Horizons
Google Buzz: How it works
Move over, Facebook. Heave-ho, Twitter. Google Buzz has arrived.
What is it? Billed as "a Google approach to sharing," Google Buzz takes the features of Facebook and Twitter and applies the company's search and location expertise.
Before the familiar groan – "Not another service to learn and subscribe to," hear this: If you're a GMail user, Google Buzz is baked into your inbox. Beginning this afternoon, GMail users will start to see a new tab pop up under their inbox. And instead of having to request friends or build up followers like we all did with Facebook and then Twitter, Buzz's network draws from user's GMail history to build a community of people he or she already connects with. In short, if you already email and GChat someone, you're automatically linked on Buzz.
How is Google Buzz different from Facebook and Twitter? In many ways it's very similar. Users can post new buzz by sharing links, photos, videos, and status updates. You can comment on and "like" friends' postings just as on Facebook, and send @ messages to get specific users' attention much like on Twitter.
How do you know if you're following the best people on Twitter? Guesswork? Follow everyone and weed out the spammers and oversharers? Google Buzz's algorithms are constantly analyzing users' preferences – what they like and dislike, what their friends are sharing, and who they're interacting with. If a bunch of your friends are passing around a link or talking with a person, Buzz will shoot you a recommendation. (Though this could be not so helpful if your friends are, say, planning a surprise party for you.)
In that vein, what about privacy? With all of this recommending, analyzing, and sharing, Buzz's potential as a stalker tool becomes glaringly apparent. Google says Buzz aims for simplicity. Each post has its own privacy control, which gives the user granular control over who can see its content. It's also possible to block someone from following you. In a touch that could be helpful or not – we're still not sure – the privacy preferences are "sticky" – Buzz remembers the last privacy setting you used.
A mobile mover
Depending on who you're talking to, Google is either revered or resented for its wide reach. From search to telephony, maps to mobile, Google is expanding. The story stays the same with Buzz. The mobile version of the service rolls out features that were once the turf of Foursquare and Yelp. Using Buzz on your mobile phone (and you can – with an Android App or just mobile.google.com) you have the ability to include a location with your updates. Google, like Foursquare, will ask to use GPS to find your location and then display a list of places nearby – Google has already logged 50 million of them. Tap the one closest to you, and your updates are aggregated with others from that place. Or, fire up Google Maps for Mobile, and see the places people have "buzzed" about around where you are. Pretty slick.
Check out the video below for a look at how it all works.
First impressions
Unlike Google Wave, which languished in closed "beta" testing for months, Buzz will roll-out now – and to a wide user base. Will it kill Twitter or Facebook? Don't bet on it. The two companies have fought long and hard for their legions of users, and the connections people are making on both will still be there, even if Google presents another way of communicating. If you don't yet have Buzz in your GMail, be patient – Google says the roll-out to all its users should take a couple days.
––
There's still a lot to explore and discuss about Google Buzz. Will you use it? Give us your opinions in the comments, and if Twitter is still your thing, follow us @CSMHorizonsBlog.
Denny's free breakfast, Dockers free pants led Super Bowl ad searches, Google says
We've showed you some of the worst Super Bowl ads, and some of the very best Super Bowl ads. But which Super Bowl ads drummed up the most buzz among viewers? According to Google – which had a pretty good ad of its own – the answer has everything to do with greasy spoon breakfasts and a lack of pants. Not necessarily in that order.
Writing yesterday on the official Google blog, software engineer Jeffrey Oldham tallied up the hot searches from Sunday's Super Bowl in Miami.
Oldham threw the net pretty wide: Colts quarterback Peyton Manning, for instance, was the most-searched-for player, while the New Orleans Saints were the most-searched-for Super Bowl team. But what really caught our eye was the most-searched-for advertisers. We live, after all, in a world where buzz is mostly a matter of clicks. Many successful companies run major Internet campaigns alongside TV spots, and gauge market penetration by watching Google Trends.
