Apple and Samsung Slug it Out in the Smartphone Wars

No one else comes close as the two heavyweights for tech gadgets blow the field away with their latest figures. Apple reported its third-quarter iPhone 5 launch profits, but Samsung is way ahead in overall sales. 

Sales Apocalypse Incoming!

Next quarter, Apple will report its figures for the recently announced iPad 4, iPad mini, new iPods and new Macs. It threatens to be the biggest thing since The Beatles, which for some men in suits talking numbers is pretty scary.  This quarter, Apple merely reported the 5 million iPhone 5 sales and a few other bits and pieces (get the detailed numbers here). 

The company reported $36 billion in revenue, $8.2 billion in net profit, based on sales of 26.9 million iPhones, 14 million iPads, 4.9 million Macs and 5.3 million iPods. iPod sales were down almost 20% from this period last year but could well ping back up as the new models launch, Mac sales sneaked up 1%, but will all those new models may well go ballistic while iPad sales are up 25%.

That lot represents a record September quarter for Apple, and it is expecting $52 billion in the next quarter (and Apple usually underestimates these numbers)! Shareholders get a dividend of $2.65 per share. 

Enter Samsung's Powerhouse

Samsung, with its far wider product range (including the new mini Galaxy SIII) and the fact that it makes stuff for a lot of other companies (including Apple, as well as Google's new 10-inch tablet), manages to make Apple's figures look pretty small. The company sold 56.3 million smartphones, which accounts for over 31% of the global market, double Apple's 15% figure. However, Samsung's stock value is just a third of Apple's.

However, its financial figures are pretty comparable with net profit for the South Korean firm doubled to a record 6.6 trillion Korean Won, around $6 billion in 3Q, powered by smartphone sales and huge demand for its processors, display panels and use of its manufacturing base.

The figure isn't higher than Apple's as Samsung struggles with the lumbering HDTV market (although its large TV panel sales are back in profit), and making all these things is expensive, with continuous rising costs in Asia. There is no breakdown yet on how the Samsung Galaxy SIII is selling (Samsung say it has shipped 20 million). That will be the key point of comparison for many, and while Apple is expected to surge next quarter, Samsung is looking at reduced profits. 

Anyone Else?

The other smartphone makers are so far down the scale it seems rude to compare them. The analyst firms will produce their next comparisons in the coming weeks, but it doesn't look like good news for anyone outside the top two. 

On the tablet front, Amazon also reported its figures with a $274 million net loss, but only stated that the Kindle FIre HD (which it sells at a loss) was the No. 1 product across Amazon stores worldwide. With the product just hitting Europe and Japan expect it to continue to dominate in the run up to Christmas and the company to benefit from content sales.

Despite their legal battles, both must be pretty happy at the top of the pile, and it is hard to see how even almighty Windows Phone 8 and Surface or Lumia and Asha sales could propel Microsoft or Nokia anywhere close, that is a battle that will take years to win. 

 

 

Source : cmswire[dot]com

DARPA's Cybernetic Binoculars Tap Soldiers' Brains To Spot Threats

The U.S. Army and DARPA have concluded field tests on next-generation binocular replacements that read human brain signals and have a 91% threat detection success rate. They might just help you control your car with your thoughts too (seriously).

Binoculars on the battlefield are fine, as long as soldiers know what they're looking at. But when a target's not so clear or, say, a shop keeper with a broom could easily be mistaken for an insurgent with an RPG, the eyes--even the conscious, rational mind--might not be the best tool for threat spotting and quick reaction.

So a new system from military think tank DARPA is instead going straight to soldiers' brainwaves to spot real threats--from far away, or amid a crowded landscape.

The concept might sound familiar to science fiction readers: Augmenting human soldiers with brainwave-reading computers. The Cognitive Technology Threat Warning System (CT2WS) is a threat detection system for troops in the field that simultaneously scans warfighters' brainwaves while a camera surveys the area. The binocular replacement system detects a specific kind of brainwave (the P300, which is involved in stimulus evaluation and categorization), combines that info with a camera feed, and processes it all through an algorithm in near-real time to feed back an almost-instant threat assessment. (Think: every cyborg POV shot in every Terminator movie ever made.) Sounds pretty out there, but testing indicates 91% of enemy targets were identified in the field, compared with the 47% spotted by U.S. warfighters in action today who aren't using the new system.

The CT2WS project started in 2008, with the goal of developing next-generation portable visual threat detection devices for use in warzones. The University of California San Diego's bioengineering department and several California biotech and hardware firms partnered with DARPA to develop the brain-scanning enemy detection device.

As currently developed, CT2WS consists of three parts. There is a electroencephalogram (EEG) headset (below) worn by the user which records electrical activity in the brain and sends a ping to an outside computer system when the subconscious evaluates a visual threat.

Additionally, there is a separate 120 megapixel electro-optical video camera with a 120 degree field of view (below).

Lastly, both the camera and EEG unit are connected to a computer system that uses proprietary algorithms to identify potential targets and cue images for review. The software behind CT2WS can be run on a laptop as well, according to DARPA.

HRL Laboratories is a Malibu-based R&D house jointly owned by Boeing and General Motors which worked on CT2WS. One of HRL's specialties is developing cognitive-neural algorithms that allow computers to interpret human thoughts. According to HRL, the end result is far superior to conventional enemy-spotting technologies like binoculars. “CT2WS automatically scans a field of view more than ten times as wide as that is available using standard army binoculars. This is coupled with digital techniques that provide far higher resolution and greater effective visual distance than today's binoculars,” HRL's Deepak Khosla tells Fast Company.

In testing for desert, tropical, and open terrain, CT2WS was able to identify 91% of targets successfully. DARPA is also considering combining the system with a commercial radar--during field tests, the combination of CT2WS and a commercial system, the Cerberus Scout surveillance system, was able to identify 100% of the targets encountered.

The EEG sensor component of CT2WS was developed by San Diego's Quasar. Quasar used special wireless EEG sensors for the project that don't require the use of conductive gels and which don't cause skin abrasion. The lightweight EEG sensors and accompanying headset are small enough to wear under a bike helmet according to Quasar's Walid Soussou. The CT2WS headset is also designed for easy cleaning, and meets the blunt and ballistic impact safety requirements for a military helmet.

DARPA, for their part, is playing up the fact that human and machine can complement each other on the battlefield. Project literature claims that “humans are inherently adapt at detecting the unusual,” while algorithms are successful at detecting commonplace phenomena that are potential indicators of threats or targets--such as birds in flight or tree branches swaying. When the camera and sensor were tested, sensor and cognitive algorithms returned 810 false alarms per hour. However, once a testee began wearing an EEG cap and feeding in results, false alarms dropped to only five per hour.

Development of CT2WS is currently being transitioned from DARPA to the U.S. Army Night Vision and Electronic Sensors Directorate. According to HRL, the military is interested in CT2WS for situational awareness in reconnaissance, force protection surveillance, and standard infantry tactical fighting. The transfer of CT2WS technology to the U.S. Army indicates that the brain-wave reading binoculars have progressed past testing and into the sweet spot of Pentagon bureaucracy.

Of course, CT2WS also has civilian applications: According to Khosla, HRL (which, again, is partly owned by General Motors) believes that the EEG decoding and cognitive algorithms used by CT2WS can also be used for controlling buttons inside cars or breaking in sudden emergencies--all using, well, human thought.

For more stories like this, follow @fastcompany on Twitter. Find Neal Ungerleider, the author of this article, on Twitter and Google+.

Source : fastcompany[dot]com

Internet Marketing: 5 Ways to Spot an Internet Charlatan

As Web and digital marketing become hotter and hotter, more and more of our field will experience an influx of people who will claim to be “experts.” Here’s a list of how to spot an Internet charlatan — someone you should avoid, whether they are in a sales or creative position — if they say any of the following:

1. “THIS” Works

I begin with the bête noir of our lofty field — the idea that there is a magic bullet. There is no digital magic bullet, and there is no holder of a digital magic gun. Creating content that converts users to customers, tagging pages so they show up high in search results, developing code that loads quickly and designing user-friendly and graphically pleasing interfaces requires hard work, the combination and talent of many and an iterative approach.

If someone tells you that one service they sell will solve all your digital marketing challenges, they are (Drumroll!!! Lightning!!! Thunder!!!) an Internet Charlatan.

2. Links are the Only Things That Matter

This is my personal favorite and it drives me crazy, because it is partially true. Links are not the only aspect of your digital marketing that matter, but they are critically important to your search results, rankings and perceived quality of your content. However, we all know from Google Penguin and Panda updates that shoddy links are not going to get you anywhere fast.

Building an online reputation comes from building relationships. Links to and from other people’s blogs, social media, articles and comments are critical. Quality links arise from people who want to build relationships because of the quality and value of your content.

If someone tells you that links are the only things that matter, they are (Drumroll!!! Lightning!!! Thunder!!!) an Internet Charlatan.

3. We’ll Get You on the First Page of Google

It is sad that we still need to cover this, but as more people take an interest in spending money on digital marketing, more people will be fooled by this lie. The Internet is so competitive now (trust me — you think your customized baby straws are the only ones out there? Someone else in Texas (and China) is already making them.)

Being on the first page of Google is very important, as studies show that most people will click on one of those links. That should absolutely be your goal for the keywords that drive qualified leads to your website.

However, you should not believe anyone who tells you they can guarantee your results on the first page of Google. They cannot guarantee it, or they’re doing something illegal and trust me, Google will unleash some code with a name of a black and white animal whose name begins with a P and all your money, and potentially your hard work will roll right down the proverbial drain. Plus, Google may ban you, and then at that point, why are we still even having this conversation?

If someone tells you that they can get you on the first page of Google, they are (Drumroll!!! Lightning!!! Thunder!!!) an Internet Charlatan.

4. We can Definitely do That

Just today, with two different clients, I had conversations that appalled me. During one, a client informed me that a big consulting group told them they could implement a taxonomy during the contract negotiation phase and now, during the implementation phase they admit “they’ve never done one before.” Another client picked a designer who submitted a design that looks almost identical to their competitor’s website. (These are the days I hate consultants.)

When a company, or a consultant, or a design shop, or anyone, really, tells you they can do “that,” ask them for examples, samples and results.

 

Continue reading this article:

1 2 Next Page >

 

 

Source : cmswire[dot]com