - people ) and Microsoft are likely to be next. Yahoo!, which holds an estimated 10% of the mobile ad market, likely wants to increase its share--and has the cash on hand to make such an acquisition, says Weide. Microsoft, which IDC estimates has an 8% slice of the market, is probably interested due to its "laser-like focus on search," he adds.

Other potential buyers include handset makers, which increasingly view their devices as platforms for tapping into mobile Internet traffic; publishers investing in digital content; and carriers looking for a new way to generate revenue. "Publishers are very interested in the mobile device market," says Noah Elkin, a senior analyst at eMarketer. "The same logic that applies to Apple [buying a mobile ad firm] could apply to a Hearst as well."

AOL is not on most analysts' short lists. The media giant, which is focused on a turnaround, currently lacks the means and "attention span" required for such an acquisition, says Weide.

The choicest targets appear to be Millennial Media and Jumptap, two U.S.-based firms that operate their own mobile ad networks and each command at least 5% of the mobile ad market, according to IDC. Analysts say the companies are likely meeting with potential buyers, or will be soon. Yahoo!, in fact, held talks with Millennial back in 2007, but walked away because the firm wanted too much money, says one analyst. IDC estimates Millennial's 2009 mobile ad revenue at $35 million and Jumptap's at $18 million.

Millennial and Jumptap declined to comment on acquisition rumors, but acknowledged that the AdMob and Quattro acquisitions have spurred interest in their own firms. "For people who thought the AdMob deal was a fluke, the Quattro deal validated the huge opportunity for mobile advertising ... the opportunities are just starting," says Jumptap Chief Marketing Officer Paran Johar.

But will there be opportunities for firms besides Jumptap and Millennial? Other companies, such as Amobee and Greystripe, are small enough that analysts don't track them. "It's hard to know how well [some of these companies] are doing and how much traction they have," says Julie Ask, a vice president at Forrester Research.

Some smaller players contend they're a better value. Bob Walczak, chief executive of the mobile ad tech firm Ringleader Digital, notes that Millennial raised $16 million in new funding in November while Jumptap secured more than $26 million in its last round, in August 2008. "They've put themselves in a higher price category," he says. "They'll have to show a lot of value to warrant an exit to their [venture capitalist investors]."

Analyst Weide says if Millennial and Jumptap garner the same high multiple Google paid for AdMob, they could be acquired for about $600 million and $300 million, respectively.