by publius

I'd give it a big "eh." Tonight's strategy seemed right, but the execution could have been better.

My hope tonight was that Obama would focus more on the human side. The debate has been getting bogged down in costs, and CBO reports, and new commissions, etc. All that stuff is extremely important -- but it's also very hard for the public to follow these types of policy minutiae.

And so I liked Obama's initial focus on "what's in it for you." That side of the debate should be more loudly emphasized because, at the end of the day, it's the most important. But Obama just didn't pull it off all that well, either in delivery or in the questions (Kevin Drum seems to agree). Anyway, maybe the point was just to get quotes in tomorrow's papers and to refocus coverage. As a live performance, though, he could have done better.

One last point on the whole "shouldn't we slow down" question... We don't have to analyze this question in the abstract. The stimulus debate provides good guidance.

Remember that the Republicans were saying "let's think about this," "let's slow down," etc. Now, if they had actually been interested in stimulating the economy more efficiently, fine. But that's not what they used the delay for -- they used it to drag things out and to kill the stimulus by a thousand cuts. Each day brought new demagoguery on things like honeybees.

If we were living in some sort of Platonic ideal of The Republic, fine. We could study things and enact the very best plan possible. But in this world, we have John Boehner. And delay at this point means death to reform.

Here's a really fascinating piece on the BBC about NASA programmer Don Eyles and the team behind the infamous AGC (Apollo Guidance Computer). Don was only 23 when he got the gig. Maybe it was good that he was young and naive. As he says: "I don't recall the risk and the responsibility and the fact that other people's lives were to some extent in our hands."

There are few instances in which I'm happy to be as old as I am. The fact that I got to live through and be an active observer (aka space geek!) during the Apollo program is one of those times. I still get chills reliving some of that footage.

There's a great jargon term in here, too: "LOL memory." It stands for "Little Old Lady memory" and refers to the "rope core memory" used in the AGC that required teams of (women) employees to weave meters and meters of copper wire around magnetic cores.

Weaving the way to the Moon [Thanks, Brian Jepson and Mike Loukides!]

Edocr, a smaller competitor to other document sharing startups like DocStoc and Scribd, re-launches today with new features and an API, after a long time off-radar.

Eschewing the publisher focus of Issuu, or the broad business focus of DocStoc, the boot-strapped Edocr focuses on corporates and organisations. So for instance, companies can upload all their public-facing documents, whether they be company reports, press releases, guidance documents, you name it. Admittedly the slightly dull-but-necessary focus is not going to set the world alight, but with plenty of enterprises still getting their heads around the basics of blogging, RSS and even social networks like Twitter, edocr is a simple way for companies to share their PDFs without being lumped alongside a pirated copy of a Harry Potter novel.

New features include an improved design, bulk uploading of documents, an API, document categories, better search and the ability to auto-tweet to a Twitter account when new documents get uploaded. The question is, will that be enough to set it apart from the many players in this field?

Crunch Network: CrunchBase the free database of technology companies, people, and investors

Filed under: TUAW Business, Podcasts

As my son Cole, who is three years old, explains it, nothing lives forever except for vampire robots, a particular obsession of his. While I can't speak to vampire robots, when it comes to computer and networking equipment there typically is a finite life span after which vendors don't usually provide much, if any, support. It's not that the old stuff suddenly goes bad, it's that we're supposed to buy new, whether we want to -- or even need to -- or not. They call it EOL -- End of Life -- and it represents to the sales department a giddy combination of possibility and peril where, like passing Go in Monopoly, everything is suddenly new again but there is always the risk that new stuff will have on it the label of your competitor.

This week, then, Cisco Systems announced a new class of enterprise switches called the Nexus 7000 intended to replace its Catalyst router family, which is reaching its End of Life. To me the Nexus 7000, which costs from $75,000-$200,000, looks a heck of a lot like a mainframe computer. To Cisco it looks like a frigging gold mine.

These chances to tell customers they should throw out their perfectly fine equipment come along rarely, and in this case the opportunity to throw out the old and replace with new is particularly huge and gratifying because there is so much of the old stuff to get rid of. The equipment that will be replaced with Nexus 7000 racks was generally installed during the glory days of 1999-2000, when dot-coms and V.90 modems ruled the world, there was little streaming video, and we didn't really buy all that much stuff over the Internet. In anticipation of future growth back then (and just because they could), companies like Cisco pushed so much network hardware into the sales channel that it has taken until now for most of that equipment to finally become obsolete. So now they can push a boatload of new equipment into data centers in exactly the same way.

