RSS Feed     Twitter     Facebook

Posts Tagged ‘Technology sector’

Bright ideas

Carole Cadwalladr reports from the coolest conference on Earth that attracts a vast web audience

It’s a confusing place, the world of TED. Not just because that for an event which prides itself on its cleverness, it has a name that makes it sound like some sort of football jock, but because, one minute you’re listening to a talk about how an artificial brain is just 10 years off completion and the next you’re thinking, oh look there’s Cameron Diaz. And then, in an unscheduled departure from the timetable, Gordon Brown walks on to the stage.

Even more confusingly, he receives not one standing ovation, but two! They cheer. They applaud. They, actually, whoop. But at TED, I discover, all things are possible – including a belief in an infinite number of parallel universes, in one of which Brown is the most popular man in Britain.

Truly, anything is possible in the universe known as TED. You might see flatscreen TV with no wires, no plug, nothing – one of the first public demonstrations of wireless electricity by Eric Giler. Or a British inventor, Michael Pritchard, turning sewage water into drinking water with a simple plastic bottle which he claims could save two-and-a-half million children’s lives a year. Or you could be queuing up to get into the talk on nuclear fusion (coming to a reactor near you by 2030, according to the British physicist Steven Cowley), and Meg Ryan will step on your toe.

Strange and very confusing, then. Because TED isn’t named after a US football jock, it actually stands for Technology, Entertainment & Design, which was the meat of its business when it was set up, in California in 1984 – heady days which saw the unveiling of the first Macintosh computer. Now, however, it has a far wider, more implausible remit. It aims to bring together ideas that it hopes might just change the world. It’s the kind of rampant hubristic ambition which is all very well in the Golden State, but this is Britain. We do not whoop. We do not holler – although, just possibly, we’re starting to learn.

Because TED came to Oxford last week in its new form, TEDGlobal, an event that will be held annually and costs $4,500 (£2,700) just to attend; accommodation is extra. Even then you need to be invited, or put yourself through a rigorous application procedure, including an essay question, and a system of mysterious positive vetting all designed to ensure you are “curious, creative, playful and open-minded”.

Which sounds distinctly Orwellian. Or at least Freemasonish. Yet everybody who comes to TED loves TED. Apart from a lone British journalist, although even he admits on the last night that he might quite like it. Even a guerilla operation calling itself Bil – which complains that the “unwashed masses” are kept out through the exorbitant price, loves TED – so much so that it hosted its own fringe event, “an open, self-organising alternative to TED”.

Because what TED excels in is amazing ideas, brilliantly presented. And the selection process is all part of what has gone into making it into what has been called “the coolest conference on Earth” and “a Davos of the mind”, although it has also been called “a cultish talking shop” – by the Times, last week – a fact which exercises the man who calls himself its “curator”, Chris Anderson, and who at various points asks the audience if it’s cultish enough for us. It is, actually. Because you do have to be inducted into the TED way of doing things, which someone describes to me as “the conversion process” – all talks are exactly 18 minutes long and there are never any questions from the floor. And it’s all so intense – packed bursts of talks and ideas and strange synthy music from the likes of Imogen Heap for 10-12 hours most days. And that’s before the parties begin.

In 2005 I attended the TEDGlobal prototype which was fascinating but undeniably elitist. One year later, they put all the talks online and it has become a global phenomenon. More than 300,000 people a day watch a TED talk; a hundred million a year. Since February, the numbers have been doubling. Thousands now watch the entire conference on live-streaming. A brand new translation software has seen 150 volunteers translate 1,000 talks into 150 languages in just a couple of months. Ideas, it seems, are the new rock’n'roll. And TED is its Woodstock.

What it’s done, remarkably, is to turn nerdy, unknown academics into worldwide superstars. A Swedish professor of global health called Hans Rosling has become the Susan Boyle of the academic world. “How many people did he reach before?” asks Bruno Giussani, the European director of TED. “Maybe he had 150 students a year? Now he’s reaching millions. It’s transformed the nature and concept of what it is to be teacher.”

Anderson says it has taken them all by surprise. “We weren’t sure the intensity of the live experience would translate to a four-inch screen, but it just took off and we realised we shouldn’t be thinking of it as a conference any more. It was about ideas spreading. The real audience is online. It’s changed everything.”

In 2005, I listened to speaker after speaker talk about the Creative Commons and how if you open something up to the masses they perform amazing, unprecedented feats. And, in just four years, it is what has happened to TED.

