Information Technology Blog:

ARM Has Intel in the Crosshairs

Published on: 2012-03-09 

ARCELONA, Spain (CNNMoney) -- The company behind the lightning-fast processor in the new iPad thinks it can soon become the predominant microchip business in the world.

Chips designed by ARM (ARMH), the British microprocessor company you've probably never heard of, are in a stunning 95% of the world's mobile phones and tablets, including the new iPad Apple announced this week. ARM's chips represent 30% of the entire semiconductor market sales, which is nearly double Intel's 16%, according to IHS iSuppli.

But ARM's ambitions are even grander.

"We want to see that doubled to 60%," said Warren East, ARM's CEO, in an interview conducted at last week's Mobile World Congress. "We think we've got the right sort of technology for everything from very, very tiny intelligent sensors, through the consumer electronic swathe, right through to servers."

ARM is in a unique position in the chip industry because it doesn't actually make microprocessors. Instead, ARM designs chips and licenses those different architectures to more than 300 companies around the world, including giant players such as Samsung, Nvidia (NVDA), Texas Instruments (TI) and Qualcomm (QCOM, Fortune 500).

The company is particularly successful in the rapidly growing mobile market, partially because it is good at what it does, but also because of the dumb luck of being in the right place at the right time.

ARM got its start in 1991 designing modem chips for cell phones. They were fairly limited microchips that were built for one purpose: to communicate with cell towers without sucking up too much of the phone's battery. But around the turn of the century, handset manufacturers began to realize that there was excess computer power left over in those ARM-based chips that could be used to build a user interface.

Soon after that realization, the "feature phone" was born, which ultimately evolved into the modern day smartphone. Taking advantage of the situation, ARM now designs chips for two purposes: the same-old modem processor and an applications processor that controls the user interface for Android, iOS, Windows Phone, BlackBerry OS and the like.

Demand for ARM-based chips has risen sharply of late, as the cell phone architecture made its way into disk drives, printers, cars, Internet-connected TVs, microcontrollers, and tablets. This year, Hewlett-Packard (HPQ, Fortune 500) is introducing its first server running on ARM-based chips, and Microsoft (MSFT, Fortune 500) will release a version of Windows 8 that will run on tablets powered with processors designed by ARM.

As a result, ARM's share of the overall semiconductor market has soared, doubling in just three short years. Smartphone and tablet sales will continue to help ARM's share rise, and the new markets ARM is entering could help the company arrive at its goal of doubling its share again three years from now. For instance, IHS iSuppli predicts ARM will grow its share of the PC processor market to 22% by 2015, up from practically nothing today.

Meanwhile, semiconductor behemoth Intel (INTC, Fortune 500) tried -- and failed -- for many years to get a foothold in the mobile marketplace, as ARM's 21-year old expertise in power management gave it a leg up.

But recently, Intel scored some big wins after finally convincing handset makers that its chips could play nicely in mobile. Global telecom giant Orange and Indian carrier Lava announced last week that they are planning on shipping a device based on an Intel reference design next quarter, and Lenovo launched a similar phone last month.

Motorola Mobility (MMI), which is being acquired by Google, said last month that all of its future devices will run on Intel chips. And Chinese smartphone giant ZTE said last week that it too would soon begin to ship phones with Intel inside.

Despite Intel's deep pockets and recent surge, ARM isn't fazed. The company believes its power-sipping, mobile-friendly architecture will ultimately become the world's most pervasive.

"Intel's offerings today are better than they were years ago, and undoubtedly there are going to be some Intel design wins," East said. "But I look at the capabilities of those products and see the same kind of capabilities that were in ARM products several years ago." To top of page

Highlights of the Worlds Biggest Mobile Device Gathering

Published on: 2012-02-22 

(CNN) -- Mobile World Congress is the world's largest mobile phone trade show, held every year in Barcelona. It is the venue for manufacturers like Nokia, HTC, LG, and Samsung to reveal the must-have mobile devices and services of the year.

This year is likely to be no different with big launches expected from all the major players except Apple.

So what can we expect? Some phone makers have already announced their MWC line up, some have hinted, others have been rumored. Talking to sources, joining the dots, and getting the word on the street, this is what is expected at the show:

Nokia
Nokia is rumored to be launching a number of handsets at MWC this year. Some will focus on emerging markets (Brazil, Russia, India, and China), while the others, the developed ones. The phones you are most likely to be interested in will be a European version of the recently announced Nokia Lumia 900, and a low end Lumia; the Nokia Lumia 610. Both models will work with Microsoft's Windows Phone 7 operating system.

HTC
We are expecting three handsets from the Taiwanese company; The HTC One X, The HTC One S, and the HTC One V. The top-of-the-range One X will feature the new Nvidia Tegra 3 quad-core processor and run Android, while Pocket-lint has confirmed with sources that the One V will be a music-focused device aimed at men and similar to the more female friendly (if that is possible) HTC Rhyme that is already on the market.

Samsung
Although Samsung was expected to launch the Samsung Galaxy S III at MWC this year, the company has now confirmed that it won't. With a number of pre-MWC launches already detailed, Samsung is expected instead to focus on tablets at the show. If rumors are to be believed, it will launch a 10.1-inch version of the Samsung Galaxy Note announced in September 2011. The difference from all the other tablets it sells? It will have a built-in stylus.

LG
Following Samsung's lead with the Galaxy Note, LG has announced its LG Optimus Vu prior to the show. A cross between a phone and a tablet, it will measure 139.6mm x 90.mm, meaning it's going to be one for those with big hands and big pockets. There are also rumors that the company will announce a follow up to the LG Optimus 2X called the 3X. Expect it to have a quad-core processor too.

Research In Motion
BlackBerry maker RIM has said that there will be no new hardware at the show this year, but that it will be showing off the new PlayBook 2.0 operating system and the software operating system, BB OS 10, that it hopes will power its new phones expected later in the year.

Panasonic
Having just announced a new waterproof and dustproof phone called the Eluga, Panasonic has also confirmed it has a second handset in the pipeline to launch at MWC. It will feature a dual-core processor, OLED screen and will run Android.

Fujitsu
Japanese brand Fujitsu has confirmed that it will be launching phones in Europe following its success in Japan. The company has yet to announce which models it will be bringing the continent, however the smart money is on the waterproof quad-core Tegra 3 powered Android smartphone it announced at CES in Las Vegas in January.

Sony (aka Sony Ericsson)
Trying to pinpoint a Sony phone destined for Mobile World Congress is as hard as Sony Ericsson's transitions to Sony. We are expecting a European launch for the already announced (at CES) Sony Ericsson Xperia S though. Rumors and leaked internet photos suggest maybe a bigger screen version too, as well as an array of other Android devices.

Motorola
Motorola's MWC plans are even quieter than Sony's with the company traditionally focusing on CES in Las Vegas to launch many of its first-half-of-the-year handsets. There is a suggestion that Motorola has teamed up with Intel to launch one of the first Intel-powered smartphones, but that is still to be confirmed. Motorola doesn't have a press conference at the show, but Intel does.

Google Back in the CrossHairs For Privacy Violations

Published on: 2012-02-20 

NEW YORK (CNNMoney) -- In the latest high-profile flap over online data privacy, Google has been caught bypassing the privacy settings on Apple's Safari Web browser, letting advertisers track users in unintended ways.

A Wall Street Journal investigation published Friday drew attention to the issue and set off alarm bells across the Web. In response to the Journal's probe, Google (GOOG, Fortune 500) discontinued its use of the tracking code.

The actual consequences were pretty limited: Google's code was being used only to target ads, and users' personal information was never collected. But it was yet another prominent example of a tech company drawing fire for a slipshod and sneaky way of handling private data.

The Google imbroglio revolves around the company's ad network, which serves advertisements across a wide range of websites.

Sites use files called "cookies" to follow users' movements and log-ins as they travel through the Web. Apple's (AAPL, Fortune 500) Safari has far stricter tracking restrictions than any other major browser: By default, it blocks third-party cookies. That's a big problem for ad networks, which rely on those cookies to measure their campaigns and to enable some ad functions.

That's what tripped Google up. It wanted to give viewers who were signed into Google's network the ability to use Google's +1 button to tout ads that caught their eye.

To do that, it exploited a loophole in Safari, essentially tricking the browser into thinking that the viewer had interacted with the ad. That fooled Safari into giving Google permission to install a test cookie and create a temporary communication link back to Google's servers.

Google says that link was designed to operate anonymously and did not collect any personal information. But it had an unintended consequence: Other cookies were able to follow in the first one's wake. Google essentially cracked open a door and others piled in behind it.

While it admitted using the Safari workaround, Google cast the subsequent cookie flood as an inadvertent screw-up.

"The Safari browser contained functionality that then enabled other Google advertising cookies to be set on the browser. We didn't anticipate that this would happen," Google said Friday in a prepared statement. "We have now started removing these advertising cookies from Safari browsers."

Google wasn't the only one exploiting Safari's loophole. Stanford grad student Jonathan Mayer, who published an extensive technical analysis of it on Friday, found at least three other advertising companies taking advantage of it: Vibrant Media, Media Innovation Group and PointRoll.

"I think there's quite possibly a deceptive business practice here," Mayer said in an interview with CNN.

He questioned Google's claim that no private data was ever misued.

"Google released a statement that there was not personal information at play. I'm not quite certain what they mean by that," Mayer said. "They were quite intentionally moving information about a Google user's account over to Google's advertising networks."

In his technical analysis, Mayer intentionally steered clear of a broader question the debacle raises: Is Safari's third-party cookie blocking the right way to go?

It's a big departure from the industry standard. Microsoft's (MSFT, Fortune 500) Internet Explorer, Firefox and Chrome all allow third-party cookies.

Apple says its motive is privacy. Safari's third-party cookie ban is designed "to prevent companies from tracking the cookies generated by the websites you visit," Apple says on its website.

But many websites rely on advertising to fund their operations, and Apple's ban wreaks havoc with tracking across ad networks. Those ad networks are Apple's direct rivals: It competes against them with its own iAd network, which serves ads through applications instead of websites.

Apple did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

"Marketers who rely on third-party tracking cookies are effectively blind when it comes to measuring performance on the iPad and other iOS devices," ad software maker Marin Software wrote last year in a research paper examining the problem.

The block also causes problems for some Web apps that integrate content across multiple sites. The permissions that a user intentionally grants on one site can't be carried through to other, linked sites.

Facebook's "best practices" guide for its developers lists "cross-domain cookies do not work in Safari" as a common problem and recommends using the same kind of workaround Google employed.

It's not lost on Apple's critics that the company's cookie ban is a big thorn in the side of Apple's key competitors.

"Let's step back a second here and ask: why do you think Apple has made it impossible for advertising-driven companies like Google to execute what are industry standard practices on the open web?" author John Battelle, who founded an ad network and wrote a book about Google, wrote in a blog post.

"Do you think it's because Apple cares deeply about your privacy? Really?" Battelle asked. "Or perhaps it's because Apple considers anyone using iOS, even if they're browsing the web, as 'Apple's customer,' and wants to throttle potential competitors."

FCC Getting Huge on LightSquared - NO GPS FOR YOU

Published on: 2012-02-15 

NEW YORK (CNNMoney) -- LightSquared's plan to become a fifth major nationwide wireless carrier hit a major snag this week, after government regulators said they would continue to bar the company from launching its network.

The National Telecommunications and Information Administration said late Tuesday that LightSquared's network could interfere with GPS signals, despite LightSquared's proposed engineering solutions. That interference has the potential to be extremely dangerous: In addition to powering consumer navigation devices, GPS is used by the military and the aviation industry to guide airplanes and missiles.

As a result of NTIA's decision, the Federal Communications Commission revoked a waiver that would have allowed LightSquared to turn on its network. The FCC on Wednesday plans to issue a public proposal that would bar LightSquared from launching its service "indefinitely."

LightSquared wants to sell wireless on a wholesale basis, a move that would potentially add dozens of rivals to AT&T (T, Fortune 500), Verizon (VZ, Fortune 500), Sprint (S, Fortune 500) and T-Mobile to the mix. Since the company only plans to launch efficient, next-generation network technology, it believes that it can severely undercut the current national carriers' prices.

The wannabe wireless company, owned by Philip Falcone's Harbinger Capital Partners hedge fund, remains adamant that its technological solutions to the interference issues are valid and resolve the problem.

"The NTIA's recommendation relied on the flawed conclusions ... about LightSquared's potential impact on GPS," a company spokeswoman said Tuesday in a prepared statement. "LightSquared recognizes, however, that this is just one step in the process, and it remains committed to working toward a resolution."

The problem stems from the fact that LightSquared's spectrum -- the airwaves that are used to broadcast wireless signals -- is directly adjacent to the GPS industry's spectrum. As it turns out, the GPS companies have been jumping the fence for years, picking up signals transmitted through their neighbors' property. It had gone unnoticed, since LightSquared and its predecessors hadn't been using the spectrum until recently.

GPS giants Trimble Navigation (TRMB) and Garmin (GRMN) said in response that their systems were never intended to be immune from strong signals on nearby frequencies. They have a point: The spectrum LightSquared owns was originally licensed only for satellite services, not the much stronger terrestrial transmissions LightSquared wants to put there.

To do that, LightSquared needs FCC permission. The agency granted its conditional waiver last year. The FCC's technical staff expressed surprise when the issue later blew up into a major controversy with GPS device manufacturers.

But after experimenting with several potential solutions, the agency now says it sees no quick fix. And although the interference issues aren't LightSquared's fault, the FCC said its hands are tied.

"There is no practical way to mitigate potential interference at this time," said Tammy Sun, a spokeswoman for the FCC.

LightSquared has made many concessions in its attempt to gain regulatory approval, including limiting itself to broadcasting in just half of the spectrum band that it had licensed. In its view, regulators are coddling the GPS industry.

"GPS in America has become 'too big to fail,'" Jeff Carlisle, head of LightSquared's regulatory affairs, wrote in a blog post this week. "Like Wall Street, the manufacturers of GPS devices have spent years profiting off of vulnerable technology and are now seeking protection from the government instead of implementing the necessary reforms."

Time for Zuckerburg to Face the Music of the Public

Published on: 2012-01-31 

Editor's note: Douglas Rushkoff, who writes regularly for CNN.com, is a media theorist and the author of "Program or Be Programmed: Ten Commands for a Digital Age" and "Life Inc: How Corporatism Conquered the World and How We Can Take it Back."

(CNN) -- We all knew he'd eventually get around to it: Mark Zuckerberg is expected to finally bring Facebook public. The company is reported to be preparing to file for an IPO -- initial public offering -- through which anyone will be able to buy shares of the social networking company on an open stock exchange.

As a media theorist, I used to ignore these business shenanigans. Who cares if these companies are private or public, profitable or in the red? How many non-Wall-Street-Journal readers even knew what an IPO was back before the Internet created the likes of AOL, Netscape, and Google?

But the fact is we do now think about the stock market. Many of us are aware that Apple's market capitalization is fast approaching half a trillion dollars, making it either the largest or second-largest company in the world behind Exxon Mobil - depending on the week. So when we hear that Facebook is preparing for an IPO that will likely dwarf Google's entrance to the public markets in 2004, particularly considering that the company doesn't sell tangible goods or services in the traditional sense, we can't help but wonder what this will mean for the future of Facebook, its users, its competitors, and the greater economy.

The way it appears at first glance - particularly for those who have been following Mr. Zuckerberg since he launched "The Facebook" from his college dorm or, better, those who have seen the movie "The Social Network" - is that the Zuckerberg juggernaut is continuing unabated.

This new form of media -- social networking -- will not only redefine the Internet, change human relationships, create a new marketing landscape, and challenge Google, but it will now rescue and alter the economy itself. Like virtual kudzu, it will infiltrate the financial markets, creating new sorts of opportunities for this peer-to-peer "social" economy to take root. We will all make our living playing Farmville, or designing new versions of it, or investing in companies that do.
Facebook expected to be largest tech IPO

In reality, however, I don't think we are witnessing Facebook's victory over the financial markets as much as its acquiescence to them. Yes, Apple challenged Microsoft for software supremacy, just as Facebook now challenges Google for Internet supremacy. But there's another operating system churning away beneath all this high tech activity, and it's called corporate capitalism. If a company is big enough -- and that means simply holding enough money -- then sooner or later that money influences the rest of the company's activities.

In Facebook's case, it meant approaching the legal limit of 500 investors, which triggers a requirement to open the books to regulatory scrutiny. It also meant dealing with a few thousand coveted employees who took jobs at Facebook instead of Google or Apple or anywhere else because they were hoping to get in on a big thing. The promise of cashing in a few million dollars worth of stock options helps many a programmer make it through a late night of coding.

The same goes for those who invested in Zuckerberg five or more years ago and want to cash in before the "social web" bubble pops, if it's going to. Facebook was taking so long to get to market that many people had begun selling their shares privately on what are known as secondary markets, putting Facebook's valuation even further out of the company's own hands.

Simply becoming a multi-billion-dollar company changes the essence of its goals, activities, and purpose. Its bloodstream becomes filled with cash, and cash has its own agenda. For just like print, TV, or the Internet, money is a medium, too. It has biases, or tendencies, programmed right into it. The kind of money we happen to use -- bank-issued central currency -- is biased toward lending. That's why we call our system "capitalism." It's about the capital: Our money is designed to favor those who lend it to others who actually use it to build companies or create value.

The more money a company takes in, the more obligated it becomes to function in accordance with the properties and rules of money. For example, since becoming public, Google has had to prove its devotion to its shareholders' interests by cutting pet programs, showing earnings' growth, and demonstrating focus over big dreams. Out with public experiments like Google Labs, in with products like Android try to compete with Apple's iOS and G+ to compete with Facebook. No more touting that employees get 20% of their work hours to do whatever they want. It's a real corporation, now, and has to behave like one.

By all accounts, Zuckerberg was trying to delay this eventuality as long as possible. He knows that becoming the CEO of a public company will not be nearly as much fun, or as free, as running an Internet startup. However much we may not like his vision for our future, his primary purpose was to change the world. He wanted to create the operating system on which human social activity took place.

What he has ultimately succumbed to, however, is the fact that Facebook was running on top of another operating system all along. Instead of revolutionizing our reality, by filing an IPO Mark Zuckerberg is finally getting with the program.

More Items