Rich in oil and gas, Texas looks to geothermal
Fri Jan 12, 2007 4:48pm ET
U.S. News
Withdrawals could start if Iraq plan works: Gates
New exhibit of King papers shed light on "Dream"
Trial of U.S. al Qaeda suspect Padilla delayed
More U.S. News...
Email This Article Print This Article Reprints
[-] Text [+]
HOUSTON (Reuters) - Texas is known for oil and gas, but the state said on Friday it will sell its first leases for development of geothermal energy.
Tracts totaling 11,000 acres in state-owned coastal waters in the Gulf of Mexico will be up for lease on Tuesday as part of an annual winter oil and gas lease sale, the Texas General Land Office said in a news release.
The areas to be bid on are known to have hot geologic strata below the surface, the agency said.
The state hopes the land can be drilled and water circulated through the geothermal layer and turned into steam to help generate electricity.
"We're finally making the Texas heat pay off," Texas Land Commissioner Jerry Patterson said in the release, referring to the state's hot weather.
Some companies have expressed interest in the specific tracts being offered, and may start developing them by going through existing, played-out oil wells to reach the hot strata, Land Office spokesman Jim Suydam said.
All proceeds from such lease sales go into a state fund that helps pay for public education.
Minimum bids for the geothermal leases have been set at $2 an acre, much less than the state typically gets for oil and gas leases. A company last year paid $8,750 an acre for the right to explore a Texas tract for oil and gas.
© Reuters 2007. All Rights Reserved.
Now, we must ask ourselves how can Texas possibly afford to give a reduction of over $8,500 per acre for leasing of oil and gas exploration? Our eloquent and intelligent president, being from the state of Texas, is just a minor coinicidence, since he is a most trustworthy president who has never exemplified any behavior unbecoming to the most powerful leader of the greatest power in the world? What do you think?
Friday, January 12, 2007
Where will the troops appear next?
U.S. denies military plans against Iran, Syria
Fri Jan 12, 2007 3:36pm ET
Top News
House votes to force Medicare drug negotiations
Fewer troops in 2007 if Iraq plan works: Gates
Iran's caution under sanctions eases heat at IAEA
VIDEO: The Update: Rocket hits US embassy
More Top News...
Email This Article Print This Article Reprints
[-] Text [+]
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The United States denied on Friday it was preparing for military action against Iran and Syria, after President George W. Bush issued a stern warning to them, raising concerns of a spillover from the Iraq war.
Bush, in his speech on Wednesday unveiling his revised Iraq strategy, accused Tehran and Damascus of allowing use of their territory for launching attacks inside Iraq, and vowed "we will interrupt the flow of support."
U.S. lawmakers voiced concern on Thursday the Iraq war could spread to neighboring Iran and Syria if U.S. troops were to chase militants across the border. But U.S. officials insisted the plan was to disrupt supply lines from inside Iraq.
White House spokesman Tony Snow said he wanted to knock down an "urban legend" that Bush was "trying to prepare the way for war with either country and that there were war preparations under way."
"There are not," he told reporters. "What the president was talking about is defending American forces within Iraq."
"There's lots of war gaming," he added. "This notion that somehow the president was announcing as a precursor to planned military action, a planned war against Iran, that's just not the case."
Snow reiterated that Washington was focusing on diplomatic means against Iran over its nuclear program. Western powers say Tehran is trying to develop nuclear weapons. Iran says it wants nuclear technology for civilian power generation.
The United States has repeatedly accused Shi'ite Iran of meddling in Iraq, where the long-oppressed Shi'ite majority is now in power and sectarian violence is raging. Tehran denies U.S. charges that it supplies Shi'ite militias with weapons.
Bush also said he had ordered an additional aircraft carrier strike group to the region and would deploy Patriot missile defense systems to "reassure our friends and allies" -- steps widely seen as a warning to Iran and Syria.
Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Joseph Biden bluntly told U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice on Thursday he did not think Bush had the authority to launch attacks against militant networks in Iran and Syria.
© Reuters 2007. All Rights Reserved
Fri Jan 12, 2007 3:36pm ET
Top News
House votes to force Medicare drug negotiations
Fewer troops in 2007 if Iraq plan works: Gates
Iran's caution under sanctions eases heat at IAEA
VIDEO: The Update: Rocket hits US embassy
More Top News...
Email This Article Print This Article Reprints
[-] Text [+]
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The United States denied on Friday it was preparing for military action against Iran and Syria, after President George W. Bush issued a stern warning to them, raising concerns of a spillover from the Iraq war.
Bush, in his speech on Wednesday unveiling his revised Iraq strategy, accused Tehran and Damascus of allowing use of their territory for launching attacks inside Iraq, and vowed "we will interrupt the flow of support."
U.S. lawmakers voiced concern on Thursday the Iraq war could spread to neighboring Iran and Syria if U.S. troops were to chase militants across the border. But U.S. officials insisted the plan was to disrupt supply lines from inside Iraq.
White House spokesman Tony Snow said he wanted to knock down an "urban legend" that Bush was "trying to prepare the way for war with either country and that there were war preparations under way."
"There are not," he told reporters. "What the president was talking about is defending American forces within Iraq."
"There's lots of war gaming," he added. "This notion that somehow the president was announcing as a precursor to planned military action, a planned war against Iran, that's just not the case."
Snow reiterated that Washington was focusing on diplomatic means against Iran over its nuclear program. Western powers say Tehran is trying to develop nuclear weapons. Iran says it wants nuclear technology for civilian power generation.
The United States has repeatedly accused Shi'ite Iran of meddling in Iraq, where the long-oppressed Shi'ite majority is now in power and sectarian violence is raging. Tehran denies U.S. charges that it supplies Shi'ite militias with weapons.
Bush also said he had ordered an additional aircraft carrier strike group to the region and would deploy Patriot missile defense systems to "reassure our friends and allies" -- steps widely seen as a warning to Iran and Syria.
Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Joseph Biden bluntly told U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice on Thursday he did not think Bush had the authority to launch attacks against militant networks in Iran and Syria.
© Reuters 2007. All Rights Reserved
Fight Israel's Battles for Solidarity
Senators fear Iraq war may spill to Iran, Syria
Fri Jan 12, 2007 4:50am ET
Top News
Suspected Greek militants fire rocket at U.S. embassy
U.S. says Maliki knows time is running out
Israeli soldiers held by Hezbollah alive: report
More Top News... Email This Article Print This Article Reprints [-] Text [+] By Arshad Mohammed and David Morgan
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. Democratic and Republican senators voiced strong concern on Thursday that the Iraq war could spread to neighboring Iran and Syria if the U.S. military were to chase militants across the border.
President Bush, who accuses Iran and Syria of fomenting the violence in Iraq, on Wednesday proposed sending 21,500 more U.S. troops to try to restore security nearly four years after the U.S.-led invasion.
Bush sparked worries that the conflict may widen by his comment that "we'll interrupt the flow of support from Iran and Syria. And we will seek out and destroy the networks providing advanced weaponry and training to our enemies in Iraq."
U.S. officials said their plan was to disrupt such networks while staying inside Iraq, but their comments did not appear to mollify senior U.S. lawmakers.
Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Joseph Biden bluntly told Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice he did not think Bush had the authority to launch attacks to stamp out militant networks in Iran and Syria.
"If the president concluded he had to invade Iran ... or Syria in pursuit of these networks, I believe the present authorization granted the president to use force in Iraq does not cover that and he does need congressional authority to do that," said Biden.
"I just want to set that marker," added the Delaware Democrat, who later wrote Bush a letter asking for an "authoritative answer" on whether he believed U.S. forces could cross into Iran or Syria without congressional authorization. Continued...
© Reuters 2007. All Rights Reserved.
< Previous 1 2 3 Next
Fri Jan 12, 2007 4:50am ET
Top News
Suspected Greek militants fire rocket at U.S. embassy
U.S. says Maliki knows time is running out
Israeli soldiers held by Hezbollah alive: report
More Top News... Email This Article Print This Article Reprints [-] Text [+] By Arshad Mohammed and David Morgan
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. Democratic and Republican senators voiced strong concern on Thursday that the Iraq war could spread to neighboring Iran and Syria if the U.S. military were to chase militants across the border.
