Tag Archives: Goolgle

Create your own apps for free with open-source LiveCode 6.0

Application development may have once been the exclusive domain of professional programmers, but today a growing number of amateur-friendly development environments invite just about anyone with an app idea to bring it to life.

In the past few years we’ve seen the arrival of BuildAnApp and Google’s App Inventor for Android on the mobile side, for example. An even longer-standing contender, however, is RunRev’s cross-platform LiveCode, a recently renamed version of the HyperCard-inspired "Revolution" development system born in the early 2000s.

LiveCode has traditionally been available only as a paid development environment, but on Wednesday its maker rolled out the platform’s first-ever free, open source version. If you’ve got a mobile, desktop, or server app idea for your small business, the new LiveCode 6.0 could be the tool you’ve been waiting for to help make it happen.

Drag-and-drop functionality

LiveCode 6.0 is actually the result of a highly successful Kickstarter campaign to fund the open source version. Closed at the end of February, the campaign raised roughly $760,500, far surpassing its $539,000 goal.

Targeting iOS, Android, Mac, Windows, Linux, and server, the commercial version of LiveCode offers an intuitive graphical user interface with drag-and-drop functionality and a natural English-like programming language. Apps developed in LiveCode can be written once and quickly deployed on all popular mobile, desktop, and server platforms. Annual pricing is $500.

Now, however, RunRev is targeting educators, students, and business professionals with this first open source edition of the rapid application development platform.

‘The power of programming’

“With its drag-and-drop interface and easy-to-learn English-like language, LiveCode puts the power of programming in the hands of students, business professionals, and novice developers, regardless of their familiarity with programming,” RunRev explains.

For those who want a little extra help, LiveCode “academies” are also available with step-by-step videos and documentation, including sample apps and code. Two free eBooks on the topic can also be downloaded from RunRev’s site focusing on mobile apps and games.

LiveCode 6.0 is released under the GPL3 license, and the only requirement for users is that they make their apps open source as well, with the source code publicly available. If you decide you want to build a closed-source app, you can buy a LiveCode license at that point, RunRev says. You’ll also need the paid version if you want to upload your app to Apple’s App Store because of license incompatibilities, as RunRev’s product-selection chart points out.

Source: http://www.pcworld.com/article/2033881/create-your-own-apps-for-free-with-open-source-livecode-6-0.html

Did you like this? Share it:

IT Outsourcing 3.0?

I probably first heard the term Web 2.0 around 2005, and having come from a technical background where version/release/modification (VRM) was typically only used in the context of software version control, seeing it applied to something that was conceptual or at best used to describe common attributes of a set of “things” was new to me.

Equally there is a re-emerging trend now in the consumer markets to adopt this too – Windows 8, iPhone 5, iPad 3 …no sorry, the new iPad….ah , we seem to have stopped again now!

Where am I going with this? While on the Cloud Social Media Residency in Raleigh, N.C., earlier this year, I had what I thought was a eureka moment – cloud from my perspective is part of the evolution of IT outsourcing. If this is true, is cloud actually Outsourcing 3.0? Surely nobody has invented the term “Outsourcing 3.0”, let alone adopted it yet?

I’ve been working in IT outsourcing for IBM for almost 20 years now, and have watched it evolve. This is how I would describe simplistically the various “versions” of IT outsourcing at the infrastructure level (as opposed to application development) over the years:

image

I then set about doing doing some research; surely Google won’t have indexed the term “IT Outsourcing 3.0” , my blog will be the first….

Well, what do you know only 2 pages of results – not bad.

The first hit is about a lecture scheduled for “Agile 2012” in Dallas, Texas discussing Agile development in context of offshoring (Outsourcing 3.0: The Agile Way):

“Agile has impacted the way modern offshore service providers operate. The new modes of cooperation are emerging. Some people call it “clients’ owned teams”, the others prefer the name “virtual captive”. I like calling it “Outsourcing 3.0”.

