Salon CEO Gingras Resigns to Become Global Head of News Products at Google

Cloud storage and collaboration startup Box.net is upping the ante against competitor Microsoft SharePoint today with the launch of an in-depth integration with Google’s productivity suite Google Docs and Spreadsheets directly within the platform. Essentially, the integration allows for users to create, update and collaborate on Google docs within the Box platforms.
Box, which has 6 million users and stores 300 million documents, is a cloud storage platform for the enterprise that comes with collaboration, social and mobile functionality. Box has evolved into more than just a fils storage platform, and has become a full-fledged collaborative application where businesses can actually communicate about document updates, sync files remotely, and even add features from Salesforce, Google Apps, NetSuite, Yammer and others.
Considering that most businesses that use Box are storing documents and spreadsheets on the cloud, the ability to actually create and edit these documents from within Box makes a lot of sense. And CEO and co-founder Aaron Levie says that most of the businesses using Box are Google Apps users. See our TechCrunch TV interview with Levie discussing the news below.
With the integration, all Box users can can apply Google’s real-time, concurrent editing to the more than 50 million Word and Excel files already stored on Box, and also create Google Docs and Spreadsheets directly within Box folders. Users can then share these files with other Box users, view document updates in Box’s real-time activities feed, and leverage Box collaboration tools like commenting and tasks. Box is using Google Apps’ core API for the integration.
Box, which just raised $48 million in new funding, sees this functionality as an alternative to Microsoft’s cloud document platform, Microsoft Office 365, which will come out of beta next week. Clearly teaming up with Google is part of Box’s strategy to gain marketshare from Microsoft SharePoint
Levie tells us the integration makes sense considering that many Google Apps customers are already familiar and comfortable with the cloud. So there is a lot of crossover in user base. But I also wonder if this integration will be able to draw additional users (perhaps Microsoft customers).

Dreambox dm800 HD pvr satellite receiver

DreamBox DM 500 PVR satellite receiver

AZBOX HD Premium satellite receiver

Openbox S9 HD PVR satellite receiver

Dreambox DM500s satellite receiver

Dreambox DM500HD satellite receiver

Levie also doesn’t seem to be too worried about Apple’s foray into iCloud, telling us jokingly that ‘Jobs is jealous of our business model.’ He explains further ‘We think it’s going to be a very powerful application for iOS devices, but it will be a challenge to extend it beyond the Apple ecosystem.’ Levie says that Box offers functionality on the iPhone, Android, PC, Mac and iPad
more info:
http://www.crown-sat-receiver.com/

Caterina Fake Raising $2M for New Social Start-Up

Caterina Fake, co-founder of Flickr and Hunch and an investor in companies like Etsy, has a new start-up that she says will be consumer-facing and social.
She’s raising what looks like a $2 million round, according to an SEC filing, from a list of investors that she said includes True Ventures, Founder Collective (where she is an investor), SV Angel, Keith Rabois, James Joaquin and Shoshana Berger.
The filing says more precisely that $1.54 million of a $2 million round had been collected as of June 15.
Further Google-stalking shows that the company, which appears to be code-named 2bkco, also involves Marc Hedlund of Daylife and Wesabe as well as Eric Allen of Sauce Labs.
Fake had left Hunch, which makes recommendation technology, after it pivoted from being a consumer destination site to a tool used by other sites. She said on her blog today:
“Entrepreneurs gonna entrepreneur. I have a new startup! We are building something consumer-facing, something social — all the things I love best — for optimal founder-market fit!. It’s crazy times in the Valley and while I prefer doing startups when the going’s tough, money is scarce, and engineers are unemployed — the best time to start a company is always two years ago, and the next best time is now. So now it is.”
  sources from: http://www.crown-sat-receiver.com/

