A lot of people have been talking about the technological contributions of the iOS and OSX products and of course the earlier products. These were fantastic achievements and they are the products that people will look back on for years to come and say that they changed the way we do things and opened up a whole new world. However large a contribution this was I think the key point is missed.

Steve Jobs was a truly great man who has not only given us the products that we all know and love but his true legacy is his story of inspiration and self belief, this was a man that had a career of ups and downs but still managed to come out on top. He set up a company that changed the face of personal computing, then got forced out of the company and set up another one while his original brain child was being run into the ground by an egomaniac. All of this is amazing in itself but it was in 1997 when the real character of the man came out for all to see.

He returned to Apple, which was on the edge of collapse and instead of trying to turn mass market and just sell computers he made risky decisions and was as meticulous as ever with the design of his machines. It would have been very easy for him to buckle under the pressure of the task at hand and give in to what most people would say is the sensible way out. However in the years that followed, with the help of Jonny Ive and the rest of the teams, he managed to change the landscape of industry after industry and become a market leader in MP3 players, smartphones and tablets all while never compromising on design, quality and service. I personally cannot think of another company that has managed this meteoric rise to success without a black mark on it’s record.

In 2004 Steve disclosed that he had pancreatic cancer This would be enough for the average man to take his foot off the peddle and try and recover from one of the most aggressive types of cancer that there is, that is not even close to what he did. In 2005 he made the commencement speech at Stanford University that has become his most powerful and influential speech he ever made and has been making the rounds on all social platforms today. In 2008 Steve was reimbursed $871,000 for use of the company jet, this was a man suffering from a rare form of very aggressive cancer and he was flying all over the world and working harder than ever.

From the time he was told he had cancer to the day he sadly died. He had made Apple the most valuable company in the world and the most iconic brand there has ever been. They are the standard that every company wants to meet but no one has even come close. Steve Jobs was Apple and this image that has become an iconic image over night represents how everyone feels the same.

He showed the world what it is to be a great man, he was private and understated with his trademark dressed down look of a black turtle neck and blue jeans. We never knew the man behind the public face but I think this picture gives us a good idea of what he meant to those around him. It was taken on June 6th this year and was his last public presentation.

It is this attitude and never give up determination that is Steve Jobs most valuable offering to the world. He showed us everyone what is possible and he left us with words of wisdom that will be true long after we are all forgotten. Products come and go but greatness is forever and the influence and inspiration that he has given the world is by far his greatest achievement.

This needs to change and I think that the tipping point is not too far away. The real platform for NFC is in the mobile phone, everyone has one and the capabilities are growing on a daily basis. The possibilities of NFC for marketers is just fantastic, location based targeted marketing is extremely cost effective. Payments via mobile phone in shops, data transfer, wish lists, the list can go on and on.

Picture this. You are in a restaurant and have finished your main and are in a bit of a rush, you try and catch the waiters eye but fail miserably. You want to order a desert or coffee, no problem. With the embedded NFC chip in the table you can hover your phone over it, see the menu and place your order. No need for that awkward 5 minutes of trying to catch someone’s attention only to have to mouth the words “desert” while gesticulating wildly.

One of the major benefits for marketers is the ability to gather user information quickly easily and cheaply. If each location has it’s own RFID tag then it will be possible to map usage, uptake, times of usage, most effective locations and a multitude of other forms of data. This could be invaluable to the smaller companies that do not have the finances to invest in market research.

The other major platform that will benefit is social media. Speed is everything, no one likes to wait to be social we all want it know. An RFID tag on a McDonalds door will allow quick check ins for Foursquare and other location based social platforms. Tagging locations on Facebook, tweeting information about an event. All of this is possible with NFC.

The tipping point for me would be the inclusion of the technology in the iOS devices, mainly the iPhone. If Apple decide to do this then the world will stand up and take notice. The potential sales of the iPhone 5 are amazing.  Abramsky increased the estimated iPhone sales for 2012 from 105 million units to 110 million units sold. That is an amazing figure. That could mean 110 million people ready to use NFC technology, that will surely speed up the adoption and the usage of NFC. At the moment Apple dictates what works and what fails in the phone market so I am hoping that they get on board with NFC.

There are however problems with the concept, the main one is security. What happens if a phone is stolen/lost/hacked? Well to be honest the answers are not there for this yet, the closest we have come is to have a £10 limit on NFC payments via MasterCard or Visa, but this is not a very practical answer to what is an extremely complicated issue.

It will be great to see what companies can come up with using NFC, I would love to see a vending machine with it for that time I don’t have £1 for a bottle of water! Tell me below what you would love to see, be as creative as you can.

So let’s say a visitor found your site through Google Organic search and converted, that conversion would have always been attributed to a Google Organic search. BUT! What if before they searched for you in Google they found your site through a paid link on Google? Surely that paid link should get some of the credit here? And surely you could do with knowing that it was that paid link that sparked the interest in your brand? Especially if you’re considering stopping those non-profitable paid links – Without that paid link, the second visit probably wouldn’t have happened and as a result, neither would the conversion.

Well now we can find out. Excellent.

