Archive for the ‘Products’ Category

Introducing Cthulhu Coffee

Tuesday, January 3rd, 2012

This letter from David Stutz is back from 2003, try but still seems to me to be relevant. I found this via a post by Cory on BoingBoing.

Read on and enjoy

Digging in against open source commoditization won’t work – it would be like digging in against the Internet, endocrinologist which Microsoft tried for a while before getting wise. Any move towards cutting off alternatives by limiting interoperability or integration options would be fraught with danger, viagra buy since it would enrage customers, accelerate the divergence of the open source platform, and have other undesirable results. Despite this, Microsoft is at risk of following this path, due to the corporate delusion that goes by many names: “better together,” “unified platform,” and “integrated software.” There is false hope in Redmond that these outmoded approaches to software integration will attract and keep international markets, governments, academics, and most importantly, innovators, safely within the Microsoft sphere of influence. But they won’t.

Exciting new networked applications are being written. Time is not standing still. Microsoft must survive and prosper by learning from the open source software movement and by borrowing from and improving its techniques. Open source software is as large and powerful a wave as the Internet was, and is rapidly accreting into a legitimate alternative to Windows. It can and should be harnessed. To avoid dire consequences, Microsoft should favor an approach that tolerates and embraces the diversity of the open source approach, especially when network-based integration is involved. There are many clever and motivated people out there, who have many different reasons to avoid buying directly into a Microsoft proprietary stack. Microsoft must employ diplomacy to woo these accounts; stubborn insistence will be both counterproductive and ineffective. Microsoft cannot prosper during the open source wave as an island, with a defenses built out of litigation and proprietary protocols.

I think it’s taken many years, but it does feel like Microsoft is starting to actually do just this.

I have often wondered why they don’t open up their free software to public as open source or shared source. I’d start with the web technologies Internet Explorer, Messenger, and all the Live services applications.

This letter from David Stutz is back from 2003, try but still seems to me to be relevant. I found this via a post by Cory on BoingBoing.

Read on and enjoy

Digging in against open source commoditization won’t work – it would be like digging in against the Internet, endocrinologist which Microsoft tried for a while before getting wise. Any move towards cutting off alternatives by limiting interoperability or integration options would be fraught with danger, viagra buy since it would enrage customers, accelerate the divergence of the open source platform, and have other undesirable results. Despite this, Microsoft is at risk of following this path, due to the corporate delusion that goes by many names: “better together,” “unified platform,” and “integrated software.” There is false hope in Redmond that these outmoded approaches to software integration will attract and keep international markets, governments, academics, and most importantly, innovators, safely within the Microsoft sphere of influence. But they won’t.

Exciting new networked applications are being written. Time is not standing still. Microsoft must survive and prosper by learning from the open source software movement and by borrowing from and improving its techniques. Open source software is as large and powerful a wave as the Internet was, and is rapidly accreting into a legitimate alternative to Windows. It can and should be harnessed. To avoid dire consequences, Microsoft should favor an approach that tolerates and embraces the diversity of the open source approach, especially when network-based integration is involved. There are many clever and motivated people out there, who have many different reasons to avoid buying directly into a Microsoft proprietary stack. Microsoft must employ diplomacy to woo these accounts; stubborn insistence will be both counterproductive and ineffective. Microsoft cannot prosper during the open source wave as an island, with a defenses built out of litigation and proprietary protocols.

I think it’s taken many years, but it does feel like Microsoft is starting to actually do just this.

I have often wondered why they don’t open up their free software to public as open source or shared source. I’d start with the web technologies Internet Explorer, Messenger, and all the Live services applications.

This letter from David Stutz is back from 2003, try but still seems to me to be relevant. I found this via a post by Cory on BoingBoing.

Read on and enjoy

Digging in against open source commoditization won’t work – it would be like digging in against the Internet, endocrinologist which Microsoft tried for a while before getting wise. Any move towards cutting off alternatives by limiting interoperability or integration options would be fraught with danger, viagra buy since it would enrage customers, accelerate the divergence of the open source platform, and have other undesirable results. Despite this, Microsoft is at risk of following this path, due to the corporate delusion that goes by many names: “better together,” “unified platform,” and “integrated software.” There is false hope in Redmond that these outmoded approaches to software integration will attract and keep international markets, governments, academics, and most importantly, innovators, safely within the Microsoft sphere of influence. But they won’t.

Exciting new networked applications are being written. Time is not standing still. Microsoft must survive and prosper by learning from the open source software movement and by borrowing from and improving its techniques. Open source software is as large and powerful a wave as the Internet was, and is rapidly accreting into a legitimate alternative to Windows. It can and should be harnessed. To avoid dire consequences, Microsoft should favor an approach that tolerates and embraces the diversity of the open source approach, especially when network-based integration is involved. There are many clever and motivated people out there, who have many different reasons to avoid buying directly into a Microsoft proprietary stack. Microsoft must employ diplomacy to woo these accounts; stubborn insistence will be both counterproductive and ineffective. Microsoft cannot prosper during the open source wave as an island, with a defenses built out of litigation and proprietary protocols.

I think it’s taken many years, but it does feel like Microsoft is starting to actually do just this.

I have often wondered why they don’t open up their free software to public as open source or shared source. I’d start with the web technologies Internet Explorer, Messenger, and all the Live services applications.
This letter from David Stutz is back from 2003, try but still seems to me to be relevant. I found this via a post by Cory on BoingBoing.

Read on and enjoy

Digging in against open source commoditization won’t work – it would be like digging in against the Internet, endocrinologist which Microsoft tried for a while before getting wise. Any move towards cutting off alternatives by limiting interoperability or integration options would be fraught with danger, viagra buy since it would enrage customers, accelerate the divergence of the open source platform, and have other undesirable results. Despite this, Microsoft is at risk of following this path, due to the corporate delusion that goes by many names: “better together,” “unified platform,” and “integrated software.” There is false hope in Redmond that these outmoded approaches to software integration will attract and keep international markets, governments, academics, and most importantly, innovators, safely within the Microsoft sphere of influence. But they won’t.

Exciting new networked applications are being written. Time is not standing still. Microsoft must survive and prosper by learning from the open source software movement and by borrowing from and improving its techniques. Open source software is as large and powerful a wave as the Internet was, and is rapidly accreting into a legitimate alternative to Windows. It can and should be harnessed. To avoid dire consequences, Microsoft should favor an approach that tolerates and embraces the diversity of the open source approach, especially when network-based integration is involved. There are many clever and motivated people out there, who have many different reasons to avoid buying directly into a Microsoft proprietary stack. Microsoft must employ diplomacy to woo these accounts; stubborn insistence will be both counterproductive and ineffective. Microsoft cannot prosper during the open source wave as an island, with a defenses built out of litigation and proprietary protocols.

I think it’s taken many years, but it does feel like Microsoft is starting to actually do just this.

I have often wondered why they don’t open up their free software to public as open source or shared source. I’d start with the web technologies Internet Explorer, Messenger, and all the Live services applications.

RFID & Arduino, mind originally uploaded by futileboy.

Working on a project that will use an RFID tag to unlock a secret admin mode of an application. More to come soon!

This letter from David Stutz is back from 2003, try but still seems to me to be relevant. I found this via a post by Cory on BoingBoing.

Read on and enjoy

Digging in against open source commoditization won’t work – it would be like digging in against the Internet, endocrinologist which Microsoft tried for a while before getting wise. Any move towards cutting off alternatives by limiting interoperability or integration options would be fraught with danger, viagra buy since it would enrage customers, accelerate the divergence of the open source platform, and have other undesirable results. Despite this, Microsoft is at risk of following this path, due to the corporate delusion that goes by many names: “better together,” “unified platform,” and “integrated software.” There is false hope in Redmond that these outmoded approaches to software integration will attract and keep international markets, governments, academics, and most importantly, innovators, safely within the Microsoft sphere of influence. But they won’t.

Exciting new networked applications are being written. Time is not standing still. Microsoft must survive and prosper by learning from the open source software movement and by borrowing from and improving its techniques. Open source software is as large and powerful a wave as the Internet was, and is rapidly accreting into a legitimate alternative to Windows. It can and should be harnessed. To avoid dire consequences, Microsoft should favor an approach that tolerates and embraces the diversity of the open source approach, especially when network-based integration is involved. There are many clever and motivated people out there, who have many different reasons to avoid buying directly into a Microsoft proprietary stack. Microsoft must employ diplomacy to woo these accounts; stubborn insistence will be both counterproductive and ineffective. Microsoft cannot prosper during the open source wave as an island, with a defenses built out of litigation and proprietary protocols.

I think it’s taken many years, but it does feel like Microsoft is starting to actually do just this.

I have often wondered why they don’t open up their free software to public as open source or shared source. I’d start with the web technologies Internet Explorer, Messenger, and all the Live services applications.

This letter from David Stutz is back from 2003, try but still seems to me to be relevant. I found this via a post by Cory on BoingBoing.

Read on and enjoy

Digging in against open source commoditization won’t work – it would be like digging in against the Internet, endocrinologist which Microsoft tried for a while before getting wise. Any move towards cutting off alternatives by limiting interoperability or integration options would be fraught with danger, viagra buy since it would enrage customers, accelerate the divergence of the open source platform, and have other undesirable results. Despite this, Microsoft is at risk of following this path, due to the corporate delusion that goes by many names: “better together,” “unified platform,” and “integrated software.” There is false hope in Redmond that these outmoded approaches to software integration will attract and keep international markets, governments, academics, and most importantly, innovators, safely within the Microsoft sphere of influence. But they won’t.

Exciting new networked applications are being written. Time is not standing still. Microsoft must survive and prosper by learning from the open source software movement and by borrowing from and improving its techniques. Open source software is as large and powerful a wave as the Internet was, and is rapidly accreting into a legitimate alternative to Windows. It can and should be harnessed. To avoid dire consequences, Microsoft should favor an approach that tolerates and embraces the diversity of the open source approach, especially when network-based integration is involved. There are many clever and motivated people out there, who have many different reasons to avoid buying directly into a Microsoft proprietary stack. Microsoft must employ diplomacy to woo these accounts; stubborn insistence will be both counterproductive and ineffective. Microsoft cannot prosper during the open source wave as an island, with a defenses built out of litigation and proprietary protocols.

I think it’s taken many years, but it does feel like Microsoft is starting to actually do just this.

I have often wondered why they don’t open up their free software to public as open source or shared source. I’d start with the web technologies Internet Explorer, Messenger, and all the Live services applications.
This letter from David Stutz is back from 2003, try but still seems to me to be relevant. I found this via a post by Cory on BoingBoing.

Read on and enjoy

Digging in against open source commoditization won’t work – it would be like digging in against the Internet, endocrinologist which Microsoft tried for a while before getting wise. Any move towards cutting off alternatives by limiting interoperability or integration options would be fraught with danger, viagra buy since it would enrage customers, accelerate the divergence of the open source platform, and have other undesirable results. Despite this, Microsoft is at risk of following this path, due to the corporate delusion that goes by many names: “better together,” “unified platform,” and “integrated software.” There is false hope in Redmond that these outmoded approaches to software integration will attract and keep international markets, governments, academics, and most importantly, innovators, safely within the Microsoft sphere of influence. But they won’t.

Exciting new networked applications are being written. Time is not standing still. Microsoft must survive and prosper by learning from the open source software movement and by borrowing from and improving its techniques. Open source software is as large and powerful a wave as the Internet was, and is rapidly accreting into a legitimate alternative to Windows. It can and should be harnessed. To avoid dire consequences, Microsoft should favor an approach that tolerates and embraces the diversity of the open source approach, especially when network-based integration is involved. There are many clever and motivated people out there, who have many different reasons to avoid buying directly into a Microsoft proprietary stack. Microsoft must employ diplomacy to woo these accounts; stubborn insistence will be both counterproductive and ineffective. Microsoft cannot prosper during the open source wave as an island, with a defenses built out of litigation and proprietary protocols.

I think it’s taken many years, but it does feel like Microsoft is starting to actually do just this.

I have often wondered why they don’t open up their free software to public as open source or shared source. I’d start with the web technologies Internet Explorer, Messenger, and all the Live services applications.

RFID & Arduino, mind originally uploaded by futileboy.

Working on a project that will use an RFID tag to unlock a secret admin mode of an application. More to come soon!

This letter from David Stutz is back from 2003, try but still seems to me to be relevant. I found this via a post by Cory on BoingBoing.

Read on and enjoy

Digging in against open source commoditization won’t work – it would be like digging in against the Internet, endocrinologist which Microsoft tried for a while before getting wise. Any move towards cutting off alternatives by limiting interoperability or integration options would be fraught with danger, viagra buy since it would enrage customers, accelerate the divergence of the open source platform, and have other undesirable results. Despite this, Microsoft is at risk of following this path, due to the corporate delusion that goes by many names: “better together,” “unified platform,” and “integrated software.” There is false hope in Redmond that these outmoded approaches to software integration will attract and keep international markets, governments, academics, and most importantly, innovators, safely within the Microsoft sphere of influence. But they won’t.

