Conner

On April 15, 2013 two bombs exploded at the finish line of the Boston Marathon at 2:49 PM. The bombs ended up killing 3 people and injuring more than 250, marking it as the deadliest domestic terrorist attack in the last ten years for the United States. In the days following, a massive manhunt for the people responsible ensued, but this manhunt was not a traditional one.

 Footage of the bombing and aftermath courtesy of The Boston Globe

The Boston Police Department and FBI began working together to gather video footage and any images that could help lead them to whomever committed this act. These organizations also had the ability to comb the crime scene for evidence as well as other legal rights that allowed them to move swiftly and helped lead them to killing one and capturing another of the two individuals behind the attacks.

This last thought is not some sort of crazy revelation: we all know that the police and other government organizations have more legal power than the average citizen (and most of us respect that power). But the reason I mention this, is to highlight a new trend or a new phenomenon.What about all of the people behind the manhunt that had no connection to any law enforcement in the United States? What about all these crime solvers that are behind their computers at home?

 Crowd-sourcing 

Crowd-sourcing is a new phenomena. The concept behind it is relatively simple: use a whole bunch of people using computers to complete a task. Okay, I am not Merriam or Webster and those two define the word as: ” the practice of obtaining needed services, ideas, or content by soliciting contributions from a large group of people, and especially from an online community, rather than from traditional employees or suppliers.”  Every time you type in one of those CAPTCHA boxes (when someone is “checking to see if you’re human”) you are crowd-sourcing. You, along with others who have to do the same, are helping contribute to verify the symbols in the picture. A better example of crowd-sourcing is Wikipedia. On Wikipedia, people from all over contribute to articles and supply sources of information to back up what they write. The best aspect of crowd-sourcing is that it allows for an easy way to exchange information for a low cost. That does not mean that crowd-sourcing is always academic or done with good-intentions, sometimes it’s just done for fun. In the case of the Boston bombings, crowd-sourcing was being used by the internet community to find the people responsible for the attacks.

 Reddit and 4chan

Reddit.com and 4chan.org are websites on the internet that have developed their own community and culture. These sites are for posting all sorts of content and they are mostly for entertainment purposes.

Both Reddit and 4chan had masses of people trying to figure out who the Boston bombers were. In the process they hurt the reputation of many individuals by accusing them using pictures from the marathon and by merely speculating. Most people do not realize that they can ruin people’s reputation.

Examples of pictures from these sites following the bombings

And that is just what ended up happening. There were a few people that were put in the spotlight because of these internet vigilantes. These two websites convinced so many people that somehow The New York Post  published the next day’s newspaper with the image of the two suspects covering the whole page.

Intro

Back in August of 2012 Apple set the record for the most valuable publicly traded company on the stock market with a market capitalization of 621 billion dollars.

A graph (from 1999 to 2012) of Apple’s and Microsoft’s market cap over the past few years. Courtesy of The Wall Street Journal

The record had been set in 1999 by Microsoft, a company that is in the same industry as Apple but has had a very different business model. Apple managed to gain this success by pioneering new ways technology companies market and sell their products. Their success has been so great that they have changed the way companies conduct business forever.

Apple Inc. was a leader in innovation when it came to how consumer technology products were marketed and sold.

Different

Apple set themselves apart from other companies by the way they developed their products. Apple believed that it was in their best interest to develop their own software and hardware. Many companies chose to develop one or the other instead. A good example would be Microsoft who, unlike Apple, Microsoft developed software with the intent of licensing it to other companies so that they could integrate it in their products. Apple decided years ago to stick with developing their own software and hardware for whatever reason. Microsoft’s model of creating the software and allowing hardware companies to develop products makes more sense from a competitive perspective. For years, this model benefited Microsoft because they were able to penetrate the personal computer market with their products at a greater rate than any other company, especially Apple. In the end, Apple’s model was better for their business because it allowed them to create a brand that could be recognized from both a hardware and software standpoint.