By that measure, the two major winners of the Super Bowl ad battle were Dockers, which sent thousands of men in search of a free pair of pants, and the Denny's restaurant chain, which was offering free breakfasts. (Free being the unifying theme among the top Super Bowl ads.) Among the other ads that garnered a ton of clicks was Motorola's racy spot featuring Megan Fox and the Snickers ad featuring Betty White.
Of course, this was the first year that Google aired a Super Bowl TV ad of its own, and according to Google's Oldham, "Parisian Love" was a success. As we noted yesterday, the Google ad was pretty familiar stuff: American guy meets French girl. American guy takes French Girl for some coffee. Fast forward a year, and the American guy returns to Paris to – well, why don't you watch it for yourself.
---
Which Super Bowl ads sent you scurrying to the computer? Talk to us in the comments section or on our Twitter feed.
With @CraigyFerg, Craig Ferguson leaps into the Twitter fray
Jay is on Twitter. So is Jimmy Fallon, who has amassed almost two and a half million Twitter followers. Even Dave has tried it out. (Don't ask about Conan, who famously trashed Twitter in a "Twitter Tracker" segment.) Now, Scottish-American comedian Craig Ferguson has joined Twitter – Twitter handle: @CraigyFerg – and he's already making a splash.
"The fact that i am on twitter probably means its on the way out," Ferguson joked yesterday. But Ferguson, who hosts the popular Late Late Show on CBS, shouldn't be so sure. In the time since Ferguson launched his CraigyFerg account, just under 20,000 Twitter users have flocked to his feed. "Craig Ferguson," meanwhile, remains one of the most searched terms on Google, somewhere above news about last night's season premiere of "For the Love of Ray J."
Disclaimer: As fitting his post as host of "The Late Late Show," Ferguson is a more caustic tweeter than, say, Jay Leno. @CraigyFerg has featured some spicy language in the last few hours, along with a jab at the British band The Who. But Ferguson has also cranked out a few gems. "I just retweeted somebody by accident," he writes at one point. "Sorry. My big sausage fingers are hopeless."
A few minutes later, Ferguson adds: "Btw big sausage fingers is a movie I accidentally wrote and produced." Like many celebrities, Ferguson's follow-to-follower ratio is very skewed. "I follow no one," Ferguson explained. "Except Dave I suppose. Or the local news. Or the smell of ham." Not quite true, as it turns out: Ferguson is following three other Twitter feeds, including the account for the Discovery Channel show "Mythbusters," which Ferguson loves.
And "Mythbusters" loves Ferguson. Here's a tweet from the Mythbusters' Twitter account, posted this morning: "Honored to be the first Twitter account followed by @craigyferg ! Our eau de ham must have worked!"
Will you follow @CraigyFerg? And why don't you follow us? We're @CSMHorizonsBlog. In the meantime, drop us a line in the comments section.
Three reasons the iPad will get a price drop
How low can they go?
Judging by the gasp audible in the video of Apple's launch event last month, most people were surprised at the Apple iPad's low price.
And now word is leaking from the Wall Street Journal that Apple is willing to take the price lower, if circumstances call for it.
What would those circumstances be?
The first is a bit obvious. Let's pretend the iPad is a dud – not so hard to do, if one puts much stock in a report from late last week, which found that most people, while stoked about the tablet, don't really want to buy one. If Apple, despite the Steve Jobs reality distortion field, can't get people to pony up $500 for a device no one knows how to carry, or what to do with, the svelte screens would languish on brushed aluminum shelves. Apple could drop the iPad's price $100 or $200 to stimulate demand.
The second scenario – and more likely, if you ask us – is that Apple somehow has succeeded in convincing consumers that they have need of this "third device," and the thing sells like hotcakes. It'll be popular with the early-adopter and the tech neophyte, "I use it to get to the Googles" crowds. As it did with the iPhone, Apple could drop the price in an effort to make the iPad appeal to the masses (and all the smart consumers out there). A move like that could solidify the iPad's ascent to an iPhone-esque lock on the tablet market.
