seasea: Google

显示标签为“Google”的博文。显示所有博文

2011年5月15日星期日

U.S. Inquiry of Google on Drug Ads

Federal regulators are investigating Google on suspicion of illegally displaying ads for online pharmacies that are operating outside the law, government officials said Thursday.

Google has set aside $500 million to pay for a potential settlement, according to a Securities and Exchange Commission filing the company made on Tuesday. It said the money was for the “potential resolution of an investigation by the United States Department of Justice into the use of Google advertising by certain advertisers,” but gave no details.

The United States attorney’s office in Rhode Island is leading the investigation into pharmaceutical advertising on the Web search engine and the Food and Drug Administration and Justice Department are also involved, people briefed on the investigation said.

Google and the Justice Department declined to comment. An F.D.A. spokeswoman confirmed there was a continuing investigation. Jim Martin, a spokesman for the United States attorney’s office in Rhode Island, said, “We neither confirm or deny the existence of an investigation.”?

Web sites are liable for advertising that breaks federal criminal law, according to Eric Goldman, director of the High Tech Law Institute at Santa Clara University.

Google has been trying to clean up ads from so-called rogue pharmacies, which sell counterfeit drugs or do not require valid prescriptions. In the last year, Google has made significant changes to its policies for accepting pharmaceutical ads, most recently in January. But Michael Zwibelman, litigation counsel for Google, has described it as “an ongoing, escalating cat-and-mouse game.”

In February 2010, Google changed its AdWords policy to accept ads only from pharmacies certified by the National Association Boards of Pharmacy in the United States or the Canadian International Pharmacy Association. Previously, Google had accepted ads verified by a company called PharmacyChecker.com.

In September 2010, Google filed a civil lawsuit in federal court against pharmaceutical advertisers that it believed had broken its advertising rules.

“Rogue pharmacies are bad for our users, for legitimate online pharmacies and for the entire e-commerce industry — so we are going to keep investing time and money to stop these kinds of harmful practices,” Mr. Zwibelman wrote in a company blog post at the time.

It is unclear why the investigation and penalty are coming now, after Google’s cleanup efforts.

Google said the $500 million charge reduced its net income last quarter by 22 percent, to $1.8 billion from $2.3 billion. “We believe it will not have a material adverse effect on our business,” the company said in the S.E.C. filing.

The investigation is Google’s latest run-in with regulators, who have also been investigating the company on, and in some cases penalizing it for, antitrust issues and privacy violations.

Gabriel Levitt, vice president of PharmacyChecker.com, said that Google’s measures to crack down on rogue pharmacy ads went too far, preventing people from getting drugs they needed.

But critics of online pharmacies say that Google and other Web sites feed the business.

“It’s very hard to police these sites because they change every couple of days,” said Joseph A. Califano Jr., founder of the National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse at Columbia University. “The only things that keeps them in business are the Googles of the world.”

The focus of the investigation was first reported by The Wall Street Journal on its Web site.

Edward Wyatt and Charlie Savage contributed reporting from Washington.

2011年5月10日星期二

Suit Opens a Window Into Google

Android is Google’s gateway technology to a lucrative new arena for mobile advertising. Google provides the Android operating system free to handset makers, and allows them to tailor the open-source software somewhat, yet limits their freedom to tinker.

Android phones must adhere to a “compatibility” standard determined by Google. In an e-mail on Aug. 6, 2010, Dan Morrill, a manager in the Android group, noted in passing that it was obvious to the phone makers that “we are using compatibility as a club to make them do things we want.”

Whether that club is an anticompetitive weapon is an issue in the court case.

Yet industry analysts see another motivation as well. In the smartphone market, they say, Google faces the challenge of being the creator of a popular operating system that must work smoothly with hardware and software made by other companies. In broad strokes, Google’s predicament echoes the past.

“Google has the same problem today that Microsoft had 20 years ago, when Windows started to take off in the personal computer market,” said David B. Yoffie, a professor at the Harvard Business School. “It needs to maintain the integrity of its technology, and control it.”

The e-mails in the case, filed eight months ago, recalls another parallel with Microsoft. Big high-tech companies, in particular, are run and knit together with electronic communications, which can leave a minute-by-minute trail for lawyers and litigants to mine.

In the Massachusetts court, Skyhook Wireless has alleged that Google used its control over Android not to maintain the quality of its technology, but to squelch a competitor.

The Boston-based Skyhook, founded in 2003, has been a pioneer in location-based services for use in mobile phones, developing a technique for combining location data from Wi-Fi hot spots with other sensors to pinpoint a user’s location.

Last April, Motorola chose to use Skyhook’s service in its Android phones instead of the free location data service offered by Google. Motorola reversed that decision in July.

“After we announced our deal with Motorola, Google went crazy,” said Ted Morgan, Skyhook’s chief executive. “That’s when Google went looking for compatibility compliance issues.”

Skyhook had reached a similar agreement with Samsung in April, which was also reversed in July.

Google and its lawyers declined to discuss the case or the e-mails, released along with a ruling in Massachusetts Superior Court allowing discovery of evidence to continue and witnesses to be deposed.

But in a court filing in April, Google’s lawyers called the Skyhook suit “a baseless complaint” and its requests for Google documents and e-mail a “thinly veiled fishing expedition.” In the filing, Google notes that Motorola, in terminating its agreement with Skyhook, did not mention technical compliance issues, other than Skyhook interfering with Google’s “contractual rights to collect end-user data.”

In the past, Google has portrayed the Skyhook suit as the desperate tactic of a small company trying to sell location services in a market that has changed abruptly, especially since Google offers its location services free.

The Google e-mail messages released by the court, some heavily redacted, begin on April 26, 2010, when Skyhook announced that it had reached an agreement with Motorola.

Vic Gundotra, a senior vice president, forwarded a link to a news article on the Skyhook win, to Steve Lee, an Android product manager.

“First I’d heard of it,” Mr. Lee wrote, and then suggested two possible reasons for the deal.

2011年5月7日星期六

Trying to Game Google on ‘Mother’s Day Flowers’

Those words have been typed into search engines by countless Americans in the lead-up to Sunday. What few realize is that an online war over this endearing phrase is being waged by the country’s largest flower sellers, and some of them, apparently, are not fighting fair.

Internet marketing experts say Teleflora, FTD, 1800Flowers.com and ProFlowers are trying to elevate their Web sites in search results with a strategy that violates Google’s guidelines.

The flower companies deny it. But all four have links on Web sites that are riddled with paid links, many of which include phrases like “mothers day flowers,” “mothers day arrangements” and “cheap mothers day flowers.” Anyone who clicks on those backlinks, as they are known, gets sent to the floral retailer who paid for them.