I'm not saying the Nexus 7000 is not needed or that it is bad in any way. Quite the contrary. Cisco has spent four years and $1 billion building a new generation of routers with new capabilities that are intended to be so compelling they'll keep customers from jumping to Juniper or some other competitor. And along with ensuring customer loyalty, the Nexus 7000s that start rolling out shortly will eventually enable whole new kinds of data services, most importantly robust IP multicasting as I described in this space a few weeks ago.

One huge difference between the Nexus and Catalyst lines, for example, is that Nexus comes with IP multicast turned "on," while Catalyst came with multicast turned "off" as a default. A Nexus 7000 chassis can pump up to 15 terabits per second, which is a heck of a lot of bits. Just for example, if we imagine a DVD-quality H.264 video stream running typically at one megabit per second, that Nexus 7000 could seemingly support 15 MILLION such data streams. In practical service, however, where the Nexus 7000 would be providing bandwidth for storage and network management in addition to pure file service, it is more reasonable to expect a fully tricked-out Nexus 7000 to support more like one million or so concurrent users. It is difficult at this point to even estimate the total cost of that tricked-out Nexus loaded with 10-gigabit-per-second network cards and hundreds of terabytes of storage, but it will undoubtedly set a new low cost point for per-subscriber hardware. Cisco is going to sell a lot of these puppies to telephone companies upgrading their DSL plants to offer IP TV.

What strikes me from reading the Nexus specs and that of the associated NX-OS operating system is how this new switch reminds me of an old mainframe. Nearly all services are virtualized, with multiple copies of the OS starting and stopping as needed. Everything is redundant, isolated, and intended for nonstop service. It is hard to imagine when, if ever, you'd even need to reboot. And while the Nexus supports network connections up to 10 gigabits per second, the really fast networking takes place in parallel between cards over a passive backplane. The Nexus 7000 is a data center in a rack, only with dramatically reduced cooling and power requirements which suggest to me that Cisco has a growth strategy for this architecture that will, over time, make it look more and more like a big computer and less like a router. Throw on a virtualized AIX or Solaris and the Nexus will eventually reveal that its true competition is less likely to be Juniper than it is IBM, HP, and Sun.

Remember this new platform has to last for a decade. From today's perspective making it still attractive 10 years from now requires subsuming as many computing services as one can imagine, not just undermining cable TV.

And speaking of undermining, many readers have been asking me to put in context IBM's recent move to cut pay for almost 8,000 service and support employees. I have resisted commenting to this point mainly because I see my job here as covering stories that AREN'T being handled well (or at all) elsewhere. But in the case of this story the Associated Press and others have done a good job of explaining the problem from the perspective of the employees, so I haven't had to.

But readers keep asking and there does seem to be an arm's length view of the situation that hasn't been well explained to date, so here goes.

If you aren't familiar with the story, IBM was sued several years ago by employees who were classified as exempt and therefore not entitled to overtime pay, yet those employees felt that had they worked at some other company their duties would have been considered non-exempt. IBM lost the case, paid a $65 million settlement in 2006, but took until now to decide that it ought to reduce by 15 percent the base pay of the affected employees in order to keep the settlement revenue-neutral for the company. If IBM had to pay overtime, it would tie that overtime to a lower base pay, thus keeping its costs steady.

While this probably makes total sense in the IBM accounting department, the change was a surprise to the affected workers, who say they are hurt by the lower base since it also cuts their vacation pay and IBM's contribution to their 401K. It might be easy to point to that $65 million settlement as making up for some of this, except that many IBM employees who were eligible to participate in the settlement for some reason didn't sign up for it and no longer can. Now there's a communication problem that needs exploration.

What the big picture shows here is the apparent end of IBM's tradition of respect for the individual. For most of its corporate history IBM has been a pioneer -- a model -- for corporate responsibility, but that era seems to be over. Maybe there is no more fat left to trim so the company is cutting muscle, instead. But I think there is more to it than that. I think this is a logical eventuality of IBM becoming a truly global corporation, not just an American company that does business abroad.