Why 3.0? Because I see that offshore software development is entering a new era. Finally, the era of Agility.”

Based on this, the speaker’s definition and mine are not dissimilar if we apply to an infrastructure context. Cloud enables the same principles of agility – we quickly provision infrastructure to prototype ideas and demonstrate capability to the business.

The next series of hits didn’t yield much – the label “IT Outsourcing 3.0” has used, but the writers have not defined this – seems more of a marketing term in job advertisements.

The next hit was a blog entry – titled “The Hidden Question Behind Cloud Computing” from 2009, which I think seeks to debunk Cloud, but I’m not sure I really understood the message. However, it attracted a very interesting comment from my perspective, albeit in a singly negative context, as it was in tune with my definition:

“I will comment as a true “gray beard”. I think we should call “Cloud Computing” something like “IT Outsourcing 3.0″.

In the 1960′s we used to send work out to a 3rd party who would keypunch (remember 80 column punched cards), processes and return reports (remember greenbar). That was the 1960s “Cloud”. In the 1980′s and 90′s it was typically local key entry via a terminal over a dedication comm line to a system at the 3rd party’s facility with reports sent back via the comm line to our printer. Now we see similar processing models using the web instead of dedicated comm lines. I guess this is the third generation of outsourcing, or “IT Outsourcing 3.0″.

Sorry, I still see [it as] IT outsourcing. Been doing it for 50 years. Differences – yeh, a bit, but the biggest thing (other than speed) has been changing the Web Cloud for the Exhaust Cloud from the vehicle taking our 1960′s data to the processor and back to us.”

As I open up the search to “outsourcing 3.0 cloud”, I start getting many more relevant hits including one from IDC in 2011 “As the Cloud Metamorphose into Outsourcing 3.0, CIOs and their IT Departments will face a Major Shift in their Traditional Roles, says IDC “ , CIO again in 2011 “Beyond today’s Cloud to Outsourcing 3.0”

Reading through these hits, and many more, as expected there is no agreed definition, but the consensus appears to be that cloud is a disruption to outsourcing, and as such, part of its evolution – whether it’s labelled “Outsourcing 3.0” or something else.

Was I really surprised that I was not first? No, I shall have to starting thinking about v5.0 if I want to be ahead of the pack….

source: http://thoughtsoncloud.com/index.php/2012/08/it-outsourcing-3-0/

Did you like this? Share it:

Google Fiber Project: Programming Key to Success

Google has officially rolled out its long-touted Google Fiber Project showcasing what broadband should look and feel like to all users. Yes, it sets the new standard for broadband connections with a 1Gig speedster, over 100 times faster than current broadband offerings in the U.S. Not-withstanding, just speed will not be the determining success factor; the availability of competitive programming will become the deciding judgment in Google’s move to tout reasonable costs to bundled broadband.

Programming Rights Historically Elusive

Obtaining rights to mainstream content producers is the key to a Google Fiber success. Without the likes of HBO, The Discovery Channel and other must-have content for any TV package, the prospects dim for any competitor trying to enter the broadband-cable bundles which dominate the market. Time Warner Cable will be watching closely as Google moves forward to secure rights and compete head-to-head in Kansas City. Just broadband alone, using Netflix, YouTube and others to compete is not enough. Historically, incumbent service providers have been able to lock-down competitors in any semblance of affordable programming from top content producers.

"Fiber’s biggest problem is that it needs backing from the big players, says Marguerite Reardon at CNET. The Discovery Channel, CNBC, AMC, TNT, Comedy Central, ESPN, CNN, and HBO are all glaringly absent. And Google may have a hard time convincing the owners of those channels — like Disney (ESPN, HBO) and Time Warner (TNT) — to climb onboard." From (Can Google conquer Cable TV?)

Google needs economies of scale going forward. That means it must target additional cities for Google Fiber, and quickly, in demonstrating to programmers it has staying power to compete effectively. Otherwise, programmers will shy away from any substantial deal with a new entrant. This entails having deep pockets and a willingness to compete for the long-haul.

