The iPad is perfect for her. It does exactly what she needs. It will let her watch movies and listen to music and read books on long flights. It will make using a computer fun instead of an annoying chore.

But it also won’t allow her to install umpteen news and weather gadgets that start up on boot and slow her computer to a crawl. It won’t suddenly forget how to talk to a network, or get so confused by all of the software installs and uninstalls that you finally have to break down and reinstall the system from scratch. In other words, my mother’s next computer is going to be an iPad, and I dream of the day when I can finally throw off the oppressive chains of being the one guy in the family who knows how to actually keep a computer working.

Translation: He’s getting his Mom an iPad because it’s more convenient for him. He will no longer have the burden of being the one to fix the family computers.

When I read that I cringed. Actually, I thought, “What an ungrateful asshole” and I left it alone. Seeing more responses like his and remembering pain from disloyalty I went through, I decided to write about the ungrateful disrespecting behavior I’ve noticed lately. And before you tell me, “Tyme, he probably didn’t mean it that way…”

Research: Am I the only one?

I wanted to know how others felt about the article. I asked people their opinion about the article without stating my thoughts. First, I asked my kids. My daughter’s jaw dropped and my son gave his WTF eyebrow arch when they got to “oppressive chains” part. Then I asked them what they thought about it. They both said they didn’t have to worry about having to fix my computer because I build my own computers. Besides that, they thought the point of giving a gift is giving the person what is TRULY best for the receiver, not what is convenient for the giver.

Next, I moved on to my friends, who said they would never put something like that in writing about their Moms. It’s a disrespect and a sign of disloyalty. They would be afraid their mothers would read it and it would hurt her feelings. By this point I became curious about the disconnect and wanted to push the boundaries further.

Armed with my iPhone, I asked some ghetto kids (maybe 15-20 in age) how they felt about the article. Yes, they looked at me kind of funny but I told them it was research. Similar reactions. They did not fix family computers but they understood what it was like to be the only one in the family that could fix cars, fix things around the house, understand technology…the parallels are the same (actually, fixing cars is worse than fixing a computer). They knew what it was like to have people always come to them, when they could handle it themselves even if it meant paying for it. However, they all said if their mothers needed something, they had no problem. Some shared stories on hard how their Moms had it being single parents or how much their parents sacrificed for them. They might not be the best kids (they admit that) but if their parents need something, they get it, inconvenient or not.

Since I wanted to go to the mall, I decided to hit the suburbs and ask around there. Different target group. Recharged the iPhone and went to work. This time I asked kids, some with their parents, to read the article and express their thoughts. Let’s just say the parents weren’t pleased at being “a burden” but the kids had the same attitude expressed in the article. The parents would joke, “I can’t wait until I am released from the oppressive chains of having to be a limo service for you” or something like that but the WTF look was on their face. One father said to his son, “Nice to know how loyal you are.” The kid didn’t get it…too busy complaining (bragging?) about being the tech whiz in the house.

The last test group: older mothers. Still in the suburbs, I went to a different mall – where the more mature crowd hangs out. I always feel undressed going there. Anyway, I looked for wedding rings, prayed they had some kids, and did the same thing. These women were more than happy to talk. See, parents are wise and they know when their kids feel they are a burden. Many hate to ask. Reading the article they expressed their disdain in knowing all the sacrifices they made and all the hard work they put into trying to raise their children right…and that’s the result? It’s a pain in the ass to fix the computer? It was a pain in the ass to save for their college education – why not pay that money back? Or the contribution to the weddings. Free babysitting. They had a nice long list too but one thing was very clear: it would hurt them if their child bought them an iPad not because it was the best option for her, instead it was the easiest way of getting out of fixing computers.

Another interesting tidbit: some of the mothers were not computer savvy, but some were slowly learning. The ones more advanced said the iPad was too limiting. They can’t video Skype with their grandchildren because the iPad doesn’t have a camera. Picture sharing isn’t as easy either. They prefer reading paper bound books, for the experience, and adding the books to their libraries. Some like playing games on Facebook. Their point: as they learned to do more on the internet, they do not want to be confined.