Three months ago, it launched TEDx, self-organised TED events that use the talks as the basis for a live event, and now it’s taken off in 300 cities, from Antananarivo in Madagascar to Kuala Lumpur, and even, later this summer Sheffield, Newcastle, Manchester, Liverpool and Leeds (tedxnorth.com). Anderson, an Englishman who made his fortune as a media entrepreneur, founding Future Publishing which at its peak owned 130 magazines and employed 1,500 people, says that he suspects it’s that “something is missing from the media diet. Beyond ‘if it bleeds, it leads’, and celebrity tittle-tattle, people want to learn new things.”

It’s true, it’s addictive learning new things at TED. There’s Garik Israelian, a spectroscopist who explains why he believes that we will find signs of extraterrestrial life within 10 years. Then there’s Rebecca Saxe’s remarkable talk on the RPTJ region of the brain which, if targeted with a magnetic pulse, can actually change people’s moral judgments.

“Don’t you have the Pentagon calling?” Anderson asks her.

“I do,” she replies. “I just don’t take their calls.”

Then there are the coffee breaks when you find yourself talking to someone such as Peter Vermeersch, a political science professor from Leuven in Belgium, who got 50 poets to rewrite the EU constitution in verse, Steve Truglia who is planning to parachute from outer space, or Jeff Bezos, the founder of Amazon, or one of the TED Fellows, a group of extraordinary young people from around the world who are sponsored to attend including Frederick Balagadde from Uganda who has invented a micro-fluidic chip which could bring HIV diagnostics down from $65 to $10.

But actually, the celebrity tittle tattle’s not bad either. Jonathan from the BBC says he saw a woman walking down the street “and of course I’d have had absolutely no idea who she was except she was wearing a great big name tag on her chest which said: CAMERON DIAZ.”

It’s no wonder the celebs love it. They are the least interesting people in the audience. I completely fail to spot the fact that I’ve been sitting next to two supermodels (Petra Nemcova and Karolina Kurkova). And although there’s a frisson when Oxford physicist David Deutsch walks into the room, Meg Ryan can hang out in Costa Coffee completely unmolested. There’s probably nowhere else on Earth that’s quite as levelling as being a celeb at TED. Even in prison, Paris Hilton managed to upgrade to an executive cell; at TED, if you register late you’re going to be staying in a college room in Keble even if you’re the head of a charitable foundation and married to a multi-billionaire hedge-fund manager, as happened to one woman I chat to.

“I had to carry my suitcase up two flights of stairs!” she says. “I thought I was going to die!”

The competition among speakers is so high that even the British celebs with vaguely intellectual credentials don’t cut it at TED. Alain de Botton pulls it off, but Stephen Fry just hasn’t prepared. At TED it’s not just about what you say, but how you communicate it to the audience, and preparation is key.

“It’s too short for an academic to do their standard 45-minute presentation, and too long to improvise. You have to prepare and have to take a fresh approach,” says Giussani. “It really puts pressure on them.”

And it works. Not just in the room, but out in the big wide world. The very first person I meet at TED, beaming like a very small child who has just been given a very large ice-cream, is a firefighter from Sacramento called David Dolson IV. He wants to set up an international burns camp sharing knowledge about best practice in burn treatment and has watched every single TED talk online.

“My buddy introduced me to them and you watch one and it’s a domino effect, you want to watch them all. And so I did. And it just really inspired me to want to do something, you know?”

I do know. Because it’s what everybody says all of the time. David paid more than $6,000 to come to TED out of his own pocket – “and we’re some of the lowest-paid firefighters in the country” – but he’s loving it. So is Maria Popova, a Bulgarian blogger, and a huge TED fan (“Really – they could cut off my left leg and I’d still love it”) who raised the money to come via her followers on Twitter in just six days.

James Purnell, who resigned from the cabinet last month turns up on a day-pass on Thursday. He says he has downloaded dozens of the talks on to his iPhone “and I’m probably even going to pay with my own money to come back next year”. An MP! Paying for something! It’s nothing short of a revolution.

Anderson is always saying that TED is about the exchange of ideas. Ideas Worth Sharing. And if Hollywood stars love TED, then TED returns the favour. The production values are impossibly high. Vast amounts are spent getting it right and the programming shows a Robert McKee-like grasp of plot, triumph over adversity being the Tedster’s favourite.

Elaine Morgan, now almost 90, gives a gripping account of her life-long quest to prove that her theory that humans are descended from an aquatic ape. She has been dismissed as a nutcase for years, but both David Attenborough and Daniel Dennett have recently come around. Most movingly of all, however, is Emmanuel Jal, a former child soldier who was smuggled out of Sudan by a British aid worker, Emma McCune, and who is now a rapper. He sings a song called “What would I be if Emma McCune never rescued me?” and it’s impossibly emotional. Hardened CEOs break down and weep; a TED lunch half an hour later immediately votes to give him €10,000 (£8,600).