By-Passing Hardware Vendors

Google Fiber seems intent on holding costs down by combining its own research and hardware. Project engineers have taken research from related Google hardware molding new hardware into low-cost products. The devices include a cable box, and hand-held device all seem to come from Google resources, like Google TV, Nexus 7 Tablet. New devices created include a stackable storage and network box. All these components add up to a quick and nimble broadband and TV package available for $120.00 per month. Boxes for additional TV’s are separate from this package. Learning from those going before it, Google is forging a seemingly level-headed approach to combine resources in the venture, thereby keeping the $500 million price tag in check.

Potential Customers Must Show Interest

Kansas City’s potential customers must register online for the project by paying a $10.00 fee, and their neighbor’s must do the same to get in line for initial installation of Google Fiber. This pre-qualifying aspect is the marketing component which Google foresees as a must-have in moving forward with actual deployment. If the interest is not concentrated enough within neighborhoods, roll-out will be delayed until enough interests warrant the cost of installation. This could save tons of money on the front end with less truck-roll for individual installations.

Residents can either pay a $300.00 fee or sign up to an initial package like broadband and TV or just broadband to waive that fee. There will be a 2 year contract for packages. Signing up for free broadband is also available, but does not include the 1Gig version, only a standard speeds. Google is playing it smart, at least on the front end of their historic project, using milestones to move from one level to the next in roll out. If insufficient interest by neighborhood does not materialize, those neighborhoods will have to wait for the fastest broadband available.

Conclusion

While these factors; using in-house hardware, and qualifying potential customers will save money on the front-end, as stated, the determining factor will be competitive programming acquisition. It is worth watching to see how Google handles entrenched competitive forces with what many think is an innovative project at its best. But the Internet giant must not only navigate a competitive environment, it also must offer the best product on the market. That will ensure success over the long-haul, which means, pouring money into build-outs, programming, and marketing costs for a multi-year investment.

source:

http://www.circleid.com/posts/

0120805_google_fiber_project_programming_key_to_success/

Did you like this? Share it:

Android, Java, and the tech behind Oracle v. Google (FAQ)

The eyeless, mouthless Java mascot named Duke cartwheels across a T-shirt from a JavaOne conference.

Sun Microsystems’ years-long effort to profit from Java has come to this: the chief executives of two of tech’s most powerful companies, Oracle and Google, being grilled in court.

Scrapping over copyrights, patents, and licensing deals is an ignominious outcome for a technology that a decade and a half ago spooked Microsoft and seemed poised to inject dynamism into a largely static Web. Back when it debuted, Java was a brand that carried impressive power.

Though Java has been technologically influential, its brand clout with the average person has diminished as other software such as Apple’s iOS and cloud computing rose to prominence. So now probably is a good time to dig into some of the details on which Oracle’s case hinges.

What is Java?

Java — invented at Sun in the early 1990s and absorbed into Oracle with Oracle’s Sun acquisition in 2010 — is several things.

First, it’s a programming language — a carefully defined way of issuing instructions to get a computer to do something useful.

Second, Java comes with software called a virtual machine that runs programs written in Java. The Java virtual machine (JVM) looks to Java programs like a real computer, but it’s really a layer that hands off instructions to the lower-level operating system actually running on some computing hardware. By building JVMs tailored for a variety of computers, the same Java program can at least theoretically run on both a Mac and a Windows computer. Thus Java’s initial tagline: "write once, run anywhere."

Third, Java includes pre-written code called class libraries that does all manner of work — everything from cryptography to communicating using Bluetooth. A Java programmer wanting to tap into this prefab power does so through a carefully defined mechanism called an application programming interfaces, or API. A sizable collection of companies define these APIs for Java.

Collectively, these three components are collectively called a Java runtime environment, or JRE, and it’s what you need on your computer to run Java software. To be able to slap a Java logo on a particular device, it has to pass tests to ensure it runs Java programs correctly.

