Articles in “November 2008” from Datamation Blog

I am a lapsed Howard Stern fan.

I was a devotee in the 90s and early part of this decade, when I used to commute from Cupertino to San Francisco. Then a couple things happened. I started working from home. It became problematic to listen to Howard when he ran certain contests regarding certain porn stars, with my wife and young son around the house. (I can never hear the name Queen Latifah without laughing ... you fans know what I'm talking about.)

Then Howard went satellite, and I never joined the club. (And a third thing happened: Stuttering John left for the bright lights and big chin of Jay Leno.)

I just don't want to pay for radio. But I have the feeling I'll sign up someday and get back into Howie. There are other reasons. My brother in law, a NY Mets fan living in California, tells me how great satellite is. He's one of many converts I know.

Now, along comes a persuasive, thought-provoking Datamation article from Mike Elgan, "Satellite Radio is Dead."

The article has sparked a huge response from our readers. Their numerous comments have tested our commenting software, and we've been treated to some exciting new profanity, which I won't go into here. Let's just say our favorite involved a mop. Other comments are like this: "Hey, Mike, what is NAB paying you to write this BS?"

Elgan makes a very good case. I don't agree that podcasting technology is robust enough at this point, and ultimately I have to side with this commenter, at least for the foreseeable future:  "I continue to believe that this expensive delivery system that I have come to depend on will survive because it is the greatest content that is out there."

In addition to their enjoying the technology, it's safe to say that most iPhone users gain a psychological benefit from their multipurpose device -- it makes them feel cool and cutting edge. Ahead of the plodding crowd, as it were. Nothing wrong with that.

Now a new application for the iPhone promises to help their owners stay in the fast lane -- ticket-free. From an article in today's New York Times:

Apple's iPhone has been used for everything from following the 2008 election to deciding where to grab a bite on the go. Now, it's helping lead-footed drivers avoid costly speeding tickets.

NMobile and Trapster are two mobile applications that provide up-to-date, detailed maps of speed-enforcement zones with live police traps, speed cameras or red-light cameras. After launching, each application pulls up a map pinpointing the locations of speed traps within driving distance. An audio alert will sound as vehicles approach an area tagged as harboring a speed trap.

So far, so good. But here's where things bog down:

Both applications rely on the wisdom of the crowds for their data. Users can report camera-rigged stop lights and areas heavily populated with radar-toting police officers through the application or on each company's Web site.

I'm not sure the "wisdom of the crowds" is a sufficient substitute for, say, a good radar detector. Still, you have to give the iPhone apps developers credit for creativity. The Times notes there now are 8,000-plus offerings at Apple's iPhone Application Store, "ranging from the practical to the silly."

On the home page of the store is a feature where you can see the 10 most popular paid applications as well as the 10 most popular free apps. I went through both lists, and of the 20, I'd say seven belong in the "practical" category and 13 -- or nearly two-thirds -- in the "silly." 

Wisdom of the crowds, indeed.

With all the spam-fighting experts and tools out there, with all the money being thrown at the problem, how come there's still so much flotsam and jetsam in my email?

How many ads for the misspelled viarga, ivagra, etc., can I get?

I've heard tons of opinions on the spam problem. I know people who get very little spam. This happens for a variety of reasons -- about which they like to brag -- from Gmail, to the use of junk-filtering folders, to the frequent changing of email addresses, to open-source solutions.  

Maybe it's because it's my corporate email account that gets the spam. That's an address I can't change, and that email has been distributed widely in the Internet ether.

Whatever the reason, spam killing consumes more time every day. Which leads to our poll question.

To Vote in the Poll

1. Click the Watch Now arrow

2. Look for the small Vote Now link and click it

3. A box pops up. Vote, and you'll see your vote tally in real time

4. You can also post a comment

It's bad enough that Datamation columnist Mike Elgan predicts the imminent demise of satellite radio. Now comes a study that asserts the Internet is headed for an iceberg, and probably before the next presidential election.

Using Internet and IP infrastructure modeling along with data from current and projected traffic, Nemertes Research Group projects that "demand will exceed access line capacity within the next two to four years."