A third possibility, one backed by news out of Austria, is that wireless carriers will begin offering subsidies for the iPad, provided users sign service contracts. AppleInsider points to the rumor from TamsIJungle:
Hutchison Austria will be the first Austrian carrier to bundle the iPad. We will do so via our long-established laptop bundle, which offers customers a 333euro rebate if they agree to a 2yr contract offering 5GB of data for 29.90euro.
As the first iPads sold in Austria won’t have 3G radios, we will bundle the device with a Huawei modem called i-Mo. This device is a “wireless wifi router”, creating a personal WiFi for the iPad.
What's all this mean for you, dear reader? Wait.
Wait for that price drop. Wait for the software updates. Wait for people to develop cool new apps for it. Wait for someone to give it to you as a gift. Wait for iPad 2.0. Wait for it to possibly fail in epic fashion. Whatever your reason for waiting, even if a price drop doesn't come, you'll let a whole generation of users work out the bugs and frustrations for you.
––
Well, will you wait? Or must you have an iPad on day-one? Leave a comment below, and keep up with us on Twitter.
Watch out, Twitter and Facebook. Google is on your heels.
Google is close to adding a new social networking component to Gmail – a move which would edge the search giant further into territory traditionally dominated by Twitter and Facebook. According to the Wall Street Journal, which quotes anonymous sources within the company, Google could have the feature up and running by this week. (Google has declined to comment.)
So what would a social media-enhanced Gmail look like? The platform already comes with a popular chat functionality, where users can post "away messages" and links. Google apparently wants to expand that service to collect status updates from multiple users, which would be streamed in the same way Facebook aggregates content on its news feed.
On the one hand, there's a major integration opportunity here for Google. As Nathania Johnson at Search Engine Watch points out, "directly competing with Facebook or Twitter would probably not be a great idea for Google." Facebook is simply too entrenched. But Google does have the option to open things up with its new social media feature. Gmail users, for instance, might be able to send their status updates or links automatically to Facebook and Twitter.
But others see the impending Google move as nothing less than a direct sally against Twitter and Facebook. At TechFlash, Todd Bishop says that Google is the one company with enough clout to present a viable alternative to Facebook. Maybe. But it would be an uphill battle from the outset: Facebook says it has upward of 400 million unique users. Gmail? 176 million unique users.
Does Google have a shot at knocking Twitter and Facebook off the social networking heap? Are there room for three at the top? We want to hear from you. Drop us a line in the comments section, or follow us on Twitter for more sci-tech news.
Canon T2i: The Goldilocks of digital cameras
Ready to trade in your point-and-shoot camera for something more powerful? Canon would like a word with you.
The new Canon T2i falls somewhere in between a weighty professional SLR and a shove-in-your-pocket amateur camera. It focuses on the growing market of enthusiasts – people with a good eye but little training, prepared to spend money on their passion but not more than $1,000.
Due out in March, the EOS Rebel T2i gives last year's T1i an improved megapixel count, faster shutter, and stronger HD video features. Plus, fans of the T1i will be happy to learn that its simple body and clear interface will carry over to the new generation.
The new 18-megapixel setting goes well beyond the comparably priced Sony Alpha A500 and Nikon D90 – both with 12.3 megapixels. (Just remember: More megapixels doesn't mean better pix. Despite this higher count, the T2i's image sensor is slightly smaller than its competitors, suggesting pictures may come with more odd blotches and color fluctuation. But, to be fair, such imperfections are often only apparent when you zoom in on a picture or print it in a large format.)
The T2i also takes fewer pictures per second than the A500 and D90 (3.7 fps compared to 4.5 and 5 fps). This slower speed is still superior to most point-and-shoots. Plus the new Canon compensates with video, something the Sony and Nikon advanced-beginner cameras do not offer.