 

Happier times: Sun and Google were Java allies in 2005, when Sun's then-president Jonathan Schwartz, left, and CEO Scott McNealy, center, joined Google CEO Eric Schmidt to tout a partnership that ultimately fizzled.

 

Well, that sounds simple enough
Guess again. Java quickly gets more complicated than that.

There are different varieties for different uses. The initial Java Standard Edition was geared for personal computers. It was joined by the Enterprise Edition, which defined APIs for server tasks such as managing databases, and the Micro Edition, which defined APIs for mobile tasks such as sending text messages on a phone.

And it got even more complicated: the Micro Edition had different varieties: the Connected Limited Device Configuration, the Personal Profile Specification, the Mobile Information Device Profile, the Mobile Information Device Profile 2.0, and more.

The upshot was that programmers couldn’t necessarily predict what APIs a particular device would support. Would a phone allow accelerated 2D graphics through Java? How about 3D graphics? That’s important to know if you’re writing a game. The lack of consistency led to the mocking tagline of "write once, test everywhere."

A last gasp came in the form of JavaFX, which aimed to sweep away the muddle with a prepackaged software foundation from Oracle. But as it was arriving, another force attracted mobile programmer attention instead: Apple’s iOS.

Oracle argues that Android has fragmented Java, undermining its write-once, run-anywhere promise.

Read More:

http://news.cnet.com/8301-1001_3-57417144-92/android-java-and-the-tech-behind-oracle-v-google-faq/

Did you like this? Share it:

Oracle-Google case shows patent system flaws

The big news out of the Oracle versus Google showdown on Monday was that one of Oracle’s patents was brought back from the dead, put back into play after the U. S. Patent and Trademark Office reversed its earlier rejection.

But let’s be clear: One zombie patent isn’t the remarkable thing in this case. The remarkable thing is that, when the dust settles, five of the seven patents Oracle claimed that Google violated will likely be overturned because Google forced the patent office to take a second look.

Oracle filed the lawsuit in 2010, alleging Google infringed on patents and copyrights related to its Java programming language in developing the popular Android smart-phone software.

If only two of Oracle’s patents hold up on review, that means the patent office got it right less than 30 percent of the time, an average we have every reason to believe is representative of the entire sector’s patents. In fact, software patent holders lose nearly 90 percent of the time in litigation, Stanford law Professor Mark Lemley found in a research paper published last year.

Invalid claims

Yet these overwhelmingly invalid patent claims have had dramatic impacts on the industry. They’ve allowed an entire sector of patent trolls to emerge with the sole aim of strong-arming companies into forking over licensing fees. They’ve forced tech giants to drop billions on legal fees or defensive patent portfolios, money that might have gone into research and development.

"It’s approaching crisis levels," said James Bessen, a lecturer at Boston University School of Law and co-author of "Patent Failure." "In most industries, the patent system has become a disincentive to innovation."

Still, companies are left with little choice but to play the game and act as if all patents are legitimate. It’s so expensive and time consuming to challenge them in court or through the patent office that most companies simply acquiesce to licensing fee demands. Or they buy up patents of their own in hopes of discouraging claims through a sort of mutually assured legal destruction. You sue me, I’ll sue you.

Google is acquiring Motorola Mobility for $12.5 billion, a purchase largely geared to gain access to the company’s trove of mobile and wireless patents. Microsoft spent more than $1 billion to buy nearly 1,000 patents from AOL. And Facebook announced plans Monday to purchase about 650 of Microsoft’s newly acquired patents for $550 million. That’s likely to provide ammunition in its legal battle with Yahoo, which filed a patent suit in March; Facebook responded with a countersuit several weeks later. It’s one of dozens of patent cases now embroiling the online and mobile industries, as Apple, HTC, Kodak, Samsung, Motorola, LG and many others duke it out.

So how did we get here?

