Motion detection technology firm 3DV is entering a sales agreement with an unnamed third party, thought to be Microsoft.
For weeks people have been speculating that Microsoft will be purchasing the Israeli digital camera technology company for around $34 million, though the platform holder has declined to comment on the matter.
3DV holding company Elron Electronics yesterday announced that it had “entered into a definitive agreement for the sale of substantially all of its assets to a third party.” This sale transaction is expected to close by the second quarter of 2009.
3DV has been designing its camera technologies for some time; its ZCams are said to be a far more accurate version of Sony’s EyeToy, due to the fact that the devices can interpret how far away a subject is from its lens. The technology had reportedly been used in “advanced defense systems”, and has already been described as superior – in terms of accuracy – to the Wii Remote.
This is the start of the NEXT NEXT generation of gaming.
Tuesday, March 31, 2009
Thursday, March 19, 2009
Who Owns Social? Everyone...
Every day new technologies impact the way we live and communicate, disrupting markets in motion and forcing adaptation, innovation and change.
The introduction of the empowered and connected web surfer brought increased prominence to the voice of the individual and the power of the community. While nearly everyone now recognizes the power of social engagement, an intense debate has raged over where this discipline should live. While some have suggested that PR and Digital Agencies are poorly positioned or equipped to address this new communications dynamic (and in many cases they are right), I believe that this is more than a discipline, it is an actionable philosophy that lives across all marketing and communications streams. Oh yeah, and some agencies have proven more than capable at adapting to and activating in the social dynamic as well.
One Size Doesn't Fit's All
Nobody truly owns social. Not a single division within a brand, not a PR agency, not a digital agency, not a word of mouth agency, not an unagency. Social is owned by a team, not by any individual person. Because no one person or agency represents all aspects of the marketing discipline.
* CRM would never own product ideation discussions on their own.
* Engineers would never own customer service discussions on their own.
* Marketers would never own design discussions on their own.
So why would one suggest that social listening, activation or cultivation would live in any single agency?
Agencies Are Evolving
Clearly the face of the agency world is evolving. It always has. And successful agencies will continue to evolve. To suggest that digital agencies can only focus on banners and PR folks can only focus on journalists is ridiculous. New competencies are emerging within agencies of all stripes. New structures are being introduced regularly.
This is not an all-or-nothing world. Just because a capability wasn't embedded in an agency 10 years ago doesn't mean that it can't be there today or in 6 months from now. All it takes is a commitment to learn, to build and to optimize for success.
Good Relationships Often Drive Budgets
Agencies with good relationships with their clients are being asked by their clients to bring social expertise to the table. Smart agencies are proposing these solutions, bringing this expertise in house in advance of these requests, proactively proposing social marketing efforts and when appropriate, are even restructuring their teams to better meet social demands. There are relationships in place, and these should not be tossed out with the wind.
That being said, when agencies fall short of expectations or fail to deliver beyond expectations, smart brands look elsewhere for solutions. And these solutions may come from a "new media shop" or a "social consultant". But even the strongest social solutions should not live in a vacuum. Everyone who impacts the brand and their communications belongs at the table.
We all started somewhere
Even the smartest, most savvy marketer was once a child learning to walk. Part of this process involves falling down. While some of us are not falling down as often as some others, we are all listening to one another. We are all engaging in the same industry conversations, reading the same blogs, participating in many of the same twitter conversations, attending the same events and having many of the same behind closed doors conversations with our peers about what has worked and what hasn't. We may not have the same perspectives, frameworks or operating infrastructure, but one has to believe that anyone with a brain, two ears and eyes, a will and the drive to build successfully can and will do so.
The introduction of the empowered and connected web surfer brought increased prominence to the voice of the individual and the power of the community. While nearly everyone now recognizes the power of social engagement, an intense debate has raged over where this discipline should live. While some have suggested that PR and Digital Agencies are poorly positioned or equipped to address this new communications dynamic (and in many cases they are right), I believe that this is more than a discipline, it is an actionable philosophy that lives across all marketing and communications streams. Oh yeah, and some agencies have proven more than capable at adapting to and activating in the social dynamic as well.
