SNS: EINSTEIN'S BIGGEST MISTAKE (Resonance Series)

 

SUBSCRIBER EDITION

 

 

STRATEGIC NEWS SERVICE

 

"Next Year's News This Week"

 

 

 

The most accurate predictive letter in computing and telecommunications

Read by industry leaders worldwide

 

 

 

This June 17th, 2003 Issue:

 

***SNS*** EINSTEIN'S BIGGEST MISTAKE

 

 

 

 

Provided by: Technology Alliance Partners

On the Web: https://www.stratnews.com

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

TO SUBSCRIBE, EMAIL SNS@TAPSNS.COM WITH THE WORD "SUBSCRIBE" IN YOUR MESSAGE; YOU WILL BE BILLED LATER (see the end of this newsletter for details).

 

RE-SENDING OF THIS NEWSLETTER TO ANY NUMBER OF COLLEAGUES IS ENCOURAGED ON A ONCE-PER-USER BASIS, PROVIDED YOU ALSO CC: SNS@TAPSNS.COM; IN RETURN, WE WILL PROVIDE RECIPIENTS WITH A ONE-MONTH FREE TRIAL SUBSCRIPTION.

ANY OTHER UNAUTHORIZED REDISTRIBUTION IS A VIOLATION OF COPYRIGHT LAW.

 

This June 17th, 2003 Issue:

***SNS***  Einstein's Biggest Mistake



IN THIS ISSUE:

Some Quick Background

Some Focused Background

Not Needing The Ether

Maxwell's Revenge: Quantum Mechanics

Post 1930: A Dry Hole

How To Go Back And Start Again


   Insites
   Upgrades and Ethermail

Cellphone Sales

Online Ad Sales: The Call You Want

Growth In Wireless Broadband

Using WiFi For Homeland Security

Chaos Theory

Asking Questions At MLB

The Other CANDU

The U.S. vs. Europe and Asia: PCs vs. Phones

Two Screens

Asking The Right Questions

George Carlo On the Discovery Channel


   How to Subscribe, Including Corporate Volume Licenses
  






 


Einstein's Biggest Mistake

There are a lot of different ways to tell this story, but in the end, it is the story itself, or the scientific and historical truths behind it, which really matters. The rest is just human interest.

 

It occurred to me that I could tell it from the perspective of working for a year with Professor Emeritus of Physics William Bender at Western Washington University on a program for unifying all of the major force laws into a single mathematics, while listening to his thoughts on how to unify Relativity physics with Quantum Mechanics.

 

For those not directly interested in physics, this unification was Einstein's primary interest for the second half of his life. Or perhaps I should state this a bit more carefully: Einstein was never content with the apparently acausal, probabilistic nature of quantum theory, and worked to extend the causal mathematics of relativity to explain this other half of physics.

 

It also occurred to me to tell this story from the perspective of a modern, top-flight science department, since even modern physics groups have their problems. I can do this, really, in a couple of sentences. After I spent about a year talking with Nobelists and other advanced theoreticians around the world about a new theory of physics, the Dean of Physics at the University of Washington offered to introduce me to one of his top graduate students, which he did. I explained that I thought I might have found a path for explaining both quantum mechanics and relativity theory using a single model, which I called Resonance.

 

"We solved that already," he told me. This was in about 1980. I have no doubt that my jaw literally dropped open. He maintained that this had all been resolved years ago, no help needed now.

 

Today, it has yet to be resolved. I just don't know what he was thinking. I've since learned that there are a lot of folks like him in the physics business.

 

But my favorite way of opening this story comes from my visit, last winter, to the just-opened Einstein exhibit at the American Museum of Natural History. The exhibit was so popular that you had to buy scheduled tickets, and even then, it was very crowded. Trained docents, not obvious physics mavens, tried to walk the public through the basics of Special and General Relativity; they did a pretty good job.

 

So it was that I found myself standing before a large exhibit, which showed the curving of spacetime, accompanied by a docent and an older woman. "This was Einstein's greatest mistake," I told the woman. The docent looked terrified: obviously, in her young world, the Master didn't make mistakes. But the woman was interested, so I explained it to her in a few sentences, and she walked off, seemingly satisfied.

 

 

As crazy as it sounds, it is possible that that woman and I are the only two people who have a clear understanding of Einstein's Biggest Mistake (and, perhaps, his only one). For that reason, and because this remains one of the real roadblocks in physical theory, and because so many professionals still don't see the problem, I thought I'd share the answer with you. Perhaps, in this way, this little idea will lead to something big, in the hands of someone in physics. After all, we generally like scientific revolutions, and the technology opportunities that follow them.

 

It sounds audacious to say that Einstein made a mistake, doesn't it? But he, like the rest of us, was only human, and, almost predictably, he made the mistake of his career in an area invested with plenty of emotion.

 

At the time Einstein began the thinking that would lead to Special Relativity Theory, the scientific establishment was torn by arguments over whether there was, or was not, some kind of "ether," a physical substance filling space, which would be dragged along with the Earth as it flew through space, and which had various physical properties which would allow the passage of light.

 

Maxwell had explained how electromagnetic waves could propagate through space, in an incredible mathematical feat that unified the speed of light and the electric and magnetic properties of space itself.

 

Lorentz had produced the basic mathematics, in the form of his Contractions, which would become the mathematical spine of the Special Theory, which showed how time seemed to dilate, and distances contract, vs. C, the constant speed of light.

 

Then Michelson and Morley came along and proved that light traveled at the same speed regardless of path orientation, proving that the ether could not have been the "drag along" stuff everyone had been arguing about.