But then there’s a Dragon’s Den element to TED. The TED Prize, for starters, which awards $100,000 to three people every year to carry out “a wish”. And I’m chatting to Giussani, when Pritchard, the water purifying man, rushes up to him.

“Thank you so much, Bruno! There was me saying, no, I’ve never heard of TED, I haven’t got time, well, humble pie all over my face. It’s been absolutely amazing.”

He had no idea what TED was, he says, “and then I looked online and saw Bill Gates and Bill Clinton and thought, bloody hell. And I practised and I practised and I practised and now I’ve got major foundations coming up to me and saying they think it’s fantastic”.

When I speak to Elaine Morgan, she says in a cracked voice: “I’ve been struggling to get this idea across my entire life, and then to have this reaction! Well, it’s amazing.”

It is, and it’s life-changing not just for Emmanuel Jal, who might finally get the money for the school he wants to build in Sudan, but for those who watch it too. Even Carole Stone, the queen of networkers (“I have 40,000 people in my database”), tells me she has decided to change her life: “I’ve got to do something! I thought it was enough to put people together. But it’s not!”

Then there’s Andy Hobsbawm, who was my TED pal in 2005 and shared my delighted non-comprehension of a David Deutsch talk. I went home; he set up a non-profit foundation, Do The Green Thing. “I had a TED epiphany,” he says. “I just heard all these speakers talking about climate change and I thought what can I do?”

Jesus, Andy, I say. I’ve managed to go to the pub a couple of times. But that’s ideas for you. You never know where they might land. And at TED they’re gushing from the 50 speakers and the 700 audience members, and from there, out on to the internet, and off to everywhere else, landing where they land.

Most viewed

Among Ted’s “most favourite” talks:

Ted 2006: Sir Ken Robinson makes a case for creating an education system that nurtures creativity and champions a radical rethink of our school systems.
www.ted.com/talks/ken_robinson_says_schools_kill_creativity.html

Ted 2008: Neuroscientist Jill Bolte Taylor got a research opportunity few would wish for: she had a massive stroke and watched as her brain functions – motion, speech, self-awareness – shut down one by one.
www.ted.com/talks/jill_bolte_taylor_s_powerful_stroke_of_insight.html

Ted 2006: A Swedish professor of global health, Hans Rosling, debunks myths about the “developing world”, a talk that culminates in him swallowing a sword.
www.ted.com/talks/hans_rosling_shows_the_best_stats_you_ve_ever_seen.html

A brief history

TED is owned by a non-profit foundation and devoted to “ideas worth spreading”. It now includes science, culture and development. At its main conference in California, speakers have included Bill Clinton, Bill Gates, and Google founders Sergey Brin and Larry Page. TedGlobal will be held annually in Oxford, and the talks posted online at ted.com.

What they said in Oxford

• “We’re going to build a realistic model of the human brain within the next 10 years … and if we build it right, it will speak.”

Henry Markram, director of the Centre of Neuroscience and Technology in Lausanne, Switzerland

• “Spectroscopy can change this world. In 15 to 20 years we will discover a spectrum like ours and an Earth-like planet.”

Garik Israelian, an astronomer at the Instituto de Astrofísica de Canarias

• “Batteries suck! 40 billion disposable batteries are being thrown away each year.”

Eric Giler, CEO WiTricity, who demonstrated a TV powered by wireless electricity.

• “Eighty per cent of the global trade in food is controlled by just five corporations.”

Carolyn Steel, architect and author of The Hungry City

• “Ipod liberalism” doesn’t exist. “There’s an assumption that if you give people enough connectivity and enough devices, democracy will inevitably follow. It doesn’t.”

Evgeny Morozov, fellow of the Open Society Institute, New York, originally from Belarus.

• “The World Health Organization estimates between 150 million and one billion people would see their lives change if they had glasses.”

Joshua Silver, professor of physics of Oxford University, and inventor of self-adjusting glasses that require no optometrist.

• “People say, ‘I like the theory but I think it’s wrong because everyone I talk to says it’s wrong and they can’t all be wrong.’ Well, yes they can!”

Elaine Morgan, author of The Aquatic Ape

• “The next time you see someone driving a Ferrari, don’t think they are greedy, think they are vulnerable and in need of love.”