More examples…

I had my own experience with ungratefulness and disloyalty which cause me to open my eyes and question how I was treating the people in my life and how they were treating me.

I had a friend, let’s name him Andy who, at the time, I’d known three or four years. Platonic friendship, we went through a lot together as life tends to throw hurdles when we least expect it. He went through some hard times, it seemed one bad thing after another. I knew he wasn’t doing the best he could, I knew he had the potential to be more than he was, I knew he lied to try to hide he wasn’t doing the best he could, I hoped that one day he would sincerely want to do better. I also knew, from experience, he was at the “screw up” age – the prime age to screw up, get it over with, and move on to a better life. Better to screw up earlier than later in life when the price is higher. I tried to be a loyal friend. No matter what was going on he didn’t have to question whether, if he needed me, if I would help him out. There were two instances when I said, “I can’t do this” because, frankly, I would have been an idiot to do it…anyone would have.

Andy met a girl and after a month or so, felt she was “The One”. Sort of, because he didn’t treat this girl very well initially. I warned him he’d lose this girl if he kept it up. I guess he lost the girl then did what guys typically do, he wanted her back. Which, of course, leads to the “making it up to her, jumping through hoops” stage. During this time I noticed my friendship with Andy changed dramatically, even mentioned it to the guy I was seeing at the time. I became the person he spoke to only if a problem arose. I didn’t understand why, wondered what I’d done…until recently. While gaming with friends, the guys were casually talking about the things guys do jumping through hoops for women that, in the end, were a waste of time. During that conversation, I saw very clearly what happened between Andy and I. He must of told the girl some of the times I helped him out, instead of being grateful he had a friend who had his back, she became jealous (maybe hurt he lied to her) and I got the shaft. A woman Andy knew for a couple of months wiped out and was more important than the three to four years of loyalty I consistently showed. If I was the girl, my response would have been, “Andy, I’m glad you have a friend that supports you. I’d like to meet her one day. But, we need to deal with our problems as a couple…” Given the fact that she benefited by my actions and I tried to help HER out by telling HIM to straighten up (literally, I put my foot down but, behind my back (and hers), he still did what he promised he would not do – so much for really liking that girl, right?), I didn’t take the realization very well. My heart broke like glass. Especially since that opened my eyes to other betrayals that fit together like pieces to a puzzle. For some reason Andy holds on to screwed up people and lets go those who are truly loyal.

Look around the internet and you’ll see people reveal things that will make you wonder what type of person they really are. People who, literally, love technology more than their spouses. People who aren’t trying to “network” with people because they feel they legitimately have something in common; instead, they attract because of what they feel they can gain from the people they are attempting to connect to (without giving something in return, of course). An alarming amount of people openly complain about their jobs yet, if they lost the job, would be broke (we won’t get into they could change their job). It’s odd how people don’t appreciate what they have, seek more, and slide into unsavory behaviors treating people in a way they most likely would not want to be treated themselves.

Not long after that, my Mom passed away.

My Mom and her computers

I had a different attitude about Mom and computers. I wanted her to experience everything the internet had to offer, if she wanted to. I got her top of the line computers. I taught her how to use them. Did I occasionally have to fix her computer? Sure. Did she learn how to fix many of those issues herself (and how to avoid them)? Over time, she did, because I taught her. The benefit? I had the pleasure of her interacting on the forums with me and in comments. My readers had the opportunity to learn from her, interact with her and have fun with her. She watched my online business and sites change and evolve. I laughed with her every day, even when she was sick. Before she died, the image of her I have: smiling. Saying she loved me. I can still feel my lips on her face and I remember how her hands felt in mine.

I’m grateful that, not once, did I feel the “oppressive chains” of fixing her computer.

And I’m especially proud I was loyal, grateful, and appreciative until the end. I’m glad I didn’t become selfish and opt not to get her top of the line computers because it would have been an inconvenience to me. Do people go overboard asking for free help with their computers? No doubt, but I think it is twisted when people place their parents in that category, considering how much our parents sacrificed to help us be the people we are today. In most cases, if they could do better, they would. Educate them instead of punishing them.

Check yourself

Take a look at the people in your life. Are you treating them the way they deserve to be treated or are you treating them what is convenient for you? Are you showing your appreciation to the people in your life? Are you becoming selfish and ungrateful to those who have earned your loyalty? Do you have your priorities straight?

Get it together.

One more rant about the article…

And you know what? There are millions upon millions of people just like her out there. They outnumber us. And they finally have a chance to become productive, self-sufficient computer users instead of constantly asking family members to fix their computers or, even worse, keeping the Geek Squad in business.

• Parents don’t outnumber kids. How did that happen since parents die off at a fast rate? Look at the census numbers. Ages 0-64 beats 65+.
• Youth outnumbers older adults. The kids coming up today start being power users at a young age.
• The iPad is NOT being marketed as a computer but you can sync a computer to it.

Inconsistency = Not Good

I find a headline that sounds interesting. I go to the web site. The site name is ISeeYou (I just made that up) all as one word. However, go to the bottom of the page, next to the copyright date, it says I See You. I look on the RSS feed, it says I See You. Another example, another imaginary web site with the name widgetri in lower case letters. On the footer, it says Widgetri. Which one is the correct one? Who knows? I tend to use whatever is on the footer or the RSS feed. If that’s the wrong, I don’t want to hear about it. Make a decision and stick with it.

Why is this important? One of the goals of brand identity is for large numbers of people to have the same image of a company. Same name, same logo, same impression. Since today is Apple Day, let’s use Apple as an example. They use the bitten apple as their logo, their name is Apple, and they are known for quality hardware. It is widely felt that without Apple’s brand, the company would not survive. That their loyal users are not loyal to the products, they are loyal to the Apple brand. This seems to be true. The tablet hasn’t been formally announced yet people are waiting in anticipation and are begging their spouses to allow them to purchase one. One can’t have loyalty to a product they’ve never seen, never used and hasn’t been released.

One other big difference

Many of the large companies that are not consistent (for example is it Walmart or Wal-Mart?) started prior to the internet, meaning print media prevailed. Wal-Mart Inc. is the company name and at one time their logos reflected the hyphen. When the internet became popular, Wal-Mart had a problem. People would go to walmart.com instead of wal-mart.com and there was inconsistency with the branding. They refreshed their logo to Walmart. They are consistent in using Walmart when referring to their brand and Wal-Mart when referring to their corporate name.

You aren’t one of the big guys

Big companies have already established their brand. Nike can get away with doing NIKE and everyone knows it’s Nike and the swoosh image. Best Buy can have a logo in caps and everyone knows it is Best Buy. There is only one Nike and only one Best Buy. These companies started their brands when print media was the only option. Today, millions of people have blogs and companies want people to share their experiences with products and services on their blogs and social media profiles. Unless a site has spent the money to globally lock down their brand, odds are there is (or will be) another site or company with the same name. Owning the domain name is not enough protection against that. Widgetri could have a highly popular blog at widgetri.wordpress.com when someone else owns widgetri.com. What will set them apart? What they offer and their brands.

Keep it simple

Pick how you want your company name displayed and stick with it. If you use lower case, be consistent. If you make the name all one word, keep it that way. Just because you see other sites being inconsistent doesn’t mean their decision is a smart one. This is the age of sharing online and social networking. When it comes to your brand, especially to avoid legal issues, be consistent not only with your marketing but with the quality of products and services you provide.

Or not. You’re probably not meant to have brand loyalty like Apple anyway.

• Company allows developers to create software to interact with their product.
• Things go well for a period of time.
• Some greedy developer decides to push the limits, crippling the user experience.
• Company ends up putting in restrictions to block malicious behavior.
• Developers get upset because the rules changed.

People scoff at knowing history but one who takes the time and knows the history of their community or niche will go far by not repeating the same mistakes. Knowing what I stated above, one would think the people who created add-ons for World of Warcraft would not be surprised at the new policy changes. Let’s take a look at what happened and then look into the future.