 

It was at that point that Einstein stepped in and wiped out the idea of the Ether.

 

Showing that he could achieve the same Lorentz contractions without using an Ether, he proclaimed that, since the Ether was not necessary, he would never mention it again. I should note that this was considered, at the time, to be a masterstroke of scientific genius.

 

Keep in mind, almost all of Einstein's work was based on light and how it behaves.

 

By talking thereafter only of spacetime, a new flexible four-dimensional combination of space and time, he could indeed move forward almost effortlessly in his examination of mass, energy, motion and gravitation.

 

 

 

But what about Maxwell, and the world of electric and magnetic charges and fields?

 

You are starting to see it.

 

It turned out that, indeed, empty space has electrical and magnetic properties properties that are not connected with spacetime contractions in any obvious way. You can't arbitrarily dismiss the Ether, after all.

 

In fact, so-called "empty space" becomes the source of all of the symmetries and physical characteristics which underlie physical law. There are, today, quantum physicists who have even derived the laws of conservation of momentum and energy from the properties of empty space.

 

Oops.

 

These things are obvious to those who study Quantum Electro Dynamics, or Quantum Chromo Dynamics, but they were not obvious at the time, and they were not particularly well-suited, as problems, to Einstein, who had inadvertently chosen a study program which focused upon mass effects, to the near-total exclusion of charge effects.

 

Einstein's inability to see that there was indeed a real space, with real physical properties, in place of the Ether he so casually (and happily) discarded, led him to decades of increasingly frustrated, and not useful, work.

 

Can we ask, what would have happened if he had understood this flaw of logic, and gone back to redefine the Ether, instead of kill it off? I don't think so. Certainly, he was aware of the Maxwell Equations, without feeling this need.

 

I believe that I am not alone in feeling a great disappointment in the progress of physics since Einstein's time. In my opinion, we have never had a scientist more intuitively capable of understanding physical law than Einstein; and few would argue that our productivity in the discovery of physical laws has slowed to a crawl since he, and a handful of other brilliant scientists, laid out the universe as we understand it today.

 

That work ended in the 1920's and 30's. True, Richard Feynman (and Julian Schwinger, and Tomonaga, and Freeman Dyson and others) came along and used his genius in mathematics to simplify the QED; but this was a lesser triumph, if not also a much more practical one.

 

In fact, I would suggest that Einstein's Biggest Mistake was not just his own, but was shared by the whole physics program, worldwide, which has yet to properly integrate these two great theories, and which will continue to fail to do so until they revisit this first logical stumble.

 

A successful program will describe not just how light passes through a curved spacetime, nor the


 

 

likelihood that wave collapse will lead to a particular observation, but to a description of how the physical properties and inherent geometry of empty space lead to physical law; and how light, made of charges and their effects, emerges from empty space, which we will no longer refer to as the Ether.

 

Perhaps it will happen in our lifetimes. If I didn't think it was possible, I wouldn't have taken your time today in discussing it.



Your comments are always welcome. 


Sincerely,

Mark R. Anderson

President
Strategic News Service  LLC              Tel. 360-378-3431
P.O. Box 1969                                   Fax. 360-378-7041
Friday Harbor, WA  98250  USA        Email: sns@tapsns.com


-------------------------------------------

INSITES

   SNS readers interested in additional predictions and information can turn their browsers to:

      The SNS website, at https://www.stratnews.com.


SNS Members' Corner, at

https://www.stratnews.com/subscriber_corner.shtml

SNS Members' Gallery Spotlight Page:

https://www.stratnews.com/spotlight.shtml


      The Orca Relief Citizens' Alliance, a 501(c)(3) non-profit effort to study and reduce Orca mortality rates, supported largely by technology workers.  Please visit our new website, at https://www.orcarelief.org, for more information.  Contributions may be sent to: ORCA, Box 1969, Friday Harbor, Washington, 98250.


      The Hybrid Vigor Institute, at https://hybridvigor.org
focused upon providing tools and environments leading to great new discoveries in interdisciplinary science.


A profile on Mark this week in the Puget Sound Business Journal:

https://www.bizjournals.com/seattle/stories/2003/06/16/focus2.html

 


New to the Family:

 

I would like to welcome, among others, these new members to the SNS Family: (returning) Casey Higgins, Student, Golden Gate University, San Francisco, CA; Adolfo Maichel, Manager, Phone1, Miami, FL; Stan Skelton, Director, Strategic Planning, LSI Logic Storage Systems, Wichita, Kansas; Jan Beyer-Olsen, Export Sales Manager, Polyform US, Kent, WA; and many others.



Quotes of the Week:


[Oracle CFO Jeff Henley] "was particularly combative in his comments regarding PSFT [PeopleSoft], against which he believes Oracle is gaining traction." an analysts' note from Rick Sherlund, Heather Leonard, Christopher Sailer, and John Collier, of Goldman Sachs, released April 30th.

 

Now that's interesting, given Oracle's bid for PSFT. I think the bid will fail.

 

 

"Our process allows us to use the tiny carbon nanotubes to replace copper to interconnect network layers on silicon chips. We think this new process may well help to sustain Moore's Law." Meyya Meyyappan, director of the Center for Nanotechnology, NASA's Ames Research Center; on discovering a new manufacturing process for integrating nanotubes and silicon.

 

 

"Datacasting is one of those best-kept secrets in the U.S." Jay Trager, COO, National Datacast, on CNet.

 

 

"I do think you have to look at the long-term fundamentals. There is a real economic need for education standards. The political will is there, this is primarily an economic issue." Reed Elsevier CEO Crispin Davis, in the FT.

