Rick Rant

Views and opinions on the latest news and hot topics for computer business owners and other IT service professionals.

Microsoft debuts first Seinfeld ad – What’s up with that?

by

Microsoft debuted the first in a series of TV spots starring Jerry Seinfeld Thursday night – to overwhelmingly negative reviews.

The ad, a long one-and-a-half minute commercial that aired on NBC during the NFL season kick-off, features Seinfeld at a shoe store helping Bill Gates buy a new pair of shoes. The ad was the first of a series of commercials to star Seinfeld and Gates at a cost of  $300 million. Seinfeld was purportedly paid $10 million for his part.

 
 

According to Microsoft, the commercials are designed as a viral marketing campaign to change Microsoft’s image from an old, stodgy dinosaur into that of a younger, hipper company like Apple. The question is, can they do it?

Initial response to the first ad was overwhelmingly negative. Reviews from news organizations on the Internet and reaction throughout the blogosphere blasted the ad as an unfunny pitch about nothing and suggested that Microsoft has already lost this one right out of the gate. Perhaps they have. Then again, perhaps we were all set up and the ad was actually an overwhelming success.

A lot of critics who posted negative reviews of the ad would probably call me a nut case for suggesting such a thing and anyone who saw the ad could certainly understand why. Even Microsoft fanboys are blasting the ad, calling it everything from dull to dimwitted. Sure, I was not impressed with it either, but I also noticed the ad had more than one layer to it, contained some obvious metaphors, and actually attempted to be coy. I also picked up on the term ‘viral marketing’ that is used to describe the intent of the entire campaign. I suspect that something else is going on here and both traditional and new media types are being played.

The key to this is “‘viral marketing “.

To understand what I am trying to say, it is important to understand what viral marketing is. The term itself is somewhat new, having been coined circa 1996 and attributed to author and Harvard professor Jeffrey Rayport in an article for Fast Company, according to Wikipedia .The concept centers around the use of social networking and word-of-mouth campaigns to sell products and services and to create brand awareness. It is a type of stealth marketing that sells by popular suggestion and referral as apposed to a direct sales pitch and is considered to be more effective in some venues, particularly on the Internet.

Consider this. Microsoft generated a lot of industry buzz during the last few weeks when it first announced the campaign. They told us what they were going to do, who they signed on to do it and how much it would ultimately cost. They built up great (although skeptical) expectations, speculation and a lot of hype, most of which was actually created not by Redmond itself, but by the news media and bloggers.

Then came the debut and the let down. People heard the name Seinfeld. We heard $300 million. We heard Microsoft. We expected a lavish production , a great performance (from Seinfeld, not Gates) and  most of all, we expected it to be entertaining and funny. Our expectations, although full of scepticism,  were high. Then it aired. It was not exactly what people were expecting.

Of course, the reaction was immediate. The Microsoft fans were disappointed and angry. The Microsoft detractors had more fodder to feed upon. The net was alive with the cacophony that ensued.

Okay, the concensus is that the ad was a bust. Was it?

Think about this. What if the ad had been really, really good? What if it was in-your-face funny and the message was spot-on? Would it have had as much coverage the day after? Would people be talking about it as much as they are now? Even if it was a hilarious one-and-a-half minute stand up routine, chances are it would all be forgotten by now. The old saying that there is no such thing as bad publicity still holds true.

Remember, the word for today is ‘viral marketing’.  Good or bad, this was the overall intent of the campaign, was it not? The mainsteam media is mainstreaming it. The Bloggers are blogging about it. Podcasters are podcasting it. The buzz is everywhere.

It may not have been what people were expecting, or even what they wanted to watch. But from a viral marketing perspective, it was certainly not a bust. Au Contraire, it was very effective. It got noticed. That, I believe, was the real hook. Redmond played and manipulated the mainstream media and the bloggers and they hardly even noticed it. Good or bad, I think Microsoft definitely got their money’s worth on that one.

 

 

Free Microsoft Mobile Business Resource Kit

Microsoft and IE: losing browser market share or just losing it?

by

Microsoft announced the release of Internet Explorer 8 beta 2 this week. The new version brings the promise of a new era in online productivity and W3C compliant web browsing. However, the second beta, which supposedly is an improvement on the first, also came a couple of caveats.

