Wednesday, June 29, 2005

TECH| ‘Survival Time’ must be increased!

The danger to an unprotected PC, connected to the Internet, has reached such a high degree that there's a new measure called 'Survival Time'; which is a benchmark to determine how dangerous virus and hack attacks have become.

Recently, the SANS Internet Storm Center, announced some good news. Apparently, the survival time has more than doubled since September 2004.

The ‘official’ reason is the adoption of Windows Service Pack 2, which provides a supposedly comprehensive security upgrade for Windows XP.

Experts though, also have a theory that the absence of a major virus scare, on the scale of the Sasser worm that hit in Spring 2004, has also helped.

In any case, the time gained in the 'survival time' measure is still not that large.

An unguarded Windows computer- without firewall and critical security patches- can expect to be hacked within little more than 40 minutes of going online. Imagine that!

The scale of attacks is potentially explosive, as infected PCs become 'bots', which means they can be remotely controlled by hackers and used to send viruses and Trojans to all addresses on that PC; or can be manipulated to distribute information and data across networks.

The criminal opportunities that Windows vulnerabilities, and hacker talents, have opened up are becoming a worldwide concern.

All new terms you hear like 'phishing', 'pharming', 'botting' and others refer to activities only possible on a network once it has been penetrated by hackers. Nowadays, there's so much more at stake than just data damage.

Data theft and manipulation, in an age when information is critical and computer networks rule the global transaction process, requires serious steps.
Governments and corporations have found that it’s not enough for them to protect their own networks. In a connected world, small businesses and home users must also play their part. Otherwise, threats will find their way into the networks of bigger organizations.

Now, more than ever before, computer users must take preventive measure. They must firewall and patch their systems.

They must constantly update their anti-virus software, and use anti-spyware to prevent Trojans from opening backdoors to their PCs and networks.

There are many sources on the web for all these products, some are freeware (the Microsoft patches, some anti-virus and anti-spyware), while some must be bought and are worth every penny. Norton Anti-Virus and Adaware ar among your best options in both fields.
Every one of us can make his/her tiny contribution to increasing overall survival time.

If you want your data to survive, you must take action. Find out how secure, or insecure, your PC actually is.
zeid@maktoob.com

Wednesday, June 22, 2005

TECH| Yes, the Intel-Macintosh!

When you think of the Apple Macintosh, the furthest thing from your mind is Intel. After all, it is the marriage of Intel microprocessors and Microsoft operating systems that power the PC market, which has eclipsed the Macintosh over the past couple of decades.

Today, the Macintosh accounts for less than 5 percent of the personal computer world, with even Linux having a bigger share, while Windows-based PCs gobble up around 90 percent of the market.

In fact, for Mac devotees, the words 'Intel' or 'Microsoft' create feelings of rage and criticism. One can only wonder how these devotees must have felt earlier this month when Steve Jobs, the King of the Apple Kingdom, announced his company would be switching Macintosh systems to Intel processors!

To begin with, the announcement spelled the end of a 15 year association between IBM, Apple and Motorola which was known as the 'PowerPC alliance’, by which Motorola designed PowerPC processors that would sit at the heart of Apple computers and some IBM PCs.

The idea was to challenge Intel's supremacy, and create a stronger alternative platform based on the Macintosh Operating System. The result has been, simply, the production of Macs with increasingly more powerful PowerPC processors, but without denting the domination of Intel-Windows PCs.

As Apple's view of the future of computing is one that is platform-independent, meaning that Windows-Linux-Macintosh computers will all be talking to one another and data exchange needs to be flawless, moving to an Intel architecture while still retaining the Mac OS backward compatibility seems like an ambitious, but very promising, goal.

But that's not the only reason. Intel's mobile processors, such as the Pentium M, outperform the PowerPC processors for notebooks in every department; mainly in power conservation and heat dissipation.

Macintosh PowerBook and iBook ranges will benefit from better power management and less over-heating.

The over-heating issue, in particular, looks crucial to Apple's latest miniature designs in the desktop range. The Mac Mini and iMac, both of which have all-in-one designs that are very compact.

But, what about compatibility issues? Typical of the new image of Apple, the company plans ahead impressively, developing and testing ideas or products, then announcing them.

Apparently, Apple has already rewritten its operating systems to run on Intel chips. Every Mac OS X release has an Intel-compatible version, developed alongside the PowerPC versions that are now on the shelves. Apple is also preparing software called Rosetta, which seems like an emulation utility, to run most existing Mac software on Intel-based Macs. Ensuring that developers are not left behind, Apple is providing Macintosh programmers with a development toolkit, called Xcode, to create bilingual, "universal binary" programs that run on either chip without alteration.

