Decoding the new economy

Anniversary reflections

Windows turns 25 and the web turns 20. Where do we go next?

Last weekend Microsoft Windows turned 25 and the World Wide Web turns 20 next month. It’s worthwhile reflecting on how both have changed our industries and where the future is taking us.

When Windows came along, the vast majority of computer users where not connected to networks, in fact Windows’ few networking features were horrible until the arrival of Windows for Workgroups 3.11 in late 1993.

Even then it didn’t support the Internet, requiring an additional TCP/IP “stack”, the collection of software to make a Windows computer work with the net. The most popular TCP/IP stack was Trumpet Winsock, developed by Tasmanian Peter Tattam.

Microsoft’s disdain for the Internet lasted five years until shortly after the release of Windows 95 where Bill Gates realised bundling the private Microsoft Network (MSN) along with competitors such as Compuserve and America On Line was a strategic mistake.

That realisation and the rapid change executed by Bill Gates will go down as one of the biggest strategic turnarounds in corporate history. It certainly saved Microsoft’s neck although the integration of Internet Explorer into Windows created the massive malware problem that exploded in 2002 and persists to this day.

In turn the net has changed the way we connect with our staff, suppliers and customers. Email alone probably increased the speed of business by a factor of five and now smartphones, tablet computers and mobile broadband are each doing the same.

Looking back at that situation, we can ask ourselves where these technologies are going in the future. A recent presentation by Wall Street investment analyst Mary Meeker points to some of the direction we’ll see this heading.

Her presentation is excellent reading with her predictions of when smartphones will overtake desktop computers and some scary postscripts of the fiscal corner the US has painted itself into. The points can be summarised thus;

Globality
Mobility
Social ecosystems
Advertising
Commerce
Media
Company leadership
Steve Jobs
The ferocious pace of tech change

The last point is the most pertinent. At the time of the launch of Windows and the web innovation was largely a top down, management driven process. Today consumers and employees drive change, leaving corporate managers to catch up.

While Mary Meeker aimed the presentation at Internet executives, the lessons in it are clear for all businesses – our industries are going to be connected, mobile, global and far more responsive to the needs and ideas of our customers, staff and suppliers.

The change and disruption we’ve seen in our supply chains, markets and recruitment is going to become even faster that it’s been in the last twenty years.

It’s worthwhile reading Mary Meekers’ report while reflecting on how Windows and the Internet have changed our workplaces. It shows we’re only at the beginning of this era of massive change.

the new gatekeepers

Are four powerful online empires developing?

As the net matures, are we seeing a new phalanx of gatekeepers gathering to complement the old ones?

Four companies striving to control great parts of the Internet economy; Google in the search market, Facebook for social media, Amazon in e-commerce and Apple in mobility.

Of the four, Apple seems to be the furthest along this path as the iTunes store coupled with the market take up of iPad, iPhone and iPod combination are beginning to dominate the mobile device segment of the Internet.

This is illustrated by two stories in recent days; the first is News Corporation’s deal to develop a dedicated iPad “newspaper” and the other Robert Scoble’s description of how Application developers are increasingly focused on the Apple platform.

The telling part of Scoble’s story is where he speculates how the tech media could be being rendered irrelevant by Apple’s control of the iTunes store, he goes on to say;

“Do app developers need the press anymore?

They tell me yes, but not for the reason you might think.

What’s the reason? Well, they suspect that Apple’s team is watching the press for which apps get discussed and hyped up.”

Scoble’s article is interesting in how Apple’s dominance of the distribution chain allows them to bypass other media channels; why go to Facebook or Google, let alone your local newpaper to find out what the hottest new apps are?

Even more fascinating is how Apple’s control of its distribution channels ties in with its dominant hardware platform, this is the online equivalent to one company owning the paper mill, the presses, the trucks and the news stands then forcing every magazine and newspaper publisher to work them.

It’s instructive that despite the real risk that Apple could end dictating all terms to those who rely on iTunes as their publishing platform, newspaper publishers are locking themselves onto this world. This is despite the publishers spending the last two decades shoring up profitability by reducing margins to their news sellers and delivery agents.

Despite these risks, News Corporation isn’t holding back after Rupert Murdoch described the iPad as “a fantastic invention”, across the empire various outlets are promoting their iPad applications, including the New York Post, London Sun and the Sydney Daily Telegraph.