In its study, Internet Interrupted: Why Architectural Limitations Will Fracture The 'Net, Nemertes concludes:

• If current trends continue, demand will continue to grow to a point at which it outpaces capacity at the access layer. Globally, this will occur in approximately 2011/2012.

• In North America, indications are that sophisticated users already areexperiencing capacity limitations.
  

• [P]ressure to manage service delivery is forcing many service and content providers to migrate their traffic off the "public" or Tier-1 peered Internet in favor of dedicated pipes to the ISP aggregation points.
  

• [A]s demand growth accelerates we are quickly depleting logical addresses that identify destinations on the Internet. And, IPv6, largely touted as the answer, doesn't appear to be poised to fill the gap.
  

• The bottom line: The Internet continues to be bedeviled by infrastructure issues that, if left untreated, will dramatically curtail application innovation in the coming years.

While it may be tempting to lay much of the blame for excess demand on greedy multimedia downloaders and the proliferation of personal PDAs, Nemertes cites another trend as playing a big part in the increased demand: the rise of the virtual worker.

"The movement of workers from corporate inhabitants to virtual workers is substantial," the report states. "89% of companies identify their workplace as "virtual". Among them, 29.8% of their employees are virtual, on average."

In practical terms, as just about any network manager can attest, this means:

Virtual workers drive increased demand because they typically are located remotely from corporate resources, such as servers and applications. They expect seamless communications, regardless of where they conduct business. And they often require more advanced communication and collaboration tools than those who work at headquarters. Organizations use technologies such as videoconferencing and Web conferencing to cut down on travel and keep these virtual workers connected to the rest of their teams.

And with the recession and continued rise in travel costs (don't be fooled by the temporary drop in the price of oil), the number of virtual workers should only increase.

Nemertes includes some hedge language ("It's important to understand that were not saying this will occur. The model is an 'if-then' model. ...Obviously, a lot can change between now and 2011."), but anyone reading the study will come away with the impression Nemertes is expecting the worst.

Meanwhile, industry analyst Point Topic reports the number of broadband subscribers worldwide has hit the 400 million mark. Ten years ago there were a little more than 57,000.

Point Topic's report was commissioned by the Broadband Forum, an industry trade group. Not surprisingly, this report draws paints a much sunnier picture than the Nemertes study. Here's Point Topic senior analyst Oliver Johnson (quoted from this press release):

"[W]e're in the early days of a new era, which is going to be much more about quality than quantity. The emphasis is now going to shift to providing high bandwidth, high quality broadband, that can deliver multiple, steady, pin-sharp images for applications."

End of a glorious era, or beginning of a glorious new era? One thing's for sure: They can't both be right. Any predictions?

First things first: Jerry Yang did the right thing by agreeing to step down as CEO of search/media portal Yahoo. I'm sure it was a difficult decision, and probably not because of his ego, some burning desire to maintain control or monetary greed. (He's still one of the wealthiest people in the world, after all.)

While I've never met the man, it seems clear that he has a strong emotional attachment to and passion for the company he co-founded with David Filo in 1994 while at Stanford University. (The company's first name was Jerry's Guide to the World Wide Web.) Of course, it arguably was a mixture of emotions -- loyalty to employees, pride in Yahoo's history and independence, etc. -- that fueled his fierce resistance to Microsoft's $44.6 billion (or $33 a share) acquisition offer made on Feb. 1. With Yahoo's stock today at less than $12, its competitive position deteriorating and strategic options dwindling, this looms to many as Yang's biggest blunder.

So let's give Yang credit for realizing that he's no longer the right person to lead Yahoo. Sure, many others already had come to that conclusion, but there's a long history of chief executives who have had to been dragged from the corner office well after it was clear they simply didn't belong there.

So who should succeed Yang? I don't have any names in mind (not that it would matter if I did), but I hope Yahoo's board doesn't fall for a tough-guy turnaround artist whose first, second and last impulse is to slash jobs, or some monogrammed cuff-link type who has a track record of success running some hydra-headed corporation. Yahoo  needs something different.

That's why I hope board members read this excellent column by Saul Hansell in the New York Times. Hansell argues -- quite persuasively, in my opinion -- that Yahoo should seek out someone with a clear vision of what the company is and what it offers consumers:

Yahoo doesn't need a chief executive so much as an editor in chief. And I mean the sort of imperial editor who has a vision of how to create an environment that lures in both readers and advertisers, like Tina Brown, Clay Felker or Adam Moss.

In most conversations about the job, I hear people dismissing many names because this or that person "doesn't have enough management expertise." They say Yahoo is a big and complex business, and the ideal head should have run some sort of conglomerate.

[P]art of the company's problems have come from thinking of its business as a portfolio of 100 loosely connected sites: Yahoo Finance, Yahoo Games, Yahoo Briefcase and so on. What's been lacking is a unified vision of what Yahoo stands for and how its parts fit together into a coherent experience. That's what makes me think of those legendary editors who can inspire (and perhaps bully) people to coalesce around an idea.

Hansell cites Internet-era leaders such as Amazon.com's Jeff Bezos, CNet co-founder Halsey Minor, Apple's Steve Jobs and Facebook's Mark Zuckerberg as CEOs who have successfully defined for themselves, their employees and -- most importantly -- their customers what their companies are and what they offer. It's been a long time since Yahoo has been able to do this.

Maybe it's too late for Yahoo to redefine itself. Maybe it can't survive, let alone flourish, as an independent company. It certainly wouldn't change my life -- I don't use any Yahoo services because, quite simply, I have no compelling reason to do so. But I'm still rooting for the right person to come in and give it a shot, if only because I'd like to think passion and pride still count for something.

In the midst of this somewhat terrifying recession our economy is going through, it's nice to see a technology company reporting strong earnings.

And it's especially nice that the company in question is Hewlett-Packard, which, as recently released court documents reveal, essentially was stabbed in the back by Microsoft a couple of years ago when Redmond decided to lower tech requirements for its Vista operating system to appease chipmaker Intel. HP had invested time and money to meet the original, higher standards for Vista, and executives at the computer maker were none too  pleased that Microsoft basically had rendered those efforts a waste.

From Reuters, via internetnews.com:

HP's preliminary net profit in the fiscal fourth quarter that ended October 31, was 84 cents per share, or $1.03 excluding items such as restructuring and acquisition charges.

Analysts were looking for earnings per share of $1.00, excluding items, according to Reuters Estimates.

Fourth-quarter revenue rose 19 percent to $33.6 billion, or an increase of 16 percent when adjusted for currency effects, compared with the average analyst estimate of $33.1 billion.

The company forecast fiscal 2009 earnings excluding items of $3.88 to $4.03 per share, which beat the average Wall Street estimate of $3.86.

While HP didn't break out numbers by operating division -- full results are due Monday -- it's fair to say that its performance in an extremely difficult environment reflects the solid leadership of CEO Mark Hurd, who replaced ousted CEO Carly Fiorina in 2005.  

What did Ballmer know and when did he know it?

That's arguably the biggest question in the Microsoft "Vista Capable" class-action lawsuit being heard by a federal judge in a Seattle court. Documents unsealed last Thursday imply that the Microsoft CEO was in on the decision two years ago to lower technical requirements for its Vista operating system as a favor to chipmaker Intel, which pressured the software giant to slap "Vista Capable" stickers on PCs with Intel 915 chipsets, hardware that  lacked the firepower to run the full Vista feature set.

Intel allegedly stood to lose "billions" of dollars if Microsoft stuck to its original specs because the chipmaker would have been stuck with a whole bunch of the Vista-inadequate 915s. And while Microsoft's concern for Intel's quarterly earnings results was touching in that corporate bottom-line kind of way, the impact on consumers was less than heart-warming.

Stuart Johnston over at internetnews.com explains:

The plaintiffs argue that Microsoft's "Vista Capable" sticker on the boxes deliberately misled consumers to believe that new PCs that they bought prior to Vista's consumer delivery on January 30, 2007, could be upgraded to run higher-end editions of Vista that feature the Aero Glass user interface and other graphics intensive features of the operating system.

Oh, and computer maker Hewlett-Packard, which had sunk a lot of development time and money into two motherboards for Vista, wasn't loving it either. From Information Week:

"The decision you have made and communicated has taken away an investment we made consciously for competitive advantage knowing that some players would choose not to make the same level of investment as we did in supporting your program requirements," HP consumer PC executive Richard Walker wrote in an e-mail to former Microsoft co-presidents Jim Allchin and Kevin Johnson, dated Feb. 1, 2006.