Alain de Botton

guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2009 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds


Vodafone interested in iPhone deal

• Operator hints it could challenge O2′s exclusive deal with Apple
• Growth in emerging markets offsets slide in European revenues

Vodafone has added to speculation that O2′s exclusive deal to supply the iPhone in the UK may soon be up for grabs by suggesting that it would like to offer Apple’s smartphone to more of its own customers.

Andy Halford, chief financial officer of the world’s largest mobile phone operator, told reporters this morning that Vodafone was keen to supply the iPhone across more of its empire. It currently sells the device in 11 countries but not in the key European markets of Germany, where it is stocked exclusively by T-Mobile, or the UK.

“It’s a good product and we would love to have it in the portfolio in more countries,” said Halford, speaking after Vodafone published first-quarter results that showed the continuing impact of the recession and intense competition in its core European markets.

There has been intense speculation in recent weeks that T-Mobile, Orange and Vodafone are trying to muscle in on O2′s exclusive deal with Apple in the UK. T-Mobile is going so far as to buy the device in other markets where it is freely available without being tied to one operator and shipping it back to the UK in order to sell it to customers who are considering defecting to O2.

Halford also said Vodafone likes the idea of merging its businesses in underperforming markets with other players in order to reduce costs. The company, which last month merged its Australian business with local rival 3, is understood to have been approached by bankers at JP Morgan about the possibility of a merger in the UK with fourth-placed T-Mobile.

Asked about Vodafone’s attitude to so-called in-market consolidation, Halford said: “The concept of putting two business together with very obvious cost synergies … is one that we like.”

“There are other markets where we think more consolidation would be a good thing,” he added, alluding to the UK.

Much of Vodafone’s recent acquisition activity, however, has been in emerging markets such as India and Africa. In the latter, Vivendi recently halted talks about a potential $10bn (£6bn) acquisition of Zain, which has operations across the continent. Asked whether Vodafone would be interested in Zain, Halford said: “Our primary focus is on squeezing all the pips we can out of the existing business.”

Recession takes its toll

Vodafone announced today that first-quarter revenues rose 9.3% to £10.7bn, roughly in line with analysts’ projections. Splitting out currency effects and acquisitions, organic service revenue was down 2.1% due to weakness across most of Europe as a result of the continuing economic recession. That poor performance was offset somewhat by solid results in Italy and continued growth in emerging markets, especially India.

Overall, the company achieved first-quarter free cash flow of just under £1.9bn, up 21.2%, as it continued to rein in costs. It added a total of 8 million new customers in the quarter – taking its base to 315.3 million – although most of that growth was in India, where is gained almost 7.7 million.

Revenues in Europe were £7bn, down 4.4% on an organic basis, and the only growth markets for the company were Italy and the Netherlands. The company, which flagged at its full-year results in May that the recession would hit the business, admitted that revenue in the second quarter will be affected by regulatory price cuts in the UK and a drop in the money it makes from international roaming as fewer people go on holiday. In some European markets, such as the UK, it has abolished roaming rates altogether.

Within its core European business, Spain continued to be a major problem with revenues down 8.1%, while in the UK revenues of just under £1.2bn were down 4.7% on an organic basis. The firm said this was due to “intense competition and economic pressures; the latter resulted in reduced discretionary spend which led to customers optimising bundle usage, higher prepaid inactivity and lower roaming revenue”.

Vodafone lost customers across three of its four main European markets – Germany, Italy and the UK – with its British operation seeing 159,000 defect. It now has 18.6 million UK customers, making it number two behind O2.

Reports overnight suggested that Vodafone plans to charge people who call the swine flu hotline set up yesterday for NHS patients in England. A spokesman for the company, however, stressed this morning that it is not charging for calls to the 0800 number, in line with rivals Orange, O2 and T-Mobile.

Meanwhile, Vodafone’s Turkish business, which has taken far longer to turn around than the company had hoped, continued to struggle, with service revenues down 11.2% at constant exchange rates, driven by a 26.8% decline in outgoing voice revenues.

guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2009 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds


Apple’s record profits buck downturn

After spending recent months fighting off questions about the health of chief executive Steve Jobs, iPod maker Apple today shrugged off its critics by announcing some of the best financial results in its history.

Despite the economic gloom, the Californian technology giant reported revenues for the three months to the end of June of $8.34bn – up almost 12% from the same time last year. That generated profits of $1.23bn, a 15% increase on this time in 2008, and a record amount for the company outside of the Christmas season.

The success was achieved largely thanks to the launch of the new iPhone 3GS, which went on sale in June – as well as renewed interest in the company’s Macintosh computers. Sales of iPods were down year-on-year, although the company hinted that more models were on the way later this year.