President Bush, who accuses Iran and Syria of fomenting the violence in Iraq, on Wednesday proposed sending 21,500 more U.S. troops to try to restore security nearly four years after the U.S.-led invasion.
Bush sparked worries that the conflict may widen by his comment that "we'll interrupt the flow of support from Iran and Syria. And we will seek out and destroy the networks providing advanced weaponry and training to our enemies in Iraq."
U.S. officials said their plan was to disrupt such networks while staying inside Iraq, but their comments did not appear to mollify senior U.S. lawmakers.
Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Joseph Biden bluntly told Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice he did not think Bush had the authority to launch attacks to stamp out militant networks in Iran and Syria.
"If the president concluded he had to invade Iran ... or Syria in pursuit of these networks, I believe the present authorization granted the president to use force in Iraq does not cover that and he does need congressional authority to do that," said Biden.
"I just want to set that marker," added the Delaware Democrat, who later wrote Bush a letter asking for an "authoritative answer" on whether he believed U.S. forces could cross into Iran or Syria without congressional authorization. Continued...
© Reuters 2007. All Rights Reserved.
< Previous 1 2 3 Next
What defines Africa's poor?
Mali film puts West's blueprint for Africa on trial
Jan 12, 2007 8:29am ET
In Depth News
Somali refugees in Kenya downbeat about return
U.S. Guard strained by Iraq, but ready for more
Mountaintop meteorology mixes high, low-tech tools
More In Depth News... Email This Article | Print This Article | Reprints [-] Text [+] By Nick Tattersall
DAKAR (Reuters) - Africa's poorest are even worse off than they were a quarter of a century ago and despite years of debt relief, humanitarian aid and the goodwill of fund-raising rock stars, the West is to blame.
So say the witnesses who line up to testify against Western financial institutions in "Bamako", a scathing film by Mauritanian-born director Abderrahmane Sissako, due to be released in Britain and the United States next month.
The plot is simple. Mostly poor Africans who have had no say in how their economies are run plead their case against the World Bank and International Monetary Fund, accusing them of imposing rules that have kept their nations mired in misery.
Reuters Pictures
Editors Choice: Best pictures
from the last 24 hours.
View Slideshow
Set in the dusty courtyard of his father's family compound in Mali's capital Bamako, Sissako's fantasy trial gives a voice to the voiceless, those who have felt the effects of measures imposed by Western economists but have had no easy way to reply.
"It's not so much about identifying who is guilty as denouncing the fact that the fate of hundreds of millions of people has been sealed by policies decided outside their universe," Sissako says on the Website www.bamako-film.com.
It would be easy to dismiss this as a theatrical gesture by an intellectual blaming his continent's ills on outsiders.
But what makes Sissako's film compelling is that his roll-call of witnesses are not actors but real local people, including a would-be illegal migrant, an elderly villager and a former minister. Continued...
© Reuters 2007. All Rights Reserved.
1 | 2 | 3 | 4
Jan 12, 2007 8:29am ET
In Depth News
Somali refugees in Kenya downbeat about return
U.S. Guard strained by Iraq, but ready for more
Mountaintop meteorology mixes high, low-tech tools
More In Depth News... Email This Article | Print This Article | Reprints [-] Text [+] By Nick Tattersall
DAKAR (Reuters) - Africa's poorest are even worse off than they were a quarter of a century ago and despite years of debt relief, humanitarian aid and the goodwill of fund-raising rock stars, the West is to blame.
So say the witnesses who line up to testify against Western financial institutions in "Bamako", a scathing film by Mauritanian-born director Abderrahmane Sissako, due to be released in Britain and the United States next month.
The plot is simple. Mostly poor Africans who have had no say in how their economies are run plead their case against the World Bank and International Monetary Fund, accusing them of imposing rules that have kept their nations mired in misery.
Reuters Pictures
Editors Choice: Best pictures
from the last 24 hours.
View Slideshow
Set in the dusty courtyard of his father's family compound in Mali's capital Bamako, Sissako's fantasy trial gives a voice to the voiceless, those who have felt the effects of measures imposed by Western economists but have had no easy way to reply.
"It's not so much about identifying who is guilty as denouncing the fact that the fate of hundreds of millions of people has been sealed by policies decided outside their universe," Sissako says on the Website www.bamako-film.com.
It would be easy to dismiss this as a theatrical gesture by an intellectual blaming his continent's ills on outsiders.
But what makes Sissako's film compelling is that his roll-call of witnesses are not actors but real local people, including a would-be illegal migrant, an elderly villager and a former minister. Continued...
© Reuters 2007. All Rights Reserved.
1 | 2 | 3 | 4
Soldiers Without Options
Pentagon Abandons Active-Duty Time Limit
By ROBERT BURNSAP Military Writer
WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Pentagon has abandoned its limit on the time a citizen-soldier can be required to serve on active duty, officials said Thursday, a major change that reflects an Army stretched thin by longer-than-expected combat in Iraq.
The day after President Bush announced his plan for a deeper U.S. military commitment in Iraq, Gen. Peter Pace, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told reporters the change in reserve policy would have been made anyway because active-duty troops already were getting too little time between their combat tours.
The Pentagon also announced it is proposing to Congress that the size of the Army be increased by 65,000, to 547,000 and that the Marine Corps, the smallest of the services, grow by 27,000, to 202,000, over the next five years. No cost estimate was provided, but officials said it would be at least several billion dollars.
Until now, the Pentagon's policy on the Guard or Reserve was that members' cumulative time on active duty for the Iraq or Afghan wars could not exceed 24 months. That cumulative limit is now lifted; the remaining limit is on the length of any single mobilization, which may not exceed 24 consecutive months, Pace said.
In other words, a citizen-soldier could be mobilized for a 24-month stretch in Iraq or Afghanistan, then demobilized and allowed to return to civilian life, only to be mobilized a second time for as much as an additional 24 months. In practice, Pace said, the Pentagon intends to limit all future mobilizations to 12 months.
Members of the Guard combat brigades that have served in Iraq in recent years spent 18 months on active duty _ about six months in pre- deployment training in the United States, followed by about 12 months in Iraq. Under the old policy, they could not be sent back to Iraq because their cumulative time on active duty would exceed 24 months. Now that cumulative limit has been lifted, giving the Pentagon more flexibility.
The new approach, Pace said, is to squeeze the training, deployment and demobilization into a maximum of 12 months. He called that a "significant planning factor" for Guard and Reserve members and their families.
David Chu, the Pentagon's chief of personnel, said in an interview that he thinks Guard and Reserve members will be cheered by the decision to limit future mobilizations to 12 months. The fact that some with previous Iraq experience will end up spending more than 24 months on active duty is "no big deal," Chu said, because it has been "implicitly understood" by most that they eventually would go beyond 24 months.
A senior U.S. military official who briefed reporters Thursday on Iraq-related developments said that by next January, the Pentagon "probably will be calling again" on National Guard combat brigades that previously served yearlong tours in Iraq. Under Pentagon ground rules, the official could not be further identified.
Defense Secretary Robert Gates, appearing with Pace, announced several other changes in Guard and Reserve policy:
_Although the Pentagon's goal is to mobilize Guard and Reserve units no more frequently than one year out of six, the demands of wartime will require calling up some units more often than that. They provided no details on how many units would be remobilized at the faster pace or when that would begin to happen.
Army officials had been saying for some time that more frequent mobilizations were necessary because the active-duty force is being stretched too thin. Gates' announcement is the first confirmation of the change.
_To allow for more cohesion among Guard and Reserve units sent into combat, they will be deployed as whole units, rather than as partial units or as individuals plugged into a unit they do not normally train with.
_Extra pay will be provided for Guard and Reserve troops who are required to mobilize more than once in six years; active-duty troops who get less than two years between overseas deployments also will get extra pay. Details were not provided.
_Military commanders will review their administration of a hardship waiver program "to ensure that they have properly taken into account exceptional circumstances facing military families of deployed service members."
As part of Bush's plan for boosting U.S. troop strength in Iraq, a brigade of National Guard soldiers from Minnesota will have its yearlong tour in Iraq extended by 125 days, to the end of July, and a Patriot missile battalion will be sent to the Persian Gulf next month, the Army said Thursday.