First, if you have Windows XP SP3, in order to install IE8 Beta 2, you must first uninstall beta 1. In order to uninstall beta 1, you must first uninstall SP3, remove beta 1 and reinstall SP3. If you install beta 2 with Windows XP SP3, you won’t be able to uninstall either the service pack or the browser. According to a statement posted on the IEBlog by Microsoft Program Manager Jane Maliouta,  the installation becomes permanent. You can upgrade to later builds of IE 8 but you won’t be able to remove the browser or SP3.

Second, as listed in the release notes, Internet Explorer 8 beta 2 has known compatibility issues with numerous applications, both third-party and Microsoft. Apparently some of these issues existed in the first beta as well, including a major incompatibility with one of Microsoft’s own applications, Visual Studio .NET 7.

When software reaches beta it is usually theoretically in a state where major bugs are addressed and the software is only a step or two away from production. When the software is in beta, it usually means it is ready for usability testing in a real-world environment. Normally a browser application wouldn’t necessarily need such serious scrutiny for compatibility with other independent applications. But this is IE, which, once installed, becomes embedded with Windows.

The inability to be uninstalled in its native OS without practically reinstalling the OS itself (once SP3 is installed it becomes part of the OS) and the issues it has with at least two of Microsoft’s own applications are serious issues. Many software companies would consider such major bugs as software still in alpha, not beta and would take the time to fix them. Mozilla is one example of a company that does this.

The fact that Microsoft was fully aware of these issues when it was in beta 1 and still released them in beta 2 instead of addressing them first tells me that they are rushing to release instead of ensuring stability for beta testing.

Remember, this is the second beta. Theoretically the second beta addresses the bugs found by testers of the first beta. Yet these major bugs purportedly exist in beta 2 as well.  What other bugs were not fixed? Ask other beta testers if they want to waste their time logging the same bugs in beta 2 they logged in beta 1. Given this scenario from their point of view, how productive is that?

So, if IE8 beta has so many issues, why even beta test it? I mean, after all, this is a mega giant software company, the largest and most powerful software company in the world. They created this thing called IE8. It’s their little monster. They can essentially write the code to  make it do what they want.

Are they that lazy that it is just easier to release it with a disclaimer than to just make it work right to begin with? Or are they in such a hurry to get it to market and stop the leak in market share to Firefox that they just don’t have the time to bother with it?

It may be a little of both, however I contend it is the latter. Given their rush to market with Vista I surmise this is becoming their modus operandi. Apparently they didn’t learn anything from the Vista launch.

Microsoft is losing market share in the browser arena, confidence in the operating system market, trust among the developers and credibility overall.

In other words, I think Microsoft is losing it.

 

 

Sitepoint

 

Astronauts discover malware in space

by

Think you can escape the evil of malware infestations by leaving the planet? Think again. Malware can be found anywhere now, even in space.

Computerworld posted an article today revealing that astronauts on board the International Space Station discovered it on one of their laptops, and according to NASA, apparently it is not the first time.

The malware was allegedly identified as W32.Gammima.AG by SpaceRef.com. it was discovered by Russian astronaut Sergey Volkov last month. Volkov was scanning flash cards for viruses on a Russian laptop when the worm was found. According to the International Space Station Daily Report for Friday August 22, NASA reported the space agency uploaded Norton AntiVirus to the space station the day before to install on the laptop and remove the malware. “All A31p laptops onboard are currently being loaded with latest NAV software and updated definition files for increased protection”, NASA said in the report.

Of course, the worm didn’t originate off-world, it was carried up there, but that makes it all the scarier. The simple truth is that when it comes to avoiding badware, there really is no escape. 

There is a lot more we can say about it all, but the only thing I really want to know is this. Why Norton? Surely NASA could do better than that. No wonder we haven’t sent a man to Mars yet. I know NASA is on a budget and they are not exactly in the anti-malware business, but Norton? Sheesh. I hope it wasn’t the trial version.

Then again, if they are using Norton, that means they are also probably using Windows. Hmm.

On second thought, Is this something we really want to know?

