Did Cingular read my my rant about the ugly designs of Blackberry? The new 7130c from Cingular (not to be mistaken with the still ugly 7130 from other carriers) comes closer to what modern design for a PDA-with-phone should like like.

Having tested a ton of phones, PDA's etc over the years, the 7130c is a very attractive competitor to the bulky Palm Treo 650 and ... certainly more usable. The small dimensions of the 7130c cuts the size of the older Blackberry almost in half, a little thicker than the Motorola RAZR (which I love) and a bit taller, the 7130c still fits in the pocket of my pants easily. I like it so much, that I decided to get rid of my old Blackberry (on eBay) and my RAZR (although I'll keep it around, just in case) and combine two capabilities into one.

The 7130c with EDGE internet connectivity is actually fast enough to make it a delight to browse the internet (and visit the WAP site of CNN) and read e-mail, while waiting for the traffic light to turn green. The industrial design is good enough (not great) and appealing, the screen that is clearly visible in bright sunlight and adjusts automatically to your surroundings. This is absolutely the best screen I've ever seen on a mobile device.

Phone services are integrated into the PDA capabilities, but this part could be more intuitive. The heritage of the scroll menus from the Blackberry PDA platform complicates things beyond what is necessary. More 'special purpose' buttons would solve the problem. For now however, the Blackberry 7130c has become my new one-eyed king in the land of the blind.

Tags: Plaxo, LinkedIn, Mac, VC, Sequoia, Yahoo, Sherpalo

Many times the question comes up, what exactly is Web 2.0? Although we are not great supporters of buzzwords that have little real meaning, we are - just this time - tempted to put our big-thinking in the mix.

We believe it describes a set of technologies to support the immense popularity and growth characteristics of free-markets.

Free markets have been in existence at least since 1637, when dutch growers imported Tulips from Turkey and engaged in heavy bidding wars with buyers at the onset of the flower markets. [In the interest of "full-disclosure"; I grew up in Holland].

The Dutch auction (also referred to as "The Essence of Fairness" with respect to IPO markets) was created when ample supply was met with equally impressive demand, and a unique trading mechanism was developed. Apart from the details of the trading options (which eBay has adopted), we want to focus here on the dynamics of the market that are so different from the technology industry in its current incarnation.

The technology industry (still in an immature state) has built success around companies that identify and carve out a one-to-many relationship with customers. Successful companies like Microsoft, Oracle, Cisco etc. staved off early competition and now act as the single asset owner of the technology they sell to many customers, fearing little organic competition. We call them what they are; demi-cartels. A great position to be in and very profitable, but the technology market is about to get a shakeup, not dissimilar to what happened in the flower markets.

The creation and composition of technology assets, whether those assets are applications, databases, code or new media content, is emerging from the hands of specialists into the realm of a much broader set of providers.

Suddenly, the technology industry faces competition it has never seen before. And it is responding by changing its tactics [ technology taxonomy in motion], it has to. Oracle loses a big customer because it refuses to put up with fat margins, exorbitant pricing and 20% support fees and makes the switch to a little vendor called MySQL. New online capabilities enable Craigslist, where posting classified ads is free of charge, to hasten the demise of traditional newspaper classified advertising. MySpace takes the need for people to express themselves out of the hands of the specialists.

New many-to-many market models arise and dramatically impact the old rules of the game. New content establishes micro-celebrities that drive the popularity of a free-market technology platform. The Pareto principle is dead (well, not really - its amplitude will change).

So, Web 2.0 is a platform strategy (rather than a proprietary stack) that enables many-to-many relationships between buyers and sellers of electronic assets. When transparency and integrity are key objectives in the creation of these marketplaces, Web2.0, with whatever technologies that represents, actually has a chance of becoming a buzzword we can speak fondly about.

Tags: Blackberry, EBay, PDA, Motorola, Cingular, AT&T, CNN, Design

Internet security companies are the Jiffy Lubes of the auto industry, they require constant innovation to keep up with the changing product stack they attempt to optimize, but not own. Some companies achieve innovation through non-organic growth (Symantec), others build a set of urgently needed technologies that becomes bigger as customer requirements grow (Trend Micro, McAfee). But keeping up is a challenge, and I expect security companies and the stack owners to aggressively pursue acquisition strategies to round out and secure their own future. Stack owners (Microsoft, Oracle, IBM, Cisco) will become fierce competitors to security companies, if partnerships are not appropriate. Today's Security leaders need to change and look into new business strategies.

Looking at the security marketplace from a fresh perspective, I give the current marketplace a 1.2 grade on the following evolution scale.

Security 1.0: the internet is not secure by any stretch of the imagination, but neither is the conventional world. So, get over it. Security is also not an absolute science. Spam, Viruses, Exploits, Worms, Cross-site scripting etc. deliver a vast amount of opportunities to security companies that provide band-aids to the multitude and severity of security gaps. 83 Enterprise AntiSpam companies battle it out every day. Leaving it up to customers filled with fear, uncertainty and doubt to wade through a plethora of point products to select which one is best, and when. It's a jungle out there.

Security 2.0: a secure enterprise, shielded from some of the garbage on the internet, needs protection in the same way you secure your house. Depending on personal preferences that define the vigor and quality of security, securing the doors without securing the windows doesn't make a whole lot of sense. Security is really a risk management issue, a delicate balance in which no single piece of security, data type or communication channel prevails; the equilibrium of security techniques (AntiSpam, AntiVirus, AntiSpyware, Web Application Security etc.) needs to provides sufficient shelter and trust. Leading security companies need to move towards marketing that equilibrium and scope.

Security 3.0: while internal threats are becoming a force to be reckoned with, many security companies are developing a Security 2.0 strategy that incorporates content compliance and other technologies to protect company assets against the employees themselves. I believe security companies should focus on aggressively protecting against outside threats, yet stimulate and enable the internal exchange of information. Content compliance should be checked but not enforced. The integrity of your business lies in the hearts and minds of people, not technology. Moving on, Security 3.0 is a platform strategy consisting of a framework in which a multitude of vendors can provide plugins that separate threat detection from distribution. It will be a free-market in which the best technology will plug into a framework that allows this technology to be used on any type of information, in motion or at rest. I believe many stack owners and security behemoths will play a pivotal role in defining the key components of this security platform and new security specialists will define the new, and highly specialized, security threat detection capabilities.

Bottom line: plenty of acquisition opportunities continue to exist for emerging security companies as the incumbents and stack owners battle to own a large part of the security framework that is essential to instill trust with customers.

The size of after-market providers like Jiffy-Lube, AutoZone is larger than the market size of the car manufacturers, proving that after-markets will exist for quite some time. Security is still the after-market of the technology industry and I see no vendor changing that paradigm significantly today. New security vendors will continue to reap rewards and the incumbents will slowly move towards owning something they've never had, a technology (or platform) stack.

Tags: Free-market, Microsoft, Oracle, Cisco, MySQL, Craigslist, Pareto, MySpace, Margin