Maj. Randy Taylor, a spokesman for the 3rd Battalion, 43rd Air Defense Artillery Regiment, at Fort Bliss, Texas, said the Patriot unit was aware of the announced deployment. He said no formal order had been received Thursday.
The dispatching of a Patriot missile battery, capable of defending against shorter-range ballistic missile attacks, appeared linked to Bush's announcement Wednesday that he ordered an aircraft carrier strike group to the Middle East, which would be in easy reach of Iran, whose nuclear program is a U.S. concern. Navy officials said the carrier heading to the Gulf region is the USS John C. Stennis, which previously had been in line to deploy to the Pacific. It was not clear Thursday how the Pentagon intended to compensate in the Pacific for the absence of the Stennis in that region, where a chief worry is North Korea.
The Marines announced that two infantry units _ the 3rd Battalion, 4th Marine Regiment, and the 1st Battalion, 6th Marine Regiment _ will stay in Iraq 60 to 90 days longer than scheduled. That will enable the Marines to have a total of eight infantry battalions in western Anbar province, instead of the current six, by February. Once the 60- to 90- day extension is over, an additional two battalions will be sent in early from their U.S. bases.
Also, the 15th Marine Expeditionary Unit, which combines infantry with a helicopter squadron and a logistics battalion, totaling about 2,200 Marines, will stay in Anbar for 45 more days.
Those extensions conform with Bush's announcement that he was ordering 4,000 more Marines to Anbar.
The military tries to avoid extending combat tours and sending forces earlier than planned because it disrupts the lives of troops and their families and makes it harder for the services to get all troops through the education and training programs they need for promotions. But in this case it was deemed unavoidable.
By ROBERT BURNSAP Military Writer
WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Pentagon has abandoned its limit on the time a citizen-soldier can be required to serve on active duty, officials said Thursday, a major change that reflects an Army stretched thin by longer-than-expected combat in Iraq.
The day after President Bush announced his plan for a deeper U.S. military commitment in Iraq, Gen. Peter Pace, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told reporters the change in reserve policy would have been made anyway because active-duty troops already were getting too little time between their combat tours.
The Pentagon also announced it is proposing to Congress that the size of the Army be increased by 65,000, to 547,000 and that the Marine Corps, the smallest of the services, grow by 27,000, to 202,000, over the next five years. No cost estimate was provided, but officials said it would be at least several billion dollars.
Until now, the Pentagon's policy on the Guard or Reserve was that members' cumulative time on active duty for the Iraq or Afghan wars could not exceed 24 months. That cumulative limit is now lifted; the remaining limit is on the length of any single mobilization, which may not exceed 24 consecutive months, Pace said.
In other words, a citizen-soldier could be mobilized for a 24-month stretch in Iraq or Afghanistan, then demobilized and allowed to return to civilian life, only to be mobilized a second time for as much as an additional 24 months. In practice, Pace said, the Pentagon intends to limit all future mobilizations to 12 months.
Members of the Guard combat brigades that have served in Iraq in recent years spent 18 months on active duty _ about six months in pre- deployment training in the United States, followed by about 12 months in Iraq. Under the old policy, they could not be sent back to Iraq because their cumulative time on active duty would exceed 24 months. Now that cumulative limit has been lifted, giving the Pentagon more flexibility.
The new approach, Pace said, is to squeeze the training, deployment and demobilization into a maximum of 12 months. He called that a "significant planning factor" for Guard and Reserve members and their families.
David Chu, the Pentagon's chief of personnel, said in an interview that he thinks Guard and Reserve members will be cheered by the decision to limit future mobilizations to 12 months. The fact that some with previous Iraq experience will end up spending more than 24 months on active duty is "no big deal," Chu said, because it has been "implicitly understood" by most that they eventually would go beyond 24 months.
A senior U.S. military official who briefed reporters Thursday on Iraq-related developments said that by next January, the Pentagon "probably will be calling again" on National Guard combat brigades that previously served yearlong tours in Iraq. Under Pentagon ground rules, the official could not be further identified.
Defense Secretary Robert Gates, appearing with Pace, announced several other changes in Guard and Reserve policy:
_Although the Pentagon's goal is to mobilize Guard and Reserve units no more frequently than one year out of six, the demands of wartime will require calling up some units more often than that. They provided no details on how many units would be remobilized at the faster pace or when that would begin to happen.
Army officials had been saying for some time that more frequent mobilizations were necessary because the active-duty force is being stretched too thin. Gates' announcement is the first confirmation of the change.
_To allow for more cohesion among Guard and Reserve units sent into combat, they will be deployed as whole units, rather than as partial units or as individuals plugged into a unit they do not normally train with.
_Extra pay will be provided for Guard and Reserve troops who are required to mobilize more than once in six years; active-duty troops who get less than two years between overseas deployments also will get extra pay. Details were not provided.
_Military commanders will review their administration of a hardship waiver program "to ensure that they have properly taken into account exceptional circumstances facing military families of deployed service members."
As part of Bush's plan for boosting U.S. troop strength in Iraq, a brigade of National Guard soldiers from Minnesota will have its yearlong tour in Iraq extended by 125 days, to the end of July, and a Patriot missile battalion will be sent to the Persian Gulf next month, the Army said Thursday.
Maj. Randy Taylor, a spokesman for the 3rd Battalion, 43rd Air Defense Artillery Regiment, at Fort Bliss, Texas, said the Patriot unit was aware of the announced deployment. He said no formal order had been received Thursday.
The dispatching of a Patriot missile battery, capable of defending against shorter-range ballistic missile attacks, appeared linked to Bush's announcement Wednesday that he ordered an aircraft carrier strike group to the Middle East, which would be in easy reach of Iran, whose nuclear program is a U.S. concern. Navy officials said the carrier heading to the Gulf region is the USS John C. Stennis, which previously had been in line to deploy to the Pacific. It was not clear Thursday how the Pentagon intended to compensate in the Pacific for the absence of the Stennis in that region, where a chief worry is North Korea.
The Marines announced that two infantry units _ the 3rd Battalion, 4th Marine Regiment, and the 1st Battalion, 6th Marine Regiment _ will stay in Iraq 60 to 90 days longer than scheduled. That will enable the Marines to have a total of eight infantry battalions in western Anbar province, instead of the current six, by February. Once the 60- to 90- day extension is over, an additional two battalions will be sent in early from their U.S. bases.
Also, the 15th Marine Expeditionary Unit, which combines infantry with a helicopter squadron and a logistics battalion, totaling about 2,200 Marines, will stay in Anbar for 45 more days.
Those extensions conform with Bush's announcement that he was ordering 4,000 more Marines to Anbar.
The military tries to avoid extending combat tours and sending forces earlier than planned because it disrupts the lives of troops and their families and makes it harder for the services to get all troops through the education and training programs they need for promotions. But in this case it was deemed unavoidable.
Cingular's Largest Amount of Dropped Calls
AT&T to phase out Cingular brand
AT&T will begin to extinguish the cell brand to imprint its more-than-century-old name firmly across its services.
By Reuters -->
Published: January 11, 2007, 10:30 PM PST
TalkBack E-mail Print del.icio.us Digg this
AT&T will begin to extinguish next week the brand of cell phone operator Cingular, built up with billions of dollars over a few years, to imprint its more-than-century-old name firmly across its services.
AT&T, which took full control of No. 1 U.S. mobile carrier Cingular with its $86 billion purchase of BellSouth last month, will launch on Monday a campaign to mark the change.
"We did not enter that decision lightly," Wendy Clark, vice president of advertising at AT&T, said in an interview. "We came to understand that consumer customers and business customers alike are looking for a single provider. We heard it so consistently across the marketplace."
In its first stage, Cingular will share its orange logo of a bouncing jack with the AT&T globe logo on everything from television ads to sales uniforms and monthly bills.
AT&T 's name and logo will eventually replace Cingular in a process expected to take several months, with the exact timing determined as more customer feedback comes in, Clark said.
But with its long and complicated history, AT&T may face customer confusion over its name, marketing experts said. Also, Cingular built up a reputation among younger customers who may not easily associate with the AT&T brand.
At stake are AT&T 's efforts to promote its bundle of phone, Internet and video services against a growing number of rivals, including cable operators and Web providers.
One new ad will portray a familiar Cingular image--grain harvesters mowing a field to represent "bars" showing maximum cell phone reception. But in a new take, the harversters will change direction and mow the AT&T globe out of the stalks.
