http://www.pugetsoundradio.com/cgi-bin/forum/Blah.pl? http://www.eblah.com en http://www.pugetsoundradio.com/cgi-bin/forum/Blah.pl?m-1283379315/ http://www.pugetsoundradio.com/cgi-bin/forum/Blah.pl?m-1283379315/#num1 Getting more from Gmail
  
Posted by Al Gibes
blogging for the
Las Vegas News Journal
http://www.lvrj.com/blogs/onlineguy
Tuesday, Aug. 31, 2010

I placed my first telephone call from my Gmail account a short while ago. That's right. Gmail is new and improved, as in it now includes telephone service.

Why type when you can talk, right? And, if two parties have the Gmail chat plug-in installed and both parties have a webcam, you can talk and see the person on the other end. Sounds like Skype. The difference with Gmail phone is that all calls to the United States or Canada are free. With Skype, only calls going Skype-to-Skype are free.

Calls coming from my Gmail account show up on Caller ID as coming from an Escondido, Calif., number. That means I'll need to tell people that it's OK to pick up a call from that strange locale. I'm not sure yet how much I'll use this new calling feature, but I know it's there and I know it works.

I have friends in rural Pennsylvania who have had outages with their telephone land line recently. They live so remotely that there's no mobile signal available on their property. I'm guessing we can chat via Gmail instead of waiting for the phone company to fix the problems. I'll let you know how it goes.

Google announced another enhancement to Gmail today, but I can't find it for the life of me. It's called Priority Inbox, and it’s supposed to filter messages from addresses it deems more important than others into a special inbox. The feature is still in beta testing, so perhaps my account will see the new inbox in the next couple of days.

An AFP story on Yahoo said: "Priority Inbox in Gmail divides incoming messages into one of three categories. An automated program separates "important and unread" messages from those that are "starred" and "everything else."

Why is Google doing this? The story cites a Google source saying there are about 294 billion e-mail messages sent every day. The average inbox receives more than 150 messages a day. I get about twice that many across the three accounts I monitor daily.

I'll let you know if the Priority Inbox helps me any. That is, once I have it]]> Wed, 1 Sep 2010 15:15:15 boredop http://www.pugetsoundradio.com/cgi-bin/forum/Blah.pl?m-1283355278/ http://www.pugetsoundradio.com/cgi-bin/forum/Blah.pl?m-1283355278/#num1 Telus, Bell must repay customers, CRTC rules
Those in urban centres will see refunds of up to $90 to compensate for overcharging between 2002 and 2006

By Tiffany Crawford,
Vancouver Sun
September 1, 2010

  Urban customers of Bell and Telus will receive a rebate of up to $90 after Canada's telecommunications regulator on Tuesday ordered the country's major telecom companies to repay overcharges to their urban phone customers.

The companies were also ordered to spend millions to expand broadband Internet service in rural communities.

The Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission has ordered Bell Canada, Bell Aliant, Telus and MTS Allstream to rebate $310.8 million to their urban home telephone customers. Rebates will range from $25 and $90 per customer.

In British Columbia, Telus customers in 96 urban centres will see rebates.

The decision is the culmination of four years of disputes between consumer groups and telephone companies over what to do with money that was overcharged to customers between 2002 and 2006.

The overpayments resulted from an order of the CRTC that forced major land-line telephone providers to keep rates in high-service areas artificially high to encourage competitors to enter the market.

The difference between the actual rates, and the lower fees that would have otherwise been allowed, had to be kept in a deferral account. Over time, the account accrued more than $700 million in funds. Companies argued the money should be returned as revenue to be spent on hooking up Internet in rural areas, while consumer groups argued it was an overcharge.

Michael Janigan, executive director of the Public Interest Advocacy Centre, called the order "a reasonable conclusion to a flawed regulatory adventure."

"We are pleased that the CRTC has shut the door on the blank-cheque approach of Bell Canada and Telus to expanding their broadband networks," he said.

In 2008, the case went to the Supreme Court of Canada, but the top court ruled the CRTC was to allocate the funds.

That money will now be split and redeployed, with $310.8 million going to the rebates and $421.9 million toward Internet broadband in rural areas.

Also Tuesday, the CRTC approved a plan for broadband Internet service to be delivered to 287 remote rural communities in Canada. It will be rolled out over four years.

Bell Canada and Bell Aliant Regional Communications will connect 112 communities in Ontario and Quebec; Telus Communications Company will connect 159 communities in British Columbia, Alberta and Quebec; and MTS Allstream Inc. will connect 16 communities in Manitoba.

Shawn Hall, Telus spokesman for British Columbia, said the company is looking forward to connecting the smaller communities but was disappointed that it was less money than it had asked to be allocated.

The CRTC reduced the amount to be spent by $20 million, which will make it more challenging to serve rural areas," said Hall.

"It is unfortunate that the commission reduced the amount we think that is a public good."

CRTC chair Konrad von Finckenstein called the announcement a positive solution for Canadian consumers.

"Subscribers of the major telephone companies in urban areas will enjoy a rebate on their home telephone service. And residents in hundreds of rural communities will soon be able to take advantage of the many social and economic benefits broadband Internet access provides," he said, in a news release.

ticrawford@vancouversun.com

http://www.vancouversun.com/business/Telus+Bell+must+repay+customers+CRTC+rules/3467368/story.html

.]]> Wed, 1 Sep 2010 08:34:38 SkyLine http://www.pugetsoundradio.com/cgi-bin/forum/Blah.pl?m-1283276462/ http://www.pugetsoundradio.com/cgi-bin/forum/Blah.pl?m-1283276462/#num1

Roll 'Em: Google/YouTube To Launch Pay-Per-View TV

Wayne Friedman,
Aug 30, 2010

Following on the heels of Google TV, Google is now looking to get into the pay-per-view film business -- looking to compete with Netflix and possibly Apple's iTunes.  



According to a recent report, Google's YouTube video site is in negotiations with movie studios to launch a global per-per-view service at the end of this year. YouTube already has a free movie service in place.

Recently, Google announced Google TV, a service intended to better connect traditional TV viewing with the capabilities of the Internet. The Google TV advantage seems to be the navigation tools it can bring to the party, such as Google's dominant search engine.

The Financial Times reported that the new Google YouTube PPV service for films would begin in the U.S., then roll out worldwide. Those films would appear on the same release date as DVD rentals. Top movies -- streamed, now downloaded -- could have a $5-per-title price tag.

News of Google's TV and film activities follows Apple's, which is looking to upgrade its up Apple TV service. It connects traditional TV sets to the Internet, as well as Apple iTunes' new TV plan: a 99-cent-rental-per-episode of TV series.

Netflix already has a growing digital entertainment business in which consumers can electronically rent TV and film content. The company is looking to add to its many studio deals.

Negotiations with studios and Google's YouTube have been going on for months. They have increased recently as a result of the flurry of other possible digital TV deals in the works. YouTube has been beta-testing a film rental service since January.

http://www.mediapost.com/?fa=Articles.showArticle&art_aid=134678&nid=118107
.


]]> Tue, 31 Aug 2010 10:41:02 SkyLine http://www.pugetsoundradio.com/cgi-bin/forum/Blah.pl?m-1283268965/ http://www.pugetsoundradio.com/cgi-bin/forum/Blah.pl?m-1283268965/#num1 CRTC hands victory
to smaller Internet providers

By Jamie Sturgeon,
Financial Post
August 30, 2010


"Access to broadband Internet services is a key foundation for the digital economy," said Konrad
von Finckenstein, chairman of the CRTC.Photograph by: National Post

The country’s major Internet providers such as BCE Inc.’s Bell Canada and Telus Corp. must lease network space to smaller competitors at matching speeds to ensure competition for broadband services, the telecom regulator said in a key ruling Monday.

The decision, delivered after hearings last spring, is a critical victory for independent resellers like TekSavvy Solutions Inc. and Telnet Communications, which will now be able to keep pace with incumbent offerings.

Yet for Telus and Bell, it is a big blow in their fight to gain television share and slow home-phone losses against rival cable companies Shaw Communications Inc. and Rogers Communications Inc.

Limited bandwidth capacity that the pair would rather use for new Internet TV products must instead now go toward wholesale services under regulated prices and fixed returns.

In the decision, Konrad von Finckenstein, chairman of the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission acknowledged that the country’s big providers are investing in network infrastructure, but regulated access was still required to foster “more competition and ... better serve consumers.”

The reseller model depends on set prices for wholesale network access which is then resold to customers. The telecom industry sub-sector consists of several dozen companies led by a few sizable firms like TekSavvy, Telnet and Primus Canada.

Many have been selling slower broadband services in recent years as incumbents have steadily increased their own, threatening to drive them out of the market.

Short of regulatory aid forcing incumbents to raise wholesale speeds, “We [would have to] close our doors,” said Tom Copeland, head of Canadian Association of Internet Providers, which represents about 50 small ISPs.

“If we can’t deliver services to our clients on a competitive basis, what else is there to do? We can buy retail services from these companies and repackage them, but we’re already under margin pressure,” he said.

Resale data speeds will now be dialed up to about 15 to 16 megabits per second from between 4 to 5 Mbps in many cases, Andrew Day, chief operating officer at Primus said.

To help compensate for the increase, the commission said it will allow for incumbent network owners to raise tariff prices by 10%.

It is a policy tweak that satisfies few — it cuts into already thin margins, Mr. Day said, but fails to make up for capital losses phone firms like Bell and Telus will now absorb, according to Telus’s chief of regulatory affairs, Michael Hennessy.

“The investments we’re making are predicated on getting money from Internet and television. The commission has skimmed over this issue and considered that a 10% bump will be sufficient,” he said.

Vancouver-based Telus is spending the better part of $1.7-billion this year to bring Internet capabilities in line with Western Canada cable rival Shaw. The same dynamic is playing out in Eastern Canada between Bell and rival cablecos Rogers and Videotron, who have enjoy higher bandwidth due the higher carrying capacity of coaxial networks.

Monday’s ruling threatens to once again weaken the two phone firms competitive position against the cablecos by forcing them to share new capacity with resale services.

Mr. Hennessy threatened that the decision will mean Telus turns away from boosting broadband in underserved areas back toward urban centres where more fibre must now be ploughed underground in order to compete.

“When we give our loop to a reseller, we’re forgoing the opportunity to sell TV,” Mr. Hennessy said. “So at the margins, particularly in rural markets, this decision has the potential to slow the rollout.”

jasturgeon@nationalpost.com

Read more: http://www.montrealgazette.com.....y.html#ixzz0yIAGHbfE
]]> Tue, 31 Aug 2010 08:36:05 B Control http://www.pugetsoundradio.com/cgi-bin/forum/Blah.pl?m-1283066086/ http://www.pugetsoundradio.com/cgi-bin/forum/Blah.pl?m-1283066086/#num1 Is the desktop in its death throes?

By Jameson Berkow, Financial Post
August 27, 2010

Many have long predicted the impending death of the home desktop computer, but nobody expected the end to come so soon.

“In three years’ time, desktops will be irrelevant,” John Herlihy, vice-president of global ad operations for Google Inc., told Ireland’s Digital Landscapes Conference in March.

“I would say that is fairly accurate.... I wouldn’t be surprised if it was even sooner,” agreed Ronald Cenfetelli, professor of management information systems at the University of British Columbia’s Sauder School of Business. “And I think you’re seeing that in the marketplace right now.”

Intel Corp. hammered what could be the final nail in the coffin of the desktop PC Friday morning, when it warned investors its quarterly revenue will fall short of its own estimates. The world’s largest maker of PC processor chips said weaker-than-expected demand for personal computers will hurt Intel’s third-quarter sales to the tune of US$1-billion, possibly more.

The announcement was simply the latest harbinger of doom for desktop PCs. Market research firm Forrester Inc. says desktops and laptops in 2008 were tied, with each holding about 45% of the U.S. consumer computing market. Since then, the desktop market share has fallen dramatically, replaced mostly by wildly popular tablet and netbook devices such as Apple’s iPad. By 2015, Forrester projects the market share for desktops will be just 18%. An overwhelming majority of computing products will be portable by mid-decade.

Best known for providing the technology at the heart of many popular desktop and laptop computers, Intel has been slow to adapt to increasing consumer demand for more mobility.

“Intel really missed the boat,” said Josh Martin, senior analyst for wireless media services at Massachusetts-based Strategy Analytics. “What was it that caused Intel to be so far delayed and so far behind everybody else I don’t have an answer for that,” he said. “It is definitely going to be an uphill battle for them.”

The company has been scrambling to catch up in recent weeks to such leading mobile chip makers as Qualcomm Inc. Last week, Intel announced its largest-ever acquisition, paying US$7.68-billion for security software firm McAfee Inc. Intel said the purchase was motivated from a desire to embed better security features into its processors. However, industry analysts argue the move had more to do with Intel’s efforts to break into chip making for mobile devices, which tend to require more enhanced security features.

Those arguments were validated Friday, when Reuters reported the U.S. chip giant could finalize a deal this weekend to purchase the wireless processor unit of German chipmaker Infineon Technologies AG.

Intel would indeed be wise to shift its development focus away from desktops, sales of which have been falling precipitously for some time now.

“The desktop business has been slowly declining over the last three years,” said Allan Kambeitz, merchandising director for Best Buy Canada. “So what we’ve done in that business is we’ve tried to minimize our assortment a little bit.” When Mr. Kambeitz started at Best Buy nearly 15 years ago, he said desktops were “like the meat and potatoes of the computing business and laptops were hardly anything.”

“Now laptops are four to five times of our business compared to our desktop business,” Mr. Kambeitz said.

Not everyone expects the desktop computer to go the way of the dodo. Sarah Rotman Epps, a Forrester Research analyst, believes the rise of tablet devices could actually be a boon for desktop demand.

“When consumers who own tablets go to buy their next computer, they start to look at desktops as a great value for the processing power that you want and not see a need to pay extra for portability,” Ms. Epps says.

Based on a Forrester survey of 4,000 U.S. online consumers in June, she notes that buyers of an Apple iPad are twice as likely to also buy a desktop computer in the next year.

The gravity of the Intel warning, Ms. Epps argues, should not be exaggerated.

“I would be wary of making a conclusion just based on one quarter for one company, because there are a lot of reasons why that might happen,” she said, noting that other companies such as Hewlett Packard are actually “quite bullish” on their desktop PC sales.

http://www.edmontonjournal.com/business/fp/desktop+death+throes/3452133/story.html]]> Sun, 29 Aug 2010 00:14:46 VancouverTVGuy