For starters, we have an overworked and underfunded patent office staff, said Gregory Aharonian, who performs research on behalf of companies challenging patent awards, in an earlier interview. Staff members routinely approve redundant, unoriginal or vaguely worded patents. They simply don’t have the resources and motivation that a company like Google can bring to bear in digging up "prior art," or examples of the technology that precede and thus invalidate the patents.

There’s a complicating factor when it comes to software patents. Since software – unlike, say, chemical compounds – can be described by different firms in completely different language, the only foolproof way for a company to ensure that it’s not bumping up against existing patents is to hire attorneys to examine every one.

Since there are hundreds of thousands of software patents, with 40,000 new ones approved every year, one firm could easily spend hundreds of thousands of dollars to perform patent research on just one piece of software, said researchers Timothy Lee and Christina Mulligan in a summary of their recent paper on the tech blog Ars Technica.

"It’s so difficult, in fact, that the vast majority of software developers don’t even try" to perform that patent research, they wrote.

Read More:

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2012/04/24/BUCM1O88OR.DTL&type=tech

Did you like this? Share it:

Goole Drive to be launched next Tuesday with 5 GB storage space

A press newly released press manuscript provided by a Google partner indicates the launching of Google drive next week.

The manuscript shows that Google will probably launch Google Drive nest Tuesday at http://drive.google.com . Unlike Dropbox, an online storage service provider that allows 2GB storage space for each user, Google will provied each user with 5 GB storage space for free.If that is not enough, users can also pay for more space. Dropbox users, however, also have easy access to more storage space, especially HTC users who can gain an additional 23GB storage space.

The manuscript also shows that Google Drive will run in the desktop folder of computers with both Mac and Windows system. This is a sign that its functional problem remains unsolved.

What we can be sure of is that Google Drive is expected to be released next week. According to professionals, given the operating mode of Apple, Google and other established companies alike, Google is most likely to launch this service next Tuesday, although Wednesday is its ususal updating day.

The professionals also claimed that for large companies like Google, it is not unusual to reveal some of the new characteristics of its products to its partners in advance. And if the company does provide such information, that means the partners are usually informed of the details, just like the information leak of Lucidchart last week. Therefore, the manuscript is quite credible.

Up till now, the functional details of Google Drive are still in the air. But it can be expected that it will be able to edit files within applications.

Did you like this? Share it:

Android ‘important but not critical’ to Google, says Page in Oracle trial

           image

Google headquarters in Mountain View, California. Chief executive Larry Page testified in the lawsuit brought by Oracle. Photograph: Paul Sakuma/AP

Google chief executive Larry Page spent nearly an hour in a federal courtroom Wednesday deflecting questions about his role in a copyright dispute over some of the technology in his company’s Android software for smartphones.

In one remarkable exchange, he said that Android is "important, but not critical" to the search giant. That is surprising given the efforts that Google has poured into the mobile software, and the $12.5bn that it has spent to buy Motorola Mobility, a handset maker with a raft of patents relating to mobile phones which could defend Android from rival mobile challengers such as Apple and Microsoft.

The taciturn Page often looked uncomfortable on the witness stand as he sparred with David Boies – a tenacious lawyer who made headlines for grilling former Microsoft chief executive Bill Gates in an antitrust lawsuit filed by the US government in 1990s.

Boies is back

In this trial, Boies is working for business software maker Oracle, which accused Google of building its Android software by stealing pieces of the technology from Java, a programming platform that Oracle now owns.

Page said Android was very important, but disputed the notion that it was critical. He then said that he would not be surprised if Google’s board was told that Android is critical to the company.

The Google co-founder, dressed in a gray suit and wearing a tie, said that the Internet search giant moved to create its own smartphone software seven years ago because the technology at the time made it difficult for consumers to use its online services on mobile phones.
"We’d been really frustrated in getting our technology out to people," Page said.

Oracle, which is based in Redwood Shores, California, is seeking hundreds of millions in damages and royalties for Google’s future use of Android, which powers more than 300m smartphones and tablet computers.