“We’re proud to report the best June quarter for both revenue and earnings in Apple’s history,” Jobs, who returned to work a few weeks ago after undergoing life-saving liver transplant surgery, said in a statement.

“We set a new record for Mac sales, we think we have a real winner with our new iPhone, and we’re busy finishing several more wonderful new products to launch in the coming months.”

During a six-month leave of absence, the company was run by chief operating officer Tim Cook, whose successful command underscores the view of many that he is set to be Jobs’s successor.

But Apple’s fortunes contrasted sharply with those of Yahoo, which reported another disappointing quarter.

Revenues for the past three months dwindled to $1.573bn, down 13% year on year, while profits dropped to $76m – a 25% fall from the same period in 2008.

The company said it had been hit heavily by currency fluctuations, which accounted for nearly 5% of the fall in revenue, but insisted that the figures represented a “solid quarter” in the face of wider economic turmoil.

“I’m pleased with our results this past quarter,” said chief executive Carol Bartz. “We established a clear, simple vision to be the centre of people’s lives online, and we’re backing that vision with important initiatives to create ‘wow’ experiences for our users.”

The company was keen to point to the recent relaunch of its homepage, one of the web’s most popular portals – but those words seem foolhardy just days after Yahoo’s main rival posted results that bucked the downturn entirely. Although Google’s overall revenues were flat for the last quarter, the company eked out efficiencies to post an 18% increase in profit year on year.

That will not have gone unnoticed at Yahoo, where the company’s inexorable slide has been taking place for several years – ending the rule of a succession of executives who were unable to prevent the rot from taking hold as Yahoo. Most recently co-founder Jerry Yang stepped aside as CEO in January to be replaced by tough-talking technology veteran Bartz. However, despite attempting to streamline and reorganise the company, she has yet to make a noticeable impact on the bottom line.

The numbers will also make intriguing reading for executives at Microsoft, after reports last week that the Seattle technology giant was close to signing a deal with its Silicon Valley rival.

The two companies have had a testy relationship ever since Microsoft launched a $45bn takeover bid for Yahoo last year – but even so, they are believed to be closing in on a deal that could see Microsoft take control of Yahoo’s search engine for around $3bn.

Microsoft is desperate to take on Google and gain more traction in the lucrative search advertising market – but Martin McNulty, director of search marketing specialist Trafficbroker, said that the raised more questions than it answered.

“The results are really just a sideshow to the main event right now, and that’s the potential deal with Microsoft,” he said. “It’s unclear why Yahoo can’t stand on its own two feet, as it still commands a significant market share in search queries and advertising revenues globally.”

“Even if the deal does go ahead,” he added, “A Microsoft-Yahoo collaboration is unlikely to offer an increased threat to Google, which, brand and technology-wise, is in a league of its own.”

guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2009 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds


Apple bucks recession with record profits

After spending recent months fighting off questions about the health of chief executive Steve Jobs, iPod maker Apple today shrugged off its critics by announcing some of the best financial results in its history.

Despite the economic gloom, the Californian technology giant reported revenues for the three months to the end of June of $8.34bn – up almost 12% from the same time last year. That generated profits of $1.23bn, a 15% increase on this time in 2008, and a record amount for the company outside of the Christmas season.

The success was achieved largely thanks to the launch of the new iPhone 3GS, which went on sale in June – as well as renewed interest in the company’s Macintosh computers. Sales of iPods were down year-on-year, although the company hinted that more models were on the way later this year.

“We’re proud to report the best June quarter for both revenue and earnings in Apple’s history,” Jobs, who returned to work a few weeks ago after undergoing life-saving liver transplant surgery, said in a statement.

“We set a new record for Mac sales, we think we have a real winner with our new iPhone, and we’re busy finishing several more wonderful new products to launch in the coming months.”

During a six-month leave of absence, the company was run by chief operating officer Tim Cook, whose successful command underscores the view of many that he is set to be Jobs’s successor.

But Apple’s fortunes contrasted sharply with those of Yahoo, which reported another disappointing quarter.

Revenues for the past three months dwindled to $1.573bn, down 13% year on year, while profits dropped to $76m – a 25% fall from the same period in 2008.

The company said it had been hit heavily by currency fluctuations, which accounted for nearly 5% of the fall in revenue, but insisted that the figures represented a “solid quarter” in the face of wider economic turmoil.

“I’m pleased with our results this past quarter,” said chief executive Carol Bartz. “We established a clear, simple vision to be the centre of people’s lives online, and we’re backing that vision with important initiatives to create ‘wow’ experiences for our users.”

