Gregarius » ReadWriteWeb

It's an attention economy, and the good people at Jones-Dilworth have built a tool that will help you get some. Totem launches today, a free app that helps anyone build a great press page. Whether you're a giant company, a start-up, or even a solo act, you shouldn't have to think too hard about a press page. For that matter, neither should I.

A press page is a place for you to put all the info a reporter needs about you, your company, your product and your news. It's not the whole story; it's just the colorful details. But you'd be amazed at how hard it is to find that stuff sometimes. Jones-Dilworth has a wealth of experience, it has worked with reporters, and Totem reflects all the right priorities. If you want to make a good impression on the press, this is the way to go.

Sponsor

Free Totem users can build unlimited press pages with all the right info, bios, articles and image resources in all the right places. The pro version costs $99 - a one-time upgrade - and it lets you host Totem at your own domain (press.YourNameHere.com) or embed it as an iframe on your site. Pro users can customize the color and background and remove the Totem branding.

Here's an example. This is the press page for Totem itself.

The front page includes the basic gist, links to social feeds, and all the video and image resources a reporter will need to grab. There's a separate page for full team bios. The press contact is always in the upper right corner, because that's the person a reporter needs to get to quickly if something is wrong or missing.

The right side also features a few feeds to keep things fresh, such as company press releases and featured blog posts. It also has a ticker of recent articles, which can be viewed in full on the articles page.

The back end of Totem lets moderators input stories there, but there's also a browser bookmarklet that lets you add new articles with one click as you find them online.

Have you noticed those nice rows of publication logos at the bottom of start-ups' websites highlighting good coverage? Totem lets you easily create one of those and embed it on your site, linking to these articles.

Business depends upon good storytelling. The press (yours truly) is the filter through which the stories get to the public. If you want to tell the public your story, you have to get through us. But lest this sound self-important, let me tell you, we're lazy, frantic people. If you can make that story easier for us, we're much more likely to tell it.

I saw the Totem-built press page for Parse.ly before I knew what it was, and believe me, I noticed it. I spend so much time in Google Image Search looking for the least-crappy logo I can find. This time, there was just one link, and there I found everything I needed laid out exactly where I wanted it. If your boss needs more evidence that this is really worth doing for reporters, this is me saying, "Yes."

Check out Totem at totemapp.com.

When developers think of application testing, it always centers around how an app will perform on a particular device. This is especially important in the Android ecosystem that has upwards of 300 devices from a variety of original equipment manufacturers worldwide. From the inverse perspective, nobody ever thinks of the testing needs of the carriers and OEMs.

Cloud-based testing platform Apkudo thought about manufacturers and carriers with a new release of device analytics platform. Manufacturers can now test devices against the top Android apps before releasing. The idea is that if a device is tested from the supplier side, fewer handsets will be returned by consumers, potentially saving manufacturers billions of dollars.

Sponsor

Apkudo tests with what it calls a "device cloud." The configuration of more than 300 Android devices are set up in the cloud and mobile app developers can run their projects through that cloud to make sure it will work across OEMs and Android system versions.

For Apkudo's device analytics, the opposite approach is taken. Manufacturers and network operators can test their apps against the contents of the Android Market. Apkudo will run a device against the top 200 apps in the Market to test functionality with the touchscreen, keyboard, audio, device access (accelerometer and GPS, for instance) along with performance characteristics.

This should provide developers, network operators and manufacturers with tools against Android fragmentation. As we noted last week, there is actually less fragmentation of Android devices than many think, with the optimal Android handset running on a 4.3-inch screen on version 2.3 Gingerbread. Yet, with the sheer volume of devices and applications available in the Android ecosystem, testing is still one giant headache.

Apkudo can speed up on the process that OEMs must go through to test devices. According to CEO Josh Matthews the process normally takes 6-8 weeks. Apkudo says it can do it in three days.

Device analytics will break down the results into two categories: characterization and optimization benefits. Characterization benefits help operators target competing devices while expanding their own portfolios. Imagine it as a bench mark against the rest of the ecosystem. Optimization benefits recommends how devices can be made better before release to be truly competitive in the market place.

The first U.S. carrier to sign on with Apkudo is MetroPCS. Apkudo also has agreements with "most major OEMs" in the Android ecosystem.

App developers should be happy with Apkudo's testing abilities because it means that the OEMs could have a more efficient testing program to make sure apps work on their devices. When it comes to app functionality on Android, developers need to work the manufacturers and carriers to ensure a quality experience. The end of fragmentation, after all, is a two way street.

In 2008, a UK-based Adobe Acrobat engineer remarked, "I believe in striving to minimize the use of paper, but I do believe that we will probably never reach a position where paper is eliminated from our workplaces." This morning, his predictions were clearly confirmed by a study published by the information professionals organization AIIM.

The study shows that while the exchange of PDF files as e-mail attachments has reduced the volume of paperwork traded between IT professionals, that reduction is not only minimal, but quite possibly made up for. Over three-quarters of IT professionals surveyed say one of the first things they do with a PDF-based invoice... is print it out.

Sponsor

And after those 77% of AIIM's 395 respondents print out their invoices, some 16% then scan them right back into the system for use as PDF attachments... some 77% of whose recipients print them right back out again.

Of the 358 respondents who provided detail for AIIM's study, entitled "The Paper Free Office: Dream or Reality?" some 10% said they actually print out their PDF invoices multiple times. And 10% say they print out at least one copy for archival purposes.

"Although many of the larger companies are pressing to have all-electronic billing and payment systems, we are still a long way from this ideal," the study reads. "Around a quarter or respondents are able to feed PDF invoices and fax images directly into a capture and/or workflow system. Another fairly common paper-intensive practice with faxes, especially with contracts and application forms, is to print the fax, sign it, and feed it back into the scanner or fax machine."

Ironically, some 45% of the documents being printed on paper originated, respondents said, not from scanned paper to begin with but from a word processor.

AIIM's respondents tended to fall into two groups: those whose companies do not scan their paper-based forms (including invoices) prior to their being processed, and those who do. Both groups were asked to list all the costs involved in the handling process, including labor. For the former, the average cost for processing each paper form prior to mailing it was $3.63 per form. For those who do scan, the cost falls to $2.83 per form.

So companies look at the 80¢ they're saving per form, and conclude they have the right to proclaim themselves "green." As AIIM noted, these businesses are failing to recognize that their business processes continue to revolve around paper. One astounding finding is that almost 30% of respondents scan their mail upon arrival, ostensibly for archival purposes, but many of them with the intent of printing out the scans since businesses tend to believe paper storage to be more permanent than electronic.

The study makes this... fairly obvious suggestion: "Keying the data at source into a Web form or a mobile device, rather than filling out a paper form, will save all of these costs."

Path is a lovely app. It pushes all the right buttons. It's mobile, it's tactile, it's personal, it's full of people we love and moments that matter to us. It makes us feel good. It's got all the greatest hits a post-Facebook social app should have. It's also free.

"Facebook will always be free," it tells us, so free is now the standard. Free apps are expensive, though; we pay with our data. Whenever Facebook or Google messes with our privacy, this is the cost of doing business for free. Path is no different. It's already using our personal data in ways we didn't expect. Arun Thampi discovered today that it uploads the entire iPhone address book to its servers. Surprised? Don't be.

Sponsor

Thampi was using a cool new tool to observe Path's API calls, just out of curiosity. The first thing that surprised him was a POST request to https://api.path.com/3/contacts/add. When he looked into it, he found that the entire address book - names, email addresses, phone numbers, everything - was being sent to Path's servers. He created a new Path and duplicated the results.

It's a secure exchange of information between Path's servers and your phone, and it's not necessarily doing anything flat-out wrong with the information. But Path never asked its users if it can do this. It may be using our contacts for the benefit of our user experience, for finding friends on Path, for example. But we need an explanation.

Why didn't we know about this until an enterprising hacker stumbled over it by accident? Is this a sign of how Path will treat user data in the future? What do Path's adoring users do now? Well, they should get used to it. This is the price of free.

The functionality is opt-in on Android, and CEO Dave Morin says it will be opt-in on iOS soon, but the fact is, the app added it before asking.

All I want @Path to say is "Oops, our mistake. We'll update the app and our servers to keep only hashes, and be opt-in. We're sorry."

— Matt Gemmell (@mattgemmell) February 7, 2012

UPDATE 11:53 a.m.: Path CEO Dave Morin replied to Thampi's post in the comments:

"We upload the address book to our servers in order to help the user find and connect to their friends and family on Path quickly and effeciently as well as to notify them when friends and family join Path. Nothing more.

We believe that this type of friend finding & matching is important to the industry and that it is important that users clearly understand it, so we proactively rolled out an opt-in for this on our Android client a few weeks ago and are rolling out the opt-in for this in 2.0.6 of our iOS Client, pending App Store approval."

Translation: We did it first, and we'll ask you for permission in a little while. Also, this makes clear that Path uploads Android contacts as well.

Developer/blogger/legend Matt Gemmell raises three questions missing from Morin's explanation:

"1. Why are you uploading the actual address book data, rather than (say) generating hashes of the user's email addresses locally, then uploading just those hashes? You'd be able to do friend-finding that way, and similarly if you uploaded hashes of all email addresses in the user's address book, you'd be able to do your notifications of when a friend joins. At no point would your servers ever need to see the actual email addresses or phone numbers from our contacts.

2. Why wasn't this an opt-in situation to begin with? Isn't that against Apple's own T&Cs?

3. How can we have our contact information deleted from your servers, if we wish to do that?"

UPDATE 12:22 p.m.: Morin responds to Gemmell's questions point-by-point:

"1. This is a good alternative solution which we'll look into. Thanks for the idea.

2. This is currently the industry best practice and the App Store guidelines do not specifically discuss contact information. However, as mentioned, we believe users need further transparency on how this works, so we've been proactively addressing this.

3. As I mentioned in the previous answer, we are rolling out this functionality for 2.0.6. In the meantime, if you would like your data deleted from our servers please contact our service team at service@path.com. We take this same policy for any of your data, if you'd like your account deleted, including all data, we're happy to do this as well. We fundamentally believe that you as a user should always have control over your information and data and you can always email our service team and we will remove anything you'd like from our servers."

The response is in the right spirit, but Path should now see the repercussions of setting it up this way. The only opt-out for users is to manually email the support team, and the opt-in version is coming to the App Store after the fact. If Path had just asked its users before adding this functionality, and if the app hashed the sensitive info locally before uploading it, everyone probably would have said "yes," and this wouldn't be a story.

Are you using Path? What do you think about this news?

Wolfram Alpha isn't the "Google killer" that many hyped it up to be prior to its 2009 launch. Instead, the self-described computational knowledge engine takes a completely different approach to letting users find and analyze information. Rather than scouring the Web and ranking everybody's pages in the order it thinks we'd find them useful, it uses its own data sets and computational power to return detailed reports and analysis about whatever topics users query it for.

Tomorrow, the service will ramp things up a notch when its "pro" version launches. For $5 per month, Wolfram Alpha Pro will allow users to do way more with its data, as well as enable them to upload their own. The premium offering will be discounted for students and enterprise users.

Sponsor

This is freemium done right. What Wolfram Alpha is bolting onto its core offering is powerful and useful enough to justify what is undeniably a very reasonable price tag. For more users, what Wolfram Alpha's standard version does will continue to be enough for educational and other research purposes. For those with more specialized or comprehensive data needs, paying $5 will be well worth it.

The value offered by Wolfram Alpha Pro is two-fold, and it sits at both ends of the query process. First, users can upload their own data sets and have the service crunch through it for them, try to understand it and built out reports and graphs that previously could have taken them hours in Excel or elsewhere. In addition to text, you can even input images and get a detailed report about their visual characteristics.

Second, once a report is built - be it from Wolfram's data or your own - you can export the end results, images and all. This allows you to take the data analysis one step further using whatever other tools you want, effectively open-sourcing Wolfram Alpha's results. You can also turn charts and graphs into interactive versions of themselves. The Verge put together a detailed, hands-on overview of Wolfram Alpha Pro that is well worth checking out.

The potential these features have for people like journalists, business owners and Web analytics professionals is enormous. Just plug in a spreadsheet or other data set and let the knowledge engine work its computational magic. So much of the heavy lifting is shifted over to Wolfram Alpha's servers, freeing up the individual to spend time understanding the information, more easily spotting important trends and deciding if any further analysis is needed.

The premium plan is the latest part of the company's monetization strategy, which to date has included paid mobile apps, licensing of its API to third parties and various enterprise services.

Fewer people are relying on the Internet in general and social media specifically for election news and information than some social media "experts" would have us believe, according to a new poll by the Pew Research Center.

Sponsor

While many in tech journalism circles have been quick to call the 2012 presidential race "the Social Media Election," the poll found that few of us are relying on Facebook, YouTube and Twitter for election information. While 25% say they regularly learn something about the election from the Internet, tha's almost unchanged from 2008, when 24% said they regularly got election information from the Internet.

Even more telling is where on the Internet that information comes from: 6% of poll respondents said they are regularly learning about the campaign from Facebook, followed by YouTube videos (3%) and Twitter (2%), according to Pew.

One reason social media hasn't grown by the leaps and bounds predicted is less engagement by young people. In 2008, there were two contested primaries, including a Democratic primary which has traditional drawn younger and arguably more tech-savvy voters. This year, only one in five people under 30 say they have been following the campaigns "very closely," down from 31% in 2008.

When Google announced that the Chrome browser would become its own operating system and run on netbooks, the thought around the tech community was that eventually Google would have to merge Chrome with Android. After all, what is the point of supporting two disparate mobile operating systems? The convergence has not yet occurred but may have taken a step further today as Google announced Chrome for Android available on devices running version 4.0 Ice Cream Sandwich.

Chrome for Android is a win for everybody. Except, of course, most users. As of Google's latest Android platform numbers, only 1% of devices are running Ice Cream Sandwich. That will change as 2012 moves along with adoption accelerating from new device purchases and updates. Chrome for Android immediately becomes one of the go-to browsers on the platform, which is good for HTML5 development, reliability and security.

Sponsor

The best thing that Chrome for Android brings to the table is robust HTML5 integration. The native Android browser is known to have mediocre HTML5 performance (pre-Ice Cream Sandwich) but Chrome for Android promises to make up what has been lacking.

That will include a hardware-accelerated canvas, overflow scroll support, HTML5 video specs support along with Indexed DB (for offline caching, presumably), WebWorkers and WebSockets.

The biggest advantage for mobile HTML5 though will be the ability to bring Chrome tools to the Android platform. If a developer knows how to work in Chromium, working in Chrome for Android will be a seamless transition. This is where the possible convergence of the Chrome and Android platforms will take place.

"Much of the code for Chrome for Android is already shared with Chromium and over the coming weeks, the Chromium team will be upstreaming many new components developed for Chrome for Android to Chromium, WebKit and other projects," Arnaud Weber, Google's engineering manager for Chrome, wrote in a blog post.

Chrome for Android has already been put through its initial HTML5 tests with a score of 343 (+10 bonus) on HTML5Test.com. The native ICS browser scored 256 (+3 bonus) which put it in the middle of the pack in terms of mobile browsers.

Chrome for Android promises to be fast, simple and reliable. It pre-loads pages with the Chrome Omnibox (only when Wi-Fi is enabled) and predicts where and what you want to navigate to. It also brings a simple user interface to the Android browser environment, something that many users will be very grateful for after dealing with some of the more complicated UIs from third-party options like Opera, Dolphin HD and Skyfire.

The best aspect of Chrome for Android though will be the ability to sign in to your Chrome browser and have access to all of your bookmarks, tabs and browsing history from anywhere. If you leave your computer with open tabs, Chrome for Android will recognize those and open them for you. Chrome will also be able to track your browsing history to better provide search suggestions. Like many other mobile browsers with desktop presences, Chrome for Android will also be able to sync your bookmarks to your mobile device.

We are going to be perfectly honest. No writer at ReadWriteWeb has a device running Android 4.0 Ice Cream Sandwich. So, we could not put the Chrome Beta through the paces (most RWWers use iPhones as well).

And there is the rub. Next to no one has Ice Cream Sandwich yet, outside a couple Galaxy Nexus users. This poses a problem, if a temporary one. Many existing Android devices are never going to get the ICS upgrade and the devices that have it pre-installed are still in early adopter/Android geek territory.

For many, the Chrome for Android is just an exciting announcement to shrug at since most will never see it on their current devices. Chrome for Android developers have plenty of time to roll out dynamic Web apps before the mass of Android users actually gets the browser. So, perhaps there is a positive side.

Excited for Chrome for Android? Will you develop for it? What about signing in to Chrome across all your devices? Let us know your reactions in the comments.

Well, it's official. Netflix has entered the original programming game and is no longer just a distributor of other companies' content. "Lilyhammer," a dramatic comedy starring "Sopranos" actor Steven Van Zandt, went live on Sunday. For the first time, the following words have appeared on the opening credits to a television-style show: "A Netflix original series."

Rather than being broadcast on HBO, a standard cable channel or even network TV, "Lilyhammer" is going straight to audiences via the Web. Netflix hopes that by making some content available exclusively through its service, it will attract new users and potentially even gain some additional leverage with other content providers.

Sponsor

This is a trend that's been unfolding among the premium streaming services this year. Hulu, which plans to invest $500 million in new content initiatives in 2012, will be launching an original series of its own next week. Even YouTube has been putting more effort into making higher-quality content available and recently launched a substantial redesign geared toward aiding in content discovery.

Netflix's own new initiative comes after what can hardly be described as a good year for the company. Between its subscription rate increase, loss of a key content deal, botched plans to spin off its DVD business and loss of 800,000 subscribers, the latter half of 2011 alone was a bit of a nightmare for the once-beloved company.

It also comes a time of heightened tensions between Netflix and some of its content providers, who have more traditional relationships and revenue streams to worry about. First, the company lost a key contract with Starz Entertainment. Now DVDs of Warner Bros. movies are subject to a 56-day waiting period before users can rent them, and a 28-day window before they can be added to one's queue. Netflix hasn't exactly pushed back against such efforts from Hollywood, so perhaps it deserves part of the blame. Regardless, it's clear that big content providers are nervous about the potential impact streaming services could have on traditional models.

This being the case, the move toward original content is a wise, indeed necessary, one. Will it be enough to turn things around? It's hard to say what kind of impact "Lilyhammer" alone will have, all the show is apparently already very popular in Norway. What's perhaps more important is the milestone that this represents.

One of Netflix's next forays into exclusive content will be interesting to watch. "Arrested Development," the discontinued Fox comedy with a major cult following, will return for a new season, but will only be available on Netflix.

This will be the year that online streaming services try to position themselves as an even more attractive alternative to cable by offering their own content. Even if the new trend doesn't destroy any legacy models, it could bolster the leverage of streaming services when it comes time to negotiate with legacy players over content deals.

"If the Super Bowl is such a meaningless game, why are so many people posting updates about how they're not going to watch it?" said one of my Facebook friends, as the game approached halftime.

OK, I don't follow football. And I especially don't know anything about the Super Bowl. After the Super Bowl, I was wondering why Nicki Minaj and MIA (aside from her Cee Lo flick-off) didn't play a bigger role in Madonna's halftime show. I was also pretty relieved that Madonna made it through that entire performance without slipping, though she did come scarily close. I was truly impressed by some of the throws (Eli Manning!) and was also curious about the stories behind the football players' tattoos.

What I do know about the Super Bowl is that the Giants won (go New York!), and I got to hang out with some very awesome friends and my friend's dog, who I want to steal. I also have a few witty one-liners thanks to my more football-savvy Facebook friends because I, like most other social TV watchers, checked Facebook and Twitter during the game.

Sponsor

A new report from Forrester report focuses on how marketers can use audio fingerprinting on second screen messaging to sync with what consumers are watching on the television screen. This, of course, assumes that the person watching the show is focused only on that show. For a mass media spectacle like the Super Bowl, however, the picture is not as simple. More than 40% of U.S. consumers who own tablets or smartphones are using them while watching TV. How can these second screens compliment - and perhaps even trump - the first screen TV experience?

The first thing to consider: Consumers often use their second screens as a space for commentary, not necessarily as a replacement for the first screen. Some consumers may prefer to watch TV while chatting with friends on their iPads. They may or may not be talking about the show. Other times consumers will just text with friends during the show, essentially ignoring much of it.

A co-viewing app, however, recognizes that the consumer is actually watching the show. This is where audio fingerprinting comes into play. If a consumer is using a co-viewing app, audio fingerprinting can be used to deliver relevant content to the second-screen device. In other words, open a co-viewing app and you'll definitely receive content that is related to the show you're watching.