Despite the dark stories I have written about IBM over the last couple years, the company's latest financial reports were very good and the earnings guidance it gave to Wall Street was positively glowing. This makes little sense looking at the company from a U.S. perspective, where customers are upset and profits appear to be fleeting. Cutting through the recent IBM financials shows, in fact, that the company makes little or no money in the U.S. and quite a bit of money internationally. Nearly all of IBM's current profit, in fact, can be attributed to a single condition -- the weak dollar. International sales and profits are bigger mainly because the dollar is so much smaller than it used to be -- a condition that is likely to continue, hence the glowing earnings forecast.

Maybe what IBM is doing is turning itself into a business that is mainly NOT in the U.S. Those rosy forecasts could be based on an active plan to essentially abandon the bottom of the U.S. market in favor of the top of every international market. It hurts the U.S. employees (especially those in services) but makes sense in so many ways. The model it scarily reminds me of is Tyco, which went so far as to switch its incorporation to Bermuda.

And what if this strategy fails or the dollar recovers? Then they'll ramp up production of those vampire robots, I'm sure.

NEW YORK, January 7, 2008 Porter Novelli has formed a strategic alliance with Shunya International, an operating company within the Shunya Communications Group, one of China's leading independent public relations and marketing groups, to provide strategic planning and other consultancy services to multinational organizations in China.

The deal follows the recent investment by parent Omnicom Group's BBDO, in a significant minority stake in the Shunya Communications Group. This partnership is designed to provide highly-skilled Chinese resources and market access to Porter Novelli and to create international scale and development opportunities for Shunya International's multinational clients and staff.

The creation of Shunya International as a member of the Porter Novelli global network follows the integration of Porter Novelli and Shunya consultants in China into a 60-person agency team, based in Beijing, Shanghai, Guangzhou and Chengdu. The team has already won clients in China including P&G's Pampers program as well as providing additional resources to Porter Novelli global clients such as The Dow Chemical Company.

Shunya International's management team is led by Michael Song, managing director, and John Orme, president. Michael has led a number of client teams since joining the Shunya Group in 2000 as one of the agency's first employees. John, who joined Porter Novelli's UK business in 1982, spent six years in the agency's Brussels' office before moving to China in April 2007 to focus on the development of Porter Novelli's resources for clients in China.

The new agency will provide a portfolio of stakeholder relationship services to national and international clients, including strategic research and planning, issues counsel and interactive communications skills, as well as media relations, event management and internal communications.

We have taken a deliberately pragmatic approach to building our presence in China, said Helen Ostrowski, chairman of Porter Novelli. In the Shunya International team, we now have the right combination of local expertise and global best practices to provide the kind of guidance and executional support that multinational clients are looking for in China.

Ostrowski noted that the formation of Shunya International is the latest significant step in the development of Porter Novelli Asia Pacific. Over the past decade, the agency has focused on key markets such as Japan, Korea, India and Singapore, as well as the more recent development of its partner network in the ASEAN region.

Shunya International President John Orme said: This is great news for our growing portfolio of clients in China. Our relationship with Shunya will enable Porter Novelli to provide national and international clients with unparalleled skills and reach. Added Michael Song, Shunya International Managing Director: The public relations market in China is experiencing accelerated growth into its third decade, coupled with an immense appetite for best practice learning and knowledge transfer.

About Porter Novelli

Porter Novelli is one of the world's leading public relations agencies and is represented in all major markets. With a focus on effective stakeholder communications and adopting a holistic, media-neutral approach, Porter Novelli develops public relations programs that deliver value and impact to its clients' business. Porter Novelli was founded in Washington, D.C., in 1972 and is a part of Omnicom Group Inc. (NYSE: OMC) (www.omnicomgroup.com). Omnicom is a leading global advertising, marketing and corporate communications company. Omnicom's branded networks and numerous specialty firms provide advertising, strategic media planning and buying, digital and interactive, direct and promotional marketing, public relations and other specialty communications services to over 5,000 clients in more than 100 countries. For more information, please visit www.porternovelli.com.

About Shunya Communications Group

BBDO Asia Pacific (www.bbdoasia.com), part of BBDO Worldwide, operates in 14 countries throughout Asia for clients such as FedEx, Visa, Pepsi, KFC, ICI, DaimlerChrysler and Fonterra. BBDO Asia Pacific won Campaign Brief Agency of the year from 2004 to 2006 and was the most awarded agency for print and TV at Adfest in 2006.

