After a longer-than-expected wait, some shipping glitches, and a good deal of anticipation, my open-source, crowd-funded, cloud-gaming, Android-powered Ouya game console arrived in Friday's mail. I unpacked the box, plugged it in, and fired it up. After 24 hours, I've come to some conclusions about the device – though I can't say they're all positive.

(See also Can Startup Ouya's Crowd-Sourced Gaming Console Challenge Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo?)

Ouya: Out Of The Box

The Console: The first thing I noticed about the console itself was its size. The thing is small – about the size of a Rubik's Cube. With no optical drive or expansion slots, there's no reason for the device to be any bigger, but it was still a little jarring. It's also pretty idiot-proof. Plug in the included power adapter and HDMI cable, press the only button on the device, and you're ready to get started. 

The Controller: The controller was reputed to be the system's crown jewel, and overall, it's a success. The pop-off panels for accessing the dual battery compartments seem a little insecure at first, and I would have preferred a more traditional hinged compartment on the back, but the Ouya design seems rigid enough once everything is snapped together, and it's probably cheaper to fix, down the line.

Other than that, the pad, sticks and buttons worked as planned, the controller fit my average-sized hand nicely, and I was able to forget about controls and focus on the games immediately. And that's really the point. I found it worlds more comfortable than any Sony controller, and somewhat more natural than the Xbox 360's. If this controller shipped with a next-gen system, I wouldn't be upset.

Ouya Setup

The hardware was great, and pairing the controllers was straightforward. When I logged into my account, though, the Ouya's Kickstarter roots started to show. Setup went smoothly enough, but even a little documentation might have been nice. The box included only an FCC-mandated warning: no manual or diagrams. The log in process was simple, but to retrieve the username I'd registered months ago, I had to swap to my laptop and Google "Ouya username retrieval." An inline "Retrieve Username" next to the "Lost Password" link in the setup screen wouldn't have been terribly hard to add.

With any luck, that retail units will ship with more documentation and a smoothed-out interface. As an early backer, a reviewer and someone who'd like to see this type of project succeed, I didn't really care, but the Best Buy set is accustomed to a higher level of hand-holding.  

The Ouya UI

Once you're logged in, the Ouya interface is pretty clean, but there aren't too many more positives worth noting. It's tough to make four menu items a jumble, but Ouya somehow succeeded. The designers may have been trying a bit too hard to make things cool.

The menu items:

PLAY: Play the games you’ve downloaded. Simple enough.

DISCOVER:  This is the Ouya app store. DISCOVER is a horribly awkward list of downloadable games, with confusingly named sub-menus (What’s the difference between CHECK IT, STAFFPICKS, and FAVS, anyway?). The GENRES section is more useful, but it reveals an unfortunate lack of content designed for the device. As of the weekend, there were only six games in the DUAL STICK category and only three applications in APPS.

MAKE: Information for software developers that really doesn’t belong in a main menu.

MANAGE: System configuration.

I get what Ouya was going for, but everything abut the interface screams BETA, and it wouldn't have been that hard to do it right. Drop me straight into PLAY, provide a prominent link to the store, and link to games that are related to the one I'm currently playing. Hide the rest somewhere boring. Done.

Some of the gaps should get filled when more titles become available, but that list is likely to to see a lot of static. The bar is pretty low for Android games, so not every entry will be up to par for console games.

That's where some content curation could help. Branded channels (e.g., something by IndieCade or one of the gaming mags) could really help users find games worth playing. So could a healthy peer rating system and some filtering based on past ratings. The good news is that all of this can be fixed in software. The bad news is that the retail release date is coming up fast.

(See also Android Gaming Console Ouya Set To Ship At End Of June.)

Ouya Games

Final Fantasy III: What about Final Fantasy III? If you've played the Android version on other devices, you know what you're getting. If you played the original version 20 years ago, it's a refreshing trip down memory lane. FFIII offers Game Boy mechanics with 3D graphics: think Pokemon Stadium on the N64 compared to Pokemon Yellow and Red. Younger gamers without an appreciation of history will probably get bored very fast. It's great to see a major studio throw some weight behind the Ouya, but this game is not a kingmaker. 

The Ouya Verdict

I think the gaming industry needs a kick in the pants, and I'm glad to have helped support the Ouya's attempt to provide it. I have hopes that in time, the Ouya can provide exposure to indie game developers, add playability to Android games that could really use a solid controller and function as a valid over-the-top box for Netflix and other TV apps.

As a geek and freedom fighter, I think my money was well-spent. If I were a parent on a shopping mission or hardcore gamer looking for a fix, though, the Ouya just doesn't deliver. If you're looking for anything resembling a AAA-title gaming experience, your $99 would be better spent on a used Xbox 360 or a new video card for your gaming computer.

I think Ouya has the potential to fix the bugs and round out its stable of apps and games to make a really viable complement to traditional consoles, but the company needs to move fast, before gamers decide to move on.

On Wednesday, Bloomberg released a new website for its Bloomberg Billionaires Index, complete with some snappy data visualization tools. While we'd like to see a few more features added to the mix (a year-by-year progression of adds and drops would be great), it's a fun tool, and it makes certain trends easy to spot. For those of us who watch the tech community, the list provides a quick gut-check about where the tech sector fits into the larger world's priorities.

Technology Isn't Everything

Technology is important, but don't forget that people need to build things, buy things and pay for them, and those industries generate revenue, too. Only 12 of the world's 100 richest hail from the tech industry, so it's far from a dominating presence. The tech billionaires are well distributed throughout the list, with only Bill Gates and Larry Ellison in the top 10, and half the techies landing the bottom 50. Tech has a significant showing on the list, but its not as strong as retail (17 total, with 9 in the top 20). Overall, technology seems to be about as lucrative as mining or finance. It's still a much better bet than newspapers, though. Only three of the top 100 hail from the media world.

Almost All-American - For Now

All but two of the tech 12 are Americans. The others – Wipro CEO Azim Premji, (India, #49) and Samsung Chairman Lee Kun Hee (South Korea, #91) – are the first of what is likely to be many more future overseas members of the club. The U.S .list is still weighted pretty heavily toward the heavy hitters of the 1990s. SAS, Microsoft, Oracle, and Dell are solid companies, but most people wouldn't consider them the future of tech. Yet these "legacy" companies account for 6 of the 10 Americans on the list. It's a pretty sure bet that 5 to 10 years from now, we'll see a lot more members from South Korea, China, India and Russia.

$10 Billion Takes Time

Becoming an overnight millionaire in the tech industry is no big deal, but there's no shortcut to the top 100 billionairs. Well, there might be just one. Mark Zuckerberg. Zuck is the only person under 30 in any industry to make the list. Even stepping up to the sub-40 bracket, there are only three more additions: Larry Page, Sergey Brin, and Colombia's Alejandro Santo Domingo, who manages a collection of media companies and SABMiller. Technology can certainly make you rich in a hurry, but to join the ranks of the mega-mega-rich, even geeks have to work at it for a while.

Family Planning

One bonus for the children of tech billionaires is inheritance. While many of the more traditional industries seem to favor having lots of children, the tech industry tends toward a more reasonable family size. The sweet spot seems to be 2-3 children - which leaves lots more cash for each offspring. Zuckerberg and Paul Allen have no children (yet), while Jeff Bezos and Michael Dell each have 4. On the rest of the list, 21 have 5 or more kids, and Malaysia's Robert Kuok has 8! Of course, since many of the techies on the list have already signed Bill Gates' Giving Pledge to donate the bulk of their fortunes to charity, those kids might have to settle for measly single-digit billions, anyway.

Japan didn't just give us the quartz wristwatch, the DSLR, and the Playstation. It also gave us the Subway Sleeper, the Hay Fever Hat and the Kaba Kick Russian Roulette Toy for Kids! The country has long been a hub for wacky inventions you never knew you wanted, so in tribute to the keepers of the bizarre, here are some of our favorite devices to make you say それはクールだ!

