Motorola Inc needs to spark some serious gadget lust next week when it unveils new phones to convince consumers and Wall Street that it's still a player in the global mobile industry, but the odds may be heavily stacked against it.
After losing market share for years, Motorola has made what is viewed as a make-or-break bet on Google Inc's Android mobile software, hoping the partnership with the giant Web company can help it win back customers.
Shares of the one-time market leader, now ranked fourth in global handset sales, jumped 11 percent earlier this week on investor hopes that the new phones could generate enough excitement to make Motorola's bat-wing logo famous again.
But while no one is expecting an iPhone-killer at the San Francisco unveiling on September 10, analysts say the risk is still that the new phones will not be unique enough to wow consumers, especially when other vendors also sell Android phones. "Early devices will not be significantly differentiated and could disappoint those playing the 9/10 launch," said Macquarie Research analyst Phil Cusick, who expects Motorola to display two new Android phones that day.
Motorola has given few details about the announcement, which will come during Co-Chief Executive Sanjay Jha's keynote at GigaOm's mobile conference. Jha first revealed his plans for creating Android phones in October.
He has said the new phones will be integrated with popular online social networks; but rivals such as Apple Inc, Research in Motion Ltd, HTC Corp and Palm Inc already have features for services like Facebook.
Shareholders have been impressed enough with Jha that they have more than doubled Motorola's share price since May. Still, the stock is down 70 percent from its 2006 peak of $26 and has been trading below $8 per share. "It's going to be extremely significant to the company's future," said Current Analysis analyst Avi Greengart. "If the phone does well, they live to fight another day."
Comparisons will inevitably be drawn to Palm's Pre phone unveiling, which was also seen as a last chance for that company. Pre reception was good and caused Palm's share price to quadruple, in part on the perception that the company has become a more attractive takeover target.
Should the initial reaction to Motorola's devices be as strong, the company could have a good chance of luring back consumers, investors and mobile service providers, analysts say.
PRETTY HARDWARE
Motorola turned to Google for phone software because its own strength has been in hardware. This was demonstrated by the Razr, whose slim form inspired imitations for two years before it started to fall out of favor in late 2006.
Analysts expect Motorola's new phones to have stylish enough hardware to secure distribution by mobile carriers, but the question is whether the software will be different enough to spur holiday season sales -- especially when the bar has been set very high by Apple's iPhone and the thousands of apps available for download from Apple's online store.
"Short-term, Motorola needs to win the purchase decision of specific carriers," Greengart said. "Long-term, they're going to need to do something more than selling pretty hardware running an operating system other competitors have access to."
Motorola's Jha has said several times that carriers were impressed with the Android phones. He told Reuters in a recent interview that he was encouraged when one operator executive told him "bat-wings are back."
Analysts expect Motorola Android phones to be sold by Verizon Wireless, owned by Verizon Communications Inc and Vodafone Group Plc, and by T-Mobile USA, owned by Deutsche Telekom AG. But Verizon said it is not involved in Motorola's announcement next week. T-Mobile said it will launch new Android phones this year but declined to give details.
Even if carriers did back the phone, some of Motorola's former shareholders say they would be wary of betting on the company unless it started to show sustainable improvements.
"I wouldn't touch the stock until they've launched three, four or five phones and they've gained market share for at least a year," said Jane Snorek, an analyst for First American Funds, which manages $35 billion in equities that used to include Motorola shares.
Deutsche Bank analyst Brian Modoff said he is impressed by Jha but agreed that investors should look beyond September 10. "If you get to several phones and they're all disappointing, then you have to start writing the obituary. I don't see that," said Modoff. He said he will focus on the reaction from young consumers who crave cool gadgets: "We'll see what the 20-year-olds think. That's what really matters."
Agencies
Showing posts with label Verizon. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Verizon. Show all posts
Monday, September 7, 2009
Monday, August 31, 2009
Does Barack Obama plan to take over the internet?
The new version of a US Senate bill allows President Barack Obama to seize temporary control of private sector networks during a cybersecurity emergency. The bill allows the President to "declare a cybersecurity emergency" related to the "non-governmental" computer networks for dealing with cyber threat. The bill is introduced by senator Jay Rockefeller, a West Virginia Democrat, who has spent months preparing the draft.