Google ber Allies

A Sliced Apple

Dance of the Elephants

Sun Sets on Palm?

Facing the Music

This article is part of a regular series by Matt Rogers, co-founder of Aroxo, on the topic of bootstrapping a startup. See also his previous posts: How to bootstrap your startup and How to create a web app.

A really effective way of bootstrapping your start-up is to offshore and outsource your development. But doing this also carries risks, how can you be sure that you are going to get a developer who'll see it through and has the right experience? This post lays out an effective process to find the right developer.

From starting the search, to the first developer writing code, should take around 3-5 months and there may be further delays whilst you complete your documentation. In this article I'll talk you through what you should be doing at each stage, and what the objective of each stage should be. Here's an overview of the process:

• Build a long list of development companies
• NDA all the companies on the long-list
• Issue a Request for Information (RFI)
• Analyse responses and short-list the developers
• Issue a Request for Quotation (RFQ)
• Analyse responses and select a preferred vendor and a spare
• Negotiate contract with preferred vendor
• Commence development based on your documentation

This is a long process, and therefore I've split it up into 4 sections. These will be posted each week for the next four weeks. Regular readers of this series can relax: the whole lot has been written in advance, so there won't be any month long gaps in between!

Finding a great development company is one of the most important decisions your company will make. Changing developers mid-way through a development is near impossible and so it is important that you select a company which you are confident has the ability to see it through. The purpose of this 8-step process is to stack the odds in your favor by finding out as much as possible about the development company before you sign the contract.

At several stages I've included sample documentation to give you more guidance on what should be included. You can download these examples from the documentation bank on Aroxo.

Before we start, one word of advice. Running a vendor selection process will involve giving a large number of developers bad news (and only one company good news). When I first started doing this I found the process of giving bad news quite unpleasant. It is, but it is still important to do it. Vendors are used to receiving rejections, so they tend to take it more easily than expected and I also find that giving the bad news, along with some personalised feedback, is always much appreciated.

Step 1: Build a long-list

Before we start populating a long-list, it is worth spending a few minutes getting properly organised, as running a vendor selection process involves a lot of time, organisation and communication. I find it easiest to run these off a spreadsheet. There's a sample vendor dashboard included in the documentation bank.

Building a long list involves populating this dashboard. The aim is to get 20-30 companies into the dashboard that satisfy your broad requirements for the type of system you want to build. You want to make sure that each company has:

• Experience in building the type of system you're looking for (if you think your system is entirely new, it almost certainly isn't, there will be parallels which you can look for - even if those are purely functional elements)
• Experience working with start-ups
• Offices somewhere in the world where you are happy doing business
• Experience in the technology you want your system built in (if you don't have a preference, then ignore this)

By far and away the hardest of these objectives to meet is the first. You may need to contact many companies to determine whether they have built a similar application to the one you're looking for.

In order to find companies, there are a few tricks you can employ:

• Use your network: ask anyone you know who works in the software industry for 2-3 development company recommendations
• Use referral companies to provide connections and act as a filter
• Use associations to help pinpoint development companies
• Use tools like eLance, Scriptlance and Rentacoder to find developers
• Use Google to help find companies
• When you've found a company you like, do a reverse search for their homepage on Google to see if they belong to any associations with links to other companies

You may need to look through a large number before you've found 20-30 companies which can meet the 4 requirements set out above.

Step 2: NDA everyone

You're a start-up (I'll return to this point later), so an NDA offers no protection. If you've got funds to sue a company then, frankly, they would be better spent fixing the mistake with a new developer. However, it is still essential that you NDA all the vendors, even though you are not going to be providing them with any confidential information (other than of your existence, just yet).

First thing you'll need is an actual NDA. There are plenty you can download for free on the web, so I've not provided one. Read it to make sure that you are comfortable with everything included in it. If you've selected a lawyer at this stage, ask them to provide an NDA, but don't pay them to write out a new one.

Email it to all the developers on your long-list and ask them to fax or scan signed copies back; and make sure there's a deadline for return in your email. When you receive one back, open up the Vendor Dashboard and update it so that you don't forget you've received it. Then print it out and file it.

When you hit the deadline, ignore any further submissions. If the development company can't meet this simple deadline. they are not going to meet any further deadlines.

In next week's post I'll detail how to write and issue an RFI; and then short-list your developers.