#1. Taily - "The Tail That Wags When You Get Excited"

We're all fans of Necomimi, the "Brainwave Cat Ears," right? Right. I mean, without cat ears to wiggle, how will we ever know if you liked your donut? Well, Shota Ishiwatari, creator of the Necomimi prototype, isn't resting on his fuzzy laurels. Ladies and gentlemen, we give you Taily:

You wouldn't wear a jacket without pants. Now there's no need to wear those adorable kitty ears without a matching tail. You'll be the talk of the furry convention circuit, and your friends will never have to ask how you're feeling again!

#2. The H-Boya USB Creepy Kid

Source: audiocubes.com The letter "H" is bad. Very bad. So bad, in fact, that you need a bobbleheaded child to blink at you in creepy terror every time you type it. Yup. That's all the H-Boya does. It blinks when you type "H," because, as the story goes, "H is for Hentai," and that's bad. But terrifying robochildren who watch your every move? That's totally right.

#3. The Marriage-Hunting Bra

When a suitor is feeling amorous, the Marriage-Hunting Bra helps him check his intentions. The bra sports a digital countdown timer headed for the precise moment when its wearer wants to tie the knot. It also has a ring-carrying compartment and a pen holder, so you'll never be a a loss if you decide to jet off to Vegas for a quickie ceremony.

Lest you think we're just beating up on Japan, we give you two humble entries from other countries with too much time to burn. First up, China's entry:

#4. The Home Core Toilet-Sink

Source: yankodesign.com
The iPotty was child's play. The champion of the pro toilet circuit is industrial designer Dang Jingwei. His second toilet design (following the ingeniously low-tech Portable Paper Toilet) is the Home Core Integrated Toilet, which combines a sink, a vanity, and, of course, a toilet. It's a bit crowded for our tastes. Gray water recycling is a fantastic idea, and we're all for saving the environment, but a shower might be an easier place to start. 

And in case you think innovation is dead in the USA, we bring you the awesomeness that is:

5. The TV Hat

Yes, that's right. Theres no need to buy a battery-busting Galaxy Note II to watch movies when you can slap a magnifying glass over your iPhone. Plus, you get a super-cool hat to hide your identity from thieves who'll want to break into your house and steal the hat! Or the horrifying possibility that someone you know might see you wearing this thing.

Honorable mention: the GoJo.

There's been a lot of talk about why the proposed Dell buyback doesn't add up. Some of it dates back more than two years, and the arguments all center on one thing – money. 

The problem, as critics see it, is that going private robs Dell of critical cash at the time it most needs to spend that cash to acquire companies that diversify its lineup. It's a valid point, but that doesn't mean it's the only way to look at the situation. Even with a cash crunch, pulling Dell off the public market might be exactly what the company needs to avoid prying eyes that could toast its chances for future success.

Source: Dell.com The IBM Ideal

When IBM sold its PC business to Lenovo in 2004, everybody won. IBM pulled in some needed cash, exited a low-margin business and focused on the enterprise. Lenovo got instant credibility and brought efficiencies to a market that still had years of oomph.

Nearly everyone predicts that Dell wants to do the same with its buyback, but today's market is fundamentally different. PC sales are dropping, and Dell's share of that market is falling even faster. Plenty of PC manufacturers would be willing to fold Dell's brand into their lineup, but not at the premium investors would ask. Time isn't on Dell's side. The longer it waits to offload its PC business, the worse the deal will get. Going private would at least shield the company from having to make those details pubic.

The HP Boondoggle

Dell is smaller and more dependent on PCs than is HP, but the two companies line up well enough to illustrate how  a reinvention of Dell might work. 

HP is an absolute wreck. Investors are shaky, key executives are fleeing, and even Meg Whitman's rosiest turnaround scenario offers years of bleeding to come. HP has product problems, legal problems and PR problems, and it's headed for a fire sale. Seven out of the ten first-page results on a Google News search for "HP" were negative. HP is floundering in full view, and all the negativity is making it difficult for the company to manuever. 

So why didn't HP go private?

According to Gartner Senior Research Analyst Chris Gaun, "HP has a larger market capitalization, and going private might not have been an option." Raising $15 billion for a Dell buyout is pushing the envelope. $34 billion for HP would be in a completely different zip code. Gaun also points out other complications, such as the Autonomy investigation, which would add substantial risk and complexity to any buyout. HP is too big and too messy for a buyback.

HP CEO Meg Whitman claims low-margin PCs are essential to HP's survival as a full-spectrum technology provider. Lets' say Dell agrees. Going private still makes sense. 

According to Reticle Research Principal Analyst Ross Rubin, a buyback could benefit Dell, regardless of its goal. "Going private would insulate Dell from investor scrutiny and the expenses of running a public company. It would have more flexibility to continue the low-margin PC business if, like HP, it continued to see it as part of a solution - or spin it out and take the revenue hit, as HP was considering."

Source: Shutterstock Protecting The Brand

Even the high-margin products and services Dell wants to protect are being pushed toward commodity status. In the end, Dell will be trading on its name. Insulating that name from controversy that might cheapen it could be worth some belt-tightening.

Michael Dell photo from Dell. 

In a publicity bid this week, German website Populeaks.org announced The NRA Bet, challenging the National Rifle Association - in fractured English - to use its guns to "keep all non-public data a secret till April 30, 2013." If the NRA manages to protect its data, the site promises to provide two unrequested staffers to provide unwanted services – in this case, helping to polish 500 guns at the NRA's next annual meeting.

Source: http://www.g4tv.com/hurl I'm sure Wayne LaPierre is thrilled. "The NRA Bet" may never amount to much. It's not as if Populeaks, which was created only three months ago, can really call down the fury of a mighty hacker horde.

Still, by framing its call to action as a humorous contest, Populeaks staggers across an interesting point. What if instead of threats, hactivism groups tried offering their targets something they wanted in return for complying with their demands (er, requests)? And what if instead of anger and outrage, the conversation included a little humor and satire? Would that kind of lighter approach be more likely to achieve the desired results? Or at least make the hacktivists more likable?

PopuWHO?

First things first: You might be asking "What the hell is Populeaks?" That's an excellent question. According to its About Us page:

• POPULEAKS confronts governments, corporations and non-governmental organizations with the assertions made by our whistleblowers – and demands substantiated replies or information within a time window of ten days. 
• In order to increase people’s readiness to respond, POPULEAKS informs up to 6,000 journalists and bloggers from its custom media mailing list - at the same time it receives an inquiry - and publishes the full text of the inquiry, word-for-word, on www.populeaks.org.

In other words, the site encourages users to spam it with gossip, attempts to force the subjects of the gossip to reply, then turns around and spams "6,000 media contacts" (including us), hoping to get coverage. It's an annoying business model, and it's highly unlikely you'll see the group mentioned here again unless it actually breaks some news. But the tactics employed in this particular case (which actually has nothing to do with PopuLeaks' stated whistleblower mission) are worth a look. 

Taming The Shame Game

Public shaming by the hacktivist community is hardly new. Anonymous has made a fetish of it, following grand pronouncements about unchecked corporate greed and disregard of the common man with threats to tear down Facebook, Egypt and Iran, among others.

Demand => Threat => Resolution. It's a time-tested formula that's been around since the Greek siege of Troy (probably since Gok threatened Gom with a rock if he didn't quit hogging the mastodon leg). The problem is that after a few years of constantly threatening people, you kind of seem like a jerk, particularly if you have to follow through on your threats. Facebook may or may not be evil, but if you're the one keeping the masses from sharing their kitten videos, you're the bad guy.

Groups like Anonymous tread a fine line between Robin Hood and (in the words of BreitBart.com) "terrorist" in the court of public opinion. Mixing it up could help the hactivists' image. Populeaks is an unknown site, and the NRA Bet isn't even particularly witty or creative - or even coherent. Overall, it's pretty low-rent, and offers nothing of value to the NRA.

But if someone with a bit more street cred offered to do something useful, relevant and funny if their target complied with their requests, we might actually see some progress.

Friendly rivalries and side bets with conservative pundits like Bill O'Reilly and Mike Huckabee have earned Jon Stewart and the Daily Show a legitimate place in the political discussion, increased everyone's likability and actually put substantive political discussions back on the air. Maybe injecting some of that into the cyber-rights battlefield wouldn't be such a bad idea. I bet the EFF's leaders would gladly pump gas for a week at a Chevron station if the company would drop its lawsuits and admit it was wrong about Ecuador.

There will always be intractable situations that call for severe responses, but dangling a few carrots couldn't hurt.

Lead image courtesy of Shutterstock.

We all know PR reps work charm and tsotchkes to build "relationships" with journalists and analysts, but they're way less shady than, say, Black Hat scammers in the SEO biz, right?

Apparently not. A few weeks ago, I saw the following job post on Elance. The description was a remarkably up-front pay-for-play bid:

We need people who can publish news articles at news sites PR2+.
You choose the topic and weave in the subject we assign. After a review, you publish to a specified news site.
Several journalists needed.

In 2013? Seriously? Wasn't Payola over in the 60s (or at least after the J-Lo scandal of 2005?). I had to see if this had legs, so I submitted a bidless proposal.

Into The Heart of Darkness

The next day, I got a response, asking me to promote a small virtualization vendor:

Their price for selling my soul? 25 bucks. That hurt.

I contacted the vendor's PR department, ready to tear them a a new one, but instead of excuses, I got shock and horror. They claimed to be completely in the dark – and I believed them. I emailed the poster, asking if the company was a knowing client. They said yes. I replied, telling them I'd contacted the company and heard just the opposite.

Crickets.

It's been four days, and all communications have ceased.

The vendor was pissed. In fact, the Senior Product Manager with whom I spoke was angry enough to threaten legal action against the job poster, and I believe that's already begun. That action is the reason I'm not naming names, though you can probably find the job by digging on your own, if you're curious. UPDATE: After the publication of the piece, I was contacted by the vendor's actual PR firm, a boutique outfit that's worked with some very large technology brands. We've worked with them in the past. At this point, I became even more convinced that the scammers were flying solo.

I reported the job to Elance, describing its varying levels of sketchiness, but it's still up, and will probably stay there. As far as I can tell (and please correct me if I'm wrong, folks), there's no law against paying for references in a blog. Still, when I mentioned "paid placement" to the poster, they shot back a clarification right away. They were "pitching an idea." They just happened to pay money if they were allowed to review the post before publication and that "idea" made its way to a site.

Pay-For-Play Alive And Well

Semantic juggling fixes everything.

The point here is that payola is apparently alive and well in the blogosphere. If the going rate is truly only $25 for a mention in a respectable publication, it's easy to see the appeal – a dozen mentions would cost less than the airfare to send one rep on a briefing. But why would one of these shady agencies spend money to promote a non-client?

The biggest advantage is protection. When you're feeling out an ethically-icky situation, you don't want to dangle any top-shelf clients that can expose you. Once the journalist is on the take, both parties have a vested interest in keeping things quiet, so the agency can relax a bit. The other benefit is promotion. The by-product of all this fishing will be a catalog of company references in relevant publications, which could be an excellent door-opener for sales. In any case, freelancing sites provide a fantastic layer of anonymity for shady promoters. It's something Elance, Guru.com and the rest of the freelance marketplaces will have to address in the future.

Maybe all my instincts are wrong, and the vendor was actually involved. It's always possible, but it doesn't change the conclusion. There's apparently still money in buying off journalists, and from the looks of it, they aren't very expensive.

For all our brand loyalty, consumer electronics are commodities. A very small number of suppliers produce the guts of most electronic devices, and competing brands are often assembled in the same factories (we're looking at you, Foxconn). Assuming the same components, the only major differences among many products are fit-and-finish standards and customer support.

What Would You Pay For Giant Monitor?

Sometimes support is reason enough to pay more. When my Macbook Pro's hard drive died 10 months after purchase, I had a replacement hard drive installed within two hours. That beats boxing the computer and waiting weeks for a replacement. When it comes to laptops, a few dollars more can be a worthwhile investment. But what about components that don't usually break? Like monitors, for example?

Source: Shutterstock For the past several years, budget-savvy buyers have saved cash by buying grey-market Asian (usually Korean) merchandise - including large-screen monitors - directly from importers. The sellers typically work through eBay, Amazon, or an auction site, and the products the buyer receives are pretty bare-bones. Seller warranties usually cover products that are Dead On Arriva and (in the case of monitors), a negotiable number of dead pixels, but that's it. The manufacturer warranties are typically written in Korean, and it's up in the air whether they even apply in the States. It's a lot like the gray market trade on which many camera vendors have built a business, but in this case the manufacturers themselves are relative nobodies, too. When you buy a Yamasaki Catleap or a Crossover 27Q monitor, you're pretty much on your own.

The flip side, of course, is that you get a whole lot of 27-inch monitor for your money. Less than $400 to your door (add an extra $10 to $100 for a "pixel-perfect" guarantee) buys components found in domestic monitors at more than twice the price. Inputs are limited, controls are basic, and case design can be a bit wonky, but you'll get the same LG IPS panel Apple uses in its Cinema Display, which is a truly beautiful thing to behold.

What About The Warranty?

At this year's Consumer Electronics Show (CES), Monoprice (the ultra low-cost retailer that's been the king of cables and accessories for some time) was showing off its entry to the sub-$400 27-inch monitor market: the CrystalPro WQHD. Like the other Korean imports, the CrystalPro sports a high-resolution, 2560 x 1440, LG IPS panel, a VESA wall mount, and dual-link DVI inputs. The difference is the warranty. Monoprice offers a 30-day money-back guarantee, a full one-year warranty on the monitor, and a lifetime warranty on cables and accessories. Plus, it's located in Rancho Cucamonga, California, with live chat support seven days a week.

There's no denying that Apple's Cinema Display is a better, more polished product, but when properly calibrated, the display quality of the Korean imports can hold their own at a fraction of the cost. For system builders, those contemplating a multiple-monitor setup, or anyone looking to step up from a smaller screen, the $400 deal is tempting. With the addition of a real warranty from an American importer, we may have reached a tipping point.

My old 24-inch monitor is suddenly looking kind of small and tired. For $390, I'm willing to give an off-brand alternative a shot. How about you?

When Microsoft gave its first public preview of Windows 8 in 2011, the now-President of Windows Julie Larson-Green sent shockwaves through the Windows development world with just four words: "our new development platform." The reason? That platform was based on HTML5 and Javascript.

To casual observers, that makes sense. HTML5 is roaring to the forefront of development far faster than industry predictions. We even saw some commercial proof of the platform's "Write Once, Run Anywhere" promise in 2012. To seasoned Windows developers, though – particularly those building enterprise apps in dedicated Microsoft shops – it crushed their world. After spending decades learning to use different languages and development environments – most recently Microsoft's proprietary but feature-rich WPF and Silverlight – the thought of jumping ship for HTML5 was devastating.

Microsoft has backpedaled in a number of forums since then, assuring developers that while HTML5 is the new standard for cross-platform apps, other tools will continue to work for Windows-only development. But the writing is on the wall. HTML5 is the future, so if you develop enterprise Windows applications, should you bite the bullet and make the move?

Will HTML5 Save Enterprises Money?

The cost argument will rage for some time. One camp holds that HTML / Javascript developers are cheap and plentiful, so HTML5 is necessarily cheaper. The other side believes that instability of the HTML5 spec (only recently finalized and not scheduled for Recommendation status until 2014) compared to the more mature development environments available for "traditional" Windows development means developers can build complex applications faster, without worrying about tweaking things down the road.

The CTO of one small software vendor saw value in both views: "For our simpler apps, I can hire kids with good Javascript skills and let them learn the Windows specifics on the job. For really complex applications with tens of thousands of lines of code or more, It would be dumb to break what already works." He added that his more experienced Windows developers are mentoring the generally younger HTML developers to cross-pollinate knowledge. "Ultimately, each tool will have a use, for at least the next several years, and I want all of my devs to be able to pick the one that makes sense."

"Serious Coders" vs. "Script Kiddies"

His biggest problem so far is a reluctance to embrace change. "I have a couple 28-year-olds who act like grumpy old men, afraid that the 'script kiddies' without any real computer science knowledge are moving in on their turf. To them, HTML5 cheapens the application, dumbs down their resumes, and opens the door to a whole lot of bad coding from people who know how to make Web pages, but don't have any formal experience with structured coding."