Now on News.com:
Brisk business for Vista?
Photos: Robots on the loose at gadgets shindig
Photos: Around and about the Macworld floor
Extra: Spy coin report overblown
Video: Will CBS' experiment in user-generated content work?
"It's a tough proposition," said Hayes Roth, chief marketing officer at brand agency Landor Associates. "Multiple brands within any company is expensive. Arguably they don't have much choice, they've made a stand now that they've invested back in the core brand."
Cingular spent nearly $1 billion on media advertising in the first nine months of 2006, up from about $920 million in the same period during 2005, according to the latest data from tracking firm TNS Media Intelligence.
For the remainder of their businesses, AT&T spent nearly $600 million on media ads in the nine-month period, while BellSouth spent just over $100 million, TNS said.
AT&T has said about 20 percent of operating cost savings in the BellSouth merger will come from lower advertising costs.
The new AT&T was formed in the merger of SBC Communications and AT&T in late 2005. Adding to the mix, in late 2004 Cingular bought AT&T Wireless, eradicating that brand for its poor reputation among customers.
"The good news is there is a difference between AT&T and AT&T Wireless," Clark said. "We have benefited significantly...by having 12 months under our belt as the new AT&T."
Story Copyright © 2007 Reuters Limited. All rights reserved.
TalkBack E-mail Print del.icio.us Digg this
AT&T will begin to extinguish the cell brand to imprint its more-than-century-old name firmly across its services.
By Reuters -->
Published: January 11, 2007, 10:30 PM PST
TalkBack E-mail Print del.icio.us Digg this
AT&T will begin to extinguish next week the brand of cell phone operator Cingular, built up with billions of dollars over a few years, to imprint its more-than-century-old name firmly across its services.
AT&T, which took full control of No. 1 U.S. mobile carrier Cingular with its $86 billion purchase of BellSouth last month, will launch on Monday a campaign to mark the change.
"We did not enter that decision lightly," Wendy Clark, vice president of advertising at AT&T, said in an interview. "We came to understand that consumer customers and business customers alike are looking for a single provider. We heard it so consistently across the marketplace."
In its first stage, Cingular will share its orange logo of a bouncing jack with the AT&T globe logo on everything from television ads to sales uniforms and monthly bills.
AT&T 's name and logo will eventually replace Cingular in a process expected to take several months, with the exact timing determined as more customer feedback comes in, Clark said.
But with its long and complicated history, AT&T may face customer confusion over its name, marketing experts said. Also, Cingular built up a reputation among younger customers who may not easily associate with the AT&T brand.
At stake are AT&T 's efforts to promote its bundle of phone, Internet and video services against a growing number of rivals, including cable operators and Web providers.
One new ad will portray a familiar Cingular image--grain harvesters mowing a field to represent "bars" showing maximum cell phone reception. But in a new take, the harversters will change direction and mow the AT&T globe out of the stalks.
Now on News.com:
Brisk business for Vista?
Photos: Robots on the loose at gadgets shindig
Photos: Around and about the Macworld floor
Extra: Spy coin report overblown
Video: Will CBS' experiment in user-generated content work?
"It's a tough proposition," said Hayes Roth, chief marketing officer at brand agency Landor Associates. "Multiple brands within any company is expensive. Arguably they don't have much choice, they've made a stand now that they've invested back in the core brand."
Cingular spent nearly $1 billion on media advertising in the first nine months of 2006, up from about $920 million in the same period during 2005, according to the latest data from tracking firm TNS Media Intelligence.
For the remainder of their businesses, AT&T spent nearly $600 million on media ads in the nine-month period, while BellSouth spent just over $100 million, TNS said.
AT&T has said about 20 percent of operating cost savings in the BellSouth merger will come from lower advertising costs.
The new AT&T was formed in the merger of SBC Communications and AT&T in late 2005. Adding to the mix, in late 2004 Cingular bought AT&T Wireless, eradicating that brand for its poor reputation among customers.
"The good news is there is a difference between AT&T and AT&T Wireless," Clark said. "We have benefited significantly...by having 12 months under our belt as the new AT&T."
Story Copyright © 2007 Reuters Limited. All rights reserved.
TalkBack E-mail Print del.icio.us Digg this
Thursday, January 11, 2007
Office Email Loops
Firms Fret as Office E-Mail Jumps Security Walls
Todd Wilson, an operations manager at Johns Hopkins University, said copies of employees’ forwarded messages sit untouched on servers.
By BRAD STONE
Published: January 11, 2007
SAN FRANCISCO, Jan. 10 — Companies spend millions on systems to keep corporate e-mail safe. If only their employees were as paranoid.
A growing number of Internet-literate workers are forwarding their office e-mail to free Web-accessible personal accounts offered by Google, Yahoo and other companies. Their employers, who envision corporate secrets leaking through the back door of otherwise well-protected computer networks, are not pleased.
“It’s a hole you can drive an 18-wheeler through,” said Paul D. Myer, president of the security firm 8E6 Technologies in Orange, Calif.
It is a battle of best intentions: productivity and convenience pitted against security and more than a little anxiety.
Corporate techies — who, after all, are paid to worry — want strict control over internal company communications and fear that forwarding e-mail might expose proprietary secrets to prying eyes. Employees just want to get to their mail quickly, wherever they are, without leaping through too many security hoops.
Corporate networks, which typically have several layers of defenses against hackers, can require special software and multiple passwords for access. Some companies use systems that give employees a security code that changes every 60 seconds; this must be read from the display screen of a small card and typed quickly.
That is too much for some employees, especially when their computers can store the passwords for their Web-based mail, allowing them to get right down to business.
So far, no major corporate disasters caused by this kind of e-mail forwarding have come to light. But security experts say the risks are real. For example, the flimsier security defenses of Web mail systems could allow viruses or spyware to get through, and employees could unwittingly download them at the office and infect the corporate network.
Also, because messages sent from Web-based accounts do not pass through the corporate mail system, companies could run afoul of federal laws that require them to archive corporate mail and turn it over during litigation.
Lawyers in particular wring their hands over employees using outside e-mail services. They encourage companies to keep messages for as long as necessary and then erase them to keep them out of the reach of legal foes. Companies have no control over the life span of e-mail messages in employees’ Web accounts.
“If employees are just forwarding to their Web e-mail, we have no way to know what they are doing on the other end,” said Joe Fantuzzi, chief executive of the information security firm Workshare. “They could do anything they want. They could be giving secrets to the K.G.B.”
Hospitals have an added legal obligation to protect patient records. But when DeKalb Medical Center in Atlanta started monitoring its staff use of Web-based e-mail, it found that doctors and nurses routinely forwarded confidential medical records to their personal Web mail accounts — not for nefarious purposes, but so they could continue to work from home.
In the months after the hospital began monitoring traffic to Web e-mail services, it identified “a couple hundred incidents,” said Sharon Finney, DeKalb’s information security administrator. “I was surprised about the lack of literacy about the technology we depend on every day,” she said.
DeKalb now forbids the practice, and uses several software systems that monitor the hospital’s outbound e-mail and Web traffic. Ms Finney said she still catches four to five perpetrators a month trying to forward hospital e-mail.
The Web mail services may also be prone to glitches. Last month, Google fixed a bug that caused the disappearance of “some or all” of the stored mail of around 60 users. A week later, it acknowledged a security hole that could have exposed its users’ address books to Internet attackers.
Even the security experts most knowledgeable about the risks of e-mail forwarding to personal accounts acknowledge doing so themselves.
“Of course I do it; who doesn’t?” said Kimberly Getgen Bargero, vice president for marketing at Sendmail, an e-mail software company in Emeryville, Calif. Ms. Bargero said she often used her Yahoo Mail account on business trips so she does not have to access her corporate network remotely.
What do you think of this article?
Ted Turner Solar venture
Ted Turner to launch venture with NJ solar company
Wed Jan 10, 2007 5:01pm ET
Wed Jan 10, 2007 5:01pm ET
U.S. News
Pentagon chief seeks bigger Army, Marine Corps
Kids in poverty have less parent time: Census
Rice loves Fox tv, sees CBS anchor as "decent guy"
More U.S. News...