Things Go Well For a Period of Time

Blizzard, through their API, allows developers to create add-ons that can add functionality to the game or even change the UI’s appearance. World of Warcraft was released four years ago and the add-on community is extremely active. Most add-ons are free, some ask for donations and there are a small amount of premium add-ons that have to be purchased to use. The creativity of the add-on community is excellent. The period of time things went well? Four years. Before we go any further, let’s keep in mind World of Warcraft’s Terms of Service that everyone agrees to when they play the game:

Grant of a Limited License to Use the Service
Subject to your agreement to and continuing compliance with the Terms of Use agreement, you may use the Service solely for your own non-commercial entertainment purposes by accessing it with an authorized, unmodified Game Client. You may not use the Service for any other purpose, or in connection with any other software.

Additional License Limitations.
B. exploit the Game or any of its parts, including without limitation the Service, for any commercial purpose, including without limitation (a) use at a cyber cafe, computer gaming center or any other location-based site without the express written consent of Blizzard; (b) for gathering in-game currency, items or resources for sale outside the Game; or (c) performing in-game services in exchange for payment outside the Game, e.g., power-leveling;

Some greedy developer decides to push the limits, crippling the user experience.

Over time developers got the bright idea of making income off of the add-ons. Most just wanted to recoup their hosting fees and if there was extra they were happy. The ones that wanted to make a living off of their add-on (they went from creating to boost the community to being all about the money). As with all things, if someone is doing something for the wrong reasons they tend to make dumb decisions. Let me be clear in distinguishing the greedy developer from a developer like Zygor. Zygor’s leveling add-on(s) were not free but they handled their “business” like a business by advertising their product, not soliciting customers or abusing privileges, they supported their product, etc. They even had an affiliate program giving bloggers the opportunity to make money. Zygor reminds me of strategy guide publishers. They handled their business the same way.

Enter the Carbonite and QuestHelper developers. Carbonite and QuestHelper are leveling add-ons. Carbonite charged for their add-ons (but had a free limited version) and QuestHelper solicited for donations once the add-on was installed in-game. To compete with QuestHelper Carbonite developers got the bright idea of offering a free version with advertisements, in game. Many users were shocked to update the add-on and find in-game ads. Considering one pays to play World of Warcraft there are not many people who want to see advertisements but there were many people who were dependent on the add-on to level, particularly since the free “crippled” version of Carbonite was included in many UI packages. Things were quickly getting out of hand and it was time for Blizzard to step in. To be fair there are other add-on developers “pushing the limits” but these two add-ons are two the community will always name first.

Company ends up putting in restrictions to block malicious behavior.

The timing was perfect for Blizzard to step in because a patch is on the horizon where many of these add-ons would break. Update under the new terms or leave the playground. Blizzard announced the new add-on policy. Keep in mind that Blizzard does not take away the ability to make money completely:

5) Add-ons may not solicit donations.
Add-ons may not include requests for donations. We recognize the immense amount of effort and resources that go into developing an add-on; however, such requests should be limited to the add-on website or distribution site and should not appear in the game.

Essentially, an add-on developer will possibly make enough to recoup hosting fees and perhaps have extra money but the odds of making a living off an add-on are minimal.

Developers get upset because the rules changed.

Of course, some developers (namely the ones pushing the limits) became upset and some pulled their add-ons. Others will not be updated after the next patch. The add-on community is shaken up a bit but when the patch drops, the community will band together and honestly, there are free add-ons people will migrate to.

The key here: in order for Blizzard (or any company) to stop the deviant behavior, the change has to be applied to the entire community.

History Tends to Repeat Itself

For those that scoff at knowing history, smart people learn from history and do not repeat the same mistakes. If I were a developer I would not expect to earn money from something I built off of someone else’s API unless it was something like Apple or Facebook, where there was a verified (endorsed) system in place. Apple and Facebook charge a fee and encourage the developers to make money. In other words, a better foundation exists to build one’s future. Even in these environments, companies have later added restrictions because of #2 – the greedy developer.

Keep in mind it took four years for Blizzard to implement this change. If you are going to develop something that interacts with someone else’s intellectual property, invest your time with a company that has firm rules in place. It will save you a lot of trouble in the end.

If you opt not to follow my advice and when the inevitable change happens because the greedy developer surfaces, do not complain. Do not whine. You made your bed.