The last point is probably the most valid. Knowing HTML and some Javascript isn't a particularly high bar, so enterprises need to be diligent about hiring and mentoring. If you pull developers off of Craigslist for $15 an hour, you're not going to get quality enterprise work. Even well-established Web developers coming from a LAMP background may not have the right experience. A mentoring program using Agile or another pair-programming methodology – can be a great way to ease Web developers into a more formal programing environment.

What Do Developers Want?

One long-time C++ and (more recently) C# developer wasn't excited about the rise of HTMLt5: "Eh. I get what they're doing. It's all about the portability of UI. They've been on that path for a long time, but whatever. The thing is, developers don't want to learn a new markup when Microsoft has already forced them to learn one recently. WPF / Silverlight is crap, but so was Winforms. If they'd skipped WPF, they'd probably have more success trying to get people to shift to HTML5... I'll go where the money is, though."

That last point is telling. Developers will follow the work, they really don't have a choice. And that it won't be long before everyone will be doing at least some work in HTML5. Smart enterprises will be begin mixing in some of that work now makes sense, but there's not yet good reasons for a complete shift.

It's official. Long after the XBox 360 is relegated to scrap heaps and Gamestop bargain bins, the Microsoft Kinect – the XBox peripheral that lets you control the action with body movements alone – will be going strong.

A Mediocre Game Controller

To tell the truth, the Kinect is a pretty ho-hum video game controller. It works with a fairly weak selection of game, given how long  it's been on the market, largely because blockbuster games generally require the kind of pinpoint control you can get only from a joystick or control pad. Microsoft may be working on games that take better advantage of the Kinect hardware, but that's not the point. 

The point is that the Kinect is a cheap, open, powerful piece of hardware with a life beyond video games. It's been hacked in a number of ways since its inception, and with October's launch of Kinect for Windows, Microsoft is fulfilling the promise of its SDK and throwing the company's weight behind the effort in a big way.

Microsoft Moving Beyond The Xbox

Microsoft's emphasis on the Kinect makes sense. The XbBox has been wildly successful within the high-end game market, but that covers only a fraction of total households. To earn the company's SmartGlass system a spot in non-gamer living rooms, Microsoft needs a central piece of hardware, and an open Kinect gives it an in that Apple and Google can't currently match. On the back-end, Microsoft is positioning the Kinect as a boon to revenue-hungry content providers, but on the demand side, it's hoping the market will take care of things on its own.

So far, the market has responded. Projects like OpenKinect have spawned dozens of interesting uses of the original Kinect sensor, including virtual touchscreens and three-dimensional image tracking that works in the dark. It probably won't be long before the Ouya has its own Kinect hack. With the addition of official support and upgraded hardware, Kinect for Windows should encourage those developers to productize their work, and attract a lot more interest from commercial developers. The $200 device provides a standard platform with a high-quality camera, skeletal tracking, face and voice recognition, and a wealth of development tools and support. Its camera alone is probably worth the cost. 

Kinect-ing With Physical Therapy

Late in 2012, the Department of Defense expressed some interest in using the Kinect for therapy. The DoD found the Kinect particularly interesting for the ongoing treatment of remote patients, or those who wanted to maintain anonymity while undergoing care. The economics of the system make sense (the costs of just a few patient transports could easily pay for a Kinect and PC), and Microsoft is pursuing the deal aggressively.

Medicine is a big market for the Kinect. Tokyo Women's Medical University is currently using Kinects as part of its Opect project (see video here), which lets surgeons access information in a hands-free, Minority Report style that doesn't contaminate their hands.

While medical uses make better PR than an automatic Nerf gun turret, they still doesn't get the Kinect into the average living room.

For that, we'll need an entirely new killer app. If Microsoft gets really lucky, that app might come from crowdsourcing. But the more likely source is a certain television manufacturer with a dislike for Apple and Sony. 

See more Kinect coverage on ReadWrite.

On December 23, the Journal News published an interactive map showing the names and addresses of all pistol-permit holders in two New York counties. Some 43,000 comments later, the battle over the paper's move rages on. Incensed gun owners claimed the article made their homes targets for thieves and drew unwarranted attention to them "like it was some sort of sex offender registry." More than 20,000 people responded by circulating the author's address, phone number on social media in a "How do YOU like it?" strategy.

It didn't end there. On January 3, Putnam County officials refused the paper's request for its pistol permit records, citing the risk of "endangering citizens."

Is it Legal?

The fight will probably go to the courts, and the county will probably lose, because the newspaper is perfectly within its legal rights to publish the information. The information was obtained legally, and everything published was available, for free, to any resident who asked.

According to Mark Rumold, a staff attorney with the Electronic Frontiers Foundation, the issue is cut-and-dried: "I can say, in no uncertain terms, that publishing the information was legal and squarely protected by the First Amendment. Whether or not publishing the information was the right thing to do, or smart, or in the public interest, is probably a question of journalism ethics that I'm not qualified to answer."

Another criticism – leveled at both the newspaper that published the data and the gun owners who later published the author's address – is that it's a question of "intent." According to that argument, if the intent of the publication was to shame the named parties, the First Amendment doesn't protect that.

Again, Rumold dismisses the argument: "The First Amendment, if it protects anything, certainly protects the publication of truthful, lawfully obtained information about a topic of significant public interest. That protection includes shielding a newspaper from civil liability – for example, for violations of privacy." He adds that the line gets blurry in some "edge cases," such as publicizing a rape victim's name, but, in his opinion, "this case doesn't even approximate that level of privacy intrusion." So until someone comes out and says "Let's all meet at 5pm to steal their guns," Uncle Sam is fine with it.

But Is It Right?

As ReadWrite's Fruzsina Eördögh pointed out in a recent article on minors' privacy rights, having the ability to do something isn't a green light to go ahead and do it. Journalists choose not to print information all the time, if they believe that information could cause harm.

Legal does not equal ethical.

Clearly, the paper published the list to attract readers, and that worked in spades. It's less obvious that it considered the additional ramifications of its actions. Still, all of the permit holders referenced in the article are over 21 and (one would hope) aware of the fact that their permits were open to the public. If they were not made aware of that fact, the fault lies with the permitting system – not the newspaper. Rumold agrees: "In my opinion, for those upset about the publication of the information, I think their grievance is with New York's legislature's for making the information a public record."

What Happens Next?

Governing bodies clearly have failed to anticipate the kind of proactive publication modern technology allows. While publishing a database of public information may be perfectly legal, it could very well cause unintended headaches. Over the next few years, we'll probably see a lot more protections against massive data aggregation pop up in the form of data throttling or outright bans on publication, followed by court challenges to all those moves.

We'll see how that all plays out, but for now, it looks like the press has the advantage.

Lead image courtesy of Shutterstock.

Zeno Group's 2012 Digital Readiness Survey revealed a striking truth: businesses are burned out on social media, too.

For all the lip service paid to social media marketing and all the "New Media Marketing" hires on LinkedIn, it seems that a lot of businesses are coming around to the idea that social media actually might not be very important. Generally, the survey found that smaller businesses (those with fewer than 10,000 employees) and business-to-business (B2B) companies were less likely to engage with their customers via social media. In fact, 43% of B2B companies admitted that their CEO ignores online reputations altogether.

On its face, the survey makes a certain amount of sense. If you sell to other businesses, you probably have fewer customers and a direct sales force, so you can just pick up the phone to reach them. Likewise, smaller companies probably have fewer resources to dedicate to a social campaign - and less ability to make a splash.

But the one-to-many push of social marketing is comparatively cheap, and there's no reason to make your sales force perform damage control when they should be selling. Sure Facebook fatigue seems to be catching these days, but it seems like many businesses are missing an opportunity.

For all the details, check out Zeno Group's infographic below:

After the recent tragedy in Newtown, CT, some commentators and - notably - the National Rifle Association (NRA) remarked that video games played a role in a "culture of violence" and detachment that can ease the path to violent behavior. This, in turn, has given new life to the debate about the role of media violence – particularly, violent video games – on real-world aggression. It's a serious topic, so ReadWrite thought it was important to to recap the latest on the discussion and see where scholarly studies and popular opinion fall.

Understanding The Numbers

We all know the guy who plays Call of Duty eight hours a day, then goes home to a world of puppies and rainbows. We've also heard of the kid who plays a game for an hour or two, then goes on a shooting spree. There are exceptions to any rule, and if we're going to find real answers, we need to look at trends and averages, not statistical outliers.

It's also important to remember that even if there is a link between violent games and aggressive behavior, that does not imply causality. Violent criminals may well choose violent games, but tens of millions of gamers play those games every week, and the vast majority are law-abiding, normal citizens.

At the same time, it might be shortsighted to ignore such links. According to a recent publication by Iowa State University professor Dr. Craig Anderson, "Correlational studies are routinely used in modern science to test theories that are inherently causal. Whole scientific fields are based on correlational data (e.g., astronomy). Well conducted correlational studies provide opportunities for theory falsification. They allow examination of serious acts of aggression that would be unethical to study in experimental contexts. They allow for statistical controls of plausible alternative explanations." In other words, short of placing a subject in a dangerous situation, correlation is often the best evidence available, and it can be useful debunking other theories.

The State Of Research

At the moment, studies are all over the map, largely because just about every study of video game violence uses different definitions of the terms. The Legend of Zelda, Grand Theft Auto and Missile Command are all violent games in their own ways, but they're not at all similar. Likewise, throwing a fake roundhouse kick at your buddy, checking a box describing "elevated feelings of aggression," and setting fire to a building are all extremely different violent expressions. Unfortunately, current studies span both spectrums, so anyone with a vested interest can easily find a study to support their position. Worse, this makes meaningnful meta-analysis across multiple studies is effectively impossible. 80% of studies agreeing with a certain position doesn't mean much if half of those studies were poorly structured and the other half were measuring something completely different.

5 Emerging Truths

With that said, there seem to be five theories gaining traction. Each has its naysayers, of course, but they have real data to back them up:

1. At-Risk Populations Are Vulnerable To Violent Stimuli

One popular theory holds that some people are more vulnerable to the effects of gaming violence than others. This resonates with our gut instincts, and provides a happy, reasonable-sounding middle ground for both sides. In the Review of General Psychology, Drs. Patrick and Charlotte Markey outline the three most predictive traits for vulnerability:

• high neuroticism
• low agreeableness
• low conscientiousness

This doesn't mean that games cause violent behavior. It suggests that violent games are among the many influences that can be linked to violent behaviors. We've seen copycat murders modeled after television newscasts, Mark David Chapman's obsession with The Catcher in the Rye, and thousands of years of killings based on stories from holy works. Violence and rebellion in media have always been lightning rods for the mentally ill, and video games are a popular medium for the young male demographic most likely to commit violent acts.

The upshot? Young people who are emotionally upset, detached or combative, and impulsive should probably not be exposed to violent games. Unfortunately, that describes a fair portion of teenagers, so use discretion applying the rule to your own kids.

2. Video Game violence Is Not A Significant Danger To The General Population

Even the most damning studies don't claim that video games will create violent monsters of your children. They can't. If that were true, we'd have blood running in the streets. For the majority of "normal" gamers, the worst claims seem to be short-term aggression without substantial consequence, and a general lessening of communication and empathy skills – but again, without specific consequences attached.

The majority of research on the subject seems to indicate a fairly tenuous link between in-game and real-world violence. For example, two studies conducted by Texas A&M and the University of Wisconsin - Whitewater, respectively, found no conclusive evidence. "Structural equation modeling suggested that family violence and innate aggression as predictors of violent crime were a better fit to the data than was exposure to video game violence."

In other words, a predisposition to violence or a violent homelife is very likely a predictor of future violent behavior, while video games are not.

3. Fantasy Violence Is Less Dangerous

Killing Falatacot Raiders won't make you murder humans, though we're not sure about Hitman. Some people have pointed to studies showing that even E-rated games can lead to imitation (e.g., children punching or kicking) for a period following play, but it appears that transference of aggression from aliens, orcs, or Pokemon to humans is minimal, at worst.

4. Violent Games Do Increase Simulation

Just like watching action movies or sprinting down a street, violent video games (and other competitive or action games) increase stimulation and adrenaline production, which can produce short-term disruptions and enhanced moods. Some studies claim short-term affects can last long enough to disrupt sleep when played before bedtime, while others saw certain effects lingering up to 24 hours. At the very least, the "amp up" factor is real – it's kind of the point. For parents of children who may be particularly affected by such things (e.g., those with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder, or ADHD), this can be a concern.

5. Content Ratings Matter

People on both sides of the issue agree that content ratings are important. Even absent a long-term impact on violent behavior, graphic scenes of violence, nudity and other adult situations can impact developing minds. Video game access should be restricted like access to any other type of media.

The Easy Answer

Anyone who wants the government to step in and make the call on what to do about video game violence will be sorely disappointed. There simply isn't enough evidence linking video games and violence to even start that discussion, particularly when films and images of far more graphic violence are readily accessible.

The answer to the problem seems to be the same as the answer to concerns about TV rotting your kid's brain in the 1960s: personal responsibility. If you're a parent, pay attention to the ratings, research the content of games online before you buy them, and above all, know your child's sensitivities and limitations. If you're in doubt about the effect of a game or other piece of media, say no.

That won't end the debate, of course. Truly troubled teens often don't have the parental supervision they need to limit their gaming or other media consumption. But it's unclear exactly what the right strategy would be to deal with that issue.

The ReadWrite DeathWatch is known for serving up plenty of doom, gloom and grumpiness. But for the Holiday Season, we're taking a slightly different tack - highlighting companies, technologies and perspectives that have managed to cheat death.

This week, we're taking a look at MySpace, that social network that showed Friendster how it was done, then got shown the door by Facebook. When its users bailed and the tumbleweeds started rolling, MySpace could have packed it in, but instead, it regrouped for one last shot – behind a leader with some really sweet dance moves.

Where Myspace Came From

Remember Tom? Sure you do. If you're under 45, he was probably your #1 friend at one point. In 2003, Tom Anderson and Chris DeWolfe founded the MySpace social network, and it was an instant hit.

In 2005, traditional media took note, and Rupert Murdoch's NewsCorp dropped $580 million for MySpace and its parent company. By fiscal 2008, Fox Interactive (MySspace's new parent)turned a $10 million profit on revenue of $500 million. Murdoch was ecstatic on an earnings call. Things changed pretty quickly.

The next May, Facebook, already bigger overseas, surpassed MySpace in the U.S. by nearly doubling its user base over the previous year. Myspace responded by slashing 400 jobs to reinvent "a startup culture." The decline was on.

In April of 2011, Murdoch started shopping MySpace to bidders, asking for $100 million. He took a lot less, and sold the company to Specific Media for $35 million in June.

Planning to refocus on MySpace's biggest strength – music – Specific Media brought in Justin Timberlake for some star power and industry cred. Management went into planning mode, and apart from a more graphical home page, the site just kind of sat there. On the plus side, the bleeding stopped by December, and Myspace (now with a lowercase "s") actually started adding users again.

Where Myspace Is Now

In September, 2012, the team began teasing a new, more visually attractive site, focused on a single mission: providing a single social space for consumers and labels to discover musical artists. In the words of an employee, "There's going to be a huge emphasis on surfacing unknown and up-and-coming artists of all kinds and content around them that is different from what you get on other sites."

The site looks a lot like Twitter. And Pinterest. And every other social media site that's hot right now. There's a layer of media sharing and consumption tools, plus reporting tools that let artists see who's listening to and sharing their music, help them strike up relationships with promoters, influencers and (if they're lucky) music labels.

Myspace began taking requests for invitations and pushed its beta to the industry, with consumer invites to follow. The beta has drawn mixed critical reviews of the business model. ReadWrite's Jon Mitchell can't understand why anyone would invest so heavily in the Web when mobile is where the action is, and he may be right. Still, everyone seems to agree about three things: The beta looks fantastic. It's hyper-focused on sharing and discovery. Justin Timberlake is more than just a name on the marquis – he has a very real stake in the product's success.

So why would Timberlake risk his reputation on reviving Myspace? For one thing, it still has assets. With 28 million unique monthly visitors, Myspace is no Facebook (152 million in just the US), but it's bigger than Pandora (21 million), and more than twice the size of Spotify (12 million). It also has global rights to its catalog, while Pandora is limited to U.S. distribution. The catalog itself is much larger, too, owing to Myspace's direct relationships with unsigned artists, who bring 27 million of the service's 42 million tracks. And as Myspace's parent company pointed out in a leaked slide deck in November, those unsigned artists' songs are free, dramatically lowering Myspace's costs per listening hour.

A Myspace spokesperson was honest about the company dropping the ball. "I think, internally, we all felt like we’d let that community down; like we owed them something and had to make it right by delivering on the promise of Myspace." But she also understood that no one had picked up the slack. "In its heyday, Myspace was a great platform for artists. When we stopped serving that community, no one else stepped in to give artists a place to put their music, connect with audiences, see how their art’s resonating with people, promote themselves, collaborate with other creators… The need for a Myspace is there. We plan on delivering on that need."

Where Myspace Is Headed

Myspace has a product to sell. It has the economics to make that product profitable. It just needs to make the product desirable.

This is where star power comes in. Timberlake has managed to endear himself to teenage girls who think he's cute, grown-up women who find him sexy, and grandparents who want to pinch his cheeks – all without alienating guys, who want to drink a beer with him and meet his wife. Timberlake is there to bring labels to the unsigned bands, marquee names to the catalog, and users to the site. If he delivers, it's up to the team to keep them interacting.

And what about that team? As one Myspace worker puts it: "Before Tim & Chris & Justin took over Myspace, I was looking for jobs elsewhere. I wasn't even confident that new ownership would make a difference. But when they bought the company and we met them, heard what they had to say, there was an immediately noticeable shift. These guys were really ready to turn this thing around, and they had a plan. And the sense I get from them is that they don't fail. They work hard and are focused on specific goals that can succeed, which was really refreshing. The staff, who were tired of being on the losing team, started to perk up and get energized again because we started to have a focus and a goal and some real hope."

Employee excitement doesn't necessarily lead to a turnaround, but it's a necessary component, and something Myspace has lacked for a while.

Can Myspace Make It?

There are a lot of "ifs" in this scenario, but once you posit that there's a market for a music discovery and sharing service, Myspace actually seems to be in the lead.

Or it will be, once the beta launches. The date on that is still uncertain. According to the company, "We’re literally pushing fresh code every day. We’re actively getting feedback from our community and making tweaks and adjustments based on what they tell us."

The site is due to relaunch at some point in 2013, and when it does, we'll see whether Myspace belongs on real DeathWatch list.

As of the end of 2012, though, Myspace is still here – and still potentially relevant. So we tip our caps to them, and look forward to seeing whether the company can make it all the way back.

To see more ReadWrite DeathWatches, check out the ReadWrite DeathWatch Series, which collects them all, the most recent first.

Five years ago, game publisher THQ was worth $2 billion. On Wednesday, with a market cap of just over $11 million, THQ filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection.

Years Of Bad Decisions

The fall is the result of years of poor choices. The overpriced, underperforming uDraw is the poster child for the company's woes (in fact, it's called out specifically in the filing), but THQ has been doing things wrong for years.

While accidental hits from the Saints Row or UFC franchises have propped up the business from time to time, its Electronic Arts-style buy-and-bleed policies (snapping up game development studios but not investing in them) have robbed credible franchises of life and produced financial train wrecks.

THQ acquired studios Juice Games, Paradigm Entertainment and Kaos Studios, fumbled their titles, and ended up closing all three shops. Big Huge actually thought its chances would be better with the now collapsed 38 Studios (think about that)! Add some underperforming releases like Darksiders II and a total bungling of its once-core children's line-up, and there was only one way for this to end.

Can Bankruptcy Be A Good Thing?

So what does Chapter 11 mean for the company? According to THQ president Jason Rubin, nothing but sunshine. On his corporate blog, he posted the following: "The most important thing to understand is that Chapter 11 does not mean the end of the THQ story or the end of the titles you love. Quite the opposite is true, actually."

Rubin goes on to explain that Clearlake Capital Group has agreed to purchase the company's assets, and work will continue uninterrupted on current projects. With the bankruptcy wiping liabilities off the table and new funding in place, "the teams will be unburdened by the past and able to focus on what they should be focusing on - making great games."

He has a point. If Clearlake is willing to invest in the company at a substantial premium, it must have some faith in upcoming products, so a hands-off approach makes sense.

Bankruptcies Are Never Clean

But despite the promises, bankruptcies are never clean, for good reason. Something got the company into this spot, so something has to change. It's unlikely that THQ will have the financial resources to go on a buying spree any time soon, but that too could be fortunate. The bankruptcy may indeed force what's left of the company to focus on the little picture of game design and playability - a concentration that's been absent for too many years.

Rubin did note that anything can happen during a Chapter 11 filing, so they money isn't locked in just yet. But with no other buyers circling, Clearlake looks like a good bet to "win" control of THQ. And it might just be able to force THQ to turn things around.

2012 was a weirdly quiet year for gaming. With aging consoles, there was a predictable trend toward buying blockbuster titles and some expansion in digital sales.

Tablet gaming is still mostly Angry Birds, the big titles are incremental improvements - nothing earth-shattering. And E3 was pretty dull, too.

2013 promises to be more interesting. It will still be a transitional year for the industry, but those transitions will come faster and be a lot more obvious. Here's what to look for:

1. Sony Will Continue To Flounder

Nintendo's 3DS outsold the Playstation Vita 46-to-1 from November 5 to November 11. One more time: 46-to-1.There are plenty of reasons for that (the game catalog being the biggest), but the upshot is that Nintendo is crushing Sony in an already-brutal handheld market. Sony's PS3 lineup isn't doing much better, failing to generate any mojo in its later years.

The PS4 is still far, far away, and despite a predicted return to profitability, Sony as a whole is still in pretty rough shape. Beyond the usual franchise previews at E3 and some teasers about the PS4, don't expect to hear a lot from Sony next year. 2013 is about regrouping for one last big shot.

2. Free-to-Play (F2P) - And Some High-Profile Failures

The trend of Free-to-Play games is inevitable, but it's going to force developers to think – and build – differently. The frontloaded revenue of unit sales allows developers to go nuts in ways that Free-to-Play doesn't. That's fine for an indie shop building a small game and trying to make money on in-game sales, but the AAA publishers used to gorgeous cutscenes, pristine graphics and endless hours of linear content available at launch could find themselves in a bind. Creating Call of Duty isn't cheap.

It's guaranteed that someone will fail to learn from the Star Wars: The Old Republic flop (and that was with retail sales) and will overbuild a F2P ghost town.The good side is that, by the end of the year, we'll see a renewed focus on storytelling, with nonlinear narratives that encourage multiplayer cooperation and replay – the kinds of behavior that forgive corner-cutting elsewhere and ultimately lead to the in-game purchases the F2P model requires.

3. The Ouya Changes Everything, Even If It Fizzles

The Ouya, Kickstarter's darling, will launch on schedule, with a host of titles, a great price point and a ton of fan support. While the GameStop, in the short term.

4. The Resale Market Lives Another Year

Digital downloads are already having an effect on the market for used games, but with no new XBox or Playstation on the horizon, there will still be plenty of low-cost playthrough on existing systems. That means a lot of swapping through back catalogs and playing the games you missed the first time around. That's good news for a banged-up GameStop, in the short term at least.

5. Augmented Reality Takes Off

Back in 2009, ReadWrite readers already knew Augmented Reality would be a big deal. Sony's Wonderbook was an interesting (if limited) foray into AR gaming in 2012, but the real push will be on the mobile side. 2012's AR Defender 2 (trailer video below) was a cool new take on tower defense, but 2013 will be focused on getting us outdoors.

Plan to see a slew of location-based mobile games like Ingress that also add full AR via smartphone cameras. Primitive-but-cool combat and cooperative mechanics will show up, as well. Just don't step into traffic while you're playing, and look out for the cops. 

This month, the state of California sued Delta airlines in a very big way for failure to comply with the California Online Privacy Protection Act (CalOPPA). The suit alleges that the Fly Delta mobile app lacked a conspicuous, accurate privacy policy, and seeks up to $2,500 for each download. Delta quickly threw up a policy (though researchers have already found flaws in it), but the suit stands, and the potential damages are very real.

The really dumb thing is that this lawsuit never should have happened. Delta was given 30 days notice by the state of California, and it still couldn't make the deadline. There's no excuse for that. It's a privacy policy, made of words, not code. Delta - and any company in that position - should have had a policy up within a week.

So consider this your company's official notice. If you don't have a privacy policy for your mobile apps, write one today. Here are some tips to get started: 

Step 1: Review Your App

Get your app developers and your spec together and perform a 6-step review:

1. Document any collection of personally identifiable information (PII). PII can include but is not limited to:

• Name
• Terrestrial or Email Address
• Phone Number
• IP Address
• Current Location

2. Note whether any of the PII your apps collect (for example, a social security number) is more sensitive than others, and any special steps you take when collecting it.
3. Take special note of your target age range. If your apps knowingly collecting information from users under 13, consult your attorney before continuing.
4. List all the parties (such as ad networks and technology partners) who have access to PII and how it will be used.
5. List all user profile control options: can users request, view, edit or delete their information?
6. Outline data retention and disposal policies for all user data, paying particular attention to canceled accounts.

Step 2: Write Your Policy

With that in hand, it's time to write your policy. If you have an attorney on staff with the requisite experience, start there. If not, there are lots of free templates and tools like the Privacy Choice policy maker to get you started. Customize as you see fit. (There are also plenty of paid services that specialize in privacy policies.)

If you have a privacy policy for your website, you've already done most of the work. Your job now consists of identifying the ways in which your app is different from your website, then displaying your policy in a succinct manner that mobile customers will actually read. The Center For Democracy and Technology (CDT) has an excellent, free resource called Best Practices for Mobile Application Developers that will help smooth out the edges.

Step 3: Review Your Policy 

In all the prettying up, you may have misinterpreted some facts. Run the finished policy past your developers. Then compare your policy to those mandated by any of the app stores that will be distributing your app. The CDT document has some good summaries, but you'll want to check the most recent terms from the stores themselves.

Step 4: Get Certified (Optional)

If you really want peace of mind, take the next step and get your app certified by TrustE. It's not strictly necessary (Google doesn't even require a privacy policy – but California does, so write one!), but it provides users with an additional layer of confidence, and verifies that you've done your job right.

Having a mobile app privacy policy doesn't guarantee you won't get into trouble. But not having one is just asking for litigation.

Lead image courtesy of Shutterstock.

The ReadWrite DeathWatch is known for serving up plenty of doom, gloom and grumpiness. But for the Holiday Season, we're taking a slightly different tack - highlighting companies, technologies and perspectives that have managed to cheat death. That are surviving even after many observers wrote them off. 

Ed Robben's LinkedIn Profile page lists his title as "SVP & CIO, Fossil." The irony of that title isn't lost on the latest wave of doomsayers predicting the end of the CIO.

In January, retailer J. C. Penney named Kristen Blum its new CTO. At the same time, they let Robben – their CIO – go. The newly rebranded JCP was too small for two sheriffs, and the CTO was running the show.

Did that send a bigger message to the technology world? A message that the CIO - as we understood the role - was a dying breed?

Plenty of people seem to think so.

At a September event in Sydney, a Forrester Research analyst described the CIO position as "potentially under threat". A different analyst at the same event called out the emerging Chief Mobility Officer (not to be confused with a Chief Marketing Officer) as one of the primary usurpers. The logic behind that assertion, it seems, is that CIOs are traditionally PC-focused, while CMOs are gaining power with the rising tide of mobile devices in the enterprise. A report by Getronics claimed the real threat comes from increasingly tech-savvy CFOs.

It's like an episode of Spy vs. Spy with less exciting weapons.

Alphabet Soup

There's no shortage of theories about who's gunning for the CIO, but they all miss the point. Yes, the CIO's role is changing, but so is everyone else's. Marketing is buying software. CFOs are shifting from purchases to subscriptions. It's a wacky world out there, to be sure, but the CIO still has plenty to do - and a lot of value to bring to the party.

The biggest danger to the CIO is tying the position's definition to the devices, rather than the responsibilities. Once upon a time, the CIO kept the mainframes running and – in a very literal sense – "kept the lights on" in the datacenter. These days, many of those services are being pushed to the cloud. If you view the CIO as the person in charge of making sure someone reboots the servers on schedule, she's obsolete. If the CIO is the person who keeps mission-critical technology running smoothly at the best possible cost - while grabbing opportunities for innovation and competitive advantage, she's still an invaluable asset.

Businesses play fast and loose with C-level titles all the time, particularly when technology is involved. Before taking the CTO position at JCP, Kristen Blum held CIO titles at PepsiCo and Abercrombie & Fitch. And in her spare time? According to J.C. Penney, "She is a member of the National Retail Federation's CIO Council and a Governing Body Member of the CIO Summit, among other leadership roles in CIO-focused organizations."

CIO vs. CTO

So what's the difference, anyway? It depends on the organization. Traditionally, most businesses view the CIO as a cost center, charged with maintaining system reliability. While the CTO is seen as a potential revenue center, building new technologies.

In some companies (for example, software outfits), the delineation between the two jobs and the skill-sets required of them is fairly clear: IT versus product development. In other companies, much of the development may be internally focused, and internal and external systems may be intimately connected, blurring the lines.

In those cases, businesses may find a single chief executive managing technology can be more efficient. That's likely what happened at J. C. Penney. We'll probably see a lot more consolidation in 2013, but businesses could just as easily call their surviving executives CIOs and have the same outcome. After all, Kristen Bum is Kristen Blum, regardless of her title.

Chief Accountability Officer?

Whatever the letters, one thing that won't change is the CIO's most basic function. One man who's been both a CIO and CTO described it this way: "I don't care what you call me. I'm still the guy with his ass on the line when something breaks. Someone needs to take responsibility for whatever systems you're using, and it's sure as hell not going to be the Marketing guy."

That's exactly right. The CMO may become the new technology customer, but someone else needs to be responsible for oversight, integration, performance monitoring, compliance auditing and other technological evaluations – all functions that are squarely in the wheelhouse of the CIO.

The CIO function will continue to evolve, and we'll probably see a reduction in line-of-business CIOs as platform consolidation occurs, but the job isn't going anywhere.

To see more ReadWrite DeathWatches, check out the ReadWrite DeathWatch Series, which collects them all, the most recent first.

GPS-based Augmented Reality is great for a mobile game like Ingress, but it won't help you fix your car.

New software from PAR Works has a visual take on Augmented Reality, bringing the benefits of the concept to an entirely new class of applications. It might even work its way into gaming, too.

Current implementations of AR usually tie into your phone or tablet's location features (GPS, compass, etc.) to determine exactly what to show you. In some cases, like an interactive subway map, this is exactly what you need, but there are times when you want something more precise – or times when location doesn't matter at all.

Companies like Aurasma have brought some really interesting AR applications to 2D picture recognition, and they have the potential to transform marketing.

But we live in a 3D world. Imagine being able to tag 3D objects and have your overlays viewable from any angle. That's what PAR Works claims its Mobile Augmented Reality Solution (MARS) can do.

What MARS Does

The video above simulates an application an automaker might ship with its cars. Open the hood, start your camera and tap anywhere for support information. Turn the phone upside-down, lean in from the side, or take a shot from beneath the car, and it still works.

There are plenty of applications for this sort of technology, usually centered around large, fixed objects that could be viewed from multiple angles. Imagine a virtual tour for an installation like the Space Shuttle Endeavor that worked from any angle and any distance. Or a construction site that allowed workers to pull specific schematics with a click, regardless of whether they were two blocks away or inside the building.

How MARS Works

MARS' bread-and-butter is the way it translates 2D images to 3D point cloud models (the type you normally get when you put something through a 3D scanner).

Creating a MARS overlay goes like this:

1. Upload 20-30 2D images of a building, object or location, taken from different angles. 
2. In about 2-3 minutes, MARS renders that into a 3D model. This happens on the back end, and you never see the model.
3. Choose one or more of your 2D images and tag as many hot spots as you want with URLs or other data.
4. MARS applies those zones to its model, and the user can now view AR content from any angle.

MARS' Limitations - And Its Potential

For industrial and commercial uses, it's a great idea. For most consumer apps, including gaming, it's pretty limited on its own. In an online scavenger hunt, for example, seers could fake out the system by snapping a picture of a photograph. And if you wanted to create a MARS-enabled version of something like Ingress, good luck uploading 20 or more images for each of your thousands of portals.

Of course, the MARS system isn't designed to stand alone. Developers still have access to all of the phone's other functionality, so they could choose to combine location-based services with PAR Works' visual model. A scavenger hunt or a "sniper" game might require visual confirmation plus physical proximity within a viewing distance, allowing users to find creative ways of targeting a tough-to-find objective.

A tourist app might query your general location, then pull down all visual maps matching "Times Square" so you can search for restaurants by storefront. And for that Ingress-like game, you could always distribute the load, letting users upload photos and create their own hot zones.

MARS' Future?

MARS certainly won't be a cure-all for all developers' AR ills, but it looks like it might be a powerful tool. Until January 31, 2013, PAR Works is running a $25,000 developer contest, and it has some 250 coders in the program. It will be interesting to see where developers take the MARS platform.

Holding on to old data slows applications, increases storage costs and backup times, and dramatically increases the danger of attacks. A good data disposal policy can reclaim some of your budget and help you sleep better at night.

For the sake of argument, let's assume your company already has a data retention policy. If it doesn't, stop reading right now and make one. No one wants to be left in the lurch when auditors come calling or a client claims you didn't pay that invoice back in 2011.

But what about the other side? Is there such a thing as too much data?

Absolutely.

Why You Need To Do It

According to the Compliance, Governance and Oversight Council, nearly three quarters of all data stored in an organization has no current business use. If that seems like a lot, consider the forms that data might take. The biggest and scariest culprit is email, which often contains sensitive personal and client information, as well as multiple versions of files forwarded as attachments. Email is a horrible storage and versioning system, but it's one of the most popular.

Then there's the problem of department-specific data silos, which often hold redundant records that can be orphaned. Imagine your HR, Marketing and legal departments each keep separate copies of employee records. For compliances's sake (or, more likely, because you never got around to integrating your systems), those records are all stored in separate systems. If HR terminates an employee but the information doesn't sync, you've just created orphans in the other system that may last forever.

On the other hand, maybe you've done it right. Your records share a common repository and each department has properly permissioned views.

You still might be in trouble.

HR might need to retain certain data after a termination, but retaining other sensitive information might actually be illegal. If you're in a highly regulated industry, you're probably aware of these restrictions. If you're not, you may not know about them until there's a lawsuit after a breach.

Don't forget about the storage issue. Slashing your storage by 50% to 75% would save a lot of cash. The CGOC estimates a savings of up to $50 million in some enterprises. In some highly virtualized enterprises, storage costs can account for as much as 40% of the total IT budget. Plus, everything – from record searches to backups – will run faster.

If you're still not sold, Ben Rothke's 2009 article, Why information Must Be Destroyed, remains valid and convincing.

You're on board. Less data equals the less risk carried, faster systems, and more money.

How Do You Get Started?

Create A Policy

This might sound obvious, but the first step toward disposing your data is to create a data disposal policy. It should mirror and integrate with your data retention policy, as well as any other physical destruction (e.g., shredding) policies you follow. You don't want anything falling through the cracks.

Don't try to make decisions on your own. Each department should have input, and the final policy should pass through legal and compliance reviews before landing on the CEO's desk. Everyone needs to be on board.

Assume The Worst

Try to minimize the amount of effort required by employees. For example, autoarchiving emails past an age threshold will point out inappropriate use pretty quickly. One CTO of a mid-sized firm remarked that when his company moved from POP to IMAP and began archiving older emails, his sales department panicked. "They'd been storing customer data in emails and spreadsheets instead of using our CRM system. We were storing sensitive data without gaining any value, and our sales reps weren't doing their jobs." There will always be room for human error, but prevention will ease the cleanup burden after the fact.

Consider The Hardware

Different types of data require different disposal methods. Medical records or confidential design documents may require physical destruction of a disk or a magnetic degaussing. Old tweets and press releases probably need only a simple overwrite. If you're still storing a mix of data on the same physical disks, this might be a good time to change that.

The disposal methods you choose will be based on your industry, so your Legal department is the ultimate authority, but you can start your research with the NIST's Guidelines for Media Sanitization.

Get Service Guarantees

This is a problem even the largest enterprises sometimes face. Much of your data is in the hands of third parties, and more will be shifting that way soon. It may be their cloud, but it's your data.

Send your disposal plan to your service providers and get a guarantee that they'll abide by it. This may add costs to your contract, but failing to do so makes the policy pointless. If your provider already specializes in government or industry compliance, this should be an easy talk to have. If its not, consider shopping around for new services.

Remember: It's A Process

You won't be able to do everything at once. Some parts of the policy may require more review than others. Some systems may require redesign. Get the low-lying fruit first.

If you're starting from scratch, even the first steps are steps in the right direction.

All images except chart courtesy of Shutterstock. Chart courtesy of the Compliance, Governance and Oversight Council.

OptioLabs has just released OptioCore, a secure version of Android, to handset makers. It's pretty cool, but does it mean Android is ready for the enterprise?

From a security standpoint, Android has always been a case of untapped potential.

The Two Sides Of Android Security

On one hand, it's an open and popular operating system, which means it's a prime target for hackers. According to researchers from Georgia Tech, 2013 will be the year mobile malware gets serious, and Android is vulnerable. Google's App Verification Service, which is supposed to identify harmful applications upon instalation, is kind of a flop, and the majority of users don't install any third-party antivirus software.

On the other hand, Android's dominance and openness also creates a market for third parties to try to fix these problems, and that's just what Optio Labs, created by Allied Minds, claims to have done. The mobile device management and security firm has recently released a hardened version of Android that includes a bunch of baked-in security features – and not just malware detection.

The OptioCore OS and administrative tools (Optio MDM) will be distributed through a series of hardware partners and software integrators. But the company was unwilling to share specifics: "We are in collaboration with numerous established, multi-national OEMs, systems integrators and software companies on various strategic initiatives and commercial activities." We'll know soon enough, as devices using the new OS should be available in late 2013, and the PR push should begin even sooner.

Lots Of Security Features

So what does OptioCore do? Pretty much everything.

First, there's malware protection. The company claims to protect against "all known Android malware variants including Rage against the Cage and other root exploits."

Second, there's auditing down to the application level, which is good news for regulated businesses.

Third, based on policies that can be stored locally or in the cloud, admins can remotely administer or wipe phones, view devices that are out of compliance, and perform all of the other features that are common to Mobile Device Management (MDM) applications. It even allows users to store different profiles on a phone, so a work wipe won't affect personal files.

That's all great to have, but it can already be done with existing software. What really makes Optio's Android different is the system's ability to tie into location-based services.

Location, Location, Location

Admins can lock down phone behaviors through PhantomLink, a service that uses Bluetooth "beacons" to determine physical proximity. If you want to disable a phone's cameras or turn off texting in a product development meeting, you can. You can also require physical presence in a location to access documents or applications, ensuring that data can't slip out the door to your office, even if the devices accessing that data go home with your workers every night.

If you already have an MDM solution you like, OptioLabs isn't against using it, but the vendor will have to write its own hooks into OptioCore via an application programming interface (API). That means early adopters will probably be playing around with the bundled tools for at least a few months.

The OS is also open to further customization, particularly for vertical markets with specific needs that can't be met through the MDM console. According to Brian Dougherty, OptioLabs' Director of Engineering, "OptioCore can be augmented with additional procedures and controls to create custom, domain-specific flavors of OptioCore." Security reviews for these products would happen through a third party.

OptioCore isn't perfect – someone with physical access to the hardware could still root the phone – but being able to tie into physical spaces via PhantomLink should dramatically limit the risk of intentional or accidental data leakage. If it all works, it's a massive step toward making BYOD manageable, and since it's still Android, there's a good chance it will run on phones employees actually want to bring to work.

Image courtesy of Shutterstock.