The T1i called itself HD, but its 1080p video option could handle only 20 frames per second. As a rule, demand at least 30 fps video, unless you're OK with choppy motion. Now, the T2i supports 30 fps on 1080p and super-smooth 60 fps for 720p video.
Interested? The Canon's EOS Rebel T2i will hit shelves in March at $899 with a standard lens, or $799 for just the body.
---
What camera do you use? Are you happy with it? Share your reviews in the comments section and follow us on Twitter for more sci-tech news.
Google scores with Paris Super Bowl ad
Yes, the E-Trade baby bit was pretty good. So was the spot with Chevy Chase and his "National Lampoon's Vacation" co-star Beverly D'Angelo. But one of the best ads shown during last night's Super Bowl was "Parisian Love," a short – and deceptively simple – clip by the folks over at Google.
The plot of Google's first-ever Super Bowl advertisement is standard-issue romantic comedy stuff: A guy lands in Paris to study abroad. He meets a girl. He takes her for some coffee; he buys her truffles. She calls him cute. And then, a year or so later, the American guy returns to Paris to marry the French girl.
But Google hired no major actors during the making of "Parisian Love."
There are no slow, hungry shots of the Eiffel Tower. Instead, the whole of the "Parisian Love" advertisement is comprised of screen-shots from Google search, Google Maps, Google's translation services, and even that cool Google tool that tracks the status of international and national flights.
"Search on," reads the single line of text displayed at the end of the advertisement. The conceit is that Google can be used in nearly every aspect of a person's life, from finding the right restaurant, to marrying the right girl.
Was it convincing?
To judge by some of the reactions posted today on the Web, the answer is yes. "Not sure how much — or rather, how little — the ubiquitous search engine spent on this spot," fawned the team at Entertainment Weekly, "but like a wildflower popping through a sidewalk crack, its simple charms stood out against its colder, bigger-budget competitors."
Google rarely advertises on television, and has never before advertised during the Super Bowl. In a blog post after the game, Google CEO Eric Schmidt explained that "Parisian Love," which has been available online for months, received "such a positive reaction on YouTube, that we decided to share it with a wider audience."
Here's hoping there's more where that came from.
---
What was your favorite Super Bowl ad? Talk to us in the comments section or on our Twitter feed.
Monopoly gets radical redesign -- goodbye, paper money
Seems it's redesign day here at the Horizons blog. Facebook updated its layout. Publishers demanded Amazon raise its prices. Heck, Heinz changed its classic ketchup packets for the first time since 1968.
Now, the board game Monopoly has followed suit.
In honor of the game's 75th anniversary, Hasbro unveiled a brand new board and digital interface for the classic tycoon playground. The special "Revolution Edition" will be available in the fall and pack several surprises.
First, the world is round. As your imaginary real-estate mogul learns the ups and downs of capitalism, you'll romp around a ring-shaped board. Hasbro ditched the four-corners look for a pizza-like circle. The stops on this journey are the same, but each location now comes as a radial wedge. Houses and hotels basically match older versions, but the game replaced its pewter character pieces with plastic tokens. Farewell, little doggy, shoe, and top hat.
Second, no more paper bills. Monopoly's trademark funny money has gone digital. A computer banker sits in the center of the "Revolution" board. Players spread the money around by using novelty debit cards. Good news for parents: No more picking up colored bills all over the house. Bad news for older siblings: No more sneaking extra cash under the table. Some special editions of Monopoly already come with faux ATMs – it's only a matter of time before kids figure out new ways to "game" the system.
Third, inflation hit Monopoly-ville. As you pass Go, you do not collect $200. Instead, you earn $2 million. Hasbro says all of the prices have been jacked up to better represent today's financial market.
Finally, the sound of money. As in good movies, music will punctuate the action. Clips of pop songs, such as Rihanna’s "Umbrella," Daniel Powter’s "Bad Day," and Beyonce's "Crazy in Love," will ring out during the game.
---
Like the new edition? Disappointed? What would you add to Monopoly? Let the world know in the comments section below, and learn more about tech culture through our Twitter feed.
