
<?phpxml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" 
xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
>
<channel>
<title>Haaze.com / agreemJar / Published News</title>
<link>http://www.haaze.com</link>
<description>Test Web 2.0 Content Management System</description>
<pubDate>Sat, 02 Apr 2011 07:10:05 +0000</pubDate>
<language>en</language>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[Why no one lines up for the Motorola Xoom]]></title>
<link>http://www.haaze.com/story.php?title=why-no-one-lines-up-for-the-motorola-xoom</link>
<comments>http://www.haaze.com/story.php?title=why-no-one-lines-up-for-the-motorola-xoom</comments>
<pubDate>Sat, 02 Apr 2011 07:10:05 +0000</pubDate>
<dc:creator>agreemJar</dc:creator>
<category>Mobile &amp; Electronics</category>
<guid>http://www.haaze.com/story.php?title=why-no-one-lines-up-for-the-motorola-xoom</guid>
<description><![CDATA[A couple of prominent chief executives were shown the door recently because they didn't take thetablet market seriously enough. But the executive boards doing the firing should be careful what they wish for. Device makers shouldn't try to ape the iPad. Motorola&amp;39's Droid X has been popular because it offered a form factor and experience quite different than the iPhone's.(Credit:Motorola)This week Acer's CEO, Gianfranco Lanci, was let go because, among other reasons, he wasn't responding quickly enough to the tablet phenomenon, according to Acer Chairman J.T. Wang. And earlier this year the CEO of Advanced Micro Devices resigned for similar reasons. &quot;This market is about growth,&quot; Richard Shim, an analyst at market researcher DisplaySearch, said in a phone interview, explaining why so many companies are rushing to the tablet market. &quot;ASPs (average selling price) don't go up annually, they go down. In order to have a business model that supports that...means your volumes have to go up. So, everybody's trained to look for growth. And if you're not looking for growth, then there's something wrong with you&quot; (so the thinking goes). But are we really seeing the emergence of the tablet market Or just the rise of theiPad I would argue it's more of an Apple thing than the birth of a broader tablet market. At least for the foreseeable future. One of the best ways to gauge this assertion--and what I would submit is one of the first red flags for the broader tablet market--is to do some good old-fashioned legwork. In the Los Angeles area, I visited Apple stores on the day the iPad launched, as well as Verizon and Best Buy stores during the Xoom rollout. At the risk of repeating what most people already know, there were lines as far as the eye could see for the iPad 2. (And this persisted for days--even now, two weeks after it first went on sale, the iPad still sells out every day at stores in the Los Angeles area.) Nothing of that sort happened at Verizon stores or at Best Buy. No lines to speak of and no stores--at least in my area--that were sold out. I was surprised. I had expected the Xoom to launch with a bang not a whimper. But it didn't take long to figure out why this was happening. Aside from the well-known Apple allure, it was a triumph for Apple's stores. When they walk into an Apple store, consumers know immediately why they must have an iPad. Dozens of iPads are on display. They're front and center. And every iPad is brimming with apps. Not the case with the Xoom. &quot;There were no applications that showed off what the Xoom could do,&quot; said Shim, who visited a Best Buy in San Francisco and--echoing my experience in Los Angeles--was not able to find the Xoom immediately, as Best Buy places the Xoom rather inconspicuously in the PC section. In short, an Apple Store experience it's not. &quot;It pales in comparison to the way the iPad is demonstrated,&quot; Shim said. (Shim writes about this in his blog also.) Verizon stores I visited did try their best to show off the Xoom's apps, but Verizon is simultaneously selling iPads and Samsung Galaxy tabs, too. So the Xoom does not get the sales representatives' undivided attention. Will the BlackBerry PlayBook and HP TouchPad face similarly anticlimactic rollouts I wonder. And a word to the wise for the other CEOs: Don't just ape the iPad. Microsoft executive Craig Mundie was actually on to something when he expressed doubt about the long-term viability of the tablet. My spin on Mundie's statement: Apple may succeed with the tablet but not others necessarily. Motorola, Microsoft, HP, RIM, et al should also heed another kernel of truth imparted by Mundie. A highly sophisticated smartphone--let's say a future version of the Motorola Droid X or the HTC Desire--may suffice for many consumers. So, as Mundie stated, the must-have device market for many consumers may be a futuristic high-end smartphone and newfangled laptop--sans tablet. <br/><br/>0 Vote(s) ]]></description>
</item>

