broadstuff

Eric Schmidt laid into British IT education today - BBC:

"The UK is home of so many media-related inventions. You invented photography. You invented TV. You invented computers in both concept and practice.

"It's not widely known, but the world's first office computer was built in 1951 by Lyons' chain of tea shops. Yet today, none of the world's leading exponents in these fields are from the UK."
Television transformed

There are 3 reasons for this - economics,entrepreneurialism,and education

The Economics is simple - the US is a far larger homogenous market, so any company that starts to get momentum there can grow far larger than a comparable British one. The usual plotline is that British companies either Go West (eg MicroMuse) and becomeamerican or get bought by Americans (eg not-so-Autonomy). The Commonwealth - the engine that once allowed British companies to grow larger than the home UK market - is gone and the EU, with its polyglot cultures and (often subsidised) local heroes - is a far tougher prospect to expand into.

The Entrepreneurialism issue is well known too - study after study shows that the barriers are higher for startups in the UK than the US - less money available, ,unVenturous capital, tougher labour laws, more business red tape. The only things on our side are that we speak a reasonably understandable dialect of American and our conditions are still marginally better than most other Western European countries. The US gets a Silicon Valley with universities and an ecosystem, we get a Roundabout as a PR wheeze with a contraflow.

And then there is Education. Schmidt said he had been flabbergasted to learn that computer science was not taught as standard in UK schools, despite what he called the "fabulous initiative" in the 1980s when the BBC not only broadcast programmes for children about coding, but shipped over a million BBC Micro computers into schools and homes.

"Your IT curriculum focuses on teaching how to use software, but gives no insight into how it's made. That is just throwing away your great computing heritage," he said.

Its more than that though. In the UK, Engineering and Science have always been lower class things. In every other country I have worked in or lived in (and that encompasses Europe, US, Asia and Africa), being good at Maths and Science are hugely respected abilities and parents agonise about how to improve kids skills at these subjects. Engineering is a registered profession like Accounting, Law or Medicine.

And then I fly back into the UK and its like being on another planet. The guys that fix my boiler are Engineers. Universities are warning (my) teenage kids that ICT and Computer Science are not seen as a "real" subjects for University entrance - rather do (say) Geography and Chemistry. The way to get ahead is still the Oxbridge PPE (Politics, Philosophy and Economics) rather than the Sciences. The thinking man (and woman's) airwaves are more full of Luvvies than ever, often giving technology a good kicking en passant. The Luddites seem to have have won. PhDs in Physics and maths Tutors in Universities get paid a less than Bar owners, never mind Accountants or Lawyers. Quids (or lack of) Est Demonstratum.

I think Schmidt had it right when he talked about a "back to Renaissance Man" necessity (albeit Victorian ones):

"the UK needed to bring art and science back together, as it had in the "glory days of the Victorian era" when Lewis Carroll wrote one of the classic fairy tales, Alice in Wonderland, and was also a mathematics tutor at Oxford"

In the US when I go to a magazine stand there are lots of publications on Science and Technology, in the UK there are more on faux metaphysics and (typically very British centred) history. That is the difference.

I think there are things the Government can do to help all of the 3 areas, but the key is to do them holistically. No point in making a big deal of maths and science and computing in Education if the job outcomes are crap, or if companies starting in the space can't get money/cant take on subsidised rivals/strangle under the red tape.

But Eric's right too. A start is making damn sure that the top Universities can't get away with the attitude that ICT and Computing are not "real" subjects, whereas say Georaphy and Chemistry are. It'll need some reforming of the syllabuses I'm sure, but it also needs some knocking old attitudes out of heads.

Steve Jobs resigned today as Apple CEO,for a new position as chairman. He said that:

“I have always said if there ever came a day when I could no longer meet my duties and expectations as Apple’s CEO, I would be the first to let you know. Unfortunately, that day has come.”

Stock markets have fallen, hair has been rent, and TechWorld is in mourning as if he had already died. He is ill, but news of his death is somewhat exagerrated. And senior guys move on,it happens.So why the sturmand drang?

I think MG Siegler at TechCrunch is right when he says:

The root of this lies in the emotional ties that people have with Apple products. And that fact that we’re shifting towards a world where having contact with at least one Apple product on a daily basis is the norm. It may be an iPod, it may be a Mac, it may be an iPhone, it may be an iPad. It may even be an Apple TV.

And that was Steve Jobs' genius. Computer OS User Experience was crap until the Mac. Internet Mobile experience was crap until the iPhone. Tablets were crap until the iPad (though let us not forget that There Comes A Time in technology - the Newton was hardly a soaraway success)

That is what Apple needs to continue - that constant, fanatical, putting the customer first. And that is all that anyone else needs to to do match Apple. The time has never been better to take them on.

Doing it, of course, in large risk-averse cover-my-arse corporate heirarchies is another matter altogether. Just ask Nokia. And that is why the only position you can make the change from, that you can knock all the heads together from, is the top job.

Interesting observation in the NYT re the increasng speed of killing one's mistakes:

Seven weeks after it was put on sale, Hewlett-Packard killed its TouchPad tablet, the company’s competitor to Apple’s iPad. Hewlett-Packard killed the TouchPad after 48 days, cut the price and created a buying frenzy.

Last year, Microsoft pulled the plug on its Kin mobile phones only 48 days after they went on sale.

In recent years, technology companies have been cutting their losses with increasing speed. Google proudly released Wave, its platform of collaborative work tools, to the general public in May 2010. It canceled Wave 77 days later. Palm announced its first tablet, the Foleo, on May 30, 2007. By Sept. 4, the company halted development and the product was never sold.

This is a change from a few years ago and is apparently due to Apple:

When Microsoft released the Xbox 360 in 2005, there were widespread reliability issues and the console faced serious competition from the Nintendo Wii, yet the company stayed the course, and now the Xbox is one of the best-selling video game consoles of all time. That kind of tenacity seems to be in diminishing supply.

Some analysts trace the origin of this blockbuster-or-bust mentality to Apple. Each release of the company’s popular iPads and iPhones crosses over into being a mainstream media event. Al Hilwa, an analyst at the research firm IDC, described the accelerated lifecycle of high-end hardware as “Darwinian.”

Are other companies misreading the game plan though,and thus making wrong decisions? When we did the TEDxTuttle II session, Dr Caroline Wierz of Cass Business School explained that Apple spends a lot of time and effort winding up the market before any launch, so there is a pent-up demand at product release and thus the product appears to achieve its market penetration levels very fast (Pre-Hedonic Buzz marketing, I believe it is called) and thus makes the competition think the game is over.

Halwa also thinks Social Media has exacerbated the speed of the post-launch feedback loop:

The crush of tech bloggers and Twitter-using early adopters who chronicle every bit of news — good and bad — about new phones and tablets also raises the stakes around how well new products perform in the marketplace.

“You know pretty quickly, and in a very public way, whether a product is successful or not,” said Mr. Hilwa.

However, this is not necessarily all good news- Dr Wierz went on to talk about how Social Media was probably having a measurable impact on movie success on the first weekend of release as early moviegoers gave the thumbs up - and down - for later attendees.

We think there is something in this - if it is true for movies, why not for consumer tech too?

This also ties in with other work we have done recently, where we have found that the reputation for customer service for existing customers - now that it is all over the web - increasingly impacts the buying decision of new customers. We think its the same dynamic in operation here.

So Apple's real skillis not just the Pre Hedonic Buzz, but also making products that people love to have without a lot of iteration.

Facebook has made significant changes toits privacy setings to compte with Google Plus - SAI notes you can now:

- Control who sees each post. Each time you post, a dropdown menu will appear to the right of the post and will let you control who you want to share the post with. At first, this menu will contain the same categories that you can get to through the Settings menu today -- "Public" (formerly called "Everyone" -- Facebook is changing the name), "Friends," and "Friends of Friends." But eventually it will include other Facebook Groups you've joined. In other words, it's a lot like Google+ Circles.

- Cange who can see updates AFTER you post them. If you change your mind and don't want your mom to know that you got falling-down drunk at a party last night, you can go back and change the sharing settings on that status update. That's new -- before, once you put it out there, it was out there forever.

- More control over people tagging you. Today, whenever somebody tags you in a photo, an indication of that tag appears on your wall. With the new settings, you'll be able to see who's tagging you and ask them not to tag you, or even send a message to the photo-owner asking them to take the photo down. Similarly, whenever somebody wants to add a tag a photo you've posted, you'll have an easy way to block that tag, block all tags, or take down the photo entirely.

- Facebook is also letting you share location info for any post you make, and add location to posts in the past. For instance, if you took a bunch of pictures on a trip to London, you can tag them after the trip is done. Previously, the location feature was only available on the mobile version of Facebook, and only let you tag from the location you were in.

- The mobile "Places" feature is being phased out, although similar functionality will be available from the new version of the mobile app. You can add your location through a normal status update.

Facebook product manager Kate O'Neill says Facebook started planning these changes long before Google+ rolled out. Course you did, Kate - its so in the company's DNA

What is most interesting is that competition is forcing privacy levels up, which is a hopeful sign for the future of social networking.

Yesterday we pointed to the Bad Side of using social media for London's looting and rioting. This story is about the Good Side - Londoners using social media to organise ad-hoc Flashmobs to clean up. Grauniad:

Hundreds of people armed with brooms, binbags and rubber gloves turned out across London to help clean up the damage caused by a third night of rioting, looting and arson.

Co-ordinated online on Facebook and Twitter, volunteers mobilised in the worst-hit parts of the capital to sweep streets, help local shopkeepers and show solidarity with communities thrown into turmoil by the violence. Though their efforts were thwarted in many parts by police work, their presence on the streets gave a valuable morale boost to those seeking an end to the disturbances.

The origins appeared to be the Twitter user @sophontrack who suggested a #riotcleanup operation shortly after 6pm on Monday. It was, however, a tweet from @BenDylan which found its way to Dan Thompson that set the trend going.

Thompson, who runs a social initiative encouraging people to use empty shops and open spaces, decided to use social media to co-ordinate those looking to help. By 10am the tag was the top trending topic in the UK and the second worldwide.

"There are now people on the ground all across London," he said. "Even just putting on some gloves, picking up a dustpan and brush and clearing one broken window on the way into work. People are saying, 'We're Londoners, we're resilient and getting on with it.'"

Makes me proud to be a Londoner (though I was in Wales at the time.....)

In other news, it would appear that Blackberry turned off the BBN service overnight to make it more difficult for the looters to organise thier flashmobs. Hard to tell if that, or the well publicised 16000 police on duty, was responsible for the far lower number of outbreaks in London (though predictably, Flashmob looting broke out in the cities the Police sent to London had been drawn from). Police are also using working smarter, listeing in on Twitter now and using social media sites such as Flickr to identify looters

What is also interesting is the emerging evidence of "Flashmob Defenders" - locals organising to defend their areas also using social media.

London erupted in rioting over the weekend, initially sparked by questions about the police shooting of a renegade youth gang member/young local community member (make your mind up) but the most interesting bit has been the use of social media (apparently mainly Blackberry Mobile Messenger, but that may just be Twitter and Facebook apologists trying to ensure that they are only seen to promote Good Riots* )

Apparently the looters and vandals used "flashmobbing" techniques to organise the liberation of many televisons, pairs of trainers and other goods essential to the revolution, and then to dynamically keep ahead of the police - this from onlookers in Brixton - BBC:

I saw Foot Locker on fire in Brixton High Street after midnight on Sunday. They got in and made off with widescreen TVs, vacuum cleaners, and computers. KFC and McDonalds were smashed up.
About a five-minute walk away in Effra Road, Currys was getting broken into. Nearly 200 people were there trying to get through the metal shutters. Eventually they got in and made off with widescreen TVs, vacuum cleaners, and computers. There were riot police near Brixton station, but there was no police presence in Effra Road for at least 40 minutes.

.....


I live close to Currys in Brixton. I watched hooded youths brazenly running up my road towards the store. At about 01:00, my usually quiet road was filled with cars coming from the direction of Effra Road and Currys. This could have been due to traffic being diverted, or it could have been the opportunists taking their loot home. One man walked casually past my window carrying a fairly large box, with a wide smile on his face.

Anyway, regardless of the whys and wherefores of why the riots started and by whom, this brings home the dark side of Social Media that we have been going on about for years but is typically blithely ignored by the Social media pundits - apostles, conference promoters, authors and service suppliers. Probably a good thing, as it allows a more reasoned discussion of what checks and balances Social Media services need. Also a wake up call for the London (and any big city) police to get more "with it" with new media technology.

*Twitter was full of the data too, as my first information on ths came within minutes that way - so in my opinion blaming Blackberry only is a tad disingenuous