High stakes

In a measure of the trial’s high stakes, Oracle has already called two multibillionaire executives to the witness stand. Oracle’s own chief executive, Larry Ellison, 67, appeared Tuesday, as did Page, 39, for a brief round of questioning before his Wednesday return for more extensive interrogations.

Page looked like he wished he could have stayed in Google’s Mountain View headquarters on Wednesday. During his time on the stand, he rarely looked at Boies and frequently said he couldn’t remember seeing some of the internal Google documents that Oracle is using to build its case.

Page’s foggy memory seemed to exasperate Boies, perhaps because the haze may have worked to Google’s advantage.

Boies’ attempts to display exhibits containing inside information about Google were blocked by US District Judge William Alsup because Page said he couldn’t recall seeing them. Although it’s unclear what was in the exhibits, it was clear Google’s own lawyers didn’t want the contents to be exposed in a public courtroom.

Some of the evidence currently being kept under court seal is believed to include disclosures about how much money Google has made from Android since the software hit the market in 2008 – a financial nugget that Google has never revealed.

Although Google gives away the software to mobile device makers, Android brings in revenue from digital advertising and sales of mobile applications that run on the system.

Page said in a financial results call in October 2011 that Google’s mobile revenues were at an "annual run rate" of $2.5bn, but that includes revenues from Apple’s iPhone handsets – on which Goldman Sachs estimates Google has to repay 75% of revenues.

In his testimony, he said that Google would have preferred to have entered into a business partnership with Sun Microsystems, which developed Java and which Oracle acquired in 2010.

Such a partnership would have saved Google time in its efforts to bring its software to market, Page said, but the companies could not come to terms on an agreement. Instead, Google opted to use what he referred to as the "free part" of Java.

Google did nothing wrong, he insisted. "We were very careful about what information we used and what we did not use," Page said.

Android purchase

Boies spent much of his interrogation trying to prove Page and other Google executives realised that the company probably would have to pay a licensing fee to use elements of Java as far back as 2005. That’s when Page orchestrated the deal to buy the Silicon Valley startup that hatched Android and brought in Android founder Andy Rubin to oversee an effort to make Google’s online search engine, advertising and other services more accessible on mobile phones.

When shown emails from Rubin and others mentioning the need to license some of Java during 2005 and 2006, Page linked the references to Google’s attempts to build Android in a partnership with Sun Microsystems, Java’s owner at that time. Oracle entered the picture in 2010 when it bought Sun Microsystems for $7.3bn.

Page later elaborated on Google’s discussions with Sun, under more cordial questioning from one of his company’s lawyers. "We really wanted to use Sun’s technology," Page said. "It would have saved us a lot of time and trouble to use Sun’s technology. When we weren’t able to have our business partnership, we went down our own path."

Oracle’s case hinges on whether Android infringes on 37 copyrights for "application programming interfaces," or APIs, that provide the blueprints for making much of Java work effectively. Other major companies, including IBM Corp, have licensed some of Java’s APIs, but Google hasn’t one of the few things that Boies was able to get Page to confirm during his testimony Wednesday.

Google contends the Java APIs aren’t covered under US copyright law because they aren’t a form of creative expression.

Email trail

But various Google emails presented in the trial so far have included internal recommendations to work out a licence for some elements of Java. One August 2010 email from Google engineer Tim Lindholm to Rubin – sent just weeks before Oracle formally sued, but after it had threatened to – mentions being asked by Page and Google’s other co-founder, Sergey Brin, to review possible alternatives to Java. Lindholm advised Rubin all the other choices "suck" and urged him to negotiate a license for Java.

When Boies asked about Lindholm’s email in Wednesday, Page wouldn’t acknowledge telling Lindholm to look into the issue, let along knowing him. Page did point out that Lindholm’s email had misspelled Brin’s first name as "Sergei."

In an apparent attempt to cast Google’s stance on Java as hypocritical, Boies asked Page if his company copyrighted the APIs that run its services. "I am not sure," Page responded. "I think things are copyrighted by default, but I am not a lawyer."