"I think the redraft, while improved, remains troubling due to its vagueness. It is unclear what authority senator Rockefeller thinks is necessary over the private sector. Unless this is clarified, we cannot properly analyze, let alone support the bill." said Larry Clinton, President, Internet Security Alliance, which counts representatives of Verizon, Verisign, Nortel, and Carnegie Mellon University on its board.
Large internet and telecommunications company representatives have expressed concerns about the bill in a teleconference with Rockefeller's aides. As a source familiar to the bill informed that the primary concern was the electrical grid regarding the consequences of an attack from a broadband connection.
Rockefeller's proposal provides an ease to a broader concern in Washington about the government's role in cybersecurity. President Obama has already acknowledged that the government is "not as prepared" and announced that a new cybersecurity coordinator position would be created inside the White House staff.
After three months, the post remains empty, one top cybersecurity aide has quit, and people are wondering that a government which has failed on the point of cybersecurity, how can they be trusted when they instruct the private sector.
The revised legislation of Rockefeller's proposal seeks to reshuffle the way the federal government addresses the topic. It seeks a cybersecurity workforce plan from every federal agency, a dashboard pilot project, measurements of hiring effectiveness, and the implementation of a "comprehensive national cybersecurity strategy" in six months, even though its mandatory legal review will take one year to complete.
The issue lies in section 201, which permits the President to "direct the national response to the cyber threat" if necessary for "the national defense and security." The White House is supposed to do a "periodic mapping" of private networks deemed to be critical, and those companies "shall share" requested information with the federal government.
"The language has changed but it doesn't contain any real additional limits. It simply switches the more direct and obvious language they had originally to the more ambiguous versions. The designation of what is a critical infrastructure system or network as far as I can tell has no specific process. There's no provision for any administrative process or review. That's where the problems seem to start. And then you have the amorphous powers that go along with it," said Lee Tien, Staff Attorney, Electronic Frontier Foundation.
So if any company is stated under the term "critical," a new set of regulations start like involving who you can hire, what information you must disclose, and when the government would exercise control over your computers or network.
Agencies
"I think the redraft, while improved, remains troubling due to its vagueness. It is unclear what authority senator Rockefeller thinks is necessary over the private sector. Unless this is clarified, we cannot properly analyze, let alone support the bill." said Larry Clinton, President, Internet Security Alliance, which counts representatives of Verizon, Verisign, Nortel, and Carnegie Mellon University on its board.
Large internet and telecommunications company representatives have expressed concerns about the bill in a teleconference with Rockefeller's aides. As a source familiar to the bill informed that the primary concern was the electrical grid regarding the consequences of an attack from a broadband connection.
Rockefeller's proposal provides an ease to a broader concern in Washington about the government's role in cybersecurity. President Obama has already acknowledged that the government is "not as prepared" and announced that a new cybersecurity coordinator position would be created inside the White House staff.
After three months, the post remains empty, one top cybersecurity aide has quit, and people are wondering that a government which has failed on the point of cybersecurity, how can they be trusted when they instruct the private sector.
The revised legislation of Rockefeller's proposal seeks to reshuffle the way the federal government addresses the topic. It seeks a cybersecurity workforce plan from every federal agency, a dashboard pilot project, measurements of hiring effectiveness, and the implementation of a "comprehensive national cybersecurity strategy" in six months, even though its mandatory legal review will take one year to complete.
The issue lies in section 201, which permits the President to "direct the national response to the cyber threat" if necessary for "the national defense and security." The White House is supposed to do a "periodic mapping" of private networks deemed to be critical, and those companies "shall share" requested information with the federal government.
"The language has changed but it doesn't contain any real additional limits. It simply switches the more direct and obvious language they had originally to the more ambiguous versions. The designation of what is a critical infrastructure system or network as far as I can tell has no specific process. There's no provision for any administrative process or review. That's where the problems seem to start. And then you have the amorphous powers that go along with it," said Lee Tien, Staff Attorney, Electronic Frontier Foundation.
So if any company is stated under the term "critical," a new set of regulations start like involving who you can hire, what information you must disclose, and when the government would exercise control over your computers or network.
Agencies
Saturday, July 18, 2009
Has Intel completed Wind River acquisition?
Intel has completed its purchase of Wind River, which builds software for smartphones and other devices.
The acquisition is costing Intel $11.50 a share in cash for a total price tag of around $884 million, Intel said Friday. Wind River is now a wholly owned subsidiary of Intel, reporting to the chipmaker's Software and Services Group.