Apple was not the inventor of many of the original types of products they gained their success from and people are aware of that . In fact, Apple was not the first when it comes to many of their products, instead, they happened to be the ones who pioneered them successfully. David Aaker wrote in the The California Management Review about this idea and how “Apple was not the pioneer for the iPod (Sony beat Apple by two years), the iPhone (the technology was up and running in Europe years before), or the iPad (Bill Gates of Microsoft introduced the “Tablet PC” some ten years earlier). However, in each case, Apple had the timing right.” Apple was successful where other companies weren’t because they were better at marketing their products. They convinced consumers that their products were “the” products to have. They also spent years convincing consumers that they were different from other technology companies. One famous example of this is their 1984 Super Bowl ad, which is an allusion to George Orwell’s novel 1984:

The advertisement was focused on contrasting Apple with IBM, positioning Apple as a company that respects consumers versus IBM who was too powerful to care what their customers thought. Apple later painted Microsoft as the new IBM and positioned themselves as the company that was not of the norm. Experts have claimed that this was directly resposible for Apple’s success with Albert Muniz of the Journal of Consumer Research claiming that Apple loyalists “have a strong moral certainty, feeling that they are doing the right thing by resisting the Microsoft tide” (420).

Apple Stores

Apple was an innovator when it came to how they sold their products. Most consumer technology companies over the years partnered with other companies to deliver their products. Whether that was through selling to an electronics store like Best Buy or Walmart, companies chose to go through a store to get their products to consumers. Apple believed that they could successfully sell their products in their own stores beginning in 2001. In that year Apple began opening stores with the first Apple stores being opened in Glendale, California and McLean, Virginia. The first international store was opened in Tokyo Japan on November 30, 2003. There are currently 395 stores world wide in 14 countries.

The following is a map of where the first Apple stores were opened for their respective Sate or Country. They are listed in chronological order and the number of stores for each State or Country is in the description.

View Apple Stores in a larger map

Now, companies like Microsoft are opening their own stores. Apple lead the way for this sort of behavior. They opened their stores with the hope of success and they were certainly rewarded.

Text

Consumer’s view of Apple has changed over time. Apple is largely responsible for this through their marketing and how they have developed their business model over the years. The following are examples of how people’s view of the company has changed. The main point I am trying to make here is that Apple has gone from being just another consumer technology company to THE consumer technology company.

This is a Wordle of a Time Magazine article on Apple from 2005. This year was crucial for Apple because it marked the beginning of a shift in the consumer technology industry. 2004 marked the highest recorded PC’s to Mac’s sold in the world with the ratio around 50 to 1. After that year, the ratio began to decline and it is currently sitting around 15 to 1. The Time magazine article is interesting because at the time, Apple was not a household name. However, the author is does believe that they will become a household name soon enough.

This second Wordle is from a December 2012 article on Apple that is also from Time. It focused on Apple TV and the next step for the company in the consumer technology industry. It is interesting to see the differences and similarities of these two articles. The type of articles that are being written on Apple have changed just as much as the company has.

How we know Apple has the “it” factor

One major component of Apple’s success has been their business in the smart phone industry. Apple has been a pioneer in this industry and their iPhone paved the way for smart phones. Somehow Apple has managed to make the majority of the profits when you look at the smart phone industry as a whole, even though their market share is not dominant.

Data courtesy of ArsTechnica.com

Data courtesy of Tech.Fortune.CNN.com

Having the type of success that Apple has had in the smart phone industry is good. But it is even better considering their market share. Consumers have long seen Apple as a “cool” company. People have wanted to be a part of the Apple brand in a way that any company that sells products to consumers would want. Apple did this over time through marketing. They created an image that people fell in love with.

Presentation 

Time Are Changin’

In recent years, companies have had to change the way they run their business in order to compete with Apple. Even Microsoft has started developing their own hardware by selling Xboxes as well as tablet PCs. Maybe companies have come to the realization that it is easier for a consumer to identify with a product when the hardware and software is manufactured by the same company. Google has put themselves in an interesting position with the companies they partner with because of their smart phone ideas. For years they have been selling the software for smart phones to companies that make the hardware part of the phones. Now, they have decided to make both the hardware and the software. This is what Apple has been doing for years and now companies are following suit.  Apple has been a leader in innovative products and it seems as if they also have been an industry leader when it comes to business models in the consumer technology field. Still, in the ever changing world of technology, it is possible that Apple will have to reposition themselves in a few years just as Microsoft has had to.

Apple’s success has been a combination of ideas and innovations that have compiled over the years. The success they have gained did not happen overnight; it happened over years of work. In order to have continued success, Apple is going to have to continue their path of innovation.

References

Aaker, David A. “Win the Brand Relevance Battle and Then Build Competitor

Barriers.”California Management Review 54.2 (2012): 43-57. JSTOR. University of California Press, 2012. Web. 10 Nov. 2012.

  Elgan, Mike. “The New Business Model: Competing with Partners!” Computerworld.

ComputerWorld, 24 Nov. 2012. Web. 27 Nov. 2012.

<http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9233924/The_new_business_model_Competing_with_partners_>

Elmer-DeWitt, Philip. “2004: The Year the Windows PC to Apple Mac Sales Ratio

Peaked.”CNN Money. CNN, 3 July 2012. Web. 12 Nov. 2012.

<http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2012/07/03/2004-the-year-the-windows-pc-to-apple-mac-sales-ratio-peaked/>.

Elmer-DeWitt, Philip. “Pie Chart of the Day: Apple’s Share of Smartphone Profits.” Fortune Tech

Technology Blogs News and Analysis from Fortune Magazine RSS. CNN, 11 Dec. 2012. Web. 15 Dec. 2012.

Friedman, Ted. Apple’s 1984. Proc. of Apple’s 1984: The Introduction of the Macintosh in the

Cultural History of Personal Computers, California, Pasedena. Society for the History of Technology Convention, Oct. 1997. Web. 27 Nov. 2012. <http://people.duke.edu/~tlove/mac.htm>.

Ion, Florence. “ArsTechnica.” Ars Technica. N.p., n.d. Web. 18 Dec. 2012. In Brands We Trust. Perf. Jacques Helleu, Naomi Klein, and Kevin Roberts. Films for the

Humanities and Sciences – In Brands We Trust. Films Media Group, n.d. Web. 20 Oct. 2012. <http://digital.films.com.mutex.gmu.edu/PortalViewVideo.aspx?xtid=32594>.

Linzmayer, Owen W. Apple Confidential 2.0: The Definitive History of the World’s Most

Colorful Company. San Francisco, CA: No Starch, 2004. Print.

Muniz, Albert, Jr., and Thomas O’Guinn. “Brand Community.” Journal of Consumer Research

27.4 2001): 412-32. JSTOR. Web. 27 Nov. 2012. <http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1086/319618>. Published by: The University of Chicago Press

Srinivasan, V., Chan Su Park, and Dae Ryun Chang. “An Approach to the Measurement, Analysis,

and Prediction of Brand Equity and Its Sources.” Management Science51.9 (2005): 1433-448. JSTOR. Web. 27 Nov. 2012. <http://www.jstor.org/stable/20110431>.

I found this program interesting. For some reason it reminds me of clip art that could be used for powerpoint presentations. By that I mean the simplicity of it and ease of use. I feel like it could be a precursor to something much easier to use with animation. I have no idea what kind of animation software that is out there, particularly free software, but I could imagine most of it is much more difficult to use. Maybe someday someone will improve the concept of Scratch and create a more advanced animation tool that is free. I do have to say that the Vimeo video is strange. And by strange I mean not good. All I am saying is that if this was trying to convince me to use the program, I probably would not at all. Maybe I’m not the target demographic.

I went ahead and solved that block maze for Thursday. It was pretty easy and simple to use as well. I don’t really understand the point of it. I guess the whole command thing is pretty interesting. I’m also guessing that this is how algorithms work on the internet. I have little to no clue what I am talking about here but I kind of get the whole “if this, then” idea and how you could create programs with it. I wish I was more technically oriented or intelligent enough to know how all of this works and use it to my advantage.

I remember when I was in high school and my teacher gave out an extra credit opportunity to anyone in his class who could find the source of a particular quotation he had. I can’t remember the exact quote anymore but I remember writing it down and having the determination to find out who it was that had said the words. My teacher claimed that he had been challenging his students to this for years and he wasn’t doing it to torture anyone; he was doing it because he legitimately could not remember where the quote was from and it was driving him crazy for years. He offered 3 full grade points to the quarterly grade of whomever could figure it out. That means someone’s grade would go from a B+ to an A- and so on. I wanted to be the one that figured it out because it was like a puzzle for me. I went to google and of course turned up nothing. For some reason, I had recently learned about a website called metacrawler.com and after google, I plugged the quote in there. And it came up. It took me 5 minutes and I got it. I emailed my teacher and I got the extra credit. Now, I wish I could say that I am some sort of incredible internet detective but I’m not. I know people that are exponentially better than me at finding info on the web (and I am talking about legal, easily accessible information). I will say, that I am better than many people at googling things but it all has to do with word choice. It is fascinating how a few words can change a search on the internet. I have been curious many times as to how google weighs the words that are searched but I know it is probably as complicated as nuclear physics. So, I got lucky and found that quote, but that day made me realize, just as many days have, how cool the internet is.

These data mining related websites are incredible. I am sure they will be useful to me in the future. And it is great that they are free. I am a little surprised that they are free.  It also makes me question how much the information from me is worth. Probably not much but it’s weird to think how data is so important to the world.

 I am sort of a cynical person so when I pulled up Google Ngram as well as the Time Magazine Corpus, I looked up two words to see what kind of frequency they had. Life and Death. My cynicism expected death to be mentioned more than life but I was immediately proven wrong. In time magazine, life has been mentioned 66686 times and death has been mentioned 31938. In Ngram, I saw that life is also mentioned more but that there is a relationship between how much life is mentioned and how much death is. When life goes up, so does death (for the most part) and so on. These tools are extremely useful to look at to better understand human nature. I hope sociologists and marketers use them to their advantage. Honestly, I hope everyone that could benefit from them use them. But I know that people would’ve killed for this sort of thing years ago.

Clever title right? It’s a bit cliche but at this point isn’t powerpoint? I haven’t used powerpoint in a while. The main reason may be that my teachers are no longer that into it. Even in high school I had teachers that didn’t like it. Now, teachers will explicitly say how they want it to be used. They put parameters on it which makes it better for the class. I wonder if teachers would feel if there was a better option. My public speaking teacher is not a fan at all. He thinks powerpoint is a crutch and that it is distracting. He doesn’t believe it should ever be focused on by the presenter and that it is only there for the audience to visualize what the speaker is saying.

Here is a good video on how to not use powerpoint that is funny and useful:

I don’t know how to use other forms of presentation. Personally I think that it is better to present without powerpoint. Let’s bring back charts and posters. Heck, let’s just use a whiteboard and dry erase pen to write those essential points down for everyone. Maybe there are other options out there that would be better.

Microsoft is not really the best at  making the right software for people. That isn’t new. I mean, just look at the poor president of windows with the Microsoft Surface….this made me chuckle

Hello China

Looking up a little bit about Nicholas Felton, its clear that he has a pretty big influence on the internet today. I like the fact that he is involved with changing the way people use infographics and data. When you click the “About” section of his page you can see that he has worked with Facebook to help them with their interface. That’s a pretty big deal. Googling it I found that he helped create Facebook’s Timeline feature. Seeing that Felton eventually created a career based on posting these reports on his website is cool. The article I linked describes a little bit about how he started posting the statistics on his trips and life. The overall design of the China report seems very aesthetic to me. It also seems chic. Much of the appeal of the design is similar to the appeal of modern day fashion or design. Considering the report of China was done 5 years ago, that is impressive.

2005

How much does a hipster weigh……………….??? An Instagram. Okay, so like it or not I would say Felton seems like one of the original hispters (wait? there are unoriginal hipsters?) of the last few years. Well it is a little disappointing that in his 2005 report he says he took zero analog photos but Diplo in 2005? That is impressive. I love me some Diplo 

The whole design of this report is hipster-esque to me. Maybe it is just modern-esque, I’m not sure. And honestly, I don’t care. Felton is a trend setter. I haven’t seen the use of infographics much until 2 years ago. Between using this new way to present data, and the overall design Felton has of his reports- he is something special.

Being a marketing major, I think the value of a guy like Felton is huge. Any major company in the world could use his consulting to help improve their business. This could be from website design to advertisement design. In the end, one of the biggest things he has going for him is being a trend setter. Look at his definition in the FAQ section of his website on what inspires him:

From traveling and reading. From modernist design, nature, math, patterns, geometry, science and music. In obsessiveness, language, humor, little moments, simplicity and elegance.

That sums it up.

I enjoyed visiting the  Hypercities, PhilaPlace, Euclid Corridor History Project websites and browsing them. I think it is very interesting that there are websites like this out in the world and organizations willing to take the time to make historical information like this available to all. I’m sure that there is an advantage for these cities like Cleveland and Philadelphia to create websites like this because it can help attract tourists. It is nice to see that on PhilaPlace, anyone who visits the website can add a story and image to the map. I guess this is a creative way of crowd sourcing.

I looked up hypercities on the web and found this http://www.briancroxall.net/dh/2011/10/24/hypercities-evaluation/ website which has an overview of how the site works along with reasons as to why people should use it or not use it. The author of this post was critical of the website but it was interesting to see his perspective. At one point he writes “Despite facilitating scholarship, Hypercities doesn’t really offer us anything new” and I find this very funny. He wants to make this point that the website is not really revolutionary and offers nothing new. But that is the point of the website! It offers things that are old and forgotten. He does go on to say “The true obstacle holding Hypercities back is its currently limited audience” which may be the main focus of his writing and he has a good point. I had no clue that websites like these existed before tonight and I couldn’t see a way where I would have stumbled on them besides through this class. And in the end, that statement or concept I just presented is a sort of microcosm for the internet. There are sooooo many things out there that are useful that people are not aware of and there are more educational resources being made every second. This is what makes the internet so great.  The key to making it better is passing these sorts of things on so that people can have the opportunity to find something they may not have realized they love.

I really am fascinated by Google. I love how they run their business. I think that they are extremely creative and have a very good attitude when it comes to other people being creative. The fact that they provide so many things for free is crazy to me. Google Documents (now called Google Drive) is mindblowing. I can’t tell you what Microsoft Office costs, but if it cost $50 that is $50 more than what Google thinks you should pay for that kind of software. It is a bit sketchy to me that Google has done this for free because the interface they have created for their spreadsheet as well as documents or presentations is extremely similar to Microsoft’s. Either way I think it is brilliant. I recently started using Google Documents for all of my class notes and papers instead of Word. As long as I have internet access I can get to whatever I have created in my account. I don’t need to worry about saving my paper every five minutes with the fear that my computer is going to crash because Google saves it every 2 seconds or so. If my house caught on fire and my computer was in it, I would still have everything saved on “the cloud” or better yet “the drive.” Google is such an innovator in this sense. They are constantly shaping how people use the internet and technology, and honestly I think they are the best company that does this. The cool thing is, I have never directly paid one penny to Google for anything. Okay, I guess my cellphone because they created the operating system on it but I would have had to pay someone else anyway. I mean, the idea that I actually have my own phone number through Google is crazy. If I don’t have my phone, I can hop onto the internet and call someone FOR FREE. And if I want to call someone in Canada without paying international rates, I can do that. These guys even send out cars to take pictures of anything visible from a street in the country. The entire country. It is unbelievable. The things they are doing with Google Maps is also crazy. I was unaware of this KML stuff before today and the fact that they are cataloging geographic information like this is great. I honestly have too much faith in them as a company. I have too much trust. But as of right now, I have no reason not to. They have made my life easier in so many ways and taken nothing from me in the process. They may not run the world but in a way they run my world.

I have always found the world of computer hacking very interesting. I remember reading about a famous hacker named Kevin Mitnick a few years ago and being fascinated. What really intrigued me was how Mitnick went about hacking. He focused on “social engineering” at first  and I don’t think the average person would’ve guessed that or even known what it is. I guess a basic definition of social engineering is: manipulating people to gain information from them. Using computers can help greatly in this effort because people put so much of their lives online. But it is interesting to think that I may be able to obtain your password based on riffling through your facebook photos and guessing your password based on particular interests. I’m sure that there are thousands of people who do just that.

Reading the article by Matt Honan on passwords I became a little scared. It’s weird to think that someone could steal all of your information like that and inconvenience you so quickly. I think of the first password that I ever created and how it was an interesting choice. It was just something I saw off of a book that was lying around the first time I created an AOL password. The passwords that I have had since then do have a personal connecting but they all involve random numbers. Hopefully I am safe but those articles scare me.

I remember back when I was in High School people always said that Apple computers are superior because “they don’t get viruses.” I always thought that was ridiculous and I find it funny that their cloud computing is so vulnerable. But I guess there is also a new wrinkle in all of this security stuff. The idea that these giant tech companies cannot create a secure the information they have is scary. If Apple can’t do it then who can? Or is it more of an indifference from these companies’? And in what ways are these companies liable? I guess the only thing that may answer these questions is time.

The video about the sampling of “Amen Break” was very interesting to me. I have heard about the piece of music before and I find the whole concept of sampling music important to more than just the music world.  The narrator of the youtube video, Nate Harrison, does a good job of explaining how this one piece of music infiltrated the culture of the music world.

I liked the fact that The Winstons were not ever interested in suing anyone for the use of the piece. It may have been because the piece was used by so many so quickly and it was just too late to take action. I have seen a documentary on sampling music before and I am not sure if it is the one posted but I do understand the argument on the issue. I know that the record companies started to crack down on sampling and that it caused a big rift in the production part of the industry. To me the whole example of sampling is really just a microcosm of copyrighting today.

Rounded Corners

Recently, Apple won a major lawsuit against Samsung over the design of the iPhone vs. Samsung’s smartphones. The U.S. awarded Apple 1 billion dollars in damages for the copyright infringement Samsung underwent through the design of their phones.  It is important to note that as of today South Korea (where Samsung is headquartered) and Germany are two countries that sided with Samsung and dismissed the claims Apple had. These two markets are not as important as the U.S. cell phone market but, it may make someone question the U.S. ruling. Personally, I think it is atrocious that Apple won this case. I think it is a horrible path for this country to go down. Nate Harrison in the 6 second loop video mentioned how some people believe that copyright laws hinder and inhibit innovation. My issue is that I do think what Apple is doing is wrong. For one, they are the most valuable company on the planet and they really do not need the money. They also need to worry less about their competitors and more about how they can come out with the iPhone 10 in a few years. I mean are they really that creative anymore?

Although I may not be the biggest fan of Apple, I am a fan of Google. A few weeks ago, David Lawee, the VP of corporate develoment for Google was qouted as saying “We didn’t really believe rounded corners were patentable.” http://www.bgr.com/2012/09/11/google-patent-dispute-apple-samsung/ I understand Lawee. It is hard to think that something so simple is patentable. I remember my first flip cell phone and the corners were rounded. It was a flip phone so it was different than the touch screen iPhone but to me there is little difference. It just seems trivial to try and hold intellectual property on something so simple. And honestly, it is somewhat of the same thing for sampling music. I can only imagine how many songs have been made throughout time that used tunes or sounded very similar to past songs. Sometimes it may be subliminal and sometimes it may be on purpose but I am of the belief that it can happen totally on accident. There is so much access to technology that allowd people to make music or hear it. That wasn’t the case 5 years ago, 10 years ago, 15 etc. Technology has gotten better and so has the spread of the ability to create.

And now we go back to Samsung and Apple. Samsung is now suing Apple for copyright infringement on the iPhone 5. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/20/samsung-sues-apple-iphone-5_n_1899549.html This is fun. Maybe they will just go back and forth like this for years. I’m not keen  on legal proceedings but I want to know if any of the money awarded to whomever wins, pays the court. If these trials go on forever I really hope that someone has to pay the U.S. judiciary system that isn’t a tax payer. I honestly don’t think that is the case which is also atrocious.

Back to Google

One of the co-founders of Google and graduate of Dematha High School (shout out to the WCAC) recently spoke about Apple and Facebook and how he sees the way they run their business. Sergey Brin discussed how he thinks those two companies are hurting innovation in the technology world. Here is a link to the article: http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-57414316-93/googles-sergey-brin-facebook-and-apple-a-threat-to-internet-freedom/ His company is a business rival to both of these companies but his comments are most likely based in truth. Many people will agree that when dealing with Apple, its their way or no way. Brin thinks that the way Facebook and Apple function is hurtful to the future of innovation and he fears that more companies will act like them. The one thing he says that sticks out about the companies is this: “You have to play by their rules, which are really restrictive. The kind of environment that we developed Google in, the reason that we were able to develop a search engine, is the web was so open. Once you get too many rules that will stifle innovation”

This could be the path the technology industry is headed down. Even companies like Google have too much control. What will change in the future?