 

 

Myfax Free Trial

 

 

Judge says cell phone early termination fees illegal

by

Californians may get a break from their cell phone companies – a big one. Late last month Judge Bonnie Sabraw, a Superior Court Judge in Alameda County, ruled that cell phone carriers that charged customers early termination fees for canceling their contracts did so in violation of state law.

In a class action lawsuit against Sprint Nextel that challenged the charging of early termination fees on contracts, the judge rules that the practice was against the law and ordered the company to pay over $18 million to Sprint customers in California. 

Of course, Sprint plans to appeal the ruling but if it stands, it could be the beginning of a nationwide consumer revolt. There are other such lawsuits across the country that challenge the fees and this ruling, while only a preliminary one, invites more of the same.

Cell companies do not like this at all. In fact, they are heavily lobbying the Federal Communications Commission to regulate the fee and protect cell phone carriers from future lawsuits. FCC Chairman Kevin Martin has already publicly proposed an initiative to prorate the fees during the period of the service contract.

Sprint Nextel claims the charges are reasonable and necessary to offset the cost of the cell phones offered in contract, which they maintain are sold to users below cost. However, the popular opinion among cell phone users and apparently, that of the judge herself, is that the fees are in place to discourage users from dropping the service and switching to another carrier.

I despise cell phone service contracts and I think they are very bad for consumers. If you are stuck with a carrier that doesn’t deliver services to your satisfaction, you are stuck. I wouldn’t mind paying more for a cell phone if it would mean I am a free agent and can fire the company and hire another one to serve me anytime I want without penalty.

This is also why I don’t own an iPhone. When I purchase a cell phone – or any tangible product –  I want the freedom to choose when and how it will used. I don’t like to be told to pay a premium for a mobile device and told who my carrier will be. I don’t appreciate being locked into a contract at overpriced rates just to have a pretty phone. If I like the phone but I don’t like the service, I want to be able to switch to a service that I feel serves my needs. If I can’t, the phone isn’t worth the money that created it.

If the sole reason for early cancellation fees is to offset the cost of the phone, there’s a simple solution: sell the phone for what it’s worth and ditch the fees. So, what If you BYOP (Bring Your Own Phone) and order service? Are you offered open monthly service or a contract without cancellation fees? Apparently not, or at least not that I could locate when I searched the Sprint Nextel web site.

I did find one thing. Included in their Terms and Conditions,  which is located behind links buried within the individual service plans listed on their site, is a clause stating that by signing the agreement, Sprint Nextel customers waive the right to pursue or join a class action lawsuit.

Cuil search has potential but needs work

by

I am all for competition by creating new and innovative ways to perform common and standard tasks. Given the current state of the search industry with few serious contenders, the prospect of one major player partnering with the other one in specific areas and the possibility of that search engine’s sale to another, the announcement of a new guy on the block is a big deal. So, when news broke of the launch of a new search engine called Cuil with the potential to stand with the likes of Google and Yahoo I was there, ready to give it a go.

Of course, I was a little skeptical at the news but put my preconceived notions aside to give it a fair shake. For all I knew it could be everything it was hyped to be and more. The only way to find out was to try it for myself, which I did.

After playing around with this new search tool my first impression is rather mixed. I can’t say that I am disappointed but I can understand why a lot of others are. Disappointed is a strong word for me in this case; it denotes an attitude of final judgement that I do not want to convey. I prefer to say that it has potential. I think it does, although it will take time and tweaking to get there.

It looks different, no doubt about that. Like many others who have opined on the net, I was a little put off and disoriented by the layout of the search results. We are all generally accustomed to lists of links and content clips that are easy to scan and scroll from top to bottom, with those deemed by the search engine as most relevant listed on top. The results of a typical search on Cuil are spread across the page in a combination of titles, descriptions and pictures that at first glance (and for me continuously, if I stare at the page for awhile trying to sort out the sort order) appears to have little or no hierarchy in terms of search relevance.

I suppose one could get used to it over time and in an odd way it does seem more aesthetic, however if there is a logical order or relevance to the search results I just didn’t see it on the searches I did. In fact, I looked at eighteen pages of one set of search results that had over a million hits and found that many of them were nearly complete duplicates of previous pages, which was very confusing and more than a little annoying. The redundant listings of entire pages was a time waster for me, especially given the fact that each page was somewhat slow to load. I ended the search with the notion that if it wasn’t on the first two or three pages, it wasn’t worth checking further.