The company was keen to point to the recent relaunch of its homepage, one of the web’s most popular portals – but those words seem foolhardy just days after Yahoo’s main rival posted results that bucked the downturn entirely. Although Google’s overall revenues were flat for the last quarter, the company eked out efficiencies to post an 18% increase in profit year on year.

That will not have gone unnoticed at Yahoo, where the company’s inexorable slide has been taking place for several years – ending the rule of a succession of executives who were unable to prevent the rot from taking hold as Yahoo. Most recently co-founder Jerry Yang stepped aside as CEO in January to be replaced by tough-talking technology veteran Bartz. However, despite attempting to streamline and reorganise the company, she has yet to make a noticeable impact on the bottom line.

The numbers will also make intriguing reading for executives at Microsoft, after reports last week that the Seattle technology giant was close to signing a deal with its Silicon Valley rival.

The two companies have had a testy relationship ever since Microsoft launched a $45bn takeover bid for Yahoo last year – but even so, they are believed to be closing in on a deal that could see Microsoft take control of Yahoo’s search engine for around $3bn.

Microsoft is desperate to take on Google and gain more traction in the lucrative search advertising market – but Martin McNulty, director of search marketing specialist Trafficbroker, said that the raised more questions than it answered.

“The results are really just a sideshow to the main event right now, and that’s the potential deal with Microsoft,” he said. “It’s unclear why Yahoo can’t stand on its own two feet, as it still commands a significant market share in search queries and advertising revenues globally.”

“Even if the deal does go ahead,” he added, “A Microsoft-Yahoo collaboration is unlikely to offer an increased threat to Google, which, brand and technology-wise, is in a league of its own.”

guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2009 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds


Microsoft and Yahoo deal rumoured

After almost 18 months of increasingly bitter negotiations, Microsoft is said to be closing in on a deal to buy technology rival Yahoo’s web search business.

Several reports emerged late on Thursday suggesting that late-stage talks were under way between the two companies, opening up the distinct possibility that Microsoft could finally take control of Yahoo’s search engine division.

An analyst with institutional investor ThinkEquity was quoted by investment website 24/7 Wall Street as saying a deal was “imminent”, while sources told influential Silicon Valley blog All Things Digital that an agreement was close to being completed.

It is not clear what the precise terms of the deal on offer are, but according to 24/7 Wall Street, it could see Microsoft shell out around $3bn (£1.8bn) to take over Yahoo’s search advertising operation. The deal, it suggests, would also see Microsoft agree to share revenue from the search business with Yahoo for several years.

Such a pact would bring to an end the tortured negotiations between the two companies, but it would be an incredible climbdown for Yahoo – which turned down the possibility of far more money when Microsoft launched an unsolicited $45bn bid to buy Yahoo in its entirety last February.

That offer was largely seen as an attempt by Microsoft to gain control of its rival’s search business, since the Seattle software giant has been desperate to increase its share of the lucrative search advertising market for several years. But Yahoo rejected it, saying that it believed it was worth far more money.

In the interim, relations between the two companies have been cool – and both sides have rejected rumours of reported negotiations.

However, with the two companies’ chief rival, Google, appearing not only increasingly powerful but also apparently immune to the worst effects of the recession, things could be changing once again. Microsoft’s attempt to claw back market share with its relaunched search engine – now called Bing – has failed to make immediate inroads, leaving the Windows giant still looking for a way to make its mark in the industry.

Taking control of Yahoo’s search business would give Microsoft almost 30% of the American market, more than trebling its sphere of influence.

According to figures from ComScore, Google controls around 65% of the search market in the US, with Yahoo 19.5% and Microsoft trailing in third with a little over 8%. Internationally, Google is even stronger.

Such a deal would be a further hammer blow to the reputation of Yahoo co-founder Jerry Yang, who led the charge against Microsoft and sparked a war of words with rival CEO Steve Ballmer.

Since the negotiations between the two collapsed late last year, however, Yahoo has brought in a new CEO, Carol Bartz – who may take a more pragmatic view of the situation given Yahoo’s financial struggles.

The company is due to release its latest quarterly results next week, and may be hoping that any agreement with Microsoft could take the edge off a disappointing fiscal period.

guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2009 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds


Twitter, teenagers and tech trends

The world seems all a titter that teens don’t use Twitter

Was the whiz-kid correct? Two teens give opposing views

Teens spurning Twitter was one of the bombshells from 15-year-old Matthew Robson that the media highlighted in a report he wrote for investment bank Morgan Stanley.

However, it wasn’t really breaking news that teens don’t use Twitter.

