Seidman's Online Insider - September 28, 1997
<HTML><PRE>Thema: Seidman's Online Insider - September 28, 1997
Datum: 28.09.97 15:28:07 MEZ
From: robert@onlineinsider.com (Robert Seidman)
Sender: ONLINE-L@PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (Seidman's Online Insider)
Reply-to: robert@onlineinsider.com (Robert Seidman)
To: ONLINE-L@PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM
============================================================================
Seidman's Online Insider - Vol. 4, Issue 33
Visit the Online Insider on the Web < http://www.onlineinsider.com >
============================================================================
Copyright (C) 1997 Robert Seidman. All rights reserved. May be reproduced
in any medium for noncommercial purposes as long as attribution is given.
IN THIS ISSUE
- Editor's Note
- Story Time
- IE 4.0's Outlook Express
- How Do You Pronounce URL?
- Stock Watch
- Subscription Info
Editor's Note
=============
For some discussion on the following, read what's being said in "Insider
Talk"
SNAP ONLINE: HIT OR MISS?
< http://www.wellengaged.com/engaged/seidman.cgi?c=online&f=0&t=5 >
SPAM ON AOL: PLEASE MAKE IT STOP!
< http://www.wellengaged.com/engaged/seidman.cgi?c=online&f=0&t=11 >
MSN SIGNS-UP FORUM HOSTS FROM COMPUSERVE: BIG DEAL OR SO WHAT?
< http://www.wellengaged.com/engaged/seidman.cgi?c=online&f=0&t=10 >
Next week: More Fun With Numbers
Story Time
==========
Around here, we have a regularly scheduled story time. It's a fantasy
world where everyone's usually winds up happy, animals can talk and pigs
can fly. We know it's story time because the stories usually begin with
"once upon a time".
I'm gradually learning that story time isn't always something that happens
only at regularly scheduled intervals. It's just that often the story
tellers leave out the "once upon a time". Companies want us to suspend
disbelief, something you just have to do if you're going to enjoy story
time. When Netscape tells the story of NetCenter, they want us to
suspend disbelief and not ask questions like "Why don't you want to build
something that builds a relationship with MOST of your subscribers?" I
spoke to Netscape VP Jennifer Bailey last week. Ms. Bailey heads up
Netscape's web sites, including NetCenter. I didn't find the discussion
all that productive. I understand why Netscape wants to build a
NetCenter. I even understand, for now, why it's designed the way it is
(largely because this is what they have). But Bailey confirmed that the
vast majority of visitors to its site DO NOT use any of the services that
compose the heart and soul of NetCenter (Industry Watch is now up,
basically a repackaging of Individual's NewsPage, and by far the most
easily accessible item in NetCenter).
So I just had to know WHY Netscape wasn't considering building a service
that would build a relationship with the huge majority of its visitors.
The conversation would have gone much better if it had been prefaced as
"story time". Then I would have been like, "Uh huh Ms. Bailey, then what
did the white knight Mr. Barksdale due to slay that mean, fire-breathing
Bill Gates dragon?" But I didn't realize it was story time. I thought I
was at work.
Perhaps it is an oversimplification to say this, but it seems there are
two kinds of stories in the computer/Internet realm. Stories that drive
REAL MONEY and stories that drive the stock market. And in the computer
space -- there's another story, where Microsoft is always played as the
bad guy.
Some companies have good stories. Intel is one of them. Once upon a time
there was very bright immigrant named Andrew Grove. Grove was a genius,
often perceived a ruthless genius, but a genius nonetheless. Grove and
the folks at Intel built an empire out of sand. He converted simple
silicon to cash. Billions and billions of dollars of cash. That is one
of the most fascinating stories I've ever read. Next month, all will be
able to read one version of the tale in the forthcoming "Inside Intel".
Tim Jackson did a fantastic job with the story. The book reads like the
mini-series for the birth of the personal computer market. Unless you've
been around since the beginning, this book is a must-read for anyone who
wants to understand how the personal computer industry as we know it came
to be.
But Mr. Jackson told that story. I'll pick up where the book begins AND
ends. The Pentium flaw. Remember that? Well, you can believe that Grove
and gang were muttering all kinds of unspeakable things about the Internet
back then.
Would Intel have backed down and replaced the flawed chips if there had
been no Internet? I kind of doubt they would have, but who knows? So
Intel coughed-up half a billion dollars to replace the chips and preserve
its public image. A very good move. Why risk being perceived as
"Internet Bad" when the Internet was something that would generate
upgrades of computers and new sales of computers (most of them with Intel
chips inside)? For many people, word processing and spreadsheet
capabilities aren't that interesting. Home banking? Someday maybe, but
it isn't making people go "oooooh, I have to have that!" But the
Internet, it has potential for a much wider appeal simply from a
communications and information perspective. The Internet is good for
Intel.
Of course, Intel has the advantage of working "with" Microsoft rather than
against it. Over time, perhaps that will change, but in Intel's core
market, Microsoft is good, not bad. Enter Messrs. Ellison, Barksdale and
McNealy. (note: Ellison makes it through Microsoft's Word 97 spell
check, but Barksdale and McNealy do not. Score for Larry E.!). They all
have a story and while Microsoft shouldn't really play a major part in
their stories, it often has a central role.