 


UPGRADES

Cellphone Sales

 

Every now and again, one has to take a stand. This can be particularly nerve-rattling when others for whom you have great respect are appearing to lean the other way on an issue that matters. All of these qualifiers were true this week, as Nokia came out with a minor downgrade in their April June handset projections, putting the final expected figures closer to the bottom of their 4 12% range.

 

Nokia blamed SARS, and the U.S. and Euro economic weakness, all of which is hard to argue about. Except: only 10% of Nokia gross handset sales come from China, and the company estimates that 60% of sales this year will be replacement sales.

 

Although I don't know anyone who I trust more than Nokia for estimates, I've gone against them before and won, and I'm placing a similar bet now. I think that Nokia is right about the strength of new sales coming out of emerging markets, but is wrong about the sales of new color / camera phones in the replacement markets. Further, I think the SARS virus, unless we have further outbreaks, is over as a business cause/excuse.

 

A look at orders coming through Taiwan foundries tends to confirm very strong orders for cellphones, both at TSMC and UMC.

 

Motorola has been whining about SARS handset sale effects, but I think they are going to discover that part of these problems were competition from Samsung and others, perhaps including Nokia itself, which is claiming a 3 point percentage share jump to 38% last quarter.

 

So: instead of a reduction, I am going to continue to suggest that we will have an unexpectedly strong year in handset sales, probably up 15-20% in units, and perhaps 10% more in dollars, as the average selling price grows.

 

 

Online Ad Sales: The Call You Want

 

For the past year I have been suggesting that the real benefit of increased bandwidth to individuals (primarily homes) would be an increase in online ad sales, with a concomitant increase in companies again able to depend upon ads for their own sales, thereby boosting service companies who make a cut running others' ads (such as Yahoo! and AOL).

 

That process now seems to be under way.

 

I think most SNSers first heard about the online ad slump in these pages, during Q3 of 2000: technically, Q4 of that year began a two-year slump that just ended, with revised figures in from the Interactive Advertising Bureau. The new numbers, for Q4 2002, showed ad revenues of $1.58B, up 8.9% QTQ for the first QTQ jump in two years; even so, revenues were down 3.7% YTY and 26% off Q4 2000.

 

I expect to see both QTQ and YTY increases going forward, representing the end of the Dot crash carnage (old customers disappearing, and new ones are now appearing), a maturing of companies using online advertising, and increased ad efficiency from broadband.

 

With this increased online ad spend will come new startups, healthier maturing online firms, and a re-connect between the worlds of bricks and clicks. With normal ad sales still slumping, it is not hard to see that even normal S & P advertisers are looking to the Net for Push and Pull.

 

 

Growth In Wireless Broadband

 

A report out this week from Gartner indicates that 2002 sales of wireless Local Area Net equipment hit 19.5MM units, up 120% YTY over 8.9MM. Revenues were up 29% for the same period, a decline per unit that augurs well for increased sales momentum.

 

Cisco was the only firm with falling sales, and that issue was remedied with the purchase of market leader LinkSys, a brand the company plans to continue. LinkSys had sales of $306MM, up 147% YTY.

 

One technical aspect of this equipment that will keep sales growing is the move from 802.11b standards to 802.11g, a standard finally released by the Institute for Electrical and Electronics Engineers last Thursday. While many companies had already begun marketing a presumed match for 802.11g, customers will now likely see software upgrades for minimal fixes needed to bridge the gulf.

 

The real meaning of this new standard is the provision of a commercial green light for WLANs operating at 54Mbps, vs. the old 11Mbps. While some critics have rightfully pointed out that none of these numbers matter if you don't have a robust backbone connection, it seems that enough providers have figured that tweak out now that, for many urban installations, you will be able take the numbers at or near face value.

 

For home installations, this probably means you can actually start throwing various movie threads around the house at remote screens. For those urban connects, it means you'll be much more likely to get serious bandwidth, as you share with your mates in crowded airports, Starbucks, and tire repair shops. And that means increased ads online ah yes, we've covered that one, haven't we?

 

The machine is coming unstuck.

 


ETHERMAIL


Re: ***SNS***: Unconstrained Computing

Mark,

[Re:]
https://msnbc-cnet.com.com/2100-1039_3-1015303.html?type=pt&part=msnbc&tag=alert&form=feed&subj=cnetnews

Is there a way that Homeland Security could use the Wi-Fi networks to fight terrorism?

Greg Laycock

[Cushman and Wakefield

Seattle]

Greg,

 

As the fellow who inspired our original Project Intelligent Response counter-terror efforts, you deserve a good answer to this question.

 

I think it is pretty simple: Yes.

 

One of the primary target sets often mentioned in infrastructure discussions is phone switching complexes. If we could offload most of our voice and Net traffic to locally-controlled wireless CANDU (Cheap AND Ubiquitous) broadband sites, with additional new switching, security and handoff technology running locally well, that system would, in general, be much more difficult to disable.

 

I realize that there are switching centers that serve both types of traffic, but the essence of this statement remains true. The combination of the robust Net design, plus having local on-ramps, would provide for an excellent Emergency communications system. Even better to have these hotspots stitched together into a series of national footprints. We should end up having multiple national telecom footprints, highly decentralized.

 

Good question, and thanks for asking.

 

Mark Anderson

 


Mark,

Yes, I like this [last week's] column a lot.

I have these thoughts as well. I would also propose that cellular auctions are also state machines as well (discounting out external mutagenic factors).

A bunch of chaos theory stuff covered discrete states for biological systems and how these bio systems (DNA they used in specific) goes through specific discrete AND deterministic but complex steps.  Complex yes - but still deterministic.

Hope you are great,

George Zachary

George,

 

No doubt cellular 3G auctions are a fitting part of the larger Random Walk of communications evolution, but they sure did screw up the world economy for a decade or so, without any apparent benefit to anyone.

 

When we start using words like "states" I think of physics and prepared states. When we talk about deterministic steps that DNA experiences, I suspect they are both complicated and, in the Santa Fe Institute sense, complex.

 

I decided, awhile ago, that Chaos Mathematics actually describes the relative contributions of two facets of thermodynamics, found in every system. I call them: Flow and Resistance. Is it possible that these are the basic measures of energy dissipation?

 

Whether we want to describe the shape of a coastline, caused by sea crashing on rock, or of a leaf edge, caused by plant hormones embedded in fluids hitting the inside of the leaf or even water dripping from a faucet, or blood being pumped through a heart we are essentially trying to go beyond the early work done so far on fluids, and get to deeper answers. Instead of Greene's Theorem and Navier-Stokes math, we now use Chaos math, and, I think, with better result.

 

If it turns out that this is a "correct" interpretation of Chaos mathematics, and therefore of complexity theory, SNSers will remember it for a long time.

 

Mark Anderson

 


Mark,

There is a great example of combining computing technology with asking the right questions--Major League Baseball, or at least one corner of it.

Michael Lewis' (author of "Liar's Poker" and "The New New Thing") most recent book--"Moneyball"--gives a role model example for your article last week--how computer analysis can overturn traditional thinking on talent, how to win games, and how to value players that has led to great success for the Oakland As, and now the Toronto Blue Jays. Unfortunately it took tradition bound MLB a few decades before someone paid attention and did something with the knowledge.

A great read that proves your point many times over.  If you just ask the right questions, IT will provide the tools for a sustained competitive advantage.

Bill Kaufmann
Chicago, IL

Bill,

 

Having grown up a Chicago Cubs fan for all of my early years, I can't imagine what you are talking about.

 

Grab a seat in the most beautiful open air stadium left in the circuit, enjoy some popcorn and crackerjack, watch the sun play across the stands and the deep green grass as the afternoon turns to evening, and your guys consistently lose.

 

What's so complicated about that?

 

Mark Anderson

 


Mark

I'm sure the canadian government will have no problem with your appropriation of CANDU for wi-fi rollout as per your article in FORTUNE. For those unaware of the acronym: CANDU is the Canadian nuclear reactor sold worldwide and stands for "CANada Deuterium Uranium." Although there never has been a serious accident with a CANDU reactor,  hopefully the CANDU wi-fi rollout will not see a meltdown at any time in the near future!

Kerry Ritz

 

Kerry,

 

Strangely enough, you are the first person to have mentioned the other, older Candu. As a grad student in Canada in the 70's, I was well aware of Pierre Trudeau's brilliant concept of shipping nuclear reactors worldwide as fast as possible. Despite their safety record, I always wondered if he had his head screwed on right (after all, he did marry Margaret one tends not to forget that photo of her in Studio 21).

 

So, yes, I was aware of the older, more established use of the term, but I think mine is much more natural, and up-to-date. Cheap AND Ubiquitous: the new description of local broadband.

 

Our CANDU is much better: it doesn't leave Cesium-17 and Strontium-90 for you to choke on for the next 50k years or so. Yep, I'll hear about that one


 

Glad you liked my Fortune column.

 

Mark Anderson

 

 

Mark,

[You wrote:] "cultures that favor phones will favor 3G; those that favor laptops will favor WiFi."

I agree. But it is odd to see you lumping Europe in with Asia (if I read you correctly). The clear odd-man-out, if you plot cellphone penetration and PC penetration on a scatter chart, is North America, where PCs outnumber cellphones. Everywhere else, the reverse is true. (Japan, it turns out, is near the middle of this chart, and resembles a Western European country. The outlying country where cellphones rule and PCs don't is not Japan but Italy.)

This split, between America and the rest of the world, PCs and phones, Wi-Fi and cellular, IM and SMS, strikes me as one of the most interesting trends in tech today. During the wireline Internet boom, America led the way, while the rest of us took a while to "get it". On wireless, a bifurcation seems to have occurred. Neither side is right or wrong; but America is clearly different.

Tom Standage
Technology Correspondent
The Economist
San Francisco


Tom,

I actually consider Europe and Japan to be quite different, in this regard; I probably just wasn't being clear. 

While the raw numbers may make Japan look like it falls into the center of Western Europe, my suspicion is that phones are far more important than PCs to the Japanese, compared with Western Europeans.  I am not sure all of this comes out solely in numbers per capita, but in how and how much each is used.

As for Italy, it is famous among cellular operators for its so-called "Mama Mia" effect - high cell use rates because everyone is always calling home to tell the family all about what they're doing.  Anecdotal, of course, but it is quite possible that you can get high takeup and use rates by combining passionate natures and strong family ties.

I was trying to see whether there was an inverse relation between the difficulty of keyboarding a language, and the relative importance of cellphones; and then extend that back into 3G vs. WiFi takeup.  I expect there will be a correlation, to some degree, and that the Singapore Switch from WiFi back to 3G is an indicator of same.

As for the U.S. being different, in other ways: we are extremely PC-centric, and our white collar workers work VERY long hours (even when sleeping, it would seem), so we are a test bed for the white collar worker bee side of tech.

 

Our teens, a key market in every country, are very different from Japanese teens in phone use in gross minutes, and in phone use re: SMS vs. Europe. The U.S. cellphone system is basically crummy, which prevents anyone from getting too carried away with it, I think; the systems in Europe, because of recalcitrant legacy operators (generally owned by governments), is now unified on a standard, and works better.