We’re greeted with the Overview report of Multi-Channel Funnels, which begins to give us an idea of the kind of insights we can gain from these reports. Even the below visual instantly and neatly, shows us which channels are currently overlapping.

The second report is Assisted Conversions, which partly shows you what you already know (or you can already find out in GA) e.g. How many conversions was attributed to organic traffic and the value of those conversions (Last Interaction Conversions/Value). More importantly here though, it shows the ‘Assisted’ metrics. In the example below, Organic Search has assisted in a further 219 conversion with an added value of $518, which previously would not be attributed to organic search.

The next report ‘Top Conversion Paths’ will show all of the various paths that have resulted in a conversion (only over the past 30 days, though). Like most reports in GA, you can choose from a range of different metrics to view in the report from the drop down above the paths. You can also select the length of path you want to view by (All paths, 2 paths, 3 etc…)

Time Lag and Path Length give you an idea of the length of a complete conversion path. How many days or weeks does it take to get to a conversion? How many channels (paid, organic, referral, affiliates, social etc…) does it take to get to a conversion? And of course, the values related to that specific data.

So, what can we gain from these new reports? Well, aside from the actionable and extremely valuable insights you can gain from the standard reports there’s many more possibilities like; Custom Channel Groupings (such as all branded/non-branded traffic), or Conversion Segments (such as First Interaction is Organic). As always, we have the added bonus of being able to export the data to Excel for some analytical wizardry. I would like to go into more depth about these reports but I’ll save that for another time, partly because now is probably a good time to start using and testing with these reports yourself, but mainly because I went over my 500 word quota 61 words ago and Rhys might start shouting at me.

Firstly lets take a look at Chrome OS. Chrome OS is Google’s web based OS that requires you to install nothing on your machine but simply have an internet connection and this will allow you to use an array of programs from Office to photo editing software. Google is taking a huge gamble with this idea and it may prove to be ahead of it’s time. The idea is a great one, why keep everything on your computer when there is a server somewhere in rural USA that it can be stored until the end of time?

What happens when you don’t have an internet connection? I know you may say it’s very rare that there is no internet connection but I must admit I’m going to have to disagree, I live in Brighton where there is possibly the worst mobile internet is a major UK city, sure if you have access to every major network then you can have great mobile internet but most people don’t have that luxury. This really does limit the effectiveness of Chrome OS and it could be the downfall of the system. There is however a glimmer of hope for them, and this is the introduction of 4G networks. 4G is the evolution from 3G as I’m sure that you guessed, so far it has been rolled out in some major US cities and they are getting fantastic speeds that would make our eyes water, we are talking faster than the average fibre optic broadband here in the UK.

Now doesn’t that sound fantastic. Yes, yes it does and it could prove to be the driving force behind the adoption of the cloud based OS. By now you may be wondering if I am ever going to get to my point about Facebook. Well here we are.

Facebook has a great user base of people that know exactly what to do and how to use it. Ranging from 13 year olds to people in their 70s, people who’s computer knowledge is limited to turning the machine on and typing Facebook into Bing to get to the only place in the webiverse that they feel safe secure and comfortable, this is amazing!

There is growing speculation of Spotify teaming up with Facebook to offer music streaming through the platform, this led me to think that Facebook could eventually become a cloud based OS. Think about it, it’s not that crazy. We all know how to use it and we are all comfortable with it, I know the web designers and all round power users with your Mac Pro’s wont have any interest but think, you are the minority.

Most people like the simplest and most basic OS there is, that is part of the reason for the success of the iPad, could anything be easier? A lot of people spend the majority of their internet time on Facebook, with their Bing integration there is a search engine built in, Spotify beings on demand music, what’s next? This platform really could open up a whole new world of social computing, everything you do can be published straight to your wall and help is only a post away. Facebook could end up being the only place the average user needs to go to.

I think that there is real potential for a Facebook OS and Google are creating a great platform for Facebook to launch from. As long as Facebook learns from the mistakes of Chrome OS then it could be a real hit.

Tell me what you think in the comments below.

http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2010/01/new-approach-to-china.html

Very interesting stuff.

Being part of so many communities is giving you the opportunity to increase your business, family and even old friends network but at a price: how are you going to keep up? On one hand you’ve got the possibilities of a great social network you are already involved in (in most cases not very well organised, let’s face it) and on the other hand you are literally holding a “smart” phone you are not using very smartly… yet. Let’s go mobile and let’s do it the smart way.

Organise your contacts

Have you started to count your contacts in hundreds? It doesn´t matter anymore if your social network is spread across different communities (Facebook, Messenger, Skype, Google Talk, etc.). Everybody is trying to keep up with the latest ways of communications and so are you. Now it’s time to organise your social network.

I love testing applications that are going to help us being in contact and in a very simple way. This is why I recommend Nimbuzz Mobile. Nimbuzz is a new-generation mobile service that allows you to combine all your buddies from Skype, Messenger, Facebook, ICQ, Yahoo, Google Talk, etc. into one contact list. It allows you to chat, make phone calls, send messages and files… and it´s free

In your growing social community an important step is being able to communicate, keeping up-to-date. The concept of being in touch adopts a new meaning and goes further with applications like Nimbuzz.

Try it out and don´t forget to let us know what you think! We appreciate your comments.

Download Nimbuzz and start to really enjoy being in contact.

Alex can’t wait to see you there!

8 weeks later and he’s posted some results on his blog, and as somebody who works a lot with Google and thought that Bing wouldn’t stand a chance against the almighty yardstick of search, I was a little surprised by the results.

From 559,239 search queries, the experiment showed that Google was, perhaps unsurprisingly, the top choice as the engine that gave the best results, with 41% of the vote. But following closely behind were Bing at 31% and Yahoo at 28%. I was relieved to learn that I wasn’t the only one surprised that Google’s results had not wooed the lion’s share of searchers: even users who were consciously trying to pick Google from the available results were left wondering how they had ‘accidentally’ chosen Bing.

So, does this spell the end of an era as Google is slowly usurped by search competitors? Well, the answer is… no. Google is still the first choice for those out there who do know which one they’re choosing, but it just goes to show that the alternatives probably aren’t that far behind. The influential Joy Of Tech continues to poke fun at the newly-forged Bing/Yahoo partnership, but for a webcomic that is fundamentally a four-panel leadup to an anti-Microsoft gag, that’s hardly surprising.

In his conclusions so far about the experiment, Kordahi does mention the surprise aspect of the results:

Many were surprised that Google wasn’t always their choice. There were many instances of surprise that Google wasn’t as superior as they thought it was.

Still, “hang on, I’ll Bing it” just doesn’t have the same ring to it…

Murdoch’s announcement is a significant development in the world of online news and, if the move proves successful, is likely to be copied very widely, very quickly.

The situation regarding online content provision is finely balanced and has caused huge consternation for newspaper owners in the past decade:

Quality journalism costs money; free news websites lose money. So surely users need to pay for online content?

But the reality is somewhat different. Why would users pay for content in one place, when it is free elsewhere? Buying one newspaper per day is perfectly normal, but our behaviour online is different: we can find the news (through search, blogs, news portals, aggregators, bookmarking sites) or the news can find us (RSS feeds, Google Desktop/Reader, etc). So are you loyal enough to a particular newspaper to pay for their content as opposed to getting it for free elsewhere (The Guardian, for example)?

The truth is that nobody knows. Rupert thinks people will be happy to pay for celebrity scoops at the Sun and News of the World and he could be right, especially if the other red tops follow suit and start charging. But would people really pay to read content at The Times Online when the other broadsheets (and particularly the politically-aligned Telegraph) are still free to view? And what about that perennial thorn in Murdoch’s side, the BBC?

And how long until the general public completely bypass the red tops for celebrity gossip and go direct to source at free sites like TMZ, Popbitch, Perez  Hilton etc?

So many questions!

As an aside, it is interesting to see how some newspaper websites have embraced bookmarking sites. We know of a couple that are using social bookmarking sites extensively to drive visits, a topic we have touched on before. But if there’s one thing the bookmarking sites prove, it is the huge variety of news sources out there and how little loyalty many internet users show. This bodes badly for the paid model.

The exceptions to the rule (or perceived rule) are niche publications that have truly unique content, such as industry publications and, arguably, local papers, although many of these have been slow to adapt and have their online policy dictated from on high.

We all love free stuff, but the situation is increasingly unsustainable. As Techdirt point out in this thought provoking article, old school media outlets feel like Google owes them something because they are profiting from the content providers’ hard endeavours. But the media owners are missing the point; Google makes it’s money from transactional searches, not news searches. The news services they provide are great branding, of course, and helping them to dominate the online landscape, but they are not generating significant revenues.

So, what next for online news? I would guess that eventually Google will start paying some form of subsidy to free news providers in order to avoid a war and keep the quality content coming. The search engine is a success because it provides the right information to people who want it, so logically it would be in their interest to keep the quality information coming. Maybe they will provide this subsidy through a new advertising model for news sites. Personally, I can’t see how subscription-based mainstream news websites will prosper.

So, sometimes you’ll find yourself wanting to use both. For example, if you wanted to know something as specific as the current population of China, Google will give you plenty of sites and pages with information pertaining to the answers, but Wolfram Alpha gives you the data straight away, and as many statistics as it deems relevant (such as population density, average age, life expectancy etc.). Of course, Wolfram is less useful if you’re after something less specific, or something that couldn’t be in its knowledge base, for example if you typed “SEO company Brighton”, Wolfram Alpha can’t help. Yet.

In a way, the difference between the two is as marked as the difference between intelligence and knowledge. Google (the intelligent search) adopts complex algorithmic searches that take myriad factors into consideration before presenting you with what it perceives to be the most relevant results. Wolfram Alpha (the knowledgeable search) parses your keywords and relates them to its own accumulation of facts and figures, and presents the relevant data in both textual and graphical formats.

Between the two, you can usually find what you’re after (and plenty of irrelevant yet interesting material besides); and happily, some clever chap has combined the two into a two-column search mashup, unimaginatively titled Goofram. One query, two pages of results. Convenient.