Of course, the very first search I tried was The Force Field. Type The Force Field in Google and the web site www.theforcefield.net is usually at the top of the search results. Type it in Yahoo and you get the same. Search it in Dogpile and it is in the top four. Cuil ? Not even directly listed.

Now, it’s only been around for a couple of days and it takes time for search bots to scour billions of pages on the web, so I didn’t exactly expect Cuil to list it in the top ten. But the hype was that Cuil was already the largest repository of indexed pages on the net, claiming to be much larger than Google. So I expected at least one page from The Force Field dot Net to be listed in the search results. I searched through numerous pages in the returns and it wasn’t there. Yet several other sites that were generally lower on a Google or Yahoo search were listed right there on the first page of listings in a Cuil search.

Now, there were listings for other sites that referenced or linked to The Force Field and The Force Field podcast, quite a few, in fact. There was just no direct listing for the home page of the site itself.

Okay, they didn’t list The Force Field. Hey, it’s not as if we’re a big company like Microsoft , is it? Well, it might as well be, because during another search session I typed in Microsoft. Guess what?  There were numerous third party references to Microsoft and Microsoft products but a link to their home page, which I would expect to show at the top of the first page, wasn’t the first item displayed, as I would have expected. The links to the website were there but some of the titles didn’t seem to match the search query. Mixed in were seemingly irrelevant entries to other sites with no apparent relation to Microsoft. I mean, this is Microsoft, one of the most universal household names and one of the most high profile web sites in the world. Just another listing on a targeted search? Now, that just isn’t natural.

But that was only a minor bug for me. The real annoyance was not the listings themselves but the other items attached to them – the pictures.

For every search I did, the results returned included site links accompanied by pictures that were completely unrelated to the sites. For instance, I did a search for The Force Field in search of a link to www.theforcefield.net and the same pictures kept cycling through on the listings. None of them were related to The Force Field podcast or the web portal. Few of them were actually related to the sites they linked to.

I then ran a search for The Force Field podcast. This time there were a few hits for the show, but again, the same unrelated pictures, none of which were actually connected to the show, the site or the sites that referenced or linked them. This was just plain weird. The concept of a more graphical search is nice, however it is somewhat confusing and a bit annoying when the pictures don’t actually represent the page listed or anything remotely connected to it.

Now, my initial foray into Cuil was not at all scientific nor was it organized. I was just another user searching the web. But then, isn’t that a real world scenario for using a search engine? If searches like mine are normal, what can we normally expect based on the results I experienced?

I know I sound too critical and it isn’t my intention. I am just reporting my first impressions of Cuil. Overall I like the concept and the layout of the site is something that, while unconventional for me, is something I could probably become accustomed to and possibly prefer over traditional formats in time. However, I do think it needs some work and a lot more tweaking to get it to the point where it becomes a serious contender for the search market. It’s a great concept, I just don’t think it’s there yet. Before we pass judgement on it, we need to give it some time.

This is an ambitious project and I wish it success.

Have you tried Cuil? Have you had a similar experience with it or do you get completely different (good or bad) results? What do you think?

With Yahoo, it is all or nothing and bad for us

by

IDG News Service reports that Yahoo has rejected Microsoft’s latest bid proposal. The reason? Yahoo wants to sell out completely – or not at all. If Microsoft buys that, it is bad news for consumers.

 For those who have been off-world during the last few months, Microsoft has been in on-again, off-again negotiations with Yahoo to purchase all or part of the search company. In what seemed like a done deal, Microsoft initially offered purportedly more for the stock than it was actually worth and Yahoo upped the price even further at $33 a share, more than realistic and certainly more then Microsoft was willing to pay. Yahoo did everything it could to resist – even to the the point of making a back-door deal with its rival Google that raised everyone’s eyebrows and could command the attention of the SEC.

Microsoft then walked away from the bargaining table and vowed never to return. But wait, barely a week later they were back, at first  behind the back alley, then through the front door, asking to buy only specific portions of the company.

Now Yahoo is doing an about-face, largely thanks to shareholder Carl Icahn and his followers on the Yahoo Board of Directors who actually want to sell to Microsoft  for that big Yahoo! shareholder payoff in the sky. Yahoo Chairman Roy Bostock still opposes the idea altogether but Ballmer and Icahn are really twisting his arms. Faced with the prospect of being replaced with MS-Icahn puppets, Bostock and company apparently are desperate and are now willing to talk whole bean.

Friday evening Microsoft sent Yahoo an enticing offer for a partial purchase with a 24 hour deadline. Saturday Yahoo responded with a firm rejection. They won’t just sell part of the company, they want to sell it all.

Icahn is clearly an opportunist here and is thinking of his shares. Microsoft, of course, is thinking about, well, Microsoft. No one is thinking about what this would mean for the industry overall, and most importantly, the customer.

The Microsoft-Yahoo deal is the talk of the media. There are many who think Microsoft Yahoo would be a great combination and would prevent a monopoly that Google is threatening to become. Yet, despite the fact that Google and Search are nearly synonymous, there are other choices out there, for now.

 While Microsoft’s current search product is hardly worth mentioning, it is still one more competitor to offer users choice in the marketplace. Once they purchase Yahoo (and I think it is only a matter of when, not if) Microsoft and Google will have the combined market share to render all other search engines essentially nonexistent. The two Super Searches  will also have the eventual power to possibly do the same for online advertising, SEO and other marketing venues.

Then there is the question of web applications.

What will happen to consumer choice once a majority of them are owned by two mega giant web companies? Who will control the SaaS market? Who will control access to free or Open Source web apps?

A few months ago our own Todd Hughes blogged about the dangers of a Microsoft-Yahoo deal for Zimbra. Zimbra is an OS application developed by Yahoo and is the only serious Linux alternative for Microsoft Outlook and Exchange. Microsoft has insisted that their primary interest in Yahoo is for the search engine. However, if Microsoft buys Yahoo – all of it – they will then own Zimbra.

Microsoft is not a fan of Open Source. Although they have recently made overtures to the contrary (mostly to help them push OOXML through the ISO fast track to become an Open Standard and for other personal gain) they have also made it clear that they are an enemy of the Open Source movement and seek to control or destroy it on several fronts.

When Microsoft buys Yahoo and has Zimbra, what will they do with it? What will they do with other open source code in Yahoo’s portfolio? What will they do with the patents? They can say anything to appease the public. The question is, given their history of aggression against the Open Source movement and their anti-competitive practices in general, do you trust them?

I don’t. That is why I think this deal, while great for Icahn and Microsoft, is very bad for us.

Is Dell in collusion with the RIAA?

by

Reports are spreading on sites and blogs across the Internet of an audio problem in which the stereo mix function is disabled in some newer PCs with Sigmatel sound cards – most notably Dells. While the issue is not a new one one, the talk is now centered on the question of why. Users are now putting the blame on the most hated organization in America, the RIAA.

According to these reports, the problem may not be a driver glitch, but intentional crippling of the audio by Dell and possibly several other OEMs that build their computers with these sound cards. The reason? Alleged appeasement of the RIAA.

The stereo mix feature is necessary for audio recording applications.  This includes the creation of original recordings as well as duplication of existing audio. It also includes the use of certain applications such as Skype.

The chronic problem has fueled recent rumours of possible collusion between major OEMs (especially Dell) and the RIAA, suggesting the latter, known for its aggressive anti-piracy stance and numerous lawsuits against end users both young and old alike, is pressuring Dell and other companies to disable the feature to deter piracy. Although neither Dell nor the RIAA have stepped up to confirm nor deny the allegations, such silence seems to have only fueled the concept of conspiracy by the RIAA to intentionally disable audio recording capability or control it.

If this is true, the RIAA, and possibly the OEMs as well, have clearly crossed the line. Aside from the dangers of collusion there is the issue of the rights of property owners. Commercial software companies like Microsoft may be able to get away with controlling the use of an operating system or application by the force of their license agreements but users still own the hardware itself and have the right to use it as they choose. To attempt to cripple, disable or otherwise deny access to or the use of the user’s own property, namely the PC, is very serious and needs to be addressed.

