colerithpress.com

Just another WordPress weblog

Microsoft, Nintendo, Sony tout NPD numbers

04 Sep 2010

With the release today of its March video game industry sales report, NPD has provided fodder for just about anyone who wants to read the numbers the way they want. Or trumpet them.

For example, in an e-mail from Nintendo, I learned that, according to NPD, “In March, Nintendo again defined industry momentum in both home and portable video game sales.”

Unless you’re Sony, that is. I didn’t see an e-mail or a press release about the PlayStation 3’s March performance, either in my inbox or on the official PlayStation Web site. And the way I read the numbers, there’s good reason for that: The PS3 was only the fifth-best-selling console in March–after the
Wii, Nintendo’s DS, Sony’s PlayStation Portable, and the Xbox 360. In fact, the PS3 only barely outsold Sony’s PlayStation 2.

Update: I got an email from Sony after this story was published trumpeting the PlayStation 3’s 98 percent sales growth from the same period a year earlier.

In other words, Nintendo’s sales of 720,000 Wiis topped console sales. And Nintendo also dug around in NPD’s report and discovered that it could also tout that it had the best-selling game, Super Smash Bros. Brawl, which sold 2.7 million copies in the month.

Its rationale: That consumers have spent more on Xboxes, $9.4 billion for its entire lifecycle, than on “other game consoles.”

Update: This story has been changed to reflect the email from Sony touting its
PlayStation 3 March performance.

And this is proof positive, of course, that numbers can be manipulated any way one wants.

So, we’ve got Nintendo saying it “defined industry momentum” and Microsoft arguing that gamers cast the “ultimate vote” for it.

I think it’s very clear that all these companies are going to posture and fluff their tail feathers and try to elbow each other out of the way–month after month into perpetuity. And because NPD–the leader in gathering industry sales numbers–and others put out so many different metrics, there’s always something for everybody to brag about. Well, almost always.

At the same time, Microsoft weighed in with its own celebratory e-mail, which begins by stating that, according to NPD, “Consumers continue to make the ultimate vote for
Xbox 360 as the console of choice.”

Microsoft again delays Mac XML converters

31 Aug 2010

By further delaying the converters as more documents are created in Office 2007’s new file formats, the software maker is creating more headaches for Mac users, particularly those with older systems. Microsoft does have a beta version of its converter.

Microsoft said that it now expects to make the converter available by late June. Most recently the company had said final converters would be released six to eight weeks after Office 2008 was released in the U.S. However, that timeline was already delayed from Microsoft’s original plan, which called for the tools to be available by late 2006 or early 2007.

Microsoft offered
Mac fans both good news and bad news on Thursday, and it all depends on which version of Office for Mac one is using.

“The team is mobilized to get Office 2008 updates out as soon as possible,” Microsoft said in a blog posting. “As a result we are pushing back the release of the final Open XML File Format Converter Update to Office 2004 for Mac.”

The software maker said that it plans on March 11 to deliver the first update to Office 2008 for Mac, delivering several key fixes. At the same time though, it has again pushed out the release of converters needed by users of Office 2004 to read documents saved in the new XML file formats used by Office 2007 for Windows.

R.E.M. PR firm rips off Improv Everywhere, then ap

24 Aug 2010

But all seems well now. And it’s nice to see a band like R.E.M., or its publicity people, be so reactive and responsive to this kind of calling out.

After reading Tuesday night on Laughing Squid that a new R.E.M. video had been posted by the band’s publicity firm on YouTube that seemed to blatantly rip off Improv Everywhere’s now-famous “freezes,” I wrote to the culture jamming collective’s founder to get his take.

In a posting on the Improv Everywhere site, Todd wrote, “It’s sort of shocking to see this video which gives absolutely no credit to us and presents the concept of ‘getting a mob of people to freeze in place in a public area’ as their own original idea.”

(Credit:
YouTube)

Of course, one issue seems to be the question of what’s original. As a commenter on this story posted earlier today, a TV sketch comedy show had done a bit with freezes years before Improv Everywhere came along.

The video, R.E.M.’s “The Big Still,” was an obvious take-off on Improv Everywhere’s now-famous Grand Central Station freeze event, in which hundreds of participants showed up in the Manhattan train station and suddenly froze in place for five minutes. Improv Everywhere’s YouTube video of the event has been seen nearly 9.9 million times.

An R.E.M. video posted to YouTube was an obvious take-off of the ‘Frozen Grand Central’ video from culture-jamming group Improv Everywhere and originally didn’t give proper credit. The band has taken the video down and told Improv Everywhere it is re-editing it.

The note also said that the video would be re-edited to give Improv Everywhere credit.

“I did not know they were making this video and was not involved in any way,” Charlie Todd, Improv Everywhere’s founder, told me by e-mail late last night. “They edited the YouTube description to give us credit, which is enough to satisfy me.”

“We never claimed to invent the idea of freezing in place,” Todd wrote to me in an email Wednesday. “I’m sure a caveman froze in place as a gag. What I said in the post (on Improv Everywhere’s site) was that we started the current worldwide phenomenon of ‘getting a mob of people to freeze in place in a public area.’ It’s happened in over 27 countries and it’s all been inspired by our Frozen Grand Central video which has almost 10 million views on YouTube. So sure, Just For Laughs had 1 to 3 people freeze in place at a time in a grocery store many years ago for their television show, but I don’t really think that’s relevant to what happened here with R.E.M.”

Update (3:52 pm): This story got the name of the R.E.M. video wrong. It’s fixed in the text below. Additionally, there’s new comments from Improv Everywhere founder Charlie Todd below.

In fact, the publicity firm later removed the video from the YouTube remhq channel, and wrote Todd a note saying, “Sincere apologies and do note us on team R.E.M. love the stuff you guys do.”

To Todd, that’s not necessarily the point.

Wii virtual console releases for this week

21 Aug 2010

I’m not going to lie, I’ve never heard of either of these two import games that just got released on the Virtual Console. If I haven’t heard of them, odds are you haven’t either–but here they are, ready for your downloading pleasure.

DoReMi Fantasy: Milon’s DokiDoki Adventure (1996, Super Nintendo, 900
Wii points): DoReMi Fantasy is the platforming sequel to Milon’s Secret Castle. Rescue your kidnapped friend with a bubble shooter gun as your only weapon–good luck with that.

Puyo Puyo 2: Tsuu (1994, Sega Genesis, 900 Wii points): Puyo Puyo 2: Tsuu is a head-to-head puzzle game where you must form same colored puyos in a chain or shape. Also an import from Japan, this title will cost an extra 100 Wii points.

Did Slate violate copyright law

21 Aug 2010

Slate, a popular news site, seems to be openly violating the Digital Millennium Copyright Act.

That law, much hated in cyberrights and computer security circles, is a thorn in the side to many researchers. The interesting question that we must ask is: Will Hollywood let Slate’s probable violation slide, or will they lawyer up and go after the site owned by The Washington Post Co.?

A few days ago, Slate released a video mashup of footage of Hillary Clinton and a few scenes from the movie Election, starring Reese Witherspoon. The video is mildly amusing, and did at least remind me that Election is a funny film that I should probably watch again soon.

Cynthia Brumfield over at IP Democracy discusses the video mashup and briefly explores the issue of fair use:

“It quite literally fits [NBC Universal lawyer Rick Cotton's] idea of what wouldn’t be considered fair use under a redefinition. [Columbia Law Professor Tim Wu's ] definition, however, would permit this video under fair use because nothing about it is a substitute for the original ‘Election’ film. It also, I would argue, enhances the film’s value for those who have not seen it.”

While I think she brings up an interesting point, I’m fairly certain the issue of fair use, at least in this case, is going to be cut and dry: Slate is in the wrong, and is being pretty blatant in its open infringement of copyright.

The few clips of Election in the Slate video are very high quality. The video is crisp, the sound is clear. As a result, I’d be willing to bet a few bottles of La Fin Du Monde that Slate got the video clips from a DVD. It’s almost certainly not from a video cassette tape, and I highly doubt that the Slate team made a digital copy from cable TV.

DVD ripping software is widely available. Personally, I’m a big fan of Handbrake, but there are many other free software solutions out there. These software packages allow people to make a local video copy of a DVD movie. This is not as simple as it sounds, given that all Hollywood DVD discs are encrypted with a once-secret algorithm. The MPAA and others have vigorously gone after anyone who reverse engineered (or even published information on) the inner workings of the CSS algorithm used to encrypt DVDs.

Which brings me to my “favorite” law: the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA). This law, among its many horrible features, makes DVD copying a crime. DVD-ripping software is classed as a circumvention device, the use of which is a big no-no. Section 1201(a)(1)(A) of the U.S. code makes this pretty clear:

No person shall circumvent a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title.

Ok, so we’ve now established that if Slate used DVD footage in its video mashup, then it is almost certainly violating the DMCA. What does that have to do with any possible fair-use defense to a copyright infringement claim? It turns out that to make a successful fair-use claim, you need to have a legitimate, licensed copy of the original work. As the courts wrote:

To invoke the fair use exception, an individual must possess an authorized copy of a literary work (Atari v. Nintendo 975 F.2d 832).

If Slate used DVD-ripping software, its unencrypted, DRM-free copy of the work (which they would have needed to cut and paste bits into their mashup) is in no way authorized. This means, unfortunately for Slate, that it would have no fair-use defense, and could thus face a copyright infringement lawsuit.

While I’ve spent the majority of this blog post describing potential illegal acts by Slate, the real criminal here is the U.S. Congress for passing the DMCA, and in one single act, putting hundreds of computer security and cyberrights activists at risk. As a Ph.D. student, the DMCA is a complete pain in my ass and makes my research extremely difficult. As a result, I routinely have to submit my projects to Indiana University’s general counsel for a sign-off.

So why am I making this blog post? Most people have no idea that DVD ripping is illegal. Most artists, mashup creators, and video-bloggers are in the dark about the potential crimes they may be committing. Furthermore, the RIAA and MPAA have a long history in going after the little guy.

Slate (owned by The Washington Post Co.) has deep pockets. If the MPAA tries to make an issue out of this, it would create huge amounts of publicity, and perhaps lead to calls for an overhaul of the DMCA. (I can dream, right?) At the least, it would force the MPAA to burn through a few bucks.

Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer. This is neither legal advice nor real legal analysis. Don’t make decisions based on my blog ramblings. However, this issue is essentially straight from the final exam in my copyright-law class from last year, so I’m fairly confident that I’m right.

Also, a tip o’ the hat goes to Public Knowledge’s Alex Curtis, whose offer of a T-shirt inspired this blog post.

Slate could not immediately be reached for comment.

Panasonic Blu-ray home theater system breaks the $

21 Aug 2010

The Panasonic SC-BT100 will cost just under $1,000.

(Credit:
Panasonic)

Now that Blu-ray has secured its position as the one and only HD disc format, it’s only natural to see it becoming more of a standard feature on desktop PCs, laptops, camcorders, and–now–home theater systems. Samsung’s HT-BD2T has been available for months, while the Panasonic SC-BT100–which debuted at January’s Consumer Electronics Show–is scheduled hit stores later this spring. Panasonic has yet to confirm pricing for its model, but the unit has already popped-up on J&R’s Web site for $1,000 (give or take a nickel).

If the price sticks, it would appear to be a pretty good deal at first glance (plenty of high-style home theater systems can cost more than $1,000, despite being limited to playing back standard CDs and DVDs.) Indeed, the Panasonic model has a few advantages versus the Samsung model: it has a five-disc changer (versus the single-disc player on the Samsung), an SD card slot (for playing back digital media, including high-definition AVCHD video), and wireless rear speakers. It’s also said to be Profile 1.1 compliant, meaning that it can play the BonusView (picture-in-picture video content) found on some newer Blu-ray discs.

Unfortunately, there’s a pretty big list of caveats as well. The Samsung is a 7.1-channel system out of the box, whereas the Panasonic is merely 7.1-ready: you’ll need to invest in an additional set of speakers (and another wireless transceiver unit) to get to seven speakers. While Profile 1.1 compatibility is better than many of the Blu-ray players currently on the market, it’s already behind the curve compared with the state of the art Profile 2.0/BD-Live players already announced (Panasonic’s own DMP-BD50) or available (the PlayStation 3). Furthermore, the SC-BT100 is likely to have the same limitations found on the DVD-only Panasonic home theater systems for the 2008 model year:
iPod video playback is only available from the low-resolution composite output, and the skimpy connectivity (just one set of analog and one digital audio-only jack apiece). Those limitations are easy to shrug off on the $300 SC-PT660 and $400 SC-PT760, but become a lot harder to justify on a $1,000 unit.

You can have your cake (Blu-ray 2.0) and eat it too (7.1 home theater with plenty of inputs and outputs) for about $150 more than the SC-BT100’s asking price by investing in a $400 PS3 plus a $750 Onkyo HT-S908 home theater system. Still, compared with the $1,500 price of the Samsung HT-BD2T, the $1,000 Panasonic model comes much closer to justifying itself versus purchasing such dedicated components. As those prices continue to drop–and feature sets continue to improve–look for the reaction to such Blu-ray home theater systems begin to move from “why bother” to “why not.”

Related coverage
CNET TV hands-on video: Panasonic SC-BT100
CNET review: Panasonic SC-PT660
CNET review: Panasonic SC-PT760
CNET review: Samsung HT-BD2T
CNET @ CES 2008: Panasonic’s new Blu-ray player goes Profile 2.0
Crave: PS3 firmware with BD-Live support now available

Judge issues extension in Google Book Search settl

21 Aug 2010

Update at 3:11 p.m. PDT: This story now includes a comment from Consumer Watchdog.

A federal judge has granted authors worldwide four more months to decide whether to participate in a settlement involving Google’s online Book Search service.

Absent the ruling, made by Judge Denny Chin of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, authors would have had until May 5 to decide whether to join the settlement or opt out.

But according to a law clerk in Chin’s court, as well as one of the lawyers in the case, the deadline to opt out of the settlement is now September 4, 2009, and the final fairness hearing in the case will be held on October 7, in New York.

“We’re excited about the proposed settlement agreement regarding Google Book Search,” said Gabriel Stricker, a Google spokesperson, in an e-mail to CNET News. “As we’ve said previously, the settlement is highly detailed, and we want to make sure rightsholders everywhere have enough time to think about it and make sure it’s right for them.”

In fact, though, Google may not be happy with the outcome, and some suggest that the very fact that the company asked for a delay at all indicated it didn’t have much faith in its ability to prevail in the end.

“The four-month extension is a big victory for those who oppose the Google Books settlement,” said John Simpson, a consumer advocate with Consumer Watchdog. “It’s a clear recognition by the judge that there are problems with the proposed deal. The extension also gives the Justice Department more time to consider the antitrust issues that we and others have raised and discussed with them.”

As proposed, the settlement of the case filed by the Authors Guild and the American Association of Publishers in 2005, revolves around Google’s ability to include content from books online, and in particular “orphan” works that are still under copyright, but are out of print or written by authors who can’t be found.

But some parties to the deal are objecting to Google’s proposed settlement.

Google had sought an extension to the settlement of 60 days. On Monday, the company’s associate general counsel for products and intellectual property wrote in a blog post explaining the request for a 60-day extension that, “The settlement is highly detailed, and we want to make sure rightsholders everywhere have enough time to think about it and make sure it’s right for them.”

“This is my understanding of how this goes,” a source close to the legal matter told CNET News. “(Google, the Authors Guild and the American Association of Publishers) blanket the Earth and try to let everybody know about the agreement, and right now (they) believe (they) have blanketed the Earth.”

The source also suggested that Google and the plaintiffs have been working on the settlement for years, so whether the outcome is “years plus two months or years plus four months is neither here nor there.”

But, the source added, those involved in promoting the book service are eager to see it get off the ground and that the four-month extension just means delaying that for two months longer.”

Federal judge Denny Chin granted this four-month extension to a group of authors involved in a class action against Google over the search giant’s Book Search service. Click image to enlarge and read page one of his order.

Chin’s ruling Tuesday seemed to be a direct response to a request made last week by seven authors for a full four-month extension due to the proposed settlement’s complexity.

“First, two months’ time is insufficient to understand the implications of a settlement of this scope,” the authors wrote in their request (PDF). “Second, substantial defects in notice of the settlement undermine authors’ ability to assess their rights; and third, more time is required simply to understand the complex terms of the agreement.”

Chin cited a letter from the authors, as well as a separate letter from a group of academic authors in making his decision.

“Upon consideration of the letters, I will grant approximately a four-month extension,” Chin wrote.

In an interview given to Publisher’s Weekly, Gail Knight Steinbeck, one of the seven authors who asked for the four-month extension, praised Chin’s decision. “We now have (the) time to really sink our teeth into what this agreement will mean,” she told the magazine, adding that she felt that the authors now had the time they needed to figure out whether modifications to the settlement will make it suitable, whether to opt out or whether to fight the settlement.

Joanne Zack, an attorney for the author sub-class and the Authors Guild, said she had no comment on the settlement extension.

Worry-free screwing off with the press of a button

21 Aug 2010

Ever had one of those days where you’re just not motivated to get any work done? You’re sitting there with a ton of projects due, but you just can’t pull yourself away from whatever game you’re trying to run on your work computer.

Now, I could say that you should probably get your priorities straight and start taking your job more seriously, but screw that. No, you should own the half-assed effort you’re putting into your career.

Just don’t get caught. The best way to not get caught is to not screw off. The second best way is to use the USB Foot Pedal Security Button.

Disguised as an extension cord, the button sits under your foot while you YouTube to your heart’s content. As soon as your boss or that nosy tattletale of a co-worker walks by, BAM, it instantly conceals your screen. I’m not sure how it conceals your screen just yet, though.

The button can be found for as little as $8. Just think of the amount of lost man-hours that buys you.

Innovation 1-on-1 Chris Heatherly of Walt Disney

21 Aug 2010

(Credit: Walt Disney Co.)

We asked Chris Heatherly, vice president of technology and innovation, Disney Consumer Products, The Walt Disney Co., to answer a set of questions–and he took the time to dive a little deeper.

How do you define “innovation”?
My favorite quote about innovation is one where Steve Jobs was asked how they systematize innovation at Apple and he said “We don’t. We hire good people.” I think a lot of talk about innovation amounts to a lot of dancing about architecture. People get caught up in trying to have an innovative “process” instead of having their values where they should be–making great product. To borrow from James Carville, “It’s the product, stupid!” Who cares what your process is? It’s what you put out there that matters.

If you want to make great products, you have to have high standards and absolutely insist on those standards. There’s a great story about Pixar and the making of Toy Story 2. They completed most of the movie and then decided they didn’t like how it was coming out. So they scraped it and started from scratch. How many companies have the guts to do that? Not many.

But I haven’t answered your question. I think innovation is understanding people and what they need and giving them the most perfect solution you can to their problem even if they might not know they have it yet. It’s giving people something new that they haven’t seen before or making them re-experience something familiar in a totally new and better way. Everyone talks about Apple. The reason we all worship Apple is that there is no detail too small for them to sweat out. They don’t stop at trying to make a great product. Look at the packaging. They work to reduce materials, to improve communications, to reduce shipping costs, to have better environmentally friendly materials, to create a great out-of-box experience, and on and on. Once you live and breathe these principles, you can’t compartmentalize. You have to make everything as great as it can be. It becomes a way of life.

I think too many people confuse innovation and technology. I have seen a lot of designers try to make a mediocre concept innovative by putting Bluetooth or some other whiz-bang technology du jour in it. That’s not innovation. It’s cheating. Innovation is about solving problems for people. As I write this, I am at the New York Toy Fair. I am always so impressed and humbled by the incredible cleverness and simple innovation in small things that toy designers and inventors do every day. I think the technology business could learn a lot from these guys. The toy business has to work with very cheap stuff so they can’t fall back on expensive technology. They really have to make the magic trick out of Popsicle sticks and rubber bands, if you take my meaning.

Yesterday, I saw a company that makes bubbles that you can’t spill. Brilliant! I bet a lot of people have looked at bubbles and said “How can you innovate bubbles? There’s nothing you can do. They’re just bubbles.” But this guy did and now he has a huge business because it turns out that parents don’t buy as many bubbles for their kids as they might because they are afraid they will spill them and make a mess. To me, that’s real innovation. A simple, clever idea well executed that makes things better for people.

What are the most important areas of innovation in your organization (product, process, IP, marketing, etc.)?

To be a creative company, you have to have a creative core, whatever that means for your company. For Disney, that’s people like storytellers, animators, and Imagineers. For a company like Apple, it’s designers and engineers. The people at the core of what you do have to be the heart that pumps innovation through the vessels of the organization. You can’t live without your heart. But the other parts of the organization have just as important a role in innovation. Take technology, for example. Pixar is very clear that it is about telling stories and that everyone who is there is there for that purpose. Technology plays a really important role for them. They like to say that “art challenges technology and technology inspires art.” They don’t look at technology as being a second-class citizen to their artists. It’s a respected peer. There are lots of other parts of the organization that have to be part of an innovative mission.

Here’s one people don’t put in a sentence with innovation very often–legal. Look at Google. They are constantly doing things with search and indexing and now with YouTube that challenge the legal status quo. If they had a legal team whose only role was to keep the company from getting sued, they would never do those things. If you want to be innovative, everyone has to be on board for the mission. Everyone has a role to play.

But one of the keys to innovation is having management that expects and drives innovation. You can have the best designers in the world and the worst management and nothing good will come of it. You have to have leaders who believe and have guts and support innovative work. You have to have leaders who hire the best talent and weed out the people who have the wrong values and intentions, but who at the same time are extremely tolerant of good people making mistakes or failing sometimes. If you manage quarter by quarter or have no tolerance for failure, you won’t ever have innovation, no matter how creative your people are. You have to be willing to lose.

What would you consider your most successful innovation? How did you “find” it?
I’m very critical and I always think we can do better than we have done in the past. My favorite stuff–no matter when you ask me–is in the future and stuff I normally can’t talk about it publicly.

My recent favorite innovation is a new technology called Clickables that we are launching in connection to our new Disney Fairies virtual world. It’s a way for kids to take their online world experience into the real world. The core of it is a magical bracelet. By simply clicking their bracelets together, girls become friends in the online environment. And it’s safer too because if you had to physically click with your friend that means they were in physical proximity to you, you saw them, and you know who they are. They aren’t some random person online. Also, it allows kids to download virtual objects from their inventory and trade with their friends, which is another complicated thing we made simple. Most online worlds don’t let you trade because it’s hard to authenticate. We made that simple and seamless.

(Credit: Gearlog)

How did we find the idea? We knew that online worlds were going to be a big deal and so we got about 50 of our smartest people together from different divisions and of different job types–marketing people, technology people, designers, even finance people and lawyers–and we had a big brainstorm. We have a great process for brainstorms that’s led by our head of creative Len Mazzocco. He’s like the Michael Jordan of brainstorming. We came up with probably a few hundred ideas but narrowed it down to 75 really good ones from the two days. Then we narrowed it down to our top 10 and top 5 and in there was the nugget of the Clickables concept. Then we decided that this was such an important area that we would create a dedicated team around it, called our Toymorrow team that would be a little SWAT team focused on technology in the toy space. We moved really aggressively to find partners who shared our vision and had applicable technology. Speed is of the essence in these things. Len always says that “God gives everyone the same ideas at the same time.” If you don’t move fast, someone else will have your idea and do it before you can get it to market.

My other favorite recent product is a digital camera we made for preschoolers called Disney Pix Jr. I love it because it is so simple and so rugged and just does what it says it will do. I threw one myself down a flight of concrete stairs 20 times and couldn’t break it. And the interface is so simple. We even got rid of the on button! And we have a fun feature on it called PhotoFriends that lets you pose with a Disney character in your picture. Kids are having a lot of fun with that. But for me, that is a great product because it meets the need and does what it says it’s going to do. It doesn’t read your mind or have Wi-Fi or cure cancer or any of that. It’s just a great camera for kids. It is what it’s supposed to be. Not a lot of products, especially technology products, can say that.

Which innovation “failure” did you learn the most from, and why?
That’s easy. The Disney Dream Desk PC. We had all the right ideas in the beginning. We wanted to make an inexpensive computer without all the doodads in a small form factor about twice the size of the
Mac Mini (you couldn’t make it smaller back then because the processor was so hot) with a creative software suite a la iLife but for kids and with robust parental controls. I am proud of the way the software and Internet filtering came out. But the PC grew from this small inexpensive thing to this almost full-sized PC that was not as kid-like as we wanted and was much more expensive than we originally planned.

If we had kept with our original idea, we would have had the OLPC four years before Negroponte. That was the hardest project of my life, and I can’t say I didn’t fight hard. But our partner didn’t share our vision. They thought it was imperative that it have all the slots and expansion and all the stuff parents probably don’t really care about when they buy a kid a PC but that geeks care about a great deal. I thought we could change them, that we would convince them. But I felt compelled to launch, and I wound up compromising in some areas I didn’t want to. I learned from that. Your partners need to share your vision or you will never get the result you want. I believe it’s Louis Armstrong that said “There’s some people, if they don’t listen, you can’t tell them.” You have to stick to principles. If the people you work with don’t want to do the project right, it’s not worth doing.

What lessons can you pass on to others from how your organization has changed to make itself more innovation driven?
Anyone who reads a newspaper knows that Disney has had some major changes in the past few years with a new CEO–Bob Iger–and the acquisition of Pixar. We are getting back to our roots. Focusing on quality, incredible storytelling, and the magic people expect of us. Bob’s really focused on bringing the company together as a team and put quality and innovation at the forefront of the company’s agenda. What he’s done is create a great collaborative environment for innovation and the rest has taken care of itself. You can see the whole company flourishing right now.

In your opinion, what are the biggest barriers and challenges that stand in the way of organizations becoming more innovative?
The organizations are their own biggest barriers. A lot of things that big companies do that they think are conservative and prudent are actually very foolhardy and dangerous. It’s said that cynicism is ignorance masquerading as wisdom. Business is very simple. You have to offer a product that is better than your competition and you have to keep your customers happy. A lot of big companies get caught up in other things. Managing a P&L is important, and money keeps the lights on. But if people don’t like the product or service you are putting out there, it doesn’t really matter how clever you were about saving costs here and there. When you’re dead, it doesn’t really matter why. You can’t cut your way to glory. Look at Apple. In the last recession, everyone else laid people off and cut back on R&D. Apple said “We are going to innovate our way out of this.” And look what happened for them. You can’t stop innovating.

Beyond your organization, who do you admire for risk-taking innovation, and what do you think makes them successful?
Apple is too obvious, so I’ll say Target. At a time when everyone was trying to follow Wal-Mart into the bargain bin, Target had a vision that everyone deserved nicely designed products. A lot of people thought they were talking over their audiences’ heads or they were full of themselves. In fact, everyone else was underestimating the intelligence and taste of their guests, and Target saw something no one else did. But Target innovated in a lot less obvious ways too. Take queue lines. At a lot of big-box stores, you could spend 20 minutes waiting to check out. At Target, you will wait less than 5 minutes most of the time. If the register is stacked up more than 3 people deep, they will open another one. That’s customer service. Today, Target is beating all of their competitors’ comps and doing more business per door than anyone else. Not everything has worked for Target. Remember the short-lived Philippe Starck line? But they keep trying and more often than not, they succeed.

What innovation are you still waiting for?
I think the single most important innovation we all need is low-cost green energy. Energy is the United States’ #1 trade issue, #1 security, #1 economic issue, and #1 environmental issue. Green energy will have a more transformative effect on the world than the Internet, it’s that big. Outside of this, I am working a lot with robotics these days and I’m very excited about all this smart technology that will make its way into lots of products. I live in LA and we are (in)famous for our traffic. I would love us all to have robotic
cars that could figure out traffic flow, so I never have to sit through a traffic jam again.

Microsoft yanks Money off retail shelves

21 Aug 2010

Updated 2:30 p.m., with comment from Microsoft.

It had become a ritual for Microsoft’s consumer unit. Every year it came out with a new version of Microsoft Money and sent new boxes to retail stores.

That tradition is now dead.

Microsoft, via a newsgroup posting from one of its enthusiasts, announced it will no longer update Money each year and, more importantly, it will stop selling the product at retail stores.

It’s the latest indication that Microsoft is seeing a shift in the way people, particularly consumers and small businesses, buy their software.

(Credit:
Microsoft)

“More and more retail consumers are going online to shop the endless rows of digital shelves,” Microsoft said, according to the newsgroup posting, which was noted earlier Friday by ZDNet blogger Mary Jo Foley. “In response to our retail partners’ needs, consumer behavior and business efficiencies, Microsoft is focusing distribution efforts for Microsoft Money Plus software online via download and discontinuing traditional box sales of the software at retail.”

Money is not the first consumer title to see its fortunes change in recent years. Another perennial shelf space occupant, Microsoft Digital Image Suite, was discontinued altogether last year.

However, Microsoft added in the posting that it is not abandoning packaged software companywide.

“Microsoft does not see shrink wrapped software going away anytime soon and we are always talking to customers about different ways to price and package our software offerings,” it said in the posting. “The company is evolving its strategy and product solutions to meet customer demand and optimize business efficiencies.”

Indeed, the company has seen very strong sales of the latest version of Office and its OneCare security software is also sold heavily at retail stores. The company just introduced Equipt, which is a subscription service combining the two, but sold as a packaged product at retail.

The company has been eyeing this shift for some time and looking at options like subscriptions, online services, and even advertising-funded software on the PC. After years of weighing the issue, the company went ahead with Microsoft Works SE, an ad-supported free version of its consumer productivity package.

Intuit, another big name in consumer software, has already seen a huge shift to both online sales as well as selling its personal and small business finance programs as online services, rather than packaged software.

The company already gets more money from its TurboTax online service than it does for the packaged product, with more than 10 million people doing their taxes online. The company also has 128,000 small business customers using its online services, according to spokeswoman Heather McLellan.

It has also debuted niche products that are online-only such as a medical account expense manager product.

Update: I spoke this afternoon with Chris Jolley, a product manager in Microsoft’s financial products group. He added some details on the trends that prompted Microsoft’s move.

In the past 12 months, half of the sales for Money Plus, the latest version of Microsoft Money, have come via digital download. That’s roughly three times the rate of a year earlier, he said.

Although the company laid the ground work for less-than-annual updates when it renamed the product a year ago, Jolley said that the decisions to go digital and to skip this year’s update were made more recently.