Google and Verizon Near Deal on Pay Tiers for the Web

Why shouldn't some content on the web move faster than other content. Is it a good idea that video moves the same speed as an email?

See article below.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/05/technology/05secret.html

Google and Verizon, two leading players in Internet service and content, are nearing an agreement that could allow Verizon to speed some online content to Internet users more quickly if the content’s creators are willing to pay for the privilege.

The charges could be paid by companies, like YouTube, owned by Google, for example, to Verizon, one of the nation’s leading Internet service providers, to ensure that its content received priority as it made its way to consumers. The agreement could eventually lead to higher charges for Internet users.

Such an agreement could overthrow a once-sacred tenet of Internet policy known as net neutrality, in which no form of content is favored over another. In its place, consumers could soon see a new, tiered system, which, like cable television, imposes higher costs for premium levels of service.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Google, Verizon Banish Net Neutrality with Tiered-Pricing Plan (patspapers.com)
• Google and Verizon Near Deal on Pay Tiers for Web (telcojobsbloggers.com)
• Google and Verizon Test Net Neutrality (outsidethebeltway.com)
• Google And Verizon Almost In Agreement On Plot To Overthrow Net Neutrality [Net Neutrality] (gizmodo.com)

Scopus and Google Scholar

I've had the opportunity to work with the Scopus database and Google Scholar. Google Scholar isn't very good for the following reasons:

1. Exporting to Refworks is tedious. There isn't an option to mark citations and export all at once. Each citation has to be exported one at a time.
2. The advanced search feature isn't all that advanced. The facets available to narrow searches are limited. For example, a user can't limit the search by name of journal (like in Scopus).
3. A user can't save previous searches.
   

Google Pitches a Web-Centric Future

http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/05/19/google-pitches-a-web-centric-future/?ref=technology

Google delivered its vision of a Web-centric future on Wednesday in front of around 5,000 software developers at its annual Google I/O conference.

The presentation was unapologetically geeky, steeped in the language and minutiae of the technical standards that will drive the next wave of innovation on the Internet. For the Google faithful, at least, the meal was hearty.

Google’s vision of the future is starkly different from those laid out by its rivals Apple and Microsoft, and calls for rich multimedia applications that operate within the browser — without the separate applications that people now download to their PC desktops or mobile phones.

I like the idea of applications living in the cloud or server-side, rather than on my machine. I think it's an accessibility issue, really. I don't have to download an add-on or have any special applications in order to view the web content. From the web content provider, they can reach the widest possible audience in a way that doesn't ask the user to do anything special, or have any special application available on their machine. Plus, all the tinkering on the application can be done without asking users to make updates.

Can the iPad or the Kindle save book publishers?

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=126196977

I still see a role for publishers in the future of the book business. They weed out books that should not be published. Publishers also bring their marketing skills to help introduce and sell their books to the public. Their value proposition to authors should be that they can put their books in as many places as possible in order to sell them. I don't know many authors who want to spend the time dealing with retailers and wholesalers in order to have their book on the market.

Publishers are not threatened. Their past level of profits may be threatened, but their role is still necessary. If people start to buy e-books in greater numbers than print versions, and the prices people are willing to pay come down, then publishers will have to figure out ways to deliver their services even though they are making less money. Print marketing campaigns may be replaced with cheaper online campaigns. Different ways of marketing books may also be explored.

With less money to go around because book sales are down overall, publishers need to be innovative if they want to stay in business. Someone is going to fill their role if they fail.

Amazon, Apple, and Google all have a vested interest in selling books. Although I don't believe the existence of those companies depends on how many books they sell. That being said, people are still buying books and none of the companies would turn their backs on the revenue in selling books to readers. The fighting about formats and containers to read the books is hurting everyone. Customers shouldn't be tied to one format or one company in order to buy a book. The iPad seems to take that into account, which is perhaps a strength for Apple and the iPad. I think customers will gravitate toward a device that doesn't make them think about where they need to buy their next e-book.

I think everyone mentioned in the podcast has a role. Publishers help select books worthy of publishing and leverage their brand of professional marketing. The retailers like Amazon and Apple have content to sell. The author alluded to the fact that Google can't depend on advertising dollars as much and may need the book sales as another revenue stream.

One problem I see with Google is that I believe people will have a hard time being charged by Google. People believe Google is free and I think Google will have a hard time convincing customers to pay them for anything. Thus, I think the more successful model is where the publishers continue to price the product where it must be in order to maximize sales.

I wonder if books will be priced by the chapter, like music is priced by the song. Pay for what you read when you read it versus paying for the entire book all at once. I like a pay as you go system.