Hachette emerges as new challenger in Amazon pricing war
As the launch of the Apple iPad grows nearer, the spat between book publishers and Amazon is getting louder. First, let's get you up to date: Macmillan, one of the biggest publishers in the US, doesn't like Amazon's policy of charging $9.99 for every e-book. Amazon, on the other hand, doesn't want to listen to anymore complaints from the suits over at Macmillan, and last weekend, the online bookseller temporarily barred sales of thousands of Macmillan titles.
On Monday, Amazon issued a terse press release, capitulating to Macmillan's request that publishers be able to set their own e-book prices. "We accept Macmillan's terms because Macmillan has a monopoly over their own titles," an Amazon rep wrote, "and we will want to offer them to you even at prices we believe are needlessly high for e-books. Amazon customers will at that point decide for themselves whether they believe it's reasonable to pay $14.99 for a bestselling e-book."
It's not yet clear what Amazon customers believe about the whole kerfuffle. What is clear is that Macmillan has succeeded to rousing the ire of its fellow publishers. Simon and Schuster are reportedly considering joining Macmillan in making a stand against Amazon, and on Friday, David Young, the chairman and CEO of Hachette Book Group, said his company would demand higher rates for its titles.
“It's important to note that we are not looking to the agency model as a way to make more money on e-books,” Young wrote in a letter to agents picked up by Mediabistro. “We're willing to accept lower return for e-book sales as we control the value of our product--books, and content in general. We're taking the long view on e-book pricing, and this new model helps protect the long term viability of the book marketplace.”
Let's do some quick translation here: the "agency" model mentioned by Young means a model where the publisher can set the price range for the title. Currently, Amazon sells e-books for ten bucks, and does not allow publishers to vacillate from that price point. Hachette and Macmillan, crucially, are not asking to set their own price because they want to immediately make more cash on the transaction.
Instead, as Young notes, they're taking the "long view" – arguing, in essence, that e-books should be valued more highly than they are currently valued by Amazon. Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos hasn't commented on the situation yet, but the impending release of the Apple iPad puts pressure on Bezos to settle the situation before Hachette and Macmillan pick up their toys, and go home to Apple.
--
For more from the Horizons team, follow us on Twitter.
Facebook users content with redesign. For now.
If Facebook has learned one thing over the past couple years, it's this: You don't change any part of Facebook without half of its users working themselves into a tremendous snit. The most recent flare-up happened back in October, when the popular social network rolled out a minor redesign of its status feed.
Fireworks!
Twitter was ablaze with Facebook haters, and our comments section filled up with angry letters.
"I don’t mind having options," a reader named Dave told us. "I just wish [F]acebook hadn’t forced everyone to change... Why not let users pick which design they wish to use? It’s all electronic, so it’s not like there’s a lot of wasted paper or resources involved in offering users different display formats." It was a pretty widely held sentiment: Listen, Facebook, it's cool that you're going to changing everything on us, but let us choose what we like best.
Well, guess what? On Thursday night, Facebook began implementing another redesign, this time of its homepage. The idea is that users will now find it easier to access the most important stuff – the games, the apps, the picture tags. Among the best new features – all of which are documented at length over at PC World, if you're interested – is a one-click notification icon, allowing you to easily access new activity on your profile or on a friend's.
Horizons like this Facebook redesign. And surprisingly – wait for it – everyone out there in cyberspace seems to like it, too. There are no tirades on Twitter; no hastily-organized protest groups. Yes, there are a handful of angry comments on the official Facebook blog, but more users are willing to stand up for this redesign.
"Don't know if this has already been said," one Facebook user wrote in the comments section of the blog today, "but why doesn't everybody stop whining and moaning. [T]his is a service that is provided completely free and without obligation. If you don't like, don't use it." Well said, sir.
---
What about you? Are you a fan of the new Facebook? Drop us a line in the comments section, or contact us on Twitter @CSMHorizonsBlog.