The real goal is to elevate the flower sellers’ sites in the eyes of Google. Or rather, Google’s algorithm, which uses links as a proxy for popularity — the more links attached to a Web site, the higher a site rises in Google searches.

“This is a pretty typical link-buying campaign,” says Byrne Hobart of Digital Due Diligence, a Manhattan Internet consulting firm. “These companies are paying for links to pages on their site that relate to seasonal terms, like ‘Mother’s Day Flowers’ or ‘Mother’s Day Gifts.’ It’s a high-risk strategy, but in some cases it pays off well for the link-buyer in the short term.”

Google wants Web sites to earn links because the sites are relevant; paying for links is against its rules. When caught in link-buying schemes, companies are often penalized by Google, which sends the sites plunging in its search results, sometimes for months.

On Wednesday, The New York Times sent Google representatives a list of roughly 6,000 links to the flower companies that were built in the last month. After Google’s spam team studied the list, a company spokesman, Jake Hubert, sent this statement:

“None of the links shared by The New York Times had a significant impact on our rankings, due to automated systems we have in place to assess the relevance of links. As always, we investigate spam reports and take corrective action where appropriate.”

In essence, Google said that these companies tried to game its algorithm, but for the most part, their efforts failed. So what we are talking about here is not Internet subterfuge — it is attempted Internet subterfuge.

Google is not saying whether it plans to demote any of the companies, but as of late Friday, it had not. A search of “mothers day flowers” had Proflowers at No. 1, 1800Flowers at No. 2, Teleflora at No. 3 and FTD at No. 4.

ProFlowers did not respond to requests for comment. A spokeswoman for 1800Flowers.com said the company would not discuss the links. An FTD representative said that the vast majority of its links were on Web sites owned by FTD, adding, “If any of our practices appear to have moved outside of Google’s guidelines, we will certainly address them.”

Teleflora released a statement saying that its “corporate policy is to not pay for any links that would violate Google’s guidelines. After closely reviewing the Teleflora links you provided, we believe we are in compliance with Google.”

There are, however, Teleflora links on some ad-crammed Web sites. Several appear on RickeyPearce.com, which until Friday featured a stock photo of a goateed man in a blue shirt — it is an image found all over the Internet — and a bunch of blandly written entries on topics like mortgages, car leasing and insurance, all of which contain links to corporate sponsors. An entry in March titled “Finding the Best Mothers Day Gifts Online” contained three links to Teleflora’s web site.

FTD’s campaign includes a lot of mom-related Web sites, some of which post links in exchange for money. The publisher of one Web site with an FTD link — who asked that neither she nor her site be named because she did not want to anger the company — said she received $30 a month to post a “mothers day flowers” link on her home page.

“I haven’t updated that site in a couple years,” she said. “There’s not a lot of traffic there.”

1800Flowers posted links on MyIndianRecipes.net, NapaValleyInterfaithCouncil.org and Jonathanduffy.net, which has a header that says the site is all about “Florida real estate — helping you find your dream home.”

A company buying links is risking a trip to the Internet’s answer to Siberia. That was demonstrated in February when Google demoted J. C. Penney in search results after concluding that the retailer had bought links for dozens of valuable terms during the holiday season.

Not every company gets caught, though, and because research shows that most shoppers click on the first two or three results, turning up at or near the top of a Google search presents a financial temptation.

The four flower sellers appear to have taken a calculated gamble: if they bought links and were demoted, they would suffer, but not as much as they would if they missed the chance to rank highly before Mother’s Day, when Americans are expected to spend $1.9 billion on flowers, according to the National Retail Federation.

The links put Google in an uncomfortable spot. Were the company to drag any of the country’s largest flower sellers into virtual oblivion right before Mother’s Day, users would be unable to find a retailer that they might well be looking for — and that rival search engines, like Bing, would feature.

It is impossible to double-check Google’s conclusion that few of the links of the florist companies helped in search results. The particulars of Google’s algorithm are shrouded in secrecy for the same reason that a bank does not publicize the route to its vault.

But Searchmetrics, a seller of search analytics software, found that Teleflora’s ranking had risen from No. 7 in Google searches for “mothers day flowers” to No. 4 not long after the company started its first major foray into link buying, in February of this year. Last year at this time, the company had an estimated 20,000 to 25,000 visitors per day, the company also found. This week, it has an estimated 35,000 visitors per day.

“There is a possible correlation between the backlinks and the increased visibility of the site,” said Horst Joepen, the chief executive of Searchmetrics. But without more research, he added, there is no way to be sure.

View the original article here

Trying to Game Google on ‘Mother’s Day Flowers’

Internet marketing experts say Teleflora, FTD, 1800Flowers.com and ProFlowers are trying to elevate their Web sites in search results with a strategy that violates Google’s guidelines.

“I haven’t updated that site in a couple years,” she said. “There’s not a lot of traffic there.”

View the original article here

2011年5月5日星期四

Bits: Creator of Google Voice Starts a Company Starter

The creator of Google Voice left Google last fall to work on a new start-up, and now he’s ready to talk about what he’s doing.

Craig Walker

Craig Walker, who founded GrandCentral, which became Google Voice after he sold it, has started a new company called Firespotter Labs. The start-up, which Mr. Walker calls “a company creation shop,” will be a breeding ground for mobile and communications products that he hopes will become their own companies someday.

Google Ventures, where Mr. Walker has been an entrepreneur in residence, is investing $3 million in Firespotter.

Mr. Walker joins a club of other successful tech entrepreneurs whose recovery strategy after running fast-growing companies is to start labs where they can quickly crank out new products without any bureaucratic roadblocks. Kevin Rose, who founded Digg, recently left to start a similar company called Milk that is building mobile apps. Evan Williams, the co-founder of Twitter, who recently left to work on new projects, started a similar lab called Obvious Corp. for rapidly building Web products before Twitter.

“Even though you have other ideas, you kind of put them to the side because you’re singularly focused on making that product successful,” Mr. Walker said about why he wanted to start a product-building lab after working at Google. “Maybe it’s a reaction to having some freedom.”

The new model works because it is easier and cheaper than ever to start Web and mobile companies these days, but harder to predict what will take off. And once the team makes something useful, like an easy sign-in or checkout process for an app, it can use those things in other products too, Mr. Walker said.

Unlike a traditional incubator, Firespotter won’t look for outside entrepreneurs to start companies. Its employees will come up with the ideas and develop them themselves, then hire people to run them if they become big and successful enough. Mr. Walker — along with his team of three engineers and a designer, two of whom he hired from Google — will advise the companies and make money by owning a stake in each one that it spins out.

“Small teams can work so fast, particularly when they’re the right DNA,” he said. “There’s no budget or review process. We’re just going to go knock this stuff out, and this is really fun and liberating.”