Email This Article Print This Article Reprints
NEW YORK (Reuters) - Ted Turner, the cable television billionaire and owner of vast land tracts in the U.S. West, is forming a venture with a solar company targeting California and other markets, his office said.
"Our future depends on changing the way we use energy," Turner said in a statement. "We've got to move away from fossil fuels and develop long-term energy solutions that work. Using clean energy technologies, such as solar power, is the right thing to do, and it represents a tremendous business opportunity."
Turner will partner with Dome-Tech Solar, a solar company in Branchburg, New Jersey to create DT Solar, a Turner renewable energy company, a spokesman said.
Financial details were not immediately available. The spokesman said they would be revealed in coming weeks.
Dome-Tech Solar, a private company founded in 2003, develops and builds large-scale solar energy systems for commercial, industrial and institutional clients.
The market for solar technology is expected to expand substantially in California, where governor Arnold Schwarzenegger has set a goal to create 3,000 megawatts of new solar produced electricity by 2017.
© Reuters 2007. All Rights Reserved.
Maine Bans Private Smoking
Bangor Makes It Illegal to Smoke in Cars
BANGOR, Maine (AP) -- The Bangor City Council approved a measure Monday that prohibits people from smoking in vehicles when children are present.
When the law goes into effect next week, Bangor will become the first municipality in Maine to have such a law. Similar statewide measures have been adopted in Arkansas and Louisiana and are under consideration in several other states.
People who smoke with children present in the confined space of a car or truck might as well be deliberately trying to kill those children, said City Councilor Patricia Blanchette, who is a smoker.
"Let's step up to the plate and lead; our children are worth the fight," she said.
The ordinance, which was approved by a 6-3 vote, applies to any motor vehicles on any public roads within the city. Violators face fines of up to $50.
An amendment that was added Monday to the original proposal makes the violation a primary offense, rather than a secondary offense. That means police can pull over vehicles if they see somebody smoking with anybody under 18 in the vehicle; if it were a secondary offense, police would have to stop the vehicle for some other reason, such as speeding.
Several residents, doctors and representatives from the Bangor Region Chamber of Commerce and the Fusion Bangor development group spoke in favor of the ordinance.
Pediatrician Robert Holmberg said the evidence is "incontrovertible" that exposure to cigarette smoke causes medical disorders in children, including asthma, bronchitis, ear infections and heart disease.
"Children are the most in need of the protection by public policy, because they can't protect themselves," he said.
But the ordinance also had its critics.
Councilor Susan Hawes, who voted against the law, said the police department should devote its energy to more important issues. There's already too much government intervention in people's lives, she said.
Aaron Prill of Bangor told the council that the ordinance was a "feel- good option" that was not intended to protect children but rather to "moralize" against smokers. Most smokers have enough common sense not to smoke around children, he said.
___
Information from: Bangor Daily News, http://www.bangornews.com
Consumer Electronics War
Cisco Sues Apple Over Use of IPhone Name
By JORDAN ROBERTSONAP Business Writer
SAN FRANCISCO (AP) -- Cisco Systems Inc. said Wednesday it is suing Apple Inc. in federal court over Apple's use of Cisco's registered iPhone trademark for its new handheld device.
Cisco has owned the trademark on the name "iPhone" since 2000, when it acquired InfoGear Technology Corp., which originally registered the name.
And three weeks ago, Cisco's Linksys division put the trademark to use, releasing an Internet-enabled phone called "iPhone" that uses the increasingly popular Voice over Internet Protocol, or VoIP.
On Tuesday, Apple unveiled the iPhone, its "game-changing" touch- screen-controlled cell phone device that plays music, surfs the Web and delivers voicemail and e-mail.
"Cisco entered into negotiations with Apple in good faith after Apple repeatedly asked permission to use Cisco's iPhone name," said Mark Chandler, Cisco senior vice president and general counsel, in a statement. "There is no doubt that Apple's new phone is very exciting, but they should not be using our trademark without our permission."
Cisco is seeking injunctive relief to prevent Apple from copying Cisco's iPhone trademark.
"Today's iPhone is not tomorrow's iPhone. The potential for convergence of the home phone, cell phone, work phone and PC is limitless, which is why it is so important for us to protect our brand," Chandler added.
Sheehan Making Strides
Cindy Sheehan Buys Property in Crawford
CRAWFORD, Texas (AP) -- War protester Cindy Sheehan has purchased a 5-acre plot in Crawford with some of the insurance money she received after her son was killed in Iraq.
The group she helps lead, Gold Star Families for Peace, says on its Web site that it will return next month to protest the war in Iraq in the small town near Waco where President Bush has a ranch. Like last year, Sheehan, whose son Casey was killed in Iraq in 2004, will again demand to meet with the president.
"We decided to buy property in Crawford to use until George's resignation or impeachment, which we all hope is soon for the sake of the world," Sheehan said in a newsletter set to be sent to supporters Thursday. "I can't think of a better way to use Casey's insurance money than for peace, and I am sure that Casey approves."
Her anti-war gathering in Crawford is scheduled for Aug. 16 through Sept. 2. But Bush is scheduled to be at his ranch mainly during the first two weeks of August.
Sheehan, from California, reinvigorated the anti-war movement last summer with her peace vigil, which started in ditches off the road to Bush's ranch. As it grew, the group also set up its protests on a private, 1-acre lot closer to the ranch.
CRAWFORD, Texas (AP) -- War protester Cindy Sheehan has purchased a 5-acre plot in Crawford with some of the insurance money she received after her son was killed in Iraq.
The group she helps lead, Gold Star Families for Peace, says on its Web site that it will return next month to protest the war in Iraq in the small town near Waco where President Bush has a ranch. Like last year, Sheehan, whose son Casey was killed in Iraq in 2004, will again demand to meet with the president.
"We decided to buy property in Crawford to use until George's resignation or impeachment, which we all hope is soon for the sake of the world," Sheehan said in a newsletter set to be sent to supporters Thursday. "I can't think of a better way to use Casey's insurance money than for peace, and I am sure that Casey approves."
Her anti-war gathering in Crawford is scheduled for Aug. 16 through Sept. 2. But Bush is scheduled to be at his ranch mainly during the first two weeks of August.
Sheehan, from California, reinvigorated the anti-war movement last summer with her peace vigil, which started in ditches off the road to Bush's ranch. As it grew, the group also set up its protests on a private, 1-acre lot closer to the ranch.
Wednesday, January 10, 2007
Bush helps DOD budget
Jan 10 10:07 AM US/Eastern
WASHINGTON (AP) -- President Bush will tell the nation Wednesday night he will send more than 20,000 additional American forces to Iraq, acknowledging that it had been a mistake earlier not to have more American and Iraqi troops fighting the war, a senior administration official said.
Seeking support for a retooled strategy to win support for the unpopular war, the president also will acknowledge that the rules of engagement were flawed, White House counselor Dan Bartlett said.
Even before Bush speaks, Democrats were laying plans to register their opposition to the troop buildup. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi pledged to hold a vote on the increase, trying to isolate Bush on his handling of the war. Democratic leaders in the Senate, saying they hoped to win some Republican support, said they planned to have their chamber debate a symbolic measure next week also expressing opposition to troop increases.
The Democratic congressional election victory in November showed "American voters expect us to help get us out of Iraq," Sen. Joseph Biden, D-Del., a 2008 presidential hopeful and chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, said as his panel heard independent experts on Iraq.
In the latest sign of GOP unease on the war, Sen. Richard Lugar of Indiana, top Republican on the Foreign Relations panel, said, "The president and his team need to explain what objectives we are trying to achieve if forces are expanded, where and how they will be used," and how long additional troops may be needed.
For a little over 20 minutes Wednesday night, Bush is to explain why a gradual buildup of about 20,000 additional U.S. troops, along with other steps expected to include pumping $1 billion into Iraq's economy, is the answer for a more than 3 1/2-year-old war that has only gotten deadlier with no end in sight.
Bartlett did a round of interviews on television morning shows to set the stage for the president's address.
"A vast majority of the American people are not satisfied with the progress in Iraq," Bartlett said. "President Bush is in their camp. He's not satisfied, he's going to say the strategy was not working, he's going to tell them specifically how we're going to fix the strategy."
Bush will say that the infusion of additional American forces will depend on Iraq taking specific steps to curb sectarian violence and making other moves to deal with political and economic problems. The first batch of new U.S. troops is expected to be in Iraq within three weeks.