• Last November, the Pew Internet and American Life Project found the median age of Twitter users in the US was 31, higher than 26 for Facebook and 27 for MySpace.
• In April, web metrics firm comScore reported that the majority of Twitter’s 10m or so users were over 35.
• In June, comScore reported that 11.3% of visitors to Twitter.com in the U.S. are ages 12-17. Internationally, only 4.4% of visitors were younger then 18, according to comScore data from May.
• In June, Pace University said that while 99% of 18-24 year olds have profiles on social networks, only 22% use Twitter.

In a battle of the teen prognosticators, 16-year-old Daniel Brusilovsky, writing on TechCrunch says that teens don’t use Twitter because it’s a completely open network and anyone can see your status updates. Teens prefer the privacy of closed networks such as Facebook. Brusilovsky said it makes teens feel “unsafe”.

It’s probably more about teens wanting to establish a privacy perimeter from the prying eyes of adults rather than a safety issue.

That’s not entirely true. Twitter users can protect their updates so only followers they approve can follow their updates.

Also, as David Meyer points out on ZDNet, Robson only referred to updating Twitter via SMS. However, as Meyer points out, Twitter is now used mostly via a range of desktop applications and internet apps on smartphones. Also, up until recently Twitter was MIA in the UK via SMS because Twitter and the carriers couldn’t reach an agreement on pricing.

A number of bloggers, including my wife Suw, took Morgan Stanley and the media to task for mistaking anecdotes from a 15-year-old for hard data.

Suw wrote:

Neither Morgan Stanley nor the media seem to be able to tell the difference between anecdote and data. This “research note” is more note than research, and it should not be taken to be representative of all teens. A teenager in a rural setting, or in an inner city estate, or one who feels socially excluded from web culture will have a very different experience than a teen who’s well-connected enough to get himself an internship at Morgan Stanley.

Beyond criticising Robson’s methodology, there is something more interesting going on here. As comScore’s Sarah Radwanick pointed out, as technology becomes more common, teens and college students aren’t the only people in the population that can be considered “technologically inclined”. She said:

…trends are much more prone to take off in older age segments than they used to.

It challenges the idea that the youth are the only people who are “digital natives”. Charlie Beckett, director of journalism thinktank POLIS at the London School of Economics, challenges the whole idea of the digital native:

As Matthew Robson describes, most teenagers use a variety of digital devices, but when you talk to people who work with teenagers they describe a much more complex picture of what they actually do.

The same teenagers who have literacy problems have media literacy problems. Many of the teenagers apparently comfortable with new media are in fact only using a very limited range of applications and in a very limited way.

Other researchers indicate that teenagers are getting just as frustrated as the rest of us with the complexity and cost of many online and mobile applications.

guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2009 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds


IBM to shut final salary pension plan

• Move affects 5,000 IBM staff still on defined benefit scheme
• It has totally thrown our futures into doubt, says one employee

Thousands of IBM workers in the UK face the closure of their final-salary pension scheme as the technology company becomes the latest to cut pension benefits.

UK staff were told last night that IBM planned to shut the defined benefit scheme to existing members, as it was no longer prepared to shoulder the financial burden. The scheme was closed to new members several years ago.

An IBM spokesman said the move would “maintain competitiveness in the marketplace and introduce greater predictability to long-term pension provision costs”. It has now started a consultation process.

IBM employs about 20,000 people in the UK, and 5,000 are still on the final-salary scheme. Under the proposals, this scheme will close in April 2010 and members will then have the option of joining IBM’s defined contribution scheme, under which they and the company would both pay a percentage of their salary into a fund whose final payout is uncertain.

The company, which posted better-than-expected profits in June, said it intended to enhance this defined contribution plan.

Staff learned of the plans in an email sent by IBM’s UK and Ireland general manager Brendon Riley yesterday afternoon.

According to technology news site The Register, the move has angered staff. “I’m fuming,” said one IBM employee. “It has totally thrown our futures into doubt.”

The consultation process will start on 5 August and run for 60 days. IBM is setting up a new body to allow workers to communicate their views to management, who say they will consider feedback before taking a final decision.

Theresa May, shadow work and pensions secretary, called the move another blow to pension provision in the UK.

“The reality is that this Labour government has repeatedly undermined pensions with tax raids and ever more red tape, leaving many companies feeling like they have little option but to shut down their final-salary schemes,” she said.

“Gordon Brown needs to face up to the damage he has done to pensions in the last 12 years and look at what he can do to stop the slow death of company pensions in the UK.”