Ellison, Barksdale and McNealy are trying to pawn Bill Gates off as the
evil emperor. Please. Other people may be able to make such a claim
successfully, but not one of these guys. Gates doesn't even have to say,
"Larry, Jim, Scott, I'm your father! Join the dark side and together
we'll rule for eternity." Why? Because Ellison, Barksdale and McNealy
already want what Gates has. They want to RULE. And if Bill Gates rules,
they cannot rule. Fortunately, the gang of three are all very smart.
And they are among the best story-tellers of all-time. In fact, of this
gang, Barksdale gets my vote as Mr. Story Time.
None of these guys will become paupers in their quests to overthrow Gates.
But they won't beat Microsoft with NetPCs, Java and Netscape. This week's
column from Walt Mossberg where he more or less pans the new Oracle-based
"Network PC" and by far prefers the forthcoming (Microsoft-owned) WebTV
Plus, must have sent Gates beaming and Ellison muttering.
This doesn't mean these companies won't win with their products, but
viewing these products as Microsoft slayers is ridiculous. I think what
fuels it is the notion (which sort of appears to be true) that Microsoft
doesn't want to give up ANYTHING. This is an equally ridiculous position.
I think Microsoft will ultimately gain the dominant market share with the
browsers, but it's a long ways off from dominating it in the sense it
dominates the operating systems market. People will still use Netscape
and I don't believe Microsoft can do anything to change this (well, of
course, ultimately they can buy Netscape, but that's another story).
What Intel, Netscape, Sun, Oracle and Microsoft have in common is a story.
And in large measure there is something to their stories, because these
companies really are selling products (this is not to say that I think
Oracle's NetPC will go anywhere -- I don't, but it isn't Oracle's core
business. Oracle is still selling lots of database product). It's just
that I would like to hear a story from Netscape, Sun and Oracle where
Microsoft isn't a central character. Maybe Microsoft IS the bad guy, but
these companies should put less focus on beating Gates and more focus on
developing better products.
The other kind of story is a little harder to figure out. And we don't
know how it ends yet. Once upon a time, there was a great company with
great potential. People seemed to LOVE what the company was doing and
flocked to its web site again and again and again. Now this company
hadn't quite figured out how to turn this into a profit yet, but all the
analysts were claiming the POTENTIAL for the company was HUGE. So, the
company's stock went up. And then a couple of months later, the quarterly
report came out, or people realized that the potential wasn't being
realized TODAY (that's why it's called potential, huh?) and the stock
dropped off. Did the company do anything differently or wrong? Not
necessarily. We've seen lots of examples of this.
Clearly companies like Yahoo!, @Home, Amazon.com, etc., all have amazing
potential. Is Yahoo's stock overvalued based on its current potential?
There are several ways to look at it analytically to make a case that the
stock is fairly valued based on its potential. But the thing is, it
hasn't hit its potential yet, so people seem to question whether the stock
is worth that much today (I don't really question this, I think most of
the Internet sector is overvalued based on current performance). The
stocks seem go up and down, but the stock price isn't always a fair
indication of how the company is really doing. Will these companies live
up to their full potentials? I have no idea. The stock market is always
a gamble. But I think the important thing, whether your reading a
quarterly statement from the company or an analyst's report is to find the
"real" story. I tend to put more focus on what the analysts say the
companies are going to do THIS quarter rather than what the companies
opportunity is in 2-3 years. Either way most of the companies in the
"stock watch" are riding pretty high right now. My guess is that over
the next 6 weeks or so as earnings reports come out for the quarter ending
this Tuesday, you'll see some of them tail off. But 6 weeks after that,
they'll wind up right back where they are today. Of course, I don't play
the stock market!
IE 4.0's Outlook Express
========================
There's a lot to say about the forthcoming IE 4.0 (which will be released
this Tuesday). There's even a lot to say about the bundled e-mail and
newsreader client dubbed Outlook Express. Short of saying that I find it
to be a darn good e-mail package, I won't get into a lot of the specifics
on Outlook Express here.
I was an avid user of NetManage and Eudora e-mail clients for years. But
I switched to Outlook Express. It only lacks one thing that I find myself
really missing, mostly because I receive a lot of e-mail -- I can't look
at my inbox and tell whether I've replied to a message or not. So, if I'm
not on top of things and immediately file mail I've replied to away, I can
get pretty confused. But I live with that. Why? Well, what if you could
combine all the power of e-mail with all the content you wanted from the
World Wide Web? With IE 4.0 and Outlook Express, you can (in fairness,
you could use IE 4.0 and Netscape's messenger or one of the Web-based
e-mail products that supports HTML e-mail and this should still work).
For all the talk of the Web and of Push, nothing has been as powerful for
me as the IE 4.0/Outlook Express combo, which I've been using now for 6
months. I like Pointcast, but I never bring it up anymore. I like
bookmarks, but I have too many of them. I like offline browsing
capabilities, even the features built into IE 4.0 to automatically
download web pages. And I'm starting to appreciate IE 4.0 channels a
little more, but while I like all of those things, I find myself using
them very little. I use e-mail every day.
Some of you may be thinking "so what, big deal! If you want something from
the Web just go get it." Well that sounds easy, and technically it is
that easy, but it puts the responsibility on me to do something else, and
I find I don't always like to do that. Here's a good example. I love the
comic strip "Dilbert". I have for years now. Usually, I read the New
York Times. And while "The Gray Lady" may now be "The Painted Lady" (the
Times recently added color pictures) it doesn't have comics and so, no
Dilbert. I can by the local suburban Gannett newspaper, which does have
Dilbert, but usually I don't. So, if I love Dilbert so much, why don't I
just go to the Web every day and get it. It sounds easy enough, right?
But I don't. I could put it on my to-do list, but that isn't likely. So
what happens is sometimes I go to the Web site, but most of the time I
don't. But if I could get Dilbert every morning by e-mail, I would read
it. And for the last few weeks, that's been exactly what I've done.
I know a lot of you have been receiving HTML e-mail via the content
partners on Netscape's Inbox Direct or directly from InfoBeat (formerly
Mercury Mail). I'm a big fan of these products. They provide good
content, in a good format and I like that. But, I can only get what they
have to offer. IE 4.0 let's me turn every page and any page on the Web
into an "Inbox Direct" partner. And it's far more flexible. You can set
up any kind of schedule you want. For example, I get Dilbert every
morning at 8 a.m., News.Com's home page 4 times a day beginning at 6AM,
the Interactive Wall Street Journal's home page at 6 a.m and
6 p.m., The Washington Post's Baltimore Orioles page every midnight and
the Washington Post's Redskins page every Monday morning at 7 a.m. And of
course, every Thursday morning I get Walt Mossberg's Personal Technology
column from the Wall Street Journal. And I love the flexibility I have.
I have stuff I receive once a day, once a week and once a month. To me,
this is the true power of Push.
So how does it work? It's pretty simple. You bring up a page you want to
receive in the IE 4.0 Web browser and choose to add it to your
"favorites". You then have the option of just adding the link as a
bookmark or you can "subscribe" to the page. Subscriptions offer two
options -- one is a simple notification via a red flag on your bookmarks
list when the page has changed, the other is notification PLUS downloading
the page. If you choose the download option, you then have some other
options (you could download the page and every link off the page, for
example) via the "subscription wizard". One of the options is to receive
e-mail notification, and if you select that option you can then customize
your delivery schedule. It only takes a few seconds and voila, Dilbert
every morning via e-mail.
Okay, there's a catch or two. One advantage of Inbox Direct or InfoBeat
is that someone else is mailing you a page. Whether your computer is
turned on or not, you'll get the e-mail the next time you pull your mail.
With the IE 4.0/Outlook Express combo, it only works if your computer is
turned on. If you schedule to receive something once a week on Sundays at
7 p.m. and your computer isn't turned on Sunday at 7 p.m., you're not
going to receive any mail. You can easily update a subscription at any
time, or update all your subscriptions once (but if you have a lot of
subscriptions you're downloading, this can take some time over a dial-up
line). You also need to have a connection to the Internet. Your computer
doesn't have to be connected to the net all the time, it can be set to
dial-up automatically when you need to update your subscriptions. But
your computer has to be on.
And if you're on AOL -- sorry, this isn't going to work for you. Though
AOL has been testing a MAPI protocol that allows you to use Microsoft
Exchange or Outlook (or any MAPI compliant package) to pull e-mail from
AOL, it isn't publicly available yet and Outlook Express doesn't seem to
work with it. (I could give you a long and complex explanation, but it
appears that Microsoft didn't make Outlook Express fully MAPI compliant.
This was probably by design as once Outlook Express HTML/Internet features
are incorporated into the full Outlook product, Microsoft will likely want
some sort of an upgrade path).
While AOL's own e-mail will not have true HTML ability in the forthcoming
4.0 release, I'm guessing AOL will work to figure out a way to allow its
users to use whatever e-mail they want. Why? Because many of their 9
million members will want the functionality offered in IE 4.0/Outlook
Express (and AOL WILL ultimately imbed the IE 4.0 browser), and I'm
betting one of those customers is none other than Steve Case himself. But
for now if Case wants this, he'll have to call up Erols or some other ISP!
How Do You Pronounce URL?
=========================
You can now find out in a new newsletter called "NetBITS" the sister
publication to "TidBITS". NetBITS, however, will focus exclusively
on Internet information under the direction of editor-in-chief,
Glen Fleishman. It's free, check it out at:
< http://www.netbits.com >
P.S. I say you-are-ell and I'm from the east coast! Earl always sort
of bothered me.
Stock Watch for the Week Ending September 26, 1997
==================================================
Network Solutions (NSOL) comes out strong...
Courtesy of InfoBeat's CLOSING BELL < http://www.infobeat.com >.
52 Wk 52 Wk P/E Week
SECURITY CLOSE HIGH LOW Ratio CHNG
---------------------------------------------------------------------
AT&T Corp................ 45 7/16 46 1/8 30 3/4 14 +3.2%
Amazon Com Inc........... 50 57 3/4 15 3/4 +5.5%
America Online Inc....... 71 9/16 80 1/2 22 3/8 -4.3%
Apple Computer Inc....... 21 5/16 29 3/4 12 3/4 -2.8%
At Home Corporation Ser A 21 5/8 25 3/4 16 5/8 -4.4%
C/Net.................... 41 7/8 46 1/2 14 3/16 +1.8%
CMG Info Svcs. Inc....... 24 1/8 28 1/2 8 41/64 -10.4%
CUC Intl. Inc............ 29 7/8 31 7/8 19 1/4 53 -1.0%
CompuServe Corp.......... 14 1/4 14 9/16 8 5/8 0.0%
Concentric Network Corp.. 13 15/16 16 11 3/8 +3.2%
Cybercash Inc............ 18 7/8 40 1/2 10 1/2 -7.6%
Earthlink Network Inc.... 18 5/8 22 1/2 8 5/8 -1.9%
Excite Inc............... 29 3/4 35 5 1/2 +1.7%
FTP Software Inc......... 4 1/2 8 5/8 3 1/2 +20.0%
GTE Corporation.......... 46 49 3/8 38 15 +0.8%
H & R Block Inc.......... 39 1/2 42 1/4 24 1/2 68 -0.6%
Hewlett Packard Company.. 71 1/4 72 15/16 42 1/2 25 +3.3%
IBM...................... 102 5/8 109 7/16 61 9/16 18 +3.4%
Individual Incorporated.. 5 1/2 11 7/8 2 5/8 -16.9%
Infoseek Corporation..... 9 17/64 11 1/2 4 3/8 +9.1%
Lycos Inc................ 33 42 9 1/2 -11.1%
MCI Communications Corpor 29 13/16 43 3/8 23 7/8 18 +3.0%
Mecklermedia Corp........ 23 1/4 30 16 1/4 122 -3.6%
Microsoft Corporation.... 133 3/8 150 3/4 65 7/16 51 -1.3%
Mindspring Enterprises In 22 24 5/8 5 1/4 -3.2%
Netcom On Line Communicat 12 1/2 19 1/8 7 7/8 -0.9%
Netmanage Inc............ 4 1/16 9 5/8 2 1/2 -5.1%
Netscape Communications C 39 65 23 1/2 -4.8%
Network Solutions Inc.... 23 5/16 26 3/4 23 --
Open Market Inc.......... 15 13/16 25 1/2 6 1/2 +11.9%
Oracle Corporation....... 37 5/8 42 1/8 22 25/64 51 +0.3%
Psinet Inc............... 8 14 1/2 5 1/2 -7.9%
Quarterdeck Corp......... 3 1/64 7 3/8 2 +10.2%
Security First Network Ba 11 5/16 26 1/4 5 1/4 -3.7%
Silicon Graphics Inc..... 26 7/16 30 5/16 12 5/8 61 -10.0%
Sprint Corporation....... 47 1/2 52 3/4 37 1/2 19 -0.5%
Spyglass Inc............. 9 1/8 19 1/2 6 -7.5%
Sun Microsystems Inc..... 48 5/16 53 5/16 25 1/2 25 -3.9%
Vocaltec Communications L 22 24 7/8 3 7/8 +2.3%
Worldcom Inc............. 36 5/16 37 1/2 20 3/8 -1.8%
Yahoo Corporation........ 50 1/4 58 11 9/64 -2.1%
Dow Jones 30 Industrials. 7,922.18 +0.0%
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Subscription Information
========================
To subscribe to this newsletter by e-mail:
Send an e-mail message to LISTSERV@PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM and in the
BODY of the message type:
SUBSCRIBE ONLINE-L FIRSTNAME LASTNAME
Example: Subscribe Online-L Robert Seidman
If you'd like to remove yourself from this mailing list, send a message
to LISTSERV@PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM and in the body of the message type:
SIGNOFF ONLINE-L
A Web-based version of the newsletter is available at:
< http://www.onlineinsider.com >
<FONT COLOR="#0f0f0f" BACK="#fffffe" SIZE=3>
----------------------- Headers --------------------------------
Received: from mrin79.mail.aol.com (mrin79.mx.aol.com [198.81.19.189]) by air06.mail.aol.com (v33) with SMTP; Sun, 28 Sep 1997 10:28:07 -0400
Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [206.241.12.2])
by mrin79.mail.aol.com (8.8.5/8.8.5/AOL-4.0.0)
with ESMTP id KAA03407;
Sun, 28 Sep 1997 10:27:56 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from PEAR.EASE.LSOFT.COM (206.241.12.19) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.1a) with SMTP id <8.384119CD@VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM>; Sun, 28 Sep 1997 10:24:52 -0400
Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM by PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (LISTSERV-TCP/IP
release 1.8c) with spool id 7653264 for
ONLINE-L@PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM; Sun, 28 Sep 1997 10:25:25 -0400
Approved-By: robert@ONLINEINSIDER.COM
Received: from robertse (dialin-8.white-plains.bestweb.net [208.218.53.43]) by
miro.bestweb.net (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id KAA15853 for
<online-l@peach.ease.lsoft.com>; Sun, 28 Sep 1997 10:24:16 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.71.1712.3
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.71.1712.3
Message-ID: <01bccc19$88e837e0$2b35dad0@robertse>
Date: Sun, 28 Sep 1997 10:19:30 -0400
Reply-To: Robert Seidman <robert@onlineinsider.com>
Sender: "Seidman's Online Insider" <ONLINE-L@PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From: Robert Seidman <robert@onlineinsider.com>
Subject: Seidman's Online Insider - September 28, 1997
To: ONLINE-L@PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM
</PRE></HTML>
Datum: 28.09.97 15:28:07 MEZ
From: robert@onlineinsider.com (Robert Seidman)
Sender: ONLINE-L@PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (Seidman's Online Insider)
Reply-to: robert@onlineinsider.com (Robert Seidman)
To: ONLINE-L@PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM
============================================================================
Seidman's Online Insider - Vol. 4, Issue 33
Visit the Online Insider on the Web < http://www.onlineinsider.com >
============================================================================
Copyright (C) 1997 Robert Seidman. All rights reserved. May be reproduced
in any medium for noncommercial purposes as long as attribution is given.
