(Credit: Cote @ RedMonk)
Our big MuleCon user event started yesterday and continues today, capped off with a Developer Campground that we are hosting with all of the worldwide Mule team attending and answering questions.

So far the event has been a big success and I have been too busy to blog. However, thanks to Cote, who is hosting a few sessions here I now have an update: the muffins and pastries are pretty delicious. Pictured to the left you’ll see these oddly shaped (but tasty) mini-muffin loaves that have been the hit of the party.

I just can’t repress my love for baked goods. We have a guy from Scripps Network (who own Food Television and many other stations) presenting today and I was demanding he introduce me to all the stars.

MuleCon Muffins

There will be more blogging later when Matt Asay gets here and his panel (with Jason Maynard, Larry Augustin, me and Cote) conflicts with the Arsenal game.

From 2007 to 2012, the market should more than quadruple for technology called watermarks or fingerprints that can endow photos, video, and audio with unobtrusive digital identifiers, according to a new study.

Among the reasons for the growth, according to study author Mark Kirstein, is that companies are trying to monitor the spread of copyrighted files shared over networks or social-networking sites. “Fox has already communicated that they will mandate watermarking for early-release high-definition content,” Kirstein said.

The market for watermarking technology should grow from about $131 million in 2007 to $171 million this year and $588 million in 2012, MultiMedia Intelligence said in a study released Tuesday.

In addition, watermarking could become more popular as online music distributors such as Amazon or Apple’s iTunes move away from DRM restrictions, the report said.

This collaboration between GIPS and CGS means that millions of Pronto users can now enjoy high-quality voice communication.

Global IP Solutions, a company that provides IP-based voice and video communication for mobile platforms, has now brought its solutions to power Web 2.0.

CommuniGate Pronto is a Web 2.0 client that unifies all forms of communications. Pronto 2.2 allows carriers to build modular services such as delivering VideoMail, IPTV, or video on demand to subscribers while offering full-featured mobile unified communications. The solution also powers e-mail, VoIP, instant messaging, rich media with HD audio and video, and over-the-air synchronization capability to the AirSync-enbabled smartphones.

GIPS VoiceEngine is a complete solution that goes beyond the codecs and is designed to handle all necessary voice processing for IP networks including jitter buffer and echo cancellation, while also providing superior voice quality even under the most adverse network conditions.

The company announced Monday that CommuniGate Systems (CGS), a carrier-class mobile unified communications (UC) provider, has embedded GIPS VoiceEngine to power voice communications in its Pronto client UC framework.

CGS provides software and services to mobile and broadband network operators for unified communication SaaS delivery solutions. Today, CGS’s Pronto has been implemented in more than 12,000 operators with more than 130 million subscribers worldwide. The company’s strategic partners include Intel, Hewlett-Packard, Adobe Systems, Sun Microsystems, and Acatel Lucent.

(Credit:
GIPS)

Call it Web 2.5, where the platform-as-a-service providers allow developers to create Web applications via the cloud and for users to consume them on any Web-connected device, anytime and anywhere. It eliminates what Amazon’s Jeff Bezos describes as the “muck,” the undifferentiated heavy lifting, such as setting up and maintaining servers, databases, storage, and networks.

It also leverages data centers from large players like Amazon and Google that were built from the ground up to support Web applications at huge, virtualized scale and with high reliability and relatively low cost. And, it creates potentially giant subscription-based revenue streams for the platform-as-a-service providers. They become utilities providing Web services to the planet and managing the high-value personal profile data.

Google App Engine, which was unveiled tonight at Google’s Mountain View, Calif., headquarters, offers similar capabilities to Amazon’s EC2, S3, and SimpleDB services. Google App Engine is limited to using the Python language, Google APIs, and a relatively modest amount of storage, compute cycles, and bandwidth per day currently, but you can see where this is heading.

Google could parlay its search and advertising technology, market dominance, and its infrastructure prowess into a powerful engine that runs and monetizes thousands or millions of externally developed applications.

Salesforce.com provides a more mature example today with its Force.com platform. It allows developers to write applications, mostly CRM-oriented, in a variety of languages that can run natively on the Salesforce.com software platform and data centers.

(Credit:
salesforce.com)

In many ways it is the Microsoft model–you need a subscription (license in the old days) to the platform to run your application. In this case, “run” means that Salesforce.com provides developers all the software and hardware services in exchange for a fee, which is based on specific metrics, such as Web services calls.

Rival NetSuite, as well as smaller outfits such as Bungee Labs, are seizing on the concept of providing complete cloud-based development and deployment platform services.

Microsoft hasn’t yet shown its cards in the platform-as-a-service arena. Nor has the object of its affection, Yahoo. Microsoft has talked about SQL Server Data Services and the grand synchronization mesh, but it hasn’t revealed any plans for an end-to-end hosted platform-as-a-service for developing and serving applications from the cloud. Mary Jo Foley has some insight on that topic.

Web 3.0 as envisioned by Tim Berners-Lee is not around the corner, but it is busily percolating. In parallel, platform-as-a-service is evolving, the plateau of Web 2.5. When the two meet, Web 3.0 will have arrived.

If the Internet abacus company sees its readings suggest a significant conclusion, it releases the information in an interesting and digestible form.

However, I understand that both comScore and its frats-in-stats at Nielsen Online are having their audits audited by the Interactive Advertising Bureau after mlb.com declared that Nielsen Online’s score for its site of 6 million was a “conScore.” The real figure, according to mlb.com, was actually 19 million. (the results of the audit’s audit are due at the end of this year.)

I try to leave discussions of numbers to intelligent people.

But there seems to be a big difference between 6 million and 19 million.

As I was thinking about this, a book wafted beneath my nose that tended to crystallize some human instincts about facts, something that numbers purport to be.

It’s called “True Enough: Learning to Live in A Post-Fact Society” by Farhad Manjoo.

(Credit:
misocrazy)

Mr. Manjoo performs an enjoyable analysis of some recent political controversies, such as the allegations that the elections of 2000 and 2004 were stolen by devious and surprisingly organized Republicans. (His conclusions seem to suggest that Mr. Gore was hard done by, Mr. Kerry was not.)

The book is at its strongest in describing just how deeply most human beings want to find information that most closely confirms their own prejudices. And how they shut out information that counters those prejudices.

What prejudices do research companies have? Is it, perhaps, important for them to have their research come up with newsworthy results? Are their methodologies actually primed to achieve that?

There are allegations that comScore’s and Nielsen Online’s figures tend to discriminate against, for example, foreigners and MacOlytes.

Why would the research companies allow for this sort of speculation?

Why would they allow for the perception that someone on a
Mac in Krakow, Poland, is nothing more than a hanging chad?

According to the Interactive Advertising Bureau’s CEO, Randall Rothenberg, these companies are “still relying on panels, a media-measurement technique invented for the radio industry exactly seven decades ago, to quantify the Internet”.

Wait a minute, they’re using panels? Does everyone know about this? Do the people who use their numbers know about this?

For so many people in the advertising business and beyond, who have their prejudices too, it is the headline that matters. They present in headlines. They talk about themselves in headlines. They need news.

Being 21st Century humans whose budgets are shrinking, attention spans are short and careers even shorter, they sometimes eschew analysis for today’s news currency, the soundbite.

comScore and Nielsen Online are in the business of creating some very soundbiting headlines indeed. (FACEBOOK OVERTAKES MYSPACE!!! OHMIGOD!!! I NEED TO WRITE A SONG ABOUT THIS!!!)

Which leads me to the headline of this post.

I have no reason to believe that the folks at comScore and Nielsen Online are anything other than well-meaning, dedicated but imperfect professionals.

But what if the conclusion of the IAB audit is that the figures from companies such as these have been wildly inaccurate?

What would their PR people do with that?

Would they publicize these findings, as a declaration that they need to work harder, to find better methodologies in order to reveal more accurate truths? (Oh, there are so many inaccurate truths out there..)

Or would they decide that wouldn’t be good for business?

I’m just asking.

You see, I only have a MacBook and I’m feeling ignored.

When I first read the FSJ blog I knew the writing was too good for it not to be a legit journalist. And the amazing thing is he is still cranking out great, completely absurd blog posts. It’s like Monty Python for the valley crowd.

In the podcast Dan is really funny and very candid about his work. I think I was the first one in this episode to give him a hard time about some of his previous comments about open source, but he not only explained every one of them but also proved that he is an open source supporter…only time will tell :>

X-bit Labs is not only reporting that Microsoft is still planning on releasing an external Blu-ray drive, but also that the company already has the device ready to go.

According to the article, Toshiba (yes, you read that correctly) and Samsung have been asked to come up with the external Blu-ray solution for the
Xbox 360. Rumors are also floating around claiming a $100-to-$150 price point.

With Blu-ray playback remaining as one of the few advantages the PlayStation 3 has over the Xbox 360, one would imagine Microsoft would want to release this immediately to level the Blu-ray bragging rights issue.

If this information is accurate, we’re left wondering how Microsoft will play this. Do they try and get this out in time for the holidays? Or do they wait to debut it at a show (like CES) where we’re likely to see standalone Blu-ray players fall in price anyway?

(Credit:
Samsung)

A second Blu-ray home theater system has joined Samsung’s product lineup. The HT-BD2S is essentially identical to its predecessor, the Samsung HT-BD2T, but with two important distinctions: the BD2S has small satellite speakers (versus the four tallboy models that anchored the BD2T), and it’s available for an even $1,000 (a 33 percent discount off the BD2T’s asking price).

Does the downsized price and speaker size make the HT-BD2S more attractive than its big brother? Our gut reaction is no. That’s because the head unit (the combination receiver/Blu-ray player/amplifier) included with the BD2S is identical to the one on the BD2T. In other words, even if the smaller speakers on the BD2S manage to sound better than the skinny tallboys on the BD2T, it will still suffer from the same shortfalls as the older model: a slow-loading Blu-ray player that’s limited to the old Profile 1.0 spec (no picture-in-picture commentaries, and no online-enabled features) and subpar connectivity options (few inputs for connecting other AV sources). Still, the presence of the cheaper Samsung in the marketplace may put pressure on Panasonic to lower the price of its forthcoming SC-BT100 (slated to hit later this spring, also for $1,000).

That said, at $1,000, the Samsung HT-BD2S (or the Panasonic SC-BT100) represents an enticing option if you’re looking for an all-in-one-box Blu-ray home theater solution, and you don’t care about the extra bells and whistles available on some of the newer Blu-ray Discs. And honestly, we don’t care about whiz-bang special features on Blu-ray discs–but it’s annoying to pay top dollar and have to settle for less than state of the art. So, if you want the full Blu-ray experience, we still think you’re better off getting a PlayStation 3 ($400), a full-service AV receiver (such as the $500 Onkyo TX-SR606), and a full 5.1 speaker system (savvy shopper can find some great options in the $400 to $600 range). Sure, you’ll break the $1,000 barrier, but the extra money buys you far more flexibility and power (plenty of inputs, HD video switching with analog to digital video conversion) and–if you pick your speakers judiciously–the probability of better sound quality. In our book, those advantages are worth saving those hard-earned dollars for a few months more.

The following product is available:

On Sale Now: $728.99
View the latest prices for Samsung HT-BD2S

In an interview with my colleague Ina Fried on Wednesday, Bill Gates made clear why Microsoft’s in love with this grand vision of a future “Micro-hoo.”

Jerry Yang

“We think that the combination with Yahoo would accelerate things in a very exciting way, because they do have great engineers, they have done a lot of great work. So if you combine their work and our work, the speed at which you can innovate and get things done is just dramatically more rapid,” Gates said. “So it’s really about the people there that want to join in and create a better search, better portal for a very broad set of customers. That’s the vision that’s behind saying, ‘hey, wouldn’t this be a great combination?’”

I’m still not convinced that this won’t turn into a disaster, with all the messy corporate-culture clashes that always attend mergers–but on a massive scale. Still, Gates and Steve Ballmer believe that they can successfully steer clear of the potholes, and they’re willing to put more than $40 billion behind that bet.

They’re also offering Yang a way to exit the stage as a hero to Yahoo shareholders. But the guy is playing hard to get. Last week, we learned about Yahoo’s plans to hand out “golden parachutes” to employees in the event of a change of control. Meanwhile, the rumor mill has Yang speed-dialing every mogul he ever met in hopes of stiff-arming the “Beastmaster” of Fake Steve Jobs fame. (If you want to track all the twists and turns in this story so far, check out our special coverage of the Microsoft-Yahoo events over the last month.)

To be sure, it’s been a good show, but Yang’s running out of time. He’s had more than a half year to think about what’s next, since replacing Terry Semel in June. If he was planning to unveil a grand plan, events passed him by.

Over at Silicon Alley Insider, Henry Blodget reports that his banking sources say this is a done deal in all but name. He also says Yahoo’s not likely to get Microsoft to substantially raise its offer:

“The price concession will not necessarily raise the value of the offer above $31 per share, the original value (it’s currently $28.80). Microsoft will argue that its stock is down with the market and that, but for Microsoft’s offer, Yahoo’s stock would be down too. (This will be B.S.–MSFT is down more than the S&P 500–but perhaps Microsoft’s bankers will find some tech index to compare MSFT’s stock to).”

To be continued.

(Credit:
Daniel Terdiman/CNET News.com)

PENSACOLA, Fla.–If you’ve ever watched a Blue Angels show, you may not have known that when the F-18 pilots are screaming across the sky, less than 2 feet apart, they’re probably not looking straight ahead.

Rather, they’re most likely looking sideways at the fighter just off their side, ensuring that they know exactly where it is as they rocket forward at several hundred miles per hour.

That seems like a smart thing, even though it is kind of disconcerting to think the pilots aren’t exactly looking where they’re going, since no one wants these high-performance jets touching while in flight.

This week, as part of my Road Trip 2008 project, I stopped in at Naval Air Station Pensacola here for a chance to watch the Blue Angels practice their demonstration show from way up close.

In fact, when I was planning Road Trip 2008 and found out the Blue Angels are based in Pensacola, I rearranged the entire second half of the journey to attend one of the practices, which happen on a few specific dates in between the air shows all over the country.

I was invited to watch the show from the flight line, meaning I was able to get much closer than the public gets for the practices. This was nice since, while I’ve seen the Blue Angels fly probably more than a dozen times in San Francisco and once in Seattle, I was never very close to them.

This time, I was allowed onto the tarmac where guests get to stand, meaning I was probably a couple of hundred yards away from the planes when they were at rest (see video below for a view of the tarmac, the Blue Angels planes, and the maintenance hanger).

The show itself was spectacular, especially from up close and with many other planes as backdrops, including “Fat Albert,” the team’s C-130 that ferries its equipment and support crew to various stops around the country.

Afterward, I got a chance to sit down with Lt. Frank Weisser, the No. 7 Blue Angels pilot.

Of course, if you’re a student of the Blue Angels, you know there are only six planes in the performances. Weisser, as the No. 7 pilot, serves a three-year term with the team–while the others stay for two years–because his first year is spent taking care of VIPs, organizational duties and talking to the press. After a year, he will step into one of the regular pilot’s roles.

Two Blue Angels F-18s fly directly at each other during their practice performance at Naval Air Station Pensacola.

(Credit:
Daniel Terdiman/CNET News.com)

I was curious how someone becomes a Blue Angels pilot, and Weisser explained that there’s an application process, just like for any job. But the requirements are a little more stringent than for most: to qualify, you must have flown at least 1,250 hours as a pilot of an F-18 or F-14.

Each year, the team adds three new pilots, but there are probably only about 50 applicants, since the pool of people who have the required hours is pretty small.

Those selected as finalists then join the current team at air shows around the country so everyone can get to know each other.

“That’s important for us because we’re together for 300 days a year,” Weisser said.

The front of a Blue Angels F-18 as seen from the side.

(Credit:
Daniel Terdiman/CNET News.com)

The team’s commanding officer, Weisser also explained, has even more strict requirements: he (or she, though the Blue Angels has never had a female member of the performance team) must have already commanded a squadron of F-18s.

One thing that surprised me is that the Blue Angels spend about two to three months training each year in the desert outside El Centro, Calif., a small town in the southeast corner of the Golden State. This was particularly interesting to me because they fly there from January to March, and for years, I traveled to near El Centro for the week between Christmas and New Year’s. I guess I just missed the team when they were there all those years.

Back here in Pensacola, I was curious about whether the practice shows, both here and at various sites around the country, are any different than the formal shows they do.

Weisser said that the practices, no matter where they are, are identical, in fact, to the formal shows. And over the years, the shows have changed very little.

“We have to do it that way so we stay safe in the air,” Weisser said. “There’s such a small room for error, that we can’t change the show…(And) one thing we pride ourselves on is our (consistency). Had you seen the show today and been on the team in the ’60s or ’70s, it would look very, very similar to you.” (See below for a video of some of the Blue Angels’ practice.)

After being on the Blue Angels, the idea is that the pilots return to whatever squadron they were part of before. The team is very adamant that pilots don’t use the experience as a springboard to, say, getting a plush job flying for FedEx or some private carrier.

As I mentioned above, the planes can get as close as 12 inches during the shows, flying at speeds of between 300 and 400 knots. For a civilian who’s never flown, this was a rather astounding fact. But to Weisser, it’s just how things are for the team.

The team, of course, is actually two teams. The first is a group of four of the pilots who fly as part of the “diamond,” always working together during a show. The second are the two solo pilots. Essentially, he explained, the Blue Angels fly two separate shows at a time.

But regardless of which team pilots are on, being able to fly as a Blue Angel is a boon for their careers, in large part because of how often they get behind the stick. They fly nearly every day, either in a formal show or in practices, and during their training months in the California desert, they fly as many as 15 times a week.

“You get to fly a ton,” Weisser said, “and everyone who’s a pilot loves to fly and wants to be in the air as much as they can.”

Though I won’t be in the cockpit of any high-performance fighter jets, Road Trip 2008 will continue for the next week or so. Please stay tuned to this blog, and to my Twitter feed.