Pensions experts have been warning for some time that final-salary schemes are becoming increasingly unsustainable, especially in the light of falling stockmarkets last year. Aon Consulting calculated last week that the top 200 defined benefit schemes were now £73bn in the red.

Last month, Barclays shut its final-salary scheme to existing members, while BP closed its scheme to new entrants. Surveys have shown that many other FTSE 100 companies expect to close their schemes in the next few years.

There are also fears that the BBC is facing a growing pensions deficit.

guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2009 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds


Lack of blockbusters hits Game

Retailer reports 10% fall in sales and pins hopes on Wii Fit Plus, FIFA 2010 and Pro Evolution Soccer 2010

Sales at Game Group have taken a tumble after the company suffered from the absence of a blockbuster computer game launch.

Game reported this morning that like-for-like sales fell by more than 15% between the start of February and the end of June, compared with a year ago.

The company’s sales fell by 10% but the chief executive, Lisa Morgan, insisted the results were in line with expectations.

Morgan laid the blame for the sales plunge on computer game developers. A string of hugely popular games were launched in the first half of 2008, including Grand Theft Auto IV, Mario Kart and Wii Fit, but this year’s big games are being held back until nearer Christmas.

“Last year, we saw an unprecedented level of hardware and software sales,” said Morgan. “There have not been any huge blockbusters so far this year.”

Game expects to post pre-tax profits of between £13m and £16m for the first half of the year, compared with last year’s record-breaking £36.4m.

The retailer is now pinning its hopes on a successful run-up to Christmas.

“The lineup for the second half of 2009 is extremely strong,” said Morgan, citing upcoming titles such as Wii Fit Plus, shoot ‘em up Halo ODST, and football games including FIFA 2010 and Pro Evolution Soccer 2010.

Game is also banking on Sony cutting the price of its PS3 console before the end of the year.

With the recession eating into disposable income, Game has been buying old games back off its customers in part-exchange for new titles and selling them on as ‘pre-owned’ games.

“This is a vital part of our customer offer and more and more customers are recognising the benefits,” said Morgan.

The practice is particularly profitable for Game: the gross profit margin on a pre-owned game is 39%, compared with 22% for a new one.

Looking to 2010, Morgan said that the anticipated launch of motion-sensitive technologies by Sony and Microsoft – following the success of the Wii – should give the sector a boost. But some analysts fear tougher times are ahead, with sales of the Wii console halving so far this year.

Shares in Game were down 18.5p at 145.5 in early trading.

guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2009 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds


British Gas to create 2,600 green jobs

Recruits will be needed to help introduce ‘smart meters’ to help people see exactly how much energy they are using in their homes

British Gas today promised to create 2,600 green jobs over the next three years by rolling out “smart meters” and installing wind turbines on peoples’ homes.

The move should help ministers meet targets of cutting carbon emissions through lower use of power, especially that generated by gas or other fossil fuels.

About 1,700 of the recruits will be new to the industry, while 900 are expected to be brought in from rival metering organisations in time for a government-backed roll-out programme due to start in 2012. Earlier this year the company unveiled plans to take on an additional 1,500 staff to work in the clean technology sector.

“Today’s announcement of 2,600 new jobs by 2012 shows we are creating skilled green jobs in Britain and training the experts who will help customers become more energy efficient in the future,” said Phil Bentley, managing director of British Gas.

The new workers, to be trained at the company’s growing network of energy academies, will install smart meters and help homeowners understand how the devices could reduce energy use, save money and end the practice of estimated monthly bills. Anecdotal evidence suggests savings of up to 25% can be made.

In May energy secretary Ed Miliband launched a consultation process on smart meters that is planned to run to September. The government would like energy suppliers to be responsible for meters with a new third-party body handling the data, but the companies want to do it all themselves.

Britain plans to replace all existing electricity and gas meters – often clunky objects hidden away in cupboards – with easily viewed devices that show consumers exactly how much energy they are using, and even see the energy demands of individual appliances.

It is hoped that people will change their behaviour to save money. The meters will also help homeowners sell electricity from green technologies such as solar panels or rooftop wind turbines back to the grid, while improving energy demand forecasts and network management.

Smart meters are seen as a first step toward creating “smart grids” where consumers can adjust electricity use to benefit from cheaper energy at times of low demand, including charging electric cars, and reduce consumption at peak times.

The British government estimates that smart meters could deliver net benefits of between £2.5m and £3.6m over the next 20 years.

In April, the government set a 2020 target to cut Britain’s greenhouse gas emissions by 34% compared with 1990 levels but the necessary renewable energy growth and efficiency improvements have so far been small.

guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2009 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds