|
Thursday, September 23, 2004
Previous topic
|
Next topic
|
|
 Thursday, September 23, 2004
started 9/23/2004; 11:50:37 AM - last post 9/24/2004; 10:02:50 AM
|
|
Doc Searls - Thursday, September 23, 2004 
9/23/2004; 3:50:37 PM (reads: 3309, responses: 1)
|
|
On the webio 
Raise your iPods if you hate ATRAC
| | How clueless can a company be? How little can a giant consumer electronics company understand the niche-to-death limits of pushing a proprietary sound recording codec the market clearly doesn't want? Sony has been testing these questions ever since they leveraged their denial of MP3's popularity into lines of highly unpopular proprietary ATRAC-only devices. |
| | Well, it says here Sony will, at last, wake up and stop making digital recording and playback devices that don't respect MP3's giant share of the playback codec market. |
| | Me, I've bought half a dozen Sony NetMD Minidisk recorders (ever since Sony stopped making the outstanding WM-D3 cassette recorder), and have hated them all, because they insist on making nothing but @#$&* Sony-proprietary ATRAC recordings. Converting those recordings to MP3 requires Windows-only crapware, which I can't stand. |
| | Think there will be a way to update my old NetMD's? |
| | Thanks to Xeni for the pointer. |
Gaggle?
I didn't even know he was dead
See what he said
| | The video is a fine production. I'm not well-lit, but I wore a mike, so the audio is excellent. And they edited all my slides into the video as well — something I've rarely seen done, mostly because it takes time and care. Especially in this case, since the talk ran well over an hour. |
| | A big thanks again to Paul Jones and everybody there. |
Bowling with pearls
| | I said that I understand that to them the Net looks like a medium through which content passes, some of which people aren't paying for. But, (sez I) their customers aren't "consuming" content. We're not consuming anything. We're listening to music, We're watching video streams, We're talking with friends. To call it content is to miss why it matters to Big Content's customers. |
| | Somewhere in there he mentions Sarbanes-Oxley, which is one of the biggest balls of red tape ever to preoccupy corporate paranoids and the outside consultans, which "Sox" assures full employment. (I've written about the matter here.) |
discuss
|
|
Shannon Clark - Re: Thursday, September 23, 2004
9/24/2004; 2:02:50 PM (reads: 464, responses: 0)
|
|
|
In reference to Dr. Weinberger's comments perhaps a perspective that "business" will (at least some of it) understand is as follows:
- When we (consumers) "consume" content we are, in fact, using a limited resource - namely our TIME and ATTENTION. If you (business) provide us with what we want, in turn we give you are attention and time. In the case of most digital media at a time and place of our choosing, not yours (and with DVR's such as Tivo we now consume TV content in this manner as well)
- Advertisers and advertising supported content has long understood the value and scarcity of attention and time, but most other content producers have been focused on getting compensation directly from us (the consumers) "for" that content - instead of finding a way to be compensated by someone (us and/or other parties) for occupying our (consumers) time and attention.
Consider the impact that various "thought leaders" - on and offline have in helping shape consumer action. Oprah being perhaps the biggest example of this - with the ability to singlehandedly make a book a bestseller. The "Slashdot" or "boingboing" effect online is a similar phenomenon - lots of attention and time from many parties quickly focused on a single thing. Queer Eye for the Straight Guy is another example of a content show that can influence many consumer's behaviors. Atkins is another example of content (their diet books) influence massively consumer behavior.
As a consumer my time is a scarce commodity. I "spend" it on only a limited amount of content - for me much of it online. At some point I am willing to "pay" for the content that I value - subscribing to a magazine (on or offline) which I value, buying a book from someone whose other content I enjoy (Cory Doctorow & BoingBoing being a case in point), attending a conference organized by thinkers whom I respect, etc. At times my "compensation" is indirect - I, in turn, refer others to a given content provider, or I am influenced by that content provider to buy a product or brand which they have recommended.
Shannon
www.meshforum.org
discuss
|
|
|
Copyright 2009 The Doc Searls Weblog
|
