Microsoft snatches human-powered network from Cisco in Skype acquisition

Microsoft's acquisition of Skype comes at a noteworthy time. Last week, amid the breaking news and coverage about the deal, another major technology story took a new turn. It was headlined by Cisco.

The company announced that it plans to continue its massive restructuring, shut down underperforming business units, and cut $1 billion in expenses by fiscal 2012. That also might include laying off up to 4,000 employees, potentially the biggest layoff in the company's history.

This comes on the heels of Cisco folding its Flip video camera business in April as part of its restructuring of its consumer unit. It's a change that holds new significance now that Microsoft has acquired Skype.

In my opinion, the Microsoft-Skype deal has moved the center of the human-powered network to Redmond. Microsoft has taken Cisco's position in the market in one fell $8.5 billion swoop.

Think about it. Microsoft has historically been the data and document titan. Skype adds voice and video to its offerings, and Lync will be the connector that brings it the enterprise. Taken together, Microsoft has created the human-powered network that Cisco never was.

Virtual environments in the classroom

Our core focus at ProtonMedia is to help life sciences companies create high-performance workplaces that allow their people to speed collaborative decision-making and knowledge transfer online.

But because at the end of the day our technology is built around 3-D virtual worlds, we're always interested in what's happening in the vw bubble. Virtual environments are not just for the enterprise, and avatars are not just for the movies. You can also find them in high schools and middle schools. But just like virtual environments for business, there's no playing games.

In Suffern, N.Y., for instance, 2,500 middle and high school students are learning math and foreign languages in a virtual world. Social studies students are experiencing what it was like to immigrate to the U.S. at the turn of the 20th century by creating a virtual Ellis Island and role playing.

The New York Times covered this story last week. It's an interesting article, and a few things struck me as I read it, namely:

1. Mainstream media continues to make ironic mention of PowerPoint. In this case, it's being used as a back-up for a school teacher's lecture because the Second Life platform had glitches!

2. Our kids are finding it boring to learn in the ways us grown-ups did with lectures and slides. This tells me that by the time our kids hit the workplace and are sitting in front of their PCs (if PCs even exist at the time), they're going to practically DEMAND to be using virtual environment applications. It's like what the Internet is to Gen Yers. They grew up on it, and they expect it at the workplace. The old ways of rolling out training and learning applications (Flash-based page turners) has got to change to accommodate this younger generation of future business workers and leaders.

3. Virtual environments can open a world of possibilities. If entire enterprises were using more tools like this Ellis Island simulation and more virtual 3-D workplaces like ProtoSphere, what would be the effects? If you're BP, for instance, would it perhaps make it easier and faster to come up with solutions for the Gulf oil spill or other huge environmental issues?

4. Video game was used three times. Game was used seven. Does the fact that the mainstream media still refers to these platforms as video games, aid to the stigma that already exists out there about these kinds of applications? I believe it does.

It will be interesting to see whether and how this school continues to use virtual environments as part of its curriculum. Will other schools catch on? Will virtual environments be as commonplace as computers in the classroom one day? What are your thoughts?

Google-Bump deal: Google gets it

Media are digging into why Google acquired Bump Technologies, and there's been a lot of speculation that the buy could help Google better compete with, or outdo, the functionality of the iPhone operating system.

In my opinion, it's a smart move. Google's interface could use a little "bump," er, excitement. More important, it's clear Google recognizes we've reached a tipping point where we have so much data that it is becoming easier to visualize it in 3-D.

Journalist Erika Morphy rang me up to discuss my reaction to the deal, and she featured my thoughts in articles on E-Commerce Times and MarketingVOX. She also explores other facets to Google's reasoning for acquiring Bump. Swing over to read her coverage and more of my thoughts on the deal.

Needed: a virtual assault on global warming

NO SMOKE-BLOWING: Virtual teaming is the new green energy

As I zipped between airports on my way to Research Triangle Park this week, burning jet fuel in an oxymoronic quest to tell the world about the benefits of working virtually, scenes of the massive oil spill unfolding in the gulf haunted me on every public TV I passed.

I think this event has the potential to be a wake-up call for us in the IT industry, start-up and established players alike.

We can't afford to wait for next-generation energy sources to be discovered, developed, and commercialized. That shift from fossil fuels to green energy will take a generation.

Meanwhile, we have to conserve energy and protect the planet now. And that means we have to establish the next-generation workplace now -- one that makes good use of virtual collaboration technologies to cut fuel-burning, emissions-belching travel. How much of our business travel is actually necessary? I dare say a small fraction of it, once a virtual workplace is factored into the equation.

We need to step up as a society, and show the world it's possible. We need to stop talking about the mobile, high-performance workforce, and start empowering it. And it's not just about flying. It's about driving and railroads, too.

We recently had one of our life sciences customers in the Mid-Atlantic area take stock of how much commuting was going on between their New Jersey and Pennsylvania campuses. It wasn't that far, as the crow flies. But multiply that by thousands of employees, thousands round trips per week, tens of thousands of hours of productivity lost, untold gallons to fill 'er up (along with however many tons of carbon emissions), and now we can say, "Houston, we have a problem."

Most industries are publicly committed to working virtually, whether they call it telecommuting, the mobile workforce, or virtual workplaces. In meetings with top brass at global companies, I hear time and again that "virtual teaming" is a key strategy of these organizations. But the frustration and disillusionment sets in when people attempt to spend a day on platforms such as WebEx, GoToMeeting, etc.

There are two fundamental problems that surface. First there's the notion of spending a day "on" WebEx (or what have you). Whenever you work virtually with a 2-D "flatland" meeting product, you are "on" something but not "in" anything. Second, there's the squishy use of the word "meeting" to describe these tools. In truth, they're not collaboration platforms. They're screen-sharing programs. Big difference.

Compare this conceptually to a 3-D workplace powered by ProtoSphere. The team members are invited "in" to their virtual office. It's a place (not a screen) where they can see their coworkers come and go, sit and talk, share ideas, work on documents and projects together, and collectively tap the businesses other IT assets. They can also work with data in 3-D, as visualizations, gaining perspectives and insights that are simply not available in 2-D.

That's not a sales pitch. It's a definition of the gating factors that dampen the adoption of virtual teaming, and a statement of the opportunity we have to overcome these gating factors -- and the opportunity to have a measurable impact on the environment -- by teaming in 3-D.

We can now work with anyone anywhere, without burning fossil fuels, and without losing our humanity in a 2-D flatland screen share. The time is right for bold business leaders to set the pace, and lead by example. We can empower a massive and highly productive remote workforce with a 3-D high-performance workplace like ProtoSphere. And doing so would have a measurable impact on the planet, not to mention the bottom line.

The art of being simplistic and the science of using the right tool to explain the impossible

My friend Sam Batterman, Business Intelligence Evangelist, Pharmaceutical/Life Science at Microsoft, offered to do a guest blog post on a topic that's near and dear to our heart: Keeping it simple.

Thanks, Sam, for putting this together. Read on to see what he has to say. Have a comment? Leave it for Sam below.

---

A few days ago, The New York Times ran a column in which the generals managing the war on terror condemned PowerPoint as a tool perhaps more dangerous than the insurgents killing service men. As a student of Business Intelligence, and a presenter for more than a decade, I have some opinions about this.

First, Microsoft is not blameless. PowerPoint is a huge part of the American and, indeed, the planet's business landscape. It isn't going away, no matter how many NASA officials and generals prohibit its use.

This is your brain on PowerPoint

Take a look at this image published in The New York Times yesterday. It's an actual PowerPoint slide created by the U.S. Army for Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal, the leader of American and NATO forces in Afghanistan. It shows the American military strategy in Afghanistan.

I'm no military leader, but even if I was, I still don't think I could make heads or tails of what the heck the strategy is based on that big blob of spaghetti on the screen. To call it overwhelming is an understatement.

But think about this for a moment: That PowerPoint image could also be your global supply chain. Or your network of TV broadcasters and correspondents. Or the flight patterns over Europe after the eruption of the Icelandic volcano. Or any one of a number of complex business systems.

This PowerPoint image doesn't work at any of those levels. Why? Because it's a 2-D depiction, and we don't think in 2-D. We think in 3-D. We work in 3-D. We live in 3-D. And it's time we start communicating and collaborating in 3-D.

Many of our business communication and collaboration models have been stuck in what I'll call "flatland" for generations. If you're sharing information with PowerPoint, that's flatland. If you're learning through an e-Learning course, that's flatland. If you're meeting using an online conferencing service, that's flatland.

These flat modes have no depth; they can't be used to solve complex multi-dimensional problems. The Pentagon is finding that out the hard way as it tries to map a very complicated problem -- our Afghan military strategy -- on a PowerPoint graphic.

This isn't isolated to the U.S. military. It's an issue we see in our businesses every day. We see it with pharmaceutical companies, for example, and their complex research and sales force processes. We see it with any data or process that is complex or difficult to understand.

3-D Internet: Present or future?

Did you hear the recent prediction from Sean Koehl, a technology evangelist at Intel? He said that the 3-D Internet will arrive in five to 10 years. Sharon Gaudin covered it on ComputerWorld the other week.

She quoted Sean: "'The Internet may never go fully 3-D, but making 3-D environments broadly accessible is probably capable within five years.'"

I don't want to disagree with Sean, but from where I sit, the 3-D Internet is here today. As I said in my comment on the article, companies -- like ProtonMedia -- have been helping organizations do business in 3-D over the Internet for several years.

We've been helping companies transform their businesses into high-performance workplaces and accelerate collaborative decision-making using technologies including Internet protocols and VoIP.

I think if you take a look at our case studies, you'd agree. These aren't futuristic fantasies. They are real-world business cases that show the 3-D Internet isn't five years off. It's here and now.

Tandberg's desktop video conferencing tool: Once telepresence, always telepresence

CAMERA READY? Many enterprise users say no

I don't really have an axe to grind with Tandberg. But it just seems every time I see news about Tandberg and the way it sells video, my alarm bells go off.

So with apologies and all due respect to the good folks at Tandberg, I really need to respond to their recent announcement.

The company released desktop telepresence solution, EX90 the other week. I have two main thoughts on it.

First off, it might be a step in the right direction as far as enterprise collaboration goes. Any tool that reduces costs and increases efficiency can be advantageous for enterprise users.

But it still doesn't solve the broad distribution and enterprise penetration issue surrounding telepresence. At the risk of being repetitive, there are a lot of reasons I don't see all employees in an organization using video every time they want to collaborate. Rather than rehash all my viewpoints, I'll refer you back to some of my previous posts on telepresence.

This also brings to mind an article written by Kishore S. Swaminathan, Chief Scientist at Accenture. He penned a piece for the company's Outlook journal last month, saying, "Now, a new medium, the videoconference, is rapidly emerging as an important way for executives to communicate with their employees, upper management and customers. By understanding the medium and mastering its dynamics, you can significantly improve your effectiveness as an executive."

Cisco's pipe dream: mainstream enterprise adoption of telepresence

I've written before about why Cisco's push to bring video to the desktop won't achieve critical mass in the enterprise. While telepresence might be justified as an investment for large conference rooms in global enterprises, it fails to address major cost and complexity problems and human factors issues that have historically prevented large-scale video deployments from achieving mainstream adoption.

Joel Stein reminded me of this in a recent Time Magazine article he wrote. He covered problems surrounding Skype and video presence, saying, " ... Skype breaks the century-old social contract of the phone: We pay close attention while we're talking and zone out while you are."

That's just one of several funny, yet compelling comments Stein makes in a great op-ed column that, I think, is a must read for anyone interested in the human factors that drive communication and collaboration.

You can easily say the same of Cisco's WebEx, Microsoft's Live Meeting, and other screen- and app-share tools. How many times have you been on a WebEx or similar conference and put the phone on mute, checked e-mail, surfed the Web, took a mobile phone call, or walked away from your desk?

The fact of the matter is, we don't want to do video all the time. Cisco's pursuing a pipe dream, just like AT&T before them. The first video phones were shown at the 1964 New York World's Fair. They're still not mainstream. And they never will be.

SAIC's acquisition of Forterra: latest step in industry consolidation

You probably heard the news that Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC) bought Forterra Systems, maker of the OLIVE virtual world. We shared our thoughts on Forterra's unfortunate demise back in December, when rumors were swirling about the company shedding 60 percent of its workforce.

Now it's official. Forterra is no more. My take is this was probably in a fire sale, since terms of the purchase were not disclosed. It's likely SAIC was attracted to Forterra's government simulation business, which is where the company was strongest.

The acquisition might also have been mission critical to some government contract SAIC was running to purchase the technology. (i.e., Some government organization with a mission critical commitment to Forterra technology got weak knees when they realized the company was caving.)

Twelve Forterra staffers joined SAIC. I interpret this to mean they'll continue some development focused around government projects/simulations. If they were merely after the core technology, they wouldn't have needed twelve bodies.