It seems like a well thought-out transformation. And one that opens up exciting possibilities for Macintosh owners. Maybe Mac-purists don’t like it now, but if it extends and expands the existence of their beloved Mac, they won't be complaining. They’ll be hailing their saviour, Jobs, again and again.

zeid@maktoob.com

Wednesday, June 15, 2005

MEDIA - Consumers change, channels change

It's clear to anyone that the future of information exchange is digital. What does that means to traditional media companies like newspapers, magazines and TV stations?

It means they must have aggressive digital channel strategies (Internet and mobile) or they will lose audiences to smaller more aware competitors.

The best example of this was the way Arabia.com, AlBawaba.com and PlanetArabia.com dominated the Arab news scene on the Internet five years ago. Al Jazeera was the top news source on satellite, but wasn't online. It seemed that Al Jazeera had forgotten the importance, and relative ease, of extending it brand credibility into another domain: the digital domain.

A few years after realizing this, Al Jazeera's site is now the top trafficked news site in the Arab World, as you would expect; inspite of not being spectacular. The design and user interface could be better. But they're probably working on that.

Now, they have to find ways to make money through this site, and other digital channels such as mobile phones; which explains why Al Jazeera Mobile launched last year with news and information alerts.

We, the consumers, are driving this shift as faster Internet connection become cheaper- home ADSL is now available in Jordan for as little as JD25 a month- and as young and Internet/mobile savvy consumers require content through digital channels.

For newspapers this new environment is an unparalleled challenge to the business model they've survived on for decades.

Local newspapers are now experiencing substantial growth in the number of unique visitors and registered users on their websites, and it seems there's a drop in copy sales among certain age groups.

Apparently, readers are shifting to the online edition. This means it is crucial for newspapers to find ways to generate revenue from their Internet edition.

So far, even in mature media markets like the USA and Europe, newspaper publishers have found it difficult to create considerable advertising sales on their website and even more difficult to sell content (access rights).

Regrettably, at the moment, the revenue is just not there. So, what are newspapers to do? On the one hand, they must pursue aggressive digital strategies for Internet and mobile content, to ensure they keep their readers, and on the other hand they're not making money through those digital channels. It's an unenviable situation.

AlGhad.jo, the website of a leading Jordanian daily, seems to have a 'registerd user' and 'paid premium benefits' strategy and is utilizing the site to sell subscriptions of the print edition. It's a start and these ideas are worth commending.

Simply, for us to get good news and content, we've got to contribute income to these news sources.

Think about that next time you visit your favourite newspaper or magazine site. Check out their paid services, maybe one of them is attractive enough for you to consider.

zeid@maktoob.com

Wednesday, June 08, 2005

‘Voice’ services are coming

In a recent interview with a local daily, Ms. Muna Nejem, head of the Telecommunications Regulatory Commission (TRC), discussed the losses incurred by illegal Internet telephony and estimated the amount to be 12 million Dinars.

The issue of Internet telephony and Voice over IP (VoIP) has always been a contentious one in Jordan.

For several years there has been an ongoing discussion of the business opportunities that Jordan could have utilized to establish call-centers to serve the region, and several multi-nationals have been reported to inquire and discuss such projects.

However, due to the laws governing voice services, very little happened. The law gave Jordan Telecom a monopoly on voice services up until 31 December, 2004. Now that the monopoly has ended, every company or entity planning to sell such services must apply for a license from the TRC.

It seems, however, that there are many violations of this procedure and maintaining control of the situation has been difficult.

Internet-based telephony services have side-stepped the regulation process. Peer-to-peer telecommunications services, such as Skype, are being used extensively all over the world and in Jordan, where the use of such services is increasing.

Due to issues of jurisdiction, it's difficult to regulate such use of international services based in the United States or elsewhere by individual consumers in homes and offices.

However any Internet cafes or 'call service centers' which provide this service to the Jordanian public and charge them for it per-hour or minute are in violation of the law and will be penalized.

A crackdown on these offenders requires a substantial amount of resources, but is possible. Obviously, there's a need for more awareness and better organization of the telecommunications sector with regard to voice services.

The TRC is doing its part, working as effectively as it can given the time required to eventually conquer these problems. For now, the focus seems to be on awarding voice service licenses as soon as possible.

Already, one company, Batelco Jordan, has received such a license and it is expected that two more companies will be awarded such licenses by August.

On another front, the TRC is working closely with data communications licensees (Internet ISPs and others) to lower the costs of their services to enable further Internet penetration in Jordan and to ensure that the roll-out of all services in a liberalized market environment is comprehensive.

These issues facing Jordan's telecommunications sector do not differ from the challenges faced by any country. In fact, telecommunication operators such as GSM licensees and ISPs have been operating in an open and competitive market for many years.

Fixed line and voice services are next. It should be interesting to see how the competition evolves in those categories, and to which degree local licensees will benefit as the international Internet-based services continue to grow and compete with them. It's all to the benefit of the local consumer, so stay tuned.

zeid@maktoob.com