Firespotter is already working on three ideas, though Mr. Walker would not elaborate on what they were. He said he was broadly interested in communication as well as mobile tools that take advantage of the fact that people carry mini-computers with GPS, cameras and Internet connectivity in their pockets.

But don’t expect Firespotter to follow the trend of building social apps like the photo-sharing ones that are all over. Instead, Mr. Walker wants to build tools for big industries, which he wouldn’t name, that have not yet been transformed by mobile, to change the way they get feedback from customers or communicate with vendors, for instance.

“There’s a lot of things that to me sound like a feature, not a company,” Mr. Walker said. “We’re not interested in building mobile apps for mobile apps’ sake, or doing things that are a little more fun or goofy. The bigger challenge is how do you find big industries that have not yet embraced modern technology.” DESCRIPTION CREDIT CAPTION

View the original article here

Google Takes to TV to Promote Browser

The company is taking the battle to mainstream America with an ad campaign using the old-fashioned medium of prime-time TV to talk about the Web. The 90-second ads, which began Tuesday night, show off Chrome, which it introduced in 2008. “As people look for more cool and more interesting things on the Web, our business grows,” said Andy Berndt, vice president of the Google Creative Lab, which created the campaign with the ad agency Bartle Bogle Hegarty.

While Google captures two-thirds of online searches, Microsoft, whose Bing service has only 14 percent of searches, has its browsers on far more computers.

About 45 percent of computers use one of Microsoft’s Internet Explorer browsers, according to StatCounter, a Web analytics firm, while Chrome has only about 18 percent of the market. Internet Explorer’s share, however, is down from 53 percent a year ago, while Chrome’s share has climbed from 8 percent. Last year, the number of Chrome users tripled to 120 million, from 40 million, Google said. Firefox, a browser produced by Mozilla, has 30 percent of the market while Safari, Apple’s browser, has only 5 percent.

The Google ad campaign, called “the Web is what you make of it,” is the biggest offline campaign ever for Google, which has typically shied away from advertising. It declined to disclose its spending plan.

Google says it cares so much about promoting Chrome because the more people use the Web, the more they use Google. For example, when Chrome users enter search queries in the big box at the top of the browser, which Google calls the omnibox, they go directly to Google search results.

“Instead of looking for Google and looking for search, the omnibox gives them immediate access to Google search,” Patrick Pichette, Google’s chief financial officer, said in a conference call with analysts last month.

“On a tactical basis, everybody that uses Chrome is a guaranteed locked-in user for us in terms of having access to Google,” he said during that call.

Google later said that Mr. Pichette misspoke and that Chrome users were not “locked in” because they could easily visit other search engines or change the default search engine.

As mobile Internet use heats up, a new round of battles among browser and search companies is heating up, too. Apple iPhones come with a Safari browser and a Google search box, and Microsoft could poach Google users with its search partnership with Research in Motion, maker of BlackBerry, announced Tuesday.

“The Chrome browser does have this tie-in to Google,” said Danny Sullivan, editor of Search Engine Land and an industry analyst. “If you’re installing it, there’s a much greater chance that you’re going to end up using Google and staying with Google.”

But, as Google amusingly discovered when it toured Times Square with a video camera to ask people what a browser is, many people don’t know the name of their browser or that they can download a different browser than the one preloaded on their PC.

“The browser’s probably the most important piece of software on anyone’s computer, but a lot of people, the people we’re targeting with these TV spots, don’t know what a browser is,” said Robert Wong, creative director of the Google Creative Lab.

Another challenge: Google developed Chrome because it didn’t think the existing browsers were good enough for its products. But in many ways, rival browsers have since caught up.

“Microsoft does adequately well for the vast majority of consumers,” said David B. Yoffie, a professor at Harvard Business School who has written books about competition among Internet businesses.

“The problem for both Firefox and Chrome is how are they going to convince customers that they have a significantly better product, worth the hassle of actually going and downloading something that’s new and different.”

Google’s solution is to tug at people’s heartstrings with emotional ads about what they can do with Chrome. It is appealing to Internet users who don’t care about the technical benefits of Chrome like rendering speed or apps and extensions.

One of the TV ads, “Dear Sophie,” shows a father creating a scrapbook in Gmail by sending his daughter notes, photos and videos as she grows up. As he records ballet classes and birthdays, he drags photos from Picasa into Gmail and shows their first home on Google Maps. Like all the ads, it is a true story, Google said, though it used actors and changed the names.

Another, “It Gets Better,” shows people using Chrome’s toolbar and YouTube to record videos for the It Gets Better Project to help gay teenagers who fear bullying.

The ads zero in on the computer screen, showing what people are typing and uploading, similar to the “Parisian Love” ad that aired during the Super Bowl in 2010, which told the story of an American exchange student who falls in love with a woman in Paris.

“We try to get rid of everything but the user and the tools and let you feel what is happening there, without a lot of commentary from Google itself,” Mr. Berndt said.

The new TV campaign, which ran Tuesday during “One Tree Hill” and “Glee” and which Google plans to continue with new ads, makes a subtle reference to Chrome. Google more blatantly states its mission in the accompanying online ads.

They will appear on various Web sites as white boxes cycling through phrases like “make a blog,” “make an observation,” “make a declaration” and “make yourself heard.” At the end of each ad appears a big button that says, “Switch to a new browser. Download Google Chrome.”

2011年4月28日星期四

Apple and Google Use Phone Data to Map the World

As those two companies battle for dominance in mobile computing, they have increasingly been using their customers’ phones as sensors to collect data about nearby cell towers and Wi-Fi hot spots.

Google and Apple use this data to improve the accuracy of everything on the phone that uses location. That includes maps and navigation services, but also advertising aimed at people in a particular spot — a potentially huge business that is just getting off the ground. In fact, the information has become so valuable that the companies have been willing to push the envelope on privacy to collect it.

“Google envisions a world where even a small business can promote products to consumers nearby on a mobile device,” said Alistair Goodman, chief executive of Placecast, a location-based advertising company here. “That is a massive market.”

The companies are using the cell tower and hot spot data to build maps of the world, maps that help smartphones quickly pinpoint their locations. Using the signals as navigational beacons is particularly useful in places where GPS satellite signals are weak, like urban areas or anywhere indoors.

Shifting allegiances and legal battles in the world of location services suggest competition in this market is heating up.

Apple initially relied on technology from Skyhook Wireless, a company that was a pioneer in the technique of using Wi-Fi hot spots for location. But last year it began collecting its own data as well. And late last year, Skyhook sued Google, charging that Google had copied its technology and persuaded Motorola to break contracts with Skyhook and use Google’s competing service.

Google and Apple have said that they collect the information anonymously and use it to keep their databases of Wi-Fi hot spots up to date, not to track individuals. But because a person’s location is delicate information, the practices have raised privacy fears.