One Size Doesn't Fit's All
Nobody truly owns social. Not a single division within a brand, not a PR agency, not a digital agency, not a word of mouth agency, not an unagency. Social is owned by a team, not by any individual person. Because no one person or agency represents all aspects of the marketing discipline.
* CRM would never own product ideation discussions on their own.
* Engineers would never own customer service discussions on their own.
* Marketers would never own design discussions on their own.
So why would one suggest that social listening, activation or cultivation would live in any single agency?
Agencies Are Evolving
Clearly the face of the agency world is evolving. It always has. And successful agencies will continue to evolve. To suggest that digital agencies can only focus on banners and PR folks can only focus on journalists is ridiculous. New competencies are emerging within agencies of all stripes. New structures are being introduced regularly.
This is not an all-or-nothing world. Just because a capability wasn't embedded in an agency 10 years ago doesn't mean that it can't be there today or in 6 months from now. All it takes is a commitment to learn, to build and to optimize for success.
Good Relationships Often Drive Budgets
Agencies with good relationships with their clients are being asked by their clients to bring social expertise to the table. Smart agencies are proposing these solutions, bringing this expertise in house in advance of these requests, proactively proposing social marketing efforts and when appropriate, are even restructuring their teams to better meet social demands. There are relationships in place, and these should not be tossed out with the wind.
That being said, when agencies fall short of expectations or fail to deliver beyond expectations, smart brands look elsewhere for solutions. And these solutions may come from a "new media shop" or a "social consultant". But even the strongest social solutions should not live in a vacuum. Everyone who impacts the brand and their communications belongs at the table.
We all started somewhere
Even the smartest, most savvy marketer was once a child learning to walk. Part of this process involves falling down. While some of us are not falling down as often as some others, we are all listening to one another. We are all engaging in the same industry conversations, reading the same blogs, participating in many of the same twitter conversations, attending the same events and having many of the same behind closed doors conversations with our peers about what has worked and what hasn't. We may not have the same perspectives, frameworks or operating infrastructure, but one has to believe that anyone with a brain, two ears and eyes, a will and the drive to build successfully can and will do so.
Friday, March 13, 2009
PC Remains an Online Gaming Leader
The PC continues to dominate all other gaming systems in terms of usage for online gaming, research firm NPD Group has found in the study, Online Gaming 2009.
According to NPD among online gamers surveyed, 87 percent play PC games, down from 90 percent from a 2008 survey.
Of the 20K surveyed, 25 percent said they used a console for online gaming, up from 19 percent in 2008.
Xbox 360 led the console online gaming pack, with 50 percent of online gamers saying they use Microsoft's machine to play online. Online gaming usage on the Nintendo Wii increased from 18 percent in 2008 to 29 percent in 2009. PS2 dropped "dramatically," NPD said, while PS3 moved to third place on the usage chart, with 20 percent of online gamers saying they used the system to play online.
Microsoft's concerted effort to make online gaming a major component of its console strategy began when the company decided to include a standard ethernet connection in the original Xbox. The Xbox Live online gaming service launched in 2002. Nintendo has been slower to jump on the online bandwagon, but now offers online play and a storefront, while PS3 has the highly-touted Home virtual world and PlayStation Network.
Tuesday, March 3, 2009
The Growth of Smartphones
Technology research firm In-Stat projects smartphone sales will grow strongly over the next five years, accounting for 20% of all handsets globally by 2013, compared to 10% today.
In North America, the number of smartphones will increase 15% annually over the next five years, more than doubling to 62.3 million units in 2013. With prices coming down as the choice of smartphones increases, more than one-third of U.S. wireless users in 2008 said they plan to get a smartphone the next time they upgrade their phone. Today, 36% of U.S. subscribers already own one.