To sell a crippled PC out of the box without notification could invite lawsuits. To intentionally sabotage someone’s property could be considered criminal. If allowed, it could set a dangerous precedent against personal property and privacy rights.

Is there some truth to these allegations or is it merely conjecture on the part of angry and frustrated users? There seems to be no definitive proof either way. However, it needs to be investigated quickly, if not to confront the question, then at least to stop the rumours and put the issue to rest.

 

 

AVTechnology

 

 

Contributors needed for new TechiWiki Project

by

As you all know, The Force Field podcast and web portal cover the business side of running a tech business. But the business side isn’t all there is to running one. There is the tech side, too.

Those who know me and listen to The Force Field know that I have discussed the pros and cons of being a “MacGyvertech” in our computer business. Although I have sometimes talked about the advantages of specializing in a certain area instead of trying to be everything, there are times when all of us need to be that “MacGyvertech”.

I myself was nicknamed “MacGyver” when I worked at WRBW-TV in the mid 90’s for finding ways to patch things together and make it work.I realized since then that no matter how much you want to specialize there is always that situation where you do need to do it all yourself.

During the last few months I’ve been working on another project to complement The Force Field and open up to a larger audience. The new project is designed to be community driven depends on the collective knowledge and experience of techs everywhere. This project is very large in scope and it greater than I alone can handle. I need your help.

To all members of The Force Field: I am actively seeking submissions and contributions of content for a new sister site now in beta. The site has a main portal and forums, much like The Force Field. The main area of the site, however is much different and exists on community managed content. In particular, tech related, how-to content.

It is a TechiWiki .

This is intended as a comprehensive database of picks, tips, tricks and techniques for everything tech. The concept is to provide an instant resource for techs, partiularly those in the field, who need a fix in a pinch, without having to call around to their buddies, slogging through hundreds of tech forums or googling through thousands of listings for an answer.

I am calling on members of The Force Field and techs everywhere to contribute to the wiki and make it worki for all of us.

To participate, go to http://www.macgyvertech.com and join the forums or the wiki.

Thanks!

Rick

The Force Field SysAdmin Response

by

Keith Albright from the Mind of Root podcast started a SysAdmin/Scripting Meme and called me out this week to answer the questions. I had to really think about them for awhile as some of it takes me back a few years. it’s a little fuzzy but I will do the best I can to answer them.

 

How old were you when you started using computers?

I was somewhat fascinated with the concept of computers as depicted in science fiction films when I was a kid and looked forward to a future when I could have and use one myself. I grew up watching movies such as Colossus: The Forbin Project, 2001: a Space Odyssey and TV shows such as Lost in Space and Star Trek, all of which featured computers with artificial intelligence. I thought the Batman series in the ’60s was cool because he had a computer in the Bat Cave that somehow seemed to know everything. Some of my favorite movies and TV shows were enjoyable for the technology factor alone.

It wasn’t until I was in my 20’s that computers were made affordable and easily accessible to the public, but as soon as I could afford it I purchased one. That was in 1982.

 

What was your first machine?

My very first real computer was a Commodore Pet 2001. I couldn’t afford a new one, so I purchased it used for around $300. It had a built-in 9 in. display, cassette tape drive and a little chicklet keyboard. The computer had a whopping 8k of memory which consisted of a set of static RAM chips socketed to a mainboard that blew frequently. I found a supplier for chips and replaced them as necessary. The computer was a course in computer repair. The first thing I learned about it was ESD.

 

What was the first real script you wrote?

My Commodore PET required knowledge of BASIC and I had to learn it in order to write my own programs. I recall writing a simple database script to catalog stuff. I also recall Hello World and a couple of other exercises but I don’t remember which was actually the first. When I purchased a Commodore VIC 20 and later a Commodore 64 I wrote a few other BASIC programs for myself but by that time there was so much software available for the 64 I didn’t need to do much scripting and only used BASIC to fix bugs in existing programs.

 

What scripting languages have you used?

I dabbled in Commodore Basic, some batch file scripts in MS-DOS, a little PHP (not a guru but I can tweak existing code) but I am not a programmer and have little patience for it. There are so many useful free scripts out there now that I can usually find what I need and tweak it instead of writing it myself.

 

What was your first professional sysadmin gig?

I ran my own computer business for nearly eleven years and act as SysAdmin to a few of my business clients. My first paid job as an outsource Admin was for a pain management clinic and the first thing I had to do was clean their network and all their backup media of virii. It was a massive infection. The second thing I had to do was bring them into license compliance and then build a new server, new workstations and the latest version of their medical software. Then I completely rebuilt their network.

If you knew then what you know now, would you have started in IT?

Good question. I would probably still be doing something related to IT but I would have done a lot of things differently and I probably would have stayed more focused on the web and media related aspects of IT instead of working with hardware and small business networks. To be honest, I would rather research, write and talk about IT and emerging new technologies than stare at a file server all day.

If there is one thing you learned along the way that you would tell new sysadmins, what would it be?

Listen to everyone, especially end users. Keep an open mind and research everything before making decisions. Never assume anything and always assume the worst. Keep your ear close to the ground. Stay alert to new trends, techniques and technologies and think of ways you can utilize their potential in your network.

And finally, whatever you do, don’t cut the red wire.

 

What’s the most fun you’ve ever had scripting?

I never really had fun scripting. It is just something I do when I have to do it. Well, I did have some fun with Hello World. It was a chore after that.

 

 Who am I calling out?

All listeners and members of The Force Field! 

 

You can hear the Mind of Root podcast on The TechPodcast Network . It is also available in the Media Center here at TheForceField.Net.

 

 

System Management News

 

 

Twitter – a serious marketing tool?

by

Recently I was surfing around the various tech forums and noticed the same question posted everywhere asking what is quickly becoming an almost universal catch phrase. “Do you Twitter?” Not surprisingly, one of the first responses is invariably an almost classic one. “What’s a Twitter?”

If you are one of those respondents, don’t be ashamed. Twitter is a fairly recent phenomenon in the social networking space. It is a free “microblogging” service that allows mobile users and others to connect with one another in quick text message blasts consisting of 140 characters or less. Twitter was officially launched in October 2006 and quickly grew in popularity among the social networking crowd. More recently, however, Twitter has enjoyed a surge in popularity and growth. It is so popular, in fact, that it suffers from periodic glitches and down times from overload, or “too many tweets.” One such outage occurred as recently as this morning.

With this surge in popularity comes potential opportunity. Where there are people, there is an audience. Where there is an audience, there is a potential market. Where there is a market, there are potential customers for your products and services. There is potential here.

I first found Twitter within the podcast community while searching for new ways to promote The Force Field. I admit I thought it rather juvenile at first and was actually astonished to find so many other people and organizations who were already connected to hundreds, and in some cases thousands of other people – often complete strangers – who were sending messages to each other. I thought it was completely bizarre, but immediately realized how powerful the concept was, considering that these social connections were virally stimulating even more connections.

I believe it helped fuel the growth of both the podcast and the web site in recent weeks.

I also discovered that many other companies and organizations have already realized the marketing potential of Twitter and are using it to promote their products and services to an entirely new space. They are using it to advertise and communicate with their customers and potential customers in a more interactive and personal way than with traditional media. Building relationships with customers in this way can potentially have a great impact on brand awareness, customer loyalty and, ultimately, the bottom line.

Best of all, it’s free, and you can’t beat free.

A couple of weeks ago I polled the Providers in the OnForce forums to find out if anyone else was thinking about using Twitter as a marketing tool for their business. Interestingly enough,  75% of those polled chose “What the heck is a Twitter?” These are folks in the IT industry, the ones who are supposedly on the cusp of technology, new forms of communication and new trends. Strange.

I view this as a potentially powerful tool for communication, marketing and support. Imagine setting up a Twitter account for your business and telling your customers about it. Suddenly they have an instant line to you when they need you – then you answer when you are ready for them. You have an instant line to them when you have a new ad or coupon to deliver or a special to promote. You and your customer have an instant line for support in a pinch.

Likewise, imagine if techs were connected to each other this way, they could support one another when in the field when a peer is in a pinch.

There likely other uses for Twitter as well that are yet to be developed. For now, the marketing potential alone is sufficient to justify an account. The question is, if it can be used as a tool to market your business, would you utilize it?

You can Twitter me @theforcefield.

http://www.twitter.com/theforcefield

 

 

Systems Management News