The use of this data by the companies has been under scrutiny since last week, when two technology researchers reported that a file stored on many iPhones and iPads keeps track of all the locations visited by a user. The file is unencrypted and is copied to people’s personal computers when they sync their devices.

The report prompted lawmakers in the United States to ask Apple for explanations. Several European governments said they would open investigations into Apple’s practices. On Monday, two customers sued Apple accusing it of privacy invasion and computer fraud. They contend the company is secretly recording and storing the location and movement of iPhone and iPad users.

Late last week, Google said it was collecting information about nearby networks from Android users, though it said that it was not tracking individuals and that it allowed users to decline to participate.

Lisa Madigan, the attorney general of Illinois, wrote to Google and Apple on Monday asking them to explain their location data collection practices.

Apple has declined to comment on the matter.

On Monday, the Web site MacRumors published an e-mail said to be from Steven P. Jobs, Apple’s co-founder and chief executive, in which he replied to a person who had said he planned to switch to a Google Android phone because Google did not track him. The reply said: “Oh yes they do. We don’t track anyone. The info circulating around is false.”

Apple declined to confirm the authenticity of the e-mail.

Some security specialists said they believed Apple was not tracking people, but rather collecting data to update its location databases, since Wi-Fi networks can quickly come and go. A letter sent from Apple in July to two members of Congress, Edward J. Markey, Democrat of Massachusetts, and Joe L. Barton, Republican of Texas, appears to confirm this and provides the most detailed explanation of the technology.

In the letter, Apple said it collects the location data anonymously and only when consumers agree to use its location-based services like maps, or any apps that ask for a user’s location, and for its advertising system, iAds. The company said it began relying on its own databases for location information in 2010. Explaining its need to collect data from its customers’ phones, Apple wrote, “These databases must be updated continuously.”

Security researchers said that they believed that the file with location data stored on iPhones and iPads was meant as a “cache” that would help the device pinpoint its whereabouts faster, and that it could help feed Apple’s giant database of network locations. But they said Apple should have been more diligent about encrypting the file and deleting old data.

“I don’t know why they would want to keep all that data on the device,” said Mark Seiden, an information security consultant in Silicon Valley.

Skyhook began collecting data about Wi-Fi hot spots by sending a fleet of more than 500 cars to drive around the streets of every major city in the United States, Europe and many Asian countries.

“We drove the world,” said Ted Morgan, Skyhook’s chief executive. The company updates the database by sending its cars to remap certain areas and by using phones as sensors when a user requests location data.

Google, which initially collected data on Wi-Fi hot spots with the same fleet of cars that was taking photos for its StreetView service, said it stopped doing so last year after it was found to have collected e-mails and other data streamed through those hot spots. It now collects much of that data and traffic information, through customers’ phones.

Mobile advertising could be a $2.5 billion market by 2015, according to Frost & Sullivan, and ads tied to a location are much more lucrative than other ads. But Mr. Morgan said the location data could be valuable in areas beyond the Internet and mobile phones.

For example, a retailer that has eight outlets in a city could use data about walking patterns to determine where to open its next outlet.

“You are basically getting insight into human behavior that we’ve never had before,” Mr. Morgan said.

Jenna Wortham contributed reporting from New York.

2011年4月26日星期二

Google, a Giant in Mobile Search, Seeks New Ways to Make It Pay

But there was a problem: searching on a phone was less than ideal. It was hard to type on small screens. And most irritating for Google, which brags about its speed on every page of search results, was that Web pages were slow to load on phones.

So Google started a project it code-named Grand Prix. In six weeks, engineers revamped mobile searching and hatched plans for new ways to search on the go, by talking or taking photos instead of typing.

The stakes were high. Mobile phones could be a huge new market for Google. Or they could provide an opening for a competitor to pounce, or obviate the need for a search engine altogether. If people on phones could go straight to apps for information, why Google anything?

Today, Google says mobile searches are growing as quickly as Web searches were at the same stage in the company’s early days, and they are up sixfold in the last two years. Google has a market share of 97 percent for mobile searches, according to StatCounter, which tracks Web use.

Now that it dominates the field, Google is throwing its burly computing power and heaps of data at new problems specific to mobile phones — like translating phone calls on the fly and recognizing photos of things like plants and items of clothing.

“I feel like a parent the second time around feels,” said Amit Singhal, a Google fellow who works on search. “You saw your first child grow at an amazing pace, and here we are with our second child, mobile, growing at the same pace and showing the same signs.”

Google has been slow to seize some newer Web business opportunities, most notably social networking. Investors have criticized the company for dragging its feet when it comes to figuring out how to make money in new fields.

But mobile is an exception. Last year, Eric E. Schmidt, then the company’s chief executive, said Google’s philosophy was “mobile first,” meaning it would build products for phones at the same time as versions for PCs.

“This is the place that Google is essentially betting its future on,” said Karim Temsamani, Google’s head of mobile advertising, a role created in September.

Still, Google has not consistently followed the mobile-first mantra, and some analysts, including Colin W. Gillis of BGC Partners, say it has not moved quickly enough to create new mobile products or ads.

“They’ve done a really good job of positioning themselves so they can’t get boxed out of the market,” Mr. Gillis said. “Now they just need to deliver some innovation. Let’s wring some revenue out of this platform.”

Google said in October that mobile ads were on track to generate $1 billion in revenue in the coming year. Mobile users can call a business from within a Google ad or receive coupons for nearby stores. They can take cellphone photos of movie posters to pull up a trailer. With new technologies like near-field communication, advertisers could reward customers with loyalty gifts for walking into stores, Mr. Temsamani said.

But because mobile ads generally sell for less than half the price of Web ads, Mr. Gillis said, “there’s just not a lot of profit left over.” Though Google makes Android software for phones, it does not make money from it directly because it gives it away to phone makers. Meanwhile, Apple makes money from its devices and from what appears on their screens, including its own ad network.

Still, the company’s approach to the mobile market is classic Google: take problems that computer scientists have been working on for decades, throw huge amounts of data and computing power at them and assume that if the resulting product is useful to people, it will eventually make money.

People can now snap photos of landmarks or wine labels to search for them using Google Goggles, speak to their phones using voice search and, on Android phones, translate spoken conversations between English and Spanish.

“We as an academic community would have figured this out, but we wouldn’t have been able to set it up on this kind of scale,” said Alexei A. Efros, an associate professor in computer science and robotics at Carnegie Mellon, referring to these kinds of technological feats. “That’s really the great thing about Google, the fact that it can do it on such a humongous scale and actually make it useful to the general public.”