"I can't be more clear than to say you not only let us down by reneging on your commitment to stand behind the WDDM [Windows Display Driver Model] requirement, you have demonstrated a complete lack of commitment to HP as a strategic partner and cost us a lot of money in the process," wrote Walker.

Indeed, the decision was hotly contested within Microsoft, with some executives arguing that it was unfair to consumers and would hurt the company's credibility. Fortunately, this is when Steve Ballmer decided to take charge and get to the bottom of the mess. Oh, wait:

Microsoft cites an e-mail in which Ballmer told then-Windows chief Jim Allchin -- who vehemently opposed the decision -- that Windows executive Will Poole was the one responsible. "I had nothing to do with this Will handled everything," Ballmer wrote, according to the Microsoft filing. "I am not even in the detail of the issues."

("I am not even in the detail of the issues"? Channeling Sarah Palin!)

Of course, that response was in the heat of the moment. Since then, Ballmer has assumed full responsibility for the situation. Oh, wait again:

"The e-mails highlighted by the plaintiffs reflect the normal back-and-forth discussion about an internal decision Microsoft made in January 2006, long before it began communicating about the Windows Vista Capable program to consumers in May 2006," said a statement by David Bowermaster, a Microsoft spokesman, e-mailed to InternetNews.com.

"Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer has no unique knowledge of the facts in this case," Bowermaster continued. "Anything he knows about the Windows Vista Capable program he learned from executives whom he empowered to run the program and make decisions."

Shortly after a January 2006 phone conversation between Intel CEO Paul Otellini and Ballmer, Otellini sent "a note to Steve thanking him for listening and making these changes." Yet Microsoft attorneys characterized that phone discussion as a mere "courtesy call."

Consequently, internetnews.com reports, Microsoft attorneys claim "there is no reason for Ballmer to take a day out of his busy schedule to provide a day-long deposition in the federal class action suit."

It seems to me that Ballmer could clear up a whole lot of confusion surrounding this entire matter if he would voluntarily submit to questions under deposition, something Redmond's army of lawyers has asked the judge in the case to block.

But hey, what do I know? After all, last year I bought an HP laptop powered by Vista.

It's the holiday season, and for many it really isn't the most wonderful time of the year, no matter what the great Andy Williams sings.  (Great, now that song is stuck in my head.)

With the continuing economic turmoil, it's also layoff season. So far the sackings have hit, or are about to hit, many companies, including the big U.S. automakers, Mervyns, Circuit City, the housing industry, financial services firms, and more.

My colleagues in San Francisco are reporting quickly called meetings this week after disappointing earnings reports. I assume you'll hear about layoffs at some media companies soon. All this leads to our poll question. (The poll also lets me continue to test software from Canadian startup Cover it Live. Check our story on the company at SemanticWeb.com.)
 
To Vote in the Poll

1. Click the Watch Now arrow

2. Look for the small Vote Now link and click it

3. A box pops up. Vote, and you'll see your vote tally in real time

And you thought turning water into wine was a good trick. From dbtechno.com:

The International Space Station is set to get some major upgrades once the 15-day mission is kicked off by the crew of the NASA space shuttle Endeavour.  One of those upgrades will allow astronauts to turn urine into drinking water.

As the economic recession deepens, anxious workers naturally are becoming increasingly reluctant to switch jobs, reasoning that it's better to stay aboard the ship they know -- even if it appears to be sinking.

From an article on today's Wall Street Journal web site:

A growing number of professionals are saying "no, thanks" to prospective employers asking them to change jobs.

Spooked by the shaky economy, 46% of U.S. middle managers polled in mid-September said switching employers in the current environment is risky, according to a survey by Accenture Ltd. Just 13% of respondents said they were actively looking for a new job, down from 30% the last time Accenture conducted a similar survey in 2005.

The findings are echoed by search-firm recruiters, who say they are having to work harder just to get professionals to hear out job opportunities they have to offer. And dire tales of people losing their jobs shortly after being hired, although rare, are helping to spread caution among workers.

Which means, of course, that it's the perfect environment for ruthless, insensitive bosses to exploit their employees, right?

Not so, at least regarding IT pros, says CIO Update contributor Spencer Shaffer:

With the added demands placed upon IT departments by today's economic uncertainties, CIOs need to be more vigilant than ever to take measures to prevent their employees from getting burned out.

Shaffer writes that Gartner analysts this week unveiled their "nine most contentious issues" facing IT over the next two years. No. 1 on the list is the increased pressure on IT workers to align IT with the business. In fact, Gartner asserts, "business expectations for IT have outstripped IT's internal capability to deliver."

Obviously, turning your IT shop into a revolving door won't do much to close that gap. Shaffer offers three tips for CIOs to keep employees happy, productive and away from the job boards. They are:

Invest in professional and personal growth

Conduct regular evaluations

Open bar on Fridays

Sorry, that last one is my suggestion. Shaffer's third one is:

Keep communication open

The first two are pretty self-explanatory. The last one seems a bit mushy, but what Shaffer means is fostering a positive work environment by establishing an "open door" policy so that workers are free to informally discuss work issues with any manager at any time.

It's all common sense, but common sense frequently gets jettisoned when times turn tough.

I suppose it's a start, but count me underwhelmed by the deal announced Monday between entertainment giant MGM and YouTube, Google's incredibly popular video-sharing website.

Kenneth Corbin offers some details in his Tangled Web blog over at internetnews.com:

MGM today announced a partnership with Google's popular video-sharing site that will bring long-format movies and television content to several branded channels.

The first, called "Impact," will feature action programming in the form of clips from MGM movies and television shows, as well as full-length clips. Impact began as a video-on-demand venture MGM launched with Comcast.

The second, American Gladiators, and will feature highlights and full episodes from the show's run in the 1980s and 1990s.

The old American Gladiators: Talk about rolling out the premier content! I don't mean to pick on MGM; at least its stepping up while other Hollywood studios such as Viacom continue to ignore reality and engage in nasty litigation to protect their outmoded business model. Plus MGM says this is just the beginning and that more of the studio's archives will be part of the deal. Yet why serve warmed-over crap for the first course when you have a vault full of gourmet offerings such as Legally Blonde 2 and Thunder in Paradise 2001: A Space Odyssey, Thelma & Louise and Chappelle's Show (admittedly uneven, but the funny parts are side-splitting)? Yes, clips from Rocky are intended to be part of the Impact channel; still, MGM can do better. (I hope they include the scene where Burgess Meredith as Rocky's trainer makes him chase around a chicken to improve his quickness. I tried to find that clip on YouTube months ago to show a friend who had never seen the movie, only to come up with this stupid remix.)

Regarding the value proposition of the deal, here's how my colleague Ken Corbin explains it:

Google will place ads alongside MGM's content, with the two companies sharing the revenue. YouTube has been a tough sell for many advertisers, who are reluctant to place their branded messages alongside a mixed bag of amateur content.

I certainly can understand the reticence of advertisers to slot their messages next to poorly produced, pointless video drivel. Much better for the brand to run ads next to slickly produced, pointless video drivel. Which reminds me: I can't end this without linking to a hilarious clip from The Onion News Network: 

YouTube Contest Challenges Users To Make A 'Good' Video

Now that's entertainment.

James Maguire, the esteemed managing editor of Datamation and eSecurity Planet, has done another bang-up job on his most recent IT salary outlook story, The 2009 IT Salary Guide.

With all the worries about the economy, jobs, housing, non-allergic White House puppies, and what industry to bail out next (give me a break), it's refreshing to read Maguire's story and see that the IT arena remains robust:

A number of industries are expected to hire IT professionals at a notable clip. These include healthcare, which is projected to create more jobs than any other industry between 2006 and 2016; education, a sector propelled by the burgeoning e-learning market; and (of course) high tech, which companies continue to look to for competitive advantage.

In most companies, skilled tech talent continues to be at a premium, particularly in areas like Java, SQL Server, SharePoint and .NET development. Its not unusual for these experts to receive multiple job offers.

