Mark Kolier’s Blog

Posts Tagged ‘Yahoo’

Amazon.com CEO Jeff Bezos presented the new Amazon Kindle – called ‘Fire’ this past Wednesday in New York. I’ve written much about the Kindle in general and had not planned to write about it particularly since yesterday’s unveiling offered few if any surprises. We knew there would be a 7 inch color screen, a touch screen, Wi-Fi internet access and a 30 day free trial for Amazon Prime (which includes unlimited, instant streaming of over 10,000 movies and TV shows and free two day shipping on millions of items) which if consumers do not opt out it will be an additional $ 79 renewable ‘gift’ to Amazon that would keep on giving year after year – Mr. Bezos is a smart guy indeed.

Besides access to Amazon Appstore, the Kindle Fire will include a cloud-accelerated “split browser” called Amazon Silk, free storage for all of the user’s Amazon digital content in the Amazon Cloud, built-in email app that gets webmail (Gmail, Yahoo!, Hotmail, AOL etc.) into a single inbox.

We also knew there would be no cameras (unlike the iPad), and no 3G or 4G network access (iPad’s have 3G and Apple is planning 4G access). The Kindle Fire 1.0 does not seem to me to be the iPad killer. The sale price was a bit of a mystery although most experts predicted $ 249 or less and it came out at $ 199. Amazon also released pricing plans for its entry-level black and white Kindle at $ 79 which makes it the least expensive e-reader on the market.

In releasing the Kindle Fire in front of the 2011 Christmas season at what appears to be close to its manufacturing cost, clearly Amazon is banking on increased sales of digital music, videos and books as well as other content if it is to make the new Kindle platform a winning one. The iPad (at more than twice the price) will continue to appeal to those that have the ability to afford it, and are desirous of the larger screen (a pain in the neck to carry around as far as I am concerned) and Apple App Store.

Other tablet makers as well as the Barnes & Noble Nook have great reasons to be concerned. The RIM (Blackberry) Playbook tablet is already gasping for air and the Kindle Fire will likely snuff it out completely. I believe sales of other popular Android based tablets (Galaxy, Xoom etc) will be impacted since there truly is another non-Apple alternative. If the Kindle Fire is not the iPad killer it may turn out to be the killer of many other tablets.

It’s also possible that the market for tablets could be split into two – a premium market headed by the Apple iPad and the everyday (lower end) tablet that is affordable to so many more people. It makes me wonder how many people will decide to own both devices. After all – does owning an iPad preclude one from buying and using an Amazon Kindle Fire?

As a serial early adopter I likely will pick up an Amazon Kindle Fire – 1.0. I still don’t have an iPad although I’ve used one several times and it is a great and cool piece of technology. I have and actually use my original Kindle and it still works fine. But many times since I bought the original Kindle I have wished that I waited for the 2.0 version which has been out for quite some time now.

Amazon would never tell but my burning question is how long will it be until the improved version of the Kindle Fire comes out? I can hardly wait. And that’s the problem.

An interesting story in this past Saturday’s NY Times – http://nyti.ms/b2RQFQ discussed the revamping of AOL’s website to give a greater emphasis to news created by AOL’s staff as well as original video clips. This appears to me that it could be a good idea – had it happened three years ago.

AOL’s CEO Tim Armstrong touted that AOL is,”still a very desirable place to advertise – very high household income, and more women than men”. All I could think was – so they’re old. In many cases very old. I don’t know the statistics but it’s hard to imagine very many people under the age of 35 that use AOL for anything else than an email address.

The article goes on to note that since January 2010, the number of unique visitors to AOL’s home page has declined 27 percent. Revenue during the first half of this year is down 25%. So it’s happening right now that AOL is becoming more irrelevant with each passing day.

And is it really any surprise? With the online world taking on a truly global focus how does AMERICA ONLINE fit in with a world view? Is there any way that anyone outside the United States would ever use AOL? That’s not true of Google, or Yahoo or even Microsoft’s home page. They have users from all over the globe. Somehow AOL in French or Chinese does not really work does it?

The new design will also move video near the top of the page – WOW – revolutionary! Clips will include a series called – “You’ve Got”. Is that like “You’ve Got Mail”? The 1998 hit movie starring Tom Hanks and Meg Ryan? That was 12 years ago folks – and I hate to break it to AOL but things have changed in the online world just a bit over the past 12 years.

Maybe I am missing something big here. After all AOL’s revenue was $ 1.24 billion in the first six months even if it was down 25%. But comments that Mr. Armstrong made like blaming AOL’s shrinking (maybe shriveling would be a better word?) dial-up access (Dial-up??? Are you kidding?) is responsible for the declines. Ya think?

With AOL’s first overhaul of the home page since 2008, Mr. Armstrong went on to say that the philosophy behind the page was to inform visitors while also entertaining them. The focus will shift during the day from being news-oriented in the morning to a focus on lifestyle in the afternoon. I guess he’s not too concerned about the evening and night’s since most of the users are fast asleep by 9PM.

Finally the article notes Mr. Armstrong commenting “We are basically trying to make sure that our users are prepared for the day and they don’t get caught with their pants off.” If that were to happen it would likely only be because they forgot to put them on in the first place.

Ok all you AOL lovers out there – let me have it. Speak up now – it’s your turn.

By now those of you who have read some of my posts know that I have no real use for Plaxo (although I am a ‘member’) but am a regular user of LinkedIn. I have yet to become what I see a number of people are which is what I call a ‘serial networker’. Those with more than 500 contacts fit this moniker. I have over 300 and personally know and have met almost every single person in my network. This is unlike Twitter on which I have nearly 600 followers but have met under 30. More on following large groups of people on Twitter in a subsequent post.

But I really think LinkedIn provides are great tool and service for business people. Since the information is self-provided it is generally accurate if not a bit embellished. (Save for the prevaricators that are no doubt members as well but hopefully not in my network). Whenever I am given a new contact via referral the first thing I do is type their name into the search function of LinkedIn. It does not work every time since there are still many folks who are not on LinkedIn or there are times when there are too many John Smiths to figure even if you know the geographic location. Since the information is what people provide on their own and when you do get a proper profile you get a snapshot of their location, career path, education and even a few interests. This is BEFORE you have even LinkedIn with them. And answering questions in specific areas does build your standing and reputation as a resource which has helped me and our company gain business.

But it gets better than that. Search by company can provide position locations for job searches. Industries can be investigated by category. And people with whom you have lost touch can be found (yes this is done on Facebook and other social networks as well). Of course you can get great information via Google and Yahoo but I have found LinkedIn to be faster and quite reliable.

Did I mention that Linkedin is free? They do have a revenue model for enhanced access and the ability to send messages to people with whom you would like to be in touch but have no contact. More importantly introductions via people you are connected to work out really well as there is a level of inherent trust built in.

I don’t understand why anyone would not want to be listed on LinkedIn. The days of reveling in ones anonymity are over. People can find out things about you in many other places. Just ask and read about Justice Scalia this past week. Wouldn’t want them to find out things about you from your own perspective?

Have a great holiday weekend.