By scooping up Wind River, Intel hopes to carve out a greater chunk of the mobile device market. Wind River designs operating systems and other software for cell phones, portable Internet devices, consumer electronics, and in-car "infotainment" systems. With such diverse customers as Sony, Verizon, Motorola, Boeing, and NASA, Wind River has its hooks in the automotive, aerospace, and telecommunications industries.
"The acquisition will deliver to Intel robust software capabilities in embedded systems and mobile devices, both important growth areas for the company," said Renee James, an Intel vice president and general manager of the company's Software and Services Group.
The purchase of Wind River also moves Intel further into software as an added source of revenue.
Though now owned by Intel, Wind River said it will continue to develop applications for its current customers. The company expects to pick up sales and new customers with access to Intel's technology, brand, and global sales force.
Intel first announced its decision to buy Wind River on June 4.
CNET.com
The acquisition is costing Intel $11.50 a share in cash for a total price tag of around $884 million, Intel said Friday. Wind River is now a wholly owned subsidiary of Intel, reporting to the chipmaker's Software and Services Group.
By scooping up Wind River, Intel hopes to carve out a greater chunk of the mobile device market. Wind River designs operating systems and other software for cell phones, portable Internet devices, consumer electronics, and in-car "infotainment" systems. With such diverse customers as Sony, Verizon, Motorola, Boeing, and NASA, Wind River has its hooks in the automotive, aerospace, and telecommunications industries.
"The acquisition will deliver to Intel robust software capabilities in embedded systems and mobile devices, both important growth areas for the company," said Renee James, an Intel vice president and general manager of the company's Software and Services Group.
The purchase of Wind River also moves Intel further into software as an added source of revenue.
Though now owned by Intel, Wind River said it will continue to develop applications for its current customers. The company expects to pick up sales and new customers with access to Intel's technology, brand, and global sales force.
Intel first announced its decision to buy Wind River on June 4.
CNET.com
Friday, May 22, 2009
AT&T outlets to sell netbooks across USA
AT&T Inc plans to expand sales of netbook computers to all its stores in an effort to expand wireless services beyond cell
phones.
Ralph de la Vega, the head of AT&T's consumer business, said on Tuesday that the US phone company would directly sell netbooks from Dell Inc, Acer Inc and Lenovo Group Ltd starting this summer.
Until now, only AT&T stores in Atlanta and Philadelphia, and consumer electronics retailers RadioShack Corp and Costco, have been selling the netbooks, which come with AT&T mobile data connections.
"We're taking broadband and really making it mobile," de la Vega said at the Reuters Global Technology Summit in New York.
While sales of netbooks are expected to be boosted by promotions from carriers, some analysts have said that consumer enthusiasm could be muted by the requirement to sign up for two-year wireless service contracts and the $60-a-month data connection fees that come with the devices.
AT&T said in April it was testing a $40-per-month fee for 200 megabytes of data downloads to netbooks, or about 1/25th of the downloads allowed under the $60 service.
AT&T's bigger mobile rival Verizon Wireless, a venture of Verizon Communications Inc and Vodafone Group Plc, started selling netbook computers from Hewlett-Packard Co earlier this week.
Agencies
phones.
Ralph de la Vega, the head of AT&T's consumer business, said on Tuesday that the US phone company would directly sell netbooks from Dell Inc, Acer Inc and Lenovo Group Ltd starting this summer.
Until now, only AT&T stores in Atlanta and Philadelphia, and consumer electronics retailers RadioShack Corp and Costco, have been selling the netbooks, which come with AT&T mobile data connections.
"We're taking broadband and really making it mobile," de la Vega said at the Reuters Global Technology Summit in New York.
While sales of netbooks are expected to be boosted by promotions from carriers, some analysts have said that consumer enthusiasm could be muted by the requirement to sign up for two-year wireless service contracts and the $60-a-month data connection fees that come with the devices.
AT&T said in April it was testing a $40-per-month fee for 200 megabytes of data downloads to netbooks, or about 1/25th of the downloads allowed under the $60 service.
AT&T's bigger mobile rival Verizon Wireless, a venture of Verizon Communications Inc and Vodafone Group Plc, started selling netbook computers from Hewlett-Packard Co earlier this week.
Agencies
Saturday, December 20, 2008
Net blackout in Mideast and South Asia
Breaks in three submarine cables which link Europe and the Middle East have disrupted Internet and international telephone services in parts of the Middle East and South Asia.