Bartlett also said that Bush will "make very clear that America's commitment is not open-ended, that benchmarks have to be met, that milestones have to be reached both on the security side but just as importantly on the political side and the economic side. It will be unequivocal in President Bush's speech tonight that the Iraqis have to step up."
In his speech, Bush was to acknowledge that mistakes have been made, Bartlett said.
"The president will say very clearly tonight that there were mistakes with the earlier operations, that it did not have enough Iraqi troops or U.S. troops, that the rules of engagement _ the terms in which our troops would actually conduct these operations _ were flawed," Bartlett said.
After nearly four years of fighting, $400 billion and thousands of American and Iraqi lives lost, the White House calls the president's prime-time address from the White House library just the start of a debate over Iraq's many problems.
The address _ one of the most pivotal of Bush's presidency _ is the centerpiece of an aggressive public relations campaign that also will include detailed briefings for lawmakers and reporters, trips abroad by Cabinet members and a series of appearances by Bush starting with a trip Thursday to Fort Benning, Ga.
Since Friday, Bush has briefed about 100 lawmakers _ meetings that were to culminate Wednesday with Congress' Democratic leadership and their Republican counterparts.
Bush on Tuesday also talked by telephone with key foreign allies. He filled in the leaders of Britain, Australia and Denmark, with more calls planned.
Crafting the new policy took the president nearly three months. Relevant agencies conducted reviews, outside experts were called in, and the president consulted several times with Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki and other prominent Iraqi leaders.
In the meantime, the sectarian violence in Iraq continued unabated, and public approval of Bush's handling of the Iraq war hit a record low of 27 percent in December, according to an AP-Ipsos poll.
The president will say that the 132,000 troops now in Iraq will be augmented with more sent to both Baghdad, which has been consumed by sectarian violence, and the western Anbar Province, a base of the Sunni insurgency and foreign al-Qaida fighters.
Moving first into Iraq will be the 2nd Brigade, 82nd Airborne Division, which is now in Kuwait and poised to head quickly into the country, the defense official said. The brigade, numbering about 3,500 troops, is based at Fort Bragg, N.C.
Bush is expected to link increases in both U.S. troops and economic aid to moves by the Shiite-led Iraqi government to bridge sectarian divisions. Those include taking steps to curb Shiite militias, enacting a plan to distribute oil revenue to all the country's sects and easing government restrictions on deposed leader Saddam Hussein's Baath Party.
The Baghdad government also will be required to commit more money toward reconstruction and more troops into the fight.
Other components of the president's plan include a bit over $1 billion to shore up Iraq's battered economy and create jobs and a call for friendly Mideast countries _ some of which Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice is visiting starting Friday _ to increase their aid to Iraq, said a second official, who also requested anonymity.
The president will ignore the recommendation of the bipartisan Iraq Study Group that he include Syria and Iran in an effort to staunch Iraqi bloodshed, the official said
Tuesday, January 9, 2007
Cisco makes leading moves
A shifting landscape for e-mail security
Tech heavyweights are taking charge in a "brutal battle" for dominance among spam fighters.
By Joris Evers Staff Writer, CNET News.com -->
Published: January 8, 2007, 12:01 PM PST
TalkBack E-mail Print del.icio.us Digg this
Cisco Systems' purchase of e-mail security specialist IronPort Systems is another sign that big-name vendors are taking over the spam fight, analysts say.
Upon completion of the $830 million cash and stock deal, networking giant Cisco will join Symantec and Microsoft as a leader in the e-mail security arena. Those other companies entered the market via acquisitions and product development of their own.
High Impact
What's new:
With its buy of IronPort Systems, Cisco Systems is joining Symantec and Microsoft as a leader in the e-mail security arena.
Bottom line:
The acquisition is a sign that tech heavyweights are taking charge in the battle to dominate the antispam market.
More stories on this topic
"As a market matures, this is typically what happens--the major vendors want to have another arrow in their quiver to sell," said Peter Firstbrook, an analyst with Gartner.
More acquisitions are likely, with Cisco rival Juniper Networks and tech giant IBM possible suitors for the remaining independent e-mail security companies, Firstbrook said.
E-mail security used to be the terrain of specialized providers, selling to eager buyers who wanted to stop the influx of e-mail threats, particularly spam. Today, such technology has become more of a commodity, and the area has changed from a seller's market to a buyer's market catered to by the big guys, analysts said.
Industry consolidation has been ongoing, driven by the fact that e-mail security has become a necessity for businesses. Spam and other e-mail pests have kept on rising, despite Microsoft Chairman Bill Gates' promise to squelch them. More than 90 percent of e-mail is unsolicited, and 2006 was a record year for spam yet again, according to IronPort statistics.
Acquisitions in the space include Microsoft's takeovers of Sybari Software and FrontBridge Technologies, as well as Symantec's purchase of Brightmail and Secure Computing's buy of CipherTrust. As a result, the independent companies that remain face a tougher market.
"It is a brutal battle against intelligent and well-armed enemies," said Peter Christy, an analyst with the Internet Research Group in Los Altos, Calif. "This is a time where antispam companies will start to fall by the wayside. If you're not in the top four, there is a question of how you survive with a decent business if somebody doesn't buy you."
Companies such as Proofpoint and Barracuda Networks could be acquisition targets, Christy said. "Anyone in this space who is not public would like to be acquired," he said.
The number of companies active in the space has decreased from about 150 in 2003 to about 75 now, said Dean Drako, CEO of Mountain View, Calif.-based Barracuda Networks, a venture-backed maker of antispam appliances. Yet Drako believes the market won't consolidate at the pace that pundits have proclaimed.
"I would characterize the merger and acquisition activity in this market as overhyped beyond hope for the last four years," he said. "Will there be some more consolidation in this area? Probably. In the short term, the market is not going to change significantly from the way it is today. In the longer term, over many years, the number of suppliers will be fewer."
Drako would not be drawn on the question of whether Barracuda was up for sale or would launch as a public entity. The company, which markets primarily to small and midsize organizations, is well-positioned to remain an independent player, he said. "The customer cares that the vendor is large enough to survive to provide them what they need. We crossed that threshold a year or so ago," he said.
Cisco's entry augurs a tougher battle among the big guys. Symantec, in particular, faces a challenge, compared with the days when it competed mainly with smaller rivals: The Cupertino, Calif., company used to go head-to-head with David, now it's squaring off with Goliath. "The last thing Symantec had over IronPort was their big brand name," Firstbrook said.
On the riseThe e-mail security market is growing rapidly. In 2005, it hit $660 million in worldwide revenue and was growing at 44 percent per year, according to Gartner data. Symantec held 12 percent of that pie, and IronPort had 6.6 percent, the analyst firm said.
Cisco paid a premium for IronPort, which is known for its high-end e-mail security appliances. The $830 million deal is the second-biggest purchase of a privately held business by Cisco and the fifth-biggest takeover in the network specialist's history. By contrast, Secure Computing paid $273.6 million in July for IronPort rival CipherTrust.
Now on News.com:
Gaga for gadgets: Complete CES coverage
Congress off to slow start with tech
Self-publishing made easy online
Photos: Concepts take charge at Detroit auto show
Extra: Macworld rumor recap
An acquisition should be welcome news to customers of IronPort and other such companies that get bought, analysts said. The suitors typically have deeper pockets, which should translate into more stability. "A private company, consuming venture capital, is living in limbo," Christy said.
Also, customers will be able to buy multiple products from a single provider, instead of having to deal with several suppliers. "The more vendors you have, the higher the administration cost," Firstbrook said. In Cisco's case, buyers may even be able to get their Cisco discount applied to IronPort products, he said.
But not all IronPort customers are happy that the company will be part of Cisco. "There goes the neighborhood," CNET News.com reader Fred Dunn, who works at a large academic institution, wrote in response to the buyout news. "With Cisco's reputation, we can already see the annual maintenance fees going up."
Tom Gillis, senior vice president of marketing at IronPort, assured customers that nothing will change as the company operates as a subsidiary of Cisco. "It is business as usual--no changes to products, pricing or support," he said.
TalkBack E-mail Print del.icio.us Digg this
Tech heavyweights are taking charge in a "brutal battle" for dominance among spam fighters.