It will be very interesting to see how this alliance between an old and a new media empire will turn out.

Meanwhile the new empires are jostling each other where they meet, Google’s latest spat with Facebook over data is just one of many skirmishes and we can expect to see many more as the big four explore the boundaries of their businesses.

The real question for us is how do we see ourselves working with these empires. Will we reject them, or will we accept that doing business with Facebook, Google, Apple and Amazon is the easiest way of getting on with our online lives?

If it’s the latter then we’ll have seen the old gatekeepers of the media, retail and communications simply replaced by new, bigger toll collectors.

Learning from the past

Armistice Day reminds us of why we need to learn and adapt

Today being Remembrance Day, the anniversary of the First World War’s end, it’s fitting to not just to remember those who fell in that costly war but also learn the lessons from the mistakes that ended up wasting so many lives.

Undoubtedly the biggest tragedy of the war was the sheer cost in soldiers’ lives which was due to the commanding generals’ refusal to accept the era of the cavalryman was over as the machine gun, supported by heavy artillery and the airplane, became the main battlefield weapon.

This wilful blindness to technology is even more galling when one considers the machine gun was an invention of the US civil war fifty years earlier and had been extensively used by the European powers in conquering and subduing native populations in their colonies.

Those commanders such as Haig, Gough, Ludendorff and Kaiser Whilhelm — the “donkeys leading lions” — ignored the technological changes that had changed their industry.

Worse, they wouldn’t listen; Haig rarely visited the front or spoke to his junior officers and men and the Kaiser was forced to abdicate and live out his days in exile because he ignored the discontent in his own country.

In times of great change, we need to listen, learn and adapt. As we saw in the 1914-18 war, the costs of not doing so can be great.

The new Pantopticon

Are we entering a new age of conformity?

There’s a rule in broadcasting that any microphone should be treated as loaded. Regardless of whether you think it’s on or not, you shouldn’t say anything untoward near a microphone that you wouldn’t want to go to air.

It’s a lesson many politicians have learned, sometimes to their great embarrassment and sometimes with potentially catastrophic consequences.

Today, in an age where almost everyone has a recording device in their pocket, we all have to be careful. The travails of an Australian Rugby League player, photographed by a friend doing something obscene while drunk on an end of season party, illustrates just how pervasive this surveillance can be.

In one respect this is good, as we saw with the Qantas A380 mishap in Singapore, a connected public allows the truth to get out despite the hysterical headlines of the media and the spin obsessed control of modern governments or big business. The fact almost everyone has a camera makes officials more accountable for their actions.

But there is a darker side, this constant monitoring can also be tool for conformity. Should you decide to dissent from the corporate, government or society norm, there is now plenty of material to discredit you – be it a drunken stunt with a dog, a silly Facebook post when you were 17 or a photo of you picking your nose while waiting at a traffic light.

There’s no shortage of ‘concerned citizens’ who will photograph or record us carrying out actions they believe don’t conform with their ideas what is normal and acceptable.

Our definition of ‘normal and acceptable’ is becoming more narrowed as well, as a myriad of communications channels allows us to watch only what fits into our view of the world and the rise of social media that lets us filter out those voices we don’t like.

It’s going to be interesting to see how the connected society develops over the next few year, will we become more insular and conformist or will we use these tools to broaden our horizons?

Thoughts on Media140

How is real time and social media changing politics?

This post was part of the Media 140 Australian Politics of which I was kindly invited as a guest blogger. The focus on the afternoon panel is because this was the specific session I was asked to cover by the organiser, Julie Posetti.

After an election what panelist and political cartoonist First Dog on the Moon
described as “three months of despair” a review from a panel of cartoonists,
photographers and other outliers of the Australian political journalism was always
going to be well received.

First Dog’s comments showed the general despair by the electorate at large towards
a bland performance by both major political parties, particularly in their use of new
media tools.

The rest of the afternoon panel on “alternative views on political news” shared First
Dog’s general attitude, but luckily they made up for that despair with an entertaining
and funny take on the election and pricking some of the pomposity that can surround
the social media communities.

Malcolm Farnsworth (@mfarnsworth) put this best when he described much of
Twitter as “ego, brown nosery and wankery”. Surprisingly this was taken well by the
room.