IN THIS ISSUE
- Editor's Note
- Story Time
- IE 4.0's Outlook Express
- How Do You Pronounce URL?
- Stock Watch
- Subscription Info
Editor's Note
=============
For some discussion on the following, read what's being said in "Insider
Talk"
SNAP ONLINE: HIT OR MISS?
< http://www.wellengaged.com/engaged/seidman.cgi?c=online&f=0&t=5 >
SPAM ON AOL: PLEASE MAKE IT STOP!
< http://www.wellengaged.com/engaged/seidman.cgi?c=online&f=0&t=11 >
MSN SIGNS-UP FORUM HOSTS FROM COMPUSERVE: BIG DEAL OR SO WHAT?
< http://www.wellengaged.com/engaged/seidman.cgi?c=online&f=0&t=10 >
Next week: More Fun With Numbers
Story Time
==========
Around here, we have a regularly scheduled story time. It's a fantasy
world where everyone's usually winds up happy, animals can talk and pigs
can fly. We know it's story time because the stories usually begin with
"once upon a time".
I'm gradually learning that story time isn't always something that happens
only at regularly scheduled intervals. It's just that often the story
tellers leave out the "once upon a time". Companies want us to suspend
disbelief, something you just have to do if you're going to enjoy story
time. When Netscape tells the story of NetCenter, they want us to
suspend disbelief and not ask questions like "Why don't you want to build
something that builds a relationship with MOST of your subscribers?" I
spoke to Netscape VP Jennifer Bailey last week. Ms. Bailey heads up
Netscape's web sites, including NetCenter. I didn't find the discussion
all that productive. I understand why Netscape wants to build a
NetCenter. I even understand, for now, why it's designed the way it is
(largely because this is what they have). But Bailey confirmed that the
vast majority of visitors to its site DO NOT use any of the services that
compose the heart and soul of NetCenter (Industry Watch is now up,
basically a repackaging of Individual's NewsPage, and by far the most
easily accessible item in NetCenter).
So I just had to know WHY Netscape wasn't considering building a service
that would build a relationship with the huge majority of its visitors.
The conversation would have gone much better if it had been prefaced as
"story time". Then I would have been like, "Uh huh Ms. Bailey, then what
did the white knight Mr. Barksdale due to slay that mean, fire-breathing
Bill Gates dragon?" But I didn't realize it was story time. I thought I
was at work.
Perhaps it is an oversimplification to say this, but it seems there are
two kinds of stories in the computer/Internet realm. Stories that drive
REAL MONEY and stories that drive the stock market. And in the computer
space -- there's another story, where Microsoft is always played as the
bad guy.
Some companies have good stories. Intel is one of them. Once upon a time
there was very bright immigrant named Andrew Grove. Grove was a genius,
often perceived a ruthless genius, but a genius nonetheless. Grove and
the folks at Intel built an empire out of sand. He converted simple
silicon to cash. Billions and billions of dollars of cash. That is one
of the most fascinating stories I've ever read. Next month, all will be
able to read one version of the tale in the forthcoming "Inside Intel".
Tim Jackson did a fantastic job with the story. The book reads like the
mini-series for the birth of the personal computer market. Unless you've
been around since the beginning, this book is a must-read for anyone who
wants to understand how the personal computer industry as we know it came
to be.
But Mr. Jackson told that story. I'll pick up where the book begins AND
ends. The Pentium flaw. Remember that? Well, you can believe that Grove
and gang were muttering all kinds of unspeakable things about the Internet
back then.
Would Intel have backed down and replaced the flawed chips if there had
been no Internet? I kind of doubt they would have, but who knows? So
Intel coughed-up half a billion dollars to replace the chips and preserve
its public image. A very good move. Why risk being perceived as
"Internet Bad" when the Internet was something that would generate
upgrades of computers and new sales of computers (most of them with Intel
chips inside)? For many people, word processing and spreadsheet
capabilities aren't that interesting. Home banking? Someday maybe, but
it isn't making people go "oooooh, I have to have that!" But the
Internet, it has potential for a much wider appeal simply from a
communications and information perspective. The Internet is good for
Intel.
Of course, Intel has the advantage of working "with" Microsoft rather than
against it. Over time, perhaps that will change, but in Intel's core
market, Microsoft is good, not bad. Enter Messrs. Ellison, Barksdale and
McNealy. (note: Ellison makes it through Microsoft's Word 97 spell
check, but Barksdale and McNealy do not. Score for Larry E.!). They all
have a story and while Microsoft shouldn't really play a major part in
their stories, it often has a central role.
Ellison, Barksdale and McNealy are trying to pawn Bill Gates off as the
evil emperor. Please. Other people may be able to make such a claim
successfully, but not one of these guys. Gates doesn't even have to say,
"Larry, Jim, Scott, I'm your father! Join the dark side and together
we'll rule for eternity." Why? Because Ellison, Barksdale and McNealy
already want what Gates has. They want to RULE. And if Bill Gates rules,
they cannot rule. Fortunately, the gang of three are all very smart.
And they are among the best story-tellers of all-time. In fact, of this
gang, Barksdale gets my vote as Mr. Story Time.
None of these guys will become paupers in their quests to overthrow Gates.
But they won't beat Microsoft with NetPCs, Java and Netscape. This week's
column from Walt Mossberg where he more or less pans the new Oracle-based
"Network PC" and by far prefers the forthcoming (Microsoft-owned) WebTV
Plus, must have sent Gates beaming and Ellison muttering.
This doesn't mean these companies won't win with their products, but
viewing these products as Microsoft slayers is ridiculous. I think what
fuels it is the notion (which sort of appears to be true) that Microsoft
doesn't want to give up ANYTHING. This is an equally ridiculous position.
I think Microsoft will ultimately gain the dominant market share with the
browsers, but it's a long ways off from dominating it in the sense it
dominates the operating systems market. People will still use Netscape
and I don't believe Microsoft can do anything to change this (well, of
course, ultimately they can buy Netscape, but that's another story).
What Intel, Netscape, Sun, Oracle and Microsoft have in common is a story.
And in large measure there is something to their stories, because these
companies really are selling products (this is not to say that I think
Oracle's NetPC will go anywhere -- I don't, but it isn't Oracle's core
business. Oracle is still selling lots of database product). It's just
that I would like to hear a story from Netscape, Sun and Oracle where
Microsoft isn't a central character. Maybe Microsoft IS the bad guy, but
these companies should put less focus on beating Gates and more focus on
developing better products.
The other kind of story is a little harder to figure out. And we don't
know how it ends yet. Once upon a time, there was a great company with
great potential. People seemed to LOVE what the company was doing and
flocked to its web site again and again and again. Now this company
hadn't quite figured out how to turn this into a profit yet, but all the
analysts were claiming the POTENTIAL for the company was HUGE. So, the
company's stock went up. And then a couple of months later, the quarterly
report came out, or people realized that the potential wasn't being
realized TODAY (that's why it's called potential, huh?) and the stock
dropped off. Did the company do anything differently or wrong? Not
necessarily. We've seen lots of examples of this.
Clearly companies like Yahoo!, @Home, Amazon.com, etc., all have amazing
potential. Is Yahoo's stock overvalued based on its current potential?
There are several ways to look at it analytically to make a case that the
stock is fairly valued based on its potential. But the thing is, it
hasn't hit its potential yet, so people seem to question whether the stock
is worth that much today (I don't really question this, I think most of
the Internet sector is overvalued based on current performance). The
stocks seem go up and down, but the stock price isn't always a fair
indication of how the company is really doing. Will these companies live
up to their full potentials? I have no idea. The stock market is always
a gamble. But I think the important thing, whether your reading a
quarterly statement from the company or an analyst's report is to find the
"real" story. I tend to put more focus on what the analysts say the
companies are going to do THIS quarter rather than what the companies
opportunity is in 2-3 years. Either way most of the companies in the
"stock watch" are riding pretty high right now. My guess is that over
the next 6 weeks or so as earnings reports come out for the quarter ending
this Tuesday, you'll see some of them tail off. But 6 weeks after that,
they'll wind up right back where they are today. Of course, I don't play
the stock market!
IE 4.0's Outlook Express
========================
There's a lot to say about the forthcoming IE 4.0 (which will be released
this Tuesday). There's even a lot to say about the bundled e-mail and
newsreader client dubbed Outlook Express. Short of saying that I find it
to be a darn good e-mail package, I won't get into a lot of the specifics
on Outlook Express here.
I was an avid user of NetManage and Eudora e-mail clients for years. But
I switched to Outlook Express. It only lacks one thing that I find myself
really missing, mostly because I receive a lot of e-mail -- I can't look
at my inbox and tell whether I've replied to a message or not. So, if I'm
not on top of things and immediately file mail I've replied to away, I can
get pretty confused. But I live with that. Why? Well, what if you could
combine all the power of e-mail with all the content you wanted from the
World Wide Web? With IE 4.0 and Outlook Express, you can (in fairness,
you could use IE 4.0 and Netscape's messenger or one of the Web-based
e-mail products that supports HTML e-mail and this should still work).
For all the talk of the Web and of Push, nothing has been as powerful for
me as the IE 4.0/Outlook Express combo, which I've been using now for 6
months. I like Pointcast, but I never bring it up anymore. I like
bookmarks, but I have too many of them. I like offline browsing
capabilities, even the features built into IE 4.0 to automatically
download web pages. And I'm starting to appreciate IE 4.0 channels a
little more, but while I like all of those things, I find myself using
them very little. I use e-mail every day.
Some of you may be thinking "so what, big deal! If you want something from
the Web just go get it." Well that sounds easy, and technically it is
that easy, but it puts the responsibility on me to do something else, and
I find I don't always like to do that. Here's a good example. I love the
comic strip "Dilbert". I have for years now. Usually, I read the New
York Times. And while "The Gray Lady" may now be "The Painted Lady" (the
Times recently added color pictures) it doesn't have comics and so, no
Dilbert. I can by the local suburban Gannett newspaper, which does have
Dilbert, but usually I don't. So, if I love Dilbert so much, why don't I
just go to the Web every day and get it. It sounds easy enough, right?
But I don't. I could put it on my to-do list, but that isn't likely. So
what happens is sometimes I go to the Web site, but most of the time I
don't. But if I could get Dilbert every morning by e-mail, I would read
it. And for the last few weeks, that's been exactly what I've done.
I know a lot of you have been receiving HTML e-mail via the content
partners on Netscape's Inbox Direct or directly from InfoBeat (formerly
Mercury Mail). I'm a big fan of these products. They provide good
content, in a good format and I like that. But, I can only get what they
have to offer. IE 4.0 let's me turn every page and any page on the Web
into an "Inbox Direct" partner. And it's far more flexible. You can set
up any kind of schedule you want. For example, I get Dilbert every
morning at 8 a.m., News.Com's home page 4 times a day beginning at 6AM,
the Interactive Wall Street Journal's home page at 6 a.m and
6 p.m., The Washington Post's Baltimore Orioles page every midnight and
the Washington Post's Redskins page every Monday morning at 7 a.m. And of
course, every Thursday morning I get Walt Mossberg's Personal Technology
column from the Wall Street Journal. And I love the flexibility I have.
I have stuff I receive once a day, once a week and once a month. To me,
this is the true power of Push.
So how does it work? It's pretty simple. You bring up a page you want to
receive in the IE 4.0 Web browser and choose to add it to your
"favorites". You then have the option of just adding the link as a
bookmark or you can "subscribe" to the page. Subscriptions offer two
options -- one is a simple notification via a red flag on your bookmarks
list when the page has changed, the other is notification PLUS downloading
the page. If you choose the download option, you then have some other
options (you could download the page and every link off the page, for
example) via the "subscription wizard". One of the options is to receive
e-mail notification, and if you select that option you can then customize
your delivery schedule. It only takes a few seconds and voila, Dilbert
every morning via e-mail.
Okay, there's a catch or two. One advantage of Inbox Direct or InfoBeat
is that someone else is mailing you a page. Whether your computer is
turned on or not, you'll get the e-mail the next time you pull your mail.
With the IE 4.0/Outlook Express combo, it only works if your computer is
turned on. If you schedule to receive something once a week on Sundays at
7 p.m. and your computer isn't turned on Sunday at 7 p.m., you're not
going to receive any mail. You can easily update a subscription at any
time, or update all your subscriptions once (but if you have a lot of
subscriptions you're downloading, this can take some time over a dial-up
line). You also need to have a connection to the Internet. Your computer
doesn't have to be connected to the net all the time, it can be set to
dial-up automatically when you need to update your subscriptions. But
your computer has to be on.
And if you're on AOL -- sorry, this isn't going to work for you. Though
AOL has been testing a MAPI protocol that allows you to use Microsoft
Exchange or Outlook (or any MAPI compliant package) to pull e-mail from
AOL, it isn't publicly available yet and Outlook Express doesn't seem to
work with it. (I could give you a long and complex explanation, but it
appears that Microsoft didn't make Outlook Express fully MAPI compliant.
This was probably by design as once Outlook Express HTML/Internet features
are incorporated into the full Outlook product, Microsoft will likely want
some sort of an upgrade path).
While AOL's own e-mail will not have true HTML ability in the forthcoming
4.0 release, I'm guessing AOL will work to figure out a way to allow its
users to use whatever e-mail they want. Why? Because many of their 9
million members will want the functionality offered in IE 4.0/Outlook
Express (and AOL WILL ultimately imbed the IE 4.0 browser), and I'm
betting one of those customers is none other than Steve Case himself. But
for now if Case wants this, he'll have to call up Erols or some other ISP!
How Do You Pronounce URL?
=========================
You can now find out in a new newsletter called "NetBITS" the sister
publication to "TidBITS". NetBITS, however, will focus exclusively
on Internet information under the direction of editor-in-chief,
Glen Fleishman. It's free, check it out at:
< http://www.netbits.com >
P.S. I say you-are-ell and I'm from the east coast! Earl always sort
of bothered me.
Stock Watch for the Week Ending September 26, 1997
==================================================
Network Solutions (NSOL) comes out strong...
Courtesy of InfoBeat's CLOSING BELL < http://www.infobeat.com >.
52 Wk 52 Wk P/E Week
SECURITY CLOSE HIGH LOW Ratio CHNG
---------------------------------------------------------------------
AT&T Corp................ 45 7/16 46 1/8 30 3/4 14 +3.2%
Amazon Com Inc........... 50 57 3/4 15 3/4 +5.5%
America Online Inc....... 71 9/16 80 1/2 22 3/8 -4.3%
Apple Computer Inc....... 21 5/16 29 3/4 12 3/4 -2.8%
At Home Corporation Ser A 21 5/8 25 3/4 16 5/8 -4.4%
C/Net.................... 41 7/8 46 1/2 14 3/16 +1.8%
CMG Info Svcs. Inc....... 24 1/8 28 1/2 8 41/64 -10.4%
CUC Intl. Inc............ 29 7/8 31 7/8 19 1/4 53 -1.0%
CompuServe Corp.......... 14 1/4 14 9/16 8 5/8 0.0%
Concentric Network Corp.. 13 15/16 16 11 3/8 +3.2%
Cybercash Inc............ 18 7/8 40 1/2 10 1/2 -7.6%
Earthlink Network Inc.... 18 5/8 22 1/2 8 5/8 -1.9%
Excite Inc............... 29 3/4 35 5 1/2 +1.7%
FTP Software Inc......... 4 1/2 8 5/8 3 1/2 +20.0%
GTE Corporation.......... 46 49 3/8 38 15 +0.8%
H & R Block Inc.......... 39 1/2 42 1/4 24 1/2 68 -0.6%
Hewlett Packard Company.. 71 1/4 72 15/16 42 1/2 25 +3.3%
IBM...................... 102 5/8 109 7/16 61 9/16 18 +3.4%
Individual Incorporated.. 5 1/2 11 7/8 2 5/8 -16.9%
Infoseek Corporation..... 9 17/64 11 1/2 4 3/8 +9.1%
Lycos Inc................ 33 42 9 1/2 -11.1%
MCI Communications Corpor 29 13/16 43 3/8 23 7/8 18 +3.0%
Mecklermedia Corp........ 23 1/4 30 16 1/4 122 -3.6%
Microsoft Corporation.... 133 3/8 150 3/4 65 7/16 51 -1.3%
Mindspring Enterprises In 22 24 5/8 5 1/4 -3.2%
Netcom On Line Communicat 12 1/2 19 1/8 7 7/8 -0.9%
Netmanage Inc............ 4 1/16 9 5/8 2 1/2 -5.1%
Netscape Communications C 39 65 23 1/2 -4.8%
Network Solutions Inc.... 23 5/16 26 3/4 23 --
Open Market Inc.......... 15 13/16 25 1/2 6 1/2 +11.9%
Oracle Corporation....... 37 5/8 42 1/8 22 25/64 51 +0.3%
Psinet Inc............... 8 14 1/2 5 1/2 -7.9%
Quarterdeck Corp......... 3 1/64 7 3/8 2 +10.2%
Security First Network Ba 11 5/16 26 1/4 5 1/4 -3.7%
Silicon Graphics Inc..... 26 7/16 30 5/16 12 5/8 61 -10.0%
Sprint Corporation....... 47 1/2 52 3/4 37 1/2 19 -0.5%
Spyglass Inc............. 9 1/8 19 1/2 6 -7.5%
Sun Microsystems Inc..... 48 5/16 53 5/16 25 1/2 25 -3.9%
Vocaltec Communications L 22 24 7/8 3 7/8 +2.3%
Worldcom Inc............. 36 5/16 37 1/2 20 3/8 -1.8%
Yahoo Corporation........ 50 1/4 58 11 9/64 -2.1%
Dow Jones 30 Industrials. 7,922.18 +0.0%
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Subscription Information
========================
To subscribe to this newsletter by e-mail:
Send an e-mail message to LISTSERV@PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM and in the
BODY of the message type:
SUBSCRIBE ONLINE-L FIRSTNAME LASTNAME
Example: Subscribe Online-L Robert Seidman
If you'd like to remove yourself from this mailing list, send a message
to LISTSERV@PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM and in the body of the message type:
SIGNOFF ONLINE-L
A Web-based version of the newsletter is available at:
< http://www.onlineinsider.com >
<FONT COLOR="#0f0f0f" BACK="#fffffe" SIZE=3>
----------------------- Headers --------------------------------
Received: from mrin79.mail.aol.com (mrin79.mx.aol.com [198.81.19.189]) by air06.mail.aol.com (v33) with SMTP; Sun, 28 Sep 1997 10:28:07 -0400
Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [206.241.12.2])
by mrin79.mail.aol.com (8.8.5/8.8.5/AOL-4.0.0)
with ESMTP id KAA03407;
Sun, 28 Sep 1997 10:27:56 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from PEAR.EASE.LSOFT.COM (206.241.12.19) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.1a) with SMTP id <8.384119CD@VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM>; Sun, 28 Sep 1997 10:24:52 -0400
Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM by PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (LISTSERV-TCP/IP
release 1.8c) with spool id 7653264 for
ONLINE-L@PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM; Sun, 28 Sep 1997 10:25:25 -0400
Approved-By: robert@ONLINEINSIDER.COM
Received: from robertse (dialin-8.white-plains.bestweb.net [208.218.53.43]) by
miro.bestweb.net (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id KAA15853 for
<online-l@peach.ease.lsoft.com>; Sun, 28 Sep 1997 10:24:16 -0400 (EDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.71.1712.3
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.71.1712.3
Message-ID: <01bccc19$88e837e0$2b35dad0@robertse>
Date: Sun, 28 Sep 1997 10:19:30 -0400
Reply-To: Robert Seidman <robert@onlineinsider.com>
Sender: "Seidman's Online Insider" <ONLINE-L@PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From: Robert Seidman <robert@onlineinsider.com>
Subject: Seidman's Online Insider - September 28, 1997
To: ONLINE-L@PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM
</PRE></HTML>
Comments
Post a Comment