By Joris Evers Staff Writer, CNET News.com -->
Published: January 8, 2007, 12:01 PM PST
TalkBack E-mail Print del.icio.us Digg this
Cisco Systems' purchase of e-mail security specialist IronPort Systems is another sign that big-name vendors are taking over the spam fight, analysts say.
Upon completion of the $830 million cash and stock deal, networking giant Cisco will join Symantec and Microsoft as a leader in the e-mail security arena. Those other companies entered the market via acquisitions and product development of their own.
High Impact
What's new:
With its buy of IronPort Systems, Cisco Systems is joining Symantec and Microsoft as a leader in the e-mail security arena.
Bottom line:
The acquisition is a sign that tech heavyweights are taking charge in the battle to dominate the antispam market.
More stories on this topic
"As a market matures, this is typically what happens--the major vendors want to have another arrow in their quiver to sell," said Peter Firstbrook, an analyst with Gartner.
More acquisitions are likely, with Cisco rival Juniper Networks and tech giant IBM possible suitors for the remaining independent e-mail security companies, Firstbrook said.
E-mail security used to be the terrain of specialized providers, selling to eager buyers who wanted to stop the influx of e-mail threats, particularly spam. Today, such technology has become more of a commodity, and the area has changed from a seller's market to a buyer's market catered to by the big guys, analysts said.
Industry consolidation has been ongoing, driven by the fact that e-mail security has become a necessity for businesses. Spam and other e-mail pests have kept on rising, despite Microsoft Chairman Bill Gates' promise to squelch them. More than 90 percent of e-mail is unsolicited, and 2006 was a record year for spam yet again, according to IronPort statistics.
Acquisitions in the space include Microsoft's takeovers of Sybari Software and FrontBridge Technologies, as well as Symantec's purchase of Brightmail and Secure Computing's buy of CipherTrust. As a result, the independent companies that remain face a tougher market.
"It is a brutal battle against intelligent and well-armed enemies," said Peter Christy, an analyst with the Internet Research Group in Los Altos, Calif. "This is a time where antispam companies will start to fall by the wayside. If you're not in the top four, there is a question of how you survive with a decent business if somebody doesn't buy you."
Companies such as Proofpoint and Barracuda Networks could be acquisition targets, Christy said. "Anyone in this space who is not public would like to be acquired," he said.
The number of companies active in the space has decreased from about 150 in 2003 to about 75 now, said Dean Drako, CEO of Mountain View, Calif.-based Barracuda Networks, a venture-backed maker of antispam appliances. Yet Drako believes the market won't consolidate at the pace that pundits have proclaimed.
"I would characterize the merger and acquisition activity in this market as overhyped beyond hope for the last four years," he said. "Will there be some more consolidation in this area? Probably. In the short term, the market is not going to change significantly from the way it is today. In the longer term, over many years, the number of suppliers will be fewer."
Drako would not be drawn on the question of whether Barracuda was up for sale or would launch as a public entity. The company, which markets primarily to small and midsize organizations, is well-positioned to remain an independent player, he said. "The customer cares that the vendor is large enough to survive to provide them what they need. We crossed that threshold a year or so ago," he said.
Cisco's entry augurs a tougher battle among the big guys. Symantec, in particular, faces a challenge, compared with the days when it competed mainly with smaller rivals: The Cupertino, Calif., company used to go head-to-head with David, now it's squaring off with Goliath. "The last thing Symantec had over IronPort was their big brand name," Firstbrook said.
On the riseThe e-mail security market is growing rapidly. In 2005, it hit $660 million in worldwide revenue and was growing at 44 percent per year, according to Gartner data. Symantec held 12 percent of that pie, and IronPort had 6.6 percent, the analyst firm said.
Cisco paid a premium for IronPort, which is known for its high-end e-mail security appliances. The $830 million deal is the second-biggest purchase of a privately held business by Cisco and the fifth-biggest takeover in the network specialist's history. By contrast, Secure Computing paid $273.6 million in July for IronPort rival CipherTrust.
Now on News.com:
Gaga for gadgets: Complete CES coverage
Congress off to slow start with tech
Self-publishing made easy online
Photos: Concepts take charge at Detroit auto show
Extra: Macworld rumor recap
An acquisition should be welcome news to customers of IronPort and other such companies that get bought, analysts said. The suitors typically have deeper pockets, which should translate into more stability. "A private company, consuming venture capital, is living in limbo," Christy said.
Also, customers will be able to buy multiple products from a single provider, instead of having to deal with several suppliers. "The more vendors you have, the higher the administration cost," Firstbrook said. In Cisco's case, buyers may even be able to get their Cisco discount applied to IronPort products, he said.
But not all IronPort customers are happy that the company will be part of Cisco. "There goes the neighborhood," CNET News.com reader Fred Dunn, who works at a large academic institution, wrote in response to the buyout news. "With Cisco's reputation, we can already see the annual maintenance fees going up."
Tom Gillis, senior vice president of marketing at IronPort, assured customers that nothing will change as the company operates as a subsidiary of Cisco. "It is business as usual--no changes to products, pricing or support," he said.
TalkBack E-mail Print del.icio.us Digg this
Without Ipods Life Goes On
Cisco touts the networked home of future
CEO outlines vision for building home networks that let people access video, music and other content anywhere in the home.
By Marguerite Reardon Staff Writer, CNET News.com -->
Published: January 9, 2007, 2:53 PM PST
Cisco Systems CEO John Chambers took the stage at the Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas on Tuesday to outline his company's vision of the networked home of the future and how through partnerships and acquisitions Cisco will become a top player in the market.
He said that the consumer electronics market is at an important transition. The last decade was about moving entertainment from analog to digital. And the next few years will be about networking consumer electronics devices together to allow people to use any device anywhere and to be able to do this as easily and safely as possible.
"We said 15 years ago when I first came to Cisco that the Internet and networking would change the way the world lives, works and plays," Chambers said. "We intended that if we were successful, we'd create the ability for products to be shared across any network. We outlined a strategy for the enterprise, then service provider and commercial markets. And today we outline for you why we will be the leader in the networked home."
John ChambersCisco CEO
He emphasized Cisco's track record in identifying key trends and executing its strategy to become a leader in new markets. While most companies struggle to be No. 1 in a single market, Cisco has been aggressively moving into several new markets. And in each of those cases the company has garnered first or second place in terms of market share, he said.
"So when you think about whether we will achieve our goals, step back and look at our track record," he said.
With the help of Jim Grubb, Cisco's chief demonstration officer, Chambers showed off how a connected home will look in the future. He demonstrated how a digital music system in a car could be networked to a home network so that when you arrive home the song you're listening to in your car automatically switches to your handheld mobile device when you turn off the car. And when you come into the living room and turn on your TV, the song can continue to play there with a simple click of the remote.
Playlists are automatically synched on all devices on the network, so that people won't have to carry special devices with pre-loaded music or video from room to room. And consumers won't have to update different devices when they want to hear music. Every device will be updated automatically through the network.
While these new capabilities sound great, Chambers also noted that Cisco would help ensure that there are safeguards, so parents could control what movies or music their children were watching or listening to. And he said that even though the technology that will be used to network all these devices and services together would increasingly become more complicated, Cisco would work to hide the complexity from consumers so that devices could be plugged into the network and work easily.
"Our guiding principal is to connect any device to any application in whatever mode you want, but it must be simple. And it's got to be safe," he said.
As an example, he and Grubb demonstrated how a security camera connected to the home network would automatically install and configure itself. The network would detect the camera and send a message to a home PC or a mobile device where the user would click on a button to give permission to connect the device to the network.
Now on News.com:
Gaga for gadgets: Complete CES coverage
Congress off to slow start with tech
Self-publishing made easy online
Photos: Concepts take charge at Detroit auto show
Extra: Macworld rumor recap
In addition to all the new capabilities of the connected home, Chambers noted how the new era in networking will ultimately help drive revenue for Cisco's traditional business, which is providing networking equipment for service providers and business users. The killer application, he said, will be video, which will create an explosion in terms of the need for network capacity. So instead of seeing network capacity growth rates of 50 percent to 100 percent per year it will be more like 200 percent to 500 percent growth, he said.
"By 2010, 20 homes networked together in a neighborhood will have more load across their network than the entire Internet did in 1995," he said. "This is what gets a networking person excited."