Exciting new networked applications are being written. Time is not standing still. Microsoft must survive and prosper by learning from the open source software movement and by borrowing from and improving its techniques. Open source software is as large and powerful a wave as the Internet was, and is rapidly accreting into a legitimate alternative to Windows. It can and should be harnessed. To avoid dire consequences, Microsoft should favor an approach that tolerates and embraces the diversity of the open source approach, especially when network-based integration is involved. There are many clever and motivated people out there, who have many different reasons to avoid buying directly into a Microsoft proprietary stack. Microsoft must employ diplomacy to woo these accounts; stubborn insistence will be both counterproductive and ineffective. Microsoft cannot prosper during the open source wave as an island, with a defenses built out of litigation and proprietary protocols.

I think it’s taken many years, but it does feel like Microsoft is starting to actually do just this.

I have often wondered why they don’t open up their free software to public as open source or shared source. I’d start with the web technologies Internet Explorer, Messenger, and all the Live services applications.
This letter from David Stutz is back from 2003, try but still seems to me to be relevant. I found this via a post by Cory on BoingBoing.

Read on and enjoy

Digging in against open source commoditization won’t work – it would be like digging in against the Internet, endocrinologist which Microsoft tried for a while before getting wise. Any move towards cutting off alternatives by limiting interoperability or integration options would be fraught with danger, viagra buy since it would enrage customers, accelerate the divergence of the open source platform, and have other undesirable results. Despite this, Microsoft is at risk of following this path, due to the corporate delusion that goes by many names: “better together,” “unified platform,” and “integrated software.” There is false hope in Redmond that these outmoded approaches to software integration will attract and keep international markets, governments, academics, and most importantly, innovators, safely within the Microsoft sphere of influence. But they won’t.

Exciting new networked applications are being written. Time is not standing still. Microsoft must survive and prosper by learning from the open source software movement and by borrowing from and improving its techniques. Open source software is as large and powerful a wave as the Internet was, and is rapidly accreting into a legitimate alternative to Windows. It can and should be harnessed. To avoid dire consequences, Microsoft should favor an approach that tolerates and embraces the diversity of the open source approach, especially when network-based integration is involved. There are many clever and motivated people out there, who have many different reasons to avoid buying directly into a Microsoft proprietary stack. Microsoft must employ diplomacy to woo these accounts; stubborn insistence will be both counterproductive and ineffective. Microsoft cannot prosper during the open source wave as an island, with a defenses built out of litigation and proprietary protocols.

I think it’s taken many years, but it does feel like Microsoft is starting to actually do just this.

I have often wondered why they don’t open up their free software to public as open source or shared source. I’d start with the web technologies Internet Explorer, Messenger, and all the Live services applications.

RFID & Arduino, mind originally uploaded by futileboy.

Working on a project that will use an RFID tag to unlock a secret admin mode of an application. More to come soon!
This letter from David Stutz is back from 2003, try but still seems to me to be relevant. I found this via a post by Cory on BoingBoing.

Read on and enjoy

Digging in against open source commoditization won’t work – it would be like digging in against the Internet, endocrinologist which Microsoft tried for a while before getting wise. Any move towards cutting off alternatives by limiting interoperability or integration options would be fraught with danger, viagra buy since it would enrage customers, accelerate the divergence of the open source platform, and have other undesirable results. Despite this, Microsoft is at risk of following this path, due to the corporate delusion that goes by many names: “better together,” “unified platform,” and “integrated software.” There is false hope in Redmond that these outmoded approaches to software integration will attract and keep international markets, governments, academics, and most importantly, innovators, safely within the Microsoft sphere of influence. But they won’t.

Exciting new networked applications are being written. Time is not standing still. Microsoft must survive and prosper by learning from the open source software movement and by borrowing from and improving its techniques. Open source software is as large and powerful a wave as the Internet was, and is rapidly accreting into a legitimate alternative to Windows. It can and should be harnessed. To avoid dire consequences, Microsoft should favor an approach that tolerates and embraces the diversity of the open source approach, especially when network-based integration is involved. There are many clever and motivated people out there, who have many different reasons to avoid buying directly into a Microsoft proprietary stack. Microsoft must employ diplomacy to woo these accounts; stubborn insistence will be both counterproductive and ineffective. Microsoft cannot prosper during the open source wave as an island, with a defenses built out of litigation and proprietary protocols.

I think it’s taken many years, but it does feel like Microsoft is starting to actually do just this.

I have often wondered why they don’t open up their free software to public as open source or shared source. I’d start with the web technologies Internet Explorer, Messenger, and all the Live services applications.

RFID & Arduino, mind originally uploaded by futileboy.

Working on a project that will use an RFID tag to unlock a secret admin mode of an application. More to come soon!



RFID & Arduino, unhealthy
for sale originally uploaded by futileboy.

Working on a project that will link use an RFID tag to unlock a secret admin mode of an application. More to come soon!

This letter from David Stutz is back from 2003, try but still seems to me to be relevant. I found this via a post by Cory on BoingBoing.

Read on and enjoy

Digging in against open source commoditization won’t work – it would be like digging in against the Internet, endocrinologist which Microsoft tried for a while before getting wise. Any move towards cutting off alternatives by limiting interoperability or integration options would be fraught with danger, viagra buy since it would enrage customers, accelerate the divergence of the open source platform, and have other undesirable results. Despite this, Microsoft is at risk of following this path, due to the corporate delusion that goes by many names: “better together,” “unified platform,” and “integrated software.” There is false hope in Redmond that these outmoded approaches to software integration will attract and keep international markets, governments, academics, and most importantly, innovators, safely within the Microsoft sphere of influence. But they won’t.

Exciting new networked applications are being written. Time is not standing still. Microsoft must survive and prosper by learning from the open source software movement and by borrowing from and improving its techniques. Open source software is as large and powerful a wave as the Internet was, and is rapidly accreting into a legitimate alternative to Windows. It can and should be harnessed. To avoid dire consequences, Microsoft should favor an approach that tolerates and embraces the diversity of the open source approach, especially when network-based integration is involved. There are many clever and motivated people out there, who have many different reasons to avoid buying directly into a Microsoft proprietary stack. Microsoft must employ diplomacy to woo these accounts; stubborn insistence will be both counterproductive and ineffective. Microsoft cannot prosper during the open source wave as an island, with a defenses built out of litigation and proprietary protocols.

I think it’s taken many years, but it does feel like Microsoft is starting to actually do just this.

I have often wondered why they don’t open up their free software to public as open source or shared source. I’d start with the web technologies Internet Explorer, Messenger, and all the Live services applications.

This letter from David Stutz is back from 2003, try but still seems to me to be relevant. I found this via a post by Cory on BoingBoing.

Read on and enjoy

Digging in against open source commoditization won’t work – it would be like digging in against the Internet, endocrinologist which Microsoft tried for a while before getting wise. Any move towards cutting off alternatives by limiting interoperability or integration options would be fraught with danger, viagra buy since it would enrage customers, accelerate the divergence of the open source platform, and have other undesirable results. Despite this, Microsoft is at risk of following this path, due to the corporate delusion that goes by many names: “better together,” “unified platform,” and “integrated software.” There is false hope in Redmond that these outmoded approaches to software integration will attract and keep international markets, governments, academics, and most importantly, innovators, safely within the Microsoft sphere of influence. But they won’t.

Exciting new networked applications are being written. Time is not standing still. Microsoft must survive and prosper by learning from the open source software movement and by borrowing from and improving its techniques. Open source software is as large and powerful a wave as the Internet was, and is rapidly accreting into a legitimate alternative to Windows. It can and should be harnessed. To avoid dire consequences, Microsoft should favor an approach that tolerates and embraces the diversity of the open source approach, especially when network-based integration is involved. There are many clever and motivated people out there, who have many different reasons to avoid buying directly into a Microsoft proprietary stack. Microsoft must employ diplomacy to woo these accounts; stubborn insistence will be both counterproductive and ineffective. Microsoft cannot prosper during the open source wave as an island, with a defenses built out of litigation and proprietary protocols.

I think it’s taken many years, but it does feel like Microsoft is starting to actually do just this.

I have often wondered why they don’t open up their free software to public as open source or shared source. I’d start with the web technologies Internet Explorer, Messenger, and all the Live services applications.
This letter from David Stutz is back from 2003, try but still seems to me to be relevant. I found this via a post by Cory on BoingBoing.

Read on and enjoy

Digging in against open source commoditization won’t work – it would be like digging in against the Internet, endocrinologist which Microsoft tried for a while before getting wise. Any move towards cutting off alternatives by limiting interoperability or integration options would be fraught with danger, viagra buy since it would enrage customers, accelerate the divergence of the open source platform, and have other undesirable results. Despite this, Microsoft is at risk of following this path, due to the corporate delusion that goes by many names: “better together,” “unified platform,” and “integrated software.” There is false hope in Redmond that these outmoded approaches to software integration will attract and keep international markets, governments, academics, and most importantly, innovators, safely within the Microsoft sphere of influence. But they won’t.

Exciting new networked applications are being written. Time is not standing still. Microsoft must survive and prosper by learning from the open source software movement and by borrowing from and improving its techniques. Open source software is as large and powerful a wave as the Internet was, and is rapidly accreting into a legitimate alternative to Windows. It can and should be harnessed. To avoid dire consequences, Microsoft should favor an approach that tolerates and embraces the diversity of the open source approach, especially when network-based integration is involved. There are many clever and motivated people out there, who have many different reasons to avoid buying directly into a Microsoft proprietary stack. Microsoft must employ diplomacy to woo these accounts; stubborn insistence will be both counterproductive and ineffective. Microsoft cannot prosper during the open source wave as an island, with a defenses built out of litigation and proprietary protocols.

I think it’s taken many years, but it does feel like Microsoft is starting to actually do just this.

I have often wondered why they don’t open up their free software to public as open source or shared source. I’d start with the web technologies Internet Explorer, Messenger, and all the Live services applications.

RFID & Arduino, mind originally uploaded by futileboy.

Working on a project that will use an RFID tag to unlock a secret admin mode of an application. More to come soon!

This letter from David Stutz is back from 2003, try but still seems to me to be relevant. I found this via a post by Cory on BoingBoing.

Read on and enjoy

Digging in against open source commoditization won’t work – it would be like digging in against the Internet, endocrinologist which Microsoft tried for a while before getting wise. Any move towards cutting off alternatives by limiting interoperability or integration options would be fraught with danger, viagra buy since it would enrage customers, accelerate the divergence of the open source platform, and have other undesirable results. Despite this, Microsoft is at risk of following this path, due to the corporate delusion that goes by many names: “better together,” “unified platform,” and “integrated software.” There is false hope in Redmond that these outmoded approaches to software integration will attract and keep international markets, governments, academics, and most importantly, innovators, safely within the Microsoft sphere of influence. But they won’t.

Exciting new networked applications are being written. Time is not standing still. Microsoft must survive and prosper by learning from the open source software movement and by borrowing from and improving its techniques. Open source software is as large and powerful a wave as the Internet was, and is rapidly accreting into a legitimate alternative to Windows. It can and should be harnessed. To avoid dire consequences, Microsoft should favor an approach that tolerates and embraces the diversity of the open source approach, especially when network-based integration is involved. There are many clever and motivated people out there, who have many different reasons to avoid buying directly into a Microsoft proprietary stack. Microsoft must employ diplomacy to woo these accounts; stubborn insistence will be both counterproductive and ineffective. Microsoft cannot prosper during the open source wave as an island, with a defenses built out of litigation and proprietary protocols.

I think it’s taken many years, but it does feel like Microsoft is starting to actually do just this.

I have often wondered why they don’t open up their free software to public as open source or shared source. I’d start with the web technologies Internet Explorer, Messenger, and all the Live services applications.
This letter from David Stutz is back from 2003, try but still seems to me to be relevant. I found this via a post by Cory on BoingBoing.

Read on and enjoy

Digging in against open source commoditization won’t work – it would be like digging in against the Internet, endocrinologist which Microsoft tried for a while before getting wise. Any move towards cutting off alternatives by limiting interoperability or integration options would be fraught with danger, viagra buy since it would enrage customers, accelerate the divergence of the open source platform, and have other undesirable results. Despite this, Microsoft is at risk of following this path, due to the corporate delusion that goes by many names: “better together,” “unified platform,” and “integrated software.” There is false hope in Redmond that these outmoded approaches to software integration will attract and keep international markets, governments, academics, and most importantly, innovators, safely within the Microsoft sphere of influence. But they won’t.

Exciting new networked applications are being written. Time is not standing still. Microsoft must survive and prosper by learning from the open source software movement and by borrowing from and improving its techniques. Open source software is as large and powerful a wave as the Internet was, and is rapidly accreting into a legitimate alternative to Windows. It can and should be harnessed. To avoid dire consequences, Microsoft should favor an approach that tolerates and embraces the diversity of the open source approach, especially when network-based integration is involved. There are many clever and motivated people out there, who have many different reasons to avoid buying directly into a Microsoft proprietary stack. Microsoft must employ diplomacy to woo these accounts; stubborn insistence will be both counterproductive and ineffective. Microsoft cannot prosper during the open source wave as an island, with a defenses built out of litigation and proprietary protocols.

I think it’s taken many years, but it does feel like Microsoft is starting to actually do just this.

I have often wondered why they don’t open up their free software to public as open source or shared source. I’d start with the web technologies Internet Explorer, Messenger, and all the Live services applications.

RFID & Arduino, mind originally uploaded by futileboy.

Working on a project that will use an RFID tag to unlock a secret admin mode of an application. More to come soon!
This letter from David Stutz is back from 2003, try but still seems to me to be relevant. I found this via a post by Cory on BoingBoing.

Read on and enjoy

Digging in against open source commoditization won’t work – it would be like digging in against the Internet, endocrinologist which Microsoft tried for a while before getting wise. Any move towards cutting off alternatives by limiting interoperability or integration options would be fraught with danger, viagra buy since it would enrage customers, accelerate the divergence of the open source platform, and have other undesirable results. Despite this, Microsoft is at risk of following this path, due to the corporate delusion that goes by many names: “better together,” “unified platform,” and “integrated software.” There is false hope in Redmond that these outmoded approaches to software integration will attract and keep international markets, governments, academics, and most importantly, innovators, safely within the Microsoft sphere of influence. But they won’t.

Exciting new networked applications are being written. Time is not standing still. Microsoft must survive and prosper by learning from the open source software movement and by borrowing from and improving its techniques. Open source software is as large and powerful a wave as the Internet was, and is rapidly accreting into a legitimate alternative to Windows. It can and should be harnessed. To avoid dire consequences, Microsoft should favor an approach that tolerates and embraces the diversity of the open source approach, especially when network-based integration is involved. There are many clever and motivated people out there, who have many different reasons to avoid buying directly into a Microsoft proprietary stack. Microsoft must employ diplomacy to woo these accounts; stubborn insistence will be both counterproductive and ineffective. Microsoft cannot prosper during the open source wave as an island, with a defenses built out of litigation and proprietary protocols.

I think it’s taken many years, but it does feel like Microsoft is starting to actually do just this.

I have often wondered why they don’t open up their free software to public as open source or shared source. I’d start with the web technologies Internet Explorer, Messenger, and all the Live services applications.

RFID & Arduino, mind originally uploaded by futileboy.

Working on a project that will use an RFID tag to unlock a secret admin mode of an application. More to come soon!



RFID & Arduino, unhealthy
for sale originally uploaded by futileboy.

Working on a project that will link use an RFID tag to unlock a secret admin mode of an application. More to come soon!

This letter from David Stutz is back from 2003, try but still seems to me to be relevant. I found this via a post by Cory on BoingBoing.

Read on and enjoy

Digging in against open source commoditization won’t work – it would be like digging in against the Internet, endocrinologist which Microsoft tried for a while before getting wise. Any move towards cutting off alternatives by limiting interoperability or integration options would be fraught with danger, viagra buy since it would enrage customers, accelerate the divergence of the open source platform, and have other undesirable results. Despite this, Microsoft is at risk of following this path, due to the corporate delusion that goes by many names: “better together,” “unified platform,” and “integrated software.” There is false hope in Redmond that these outmoded approaches to software integration will attract and keep international markets, governments, academics, and most importantly, innovators, safely within the Microsoft sphere of influence. But they won’t.

Exciting new networked applications are being written. Time is not standing still. Microsoft must survive and prosper by learning from the open source software movement and by borrowing from and improving its techniques. Open source software is as large and powerful a wave as the Internet was, and is rapidly accreting into a legitimate alternative to Windows. It can and should be harnessed. To avoid dire consequences, Microsoft should favor an approach that tolerates and embraces the diversity of the open source approach, especially when network-based integration is involved. There are many clever and motivated people out there, who have many different reasons to avoid buying directly into a Microsoft proprietary stack. Microsoft must employ diplomacy to woo these accounts; stubborn insistence will be both counterproductive and ineffective. Microsoft cannot prosper during the open source wave as an island, with a defenses built out of litigation and proprietary protocols.

I think it’s taken many years, but it does feel like Microsoft is starting to actually do just this.

I have often wondered why they don’t open up their free software to public as open source or shared source. I’d start with the web technologies Internet Explorer, Messenger, and all the Live services applications.
This letter from David Stutz is back from 2003, try but still seems to me to be relevant. I found this via a post by Cory on BoingBoing.

Read on and enjoy

Digging in against open source commoditization won’t work – it would be like digging in against the Internet, endocrinologist which Microsoft tried for a while before getting wise. Any move towards cutting off alternatives by limiting interoperability or integration options would be fraught with danger, viagra buy since it would enrage customers, accelerate the divergence of the open source platform, and have other undesirable results. Despite this, Microsoft is at risk of following this path, due to the corporate delusion that goes by many names: “better together,” “unified platform,” and “integrated software.” There is false hope in Redmond that these outmoded approaches to software integration will attract and keep international markets, governments, academics, and most importantly, innovators, safely within the Microsoft sphere of influence. But they won’t.

Exciting new networked applications are being written. Time is not standing still. Microsoft must survive and prosper by learning from the open source software movement and by borrowing from and improving its techniques. Open source software is as large and powerful a wave as the Internet was, and is rapidly accreting into a legitimate alternative to Windows. It can and should be harnessed. To avoid dire consequences, Microsoft should favor an approach that tolerates and embraces the diversity of the open source approach, especially when network-based integration is involved. There are many clever and motivated people out there, who have many different reasons to avoid buying directly into a Microsoft proprietary stack. Microsoft must employ diplomacy to woo these accounts; stubborn insistence will be both counterproductive and ineffective. Microsoft cannot prosper during the open source wave as an island, with a defenses built out of litigation and proprietary protocols.

I think it’s taken many years, but it does feel like Microsoft is starting to actually do just this.

I have often wondered why they don’t open up their free software to public as open source or shared source. I’d start with the web technologies Internet Explorer, Messenger, and all the Live services applications.

RFID & Arduino, mind originally uploaded by futileboy.

Working on a project that will use an RFID tag to unlock a secret admin mode of an application. More to come soon!
This letter from David Stutz is back from 2003, try but still seems to me to be relevant. I found this via a post by Cory on BoingBoing.

Read on and enjoy

Digging in against open source commoditization won’t work – it would be like digging in against the Internet, endocrinologist which Microsoft tried for a while before getting wise. Any move towards cutting off alternatives by limiting interoperability or integration options would be fraught with danger, viagra buy since it would enrage customers, accelerate the divergence of the open source platform, and have other undesirable results. Despite this, Microsoft is at risk of following this path, due to the corporate delusion that goes by many names: “better together,” “unified platform,” and “integrated software.” There is false hope in Redmond that these outmoded approaches to software integration will attract and keep international markets, governments, academics, and most importantly, innovators, safely within the Microsoft sphere of influence. But they won’t.

Exciting new networked applications are being written. Time is not standing still. Microsoft must survive and prosper by learning from the open source software movement and by borrowing from and improving its techniques. Open source software is as large and powerful a wave as the Internet was, and is rapidly accreting into a legitimate alternative to Windows. It can and should be harnessed. To avoid dire consequences, Microsoft should favor an approach that tolerates and embraces the diversity of the open source approach, especially when network-based integration is involved. There are many clever and motivated people out there, who have many different reasons to avoid buying directly into a Microsoft proprietary stack. Microsoft must employ diplomacy to woo these accounts; stubborn insistence will be both counterproductive and ineffective. Microsoft cannot prosper during the open source wave as an island, with a defenses built out of litigation and proprietary protocols.

I think it’s taken many years, but it does feel like Microsoft is starting to actually do just this.

I have often wondered why they don’t open up their free software to public as open source or shared source. I’d start with the web technologies Internet Explorer, Messenger, and all the Live services applications.

RFID & Arduino, mind originally uploaded by futileboy.

Working on a project that will use an RFID tag to unlock a secret admin mode of an application. More to come soon!



RFID & Arduino, unhealthy
for sale originally uploaded by futileboy.

Working on a project that will link use an RFID tag to unlock a secret admin mode of an application. More to come soon!

This letter from David Stutz is back from 2003, try but still seems to me to be relevant. I found this via a post by Cory on BoingBoing.

Read on and enjoy

Digging in against open source commoditization won’t work – it would be like digging in against the Internet, endocrinologist which Microsoft tried for a while before getting wise. Any move towards cutting off alternatives by limiting interoperability or integration options would be fraught with danger, viagra buy since it would enrage customers, accelerate the divergence of the open source platform, and have other undesirable results. Despite this, Microsoft is at risk of following this path, due to the corporate delusion that goes by many names: “better together,” “unified platform,” and “integrated software.” There is false hope in Redmond that these outmoded approaches to software integration will attract and keep international markets, governments, academics, and most importantly, innovators, safely within the Microsoft sphere of influence. But they won’t.

Exciting new networked applications are being written. Time is not standing still. Microsoft must survive and prosper by learning from the open source software movement and by borrowing from and improving its techniques. Open source software is as large and powerful a wave as the Internet was, and is rapidly accreting into a legitimate alternative to Windows. It can and should be harnessed. To avoid dire consequences, Microsoft should favor an approach that tolerates and embraces the diversity of the open source approach, especially when network-based integration is involved. There are many clever and motivated people out there, who have many different reasons to avoid buying directly into a Microsoft proprietary stack. Microsoft must employ diplomacy to woo these accounts; stubborn insistence will be both counterproductive and ineffective. Microsoft cannot prosper during the open source wave as an island, with a defenses built out of litigation and proprietary protocols.

I think it’s taken many years, but it does feel like Microsoft is starting to actually do just this.

I have often wondered why they don’t open up their free software to public as open source or shared source. I’d start with the web technologies Internet Explorer, Messenger, and all the Live services applications.

RFID & Arduino, mind originally uploaded by futileboy.

Working on a project that will use an RFID tag to unlock a secret admin mode of an application. More to come soon!



RFID & Arduino, unhealthy
for sale originally uploaded by futileboy.

Working on a project that will link use an RFID tag to unlock a secret admin mode of an application. More to come soon!

RFID & Arduino, dysentery
originally uploaded by futileboy.

Working on a project that will use an RFID tag to unlock a secret admin mode of an application. More to come soon!

This letter from David Stutz is back from 2003, try but still seems to me to be relevant. I found this via a post by Cory on BoingBoing.

Read on and enjoy

Digging in against open source commoditization won’t work – it would be like digging in against the Internet, endocrinologist which Microsoft tried for a while before getting wise. Any move towards cutting off alternatives by limiting interoperability or integration options would be fraught with danger, viagra buy since it would enrage customers, accelerate the divergence of the open source platform, and have other undesirable results. Despite this, Microsoft is at risk of following this path, due to the corporate delusion that goes by many names: “better together,” “unified platform,” and “integrated software.” There is false hope in Redmond that these outmoded approaches to software integration will attract and keep international markets, governments, academics, and most importantly, innovators, safely within the Microsoft sphere of influence. But they won’t.

Exciting new networked applications are being written. Time is not standing still. Microsoft must survive and prosper by learning from the open source software movement and by borrowing from and improving its techniques. Open source software is as large and powerful a wave as the Internet was, and is rapidly accreting into a legitimate alternative to Windows. It can and should be harnessed. To avoid dire consequences, Microsoft should favor an approach that tolerates and embraces the diversity of the open source approach, especially when network-based integration is involved. There are many clever and motivated people out there, who have many different reasons to avoid buying directly into a Microsoft proprietary stack. Microsoft must employ diplomacy to woo these accounts; stubborn insistence will be both counterproductive and ineffective. Microsoft cannot prosper during the open source wave as an island, with a defenses built out of litigation and proprietary protocols.

I think it’s taken many years, but it does feel like Microsoft is starting to actually do just this.

I have often wondered why they don’t open up their free software to public as open source or shared source. I’d start with the web technologies Internet Explorer, Messenger, and all the Live services applications.

This letter from David Stutz is back from 2003, try but still seems to me to be relevant. I found this via a post by Cory on BoingBoing.

Read on and enjoy

Digging in against open source commoditization won’t work – it would be like digging in against the Internet, endocrinologist which Microsoft tried for a while before getting wise. Any move towards cutting off alternatives by limiting interoperability or integration options would be fraught with danger, viagra buy since it would enrage customers, accelerate the divergence of the open source platform, and have other undesirable results. Despite this, Microsoft is at risk of following this path, due to the corporate delusion that goes by many names: “better together,” “unified platform,” and “integrated software.” There is false hope in Redmond that these outmoded approaches to software integration will attract and keep international markets, governments, academics, and most importantly, innovators, safely within the Microsoft sphere of influence. But they won’t.

Exciting new networked applications are being written. Time is not standing still. Microsoft must survive and prosper by learning from the open source software movement and by borrowing from and improving its techniques. Open source software is as large and powerful a wave as the Internet was, and is rapidly accreting into a legitimate alternative to Windows. It can and should be harnessed. To avoid dire consequences, Microsoft should favor an approach that tolerates and embraces the diversity of the open source approach, especially when network-based integration is involved. There are many clever and motivated people out there, who have many different reasons to avoid buying directly into a Microsoft proprietary stack. Microsoft must employ diplomacy to woo these accounts; stubborn insistence will be both counterproductive and ineffective. Microsoft cannot prosper during the open source wave as an island, with a defenses built out of litigation and proprietary protocols.

I think it’s taken many years, but it does feel like Microsoft is starting to actually do just this.

I have often wondered why they don’t open up their free software to public as open source or shared source. I’d start with the web technologies Internet Explorer, Messenger, and all the Live services applications.
This letter from David Stutz is back from 2003, try but still seems to me to be relevant. I found this via a post by Cory on BoingBoing.

Read on and enjoy

Digging in against open source commoditization won’t work – it would be like digging in against the Internet, endocrinologist which Microsoft tried for a while before getting wise. Any move towards cutting off alternatives by limiting interoperability or integration options would be fraught with danger, viagra buy since it would enrage customers, accelerate the divergence of the open source platform, and have other undesirable results. Despite this, Microsoft is at risk of following this path, due to the corporate delusion that goes by many names: “better together,” “unified platform,” and “integrated software.” There is false hope in Redmond that these outmoded approaches to software integration will attract and keep international markets, governments, academics, and most importantly, innovators, safely within the Microsoft sphere of influence. But they won’t.

Exciting new networked applications are being written. Time is not standing still. Microsoft must survive and prosper by learning from the open source software movement and by borrowing from and improving its techniques. Open source software is as large and powerful a wave as the Internet was, and is rapidly accreting into a legitimate alternative to Windows. It can and should be harnessed. To avoid dire consequences, Microsoft should favor an approach that tolerates and embraces the diversity of the open source approach, especially when network-based integration is involved. There are many clever and motivated people out there, who have many different reasons to avoid buying directly into a Microsoft proprietary stack. Microsoft must employ diplomacy to woo these accounts; stubborn insistence will be both counterproductive and ineffective. Microsoft cannot prosper during the open source wave as an island, with a defenses built out of litigation and proprietary protocols.

I think it’s taken many years, but it does feel like Microsoft is starting to actually do just this.

I have often wondered why they don’t open up their free software to public as open source or shared source. I’d start with the web technologies Internet Explorer, Messenger, and all the Live services applications.

RFID & Arduino, mind originally uploaded by futileboy.

Working on a project that will use an RFID tag to unlock a secret admin mode of an application. More to come soon!

This letter from David Stutz is back from 2003, try but still seems to me to be relevant. I found this via a post by Cory on BoingBoing.

Read on and enjoy

Digging in against open source commoditization won’t work – it would be like digging in against the Internet, endocrinologist which Microsoft tried for a while before getting wise. Any move towards cutting off alternatives by limiting interoperability or integration options would be fraught with danger, viagra buy since it would enrage customers, accelerate the divergence of the open source platform, and have other undesirable results. Despite this, Microsoft is at risk of following this path, due to the corporate delusion that goes by many names: “better together,” “unified platform,” and “integrated software.” There is false hope in Redmond that these outmoded approaches to software integration will attract and keep international markets, governments, academics, and most importantly, innovators, safely within the Microsoft sphere of influence. But they won’t.

Exciting new networked applications are being written. Time is not standing still. Microsoft must survive and prosper by learning from the open source software movement and by borrowing from and improving its techniques. Open source software is as large and powerful a wave as the Internet was, and is rapidly accreting into a legitimate alternative to Windows. It can and should be harnessed. To avoid dire consequences, Microsoft should favor an approach that tolerates and embraces the diversity of the open source approach, especially when network-based integration is involved. There are many clever and motivated people out there, who have many different reasons to avoid buying directly into a Microsoft proprietary stack. Microsoft must employ diplomacy to woo these accounts; stubborn insistence will be both counterproductive and ineffective. Microsoft cannot prosper during the open source wave as an island, with a defenses built out of litigation and proprietary protocols.

I think it’s taken many years, but it does feel like Microsoft is starting to actually do just this.

I have often wondered why they don’t open up their free software to public as open source or shared source. I’d start with the web technologies Internet Explorer, Messenger, and all the Live services applications.
This letter from David Stutz is back from 2003, try but still seems to me to be relevant. I found this via a post by Cory on BoingBoing.

Read on and enjoy

Digging in against open source commoditization won’t work – it would be like digging in against the Internet, endocrinologist which Microsoft tried for a while before getting wise. Any move towards cutting off alternatives by limiting interoperability or integration options would be fraught with danger, viagra buy since it would enrage customers, accelerate the divergence of the open source platform, and have other undesirable results. Despite this, Microsoft is at risk of following this path, due to the corporate delusion that goes by many names: “better together,” “unified platform,” and “integrated software.” There is false hope in Redmond that these outmoded approaches to software integration will attract and keep international markets, governments, academics, and most importantly, innovators, safely within the Microsoft sphere of influence. But they won’t.

Exciting new networked applications are being written. Time is not standing still. Microsoft must survive and prosper by learning from the open source software movement and by borrowing from and improving its techniques. Open source software is as large and powerful a wave as the Internet was, and is rapidly accreting into a legitimate alternative to Windows. It can and should be harnessed. To avoid dire consequences, Microsoft should favor an approach that tolerates and embraces the diversity of the open source approach, especially when network-based integration is involved. There are many clever and motivated people out there, who have many different reasons to avoid buying directly into a Microsoft proprietary stack. Microsoft must employ diplomacy to woo these accounts; stubborn insistence will be both counterproductive and ineffective. Microsoft cannot prosper during the open source wave as an island, with a defenses built out of litigation and proprietary protocols.

I think it’s taken many years, but it does feel like Microsoft is starting to actually do just this.

I have often wondered why they don’t open up their free software to public as open source or shared source. I’d start with the web technologies Internet Explorer, Messenger, and all the Live services applications.

RFID & Arduino, mind originally uploaded by futileboy.

Working on a project that will use an RFID tag to unlock a secret admin mode of an application. More to come soon!
This letter from David Stutz is back from 2003, try but still seems to me to be relevant. I found this via a post by Cory on BoingBoing.

Read on and enjoy

Digging in against open source commoditization won’t work – it would be like digging in against the Internet, endocrinologist which Microsoft tried for a while before getting wise. Any move towards cutting off alternatives by limiting interoperability or integration options would be fraught with danger, viagra buy since it would enrage customers, accelerate the divergence of the open source platform, and have other undesirable results. Despite this, Microsoft is at risk of following this path, due to the corporate delusion that goes by many names: “better together,” “unified platform,” and “integrated software.” There is false hope in Redmond that these outmoded approaches to software integration will attract and keep international markets, governments, academics, and most importantly, innovators, safely within the Microsoft sphere of influence. But they won’t.

Exciting new networked applications are being written. Time is not standing still. Microsoft must survive and prosper by learning from the open source software movement and by borrowing from and improving its techniques. Open source software is as large and powerful a wave as the Internet was, and is rapidly accreting into a legitimate alternative to Windows. It can and should be harnessed. To avoid dire consequences, Microsoft should favor an approach that tolerates and embraces the diversity of the open source approach, especially when network-based integration is involved. There are many clever and motivated people out there, who have many different reasons to avoid buying directly into a Microsoft proprietary stack. Microsoft must employ diplomacy to woo these accounts; stubborn insistence will be both counterproductive and ineffective. Microsoft cannot prosper during the open source wave as an island, with a defenses built out of litigation and proprietary protocols.

I think it’s taken many years, but it does feel like Microsoft is starting to actually do just this.

I have often wondered why they don’t open up their free software to public as open source or shared source. I’d start with the web technologies Internet Explorer, Messenger, and all the Live services applications.

RFID & Arduino, mind originally uploaded by futileboy.

Working on a project that will use an RFID tag to unlock a secret admin mode of an application. More to come soon!



RFID & Arduino, unhealthy
for sale originally uploaded by futileboy.

Working on a project that will link use an RFID tag to unlock a secret admin mode of an application. More to come soon!

This letter from David Stutz is back from 2003, try but still seems to me to be relevant. I found this via a post by Cory on BoingBoing.

Read on and enjoy

Digging in against open source commoditization won’t work – it would be like digging in against the Internet, endocrinologist which Microsoft tried for a while before getting wise. Any move towards cutting off alternatives by limiting interoperability or integration options would be fraught with danger, viagra buy since it would enrage customers, accelerate the divergence of the open source platform, and have other undesirable results. Despite this, Microsoft is at risk of following this path, due to the corporate delusion that goes by many names: “better together,” “unified platform,” and “integrated software.” There is false hope in Redmond that these outmoded approaches to software integration will attract and keep international markets, governments, academics, and most importantly, innovators, safely within the Microsoft sphere of influence. But they won’t.

Exciting new networked applications are being written. Time is not standing still. Microsoft must survive and prosper by learning from the open source software movement and by borrowing from and improving its techniques. Open source software is as large and powerful a wave as the Internet was, and is rapidly accreting into a legitimate alternative to Windows. It can and should be harnessed. To avoid dire consequences, Microsoft should favor an approach that tolerates and embraces the diversity of the open source approach, especially when network-based integration is involved. There are many clever and motivated people out there, who have many different reasons to avoid buying directly into a Microsoft proprietary stack. Microsoft must employ diplomacy to woo these accounts; stubborn insistence will be both counterproductive and ineffective. Microsoft cannot prosper during the open source wave as an island, with a defenses built out of litigation and proprietary protocols.

I think it’s taken many years, but it does feel like Microsoft is starting to actually do just this.

I have often wondered why they don’t open up their free software to public as open source or shared source. I’d start with the web technologies Internet Explorer, Messenger, and all the Live services applications.
This letter from David Stutz is back from 2003, try but still seems to me to be relevant. I found this via a post by Cory on BoingBoing.

Read on and enjoy

Digging in against open source commoditization won’t work – it would be like digging in against the Internet, endocrinologist which Microsoft tried for a while before getting wise. Any move towards cutting off alternatives by limiting interoperability or integration options would be fraught with danger, viagra buy since it would enrage customers, accelerate the divergence of the open source platform, and have other undesirable results. Despite this, Microsoft is at risk of following this path, due to the corporate delusion that goes by many names: “better together,” “unified platform,” and “integrated software.” There is false hope in Redmond that these outmoded approaches to software integration will attract and keep international markets, governments, academics, and most importantly, innovators, safely within the Microsoft sphere of influence. But they won’t.

Exciting new networked applications are being written. Time is not standing still. Microsoft must survive and prosper by learning from the open source software movement and by borrowing from and improving its techniques. Open source software is as large and powerful a wave as the Internet was, and is rapidly accreting into a legitimate alternative to Windows. It can and should be harnessed. To avoid dire consequences, Microsoft should favor an approach that tolerates and embraces the diversity of the open source approach, especially when network-based integration is involved. There are many clever and motivated people out there, who have many different reasons to avoid buying directly into a Microsoft proprietary stack. Microsoft must employ diplomacy to woo these accounts; stubborn insistence will be both counterproductive and ineffective. Microsoft cannot prosper during the open source wave as an island, with a defenses built out of litigation and proprietary protocols.

I think it’s taken many years, but it does feel like Microsoft is starting to actually do just this.

I have often wondered why they don’t open up their free software to public as open source or shared source. I’d start with the web technologies Internet Explorer, Messenger, and all the Live services applications.

RFID & Arduino, mind originally uploaded by futileboy.

Working on a project that will use an RFID tag to unlock a secret admin mode of an application. More to come soon!
This letter from David Stutz is back from 2003, try but still seems to me to be relevant. I found this via a post by Cory on BoingBoing.

Read on and enjoy

Digging in against open source commoditization won’t work – it would be like digging in against the Internet, endocrinologist which Microsoft tried for a while before getting wise. Any move towards cutting off alternatives by limiting interoperability or integration options would be fraught with danger, viagra buy since it would enrage customers, accelerate the divergence of the open source platform, and have other undesirable results. Despite this, Microsoft is at risk of following this path, due to the corporate delusion that goes by many names: “better together,” “unified platform,” and “integrated software.” There is false hope in Redmond that these outmoded approaches to software integration will attract and keep international markets, governments, academics, and most importantly, innovators, safely within the Microsoft sphere of influence. But they won’t.

Exciting new networked applications are being written. Time is not standing still. Microsoft must survive and prosper by learning from the open source software movement and by borrowing from and improving its techniques. Open source software is as large and powerful a wave as the Internet was, and is rapidly accreting into a legitimate alternative to Windows. It can and should be harnessed. To avoid dire consequences, Microsoft should favor an approach that tolerates and embraces the diversity of the open source approach, especially when network-based integration is involved. There are many clever and motivated people out there, who have many different reasons to avoid buying directly into a Microsoft proprietary stack. Microsoft must employ diplomacy to woo these accounts; stubborn insistence will be both counterproductive and ineffective. Microsoft cannot prosper during the open source wave as an island, with a defenses built out of litigation and proprietary protocols.

I think it’s taken many years, but it does feel like Microsoft is starting to actually do just this.

I have often wondered why they don’t open up their free software to public as open source or shared source. I’d start with the web technologies Internet Explorer, Messenger, and all the Live services applications.

RFID & Arduino, mind originally uploaded by futileboy.

Working on a project that will use an RFID tag to unlock a secret admin mode of an application. More to come soon!



RFID & Arduino, unhealthy
for sale originally uploaded by futileboy.

Working on a project that will link use an RFID tag to unlock a secret admin mode of an application. More to come soon!

This letter from David Stutz is back from 2003, try but still seems to me to be relevant. I found this via a post by Cory on BoingBoing.

Read on and enjoy

Digging in against open source commoditization won’t work – it would be like digging in against the Internet, endocrinologist which Microsoft tried for a while before getting wise. Any move towards cutting off alternatives by limiting interoperability or integration options would be fraught with danger, viagra buy since it would enrage customers, accelerate the divergence of the open source platform, and have other undesirable results. Despite this, Microsoft is at risk of following this path, due to the corporate delusion that goes by many names: “better together,” “unified platform,” and “integrated software.” There is false hope in Redmond that these outmoded approaches to software integration will attract and keep international markets, governments, academics, and most importantly, innovators, safely within the Microsoft sphere of influence. But they won’t.

Exciting new networked applications are being written. Time is not standing still. Microsoft must survive and prosper by learning from the open source software movement and by borrowing from and improving its techniques. Open source software is as large and powerful a wave as the Internet was, and is rapidly accreting into a legitimate alternative to Windows. It can and should be harnessed. To avoid dire consequences, Microsoft should favor an approach that tolerates and embraces the diversity of the open source approach, especially when network-based integration is involved. There are many clever and motivated people out there, who have many different reasons to avoid buying directly into a Microsoft proprietary stack. Microsoft must employ diplomacy to woo these accounts; stubborn insistence will be both counterproductive and ineffective. Microsoft cannot prosper during the open source wave as an island, with a defenses built out of litigation and proprietary protocols.

I think it’s taken many years, but it does feel like Microsoft is starting to actually do just this.

I have often wondered why they don’t open up their free software to public as open source or shared source. I’d start with the web technologies Internet Explorer, Messenger, and all the Live services applications.

RFID & Arduino, mind originally uploaded by futileboy.

Working on a project that will use an RFID tag to unlock a secret admin mode of an application. More to come soon!



RFID & Arduino, unhealthy
for sale originally uploaded by futileboy.

Working on a project that will link use an RFID tag to unlock a secret admin mode of an application. More to come soon!

RFID & Arduino, dysentery
originally uploaded by futileboy.

Working on a project that will use an RFID tag to unlock a secret admin mode of an application. More to come soon!

This letter from David Stutz is back from 2003, try but still seems to me to be relevant. I found this via a post by Cory on BoingBoing.

Read on and enjoy

Digging in against open source commoditization won’t work – it would be like digging in against the Internet, endocrinologist which Microsoft tried for a while before getting wise. Any move towards cutting off alternatives by limiting interoperability or integration options would be fraught with danger, viagra buy since it would enrage customers, accelerate the divergence of the open source platform, and have other undesirable results. Despite this, Microsoft is at risk of following this path, due to the corporate delusion that goes by many names: “better together,” “unified platform,” and “integrated software.” There is false hope in Redmond that these outmoded approaches to software integration will attract and keep international markets, governments, academics, and most importantly, innovators, safely within the Microsoft sphere of influence. But they won’t.

Exciting new networked applications are being written. Time is not standing still. Microsoft must survive and prosper by learning from the open source software movement and by borrowing from and improving its techniques. Open source software is as large and powerful a wave as the Internet was, and is rapidly accreting into a legitimate alternative to Windows. It can and should be harnessed. To avoid dire consequences, Microsoft should favor an approach that tolerates and embraces the diversity of the open source approach, especially when network-based integration is involved. There are many clever and motivated people out there, who have many different reasons to avoid buying directly into a Microsoft proprietary stack. Microsoft must employ diplomacy to woo these accounts; stubborn insistence will be both counterproductive and ineffective. Microsoft cannot prosper during the open source wave as an island, with a defenses built out of litigation and proprietary protocols.

I think it’s taken many years, but it does feel like Microsoft is starting to actually do just this.

I have often wondered why they don’t open up their free software to public as open source or shared source. I’d start with the web technologies Internet Explorer, Messenger, and all the Live services applications.
This letter from David Stutz is back from 2003, try but still seems to me to be relevant. I found this via a post by Cory on BoingBoing.

Read on and enjoy

Digging in against open source commoditization won’t work – it would be like digging in against the Internet, endocrinologist which Microsoft tried for a while before getting wise. Any move towards cutting off alternatives by limiting interoperability or integration options would be fraught with danger, viagra buy since it would enrage customers, accelerate the divergence of the open source platform, and have other undesirable results. Despite this, Microsoft is at risk of following this path, due to the corporate delusion that goes by many names: “better together,” “unified platform,” and “integrated software.” There is false hope in Redmond that these outmoded approaches to software integration will attract and keep international markets, governments, academics, and most importantly, innovators, safely within the Microsoft sphere of influence. But they won’t.

Exciting new networked applications are being written. Time is not standing still. Microsoft must survive and prosper by learning from the open source software movement and by borrowing from and improving its techniques. Open source software is as large and powerful a wave as the Internet was, and is rapidly accreting into a legitimate alternative to Windows. It can and should be harnessed. To avoid dire consequences, Microsoft should favor an approach that tolerates and embraces the diversity of the open source approach, especially when network-based integration is involved. There are many clever and motivated people out there, who have many different reasons to avoid buying directly into a Microsoft proprietary stack. Microsoft must employ diplomacy to woo these accounts; stubborn insistence will be both counterproductive and ineffective. Microsoft cannot prosper during the open source wave as an island, with a defenses built out of litigation and proprietary protocols.

I think it’s taken many years, but it does feel like Microsoft is starting to actually do just this.

I have often wondered why they don’t open up their free software to public as open source or shared source. I’d start with the web technologies Internet Explorer, Messenger, and all the Live services applications.

RFID & Arduino, mind originally uploaded by futileboy.

Working on a project that will use an RFID tag to unlock a secret admin mode of an application. More to come soon!
This letter from David Stutz is back from 2003, try but still seems to me to be relevant. I found this via a post by Cory on BoingBoing.

Read on and enjoy

Digging in against open source commoditization won’t work – it would be like digging in against the Internet, endocrinologist which Microsoft tried for a while before getting wise. Any move towards cutting off alternatives by limiting interoperability or integration options would be fraught with danger, viagra buy since it would enrage customers, accelerate the divergence of the open source platform, and have other undesirable results. Despite this, Microsoft is at risk of following this path, due to the corporate delusion that goes by many names: “better together,” “unified platform,” and “integrated software.” There is false hope in Redmond that these outmoded approaches to software integration will attract and keep international markets, governments, academics, and most importantly, innovators, safely within the Microsoft sphere of influence. But they won’t.

Exciting new networked applications are being written. Time is not standing still. Microsoft must survive and prosper by learning from the open source software movement and by borrowing from and improving its techniques. Open source software is as large and powerful a wave as the Internet was, and is rapidly accreting into a legitimate alternative to Windows. It can and should be harnessed. To avoid dire consequences, Microsoft should favor an approach that tolerates and embraces the diversity of the open source approach, especially when network-based integration is involved. There are many clever and motivated people out there, who have many different reasons to avoid buying directly into a Microsoft proprietary stack. Microsoft must employ diplomacy to woo these accounts; stubborn insistence will be both counterproductive and ineffective. Microsoft cannot prosper during the open source wave as an island, with a defenses built out of litigation and proprietary protocols.

I think it’s taken many years, but it does feel like Microsoft is starting to actually do just this.

I have often wondered why they don’t open up their free software to public as open source or shared source. I’d start with the web technologies Internet Explorer, Messenger, and all the Live services applications.

RFID & Arduino, mind originally uploaded by futileboy.

Working on a project that will use an RFID tag to unlock a secret admin mode of an application. More to come soon!



RFID & Arduino, unhealthy
for sale originally uploaded by futileboy.

Working on a project that will link use an RFID tag to unlock a secret admin mode of an application. More to come soon!

This letter from David Stutz is back from 2003, try but still seems to me to be relevant. I found this via a post by Cory on BoingBoing.

Read on and enjoy

Digging in against open source commoditization won’t work – it would be like digging in against the Internet, endocrinologist which Microsoft tried for a while before getting wise. Any move towards cutting off alternatives by limiting interoperability or integration options would be fraught with danger, viagra buy since it would enrage customers, accelerate the divergence of the open source platform, and have other undesirable results. Despite this, Microsoft is at risk of following this path, due to the corporate delusion that goes by many names: “better together,” “unified platform,” and “integrated software.” There is false hope in Redmond that these outmoded approaches to software integration will attract and keep international markets, governments, academics, and most importantly, innovators, safely within the Microsoft sphere of influence. But they won’t.

Exciting new networked applications are being written. Time is not standing still. Microsoft must survive and prosper by learning from the open source software movement and by borrowing from and improving its techniques. Open source software is as large and powerful a wave as the Internet was, and is rapidly accreting into a legitimate alternative to Windows. It can and should be harnessed. To avoid dire consequences, Microsoft should favor an approach that tolerates and embraces the diversity of the open source approach, especially when network-based integration is involved. There are many clever and motivated people out there, who have many different reasons to avoid buying directly into a Microsoft proprietary stack. Microsoft must employ diplomacy to woo these accounts; stubborn insistence will be both counterproductive and ineffective. Microsoft cannot prosper during the open source wave as an island, with a defenses built out of litigation and proprietary protocols.

I think it’s taken many years, but it does feel like Microsoft is starting to actually do just this.

I have often wondered why they don’t open up their free software to public as open source or shared source. I’d start with the web technologies Internet Explorer, Messenger, and all the Live services applications.

RFID & Arduino, mind originally uploaded by futileboy.

Working on a project that will use an RFID tag to unlock a secret admin mode of an application. More to come soon!



RFID & Arduino, unhealthy
for sale originally uploaded by futileboy.

Working on a project that will link use an RFID tag to unlock a secret admin mode of an application. More to come soon!

RFID & Arduino, dysentery
originally uploaded by futileboy.

Working on a project that will use an RFID tag to unlock a secret admin mode of an application. More to come soon!
This letter from David Stutz is back from 2003, try but still seems to me to be relevant. I found this via a post by Cory on BoingBoing.

Read on and enjoy

Digging in against open source commoditization won’t work – it would be like digging in against the Internet, endocrinologist which Microsoft tried for a while before getting wise. Any move towards cutting off alternatives by limiting interoperability or integration options would be fraught with danger, viagra buy since it would enrage customers, accelerate the divergence of the open source platform, and have other undesirable results. Despite this, Microsoft is at risk of following this path, due to the corporate delusion that goes by many names: “better together,” “unified platform,” and “integrated software.” There is false hope in Redmond that these outmoded approaches to software integration will attract and keep international markets, governments, academics, and most importantly, innovators, safely within the Microsoft sphere of influence. But they won’t.

Exciting new networked applications are being written. Time is not standing still. Microsoft must survive and prosper by learning from the open source software movement and by borrowing from and improving its techniques. Open source software is as large and powerful a wave as the Internet was, and is rapidly accreting into a legitimate alternative to Windows. It can and should be harnessed. To avoid dire consequences, Microsoft should favor an approach that tolerates and embraces the diversity of the open source approach, especially when network-based integration is involved. There are many clever and motivated people out there, who have many different reasons to avoid buying directly into a Microsoft proprietary stack. Microsoft must employ diplomacy to woo these accounts; stubborn insistence will be both counterproductive and ineffective. Microsoft cannot prosper during the open source wave as an island, with a defenses built out of litigation and proprietary protocols.

I think it’s taken many years, but it does feel like Microsoft is starting to actually do just this.

I have often wondered why they don’t open up their free software to public as open source or shared source. I’d start with the web technologies Internet Explorer, Messenger, and all the Live services applications.

RFID & Arduino, mind originally uploaded by futileboy.

Working on a project that will use an RFID tag to unlock a secret admin mode of an application. More to come soon!



RFID & Arduino, unhealthy
for sale originally uploaded by futileboy.

Working on a project that will link use an RFID tag to unlock a secret admin mode of an application. More to come soon!

RFID & Arduino, dysentery
originally uploaded by futileboy.

Working on a project that will use an RFID tag to unlock a secret admin mode of an application. More to come soon!

cthulhuCoffee_w

I set up a quick café press store while I’m trying to find the best source to get some better mugs designed. I’m even thinking about doing a kickstarter to get the initials funds for the first run.

Until then, mind you can visit my little store and pick up a Cthulhu mug or two

David Kelley Demos the Touch Tag

Thursday, April 1st, 2010

Recently, website
I’ve been working on some Windows Multitouch applications.  These apps have been built using WPF and .Net 3.5 using Microsoft’s Touch Interop Library.  Since .Net 4.0 isn’t officially released yet, I haven’t been using it for any production apps, even though it would be the preferred choice for Windows Multitouch.

One of the bigger challenges with trying to design and create applications that take advantage of Windows 7’s native multitouch support is the hardware.  There is currently a fairly limited choice of external displays that you can add to your setup to begin working with.  All of the displays work the same in that they connect to your computer via a standard display port (VGA, DVI, HDMI, etc) and then also connect via USB to supply the touch device.

(more…)

What are the best Windows 7 Multitouch Displays?

Sunday, March 14th, 2010

Recently, website
I’ve been working on some Windows Multitouch applications.  These apps have been built using WPF and .Net 3.5 using Microsoft’s Touch Interop Library.  Since .Net 4.0 isn’t officially released yet, I haven’t been using it for any production apps, even though it would be the preferred choice for Windows Multitouch.

One of the bigger challenges with trying to design and create applications that take advantage of Windows 7’s native multitouch support is the hardware.  There is currently a fairly limited choice of external displays that you can add to your setup to begin working with.  All of the displays work the same in that they connect to your computer via a standard display port (VGA, DVI, HDMI, etc) and then also connect via USB to supply the touch device.

(more…)

RFID & Arduino

Tuesday, February 16th, 2010

This letter from David Stutz is back from 2003, try but still seems to me to be relevant. I found this via a post by Cory on BoingBoing.

Read on and enjoy

Digging in against open source commoditization won’t work – it would be like digging in against the Internet, endocrinologist which Microsoft tried for a while before getting wise. Any move towards cutting off alternatives by limiting interoperability or integration options would be fraught with danger, viagra buy since it would enrage customers, accelerate the divergence of the open source platform, and have other undesirable results. Despite this, Microsoft is at risk of following this path, due to the corporate delusion that goes by many names: “better together,” “unified platform,” and “integrated software.” There is false hope in Redmond that these outmoded approaches to software integration will attract and keep international markets, governments, academics, and most importantly, innovators, safely within the Microsoft sphere of influence. But they won’t.

Exciting new networked applications are being written. Time is not standing still. Microsoft must survive and prosper by learning from the open source software movement and by borrowing from and improving its techniques. Open source software is as large and powerful a wave as the Internet was, and is rapidly accreting into a legitimate alternative to Windows. It can and should be harnessed. To avoid dire consequences, Microsoft should favor an approach that tolerates and embraces the diversity of the open source approach, especially when network-based integration is involved. There are many clever and motivated people out there, who have many different reasons to avoid buying directly into a Microsoft proprietary stack. Microsoft must employ diplomacy to woo these accounts; stubborn insistence will be both counterproductive and ineffective. Microsoft cannot prosper during the open source wave as an island, with a defenses built out of litigation and proprietary protocols.

I think it’s taken many years, but it does feel like Microsoft is starting to actually do just this.

I have often wondered why they don’t open up their free software to public as open source or shared source. I’d start with the web technologies Internet Explorer, Messenger, and all the Live services applications.

This letter from David Stutz is back from 2003, try but still seems to me to be relevant. I found this via a post by Cory on BoingBoing.

Read on and enjoy

Digging in against open source commoditization won’t work – it would be like digging in against the Internet, endocrinologist which Microsoft tried for a while before getting wise. Any move towards cutting off alternatives by limiting interoperability or integration options would be fraught with danger, viagra buy since it would enrage customers, accelerate the divergence of the open source platform, and have other undesirable results. Despite this, Microsoft is at risk of following this path, due to the corporate delusion that goes by many names: “better together,” “unified platform,” and “integrated software.” There is false hope in Redmond that these outmoded approaches to software integration will attract and keep international markets, governments, academics, and most importantly, innovators, safely within the Microsoft sphere of influence. But they won’t.

Exciting new networked applications are being written. Time is not standing still. Microsoft must survive and prosper by learning from the open source software movement and by borrowing from and improving its techniques. Open source software is as large and powerful a wave as the Internet was, and is rapidly accreting into a legitimate alternative to Windows. It can and should be harnessed. To avoid dire consequences, Microsoft should favor an approach that tolerates and embraces the diversity of the open source approach, especially when network-based integration is involved. There are many clever and motivated people out there, who have many different reasons to avoid buying directly into a Microsoft proprietary stack. Microsoft must employ diplomacy to woo these accounts; stubborn insistence will be both counterproductive and ineffective. Microsoft cannot prosper during the open source wave as an island, with a defenses built out of litigation and proprietary protocols.

I think it’s taken many years, but it does feel like Microsoft is starting to actually do just this.

I have often wondered why they don’t open up their free software to public as open source or shared source. I’d start with the web technologies Internet Explorer, Messenger, and all the Live services applications.

This letter from David Stutz is back from 2003, try but still seems to me to be relevant. I found this via a post by Cory on BoingBoing.

Read on and enjoy

Digging in against open source commoditization won’t work – it would be like digging in against the Internet, endocrinologist which Microsoft tried for a while before getting wise. Any move towards cutting off alternatives by limiting interoperability or integration options would be fraught with danger, viagra buy since it would enrage customers, accelerate the divergence of the open source platform, and have other undesirable results. Despite this, Microsoft is at risk of following this path, due to the corporate delusion that goes by many names: “better together,” “unified platform,” and “integrated software.” There is false hope in Redmond that these outmoded approaches to software integration will attract and keep international markets, governments, academics, and most importantly, innovators, safely within the Microsoft sphere of influence. But they won’t.

Exciting new networked applications are being written. Time is not standing still. Microsoft must survive and prosper by learning from the open source software movement and by borrowing from and improving its techniques. Open source software is as large and powerful a wave as the Internet was, and is rapidly accreting into a legitimate alternative to Windows. It can and should be harnessed. To avoid dire consequences, Microsoft should favor an approach that tolerates and embraces the diversity of the open source approach, especially when network-based integration is involved. There are many clever and motivated people out there, who have many different reasons to avoid buying directly into a Microsoft proprietary stack. Microsoft must employ diplomacy to woo these accounts; stubborn insistence will be both counterproductive and ineffective. Microsoft cannot prosper during the open source wave as an island, with a defenses built out of litigation and proprietary protocols.

I think it’s taken many years, but it does feel like Microsoft is starting to actually do just this.

I have often wondered why they don’t open up their free software to public as open source or shared source. I’d start with the web technologies Internet Explorer, Messenger, and all the Live services applications.
This letter from David Stutz is back from 2003, try but still seems to me to be relevant. I found this via a post by Cory on BoingBoing.

Read on and enjoy

Digging in against open source commoditization won’t work – it would be like digging in against the Internet, endocrinologist which Microsoft tried for a while before getting wise. Any move towards cutting off alternatives by limiting interoperability or integration options would be fraught with danger, viagra buy since it would enrage customers, accelerate the divergence of the open source platform, and have other undesirable results. Despite this, Microsoft is at risk of following this path, due to the corporate delusion that goes by many names: “better together,” “unified platform,” and “integrated software.” There is false hope in Redmond that these outmoded approaches to software integration will attract and keep international markets, governments, academics, and most importantly, innovators, safely within the Microsoft sphere of influence. But they won’t.

Exciting new networked applications are being written. Time is not standing still. Microsoft must survive and prosper by learning from the open source software movement and by borrowing from and improving its techniques. Open source software is as large and powerful a wave as the Internet was, and is rapidly accreting into a legitimate alternative to Windows. It can and should be harnessed. To avoid dire consequences, Microsoft should favor an approach that tolerates and embraces the diversity of the open source approach, especially when network-based integration is involved. There are many clever and motivated people out there, who have many different reasons to avoid buying directly into a Microsoft proprietary stack. Microsoft must employ diplomacy to woo these accounts; stubborn insistence will be both counterproductive and ineffective. Microsoft cannot prosper during the open source wave as an island, with a defenses built out of litigation and proprietary protocols.

I think it’s taken many years, but it does feel like Microsoft is starting to actually do just this.

I have often wondered why they don’t open up their free software to public as open source or shared source. I’d start with the web technologies Internet Explorer, Messenger, and all the Live services applications.

RFID & Arduino, mind originally uploaded by futileboy.

Working on a project that will use an RFID tag to unlock a secret admin mode of an application. More to come soon!

WPF Sonar application using Arduino and PING))) sensor

Monday, February 8th, 2010

I’ve been playing around with the Arduino more and more lately and really wanted to find a way to make it work with my other world of C# and WPF.   The idea was to make an application that changes the screen based on how far away the user is.  The only way that I could easily think about doing it was to use an Arduino as a serial device to help communicate with the sonar sensor. 

(more…)

Photos of the First Microsoft Store

Friday, October 23rd, 2009

I was lucky enough to be at the first Microsoft Store in Scottsdale on opening day.

Here are the photos I took:

Rules for demonstrating a new technology

Thursday, July 23rd, 2009

This mouse is watching you
This mouse is watching you
1. Make a Twitter application for you new technology
2. Make a Twitter / Google maps mash up to tun on the technology
3. Use the Flickr API
4. Combine Twitter, help remedy Flickr and Google maps
5. Make a game that has users upload photos to Flickr and then tweet about it for points.
6. It doesn’t matter just make it multitouch in fact if you can take input for all 10 fingers people don’t care.
7. Take all of the above and add pictures of cats with funny captions. Mmmmm… multitouch LOL cats.

Okay, this site page don’t take number 7. I’m going to get stinky rich with my multitouch cats that crowd sources whimsical comments made via twitter. OMG, treatment this is so going to rule the interwebs! I can see it now. You’ll control one cat on each finger, like finger puppets and then little speech bubbles will pop up on a cat and they will say things like, “IM on ur fingers Makn LOLZ”

I even made a wireframe of it.

multitouchCats

The Digital Landscape: Digital Marketing

Monday, July 6th, 2009

Like my previous post about Social Technologies I wanted to put together a better classification model in place for digital marketing. Often it seems terms are thrown around without much standardization.

Personalization

  • Behavioral Targeting
  • IP Targeting
  • Dynamic Content Delivery
  • Research
  • Network Based Targeting
  • Segmentation

Search

  • SEO / Organic Search
  • Vertical Search
  • Paid Search
  • Search Engine Marketing
  • Syndicated Search

Site Optimization

  • Creative Message Optimization
  • Landing Page Optimization
  • Site Path Optimization
  • Targeted Incentives
  • Partner Site Integration

Platform Agnostic Content

  • Podcast & Video Casts
  • Web Video / VOD
  • Syndicated / Embeddable Content
  • RSS Feeds
  • Mobile Devices
  • Home Theater PC / DVR
  • Personal Content Stores
  • In-game (Xbox)

Online Advertising

  • Display
  • text links
  • rich media
  • mobile

The Digital Landscape: Social Technologies

Friday, July 3rd, 2009

Here’s my pass at trying to come up with some simple classification for social technologies available today.

Co-Creation

  • Tagging / Folksonomies
  • Mash ups
  • Shared shorce
  • Creative Commons

Influencer Outreach

  • Eco-Systems Mapping
  • Influencer Disseminated Artifacts
  • Influencer Team Management

Mass Collaboration

  • Blogs
  • Micro Blogs
  • Forums
  • Wikis
  • Social Bookmarking
  • Forward Tracking

Social Connection Sites

  • Social Networks
  • Team sites
  • Usenet
  • Pass-along Licensing

Consumer Generated Media

  • User created content
  • Reviews
  • Ratings

Twitter Affiliate Ad Network

Thursday, July 2nd, 2009

Like my previous post about Social Technologies I wanted to put together a better classification model in place for digital marketing. Often it seems terms are thrown around without much standardization.

Personalization

  • Behavioral Targeting
  • IP Targeting
  • Dynamic Content Delivery
  • Research
  • Network Based Targeting
  • Segmentation

Search

  • SEO / Organic Search
  • Vertical Search
  • Paid Search
  • Search Engine Marketing
  • Syndicated Search

Site Optimization

  • Creative Message Optimization
  • Landing Page Optimization
  • Site Path Optimization
  • Targeted Incentives
  • Partner Site Integration

Platform Agnostic Content

  • Podcast & Video Casts
  • Web Video / VOD
  • Syndicated / Embeddable Content
  • RSS Feeds
  • Mobile Devices
  • Home Theater PC / DVR
  • Personal Content Stores
  • In-game (Xbox)

Online Advertising

  • Display
  • text links
  • rich media
  • mobile

Like my previous post about Social Technologies I wanted to put together a better classification model in place for digital marketing. Often it seems terms are thrown around without much standardization.

Personalization

  • Behavioral Targeting
  • IP Targeting
  • Dynamic Content Delivery
  • Research
  • Network Based Targeting
  • Segmentation

Search

  • SEO / Organic Search
  • Vertical Search
  • Paid Search
  • Search Engine Marketing
  • Syndicated Search

Site Optimization

  • Creative Message Optimization
  • Landing Page Optimization
  • Site Path Optimization
  • Targeted Incentives
  • Partner Site Integration

Platform Agnostic Content

  • Podcast & Video Casts
  • Web Video / VOD
  • Syndicated / Embeddable Content
  • RSS Feeds
  • Mobile Devices
  • Home Theater PC / DVR
  • Personal Content Stores
  • In-game (Xbox)

Online Advertising

  • Display
  • text links
  • rich media
  • mobile

If you live in Seattle you know this is a car town.  It’s nearly impossible to get to some points without the use of car.  It’s sort of sad really that a young city that appears to be full of environmentally conscious  people haven’t done more to make this city have better mass transit options.

I found this nice list of non-car ways to get around town.  Since it was buried in a random word document I thought I would share it here.  I’d give credit to the original author, sales purchase but I don’t know who they are.

Seattle’s Bicycle Master Plan

Find everything you want to know about efforts to make Seattle the most bicycle-friendly city in the country.

Seattle Bike Maps

Before you hit the road, remedy hit the computer – and check out the city’s best bicycle routes.

Seattle Pedestrian Master Plan

Walking is the most efficient, affordable and environmentally friendly form of transportation. Find out how Seattle’s becoming the most walkable city in the nation.

Ride Share

A convenient carpool is your ticket to the HOV lanes, so you can get where you’re going faster. In four easy steps you’ll get your carpool up and running.

Seattle Monorail

Check out the country’s first full-scale commercial monorail system for trips between Seattle Center, Lower Queen Anne and Downtown.

Seattle Streetcar

Since its opening, the streetcar has become an integral part of Seattle’s Center City transportation system, connecting the Downtown Retail Core, Denny Triangle and South Lake Union areas.

Transportation Connection

The Transportation Connection is your one stop shop for alternatives to driving and parking in downtown Seattle.

Seattle Metro Bus Trip Planner

Trip Planner helps you get where you’re going with information and schedules for all public transit in King, Pierce, and Snohomish counties.

Walk Score

Type any address to get its Walk Score – a measure of the walkability of the surrounding neighborhood, courtesy of Front Seat Management.

Zipcar

Owning a car is expense, so try Zipcar – the nation’s largest car-sharing service. Just complete an online application, receive your Zipcard and you can begin driving right away.

Bike Buddy

Meet up with a bike mentor to review equipment, map a route or join you for a test ride.

Sound Transit

Trip maps, ride alerts, schedules and project updates on the region’s transit system. This summer, check out Sounder Commuter rail and Tacoma Link Light Rail. Soon light rail service from Seatac to downtown Seattle will be available

Washington State Ferries

Come take a ride on the nation’s largest ferry system. Enjoy some of the best views of city – from Elliott Bay.

Elliott Bay Water Taxi

Water taxi service between Pier 55 and the Seacrest Dock in West Seattle takes about 12 minutes. Buses are synched to take you to Alki Beach.
Like my previous post about Social Technologies I wanted to put together a better classification model in place for digital marketing. Often it seems terms are thrown around without much standardization.

Personalization

  • Behavioral Targeting
  • IP Targeting
  • Dynamic Content Delivery
  • Research
  • Network Based Targeting
  • Segmentation

Search

  • SEO / Organic Search
  • Vertical Search
  • Paid Search
  • Search Engine Marketing
  • Syndicated Search

Site Optimization

  • Creative Message Optimization
  • Landing Page Optimization
  • Site Path Optimization
  • Targeted Incentives
  • Partner Site Integration

Platform Agnostic Content

  • Podcast & Video Casts
  • Web Video / VOD
  • Syndicated / Embeddable Content
  • RSS Feeds
  • Mobile Devices
  • Home Theater PC / DVR
  • Personal Content Stores
  • In-game (Xbox)

Online Advertising

  • Display
  • text links
  • rich media
  • mobile

If you live in Seattle you know this is a car town.  It’s nearly impossible to get to some points without the use of car.  It’s sort of sad really that a young city that appears to be full of environmentally conscious  people haven’t done more to make this city have better mass transit options.

I found this nice list of non-car ways to get around town.  Since it was buried in a random word document I thought I would share it here.  I’d give credit to the original author, sales purchase but I don’t know who they are.

Seattle’s Bicycle Master Plan

Find everything you want to know about efforts to make Seattle the most bicycle-friendly city in the country.

Seattle Bike Maps

Before you hit the road, remedy hit the computer – and check out the city’s best bicycle routes.

Seattle Pedestrian Master Plan

Walking is the most efficient, affordable and environmentally friendly form of transportation. Find out how Seattle’s becoming the most walkable city in the nation.

Ride Share

A convenient carpool is your ticket to the HOV lanes, so you can get where you’re going faster. In four easy steps you’ll get your carpool up and running.

Seattle Monorail

Check out the country’s first full-scale commercial monorail system for trips between Seattle Center, Lower Queen Anne and Downtown.

Seattle Streetcar

Since its opening, the streetcar has become an integral part of Seattle’s Center City transportation system, connecting the Downtown Retail Core, Denny Triangle and South Lake Union areas.

Transportation Connection

The Transportation Connection is your one stop shop for alternatives to driving and parking in downtown Seattle.

Seattle Metro Bus Trip Planner

Trip Planner helps you get where you’re going with information and schedules for all public transit in King, Pierce, and Snohomish counties.

Walk Score

Type any address to get its Walk Score – a measure of the walkability of the surrounding neighborhood, courtesy of Front Seat Management.

Zipcar

Owning a car is expense, so try Zipcar – the nation’s largest car-sharing service. Just complete an online application, receive your Zipcard and you can begin driving right away.

Bike Buddy

Meet up with a bike mentor to review equipment, map a route or join you for a test ride.

Sound Transit

Trip maps, ride alerts, schedules and project updates on the region’s transit system. This summer, check out Sounder Commuter rail and Tacoma Link Light Rail. Soon light rail service from Seatac to downtown Seattle will be available

Washington State Ferries

Come take a ride on the nation’s largest ferry system. Enjoy some of the best views of city – from Elliott Bay.

Elliott Bay Water Taxi

Water taxi service between Pier 55 and the Seacrest Dock in West Seattle takes about 12 minutes. Buses are synched to take you to Alki Beach.
If you live in Seattle you know this is a car town.  It’s nearly impossible to get to some points without the use of car.  It’s sort of sad really that a young city that appears to be full of environmentally conscious  people haven’t done more to make this city have better mass transit options.

I found this nice list of non-car ways to get around town.  Since it was buried in a random word document I thought I would share it here.  I’d give credit to the original author, sales purchase but I don’t know who they are.

Seattle’s Bicycle Master Plan

Find everything you want to know about efforts to make Seattle the most bicycle-friendly city in the country.

Seattle Bike Maps

Before you hit the road, remedy hit the computer – and check out the city’s best bicycle routes.

Seattle Pedestrian Master Plan

Walking is the most efficient, affordable and environmentally friendly form of transportation. Find out how Seattle’s becoming the most walkable city in the nation.

Ride Share

A convenient carpool is your ticket to the HOV lanes, so you can get where you’re going faster. In four easy steps you’ll get your carpool up and running.

Seattle Monorail

Check out the country’s first full-scale commercial monorail system for trips between Seattle Center, Lower Queen Anne and Downtown.

Seattle Streetcar

Since its opening, the streetcar has become an integral part of Seattle’s Center City transportation system, connecting the Downtown Retail Core, Denny Triangle and South Lake Union areas.

Transportation Connection

The Transportation Connection is your one stop shop for alternatives to driving and parking in downtown Seattle.

Seattle Metro Bus Trip Planner

Trip Planner helps you get where you’re going with information and schedules for all public transit in King, Pierce, and Snohomish counties.

Walk Score

Type any address to get its Walk Score – a measure of the walkability of the surrounding neighborhood, courtesy of Front Seat Management.

Zipcar

Owning a car is expense, so try Zipcar – the nation’s largest car-sharing service. Just complete an online application, receive your Zipcard and you can begin driving right away.

Bike Buddy

Meet up with a bike mentor to review equipment, map a route or join you for a test ride.

Sound Transit

Trip maps, ride alerts, schedules and project updates on the region’s transit system. This summer, check out Sounder Commuter rail and Tacoma Link Light Rail. Soon light rail service from Seatac to downtown Seattle will be available

Washington State Ferries

Come take a ride on the nation’s largest ferry system. Enjoy some of the best views of city – from Elliott Bay.

Elliott Bay Water Taxi

Water taxi service between Pier 55 and the Seacrest Dock in West Seattle takes about 12 minutes. Buses are synched to take you to Alki Beach.

If you live in Seattle you know this is a car town.  It’s nearly impossible to get to some points without the use of car.  It’s sort of sad really that a young city that appears to be full of environmentally conscious  people haven’t done more to make this city have better mass transit options.

I found this nice list of non-car ways to get around town.  Since it was buried in a random word document I thought I would share it here.  I’d give credit to the original author, sickness but I don’t know who they are.

Seattle’s Bicycle Master Plan

Find everything you want to know about efforts to make Seattle the most bicycle-friendly city in the country.

Seattle Bike Maps

Before you hit the road, hit the computer – and check out the city’s best bicycle routes.

Seattle Pedestrian Master Plan

Walking is the most efficient, affordable and environmentally friendly form of transportation. Find out how Seattle’s becoming the most walkable city in the nation.

Ride Share

A convenient carpool is your ticket to the HOV lanes, so you can get where you’re going faster. In four easy steps you’ll get your carpool up and running.

Seattle Monorail

Check out the country’s first full-scale commercial monorail system for trips between Seattle Center, Lower Queen Anne and Downtown.

Seattle Streetcar

Since its opening, the streetcar has become an integral part of Seattle’s Center City transportation system, connecting the Downtown Retail Core, Denny Triangle and South Lake Union areas.

Transportation Connection

The Transportation Connection is your one stop shop for alternatives to driving and parking in downtown Seattle.

Seattle Metro Bus Trip Planner

Trip Planner helps you get where you’re going with information and schedules for all public transit in King, Pierce, and Snohomish counties.

Walk Score

Type any address to get its Walk Score – a measure of the walkability of the surrounding neighborhood, courtesy of Front Seat Management.

Zipcar

Owning a car is expense, so try Zipcar – the nation’s largest car-sharing service. Just complete an online application, receive your Zipcard and you can begin driving right away.

Bike Buddy

Meet up with a bike mentor to review equipment, map a route or join you for a test ride.

Sound Transit

Trip maps, ride alerts, schedules and project updates on the region’s transit system. This summer, check out Sounder Commuter rail and Tacoma Link Light Rail.

Washington State Ferries

Come take a ride on the nation’s largest ferry system. Enjoy some of the best views of city – from Elliott Bay.

Elliott Bay Water Taxi

Water taxi service between Pier 55 and the Seacrest Dock in West Seattle takes about 12 minutes. Buses are synched to take you to Alki Beach.

Like my previous post about Social Technologies I wanted to put together a better classification model in place for digital marketing. Often it seems terms are thrown around without much standardization.

Personalization

  • Behavioral Targeting
  • IP Targeting
  • Dynamic Content Delivery
  • Research
  • Network Based Targeting
  • Segmentation

Search

  • SEO / Organic Search
  • Vertical Search
  • Paid Search
  • Search Engine Marketing
  • Syndicated Search

Site Optimization

  • Creative Message Optimization
  • Landing Page Optimization
  • Site Path Optimization
  • Targeted Incentives
  • Partner Site Integration

Platform Agnostic Content

  • Podcast & Video Casts
  • Web Video / VOD
  • Syndicated / Embeddable Content
  • RSS Feeds
  • Mobile Devices
  • Home Theater PC / DVR
  • Personal Content Stores
  • In-game (Xbox)

Online Advertising

  • Display
  • text links
  • rich media
  • mobile

If you live in Seattle you know this is a car town.  It’s nearly impossible to get to some points without the use of car.  It’s sort of sad really that a young city that appears to be full of environmentally conscious  people haven’t done more to make this city have better mass transit options.

I found this nice list of non-car ways to get around town.  Since it was buried in a random word document I thought I would share it here.  I’d give credit to the original author, sales purchase but I don’t know who they are.

Seattle’s Bicycle Master Plan

Find everything you want to know about efforts to make Seattle the most bicycle-friendly city in the country.

Seattle Bike Maps

Before you hit the road, remedy hit the computer – and check out the city’s best bicycle routes.

Seattle Pedestrian Master Plan

Walking is the most efficient, affordable and environmentally friendly form of transportation. Find out how Seattle’s becoming the most walkable city in the nation.

Ride Share

A convenient carpool is your ticket to the HOV lanes, so you can get where you’re going faster. In four easy steps you’ll get your carpool up and running.

Seattle Monorail

Check out the country’s first full-scale commercial monorail system for trips between Seattle Center, Lower Queen Anne and Downtown.

Seattle Streetcar

Since its opening, the streetcar has become an integral part of Seattle’s Center City transportation system, connecting the Downtown Retail Core, Denny Triangle and South Lake Union areas.

Transportation Connection

The Transportation Connection is your one stop shop for alternatives to driving and parking in downtown Seattle.

Seattle Metro Bus Trip Planner

Trip Planner helps you get where you’re going with information and schedules for all public transit in King, Pierce, and Snohomish counties.

Walk Score

Type any address to get its Walk Score – a measure of the walkability of the surrounding neighborhood, courtesy of Front Seat Management.

Zipcar

Owning a car is expense, so try Zipcar – the nation’s largest car-sharing service. Just complete an online application, receive your Zipcard and you can begin driving right away.

Bike Buddy

Meet up with a bike mentor to review equipment, map a route or join you for a test ride.

Sound Transit

Trip maps, ride alerts, schedules and project updates on the region’s transit system. This summer, check out Sounder Commuter rail and Tacoma Link Light Rail. Soon light rail service from Seatac to downtown Seattle will be available

Washington State Ferries

Come take a ride on the nation’s largest ferry system. Enjoy some of the best views of city – from Elliott Bay.

Elliott Bay Water Taxi

Water taxi service between Pier 55 and the Seacrest Dock in West Seattle takes about 12 minutes. Buses are synched to take you to Alki Beach.
If you live in Seattle you know this is a car town.  It’s nearly impossible to get to some points without the use of car.  It’s sort of sad really that a young city that appears to be full of environmentally conscious  people haven’t done more to make this city have better mass transit options.

I found this nice list of non-car ways to get around town.  Since it was buried in a random word document I thought I would share it here.  I’d give credit to the original author, sales purchase but I don’t know who they are.

Seattle’s Bicycle Master Plan

Find everything you want to know about efforts to make Seattle the most bicycle-friendly city in the country.

Seattle Bike Maps

Before you hit the road, remedy hit the computer – and check out the city’s best bicycle routes.

Seattle Pedestrian Master Plan

Walking is the most efficient, affordable and environmentally friendly form of transportation. Find out how Seattle’s becoming the most walkable city in the nation.

Ride Share

A convenient carpool is your ticket to the HOV lanes, so you can get where you’re going faster. In four easy steps you’ll get your carpool up and running.

Seattle Monorail

Check out the country’s first full-scale commercial monorail system for trips between Seattle Center, Lower Queen Anne and Downtown.

Seattle Streetcar

Since its opening, the streetcar has become an integral part of Seattle’s Center City transportation system, connecting the Downtown Retail Core, Denny Triangle and South Lake Union areas.

Transportation Connection

The Transportation Connection is your one stop shop for alternatives to driving and parking in downtown Seattle.

Seattle Metro Bus Trip Planner

Trip Planner helps you get where you’re going with information and schedules for all public transit in King, Pierce, and Snohomish counties.

Walk Score

Type any address to get its Walk Score – a measure of the walkability of the surrounding neighborhood, courtesy of Front Seat Management.

Zipcar

Owning a car is expense, so try Zipcar – the nation’s largest car-sharing service. Just complete an online application, receive your Zipcard and you can begin driving right away.

Bike Buddy

Meet up with a bike mentor to review equipment, map a route or join you for a test ride.

Sound Transit

Trip maps, ride alerts, schedules and project updates on the region’s transit system. This summer, check out Sounder Commuter rail and Tacoma Link Light Rail. Soon light rail service from Seatac to downtown Seattle will be available

Washington State Ferries

Come take a ride on the nation’s largest ferry system. Enjoy some of the best views of city – from Elliott Bay.

Elliott Bay Water Taxi

Water taxi service between Pier 55 and the Seacrest Dock in West Seattle takes about 12 minutes. Buses are synched to take you to Alki Beach.

If you live in Seattle you know this is a car town.  It’s nearly impossible to get to some points without the use of car.  It’s sort of sad really that a young city that appears to be full of environmentally conscious  people haven’t done more to make this city have better mass transit options.

I found this nice list of non-car ways to get around town.  Since it was buried in a random word document I thought I would share it here.  I’d give credit to the original author, sickness but I don’t know who they are.

Seattle’s Bicycle Master Plan

Find everything you want to know about efforts to make Seattle the most bicycle-friendly city in the country.

Seattle Bike Maps

Before you hit the road, hit the computer – and check out the city’s best bicycle routes.

Seattle Pedestrian Master Plan

Walking is the most efficient, affordable and environmentally friendly form of transportation. Find out how Seattle’s becoming the most walkable city in the nation.

Ride Share

A convenient carpool is your ticket to the HOV lanes, so you can get where you’re going faster. In four easy steps you’ll get your carpool up and running.

Seattle Monorail

Check out the country’s first full-scale commercial monorail system for trips between Seattle Center, Lower Queen Anne and Downtown.

Seattle Streetcar

Since its opening, the streetcar has become an integral part of Seattle’s Center City transportation system, connecting the Downtown Retail Core, Denny Triangle and South Lake Union areas.

Transportation Connection

The Transportation Connection is your one stop shop for alternatives to driving and parking in downtown Seattle.

Seattle Metro Bus Trip Planner

Trip Planner helps you get where you’re going with information and schedules for all public transit in King, Pierce, and Snohomish counties.

Walk Score

Type any address to get its Walk Score – a measure of the walkability of the surrounding neighborhood, courtesy of Front Seat Management.

Zipcar

Owning a car is expense, so try Zipcar – the nation’s largest car-sharing service. Just complete an online application, receive your Zipcard and you can begin driving right away.

Bike Buddy

Meet up with a bike mentor to review equipment, map a route or join you for a test ride.

Sound Transit

Trip maps, ride alerts, schedules and project updates on the region’s transit system. This summer, check out Sounder Commuter rail and Tacoma Link Light Rail.

Washington State Ferries

Come take a ride on the nation’s largest ferry system. Enjoy some of the best views of city – from Elliott Bay.

Elliott Bay Water Taxi

Water taxi service between Pier 55 and the Seacrest Dock in West Seattle takes about 12 minutes. Buses are synched to take you to Alki Beach.

If you live in Seattle you know this is a car town.  It’s nearly impossible to get to some points without the use of car.  It’s sort of sad really that a young city that appears to be full of environmentally conscious  people haven’t done more to make this city have better mass transit options.

I found this nice list of non-car ways to get around town.  Since it was buried in a random word document I thought I would share it here.  I’d give credit to the original author, sales purchase but I don’t know who they are.

Seattle’s Bicycle Master Plan

Find everything you want to know about efforts to make Seattle the most bicycle-friendly city in the country.

Seattle Bike Maps

Before you hit the road, remedy hit the computer – and check out the city’s best bicycle routes.

Seattle Pedestrian Master Plan

Walking is the most efficient, affordable and environmentally friendly form of transportation. Find out how Seattle’s becoming the most walkable city in the nation.

Ride Share

A convenient carpool is your ticket to the HOV lanes, so you can get where you’re going faster. In four easy steps you’ll get your carpool up and running.

Seattle Monorail

Check out the country’s first full-scale commercial monorail system for trips between Seattle Center, Lower Queen Anne and Downtown.

Seattle Streetcar

Since its opening, the streetcar has become an integral part of Seattle’s Center City transportation system, connecting the Downtown Retail Core, Denny Triangle and South Lake Union areas.

Transportation Connection

The Transportation Connection is your one stop shop for alternatives to driving and parking in downtown Seattle.

Seattle Metro Bus Trip Planner

Trip Planner helps you get where you’re going with information and schedules for all public transit in King, Pierce, and Snohomish counties.

Walk Score

Type any address to get its Walk Score – a measure of the walkability of the surrounding neighborhood, courtesy of Front Seat Management.

Zipcar

Owning a car is expense, so try Zipcar – the nation’s largest car-sharing service. Just complete an online application, receive your Zipcard and you can begin driving right away.

Bike Buddy

Meet up with a bike mentor to review equipment, map a route or join you for a test ride.

Sound Transit

Trip maps, ride alerts, schedules and project updates on the region’s transit system. This summer, check out Sounder Commuter rail and Tacoma Link Light Rail. Soon light rail service from Seatac to downtown Seattle will be available

Washington State Ferries

Come take a ride on the nation’s largest ferry system. Enjoy some of the best views of city – from Elliott Bay.

Elliott Bay Water Taxi

Water taxi service between Pier 55 and the Seacrest Dock in West Seattle takes about 12 minutes. Buses are synched to take you to Alki Beach.

If you live in Seattle you know this is a car town.  It’s nearly impossible to get to some points without the use of car.  It’s sort of sad really that a young city that appears to be full of environmentally conscious  people haven’t done more to make this city have better mass transit options.

I found this nice list of non-car ways to get around town.  Since it was buried in a random word document I thought I would share it here.  I’d give credit to the original author, sickness but I don’t know who they are.

Seattle’s Bicycle Master Plan

Find everything you want to know about efforts to make Seattle the most bicycle-friendly city in the country.

Seattle Bike Maps

Before you hit the road, hit the computer – and check out the city’s best bicycle routes.

Seattle Pedestrian Master Plan

Walking is the most efficient, affordable and environmentally friendly form of transportation. Find out how Seattle’s becoming the most walkable city in the nation.

Ride Share

A convenient carpool is your ticket to the HOV lanes, so you can get where you’re going faster. In four easy steps you’ll get your carpool up and running.

Seattle Monorail

Check out the country’s first full-scale commercial monorail system for trips between Seattle Center, Lower Queen Anne and Downtown.

Seattle Streetcar

Since its opening, the streetcar has become an integral part of Seattle’s Center City transportation system, connecting the Downtown Retail Core, Denny Triangle and South Lake Union areas.

Transportation Connection

The Transportation Connection is your one stop shop for alternatives to driving and parking in downtown Seattle.

Seattle Metro Bus Trip Planner

Trip Planner helps you get where you’re going with information and schedules for all public transit in King, Pierce, and Snohomish counties.

Walk Score

Type any address to get its Walk Score – a measure of the walkability of the surrounding neighborhood, courtesy of Front Seat Management.

Zipcar

Owning a car is expense, so try Zipcar – the nation’s largest car-sharing service. Just complete an online application, receive your Zipcard and you can begin driving right away.

Bike Buddy

Meet up with a bike mentor to review equipment, map a route or join you for a test ride.

Sound Transit

Trip maps, ride alerts, schedules and project updates on the region’s transit system. This summer, check out Sounder Commuter rail and Tacoma Link Light Rail.

Washington State Ferries

Come take a ride on the nation’s largest ferry system. Enjoy some of the best views of city – from Elliott Bay.

Elliott Bay Water Taxi

Water taxi service between Pier 55 and the Seacrest Dock in West Seattle takes about 12 minutes. Buses are synched to take you to Alki Beach.

If you live in Seattle you know this is a car town.  It’s nearly impossible to get to some points without the use of car.  It’s sort of sad really that a young city that appears to be full of environmentally conscious  people haven’t done more to make this city have better mass transit options.

I found this nice list of non-car ways to get around town.  Since it was buried in a random word document I thought I would share it here.  I’d give credit to the original author, sickness but I don’t know who they are.

Seattle’s Bicycle Master Plan

Find everything you want to know about efforts to make Seattle the most bicycle-friendly city in the country.

Seattle Bike Maps

Before you hit the road, hit the computer – and check out the city’s best bicycle routes.

Seattle Pedestrian Master Plan

Walking is the most efficient, affordable and environmentally friendly form of transportation. Find out how Seattle’s becoming the most walkable city in the nation.

Ride Share

A convenient carpool is your ticket to the HOV lanes, so you can get where you’re going faster. In four easy steps you’ll get your carpool up and running.

Seattle Monorail

Check out the country’s first full-scale commercial monorail system for trips between Seattle Center, Lower Queen Anne and Downtown.

Seattle Streetcar

Since its opening, the streetcar has become an integral part of Seattle’s Center City transportation system, connecting the Downtown Retail Core, Denny Triangle and South Lake Union areas.

Transportation Connection

The Transportation Connection is your one stop shop for alternatives to driving and parking in downtown Seattle.

Seattle Metro Bus Trip Planner

Trip Planner helps you get where you’re going with information and schedules for all public transit in King, Pierce, and Snohomish counties.

Walk Score

Type any address to get its Walk Score – a measure of the walkability of the surrounding neighborhood, courtesy of Front Seat Management.

Zipcar

Owning a car is expense, so try Zipcar – the nation’s largest car-sharing service. Just complete an online application, receive your Zipcard and you can begin driving right away.

Bike Buddy

Meet up with a bike mentor to review equipment, map a route or join you for a test ride.

Sound Transit

Trip maps, ride alerts, schedules and project updates on the region’s transit system. This summer, check out Sounder Commuter rail and Tacoma Link Light Rail.

Washington State Ferries

Come take a ride on the nation’s largest ferry system. Enjoy some of the best views of city – from Elliott Bay.

Elliott Bay Water Taxi

Water taxi service between Pier 55 and the Seacrest Dock in West Seattle takes about 12 minutes. Buses are synched to take you to Alki Beach.

I’ve been thinking about this for a couple of days now and what we really need is a Twitter affiliate ad network like service.  I often post tweets about products I like or things that I find interesting.  In most cases that is valuable to those companies.  I’ve done some small tests with my twitter account @futileboy and found that my click through is very high for each post about 7% of my followers click my links.  Which is a much higher number then online ads get.  Of course that’s because my links are not always trying to sell something.  On twitter if you stop being genuine the people see that and stop following you.

Aside from all that, cheap
it would be great if there was service for users of twitter to make a little money off of their recommendations.  What I would like to see is a service that’s sort of like Google Adsense, remedy but instead of suggested ads, a user would type in the product they are about to promote and then if available receive a URL with their code and the clients in it. along with a short URL version that’s easy to post to Twitter. 

Companies could go one step further with this, on demand adverting, and even offer discounts to top influencer’s followers.  Which in turn would give the tweeter more street cred.  Just imagine a tweet from someone you follow pointing out a product you’re interested in and a discount if you click the link now.  This may be just enough to push someone in to purchasing.

Would this service get abused? OF course it will.  However the natural filtering process of over advertising will ultimately make authentic influencers stand out.

Sure it’s a little evil, but if someone is willing to pay for it and someone is willing to take that money in the offer then the service should exist.