New York Post Blocks iPad Access Via Safari To Sell Subscriptions

It must have sounded like a great idea to someone at News Corp (NSDQ: NWS) at the time: “Hey, I know how we can sell more subscriptions through the New York Post iPad App! Let’s block access through iPad Safari and make them go to the app instead.” What they should have heard: “Hey, let’s make our editorial content as inaccessible and irrelevant as possible and send iPad users to other options. Oh, and at the same time, let’s take three giant steps back.”
Even better, apparently no one there noticed or cared that users of other iPad browsers like Skyfire and Opera Mini can slip right in.
It is one of the most poorly conceived paywall efforts I’ve come across—and I’ve seen more than a few.
It was annoying but understandable marketing when the Post pitched the iPad app via an interstitial that popped up whenever you followed a link. (The first few times I wound up skipping the article because it wasn’t clear that I could get to it after seeing the promo.) The Post has been clear from the beginning about wanting to make money from app.
What makes this different from News Corp sibling The Wall Street Journal, The New York Times or other news outlets limiting access to digital content in the hopes of gaining subscription revenue? The NYP literally is blocking the web for a subset of users (usually that’s left to totalitarian regimes), targeting the way someone accesses the web to keep readers out. You can’t even see the front page or the day’s front/back cover images. For iPad users relying on Safari, it is as though the site exists only as a billboard for an app.
It’s also broken access from the NYP‘s own Facebook page. Click on a link from within Safari and you end up at the redirect page. The June 17 iPad update brags about adding direct access to NYPost.com from the app as a new feature.
The paper recently discontinued New York Post Pix, its first app, telling users they would have to download the New York Post App for access. The photo app, which was one of the best early iPad apps, was supported by advertising. Nowhere does the notice to download a new app say a paid subscription is required and I never saw any effort to convert users to paid users. (Also, my saved photos were removed.)
Subscription through the app runs $6.99/month, $39.99/six months or $74.99/year. (No single-issue option.) Print subscriptions run $3.50/week, $14/month or $182/year, 22 percent off newsstand. There’s also a $2.50 a week option for Friday, Saturday and Sunday. Digital access isn’t included. The NYP offers a separate e-edition through Newspaper Direct that runs up to $26/year.
It feels like a misguided effort to recreate the Post as another Murdoch tabloid, the app-only The Daily. The digital tabloid drew some criticism when it launched earlier this year as an iPad app without a full companion website; instead, users can share some articles online via .pdf. The Daily, designed completely as an in-app paper, plans to launch an Android version. But The Daily treats everyone the same: pay for the app and you get full access.
The NYP is trying to have its virtual cake and eat it, too.
Breaking the web: To Dave Winer, who wrote about the change earlier today, the NYP is “breaking the web”:
Today I was told by the Post that I couldn’t read the article on the web at all. If I wanted to read the Post on my iPad I would have to download the app.
Okay this is bad. This is breaking the web. If no one used the iPad it wouldn’t matter. But lots of people use it.
I wonder how Apple (NSDQ: AAPL) feels about this? I can’t imagine they like it. I can see the ads now. “Get an Android tablet to read the web.”
sources from:

Azbox Digital Satellite Receiver

Coolsat Digital Satellite Receiver

Dreambox Digital Satellite Receiver

Echolink Digital Satellite Receiver

Ilink Digital Satellite Receiver

Kaon Digital Satellite Receiver

Metabox Digital Satellite Receiver

Bitcoin prices plummet on hacked exchange

The Bitcoin community faced another crisis on Sunday afternoon as the price of the currency on the most popular exchange, Mt.Gox, fell from $17 to pennies in a matter of minutes. Trading was quickly suspended and visitors to the home page were redirected to a statement blaming the crash on a compromised user account. Mt.Gox's Mark Karpeles said that the exchange would be taken offline to give administrators time to roll back the suspect transactions.
The extent of the compromise became clear when a copy of Mt.Gox's user database began circulating online. The file included username, email addres, and hashed password for thousands of Mt.Gox users. Karpeles's statement was updated to acknowledge the breach. He warned users who have re-used the Mt.Gox passwords on other sites to change them.
The crash appears to be the fault of the Mt.Gox exchange rather than a collapse in the value of the currency itself, as the integrity of Bitcoin's underlying peer-to-peer transaction clearing process does not appear to have been compromised. Prices at a competing exchange showed Bitcoins trading down about 25 percent to $13 per Bitcoin earlier today, although it has edged up since.
It's been a bad weekend for Mt.Gox, which until now has been the most popular method for converting between Bitcoins and more conventional currencies. Earlier in the weekend, it was reported that the site was vulnerable to a cross-site request forgery in which a logged-in user could be tricked into submitting fraudulent transaction requests. On Sunday, dozens of irate Bitcoin users pledged to stop using the exchange, arguing that the site's administrators lacked the technical sophistication to build a secure and reliable currency exchange.
But Bitcoin users have few alternatives if they wish to convert their Bitcoins into more stable commodities. A recently-launched competitor, called TradeHill, has capitalized on Mt.Gox's troubles by encouraging members of the Bitcoin community to use their exchange instead. But the site is so new that no one knows if its administrators have the resources or technical expertise to avoid the security and reliability problems that have plagued Mt.Gox.
It's been a wild couple of months for Bitcoin traders. Between April and June, the currency rose from a dollar to more than $30. This month, it fell back to $10 and rose again to $20. It was at $17 at the beginning of this weekend before a string of bad news pushed it down again.
Theoretically, this weekend's developments shouldn't damage Bitcoin's long-term value, since the security model of the underlying currency remains uncompromised. But Bitcoin is a fiat currency; its value ultimately depends on nothing more than public confidence. If the recent string of Bitcoin-related security woes convinces more Bitcoin users to cash out, the currency's value could continue to fall.
sources from: http://www.crown-sat-receiver.com/

Nokia's first Windows Phone 7 handset will launch in 6 European countries first

Apple has already put its inevitable defeat against Nokia behind it and is in attack mode again. Yesterday (Thursday, June 16, 2011), Apple amended and expanded its complaint against Samsung, asserting more patents and other intellectual property rights than before against an extended list of allegedly infringing products.
It's certainly no coincidence that Apple did so on the eve of today's court hearing related to Samsung's requests for samples of the (not even announced) iPhone 5 and iPad 3. Also, today is the deadline set by the court for Samsung to provide to Apple's outside counsel samples of the Galaxy S2, Galaxy Tab 8.9, Galaxy Tab 10.1, Infuse 4G, and 4G LTE (aka "Droid Charge") products, packaging, and package inserts. After receiving and evaluating that material, Apple will soon decide on whether to request a preliminary injunction -- a move that I consider reasonably probable.
Before I explain the details of how Apple modified its complaint, let me show you my usual battlemap:
The original complaint, filed on April 15, 2011, was already the most impressive multi-IPR [IPR = intellectual property rights] complaint I had ever seen. It told a complex copycat story in a compelling and coherent fashion. Despite my long-standing criticism of software patents, I admired it as a piece of art. But it got even bigger -- the main document now has 63 pages (previously 38) -- and better.
There are many changes and additions throughout the document. These are the ones I find most significant:
Copycat accusations phrased more strongly and in more detail
Many of the changes are designed to portray Samsung's alleged infringement as an incredibly outrageous act of copying. The original complaint already accused Samsung of "slavishly copying" Apple's designs. The amended one stresses that Samsung "has been even bolder" than other competitors emulating Apple's products and has created "products that blatantly imitate the appearance of Apple's products to capitalize on Apple's success."
Various paragraphs elaborate on those accusations and explain how Samsung released its accused products shortly after Apple's innovations. For example, Apple goes back to the year 2007 in which Samsung's F700 allegedly constituted a first act of "copying the clean flat clear surface of the Apple iPhone Trade Dress and the Apple iPhone/iPhone 3G/iPhone 4 Trade Dress."
In many places, just the replacement or insertion of a single word -- such as substituting "copied" for "misappropriated [Apple's distinctive product packaging]" -- strengthens those accusations.
Apple also points out that there was a lot of hard work behind its products:
While the iPhone was an instant success, there was nothing instant about the design process. Over the course of several years, Apple had teams of people working on developing each aspect of the design of the phone itself -- the shape of the phone, the materials used, and the size and placement of the mask that frames the screen -- as well as the Multi-Touch user interface, to make a product that looked and felt entirely different from prior phones on the market. The end result was a very clean shape for the phone, with an entirely flat glass panel for the front, gently rounded corners and integrated casing, and intuitive touch features.
The amended complaint also stresses the uniqueness of all of this:
Before Apple’s introduction of the first iPhone product, no other company was offering a phone with these features. Prior mobile phones were often bulkier and contained physical keypads. Some had a rocker-style navigation button and sets of buttons for numbers and calling features. Others had a front panel with a partial or full QWERTY keyboard and a screen. None had the clean lines of the iPhone, which immediately caused it to stand apart from the competition.
To show how famous its products and designs became based on their unique characteristics, Apple refers to various appearances of the iPhone and iPad on the front pages or lead sections of The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, and USA Today, as well as cover stories in Time and Newsweek. Generally, the strength of trademarks and design-related rights is enhanced by such publicity.
Apple also points to the value of its brand:
On May 8, 2011, Apple topped the BrandZ Top 100 ranking of the most valuable global brands, with an 84 percent year-over-year increase in brand value. The increase in brand value was attributed to "successful iterations of existing products like the iPhone, creation of the tablet category with iPad, and anticipation of a broadened strategy making the brand a trifecta of cloud computing, software, and innovative, well-designed devices."
Apple always makes the connection between its own success and Samsung's accused behavior and cites several IT-specialized journalists:
The copying has been widely observed in the industry and has been mentioned in multiple articles reviewing Samsung products. For example, a writer for Wired wrote that Samsung's "Vibrant's industrial design is shockingly similar to the iPhone 3G." [...] "First Look: Samsung Vibrant Rips Off iPhone 3G Design." Another Wired writer wrote, "[L]et's settle one of the biggest arguments surrounding this phone. Yes, the Vibrant closely resembles a certain best-selling smartphone." [...] "Samsung Vibrant Looks Like an iPhone, Has Battery Life to Match." [...]
[A] Business Insider review of Samsung's Galaxy Tab 10.1 stated that, "[f]rom the front, it looks like an iPad." [...]
A recent CNET reviewer remarked: "Taking another page from the iPad 2's school of sexy tablet building, the 10.1 has one of the cleanest designs we've seen on a tablet. [...]"
[Fast Company:] "Samsung’s Anti-iPad 2 Policy" – "[To] Clone the Heck Out of It"
All of this emphasis on Samsung's copying may have been added with a particular view to a possible motion for a preliminary injunction. Apple would like to -- and may very well attempt to -- shut down some of Samsung's products in a matter of months. But courts grant preliminary injunctions only under special circumstances, and some intellectual property rights (such as trademarks) are better suited as grounds for a preliminary injunction than others (such as utility patents).
Accused products
The original complaint specifically accused the following products of infringement: "the Samsung Captivate, Continuum, Vibrant, Galaxy S 4G, Epic 4G, Indulge, Mesmerize, Showcase, Fascinate, Nexus S, Gem, Transform, Intercept, and Acclaim smart phones and the Samsung Galaxy Tab tablet."
The amended complaint accuses all of the above plus the Droid Charge, Exhibit 4G, Galaxy Ace, Galaxy Prevail, Galaxy S (i9000), Gravity, Infuse 4G, Nexus S 4G, Replenish, Sidekick, Galaxy Tab 10.1, and Galaxy S II (aka Galaxy S 2). It also specifies the accusation against "Showcase" products, naming the Showcase i500 and Showcase Galaxy S.
more info:
http://www.crown-sat-receiver.com/dreambox/dm500hd.htm

Everything That's Wrong With Research In Motion -- An Ex-Employee Tells All

Research In Motion's collapse can be traced straight to the top of the company, where its execs are woefully out of touch with consumers, says a former employee who wrote us last night.
"The problem is that they brim with hubris regarding their success in the corporate market and are culturally blind to the gaping holes in their armour regarding consumer. They honestly think they understand consumer product, business, mentality, marketing - but they really don't," says our source.
This isn't a disgruntled former employee, either. He says, "RIM is a very professionally run company with hard working and relatively motivated people." He thinks it still has a "real shot" at pulling through if it can make its new OS work, and argues "they are not dead at all," and investors are underestimating the company.
We've been reaching out to people familiar with RIM to get an idea of what's happening inside the company. If you have anything to add, please email us at jyarow@businessinsider.com or call at 646-376-6037.
Here is an edited version of our source's note on the company:

"RIM is a great company that has exceptional potential, though they are going through a rough time and the market is right to punish them for some poor decisions, they have far more going for them than one would surmise from the recent media deluge. But their problems really stem from underlying cultural issues, and a failure to recognize the kinds of people required for addressing the consumer market. It is ironically their success in the business domain and their growing fortune that has shielded them from self-criticism.

CEO Jim Balsillie's occupation of the 'Chief Marketing' position is evidence of one of the ongoing tragedies of the company and arguably Jim's inability to find someone for this role of vast importance is evidence of an underlying failure to grasp just how important this 'marketing' issues is especially in the context of the consumer space. Of course, they do have an excuse in that their otherwise very able and capable marketing staff has been operationally effectively in leveraging carrier marketing dollars in lieu of their own - ironically, the strengths and capabilities derived from this 'channel' style marketing activity, which has made them billions - has left a dearth of talent in the areas of direct consumer marketing, and even worse - this 'outsourcing' of their marketing activities has left carriers to position BlackBerry as they see fit, leaving what is on the whole a rather incoherent and fragmented branding message to the end consumer. Their recent efforts with the 'BlackBerry LOVE' campaign have failed - and I think it is obvious that the 'LOVE' theme is simply inconsistent with the real and authentic 'can do', 'make it happen', and 'entrepreneurial' attitude of their core user base. The campaign was not authentic to the true nature of the company. Similarly with the new PlayBook experience, that some reviewers have questioned as 'uninspired'. RIM keeps pointing to elements such as 'dual core processor' and their old fallback 'security' (you can tell a RIM exec is out of answers when he starts talking about 'security' ...). The difference between a 'list of features' and 'inspiring' is the difference between 1st place and potentially 'out of business' - and this is something they need to understand - culturally.

But issues such as these are merely symptoms of what are arguably deeper, cultural issues. RIM's failure to understand the consumer market from product, to messaging, to platform, and it goes right to the top. Despite the deep respect I have for the co-CEO's of RIM, and their world-class strength in some areas - they are very weak in others. The problem is that they brim with hubris regarding their success in the corporate market and are culturally blind to the gaping holes in their armour regarding consumer. They honestly think they understand consumer product, business, mentality, marketing - but they really don't. Take another look at that statement: it's not so much that they are 'weak' in some areas, that's only 25% of the problem. It's that they don't recognize that they are - and they are only beginning to respect the language, ideals, and perspectives of those who are strong in consumer. Their world-class exceptionalism in some areas has left them impervious to the stains on their coat... like Shaquille O'Neil, basketball phenom, bastardizing his lines in a wayward Hollywood epic that he just clearly doesn't belong in.

Most of the design decisions at RIM are made by 50 something engineers, otherwise highly accomplished and credible in the field of engineering. But since they've lived most of their lives in the rural areas of Southern Ontario, and don't have any real background or even social sensibility for culture, design and such issues, they're woefully unqualified for the task of aesthetic judgement. The problem is not so much that they can't create a user experience with 'sex appeal' - because they could hire the right people and improve, again, it's that that they don't recognize their own weaknesses in the area. They don't speak the language of 'the creative process' and would probably laugh at anyone who did. Perhaps I can provide you with an anecdote; there is a folk-tale at RIM that the software engineers once brought in a foosball table - probably the most standard form of distraction and a minor symbol of authentic expression of what really is a heavy, intellectually creative process in need of ... you know 'breaks' and 'fun' ... Mike L. summarily dismissed the idea: 'not in my company'. There is no room in his notion of what it means to be 'professional' for t-shirts, lounging, and hip-hop. RIM is one of the world's leading brands, and yet, walking around campus you'd suspect you were in 'nowhere, USA', or Xerox HQ in 1992... by no means attractive to anyone at the cutting edge of this business. Google - it is not - in this regard. That RIM has not yet even made a dent on the 'top 100' lists of where undergrads and MBA's want to go when they graduate is indicative of this - and yet it should be a place of inspiration and aspiration given what they are doing in the world.

Extending this cultural theme is of course the fact that the company is run by a 'good ole' boy' network from Southern Ontario. Though I actually believe there can be advantages in this close-knit, trust-based social ecosystem, it is unacceptable in this day and age that a global brand should have the vast majority of its citizens derived from a section of a small province, of a small, somewhat provincial and less important country (Canada), that does not have a history of empire, or executive class with the depth or strength of character and identity as say, Sweden, or Finland. (I say this as a proud Canadian who believes that Southern Ontario businessmen are amongst the best in the world - but that no group of localites are prepared to take on such global challenges). If Apple were to be based in Wisconsin, and drew most of their talent from the state area, I'm sure Wall St. would wonder what is going on. Again - to compound the problem - it's an issue that RIM isn't really aware of. Perhaps they are intellectually, but they don't 'get it', in this regard. I hope they will.  dreambox dm8000,  dreambox dm800 hd se

Make no mistake - I'm am not 'disgruntled' about my past experiences with RIM, I believe strongly in the company, and they have so much going for them. Their stock is woefully undervalued right now, with expectations lower than Yahoo, which everyone knows is a company that has been bleeding for years with no end in sight. RIM has a strong brand, a powerful new O/S coming soon (QNX was a brilliant move) is well positioned in several markets, has a relatively motivated and highly competent team, the authenticity of 2 founder-leaders who basically invented the market for smartphones by providing the first 'addictive' data application (e-mail) that gave life to the carriers otherwise dead data offerings. If they can deliver a few world-class handsets, get their marketing and branding act together, the rest will take care of itself. Steve Jobs should be thankful for RIM for initiating the market for him, and perhaps RIM will recognize that they were outdone with the iPhone 4 years ago and they have yet to produce a competitive offering and - and that they are running out of excuses. But I do believe in them."

 read more: http://www.crown-sat-receiver.com/

Oracle seeks billions in lawsuit against Google

(Reuters) - Oracle Corp is seeking damages "in the billions of dollars" from Google Inc in a patent lawsuit over the smartphone market, according to a court filing.
The disclosure on Thursday was the first time either side publicly mentioned the cumulative scale of Oracle's damages claims.
Oracle sued Google last year, claiming the Web search company's Android mobile operating technology infringes Oracle's Java patents. Oracle bought the Java programing language through its acquisition of Sun Microsystems in January 2010.
Some see the lawsuit as a sign of a growing business rivalry between the two companies.
The case is also part of a wider web of litigation among phone makers and software firms over who owns the patents used in smartphones and tablets, as rivals aggressively rush into a market in which Apple jump-started with iPhone and iPad.
Barring any settlements, a trial between Oracle and Google is expected to begin by November.
Google has called an Oracle damages report "unreliable and results-oriented," and asked a U.S. judge in San Francisco to ignore it, court documents show. In disputing Oracle's methodology, Google also asked the court to keep private some damages information Google disclosed in a court filing.
Oracle then accused Google of trying to conceal the fact Oracle's damages claims in the case are in the billions, according to a document filed on Thursday. Oracle said it did not object to having the information about its damages become public.
Due to Oracle's stance, U.S. District Judge William Alsup ordered Google on Thursday to make public the damages information by Friday.
A Google representative declined to comment.
The case in U.S. District Court, Northern District of California, is Oracle America, Inc v. Google Inc, 10-3561.
(Reporting by Dan Levine; editing by Dave Zimmerman, Bernard Orr and Andre Grenon)
sources from: http://www.crown-sat-receiver.com/