Lie in it. Quietly.

Let’s Look at an Example

Daniel Lyons is most known for his fake Steve Jobs blog called The Secret Diary of Steve Jobs. He put a lot of work into his blog.

I blogged from cabs, using my BlackBerry. I blogged in the middle of the night, having awakened with an idea. I rationalized this insane behavior by telling myself that at the end of this rainbow I would find a huge pot of gold. But reality kept interfering with this fantasy.

He continues to whine and cry about the money he didn’t make from his efforts. He made money from his blog but never made enough to quit his job (who knew that a goal?). He continues to go on and on about how other sites are profitable, the advertising market isn’t optimal…yeah yeah, blah blah. He leaves out one big piece of the puzzle.

He got a book deal and published the book Options: The Secret Life of Steve Jobs

Whoops…

His blog presented him with an opportunity to receive a book deal. Who knows whether the book deal was profitable (obviously not?). The point is that the blog was a tool for him to get the deal in the first place. Whether the book was successful or not falls on his abilities as a writer, which has nothing to do with his blog. Writing a successful blog has nothing to do with writing a successful book.

Let’s also talk about exposure. Most people never heard of Daniel Lyons before he started his blog (and yes, there are many people that still have no clue who he is or worse, forgot). He “could” have made the most of that exposure but he opted to step away from the blog. When you have people’s attention be very careful and sure of what you are doing when you decide to do something else, giving those people something else to do with their time. You might not get them back.

Blogs DO Create Opportunity

Blogs/sites are excellent tools to create an opportunity for a person or company. One has to have the wisdom to realize their true goals and make the most of the opportunities when the arise. Lyons’ The Secret Diary of Steve Jobs blog is the reason why his Real Dan Lyon’s site has a Books tab with something on it newer than 1999.

There is a problem: what do you do if you want to monetize your site and advertising companies you use rely on third party statistics that are not accurate? Alexa is known for being inaccurate (more to forecast trends than actual stats). What does a blogger/writer do if Alexa is showing inaccurate stats and the advertising company you use relies on Alexa and other third party services? Good question.

Since I use Text Link Ads on this site I decided to ask Patrick Gavin, President of Text Link Ads, how the company deals with issues like this. Seriously, I manage my site and the more information I have the better I can do it.

Tyme: Alexa obviously has accuracy issues – all of them do. Anything with a toolbar can be gamed. Technorati has their issues too. For example, if a site has a high number of inbound links because the blogger requested people to write a review of their site, which many feel is another way of “gaming” the system. Does TLA and Review me have other methods in place to ensure that sites are judged fairly? If so, can you share a little bit about how sites are judged/priced?

Patrick: We agree Alexa is not a perfect solution for gauging a website’s traffic. A perfect example is a blog devoted to Apple users whose user base will be heavy FireFox users not using the Alexa toolbar. Because of this the Alexa ranking for this blog will be disproportionately high compared to say a blog about Microsoft. We understand this so Alexa ranking is not the only criteria we use when pricing our publisher’s websites for our products.

We use a combination of: The website’s theme, location of the ads, number of ads to be sold, Alexa ranking, Technorati rank, and a measure of the website’s link popularity. We have an algorithm that prices our inventory based on these many criteria. The results are never perfect but by taking in six data points it can help even out some of the disparities that happen with Alexa data alone.

Six different data points – that makes me feel better but I can see where more metrics will have to be used to better screen sites initially because those things can be gamed. Getting your site accepted might be a challenge but honestly, it should be. If you’ve already been accepted, how do you make sure your site is getting the best advertising deals?

Text-Link Ads [linkbuildingblog.com no longer active] has a blog with a wealth of information on how to optimize your site and increase traffic. Subscribe to the feed. After going through the blog, do the one thing most people don’t do. Take some responsibility in the monetization of your site and work with the advertising company to get the most out of it. That’s the main point of this entry. Most people slap code on the sidebar and then complain on how it doesn’t perform. Or worse, move the ads around for a month and because there isn’t instant change become frustrated. I see my relationship with TLA like a partnership and I expect them to do their part and I have a responsibility as well. I actually have to manage my site and work with them for optimal success. If you are using a company that you can’t interact with, well…why would you do that?