 

Because we are a single country, and not many, with an equally sense-free cellular policy, we ended up being Balkanized in both markets and the technologies that serve those markets. Same forces, opposite result.


Mark Anderson



Mark,

Congratulations again on an excellent FiRe conference.  I really appreciated the opportunity to meet in person with many of our esteemed collaborators.

 

Thanks!

In this issue you write:
----
"This differential showed up long ago in large cell/laptop differentials in Japan vs. the U.S. and Europe.  Now we're seeing its corollary: cultures that favor phones will favor 3G; those that favor laptops will favor WiFi. That may be something you hadn't thought about."
----

It seems to me that there may also be other long waves forming here that cross "East / West" boundaries - as PDAs and tablets blend with portable game consoles and other new devices; as the younger generation tries out new styles, both in terms of behavior patterns and in terms of artifacts, it may be that this distinction fades to oblivion...

As always, best wishes!

Martin Haeberli
[Co-founder,

Marconi Partners

SF]


Martin,

 

That is true the difference between generational habits may muffle, or even subsume, the intra-generational distinctions we share today.

 

I find it is always best to try to be specific about these things, so we can learn a bit as we go. For instance, I expect there to be a fairly strong generational shift from parents in Japan using laptops and phones, to teens just using phones and gadgets (call them PDAs if you wish, but they're ever-changing gadgets).

 

On the other hand, the kids aren't getting jobs right away.

 

Neither are they in Germany, France, or the U.S.

 

In other words, we may be creating a generation of High-Communication/Low Computing users, because we have no jobs for them, and jobs require computing.

 

There are many aspects to this generational gap.

 

Mark Anderson

 


Mark,

Can't find the issue where you described your computer setup...2 Ghz CPU,
blah de blah de blah.  I went to one of Edward Tufte's seminars 2-3 years
ago; among many wonderful & pithy comments he said "The single biggest
'productivity' factor on a computer is the number of pixels you can get in
front of your eyes." 

I tested, agreed, and declared dual-head monitor cards & double monitors on
the desks to be "the standard" in my team. Fantastic move.  The break in
'flow' from switching apps is now 1/2 as common.

So, if you're not set up that way, a small-but-big personal recommendation
to you in partial gratitude for a fantastic conference:  "Get Thee A 2nd
Monitor"

Regards,


Matthew Dunn

Bellingham


Matthew,

 

OK, I am going to try it out. This also gives me an interesting idea: if two monitors is as much better as you suggest, why not have your laptop, CarryAlong or Tablet/Pad function as your other screen when you are at the desk?

 

You just set it in a cradle, and, when it's day end or lunch time, grab the CAPC and off you go.

 

Make sense? It's the kind of thing no one in a real lab would think of, right Rick?

 

Mark Anderson

 


Mark,

I wanted to comment on your article of June 3. I would like to hear your perspective. I apologize in advance for its length, but this is a complex subject.

Like many of your readers, I think the HBR article about the computer industry missed the mark. Not only is the computer revolution not finished, but it's barely begun. Yet, we know the industry is in a funk. It's going to take a new way of thinking to get us moving forward again.

I nodded in agreement when you said, "Rather, we should ask if these are the right questions.  Aren't we, generally, asking How should we compute? rather than asking, What should we compute?" But I see the issue a little differently. I tell my customers that it's not about the "what" anymore. It's about the "why" and the "how." Why are we going to implement a computing system and specifically how are we going to build it? These fundamental questions seem entirely missing from the industry.

Traditionally, we've focused almost exclusively on the technology. It was so marvelous that people focused on the "what" of the differences between technologies. This included low-level functions like APIs, OSes, and CPUs, along with higher-level applications like databases, directory services, file systems, and back office systems.

Unfortunately, this approach only works when systems are considered individually, in isolation from each other. We know this isn't the future of computing though. Building the global computer requires vertical and horizontal integration of heterogeneous systems. The "how" of this is extremely murky. Vendors and analysts have given little guidance on how to proceed.

The "why" is even more confusing. Many computer professionals have trouble explaining the business relevance of IT. Business leaders are at more of a loss. They explain that they don't know what technology can do, they don't understand the differences between options, and are overwhelmed by what they face. Warren Buffett typifies the response: if I don't understand it, then I'm not going to buy it. This frustrating gap has existed for a long time and factors like Internet hype, Y2K, and the poor economy have exacerbated the problem. As an industry, we've focused on visionaries. We've been very successful at this, but the rules have changed. This calls for a different sales approach.

Our situation is similar to the car industry's around 1900. At the time, cars were popular, but difficult to use and expensive to operate. Most were hand built and required the operator to be his own mechanic. Automobile components like engines, brakes, and chassis were built by independent companies and integrated by clever engineers. This worked OK, but there were inherent cost, functional, and technical limits that kept cars from the mainstream. In effect, every car was a homebuilt hot rod. Inventions like the electric starter and heaters helped push things forward. But cars didn't hit their stride until the Model T lowered barriers with its new manufacturing techniques. This breakthrough made transportation cheap, reliable, and simple, but the problem wasn't technical.

Today, computer systems are like these early cars. Most data systems are hand built, requiring complex design and implementation projects. Many are built from best-of-breed components. Yet almost no consideration is given for the tremendous effort required to integrate these components. Some hire services companies in the hope they will hide all the complexity. This is like hiring a chauffeur to drive your 1901 Curved Dash Oldsmobile. You're not dealing with the difficulties of driving and maintaining the car, but it's still pretty complex and expensive.

Meanwhile, technology advocates get mired in religious battles over competing technologies. The car industry suffered through similar arguments over gasoline vs. kerosene, steam, and electrical power. While technological differences are important, it is more important to understand how they work in aggregate. Some technologies just integrate better than others. This reduces cost while improving functionality. Simultaneously, while some of these same technologies integrate well to make a single application, they fail miserably in a heterogeneous enterprise environment. It's just too costly, complex, and fragile to manually bolt everything together. It is important to consider technologies in the context of an enterprise architecture. Despite arguments to the contrary, technologies are not commoditized at this level. Products should be considered based on their ability to participate in complex systems. These complex systems will define the future of computing.

We at Avanade use a concept called Enterpresence as a framework for this. Considering enterprise systems as an integrated whole allows the de-emphasis of servers and applications in favor of computing services and business processes. In effect, the resulting system becomes a virtual enterprise presence, i.e. Enterpresence. This allows a business-oriented view of computing systems while reducing implementation and management costs. Like the modern approach to building a car, we can define integrated systems and facilitate the third-wave business functions promised by the computer revolution.

Again, I think the computing industry must change tactics in order to reinvigorate itself. All of the traditional engineering processes are still relevant. But we must add the vision (business-wide views), architecture (enterprise-wide design and integration), manufacturing (software coding and implementation), and marketing (business case, use case, ROI) that are required in every other industry.

Services companies must think about their customers' drive for competitive advantage and turn this into designs that can be practically implemented. Meanwhile, vendors must coherently describe their vision, including a well-defined roadmap for accomplishing this vision. Vendors must describe exactly how their products integrate with each other and with other systems. And vendors must describe their products on business and technical levels. This description must include business value of the product itself, and how the product would fit within an overall business and technical architecture. Religious crusades over technological minutia are of little value. The industry requires real guidance.

Until this happens, I fear the computing industry will languish in its current malaise. We will continue discussions about reducing computing costs rather than building business-transforming data systems.

Ace Swerling

Systems Engineer
East Region
Avanade Inc

Ace,

 

Content matters. The devil is in the etc. This is also the push, by name at least, that HP has decided to use in their just-released new strategy or so it would seem, from 30k feet.

 

While I can't disagree with anything you've said here, I come up for air feeling slightly empty: aren't these ideas the same ones we've been espousing since the First Tom Watson put THiNK over the door?

 

I sense in your piece a desire to get beyond the usual We build it and you will come mentality, but there is a long stretch between that country and actually Asking the right questions. If we go back to your first re-interpretation of what to ask: I said we need to get beyond How, and to move to What, to compute. You immediately put it back into How, and Why? I do like the Why part, because asking Why I would compute something is dangerously close to asking What I should compute. But How is How, and still gets very bogged down.

 

So, let's agree where we can: We need to ask new questions, in order to make quantitative leaps in returns on computing, and they have to do with asking What do I need to know (and Why)?

 

Works for me.

 

Mark Anderson

 

 

Mark,

I read with amusement, bemusement and then finally disdain for the Discovery Channel (they allowed themselves to be manipulated) the piece in the last SNS suggesting an all-clear for wireless phones and cancer.  Mark, you were very accurate in portraying my position on this regarding the science.  The science that is readily available clearly raises red flags about the safety of wireless technology that should promote precautionary steps by consumers.  However, there is more to the story and the adage is well known -- follow the money.

The word on the street is that a wireless industry trade group, through channels that create distance for public perception purposes in case someone snoops, made a substantial research grant to the funding-starved American Cancer Society and -- surprise -- received a quid pro quo.  The data that the ACS used to do their review was based on a few selected scientific papers -- it is not considered a serious scientific review of the science by those in the field.  The review was done as part of the American Cancer Society's "Top Ten Cancer Myths," which is a shameful PR gimic based on the David Letterman routine that is intended to raise visibility and money for the ACS -- and of course, the wireless industry was happy to oblige. 

The piece that the Discovery Channel aired was based on and triggered by the summary package that CTIA [Cellular Telephony Industry Association, who originally hired George to dispel cellphone health worries] sends out to the media when there is a new bit of information that they believe helps their case,  or when they know someone with a differing opinion has been talking to the media  or intends to appear on a program.  That package included the review by the ACS as the media hook.  The package is intimidating in its size -- about nine inches thick with what look like deep and complicated scientific papers.  This is not the type of background research journalists like to do.  There is a "summary page"  that serves to come to the rescue of the lazy or uninformed journalist.  The package and its content are all part of a well constructed plan to promote the industry spin.  And, for the most part, it is very effective.

The Discovery Channel should know better.  If the Discovery Channel had done even a little bit of their own due diligence and not taken the ACS gimicky review at face value, they would have found that a comparison of  the ACS (CTIA?) review that they relied upon with the position of the World Health Organization, for example, yielded a big difference in interpretation of much the same data -- the WHO advocates a precautionary approach for wireless phones and other wireless instruments as I do.   

The tragedy is that the wireless industry continues to treat the health issue as a political problem instead of a public health problem.  As such, they use political tactics like the "nine inch data package" -- which they are very good at.  This accrues to the detriment of public health and safety.  It is all so unnecessary because health protection solutions


are available and so simple.

George Carlo

[Author, Cellphone]

 

George,

 

Thank you for writing in about this. I expected this to be your response, but there is nothing like hearing it from an expert.

 

I am continually reminded of the last dying days of the tobacco industry, when the evidence was piling up higher and higher, but we still had industry leaders swearing, on oath, that, to the best of their knowledge, nicotine was not addictive.

 

Where do these people sleep at night?

 

I understand the horrible pressures that simply existing in this, the most litigious society in the world, can bring: no, you can't admit anything; no, you can't even admit doubt; no, if you know you are guilty, you still can't admit it; and so on.

 

This is a problem caused by our tort system, as much as by our lack of ethics or science.

 

Even so, one expects groups like Discovery Channel and the American Cancer Society to be above the pull of the dollar, in presenting health issues.

 

Thank you, George, for correcting that view.

 

Mark Anderson

 

P.s. For new readers, George was given a $25MM research budget by the CTIA in 1993 or so to disprove the existence of negative cellphone health effects. When he found the opposite, they canned him, and have been working to send out the opposite message ever since.

 

Somewhat lacking in transparency, sincerity and candor, eh? Some would call it criminal.

_____________

 

THE MEMBERS' CORNER -- This Newsletter version of the Members' Corner is a brief view of the full SNS website MC, updated weekly. Here we present the hottest things we're working on for you at the SNS World Headquarters (a.k.a., the ''Beach Palace Hotel''). To go to the website MC, click https://www.stratnews.com/subscriber_corner.shtml. To log in, type your full e-mail address in lowercase, as both your User Name and your Password. You may also create your own password, if you prefer.

*** WHAT'S HOT THIS WEEK:

Thank you to all of those who have filled out the FIRe 2003 survey. To those who haven't done so yet: we encourage you to respond so that we can make FIRe 2004 even better. Certainly there are areas in which we can improve or build on FIRe 2003; please let us know your ideas by using the Comments area following each section of the survey.

Discounted "early bird" registration is currently open for all who signed up at the conference, and will be available for all SNS FIRe 2003 Participants beginning Friday, June 20, until we reach our early-bird allocation. If you need help signing up, please contact me by e-mail at sam@tapsns.com or by phone at 704-821-2911.

In the interim, I've received some interesting accessories ideas. Here are two that stand out:

1) "Sam, how about a business card holder -- something small and made from leather, perhaps with the Orca logo discreetly displayed in one corner?"

Kerry Ritz

Kerry, are you reading my mail? A prototype is already made, and we expect to offer business-card holders for sale within the next couple of weeks.

2)  In an "Ethermail" from last week's SNS newsletter, Nona Clifton of MusicNet wrote: "I vote for a watch. You guys could come up with a very classy one! Not too expensive, just a slick little timepiece."

Nona, cool idea. I'll look into this.

Any other ideas? How about an SNS Orca hood ornament for your Hummer? Okay, that's going too far.  Please send all other ideas to me, sam@tapsns.com.

We still have some FIRe 2003 embroidered laptop cases available. The FIRe 2003 logo is on one side; on the other will be your custom-embroidered SNS Member number, as well as the Orca logo (unless you request that it not be included). Any SNS Members who would like to own one of these special cases should place their orders as usual through the Accessories portion of the website (see link below), then send a separate e-mail to me at sam@tapsns.com requesting this dual-logo case. First come, first served.

https://www.stratnews.com/cgi-bin/tapsns/interch/laptop.html

WEEKLY FEATURES

~ Position Sought:

Senior Manager / Director
https://www.stratnews.com/resumes/Gibs_Lawrence.htm

 


~ Positions Available:

1)  Vice President of Development/CTO
https://www.stratnews.com/resumes/JDVP-Development-CTO.htm

and

2) VP Engineering: Software Development
https://www.stratnews.com/resumes/vp-calgary.shtml



~ Pick of the Week from issues of the SNS newsletter:

Question: What was Mark referring to when he said "True, it was just about gutted and left for roadkill a few years ago by the happy bureaucrats conducting 3G auctions, but those days, thank goodness, are over"?  (See the answer at the bottom of this MC.)

~ Quote of the Week:

"The true measure of a man is how he treats someone who can do him absolutely no good."
       -- Samuel Johnson (1709-1784)

Please remember that we always welcome new:

~ Resumes / positions available for weekly postings

~ Pics and bios for representation in the Members' Gallery

In addition to the features above, the Members' Corner links to these website features:

1. Research Desktop:

https://www.stratnews.com/tapsns/subscriber_resdesk.shtml

2. Members' Library:

https://www.stratnews.com/tapsns/subscriber_library.shtml

3. ''Where's Mark?''

4. Updates on Orca Relief

5. SNS Glossary:

https://www.stratnews.com/tapsns/subscriber_glossary.shtml

6. SNS Gallery Spotlight Member:  This week we've chosen Kristan Rivers as our compelling Spotlight Member of the Week. Unlike recent Spotlight members, Kristan didn't attend FIRe 2003, but we hope to see him next year, as he'd fit right in with those of you whose businesses combine games and technology. As Kristan puts it, his background consists of working with "very cool connected devices that fit in your pocket."

As head of mobile business at DA Group Plc., based in Glasgow, Scotland, Kristan is responsible for implementing the company's core 3D character animation technologies into mobile applications and services, including messaging and streaming video.

Please check out Kristan D. Rivers' photo and complete bio, and those of other SNS Members, in the SNS Members' Gallery: https://www.stratnews.com/spotlight.shtml.