Ultimately, this deal is in line with my conviction that the virtual worlds market will consolidate along four lines:

• Collaboration products and services for business
• Training and learning services for education
• Simulation products and services for government
• Consumer entertainment and gaming products

Where do we fall? In general, bullet No. 1: collaboration products and services for business. As is pretty clear from what we write about here on our blog, we're focusing on addressing the primary pain points our customers are expressing to us. Those largely surround business applications such as global scientific research, data visualization and workflow collaborations within product development, marketing, sales, and overall business process optimization.

Just a thank you to InformationWeek and ReadWriteWeb

Just wanted to thank Mitch Wagner of InformationWeek and Alex Williams of ReadWriteWeb for including ProtonMedia in their coverage of the Second Life Enterprise announcement. You can click over to read Mitch's take and Alex's take on the news.

Shout out to InfoWorld

Thanks to InfoWorld for picking up the Q&A interview I did with The Industry Standard!

Verizon and Cisco miss the mark on advanced collaboration tools

InformationWeek covered a recent study commissioned by Verizon and Cisco (carried out by Frost and Sullivan) that focused on the use and value of "advanced collaboration tools." I wrote my thoughts in a comment on the article, but also wanted to share them here.

Quite honestly, I think that Cisco and Verizon (companies I respect greatly, don't get me wrong) are really pushing the envelope in calling VoIP, instant messaging, and high-definition video meetings "advanced collaboration tools." These are commodity technologies that exist all over the country.

The study should really include a look at truly advanced collaboration technologies, a.k.a., 3-D immersive collaborative worlds. Tools like ProtoSphere have to be considered in this discussion, especially considering that it integrates all of these "advanced functions" into a single, engaging interface.

I have an admitted bias because my company provides this technology, but I'm not the only talking about the power and benefits 3-D immersive worlds can provide. We're doing our own research that shows real business metrics and results from using 3-D immersive environments. The early adopters have not been small players either, but rather, large enterprises in entrenched industries like pharma and energy.

It's an interesting study that gets to the core value of collaboration technology -- ROI -- but it is not inclusive enough to paint an accurate picture for enterprises.

Nokia's interest in virtual worlds driven by consumer demand?

You might have heard that Nokia is looking to invest in gaming and virtual worlds, among a couple other verticals. More details are covered in the Digits blog on WSJ. I found the news interesting. And not because virtual worlds are not essential to unified communications -- they are. Like I wrote in my comment on the article, while Nokia is clearly interested in the wireless/mobile aspects of virtual worlds, I suspect that their interest may be more consumer driven. From our standpoint, virtual worlds provide the most value at the enterprise level, helping businesses with their collaboration problems.

Telepresence and live video: From intrusion to invaluable

In my last post reacting to the Cisco-Tandberg deal, I promised to explain why Cisco's push to bring video to the desktop won't break out of the enterprise's largest conference rooms.

Here are several reasons why, all of which arise from the human factors of virtual collaboration.

Modern teleworkers don't always dress for success. I'm writing this post, taking calls, and "collaborating virtually" at a time of day when my mind is sharp, but my appearance might not be. Maybe I worked until the wee hours of the morning, caught some sleep, and am now back at it. I might look tired. I might need a shave. I might not be wearing a tie. I might be grabbing breakfast at my desk.

I certainly don't want to be on a video conference right now. Of course, if I knew there was a board meeting, I'd be prepared, and telepresence or other live video would be fine with me. But collaboration mostly happens without an appointment, without a formal meeting, often without advance preparation, at all hours of the day and night.

The last thing most workers want is to have the red light go on when they least expect it, or when they don't believe they are as presentable, appearance wise, as they want to or should be. Human factors 1, telepresence 0.

Cisco's Tandberg deal: Big ambitions, big challenges for telepresence

So last week Cisco (NASDAQ: CSCO) announced a definitive agreement to acquire all outstanding shares of Tandberg (OSLO: TAA.OL) for $3.0 billion in cash (that would be 153.5 Norwegian Kroner per share).

Company officials positioned Cisco's motivation for the deal as helping Cisco "expand its collaboration portfolio" so the company could "offer more solutions to a greater number of customers," and accelerate market adoption.

Let me scrub the public relations spin off of that, translate into plain English, and reveal Cisco's real motivation for this pretty sizable acquisition. Cisco has a problem. Their big push to bring video conferencing to the enterprise hasn't been able to break out of the largest conference rooms within an organization.