Boies then asked Page if Google might use copyrights to prevent an outsider from improperly using its technology. "Google is a company based on intellectual property," Page said. "That’s one of the major intellectual property protections."

Page left the courtroom smiling, but still didn’t look completely relaxed. Maybe that’s because the judge told him that Oracle would probably call him back to testify before the trial is over.

source:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2012/apr/18/oracle-google-android-page-important

Did you like this? Share it:

Chief Scientist in Laboratory Cloud Computing of Yahoo Job-hopping to Microsoft

clip_image002

As reported, Raghu Ramakrishnan, the chief scientist in the field of laboratory search and cloud computing of Yahoo, has jumped ship to Microsoft. According to source, Raghu Ramakrishnan will work in the Microsoft SQL team.

Being working at Yahoo since 2006, Raghu Ramakrishnan played a key role in personalization technology development of Yahoo. He is one of the loss key researchers before Yahoo’s R&D department layoffs. It is not surprising about the loss of senior researchers in Yahoo. Recently, Prabhakar Raghavan, head of Yahoo laboratory, switched to Google.

Before joining Yahoo, Raghu Ramakrishnan is a professor of University of Wisconsin – Madison. His resume provided by Yahoo shows that he is the founder and CTO of Q & A community QUIQ.

Did you like this? Share it:

International Google TV apps show up in preparation of global expansion?

Google TV has taken some time taking off, one of the main reasons being that it is focused on the US market. The company has plans on rolling out its smart TV services internationally within 2012. The exact date is unknown, but those looking for any clues should take the new Google TV international apps as good news.

The Search Giant has just released a flurry of international apps to bring US residents closer to their home countries. The list includes Asian channel PPTV, Yupp TV, Raaga and Crunchyroll. As well as Al Jazeera app (Arabic), IslamBox and Euronews.

Those that feel like they are missing out on their country’s content can now head straight to the Google Play Store and download these TV applications. But if you are out of the US, you will still have to wait a bit.

These international applications could be a good sign that Google is set to release Google TV internationally soon. It has already been stated that this is a plan slated for 2012. Release dates and markets are not yet announced, but we can expect major markets like Asia and Europe to be included.

For now, let’s stay tuned for more details. We might hear some good news regarding this matter during Google I/O. And if you are in the US, go ahead and enjoy your new apps.

Source: http://phandroid.com/2012/03/18/international-google-tv-apps-show-up-in-preparation-of-global-expansion/

Did you like this? Share it:

Google Tops Search Engine Rankings in US: comScore

Continuing the winning run, Google Sites topped the U.S. search engine rankings for the month of July, a new comScore report said.

According to the comScore qSearch analysis of the U.S. search marketplace, Google Sites led the U.S. explicit core search market in July with 65.1 percent market share. Yahoo! Sites came in second with only 16.1 percent and Microsoft Sites were on third with 14.4 percent. Ask Network and AOL, Inc. rounded out the list with 2.9 percent and 1.5 percent respectively.

Out of the five, only Yahoo! Sites and AOL, Inc. saw increase in market share. Compared to June results, Yahoo! Sites’ market share was up 0.2 percent, while AOL, Inc.’s was up 0.1 percent. Google Sites’ market share was down 0.4 percent from 65.5 percent in June. Shares of both Microsoft Sites and Ask Network remained constant, according to the data released on Wednesday.

In July, over 17.1 billion explicit core searches were conducted, up 3 percent from the earlier month. With 11.2 billion searches (up 2 percent), Google Sites ranked first, while Yahoo! Sites got the second spot with 2.8 billion searches (up 4 percent). Next in the list is Microsoft Sites with 2.5 billion (up 3 percent), followed by Ask Network with 494 million searches (up 4 percent) and AOL, Inc. with 251 million (up 5 percent).

Source: http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/196241/20110811/google-tops-search-engine-rankings-in-us-comscore-study-report-research-qsearch-analysis-of-the-u-s.htm

Did you like this? Share it: