Saturday, October 15, 2005

Video Ipod -- Bombs Away?


Apple's Video Ipod was greeted with much fanfare after its introduction this week, including the "shocking" revelation that Disney would allow ABC and Disney channel content to be downloaded off of I-Tunes.

Methinks once the initial "gotta have it" crowd buys the thing, there won't be huge sales for this, nor will there be much demand for downloads of Desperate Housewives.

The problem is that there is no clear target for this thing that isn't already being serviced elsewhere (including the Nano). The tiny screen and lack of compatibility with existing video content (namely DVDs), means that business people and adults over 25 probably won't be falling overthemselves to have one. The expensive price, complexity of use, and lack of compatibility with existing video content will probably keep people from buying one for their kids. Besides, there are already small video players for kids these days.

Some might argue it would be great for people with long commutes. Possibly, but having a pricey gadget like this in your possession makes you a target in many public transportation settings.

The problem for Apple is that many people already have a portable player, and those who want it just for music probably don't have the collection to warrant the more expensive Ipod, and will opt instead for the cheaper (and cooler) Nano.

Thursday, October 13, 2005

Motorola ROKR -- Should be BOMBR

Motorola's ROKR phone, the first to combine an I-Tunes player with a phone is apparently a stinker, both in sales and with critics. The system is said to not be much of a phone or player, with slow load speeds for songs and a VERY limited capacity.

But an article I read on Salon.com I believe hit the nail on the head. A guy said words to the effect of "I use my I-pod to get away from my cell phone. Why would I want to get calls on it?"

But looking at that very statement shows where Motorola went wrong. Most people want to separate business from pleasure, and with alleged partner Apple introducing a tiny, cooler Ipod, carrying a phone you really like and a music player you really like truly isn't a burden.

I still think a phone based MP3 player isn't a bad idea, but it makes more sense on a phone that couples lots of features already, and it shouldn't overwhelm the capabilities of the phone, which is still why people buy a mobile phone in the first place.

Wednesday, October 12, 2005

The Oracle at Delphi

So Delphi is in Chapter 11, and predictions are that GM will go with it.

The bankruptcy of GM would be a terrible blow to the economy, but I think GM needs to do something drastic to survive. While I'm a big supporter of workers and worker rights, the fact is that GM has allowed themselves to enter into contracts that they can't possibly support and stay a viable company. Having cut costs in all the wrong ways (cheaper materials in the cars, cannibalized designs among several product lines, lackluster designs), they now have to get rid of the albatross around their neck, the ridiculous amount they pay the people who make the cars and the people who used to make the cars.

Yes, these people worked hard, and yes they should have something to retire on, but the fact is, they helped dig this hole, and trying to play hardball with GM won't fill the hole back in. GM cannot compete. Their only profitable vehicles are ones that nobody buys when energy prices are high and the economy is in the tank.

If I were GM, I'd start talking to the union now, and advise them that the situation is dire. I'd start looking at Chapter 11 sooner rather than later. Then I'd start some drastic cost cutting. Kill off a few of your brand lines. Get rid of cars that nobody is buying. Start looking for niche markets you can fill. Start designing cars that are reasonably priced without incentives AND get good mileage. Look to the Japanese (or even Hyundai, who pulled themselves out of a huge hole) and see what they do well and why. Plan for the next 20 years with thoughts that gas will be expensive.

Tuesday, October 04, 2005

Bizspeak article -- Amen!

This one speaks for itself.

Seattle Times


Job Market
Commentary: Bizspeak is an important foreign language today

By Larry Ballard
The Des Moines Register

There's a lot of talk in the business world, most of it in English, that the next generation of workers should be required to know a foreign language.

Educators, using government grants, have studied this issue for years. They've hired consultants, written "papers," conducted hearings, organized seminars, scheduled a few snow days and dined at fancy restaurants until they forgot about the whole thing.

That is, until the next report came out that showed U.S. schoolchildren score behind the Chinese on standardized tests.

Business leaders, in turn, complain constantly about young workers whose language skills are limited to: "So, like, how much, like, vacation time do I get after, like, the first week?"

That's why, every few years, there's another "call for reform," after which someone like former California Congressman Leon Panetta sums up the problem:

"I believe it is in the highest national interest to guarantee to the maximum extent feasible that the people of our country have been exposed to other peoples and languages, that they comprehend the limits of unilateral action and the growing necessity of international cooperation on this small, measurable, finite planet.

"Now, where are we going to eat?"

That speech was from 1979, the same year a presidential commission concluded that "Americans' incompetence in foreign languages is nothing short of scandalous, and getting worse."

I feel the time for lip service is over.

Every American should be forced to study a foreign language so he or she will be better equipped to compete in the global economy.

As Des Moines Register political columnist David Yepsen put it: Americans can buy in English, but we must sell in the customer's language.

First, some ground rules: Pig Latin does not count as a foreign language. Neither does attaching "izzle" to every other word, my frizzle.

And you can forget about that "special" language shared by you and your twin sister, which is as weird as it is creepy.

No, we mean a completely foreign tongue.

Trouble is, the language most foreign to Americans these days, at least those in the workplace, is English.

You know what I'm talking about. Or maybe I should say: "You're cognizant of what I'm referencing."

They call it bizspeak, the weird words and funky phrases that spread among offices and cubicles like a bad head cold.

Most of us speak it. Few of us know what we're talking about.

I got an e-mail with some great examples, courtesy of America Online (screen name: bigpimpdaddy1).

The list was stolen from Forbes, which is a big magazine in New York where my boss says they eat guys like me for breakfast:

• "Paradigms." I always thought it meant you were a nickel short of having change for a quarter. I have since learned the true definition: More than one paradigm.

• "Synergy." A great name for a stripper, but meaningless otherwise.

• "Out of the box." Everyone wants to be "out of the box." Bet they'd change their tune if the box had a minibar and satellite dish.

• "Effort." As in: "We really need to effort this idea." The next person who says it should be "fisted" in the nose. The same goes for anyone who wants to "grow" their business.

• "Hey, were you just rummaging through my desk drawer, freak?" (Actually, I heard this phrase for the first time only recently, but I'm sure it will catch on.)

The point is, bizspeak is just as important as any other foreign language when it comes to success in the workplace.

Without a firm command of bizspeak, our best and brightest will be outpaced in the global arena.

On the bright side: "Welcome to Burger King" is pretty much the same in any language.

Copyright © 2005 The Seattle Times Company