His point is valid though, we need to keep in mind that one of the attractions of social
media is we can choose our own friends, particularly in Twitter where we can restrict
our social circle to those we like and agree with.

A few of the questions from the floor recognised this as did Julian Morrow
(@moreoj) with a shameless plug for The Chaser’s iPhone App. In an earlier session
Claire Wardell had shown how new media isn’t just Twitter and tools like apps and
clever websites can drive the political discourse just as well as a witty tweet.

Julian also showed how The Chaser crew were ahead of the curve with taking a
failed newspaper empire online in the late 1990s. Although his line about Twitter giving “the monkeys the typewriters” also betrayed a Rupert Murdoch style bitterness towards
new media.

To further move the issue from social media, Peter Bowers (@mpbowers) raised
the issues of photographers’ rights and payments, citing the Hudson River plane
crash as a good example where an agency snapper would have received some
large rights payments for the early photos of the aircraft floating down the river.

Peter moved into another aspect of social media and the perils for photographers
when talking about Parliamentarians taking photos from the floor of the house. In
the Australian Parliament, there are strict rules about the use of images and he had
once been bought before the Privileges Committee for breaching the rules with the
possibility of gaol time for contempt of Parliament.

What this illustrated in Peter’s opinion was how laws haven’t kept up to date with
technology. We could also say it’s another example of how people don’t understand
the real time consequences of seemingly trivial online actions.

As one of the final sessions for the day, the session was good opportunity to liven up the room with some funny, out of the box and thinking that shot down the thought that the day would be a Twitter love-in.

Overall, Media140 was a success in examining how the new online tools are changing
politics and the reporting of it. Having Claire Wardell’s UK perspective and Jeffrey

Bleich’s view from the Obama campaign showed just how far Australia has to go with
these tools.

Probably the biggest message was from the journalist participants – it’s clear many are
uncomfortable with the public being able to work around the gatekeepers and some
are downright scared of the abuse they think they receive from the community.

“It’s all about getting paid” one journalist said. You can’t help but think that was the
same thing bleated by the loom weavers of 200 years ago.

What we saw from the OzPolitics Media140 is a community and society in great
change: The political parties, media and the electorate are working through how these
tools are going to change the way we vote and how our governments work.

The power of delegation

Why organisations need to learn Steve Jobs’ lessons

Randall Stross of The New York Times looked at Steve Jobs’ years in the wilderness running NeXT Computers and concluded the lessons he learned were essential to making Apple the success it is today.

While leading NeXT Jobs obsessed about detail, famously leaving his key customers waiting while he discussed the layout of sprinklers in the landscaped gardens.

On returning to Apple, Stross points out Apple’s management team has been remarkably stable and this stability, borne out of Jobs trusting his key staff to make the right decisions, is one of the reasons for the company’s success.

As we move into an era where information becomes a commodity and the old style of manager guarding their sources of knowledge becomes irrelevant, the trust based organisation is going to replace the command and control models of the past.

This is going to challenge to a lot of managers in private and public organisations. It will be interesting to see how enterprises, government agencies and political parties around the world manage those challenges.

The style of leader raising today is very different from those of the past.

An appropriate broadband policy

What should Australia’s Internet policy be?

On Radio National’s Life Matters Paul joins Richard Aedy, Jane Bennett and Peter Cox to discuss what the appropriate broadband policy should be for Australia.

Our previous discussions on this are covered in our Freeways of the Future article and presentation.

Some of the topics we’ll be looking at include;

if we choose to go with the est $43b broadband fibre to the door policy – does this mean they’ll be coming along digging up the street to lay cables into every yard?
if we don’t do this but choose to rely on wireless connection from hubs – what does that mean for reliability of internet connection?
how do any of the options compare to the current speeds Australian cities, and rural and remote regions have?
are we over-building if we proceed to take fibre to every household in the country?
are we simply ensuring that we will be ready for expansion of services on the internet?

The show is live at 9.00am Australian Eastern time and will podcast on the Life Matters site shortly afterward.

Category: future

Anniversary reflections

Similar posts:

Learning from the past

Similar posts:

The new Pantopticon

Similar posts:

The power of delegation

Similar posts:

An appropriate broadband policy

Similar posts: