Adrian Roselli

Tuesday, June 4, 2002

Nielsen Snipes E-comm Sites, Teams with Macromedia

Jakob Nielsen, in a busy week, releases a report criticizing e-commerce sites, and teams up with Macromedia to help them make Flash 99% less bad.

E-commerce Is 51% Bad

The first report, from News.com, describes a study released by the Nielsen Norman Group. The study claims that, from a field of 15 e-commerce sites, in total they met 49 percent of the usability guidelines developed by Nielsen's consulting company.

The L.L. Bean web site scored highest by meeting 66 percent of the guidelines, while Home & Garden had the lowest score, meeting only 38 percent of the guidelines. Amazon.com was left out of the survey, for reasons unknown, even though it ranked in first place two years ago.

Flash May Become 99% Somewhat Bad

Also this week, as covered at News.com, Macromedia and Nielsen announced that they would team up to create usability guidelines that can take advantage of the UI improvements offered in Flash MX. Of course, these are just guidelines, and there's no guarantee they'll be followed by anyone, but there is at least acknowledgment from Macromedia that improvements can be made in Flash.

Some of us here should be familiar with Nielsen's article, Flash: 99% Bad, written way back in October of 2000. Well, as of June 3, it's been updated with a sub-heading, Flash Now Improved, even though NNGroup hasn't actually started working on Flash yet.

Macromedia also has a press release on their site.

Sunday, April 7, 2002

Overture Sues Google

Overture (formerly Goto.com) filed suit against Google late Thursday in U.S. District Court in Los Angeles. The lawsuit only applies to the paid listings portion of the Google search engine, not its general search engine.

Google has no press releases related to this case, but a Google spokesman claims that they have analyzed the patent Overture cites in its lawsuit, and there is no infringement. Overture says the following about the lawsuit in a press release posted to its site:

The lawsuit charges Google with infringement of Overture's U.S. Patent No. 6,269,361. The '361 Patent protects various features and innovations relating to bid-for-placement products and Overture's Pay-For-Performance search technologies including its DirecTraffic Center account management system and tools.

Google took Overture's spot as the paid search service for Earthlink in February, and Overture is still trying to hammer out an overdue contract to continue services with AOL while AOL's sibling, CompuServe, started using Google in conjunction with Overture. Overture's paid listings appear on several search engines, including Yahoo! and AltaVista.

Overture filed a similar lawsuit against FindWhat.com in January (not that I can find any more about it). Also in January, a diet product manufacturer filed suit against AltaVista, Kanoodle, FindWhat.com, and Overture for alleged bait-and-switch tactics.

More information:

Google sued by its rival at the BBC
Overture sues Google over search patent at News.com
Overture Files Suit Against Google at the L.A. Times
Overture Files Patent Infringement Lawsuit Against Google press release from Overture
Google Introduces New Pricing For Popular Self-Service Online Advertising Program press release from Google
Patent 6,269,361 at the U.S. Patent Office

Saturday, March 23, 2002

Say Goodbye to Free Email

Both Hotmail and Yahoo have announced this week that people who want to continue to use some of their services will have to pay.

Yahoo announced on Thursday that it will begin charging for POP3 mail forwarding services. Yahoo originally started charging for some services back in February of 1999, and has continued over the past year to charge for services that are expensive to run. Beginning April 24, the mail forwarding service will cost users $29.99 per year, but those who subscribe before then will pay $19.99 for the first year.

Users who pay the fee will be able to use their Yahoo account as a POP3 mailbox, will be able to send attachments of up to 5 megabytes (instead of the current 1.5MB limit), and will not have the Yahoo text advertisement attached to the foot of every message. There will also be extra storage fees of $24.95 per year for 50MB, and $34.95 per year for 100MB, although users can pay monthly at $2.95 or $4.95, respectively.

Microsoft's Hotmail has taken a slightly different approach. Users who approach the 2MB limit, or don't regularly use the account, may find their inboxes cleared and their account bounces messages. Users are being pushed to upgrade to ensure their mail won't be wiped for inactivity or due to larger file sizes, while they are also being marketed the benefits of the Passport service and other internet services, such as MSN.

Last fall, Hotmail started closing accounts if inactive for 30 days, down from its 45 day policy. Over the summer, Hotmail offered storage space over the free 2MB at a price of $12.95, but raised it to $19.95 by December. Hotmail claims that first trash, then junk mail, then sent folders are cleaned before inboxes, although some users have reported the opposite has occurred. Some users argue that Hotmail has caused people to reach their file size limits by selling their information to spammers.

Monday, March 18, 2002

End of the Free Content Ride?

With the boon of the web a few years ago, sites competed with one another by acting like portals, trying to see who could post the most news and otherwise free content possible to keep people coming back. As the portal model has fallen away, and the 'net economy has tightened up, it seems some formerly free sources of information are starting to expect something in return.

Jupiter Media Metrix claims that 42% of online adults are willing to pay for content, down from 45% in August of 2000. However, there are some murmurings that the industry might be moving away from free content regardless.

CNN's decision to phase out free video clips on its new, sports, and financial sites is just one example, following ABC News' example. RealNetworks is selling a SuperPass with a monthly price tag that allows access to multimedia from ABC News, Fox Sports, NASCAR, and even pro baseball and basketball, and they've already garnered some 500,000 subscribers. Salon magazine made that move last year, moving much of its content to a premium service.

Jupiter's report suggests that paid online content will grow to a $5.8 billion industry by 2006, up from $1.4 billion in 2002. They attribute the expected growth to widespread access to broadband, as well as people just buying into the model of paying for much of their content online.

Of course, free doesn't always mean money. More and more sites are requiring registration to access content, making users decide if their personal information is a fair trade. This customer information is a form of currency you can see in places like download.com, where they now require registration to download software.

Sunday, March 17, 2002

Is Netscape the Browser for the Next AOL?

There have been many rumors on developer forums over the last week or so that AOL is testing Netscape in the AOL software. They've all been just rumors until recently, when some news sites have posted quotes from real, live AOL representatives.

AOL spokesman Jim Whitney confirmed on Thursday that a beta version of CompuServe has shipped with Netscape as the browser, and that they've been testing it since the fall. He also stated that they'll be testing Netscape with the AOL service as well, which has a worldwide customer base of 34 million users. AOL 8.0, due to ship in the fall, is likely the earliest version of the AOL service that could integrate Netscape.

With AOL's purchase of Netscape in 1999, and with AOL letting its agreement with Microsoft to use Internet Explorer as the browser of choice expire in January of 2001, some feel it's just been a matter of time before AOL would start to roll Netscape out as the default browser for the AOL service. Microsoft isn't so convinced AOL will move its user-base away from Internet Explorer given that AOL has been threatening it for years but hasn't yet moved. This, of course, ignores the January lawsuit AOL filed against Microsoft. Microsoft spokesman Jim Cullinan said, "AOL has had the ability to change browsers since they purchased Netscape back in 1998, so it's not surprising that they might make that decision. But Internet Explorer is by far the best technology because it provides users the best experience on the Internet. But the decision remains AOL's."

Jupiter Media Metrix analyst David Card walks away with the best quote to date, when commenting on whether or not AOL would really make the shift to Netscape from Internet Explorer: "Serious software companies don't ship open source. They may start with it but they build products on it. You just have to be serious about the business and I don't think they are serious (about Netscape)."

Some news bits:

AOL testing new, improved Netscape
AOL 7.0 tests Netscape browser
AOL with Gecko Beta Released over at MozillaZine, where they ask for people to beta test the software.
AOL Beta Testing Gecko-Based Browser, many discussions follow.

Track new links in the comments below, I think we'd all like to see the progression of this story.

Tuesday, January 22, 2002

Amazon Out of the Woods?

Back on January 21, Amazon had expected to report its first profit — a pro forma profit that would exclude many costs included in regular accounting and is often seen as a controversial method of creating good news where there may be none. Amazon has maintained that pro forma accounting is more appropriate for its business model.

However, Amazon posted a $5 million (1 cent per share) profit the very next day using standard accounting methods. Amazon used GAAP (Generally Accepted Accounting Principles), which is considered quite an accomplishment for a company often viewed as the poster boy for creative accounting.

Wall Street tracking firm Thomson Financial/First Call had expected Amazon to post a pro forma net loss of between 4 and 8 cents a share, compared to a loss of 25 cents a share ($90 million, pro forma) a year ago. Amazon's GAAP losses last year were $545 million, or $1.53 per share.

Amazon was able to cut its operating costs in half this past quarter, which allowed for lower prices on core products, resulting in higher sales volume. Free shipping on orders over $99 (originally a holiday special, but permanent as of today) as well as bundled products are credited with some of that volume, according to Bezos. Licensing its e-commerce package to Target and Toys R Us probably hasn't hurt, either. International sales were up 81% from last year, with the Germany and United Kingdom offices breaking even.

Amazon is still in debt to the tune of $2.2 billion ($120 million a year in interest alone), although that debt does not come due until 2008. Amazon is projecting first quarter sales between $775 million and $825 million, with $810 million in liabilities in the fourth quarter, meaning that profit is already earmarked and unable to pay down its debt.

Friday, February 2, 2001

Juno - Free Email for Megahertz

The Details

As of January 18, Juno's new service agreement has been in effect. As with all service agreements of this nature, they notify you of a change, and if you continue to use the service, you are bound by it.

So what? Well, there's a new feature that Juno offers. In exchange for using their free service, you agree to let them run some software on your computer. Modeled after the distributed computing model, made common knowledge by SETI @ Home, Juno is planning to use the computers of its users to crunch data. Section 2.5 of the agreement details this below. The salient points:

Juno makes you use a screen saver, possibly laden with advertisements, in order to run their distributed computing software. You cannot interfere with its operation.
Juno can ask you to leave your computer on at all times so the software can crunch away. You, of course, absorb the electric bill.
If you don't dial in often enough, Juno can call your computer and upload the data, whether or not you care. It is completely up to Juno's discretion. you could pay for the phone call, too.
If the software kills your system, that's your problem.

But hey, it is a free service. What will be interesting to see is where people feel that free service is valuable enough to allow this software to run. And if it does, could this business model catch on. And how will people respond to the privacy issues? Juno claims it will all fall under their privacy statement, also amended January 18. Ultimately, will people care? Was there enough backlash against Yahoo! or Geocities to really impact them? Somehow I think this will really only affect the people who run SETI @ Home.

Excerpt of Section 2.5 of the Juno Service Agreement

You expressly permit and authorize Juno to (i) download to your computer one or more pieces of software (the "Computational Software") designed to perform computations, which may be unrelated to the operation of the Service, on behalf of Juno (or on behalf of such third parties as may be authorized by Juno, subject to the Privacy Statement), (ii) run the Computational Software on your computer to perform and store the results of such computations, and (iii) upload such results to Juno's central computers during a subsequent connection, whether initiated by you in the course of using the Service or by the Computational Software as further described below. In connection with downloading and running the Computational Software, Juno may require you to leave your computer turned on at all times, and may replace the "screen saver" software that runs on your computer while the computer is turned on but you are not using it. The screen saver software installed by Juno, which may display advertisements or other images chosen by Juno, is an integral part of the Computational Software and you agree not to take any action to disable or interfere with the operation of either the screen saver software or any other component of the Computational Software. You agree that, as between you and Juno, you shall be responsible for any costs or expenses resulting from the continuous operation of your computer, including without limitation any associated charges for electricity, and that you shall have sole responsibility for any maintenance or technical issues that might result from such continuous operation. [...] If your usage of the Service is infrequent, Juno's ability to obtain the results of completed computations may be impaired. Consequently, you expressly permit and authorize Juno to initiate a telephone connection from your computer to Juno's central computers using a dial-in telephone number you have previously selected for accessing the Service; Juno agrees that it shall exercise such right only to the extent necessary, as determined in Juno's sole discretion, to upload the results of completed computations to Juno in a timely fashion; and you agree that, as between you and Juno, you shall be responsible for any costs and expenses (including without limitation any applicable telephone charges) resulting from the foregoing. Juno agrees that any software, data, or other materials downloaded to your computer in connection with the activities described in this Section 2.5 will comply with Juno's privacy policies, as reflected in the Privacy Statement. [...]