While the iPhone has been the catalyst for expanding the appeal of smartphones to date, In-Stat expects that phones powered by open mobile operating systems -- including Google's Android platform -- will overtake the popular Apple device in the coming years.
So if only 9.1 million Linux-based phones were sold last year compared to 16.2 million iPhones, the ratio will be reversed by 2013 when the former sells 68.1 million units worldwide to the iPhone's 33.4 million.
No one stands to benefit more from that trend than the Web search giant, which unveiled its first phone, T-Mobile's G1, last year. "Google and its partners have the potential to aggressively enter the smartphone segment of the market by creating a development environment that is to be the most convenient for mobile applications development," reads the In-Stat report "Smartphones: Heading to the Mainstream." "This will lead to even greater interest in the smartphone market segment."
The study also indicates that demand for the iPhone will be diluted by the host of imitators it's inspired, including the Samsung Instinct, the BlackBerry Storm, the G1, and the Nokia N97.
While none of these devices has taken off like the iPhone, the hundreds of thousands or more than a million units some have sold, show. A number of competitors including Palm, BlackBerry, Google and Microsoft, are also opening their own mobile app stores to compete more directly with Apple.
What about the impact of the recession on smartphone sales overall? In-Stat says its estimates account for the economic uncertainty that will lead people to cut discretionary spending in the U.S. and worldwide.
In North America, the number of smartphones will increase 15% annually over the next five years, more than doubling to 62.3 million units in 2013. With prices coming down as the choice of smartphones increases, more than one-third of U.S. wireless users in 2008 said they plan to get a smartphone the next time they upgrade their phone. Today, 36% of U.S. subscribers already own one.
While the iPhone has been the catalyst for expanding the appeal of smartphones to date, In-Stat expects that phones powered by open mobile operating systems -- including Google's Android platform -- will overtake the popular Apple device in the coming years.
So if only 9.1 million Linux-based phones were sold last year compared to 16.2 million iPhones, the ratio will be reversed by 2013 when the former sells 68.1 million units worldwide to the iPhone's 33.4 million.
No one stands to benefit more from that trend than the Web search giant, which unveiled its first phone, T-Mobile's G1, last year. "Google and its partners have the potential to aggressively enter the smartphone segment of the market by creating a development environment that is to be the most convenient for mobile applications development," reads the In-Stat report "Smartphones: Heading to the Mainstream." "This will lead to even greater interest in the smartphone market segment."
The study also indicates that demand for the iPhone will be diluted by the host of imitators it's inspired, including the Samsung Instinct, the BlackBerry Storm, the G1, and the Nokia N97.
While none of these devices has taken off like the iPhone, the hundreds of thousands or more than a million units some have sold, show. A number of competitors including Palm, BlackBerry, Google and Microsoft, are also opening their own mobile app stores to compete more directly with Apple.
What about the impact of the recession on smartphone sales overall? In-Stat says its estimates account for the economic uncertainty that will lead people to cut discretionary spending in the U.S. and worldwide.
Skittles.com... A Massive Social Media Experiment
Skittles's has turned it's website into little more than a channel to point visitors to buzz and information about the brand on consumer-generated media sites such as Twitter, Facebook, Flickr, YouTube and Wikipedia. Instead of corporate-produced content, visitors to skittles.com see one of these areas (the landing page is being rotated) with two overlays.
One overlay requires them to register their age and agree to terms of service stating that they are clicking into non-Skittles-controlled outside site content. The other is navigational. Clicking "chatter" takes visitors into Twitter and the thread of tweets about Skittles (bad words and all); clicking "media" takes them into Skittles videos and photos on YouTube and Flickr; and clicking "friends" takes them into the brand's Facebook area. Only the "products," "contact" and "other gobbledygook" (nutrition info) links connect into corporate brand content.
Other brands have employed the concept of using the home page to redirect visitors to social media sites. But the consensus seems to be that this is the first consumer brand to go this route.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