Finally, Chambers tried to ease concerns of traditional consumer electronics vendors and content providers that Cisco would be a threat to their businesses. He called Cisco "Switzerland" and said the company will remain technology agnostic and will use industry standards to build its new products.
In the end, Cisco will use acquisitions and partnerships to build its consumer and networked home business. And through these partnerships, Chambers said, the company will create a market that will generate revenue for all the companies involved, from content creators and owners to device makers.
"We believe in collaboration for a common win-win," Chambers said. "It will be a healthy give and take...that will (ultimately) generate a lot of money for everyone involved."
TalkBack E-mail Print del.icio.us Digg this
CEO outlines vision for building home networks that let people access video, music and other content anywhere in the home.
By Marguerite Reardon Staff Writer, CNET News.com -->
Published: January 9, 2007, 2:53 PM PST
Cisco Systems CEO John Chambers took the stage at the Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas on Tuesday to outline his company's vision of the networked home of the future and how through partnerships and acquisitions Cisco will become a top player in the market.
He said that the consumer electronics market is at an important transition. The last decade was about moving entertainment from analog to digital. And the next few years will be about networking consumer electronics devices together to allow people to use any device anywhere and to be able to do this as easily and safely as possible.
"We said 15 years ago when I first came to Cisco that the Internet and networking would change the way the world lives, works and plays," Chambers said. "We intended that if we were successful, we'd create the ability for products to be shared across any network. We outlined a strategy for the enterprise, then service provider and commercial markets. And today we outline for you why we will be the leader in the networked home."
John ChambersCisco CEO
He emphasized Cisco's track record in identifying key trends and executing its strategy to become a leader in new markets. While most companies struggle to be No. 1 in a single market, Cisco has been aggressively moving into several new markets. And in each of those cases the company has garnered first or second place in terms of market share, he said.
"So when you think about whether we will achieve our goals, step back and look at our track record," he said.
With the help of Jim Grubb, Cisco's chief demonstration officer, Chambers showed off how a connected home will look in the future. He demonstrated how a digital music system in a car could be networked to a home network so that when you arrive home the song you're listening to in your car automatically switches to your handheld mobile device when you turn off the car. And when you come into the living room and turn on your TV, the song can continue to play there with a simple click of the remote.
Playlists are automatically synched on all devices on the network, so that people won't have to carry special devices with pre-loaded music or video from room to room. And consumers won't have to update different devices when they want to hear music. Every device will be updated automatically through the network.
While these new capabilities sound great, Chambers also noted that Cisco would help ensure that there are safeguards, so parents could control what movies or music their children were watching or listening to. And he said that even though the technology that will be used to network all these devices and services together would increasingly become more complicated, Cisco would work to hide the complexity from consumers so that devices could be plugged into the network and work easily.
"Our guiding principal is to connect any device to any application in whatever mode you want, but it must be simple. And it's got to be safe," he said.
As an example, he and Grubb demonstrated how a security camera connected to the home network would automatically install and configure itself. The network would detect the camera and send a message to a home PC or a mobile device where the user would click on a button to give permission to connect the device to the network.
Now on News.com:
Gaga for gadgets: Complete CES coverage
Congress off to slow start with tech
Self-publishing made easy online
Photos: Concepts take charge at Detroit auto show
Extra: Macworld rumor recap
In addition to all the new capabilities of the connected home, Chambers noted how the new era in networking will ultimately help drive revenue for Cisco's traditional business, which is providing networking equipment for service providers and business users. The killer application, he said, will be video, which will create an explosion in terms of the need for network capacity. So instead of seeing network capacity growth rates of 50 percent to 100 percent per year it will be more like 200 percent to 500 percent growth, he said.
"By 2010, 20 homes networked together in a neighborhood will have more load across their network than the entire Internet did in 1995," he said. "This is what gets a networking person excited."
Finally, Chambers tried to ease concerns of traditional consumer electronics vendors and content providers that Cisco would be a threat to their businesses. He called Cisco "Switzerland" and said the company will remain technology agnostic and will use industry standards to build its new products.
In the end, Cisco will use acquisitions and partnerships to build its consumer and networked home business. And through these partnerships, Chambers said, the company will create a market that will generate revenue for all the companies involved, from content creators and owners to device makers.
"We believe in collaboration for a common win-win," Chambers said. "It will be a healthy give and take...that will (ultimately) generate a lot of money for everyone involved."
TalkBack E-mail Print del.icio.us Digg this
Monday, January 8, 2007
January 9, 2007
Aspirations of Peace
There are many ways to deviate
And many times situations escalate
The mind, the mind can be binded
If you lose sight by focus on distractions
No matter what is thought or sought
Many people should not be caught
They should be allowed to walk on by
In order for peace to reside inside
Regardless of affiliation or relation,
Some people love some form of agitation.
For those few, there may be help
If you see what they don't
There is no relief to help the diabolically stressed
Its not mean. Its just no contest.
Their thoughts may be contagious
Which brings about an unnecessary infection.
Just stick to the path regardless of what is said
And may your long nights be blessed in bed.
With all the peace and tranquility
which you strive for by avoiding the insanity.
Israel's Prospective War Agenda
January 6, 2007
Israel's Bad Influence
by Charley Reese
Scott Ritter, a former U.N. arms inspector in Iraq, has written a book, Target Iran, in which he accuses the Israeli government and its American lobby of pushing the U.S. into attacking Iran.
Ritter writes, "Let there be no doubt: If there is an American war with Iran, it is a war that was made in Israel." He accuses some members of the lobby of dual loyalty and urges that the American Israel Public Affairs Committee be required to register as a foreign agent.
He also blasts the Israeli lobby for its use of the Holocaust and for crying anti-Semite every time Israel is criticized. "This is a sickening trend that must be ended," he writes.
By coincidence, an Israeli general has verified everything Ritter says. According to an article published in Today.az on Jan. 2, Israeli Brig. Gen. Oded Tira published a statement urging an all-out effort by Israel and its lobby to push a U.S. attack on Iran.
"President Bush lacks the political power to attack Iran," the general is quoted as saying. "As an American strike in Iran is essential for our existence, we must help him pave the way by lobbying the Democratic Party (which is conducting itself foolishly) and U.S. newspaper editors. We need to do this in order to turn the Iran issue to a bipartisan one and unrelated to the Iraq failure."
The general urges the Israeli lobby to turn to Hillary Clinton and other potential presidential candidates in the Democratic Party so that they support immediate action by Bush against Iran. The lobby must also approach the Europeans, he adds, so Bush won't find himself isolated, and he calls for Israel to "clandestinely cooperate with Saudi Arabia so that it also persuades the U.S. to strike Iran."
As Ritter says, a U.S. war in Iran will be a war made in Israel.
Of course, Israel's American supporters, most of whom are ignorant of nuclear energy, ignorant of the history of Israel and ignorant of the people in the Middle East, will trot out their usual specious arguments.
But let's lay out the undeniable facts. Israel considers Iran its main threat. Israel wants a U.S. attack against Iran. The Israeli lobby does what the Israeli government tells it to do. Anybody who claims the Israeli lobby is just another lobby is either ignorant or lying. The Israeli lobby is the second most, if not the most, powerful lobby in America.
So, sit back and watch the Israeli amen corner start the propaganda to push America to war with Iran just as it did in the case of Iraq. It will try to have you believe that Iran can make nuclear weapons as easily as baking cakes. The truth is that even if Iran decided to seek nuclear weapons, the Iranians are a good 10 years away from having any. The truth is that Iran, even if it had nuclear weapons, is no threat to the U.S.
All of which reminds me of my favorite undiplomatic comment by a diplomat. Some time ago at a private party in London, the French ambassador said of Israel, "Why does the world put up with such a sh*tty little country causing so much trouble?" Outraged British Zionists demanded his recall, but the French government ignored them.
Sooner or later, Americans are going to wake up to the fact that Israel's influence on the American government is detrimental. If Israel wants a war with Iran, let the Israelis fight it. Of course, seeing how poorly they did against Hezbollah, I suspect that the Israelis, despite their public threats, would not choose to fight the Iranians.
In my opinion, Americans who want American youth to die and bleed for the benefit of a foreign country are guilty of more than dual loyalty.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)