... A Robert Half survey of 1,400 CIOs reveals that the following IT skills are in greatest demand: Network administration  (70%), Windows administration (69%), Desktop support (69%), Database management (58%), Wireless network management (47%), Telecommunications support (44%), Web development/Website design (42%), Business intelligence/reporting services (33%), Virtualization (32%), .NET development (22%), CRM implementation (22%), ERP implementation (20%), Linux/Unix administration (20%), Java development (17%), Open source development (17%), and XML development (17%).

As someone who covers Web 2.0 technology at Intranetjournal.com -- and the less-well-known Web 3.0 world at  SemanticWeb.com, I was particularly interested in this Maguire assertion: "Enjoying a robust spike in interest is Web 2.0 development, as businesses move still more of their operations online."

Read the full IT salary report here.

I know that Apple's iPhone has become tremendously popular as a consumer item, but I was pretty surprised to read that it now rates higher than the legendary BlackBerry among business users. Here's the story from internetnews.com:

J.D. Power and Associates' annual business smartphone customer satisfaction survey found the iPhone ranked ahead of even enterprise mobility stalwart BlackBerry for ease of operation, operating system, design, features and battery life.

It's the first time that Apple's device was included in the survey. Last year, Research in Motion's BlackBerry took top honors.

The survey was conducted in late summer, with nearly 1,400 business wireless customers who own a smartphone responding. Not only did the CrackBerry lag well behind the iPhone on the survey's 1,000-point scale (778 points to 703), it barely beat out Samsung phones, which garnered 701 points. 

Back in August I had some friends in the industry visiting me for a weekend of poker and horseracing (I live near Saratoga Springs, N.Y., where there is a famous racetrack). Two of them were working their CrackBerries like, well, CrackBerryheads. The second version of the iPhone recently had been released, and I innocently mused that I might be interested in buying one. This remark was met with withering derision from my high-powered industry friends, who dismissed the iPhone as a "trendy consumer toy." But it's clear from the survey that the iPhone is more than a "trendy consumer toy," and that my friends are no-nothing blowhards.

Of course, I already knew that.

Maybe I have a short memory, but I can't recall another instance where what the CEO of one company says has had such a dramatic impact on another company's stock price. From Reuters today:

Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer dismissed speculation the software giant might still be interested in buying Yahoo, sending shares of the Internet company down 14 percent.

And less than a month ago...

No doubt, investors are desperate these days for any positive news. I know I am. But honestly, people, all Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer said Thursday at a tech conference in Orlando was...well, here's what he said:

"I think it would still make sense economically for their shareholders and ours."

The "it" in this case is Microsoft's bid to acquire troubled Internet pioneer Yahoo...

Ballmer's comments during his keynote at the Gartner conference were like a jolt of electricity, lifting Yahoo's moribund shares as high as 17 percent, to $13.73, before they slipped back to close at $12.99.

It must be like having a superpower.

With the stock market plunging again, I was thinking about this recent quote from George F. Colony, chairman and CEO of Forrester Research.

In a recession, the use of Facebook, Linked In, eCommerce, blogs will increase, not decrease, as people look for jobs, companies stay closer to their customers, and easier-to-ROI Internet advertising accelerates. Companies will have to stay focused on their web sites, social strategies, and eCommerce this time around -- or risk losing their next generation of customers.

So I'm putting the social networking question to you, in the first-ever poll in the Datamation Blog. The poll also gives me a chance to test some software from Cover It Live.

To Vote in the Poll

1. Click the Watch Now arrow

2. Look for the small Vote Now link and click it

3. A box pops up. Vote, and you'll see your vote tally in real time.

Amidst all the post-election celebrating and post-mortems comes disquieting news...

Palin Once Greeted McCain Staff Wearing Only A Towel

Sorry, I meant this disquieting news...

The computer systems of both the Obama and McCain campaigns were victims of a sophisticated cyberattack by an unknown "foreign entity," prompting a federal investigation, NEWSWEEK reports today.

At the Obama headquarters in midsummer, technology experts detected what they initially thought was a computer virus -- a case of "phishing," a form of hacking often employed to steal passwords or credit-card numbers. But by the next day, both the FBI and the Secret Service came to the campaign with an ominous warning: "You have a problem way bigger than what you understand," an agent told Obama's team. "You have been compromised, and a serious amount of files have been loaded off your system." The following day, Obama campaign chief David Plouffe heard from White House chief of staff Josh Bolten, to the same effect: "You have a real problem ... and you have to deal with it."

That's rich, coming from this White House. Sorry, I couldn't let it pass. Back to NEWSWEEK...

 The Feds told Obama's aides in late August that the McCain campaign's computer system had been similarly compromised. A top McCain official confirmed to NEWSWEEK that the campaign's computer system had been hacked and that the FBI had become involved.

Officials at the FBI and the White House told the Obama campaign that they believed a foreign entity or organization sought to gather information on the evolution of both camps' policy positions  information that might be useful in negotiations with a future administration.

Whew! At least it wasn't something important, like Obama's fantasy football picks.

The Feds assured the Obama team that it had not been hacked by its political opponents. (Obama technical experts later speculated that the hackers were Russian or Chinese.) A security firm retained by the Obama campaign took steps to secure its computer system and end the intrusion.

All joking aside, it'd be fascinating to find out the nature of the vulnerability, though I'm almost certain we never will. My gut feeling usually is to look for human error -- a hurried decision, a lapse in concentration, failure to follow proper procedures or, who knows, maybe even malicious intent. Whatever the cause, the incident validates Obama's intention to appoint the nation's first Chief Technology Officer "to ensure that our government and all its agencies have the right infrastructure, policies and services for the 21st century." I'd say they'd best get cracking. 

Because in a million years, I never could have predicted this application (PNSFW) of GPS technology...

Feminists around the world have reacted with horror to a new line of lingerie that comes equipped with a GPS tracking system.

The 'find me if you can' range of underwear has been described as a modern-day, high-tech chastity belt.

'It is outrageous to think that men can buy this, programme it and give it to their partners and then monitor them,' said Claudia Burghart, leader of a Berlin feminist group.

With this being such a massive news day in the U.S. -- CNN is predicting more than a billion page views -- my colleague James Maguire was surprised to learn something about online readers.

He visited the New York Times' web site and went to the "most popular" section. Turns out, it wasn't a piece on Barack Obama, John McCain, Joe the you know what, or battleground states. It was about stretching and physical education.

This little tidbit got me thinking. Where are you, gentle reader, getting your election news today? Which sites will you hit? Will it be the big guns like CNN, MSNBC, Foxnews, ABCnews, Reuters, etc.? Or do you go to blog sites like Politico.com or the Drudgereport? Or do you hit the pollster sites like Zogby.com? Or will you get all your breaking news from the TV and radio? Or will you go to your local newspaper's web site?

Drop us a line and let us know which news web sites are getting it right this election. Or maybe you're burned out on the whole thing.

If you need guidance, Information Week has done a nice piece, How To Follow The Presidential Election On The Web.

PC World chimes in with Top 20 Election Day Web Sites and Online Tools.

As for yours truly, I'll do a mixture of TV and web tonight. Although maybe my thoughts are beginning to wander after this incredibly long presidential race. This morning, while going over my voter's guide before heading to the polling booth, the story that caught my eye was on Yahoo. Deana, the most recent Bachelorette, had broken off her engagement with pro-snowboarder Jesse.

I'll try to get over it by the time one of the networks or web sites calls the race tonight ... if they can. 

IT professionals certainly don't need Forrester Research to tell them that Web 2.0 technology is destined to be widespread in the enterprise -- most know that from current experience, as social networking and collaboration tools continue to infiltrate their networks.

But for $379 each, the technology research and consulting firm can show you a couple of new reports with detailed forecasts about which Web 2.0 tools will (and won't) flourish in the enterprise and how. But I'll give you some bullet points culled from the two reports' executive summaries (here and here) and tables of content, all for free:

• While Web 2.0 technologies today are being deployed in many enterprises, "most have not yet used these tools to anywhere near their potential."

• Organizations "find wikis valuable, forums stable (though underutilized), and report mixed success with blogs."

• RSS "underperforms at work"

• "Despite Hype, Microblogging Is Just Not Ready For The Enterprise" (this report section title refers to Twitter and similar services)

If you want more information on the Forrester findings, this New York Times article has more. Beyond that, you're going to have to break out your wallet.