I had a question, I asked, I received an answer. When I start optimizing this site I will (after looking over the blog) most likely have some more. I know one thing, I’m not going to throw code up blindly and pray it works.

Podcasting is exploding right now. Many do it because they enjoy doing it (like me). Others are doing it with the idea of earning a living off of it (it would be nice – who wouldn’t want to make money doing something they enjoy?). Depending on the business model only few will reach their goal compared to the number of people attempting to do it. I think The Podcast Nework (TPN) will make it because they are delivering a wide variety of podcasts and content via blogs. But there is something I think is more important…the podcasters are not in competition with each other.

For example, there is The MS Dev Show, The Media Center Show, my show The Microsoft Show and hopefully one day The Gaming Show. There will be some overlapping with these podcasts because it can’t be helped but the content will not be the same. If something significant happens with Media Center of course The Media Center Show and the Microsoft Show will cover it…but how we cover it will be different and there will be other content surrounded by the coverage. See, if I see The Media Center Show doing something big about it I might only make a blog post about it…it depends but I have the option to do that. Most podcasting networks don’t give that option. The podcast is in one place and the content is someplace else.

Then there are podcast networks all about one thing. I wrote about the Sports Network. What stands out to me is that all the podcasters are in competition with each other. Yes, there are large amounts of people listening to podcasts but there are also a large number of people starting their own podcasts. Maybe it’s just my twisted logic but why would I want to be on a network where there are several other people doing the same thing, the same way? Don’t get me wrong, I’m not criticising these types of networks but I am saying I see a problem with their business model. The individual podcasters (in my opinion) are getting a raw deal because it’s difficult to stand out when there are so many people doing the same thing. Look at TechPodcasts – there are so many and I’d actually have to download the podcast to see if I like it. There are at least five Apple/Mac podcasts on that list. Am I really going to go through five of them in an attempt to find one good one?

Nope, I’ll just go to TPN and listen to The Mac User Show. Or go completely away from networks and listen to Wizards of Technology, which is supposed to be about all technology but ends up being about Apple/Mac…go figure.

Another point – advertising. I wouldn’t have a problem running The Media Show or the MS Dev Show on my podcast because the shows are completely different from what mine will be, even though we might criss-cross content wise occasionally. Of course all the other shows are so different content wise I really don’t see a conflict of interest cross-promoting. The ability to cross promote is huge and that only strengthens the network. Niche networks don’t have the same flexibility without ticking off their listeners. If I subscribe to a Microsoft podcast I better not hear and Apple ad. And would a Microsoft podcaster really want to promote another podcaster whose doing almost the same thing they are? Highly unlikely.

Anyway, I agree with Marc Cuban’s perspective. Some people (in my opinion) are just going about it the wrong way to make money. With any technology that is cheap and easy to use it becomes diluted quickly (many people use it). With the number of podcasters growing along with the number of listeners it’s obvious all podcasters attempting to run a business off of it will not be able to do so. Think wisely, do something different, make your podcast stand out if you want to make money off of it.

They mention Peter Whitney who was fired for his blog:

Like a growing number of employees, Peter Whitney decided to launch a blog on the Internet to chronicle his life, his friends and his job at a division of Wells Fargo.

Then he began taking jabs at a few people he worked with.

Lesson : I never write about anyone or say anything I wouldn’t say to the person’s face. I always let people know when I write about them, even if I mask their identity. This simply lesson keeps me out of trouble.

Peter is quoted in the article:

“Right now, it’s too gray. There needs to be clearer guidelines,” says Whitney, who has found another job. “Some people go to a bar and complain about workers, I decided to do it online. Some people say I deserve what happened, but it was really harsh. It was unfair.”

Lesson: Never compare what is said privately to a group of people to what is published online for all to read. That’s like comparing apples to oranges.

One point mentioned in the article is IBM’s blogging policy:

The guidelines state that employees should identify themselves (and, when relevant, their roles at IBM) when blogging about IBM.

“You must make it clear that you are speaking for yourself and not on behalf of IBM,” the guidelines state. They also say bloggers should not use “ethnic slurs, personal insults, obscenity, etc.” and that they should “show proper consideration” for “topics that may be considered objectionable or inflammatory – such as politics and religion.”

I think that’s fair if a blogger must blog about work. The part that interests me is the point where the blogger should idenify themselves. Will IBM fire an employee who writes about IBM anonymously? See, I’d change that to must identify themselves and their position if the blogger must talk about their job. If an employee was anonymously writing about work once found, they’d be fired.

That sounds harsh doesn’t it? Perhaps it is but is easier to do something stupid when your name isn’t attached to it. When a blogger’s name is attached to every word written it makes a blogger think twice, perhaps three times before pressing the submit button. This isn’t a bad thing. Once a blogger publishes something it’s out there. Someone has a copy of it, guaranteed. Most bloggers don’t realize this. A large number of bloggers honestly believe their words will not be read…and that is what gets them into trouble.

Lesson: Before publishing anything to a blog read it over with the forethought that anyone (and I mean anyone) can read it. The boss, the wife, the kids, the next door neighbors, the potential future boss – anyone. If it passes that test, usually it won’t get a blogger into trouble. All the people who I know of that have been fired (and there are unfortunately hundreds now) failed that one lesson. If they thought “what if my boss or my co-workers read this?” they may have still published it but it wouldn’t have been a shock they were fired.

Note that this news wasn’t found out via rumor sites (blogs). The Wall Street Journal wrote about it in May and News.com slam dunked everyone on Friday posting that it was a done deal. Robert Scoble posted on his site that he was able to confirm it was true. Of course this all happened right in time for Apple’s Developer Conference.

I think Apple is sending a message. Respect their NDA’s, don’t try to scoop and they will provide exclusives. Get the scoop from someone breaking an NDA and they will sue you, endlessly. I don’t believe in coincidence but isn’t it odd that cNet got this scoop right after complaining about the injustice about how traditional news sites have to follow an NDA and bloggers don’t – so venders need to work with the press more?

If vendors worked with the press more things wouldn’t have to get this ugly. Of course Apple has a lot to learn about publicity obviously. Look at their press release page. They offer an RSS feed but it’s a headline only feed. That makes no sense to me. It completely defeats the purpose of getting the information out quickly and efficiently. Why must Apple make things so difficult?

If I’m right then perhaps Apple is attempting to be more media friendly. I hope that’s the case because that’s a win/win situation for everyone.

Note that this news wasn’t found out via rumor sites (blogs). The Wall Street Journal wrote about it in May and News.com slam dunked everyone on Friday posting that it was a done deal. Robert Scoble posted on his site that he was able to confirm it was true. Of course this all happened right in time for Apple’s Developer Conference.

I think Apple is sending a message. Respect their NDA’s, don’t try to scoop and they will provide exclusives. Get the scoop from someone breaking an NDA and they will sue you, endlessly. I don’t believe in coincidence but isn’t it odd that cNet got this scoop right after complaining about the injustice about how traditional news sites have to follow an NDA and bloggers don’t – so venders need to work with the press more?

If vendors worked with the press more things wouldn’t have to get this ugly. Of course Apple has a lot to learn about publicity obviously. Look at their press release page. They offer an RSS feed but it’s a headline only feed. That makes no sense to me. It completely defeats the purpose of getting the information out quickly and efficiently. Why must Apple make things so difficult?

If I’m right then perhaps Apple is attempting to be more media friendly. I hope that’s the case because that’s a win/win situation for everyone.

Swisher: “Would you have sued if the Wall Street Journal had done this?”

Jobs: “We might have. But the Wall Street Journal has serious thought behind it: the thing is today is that everyone can be a journalist: we are in a gray area and we are trying to help in some small way.”

WSJ wouldn’t have published it without discussing it with their legal department. Yes, WSJ has some deep pockets but they aren’t outside the boundaries of the law. Now what they “might” have done was tell Jobs they had the information and negotiated something. WSJ has the power to negotiate – I admit that 100%. Bloggers usually don’t.