Google trained its computers to learn spoken language based on troves of voice recordings. “Even if you’re from Brooklyn and you drop all your R’s when you park your car, it’s heard plenty of people from Brooklyn and it can do well,” said Mike Cohen, head of Google’s speech technology team.

At first, Google engineers thought people would talk to its voice search service as if they were talking to a person — “you know, it’s my anniversary, and I’d love to take my wife somewhere really romantic to eat, do you have any ideas?” — so it taught the service to filter out unnecessary words. But it turned out that Google had already trained people into thinking in keywords, so they knew to search “romantic restaurants” even when speaking instead of typing.

Goggles, the visual search tool, recognizes things that have strong visual textures, like a bar code, book cover or landmark. But it often can’t distinguish between a black cat and a black chair, for instance, or recognize food or plants, though Google is working with botanists to teach its machines the secrets of leaf-spotting. Google already has the capability to recognize faces, so people could theoretically snap a photo of a blind date and pull up an online profile, but it is not yet using that technology because it is still working out the privacy implications.

People can also snap a photo to translate a menu in a foreign country, and speak English to hear the Spanish translation. Someday Google hopes to be able to translate both sides of a phone conversation as it happens, said Franz Och, head of Google’s machine translation group.

Though the search results Google spits out might seem the same on phones as on computers, there are some behind-the-scenes differences.

For example, certain search results are ranked differently, with location factored in. Search for Wal-Mart on a computer and Google suspects you are probably looking for the e-commerce site or job openings. Search on a phone and Google assumes you are looking for the nearest store. Other search tools were built specifically for phones. Search for weather or stock prices and Google shows a scale, movable with a finger, to see results for different times.

Google says mobile search is not stealing time from computer searches. Instead, mobile searches spike during the lunch hour and evenings, when people are away from their computers. And while mobile users do search for simple things like weather and train times, engineers have been surprised at how many people also ask more complicated questions about business and politics.

“Mobile search is definitely going to surpass desktop search,” said Scott B. Huffman, who works on mobile search at Google and leads its search evaluation team. “The lines will pass, and I think they’ll pass before anyone thought they would.”

2011年4月24日星期日

Google, a Giant in Mobile Search, Seeks New Ways to Make It Pay

“This is the place that Google is essentially betting its future on,” said Karim Temsamani, Google’s head of mobile advertising, a role created in September.

Though the search results Google spits out might seem the same on phones as on computers, there are some behind-the-scenes differences.

2011年4月23日星期六

Bits: Google Says It Collects Location Data on Phones for Location Services

Updated 7:50 pm Added links to Steve Jobs talking about location privacy.

Google said Friday that it collected location data from Android phones, but that it did so anonymously and with user consent. The company said it gathered the data to provide services like maps and searches for shops or restaurants near a person’s location. The company said it also used the information to estimate traffic on various roads.

“Phones know where you are, and they need to for many of the services we offer,” said Mike Nelson, a Google spokesman.

Mr. Nelson was responding to a growing controversy that erupted Wednesday, when researchers reported that Apple’s iPhone and iPad stored the places visited by a user in an unencrypted file in the phone, and later on the user’s computer when the phone or tablet was synced. Further reports said the data was being transmitted to Apple, albeit anonymously.

While many privacy advocates and iPhone users said they were alarmed by the discovery, some security experts said they believed Apple was collecting the data not to track users but to be able to pinpoint a phone’s location more quickly, saving bandwidth and battery life, when their owners used location-based services like maps and navigation. Some also said Google was collecting similar data and also storing it on phones.

Apple declined to comment. (Last year, Steven P. Jobs, Apple’s chief executive, said that unlike many competitors in Silicon Valley, Apple takes privacy very seriously. He singled out location as an area of particular concern. “Privacy means people know what they are signing up for,” Mr. Jobs said. “In plain English and repeatedly. That’s what it means.” (Watch the video of the interview.)

Mr. Nelson said that while Google tied the location to a unique identifier, it did not link it to a person. Some privacy advocates, however, believe that given a phone’s movements, it would be easy to identify the person to whom it belongs.

While many cellphone owners believe that the services that pinpoint their location on smartphones rely on GPS technology, more often than not, companies like Google and Apple identify a phone’s location by comparing the names and strengths of nearby Wi-Fi hotspots against a database of Wi-Fi hotspots. The technique was pioneered by Skyhook Wireless. Apple initially relied on Skyhook’s technology.

But over time, Google and Apple began building their own databases of Wi-Fi hotspots. Google did so with its StreetView cars. And both companies do so by using their customers’ phones as sensors.

Still, some wondered why the companies needed to store information on users’ phones.

“We do not store info on the phone,” said Michael Shean, the co-founder and senior vice president of business development at Skyhook. Mr. Shean said it too used data from users’ phones to update its database of Wi-Fi hotspots. But he said it only looked up the information when a location-based application asked for it, as when, a camera application tried to geotag a photo. “We only do a location look up when an application requests it,” he said.

Mr. Shean said pinpointing location through Wi-Fi hotspots was often more accurate than through cell towers, and easier than through GPS. He said it complemented GPS well, since the satellite-based system often did not work well in streets surrounded by tall buildings or in indoor locations.

2011年4月16日星期六

Google video doodle celebrates Charlie Chaplin's 122nd birthday

在 ServiceModel 客户端配置部分中，找不到引用协定“TranslatorService.LanguageService”的默认终结点元素。这可能是因为未找到应用程序的配置文件，或者是因为客户端元素中找不到与此协定匹配的终结点元素。
在 ServiceModel 客户端配置部分中，找不到引用协定“TranslatorService.LanguageService”的默认终结点元素。这可能是因为未找到应用程序的配置文件，或者是因为客户端元素中找不到与此协定匹配的终结点元素。

We had to check but the Charlie Chaplin tribute isn't the first video doodle to grace the Google home page. That honor was bestowed upon John Lennon to celebrate his 70th birthday. His video, however, was just an animation whereas Google's latest doodle dials up the frame rate to recreate the lovable tramp's antics in a very Google way. The video doodle's only available from the Google Australia home page but we expect that to change just as soon as the Earth completes its rotation. See it after the break -- just remember: a $2 muffin from 100 years ago would cost about $47 today without AdSense support.

View the original article here

Magellan's eXplorist Pro 10 does GIS data collection for $700, makes Google maps green with envy

The Magellan? eXplorist? Pro 10 GPS Receiver - Waterproof, Rugged, Built-in Bluetooth and Runs an Open Platform on Windows Mobile 6.5

SANTA CLARA, Calif., April 14, 2011 /PRNewswire/ -- Magellan, a pioneering GPS brand, today announced it's re-entering the GIS market with the eXplorist Pro 10, a rugged, lightweight and waterproof GPS handheld device specifically designed for GPS/GIS data collection.

Featuring a vibrant 3-inch, WQVGA transflective color touchscreen, 533MHz processor and 128MB RAM, the eXplorist Pro 10 packs the power needed to work with maps and large data sets into a compact-handheld form factor. It comes with 4GB of onboard storage and is expandable with up to 32GB via microSDHC card slot, enabling large data sets such as aerial photos to be loaded easily.

With its rugged IPX-7 waterproof casing, the lightweight eXplorist Pro 10 is the ideal GIS data collection handheld device for GIS professionals seeking to collect GPS/GIS data. The Pro 10 can deliver 3 to 5 meters accuracy in real-time using its internal GPS receiver or work with a supported Bluetooth enabled GPS receiver to achieve sub-meter or 1-3 meter accuracy.
"Rugged environments, reliability and durability are today's main challenges for GIS professionals," said Sunnie Tsai, Sr. Director, product marketing for Magellan. "With flexible GPS accuracy options, built-in Bluetooth wireless technology and a high resolution camera, the Pro 10 handheld enhances productivity at a very affordable price."

Built-in Bluetooth wireless technology enables users to connect laser rangefinders, barcode scanners, and other Bluetooth-enabled devices for convenient cable-free solutions.
Added features to help record data include a built-in 3.2 mega-pixel camera to capture geotagged photos and video, and an on-board voice recorder to enable hands-free note taking. The Pro 10 also includes a 3D compass, pressure altimeter and barometer. It can run up 15 hours on two standard AA batteries.

The palm-sized handheld is powered by the standard Windows Mobile v6.5 operating system. The Pro 10 is specifically developed as an open platform to run powerful GIS data collection programs such as ESRI's ArcPad 10 as well as a wide range of other Windows Mobile data collection software programs.

The eXplorist Pro 10 is now available through Magellan's GIS Distribution Channel for an MSRP of $699.99. To learn more, please visit www.magellangps.com/GIS.

2011年4月15日星期五

Google expands NFC check-ins, clutters more restaurant windows

Smartag Supplies NFC Smart Poster Tags for Google Places Service

Press Release Source: Identive Group, Inc. On Tuesday April 12, 2011, 1:00 am EDT

ATLANTA and SANTA ANA, Calif., April 12, 2011 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- ACiG Technology, a supplier and distributor of RFID products and a business unit of Identive Group, Inc. (Nasdaq:INVE - News) (Frankfurt:INV - News) announced that is has been selected as the exclusive supplier of near field communication (NFC) RFID stickers for the roll out of Google's marketing campaign for Google Places in Austin, Texas. The NFC stickers are manufactured by ACiG's sister company, Smartag.

Google is currently distributing the 80x50mm stickers to local business owners throughout Austin to help them promote their products and services and encourage people to rate and review the businesses on Google's new local recommendation engine. The smart stickers are utilized to convert conventional advertising posters to connected smart posters. Consumers with NFC-enabled mobile phones who have downloaded the Google Places app can simply touch their devices to the stickers to access all kinds of relevant information about a local business from across the web -- such as its address, phone number, hours of operation, payment types, helpful reviews and more. Consumers can rate or review the business right from the webpage on the mobile device, and then receive more personalized local recommendations in their search results based on their opinions and those of their friends.

Bernardo Hernandez, senior director of consumer marketing for Google, said, "NFC-enabled stickers are an integral part of our outreach efforts to local Austin businesses as they demonstrate the effectiveness of Internet spot marketing and help consumers quickly discover more information about a business. About 20 percent of all searches on Google are for local information, and NFC technology delivered by Smartag smart stickers enables really interesting ways to connect Austin locals and visitors with the businesses in the area."

"As a manufacturer and distributor of core RFID technology, we see many market trends develop from their earliest stages," said Roger Hornstra, President U.S., ACiG Technology. "Smart posters are expected to be a tremendous growth area in B to C marketing and we are excited to work with Google as it pioneers this exciting application of NFC technology."

About ACiG Technology:

ACiG Technology, a business unit of Identive Group, Inc. (Nasdaq:INVE - News) (Frankfurt:INV - News), is a supplier and distributor of RFID inlays, cards, transponders, reader components and electronic components for the RFID and smart card industries. ACiG's leading-edge technology and extensive knowledge of the RFID Identification markets enable the company to help customers create the right products for their secure identification applications. For additional information, visit www.acig-tech.com.

About Smartag

Smartag, a business unit of Identive Group, Inc. (Nasdaq:INVE - News) (Frankfurt:INV - News), specializes in high performance design and production of high frequency (HF) and ultra high frequency (UHF) RFID inlays and inlay-based conversions including labels, tags and tickets. Smartag's products are used in mass transit, leisure, event and industrial applications and to enable secure NFC-based payments using mobile devices. Smartag's ability to utilize multiple antenna technologies and designs provides significant versatility in customizing solutions for different applications. For additional information visit: www.smartag.com.sg

Google announces Q1 earnings: $8.58 billion gross revenue, $2.3 billion net income

Google Announces First Quarter 2011 Results

MOUNTAIN VIEW, Calif. – April 14, 2011 – Google Inc. (NASDAQ: GOOG) today announced financial results for the quarter ended March 31, 2011.

"We had a great quarter with 27% year-over-year revenue growth," said Patrick Pichette, CFO of Google. "These results demonstrate the value of search and search ads to our users and customers, as well as the extraordinary potential of areas like display and mobile. It's clear that our past investments have been crucial to our success today--which is why we continue to invest for the long term."

Q1 Financial Summary

Google reported revenues of $8.58 billion for the quarter ended March 31, 2011, an increase of 27% compared to the first quarter of 2010. Google reports its revenues, consistent with GAAP, on a gross basis without deducting traffic acquisition costs (TAC). In the first quarter of 2011, TAC totaled $2.04 billion, or 25% of advertising revenues.

Google reports operating income, operating margin, net income, and earnings per share (EPS) on a GAAP and non-GAAP basis. The non-GAAP measures, as well as free cash flow, an alternative non-GAAP measure of liquidity, are described below and are reconciled to the corresponding GAAP measures in the accompanying financial tables.

GAAP operating income in the first quarter of 2011 was $2.80 billion, or 33% of revenues. This compares to GAAP operating income of $2.49 billion, or 37% of revenues, in the first quarter of 2010. Non-GAAP operating income in the first quarter of 2011 was $3.23 billion, or 38% of revenues. This compares to non-GAAP operating income of $2.78 billion, or 41% of revenues, in the first quarter of 2010.
GAAP net income in the first quarter of 2011 was $2.30 billion, compared to $1.96 billion in the first quarter of 2010. Non-GAAP net income in the first quarter of 2011 was $2.64 billion, compared to $2.18 billion in the first quarter of 2010.
GAAP EPS in the first quarter of 2011 was $7.04 on 326 million diluted shares outstanding, compared to $6.06 in the first quarter of 2010 on 323 million diluted shares outstanding. Non-GAAP EPS in the first quarter of 2011 was $8.08, compared to $6.76 in the first quarter of 2010.
Non-GAAP operating income and non-GAAP operating margin exclude the expenses related to stock-based compensation (SBC). Non-GAAP net income and non-GAAP EPS exclude the expenses related to SBC and the related tax benefits. In the first quarter of 2011, the charge related to SBC was $432 million, compared to $291 million in the first quarter of 2010. The tax benefit related to SBC was $92 million in the first quarter of 2011 and $65 million in the first quarter of 2010.
Q1 Financial Highlights

Revenues – Google reported revenues of $8.58 billion in the first quarter of 2011, representing a 27% increase over first quarter 2010 revenues of $6.77 billion. Google reports its revenues, consistent with GAAP, on a gross basis without deducting TAC.

Google Sites Revenues – Google-owned sites generated revenues of $5.88 billion, or 69% of total revenues, in the first quarter of 2011. This represents a 32% increase over first quarter 2010 revenues of $4.44 billion.

Google Network Revenues – Google's partner sites generated revenues, through AdSense programs, of $2.43 billion, or 28% of total revenues, in the first quarter of 2011. This represents a 19% increase from first quarter 2010 network revenues of $2.04 billion.

International Revenues – Revenues from outside of the United States totaled $4.57 billion, representing 53% of total revenues in the first quarter of 2011, compared to 52% in the fourth quarter of 2010 and 53% in the first quarter of 2010. Excluding gains related to our foreign exchange risk management program, had foreign exchange rates remained constant from the fourth quarter of 2010 through the first quarter of 2011, our revenues in the first quarter of 2011 would have been $19 million lower. Excluding gains related to our foreign exchange risk management program, had foreign exchange rates remained constant from the first quarter of 2010 through the first quarter of 2011, our revenues in the first quarter of 2011 would have been $23 million lower.

Revenues from the United Kingdom totaled $969 million, representing 11% of revenues in the first quarter of 2011, compared to 13% in the first quarter of 2010.
In the first quarter of 2011, we recognized a benefit of $14 million to revenues through our foreign exchange risk management program, compared to a benefit of $10 million in the first quarter of 2010.
Paid Clicks – Aggregate paid clicks, which include clicks related to ads served on Google sites and the sites of our AdSense partners, increased approximately 18% over the first quarter of 2010 and increased approximately 4% over the fourth quarter of 2010.

Cost-Per-Click – Average cost-per-click, which includes clicks related to ads served on Google sites and the sites of our AdSense partners, increased approximately 8% over the first quarter of 2010 and decreased approximately 1% over the fourth quarter of 2010.

TAC – Traffic Acquisition Costs, the portion of revenues shared with Google's partners, increased to $2.04 billion in the first quarter of 2011, compared to TAC of $1.71 billion in the first quarter of 2010. TAC as a percentage of advertising revenues was 25% in the first quarter of 2011, compared to 26% in the first quarter of 2010.

The majority of TAC is related to amounts ultimately paid to our AdSense partners, which totaled $1.70 billion in the first quarter of 2011. TAC also includes amounts ultimately paid to certain distribution partners and others who direct traffic to our website, which totaled $337 million in the first quarter of 2011.

Other Cost of Revenues – Other cost of revenues, which is comprised primarily of data center operational expenses, amortization of intangible assets, content acquisition costs as well as credit card processing charges, increased to $897 million, or 10% of revenues, in the first quarter of 2011, compared to $741 million, or 11% of revenues, in the first quarter of 2010.

Operating Expenses – Operating expenses, other than cost of revenues, were $2.84 billion in the first quarter of 2011, or 33% of revenues, compared to $1.84 billion in the first quarter of 2010, or 27% of revenues.

SBC – In the first quarter of 2011, the total charge related to SBC was $432 million, compared to $291 million in the first quarter of 2010.

We currently estimate SBC charges for grants to employees prior to April 1, 2011 to be approximately $1.7 billion for 2011. This estimate does not include expenses to be recognized related to employee stock awards that are granted after March 31, 2011 or non-employee stock awards that have been or may be granted.

Operating Income – GAAP operating income in the first quarter of 2011 was $2.80 billion, or 33% of revenues. This compares to GAAP operating income of $2.49 billion, or 37% of revenues, in the first quarter of 2010. Non-GAAP operating income in the first quarter of 2011 was $3.23 billion, or 38% of revenues. This compares to non-GAAP operating income of $2.78 billion, or 41% of revenues, in the first quarter of 2010.

Interest and Other Income, Net – Interest and other income, net increased to $96 million in the first quarter of 2011, compared to $18 million in the first quarter of 2010.

Income Taxes – Our effective tax rate was 21% for the first quarter of 2011.

Net Income – GAAP net income in the first quarter of 2011 was $2.30 billion, compared to $1.96 billion in the first quarter of 2010. Non-GAAP net income in the first quarter of 2011was $2.64 billion, compared to $2.18 billion in the first quarter of 2010. GAAP EPS in the first quarter of 2011 was $7.04 on 326 million diluted shares outstanding, compared to $6.06 in the first quarter of 2010 on 323 million diluted shares outstanding. Non-GAAP EPS in the first quarter of 2011 was $8.08, compared to $6.76 in the first quarter of 2010.

Cash Flow and Capital Expenditures – Net cash provided by operating activities in the first quarter of 2011 totaled $3.17 billion, compared to $2.58 billion in the first quarter of 2010. In the first quarter of 2011, capital expenditures were $890 million, the majority of which was related to IT infrastructure investments, including data centers, servers, and networking equipment. Free cash flow, an alternative non-GAAP measure of liquidity, is defined as net cash provided by operating activities less capital expenditures. In the first quarter of 2011, free cash flow was $2.28 billion.

We expect to continue to make significant capital expenditures.

A reconciliation of free cash flow to net cash provided by operating activities, the GAAP measure of liquidity, is included at the end of this release.

Cash – As of March 31, 2011, cash, cash equivalents, and marketable securities were $36.7 billion.

Headcount – On a worldwide basis, Google employed 26,316 full-time employees as of March 31, 2011, up from 24,400 full-time employees as of December 31, 2010.

WEBCAST AND CONFERENCE CALL INFORMATION

A live audio webcast of Google's first quarter 2011 earnings release call will be available at http://investor.google.com/webcast.html. The call begins today at 1:30 PM (PT) / 4:30 PM (ET). This press release, the financial tables, as well as other supplemental information including the reconciliations of certain non-GAAP measures to their nearest comparable GAAP measures, are also available on that site.

FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

This press release contains forward-looking statements that involve risks and uncertainties. These statements include statements regarding our plans to invest heavily in innovation, our expected stock-based compensation charges, and our plans to make significant capital expenditures. Actual results may differ materially from the results predicted, and reported results should not be considered as an indication of future performance. The potential risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ from the results predicted include, among others, unforeseen changes in our hiring patterns and our need to expend capital to accommodate the growth of the business, as well as those risks and uncertainties included under the captions "Risk Factors" and "Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations" in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2010, which is on file with the SEC, and is available on our investor relations website at investor.google.com and on the SEC website at www.sec.gov. Additional information will also be set forth in our Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2011, which we expect to file with the SEC in May 2011. All information provided in this release and in the attachments is as of April 14, 2011, and Google undertakes no duty to update this information.

ABOUT NON-GAAP FINANCIAL MEASURES

To supplement our consolidated financial statements, which statements are prepared and presented in accordance with GAAP, we use the following non-GAAP financial measures: non-GAAP operating income, non-GAAP operating margin, non-GAAP net income, non-GAAP EPS, and free cash flow. The presentation of this financial information is not intended to be considered in isolation or as a substitute for, or superior to, the financial information prepared and presented in accordance with GAAP. For more information on these non-GAAP financial measures, please see the tables captioned "Reconciliations of non-GAAP results of operations measures to the nearest comparable GAAP measures" and "Reconciliation from net cash provided by operating activities to free cash flow" included at the end of this release.

We use these non-GAAP financial measures for financial and operational decision making and as a means to evaluate period-to-period comparisons. Our management believes that these non-GAAP financial measures provide meaningful supplemental information regarding our performance and liquidity by excluding certain expenses and expenditures that may not be indicative of our "recurring core business operating results," meaning our operating performance excluding not only non-cash charges, such as stock-based compensation, but also discrete cash charges that are infrequent in nature. We believe that both management and investors benefit from referring to these non-GAAP financial measures in assessing our performance and when planning, forecasting, and analyzing future periods. These non-GAAP financial measures also facilitate management's internal comparisons to our historical performance and liquidity as well as comparisons to our competitors' operating results. We believe these non-GAAP financial measures are useful to investors both because (1) they allow for greater transparency with respect to key metrics used by management in its financial and operational decision making and (2) they are used by our institutional investors and the analyst community to help them analyze the health of our business.

Non-GAAP operating income and operating margin. We define non-GAAP operating income as operating income plus stock-based compensation. Non-GAAP operating margin is defined as non-GAAP operating income divided by revenues. Google considers these non-GAAP financial measures to be useful metrics for management and investors because they exclude the effect of stock-based compensation so that Google's management and investors can compare Google's recurring core business operating results over multiple periods. Because of varying available valuation methodologies, subjective assumptions and the variety of award types that companies can use under ASC Topic 718, Google's management believes that providing a non-GAAP financial measure that excludes stock-based compensation allows investors to make meaningful comparisons between Google's recurring core business operating results and those of other companies, as well as providing Google's management with an important tool for financial and operational decision making and for evaluating Google's own recurring core business operating results over different periods of time. There are a number of limitations related to the use of non-GAAP operating income versus operating income calculated in accordance with GAAP. First, non-GAAP operating income excludes some costs, namely, stock-based compensation, that are recurring. Stock-based compensation has been and will continue to be for the foreseeable future a significant recurring expense in Google's business. Second, stock-based compensation is an important part of our employees' compensation and impacts their performance. Third, the components of the costs that we exclude in our calculation of non-GAAP operating income may differ from the components that our peer companies exclude when they report their results of operations. Management compensates for these limitations by providing specific information regarding the GAAP amounts excluded from non-GAAP operating income and evaluating non-GAAP operating income together with operating income calculated in accordance with GAAP.

Non-GAAP net income and EPS. We define non-GAAP net income as net income plus stock-based compensation less the related tax effects. We define non-GAAP EPS as non-GAAP net income divided by the weighted average outstanding shares, on a fully-diluted basis. We consider these non-GAAP financial measures to be a useful metric for management and investors for the same reasons that Google uses non-GAAP operating income and non-GAAP operating margin. However, in order to provide a complete picture of our recurring core business operating results, we exclude from non-GAAP net income and non-GAAP EPS the tax effects associated with stock-based compensation. Without excluding these tax effects, investors would only see the gross effect that excluding these expenses had on our operating results. The same limitations described above regarding Google's use of non-GAAP operating income and non-GAAP operating margin apply to our use of non-GAAP net income and non-GAAP EPS. Management compensates for these limitations by providing specific information regarding the GAAP amounts excluded from non-GAAP net income and non-GAAP EPS and evaluating non-GAAP net income and non-GAAP EPS together with net income and EPS calculated in accordance with GAAP.

Free cash flow. We define free cash flow as net cash provided by operating activities minus capital expenditures. We consider free cash flow to be a liquidity measure that provides useful information to management and investors about the amount of cash generated by the business that, after the acquisition of property and equipment, including information technology infrastructure and land and buildings, can be used for strategic opportunities, including investing in our business, making strategic acquisitions, and strengthening the balance sheet. Analysis of free cash flow also facilitates management's comparisons of our operating results to competitors' operating results. A limitation of using free cash flow versus the GAAP measure of net cash provided by operating activities as a means for evaluating Google is that free cash flow does not represent the total increase or decrease in the cash balance from operations for the period because it excludes cash used for capital expenditures during the period. Our management compensates for this limitation by providing information about our capital expenditures on the face of the cash flow statement and under the caption "Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations" in our Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q and Annual Report on Form 10-K. Google has computed free cash flow using the same consistent method from quarter to quarter and year to year.

Google video doodle celebrates Charlie Chaplin's 122nd birthday

。 We had to check but the Charlie Chaplin tribute isn't the first video doodle to grace the Google home page. That honor was bestowed upon John Lennon to celebrate his 70th birthday. His video, however, was just an animation whereas Google's latest doodle dials up the frame rate to recreate the lovable tramp's antics in a very Google way. The video doodle's only available from the Google Australia home page but we expect that to change just as soon as the Earth completes its rotation. See it after the break -- just remember: a $2 muffin from 100 years ago would cost about $47 today without AdSense support.

Magellan's eXplorist Pro 10 does GIS data collection for $700, makes Google maps green with envy

The Magellan? eXplorist? Pro 10 GPS Receiver - Waterproof, Rugged, Built-in Bluetooth and Runs an Open Platform on Windows Mobile 6.5

The eXplorist Pro 10 is now available through Magellan's GIS Distribution Channel for an MSRP of $699.99. To learn more, please visit www.magellangps.com/GIS.

订阅：博文 (Atom)