7. SNS Accessories: We have selected the highest-quality SNS personalized accessories for you:

Laptop Cases: A top-quality, ultra-light case made of durable 1680 ballistic nylon, weighing in at just 2.5 pounds.  This case is the most efficient travel case I've found, and frankly, it's beautiful. Take a look at these one-of-a kind laptop cases, and check out all of the extra features there isn't room to mention here: https://www.stratnews.com/cgi-bin/tapsns/interch/laptop.html

Luggage Tags: A laser-etched, solid brass elite luggage tag featuring the Orca logo and your individual SNS Member number. Tags include a durable, custom-designed leather strap; they also look very classy on the laptop cases, as shown in the laptop photo (see link above).

https://www.stratnews.com/cgi-bin/tapsns/interch/other.html

Attire: Short-sleeved 100 percent mercerized cotton Polo shirts, Long-sleeved Polo shirts, and Long-sleeved Mock Turtleneck shirts. SNS canvas hats, in black or tan. All are embroidered with the SNS Orca logo and your personal Member number:

https://www.stratnews.com/cgi-bin/tapsns/interch/shirts.html.

I place orders each Monday, and shipments will usually arrive within 3 to 4 weeks of your order placement. A portion of all proceeds is donated to the Orca Relief Fund, so each purchase directly benefits the diminishing Orca population.

Please keep sending us your ideas for new products! If Member interest is high enough, we'll make them happen, and we'll send you a free customized gift to show our appreciation.

~Answer to the SNS Pick of the Week:

Question: What was Mark referring to when he said "True, it was just about gutted and left for roadkill a few years ago by the happy bureaucrats conducting 3G auctions, but those days, thank goodness, are over"?

Answer: The wireless business. (''***SNS***: Over to Wireless,'' April 23, 2003)

Please send all Member-oriented correspondence and ideas to me, SAM, at sam@tapsns.com, or feel free to phone me at 704-821-2911.

Thank you!

Sharon Anderson-Morris / ''SAM''

____________________



SUBSCRIPTION INFORMATION

 

If you are not a subscriber, the prior Strategic News Service item has been sent to you for a one-month trial. If you would like a one-year subscription to SNS, the current rate is $495.00 U.S., which includes approximately 48 issues per year, plus special industry alerts and related materials. Premium Subscriptions, which include passworded access to additional materials on our website, are $795.00 per year. Subscriptions can be purchased, upgraded or renewed at our secure website, at: https://www.stratnews.com. Conversion of your trial to full subscription will lead to thirteen months of SNS, no matter when you convert.

 

VOLUME CORPORATE SUBSCRIPTION RATES: Below half price, upon registration with SNS for a minimum of ten subscriptions at $1950.00. SMALL COMPANY (10 employees or fewer) SITE LICENSE: $995. TEACHERS' GROUP RATE: (five teachers): $195.00.

 

STUDENT and INDEPENDENT JOURNALIST RATE: $195.00 per year.

 

This service is intended for strategic thinkers who depend upon business technology planning. The SNS charter is to provide information about critical computer and telecommunications issues, trends and events not available to managers through the press. Re-purposing of this material is encouraged, with proper attribution. Email sent to SNS may be reprinted, unless you indicate that it is not to be.

 

If you are aware of others who would like to receive this service, please forward this message to them, with a cc: to Mark Anderson at sns@stratnews.com; they will automatically receive a one-month free pilot subscription.

--------------------------

 

About the Strategic News Service

 

SNS is the most accurate predictive letter covering the computer and telecom industries. It is personally read by the top managers at companies such as Intel, Microsoft, Dell, Compaq, Sun, Netscape, and MCI, as well as by leading financial analysts at the world's top investment banks and venture capital funds, including Goldman Sachs, Merrill Lynch, Hummer Winblad, Venrock and Warburg Pincus. It is regularly quoted in top industry publications such as BusinessWeek, Newsweek, Infoworld, Institutional Investor, Wired, the Financial Times, the New York Times, and elsewhere.

 

About the Publisher

 

Mark Anderson is president of Technology Alliance Partners, and of the Strategic News Service(tm) LLC. TAP was founded in 1989, and provides trends and marketing alliance assistance to firms leading the convergence of telecom and computing. Mark is a Seybold Fellow. He is the founder of two software companies and of the Washington Software Alliance Investors' Forum, Washington's premier software investment conference; and has participated in the launch of many software startups. A past director of the WSA, Mark chairs the WSA Presidents' Group. He regularly appears on the Wall Street Review/KSDO, CNN, and National Public Radio/KPLU programs. Mark is a member of the Merrill Lynch Technology Advisory Board, and is an advisor and/or investor in Authora, Ontain, Ignition Partners, Mohr Davidow Ventures, and others. He also serves on the board of the not-for-profit Hybrid Vigor Institute, and is a principal in the investment advisory firm Resonance Capital Management LLC, which manages the accounts of institutions and high-net-worth investors, focused on technology markets.

 

Disclosure: Mark Anderson is a portfolio manager of a hedge fund. His fund often buys and sells securities that are the subject of his columns, both before and after the columns are published, and the position that his fund takes may change at any time. Under no circumstances does the information in this newsletter represent a recommendation to buy or sell stocks.

 

 

On September 9th, he will offer the opening keynote speech on the current state of wireless communications, at the WSA Tech Future Conference, Westin Hotel, Seattle.  And on September 18th, he will provide the keynote speech at the Financial Executives International meeting in Las Vegas. That evening, he will host the annual WSA Presidents' Group Venture Capital evening, at the Woodmark Hotel, Kirkland, WA.

 



In between times, he will be watching as the children learn the twitch of the wrist, the slow movements, the gentle touching with all whips and ropes, that make riding a horse a small subset of communicating with a horse.


"Strategic News Service," "SNS," "Future In Review," "FIRe," and "Project Inkwell" are all registered service marks of Strategic News Service LLC.

 

Copyright 2003, Strategic News Service LLC

 

ISSN 1093-8494