Exploring the impact of broadband and technology on our lives, our businesses, and our communities.
Truckers in the U.S. and Canada are using on-the-go hydrogen generation to cut fuel costs by 10% and as a by-product, pollution is also reduced substantially, with particulate emissions (the black smoke seen from some diesel engines) by up to half.
The hydrogen is generated by a small, bolt-on system that generates hydrogen by electrolysis, which uses electricity from the truck's alternator to strip hydrogen from distilled water. The hydrogen is injected into the fuel-air mix and produces more efficient burning fuel.
At current fuel prices, the system pays for itself quickly, and the only "fuel" needed is distilled water, which is much cheaper than diesel fuel.
In yet another "new media" development--they seem to come almost daily--Cingular is going to offer a $6.99/month radio service that works with certain cellphones. It is an interesting offering, since lots of people have cellphones (yes, most of them don't work with this service yet).
It is hard to triangulate how this might work out; broadcast radio could be affected, but satellite radio providers may be harder hit, where the higher price and the need for dedicated satellite radio devices make it a tougher sell. For me, I'd have to wonder about the quality, given that my cellphone often sounds awful even when standing in clear view of a tower.
In a larger context, this is part of the continuing Betamax-VHS battle between Internet wireless and the cellphone industry. Technically, Internet wireless is a better platform that can provide more and better quality now, and can grow substantially in quality and performance in the future. But the industry itself is deeply fragmented, with many under-capitalized providers and a lack of infrastructure.
On the cellphone side, the technology is mediocre at best, but there are only a few players with very deep pockets, who have already made massive infrastructure investments and have a revenue stream from phone service to help pay for new services. Who will win? I'd prefer wireless Internet, but today, I'm not optimistic.
Honda has announced a hydrogen generation fuel cell. Designed for home use, the system generates enough hydrogen to fuel a car for around town use, and also generates enough electricity to power an average home. It uses natural gas as a source of fuel.
Nokia has announced an "Internet tablet" computer. Just three inches by five and a half inches, the device is powered by a variant of Linux and comes with all the software you would expect on a PDA, including a calendar, Web browser, email, chat, news readers, and much more. It also comes with WiFI, and has a battery life of three hours of active use, and up to seven days of standby time.
The Register has a hilarious list of reader-contributed definitions of Web 2.0, which is the current buzz phrase for a whole new deluge of technology "solutions" in search of a problem. Web 2.0 offerings typically include other buzzphrases like "live" applications (apparently everything we've been doing has been dead), AJAX (not a soap, but a new set of programming tools), and the always delightful but overused "usercentric."
While Web-based applications have improved dramatically over the past several years, there is unquestionably another whole group of "Web 2.0" start up companies with often baffling offerings that manage to be simultaneously just plain amusing and incomprehensible at the same time. A site called TechCrunch provides a nice snapshot. Most of the stuff just leaves me shaking my head while humming Prince's "Let's party like it's 1999."
Sony has really made a mess of things with their Digital Rights Management software. In a utterly misguided attempt to prevent copying of their music CDs, the company hid software on the CDs that secretly changes the core operating system on Windows.
Just today, Macintouch said they had information from a reader that found a similar Mac program hidden on a Sony CD. But wait--there's more. According to Slashdot, a class action lawsuit has been filed in California against Sony, claiming the company has violated three state laws that prohibit hacking and putting secret software on computers. And a boycott has been announced against Sony.
All of this is going to hurt the company badly at a time when Sony has not been able to compete well in the consumer electronics market. The unwritten story is about outsourcing. The company outsourced the DRM to third parties and then apparently stuck it on their music CDs with little or no internal review, legal or technical. Outsourcing is often touted as a less expensive way to acquire products and services, but the DRM Sony bought directly affected their core product. It is a perfect example of why indiscriminate outsourcing is so dangerous. It looks good on the financials, but if it damages the company the way this has, it is a false economy.
But wait! There is still MORE! The Register reports that a virus has been found using the secret Sony software as a vector. The Sony software hides files that start with "$sys$", so a virus writer designed a little virus that comes attached to an email and is very difficult to find if the Sony software is installed. Murphy's Law is working overtime on this one.
CNN has announced a beta TV news on demand service that will offer multiple news feeds and access to an archive of CNN video segments.
Why are so many players getting into this so quickly? For one, it is relatively simple. For the larger content providers like CNN and the other alphabet channels (CBS, ABC, NBC) they already have staff to throw at this. It is no big deal to digitize video (and much of it may already be recorded as digital) and stick it on a Web site. And they have enough server resources and bandwidth to support a pilot project.
But there is no free lunch. As more people start streaming and watching video via their feeble DSL and cable modem connections, those first mile networks are going to start glowing cherry red from the load and the end result will be chaos. The cable modem networks will show the strain first because of their architecture, but basically, performance will start to stink, all the time, just as it does now many evenings and when schools are out for snow.
The current connection-based fee structure for broadband simply does not work when everyone starts watching IP TV because the fee has no relationship to the actual cost of shipping bits across the network. The solution is to move toward a service-based fee structure where markets for content help set the cost of services. The current system treats all forms of services equally, and they are not. All this worked fine when the services were limited mostly to email and Web browsing. And even a little VoIP and some music downloads were too much of a problem except on college campuses, where file sharing crippled networks and forced drastic network changes.
But video uses hundreds and even thousands of times more bandwidth. The networks are jumping into this quickly in part because someone else has to pay for much of the cost of hauling their video across multiple networks to viewers. It is an unsustainable model.
Just weeks after Apple's video iPod was introduced to great skepticism (...who wants to download TV programs?), all the major studios are getting into this new business. The iPod was released with some primetime ABC shows available for download, but now CBS and NBC have announced plans to sell episodes of major shows for ninety-nine cents, bypassing the iTunes store and undercutting the ABC prices by half.
In the short term, this is a windfall for the studios. They get a one time revenue hit from the first airing of a show, and a bit more from reruns, but after that--nothing. Most shows never make it into syndication, and those that do don't always generate much additional cash.
So sticking the popular shows on a Web site and collecting a buck per download looks pretty good; you don't have to sell too many copies to start generating a significant stream of new "found" cash. Shows with a big fan base are going first, like "CSI" and "Law and Order."
I think a buck is a magic number. The shows are provided commercial-free, and the ability to watch it when you want, without commercials, is going to look pretty attractive to a lot of people. The studios win big with this, and they stand to make more, possibly, than from DVD sales.
Who are the losers? Advertisers have to be worried, as people suddenly have an alternative to "free" content. TV ads have become so long and so intrusive that paying a buck to watch your favorite show without ads could catch on quickly. And local TV stations that rely heavily on syndicated reruns may see ad revenue fizzle out as people decide to pay to watch instead.
Competition is a wonderful thing. Who would have predicted that a price war would break out this quickly over the cost of downloading TV shows? And who predicted even two years ago that all this would happen this quickly? It is another illustration of why it is dangerous to rely entirely on the past to predict where new economic development opportunities are coming from.
Updated 11/8/05:
Pixar Studios has announced that they have sold 125,000 short movies via the iTunes video store in the few weeks since it has opened. Steve Jobs, the CEO of Pixar, noted that the major obstacle to selling feature length movies is that "broadband is too slow in the United States." The emphasis is mine, but I find it interesting that Jobs qualified that statement; Pixar apparently does not see the same limitations in other countries.
A vertical axis wind turbine that has been under development for more than ten years is nearly ready for commercial use. Propeller-type wind turbines have been controversial because they are visually ugly, make a lot of noise, can kill birds, and are not all that efficient.
This vertical axis turbine, by comparison, does not have to be mounted as high to work, creates little noise, spins only as fast as the ambient wind (so is less a threat to birds), works in higher winds that propeller turbines, is much easier and less expensive to maintain, and is less expensive to build.
But wait, there's more. It also generates electricity at less cost than typical commercial fossil fuel systems, unlike a lot of other "green" systems like solar.
Will this solve all our energy problems? It won't, but it does illustrate that the emerging Energy Economy will have lots of different kinds of energy systems that will work better that what we have now, will have less impact on the environment, and may actually lower the cost of energy.
And there will be lots of new businesses to build, install, and maintain these new, highly diversified systems. New businesses means new jobs, so is your region including an Energy Economy strategy as part of its economic development plans?
Over the long term, I don't think products like Tivo have a future, for two reasons. First is more philosophical: If you can get any content you want on demand (like some kind of video program) via broadband, you don't need a device to store it. Second is more practical: If you do need something to store it, I think a "media computer" with a Tivo-like software program will be cheaper and easier to use, and will not require that you give away all your personal information (what you watch and when you watch it), like Tivo requires now.
Having said all that, the Yahoo!-Tivo partnership makes sense in the short term (next 3-4 years) because we have very limited broadband connections, and so what will become popular is downloading IP video programs overnight, storing them on your Tivo-like device (or your media computer), and watching them later.
This partnership creates, in effect, a new distribution channel that short circuits the traditional Hollywood system--competition, in other words, which is always a good thing. And it may sell a few Tivos as well, which is a major concern for Tivo, since they can read the writing on the wall too. They need to sell as many Tivos as they can over the next several years, before the devices become obsolete.