All in Industry Analysis

Lately I've been reading Ross Mayfield's Weblog, which I discovered while tracking back an incoming link from him to an earlier posting of mine, Corporate Resistance to Enterprise Web 2.0. Mayfield is CEO of Socialtext and has feet (literally) in both the development and business worlds when it comes to real world applications related to Enterprise Web 2.0. I like how he thinks and writes about enterprise adoption of systems and processes based on Web 2.0 technologies.
I am puzzled by the seemingly robust nature of the US economy and the lack of a melt-down due to runaway gasoline prices. I still remember the inflationary hardships caused on the 1970’s by rapid rises in crude oil prices and the inflationary spiral that priced so many people out of the housing market due to huge rises in interest rates. Why do economic conditions seem smoother now despite massive trade imbalances, crushing federal deficits, and an unending commitment to costly (in terms of blood and money) foreign adventures such as Iraq? Is it the Internet?
Basically, “Web 2.0″ means different things to different people. * To the programmer, it’s a set of tools and techniques that have the potential for fundamentally altering how network based applications and data are managed and delivered. * For start-ups and venture capitalists, it’s an opportunity to get in on the ground floor of another bubble. * For the corporate CIO or IT manager, it’s another set of technologies and architectures to be adopted and supported in an era of continued I.T. department budget strains. * For newer or smaller companies, it’s an opportunity to acquire technical and business process infrastructure at a fraction of the investment made by older and legacy companies. * For the marketing manager it’s an opportunity to “end-run” a traditionally unresponsive I.T. department. * For the CEO of an established legacy industry, it’s a threat of loss of control over customer relations. * For the customer it’s an opportunity to establish and maintain relationships that are both personally fulfilling and empowering in the face of the traditional power of larger institutions.
I've worked a lot with call centers and contact centers, primarily those that handle incoming calls for things like customer support, product purchasing, account inquiries, and trouble shooting. Many's the time I wondered, while poring over statistics on incoming call type, call volume, and call resolution, "I wonder what the rest of the people out there think of us?" Well, there are now ways to find out.
There are a couple of interesting discussion threads going on over at the Freedom to Tinker blog. One is called Not Just Another Buggy Program, the other CD Copy Protection: The Road to Spyware. I reproduce one of my comments below, but I suggest interested readers check out the entire threads if you're interested in some of the business and strategic aspects of what Sony is doing.
Remember the buzz generated by Apple's announcement that they would start selling downloads of Desperate Housewives to Video iPod users? I wasn't that excited. Others saw this as an indicator of Things To Come. One who obviously "gets it" is Ross Levinsohn, President of Fox Interactive Media, according to an article by Mario Sgambelluri in a recent (December 6) edition of iMedia Connection, a web based source on online media and marketing.
Cisco has announced plans to buy Scientific Atlanta, and Microsoft has announced an agreement with the cable TV industry to include digital cable card support in the next version of Windows. So what, you say? It’s all related to “convergence” where a Brave New World is heralded by the unification of the Internet and cable based home entertainment. That means more choice, more quality, more service, more innovation, and just plain more quality of life, right? Maybe.
Perhaps the controversy that is raised by this Google project will be addressed by the development of an appropriate payment scheme agreeable to all whereby copyright owners are explicitly compensated for the value contributed to Google services, as measured by their sharing in the ad revenues generated by use of the search system. One can envision, too, a pool of money generated by advertising related to hits on works whose owners cannot be found, a pool which could be distributed through an industry or nonprofit group specializing in such issues.
I’m not ant-copyright. Copyright owners have a right to do whatever they want with the properties they own and control. But to make a free market operate, there has to be information available about product features that will make products potentially unusable. Sadly, what I see happening is market confusion and a crumbling of the standards that once made it so easy to buy and use recorded music.