<item>
<title><![CDATA[FCC, not free market, best for spectrum auction]]></title>
<link>http://www.haaze.com/story.php?title=fcc-not-free-market-best-for-spectrum-auction</link>
<comments>http://www.haaze.com/story.php?title=fcc-not-free-market-best-for-spectrum-auction</comments>
<pubDate>Fri, 18 Mar 2011 07:10:57 +0000</pubDate>
<dc:creator>agreemJar</dc:creator>
<category>Technology</category>
<guid>http://www.haaze.com/story.php?title=fcc-not-free-market-best-for-spectrum-auction</guid>
<description><![CDATA[Editors' note: This is a guest column. See Steve Largent's bio below.In the last few weeks, I have read a number of op-eds claiming that reallocation of broadcast spectrum for wireless use should be left to the free market. While I am a fervent believer in free markets and limited government, there are rare instances in which government involvement is necessary. I agree with Federal Communications Commission Chairman Julius Genachowski on his proposal that managing the incentive process to voluntarily reclaim broadcast licenses and repack the spectrum is an area that absolutely requires FCC leadership and experience.When the FCC assumed responsibility in 1927 to determine the license holders for the nation's spectrum, there were only a few licensees. Today, and largely driven by the wireless industry, spectrum is a scarce commodity that commands billions when auctioned. To ensure that this finite resource is put to its highest and best use, the federal government acts as manager and aggregator of the licenses. For wireless, it identifies spectrum bands that are nationally, and sometimes internationally, harmonized once underused spectrum is identified and license holders are moved (or repackaged). With thousands of license holders across the country, including broadcasters, it's a challenging task but one the government does well to ensure interference-free service. Once the spectrum bands are free,CTIA members will bid against all participants for the right to purchase the spectrum for billions of dollars through federal government auctions. This spurs the &quot;virtuous cycle&quot; of innovation and competition. When spectrum is available, wireless providers develop and upgrade their networks, devices, services, and content. Ultimately, consumers benefit by our continuous offering of the world's best wireless products and services.Since spectrum is a valuable and finite resource, we must evaluate every single license holder to ensure each is efficiently using its bands. In recognition of this column's own finite space, let's look at our members, then the broadcasters. Facts show that the U.S. wireless industry has the most efficient providers in the world. We have three times more mobile subscribers than any one of these countries: Japan, South Korea, Germany, the U.K., France, Italy, Spain, and Canada. Americans talk on mobile devices more than 830 minutes per month, twice as many as in the closest country, yet the average revenue per minute is 4 cents, half that of the closest country. Despite leading these other countries in usage and value, many of these countries' governments are dedicating large bands of spectrum for their wireless industries because they recognize that mobile broadband is a key economic driver. Germany just auctioned 350MHz of new spectrum, Japan has identified 400MHz of spectrum for reallocation, and the U.K. has identified 355MHz. Italy, France, Canada, and Spain have each identified more than 250MHz of new spectrum for reallocation for their respective wireless industries. Right now, the U.S. has less than 50MHz that could be auctioned. This equation doesn't add up if we want to keep leading the world's mobile revolution. Broadcasters, and a few others, suggest that government mechanisms to facilitate the reallocation of spectrum aren't necessary and that reallocation should be left to the free market. This won't work either. If we are to ensure the highest and best use of spectrum, the FCC must play a role in the reallocation and repacking of broadcast spectrum, as it has proposed to do. As part of the FCC's National Broadband Plan, more than 120MHz of spectrum was identified for reallocation from the broadcasters. Currently, the broadcasters have 294MHz in each market, and much of it is unused. In our recent white paper, we conservatively estimated that the auctions of broadcast spectrum reclaimed through a voluntary mechanism would gross at least $36 billion for the federal government. This process would keep free over-the-air broadcast service while the industry would pay billions to the U.S. Treasury and billions more to the U.S. economy to deploy new technologies. Ultimately, consumers continue to get the world's best products and services. Everyone wins. The FCC rightfully plays a critical role in the voluntary broadcast incentive auction process because it works for everyone involved. Let's work with the FCC and move quickly to get this valuable spectrum to auction--the first step will be legislation that authorizes an incentive auction--so that the U.S. wireless industry can remain the world's leader and continue to offer our consumers the best mobile experience.<br/><br/>0 Vote(s) ]]></description>
</item>

<item>
<title><![CDATA[Google launching Chrome, Earth, Picasa in Iran]]></title>
<link>http://www.haaze.com/story.php?title=google-launching-chrome-earth-picasa-in-iran</link>
<comments>http://www.haaze.com/story.php?title=google-launching-chrome-earth-picasa-in-iran</comments>
<pubDate>Thu, 20 Jan 2011 08:10:08 +0000</pubDate>
<dc:creator>agreemJar</dc:creator>
<category>Mobile &amp; Electronics</category>
<guid>http://www.haaze.com/story.php?title=google-launching-chrome-earth-picasa-in-iran</guid>
<description><![CDATA[Google is for the first time launching Chrome, Google Earth, and Picasa for users in Iran, according to the company's official blog.The U.S. government recently lifted some of the restrictions prohibiting software downloads to Iran. Now, the search giant is looking to get its downloadable products into the hands of Iranian citizens while at the same time blocking access to the Iranian government.&quot;We're committed to full compliance with U.S. export controls and sanctions programs and, as a condition of our export licenses from the Treasury Department, we will continue to block IP addresses associated with the Iranian government,&quot; wrote Neil Martin, Google's Export Compliance Programs Manager, in the blog post.Google's YouTube was one of the tools used by Iranian dissidents in the 2009 protests against the country's presidential election. Despite strong efforts by Tehran to block such services, many citizens were able to sneak past the barriers imposed by their government to get their message out.Though the Iranian government may try to block the download of Chrome and the other products, Google is hoping these tools will open up new communications channels for Iranian citizens.&quot;There are many activist layers on Google Earth. Anyone can create a layer to show exactly what is going on in Iran,&quot; said Google's head of public policy, Scott Rubin, according to the BBC. Rubin also touted the benefits of Chrome, saying that &quot;in a country with a history of government surveillance it is useful having a browser that can't easily be hacked.&quot;<br/><br/>0 Vote(s) ]]></description>
</item>

</channel>
</rss>