The disruption reduced Egypt's Internet capacity by about 80 percent. Technicians were restoring some capacity by diverting communications traffic through the Red Sea, said a Communications Ministry official, who asked not to be named.
Residents said Internet service was either non-existent or very slow. The gravity of the outage, caused by breaks in cables in the Mediterranean off Italy, varied from area to area and according to the service provider.
In Pakistan, Internet service provider Micronet Broadband said its customers were facing degraded Internet services because of "issues" on the SMW-3, SMW-4 and FLAG lines.
In January, breaks in undersea cables off the Egyptian coast disrupted Internet access in Egypt, the Gulf region and south Asia, forcing service providers to reroute traffic and disrupting some businesses and financial dealings.
Several Egyptian residents said late on Friday that it was impossible to call the United States but calls to Europe appeared to be going through.
In Pakistan, Micronet engineer Wajahat Basharat said on Saturday Internet traffic was congested and slow and some of it was being diverted to other routes.
"Significant outage”
The International Cable Protection Committee, an association of submarine cable operators, said it was "aware of multiple submarine cable failures in the Eastern Mediterranean area that may be affecting the speed of Internet communications on some routes."
It said in a statement on its website it did not know what had caused the problem.
Stephan Beckert, an analyst with the U.S.-based telecommunications market research firm TeleGeography, said the three affected cables were the most direct route for moving traffic between Western Europe and the Middle East.
"If those three cables were cut and are completely out, it would be a fairly significant outage," he said.
"It is going to cause problems for some customers. It's certainly going to slow things down," Beckert said, adding that he did not believe financial institutions would be hit hard.
"Generally speaking we find that they are extremely painstaking about making sure that they have redundant capacity," he said.
Officials with AT&T Inc and Verizon Communications, the two largest U.S.-based carriers, said that some customers in the Middle East had lost all service, while others were experiencing partial disruptions on Internet connections.
Verizon had rerouted some of its traffic by sending it across the Atlantic, then the United States, across the Pacific, and on to the Middle East.
A New York Stock Exchange spokesman said he was unaware of any disruptions in trading. Exchanges CME Group, and IntercontinentalExchange said they had no disruption in their trading on Friday.
Source: Agencies
The disruption reduced Egypt's Internet capacity by about 80 percent. Technicians were restoring some capacity by diverting communications traffic through the Red Sea, said a Communications Ministry official, who asked not to be named.
Residents said Internet service was either non-existent or very slow. The gravity of the outage, caused by breaks in cables in the Mediterranean off Italy, varied from area to area and according to the service provider.
In Pakistan, Internet service provider Micronet Broadband said its customers were facing degraded Internet services because of "issues" on the SMW-3, SMW-4 and FLAG lines.
In January, breaks in undersea cables off the Egyptian coast disrupted Internet access in Egypt, the Gulf region and south Asia, forcing service providers to reroute traffic and disrupting some businesses and financial dealings.
Several Egyptian residents said late on Friday that it was impossible to call the United States but calls to Europe appeared to be going through.
In Pakistan, Micronet engineer Wajahat Basharat said on Saturday Internet traffic was congested and slow and some of it was being diverted to other routes.
"Significant outage”
The International Cable Protection Committee, an association of submarine cable operators, said it was "aware of multiple submarine cable failures in the Eastern Mediterranean area that may be affecting the speed of Internet communications on some routes."
It said in a statement on its website it did not know what had caused the problem.
Stephan Beckert, an analyst with the U.S.-based telecommunications market research firm TeleGeography, said the three affected cables were the most direct route for moving traffic between Western Europe and the Middle East.
"If those three cables were cut and are completely out, it would be a fairly significant outage," he said.
"It is going to cause problems for some customers. It's certainly going to slow things down," Beckert said, adding that he did not believe financial institutions would be hit hard.
"Generally speaking we find that they are extremely painstaking about making sure that they have redundant capacity," he said.
Officials with AT&T Inc and Verizon Communications, the two largest U.S.-based carriers, said that some customers in the Middle East had lost all service, while others were experiencing partial disruptions on Internet connections.
Verizon had rerouted some of its traffic by sending it across the Atlantic, then the United States, across the Pacific, and on to the Middle East.
A New York Stock Exchange spokesman said he was unaware of any disruptions in trading. Exchanges CME Group, and IntercontinentalExchange said they had no disruption in their trading on Friday.
Source: Agencies
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)