Salvation Army Virtual Kettles
When I was little, my mother would hand me a dollar or two and I would have the privilege of putting it into the red kettle. Hearing the bells ring as I got out of the car in the parking lot, with a chill in the air meant that the holiday season had arrived. Today, I am still unable to walk by the bell ringer at the mall, the grocery store, or the local shopping center without dropping in a few pennies, dollars or whatever spare change I have. To me, this is part of Christmas.
I recently came across an article on the Salvation Army's decision to expand its traditional methods of fund raising to include the "Virtual Kettle". Recognizing that many people don't carry cash as readily and are less inclined to take time out of their busy holiday schedules to drop money in the traditional kettle, the Salvation Army has decided to go virtual. Through the Salvation Army website, anyone can become a "virtual bell ringer" by creating a virtual kettle and inviting their friends, family and co-workers to donate electronically. Through the website, people can view each others kettle's, join a bigger kettle team, keep a running total on their donations and track overall progress towards the Salvation Army's larger goals. Donations can be directed to the donor's zip code, the kettle owners zip code or any other location in the US. Also new this year, people can now donate unused gift cards as well. I think this is a terrific way to keep the bell ringing even as the Salvation Army looks at shortages of volunteers across the US. The youth of America may not be inspired to stand in the cold and ring the bell, but they certainly are comfortable using on-line tools. If people are looking to the internet for their shopping, it makes sense that they will also look to it for their giving.
Wednesday, December 3, 2008
Wednesday, November 19, 2008
Microsoft Office takes to the Sky
http://www.cnn.com/2008/TECH/biztech/10/28/microsoft.windows.ap/index.html
A recent article on CNN.com describes the next release of the Windows operating system (Windows 7.0), which will look to address many of the problems of VISTA, and will include "Office Web" software, such as Excel, Powerpoint and Word that runs "in the cloud". My home computer still runs on Windows XP, and I have been hesitant to make the jump to VISTA. If this new release does what it promises to do, I will just go right to Windows 7.0. I am particularly interested in Windows decision to offer its most popular (and lucrative) office software in a web version. As an avid office user (as well as student continually immersed in group projects) I love this idea! For a recent group project we tried to use Google Docs to collaboratively author a paper. This only lasted until we started using some of the more advanced features of Word (linked tables of contents, etc) and then we were forced to go back to saving different versions and emailing it around. I love the flexibility that Google docs offers, which saves me from having to email documents from my work computer to my home computer and vice versa, but I like the functionality offerred by Word. Although I may have been tempted to make the switch to Google Docs, the promise of Office Web will keep me loyal to Microsoft for just a little bit longer...
A recent article on CNN.com describes the next release of the Windows operating system (Windows 7.0), which will look to address many of the problems of VISTA, and will include "Office Web" software, such as Excel, Powerpoint and Word that runs "in the cloud". My home computer still runs on Windows XP, and I have been hesitant to make the jump to VISTA. If this new release does what it promises to do, I will just go right to Windows 7.0. I am particularly interested in Windows decision to offer its most popular (and lucrative) office software in a web version. As an avid office user (as well as student continually immersed in group projects) I love this idea! For a recent group project we tried to use Google Docs to collaboratively author a paper. This only lasted until we started using some of the more advanced features of Word (linked tables of contents, etc) and then we were forced to go back to saving different versions and emailing it around. I love the flexibility that Google docs offers, which saves me from having to email documents from my work computer to my home computer and vice versa, but I like the functionality offerred by Word. Although I may have been tempted to make the switch to Google Docs, the promise of Office Web will keep me loyal to Microsoft for just a little bit longer...
Wednesday, November 5, 2008
Social Networking gets political
Tech Joy
Joy commented on Obama's use of Web 2.0 tools to bolster his campaign efforts, and I feel the need to reiterate how impressed I was at his campaign's abililty to integrate Facebook and other social networking sites into his campaign. On election eve, I was fascainted by the wave of facebook status updates pertaining to the election. Early Monday afternoon I started seeing status updates along the lines of "John Smith is the 1,173,585th person to donate their status to get out the vote for Barack Obama today. Donate yours: http://causes.com/election".
When I first started noticing these updates, people were in the 500,000's in terms of numbers who donated their status. Within a few hours or so the numbers were above 1.5 million. The speed at which that status spread was just incredible - and ingenious on the part of the Obama social networking team. The Obama facebook application, which allows you to see which of your friends are Obama supporters, view short campaign videos, and spread the campaign messages, is just one online tool votes can take advantage of. Others include an iPhone app and the Barak Obama social networking website that Joy mentions. By the time McCain launched a facebook app, Obama already had signed up a million "friends".
There are many articles and blog posts on the way in which the Obama campaign has utilized Web 2.0 tools to advance its goals, but for me, nothing was as powerful a demonstration as the "donate your status" campaign that swept through my facebook friends!
Joy commented on Obama's use of Web 2.0 tools to bolster his campaign efforts, and I feel the need to reiterate how impressed I was at his campaign's abililty to integrate Facebook and other social networking sites into his campaign. On election eve, I was fascainted by the wave of facebook status updates pertaining to the election. Early Monday afternoon I started seeing status updates along the lines of "John Smith is the 1,173,585th person to donate their status to get out the vote for Barack Obama today. Donate yours: http://causes.com/election".
When I first started noticing these updates, people were in the 500,000's in terms of numbers who donated their status. Within a few hours or so the numbers were above 1.5 million. The speed at which that status spread was just incredible - and ingenious on the part of the Obama social networking team. The Obama facebook application, which allows you to see which of your friends are Obama supporters, view short campaign videos, and spread the campaign messages, is just one online tool votes can take advantage of. Others include an iPhone app and the Barak Obama social networking website that Joy mentions. By the time McCain launched a facebook app, Obama already had signed up a million "friends".
There are many articles and blog posts on the way in which the Obama campaign has utilized Web 2.0 tools to advance its goals, but for me, nothing was as powerful a demonstration as the "donate your status" campaign that swept through my facebook friends!
Monday, October 27, 2008
Social Text 3.0
Social Text 3.0
Picking up on Jerry's Blog on Social Text 3.0
After hearing (and seeing) Alan's presentation on Social Text 3.0 I was surprised at how few of the features we are really taking advantage of. I am also skeptical of the usage of some of these by features by outside corporations. In his blog post, Jerry brings up some limitations of the People Feature. One question that was raised in class that I also take issue with is the idea of "following" people. The way ST appears to work, colleagues can "follow" each other without asking for permission, the idea being that everyone works for the same company and should have an open working relationship. In reality, I think this could get sticky - what if someone from an entirely different area of the company starts following someone else - does the company then need to set protocols around who can follow whom? In small companies this may make sense, but in larger more specialized firms, questions could be raised as to whether it is "necessary" for someone to follow someone else and see what they are working on.
In addition, I agree with Jerry that ST seems to be missing an important feature of social networking - the "instant messaging" type of communication that can be invaluable in a corporate setting. When I was consulting at GE, their in-house IM tool was a critical and highly accepted way for getting business done across the organization. If a company is using ST as a central repository for its business functions and content, it only makes sense that the tool provide the real-time benefits of networking and information sharing. For our class purposes, I think this feature would actually be useful, for mundane things such as coordinating snacks, to asking questions of each other when completing the NML assignments. The other advanced features don't seem as applicable - for now I would rather be "friends" with my classmates on facebook that "follow" then on Socialtext, but maybe that's just me being old-fashioned.
Picking up on Jerry's Blog on Social Text 3.0
After hearing (and seeing) Alan's presentation on Social Text 3.0 I was surprised at how few of the features we are really taking advantage of. I am also skeptical of the usage of some of these by features by outside corporations. In his blog post, Jerry brings up some limitations of the People Feature. One question that was raised in class that I also take issue with is the idea of "following" people. The way ST appears to work, colleagues can "follow" each other without asking for permission, the idea being that everyone works for the same company and should have an open working relationship. In reality, I think this could get sticky - what if someone from an entirely different area of the company starts following someone else - does the company then need to set protocols around who can follow whom? In small companies this may make sense, but in larger more specialized firms, questions could be raised as to whether it is "necessary" for someone to follow someone else and see what they are working on.
In addition, I agree with Jerry that ST seems to be missing an important feature of social networking - the "instant messaging" type of communication that can be invaluable in a corporate setting. When I was consulting at GE, their in-house IM tool was a critical and highly accepted way for getting business done across the organization. If a company is using ST as a central repository for its business functions and content, it only makes sense that the tool provide the real-time benefits of networking and information sharing. For our class purposes, I think this feature would actually be useful, for mundane things such as coordinating snacks, to asking questions of each other when completing the NML assignments. The other advanced features don't seem as applicable - for now I would rather be "friends" with my classmates on facebook that "follow" then on Socialtext, but maybe that's just me being old-fashioned.
Wednesday, October 8, 2008
NPowerNY & Cloud Computing - the Sky is the Limit
After September 11th, my former employer, Accenture, sent a number of us to various organizations in the city to do pro-bono work. I ended up working at NPowerNY, a well-funded non-profit technology start-up focused on "ensuring all nonprofits can use technology to better serve their communities". The majority of my first few months at NPowerNY was focused on helping the non-profits in lower Manhattan get back in working order. We provided them with hardware, free (donated) software licenses, and IT contractors who could help reboot systems, find lost data, reroute cables, and work-around power outages, data shortages, and equipment failures. Most of these tiny organizations had no backup systems, old and outdated equipment, and no budget to dig themselves out of the black hole that was their IT infrastructure. Through the generosity of corporations, IT consultants, graduate students, and other non-profits, NPower amassed a collection of resources to help NYC NGO's get back on their feet.
Today NPower and its network of affiliates provide a much needed service for the non-profit sector, including a training and internship program for IT staffers, outsourced services such as help desk and IT consulting, and other training programs targeted at member needs. Just yesterday I received an email from them, asking me to complete a survey about a new product they want to role out - "Software as a Service" - essentially cloud computing for the non-profit sector. I could not help but think how useful this would have been after the devastation of 9/11. Cloud computing would have kept countless non-profits up and running, despite the loss of physical space. For many non-profits this would allow them to run faster, better, and more updated systems without having to continually purchase new servers and storage space - something that is not typically a priority in many grass-roots organizations. In addition, this would give new organizations the opportunity to quickly come up to speed and have an IT infrastructure without having to make large-scale capital investments. I think NPowerNY is going to get a big response to their new offering - at least I hope so - with this one the sky should be the limit!
NPowerNY
Today NPower and its network of affiliates provide a much needed service for the non-profit sector, including a training and internship program for IT staffers, outsourced services such as help desk and IT consulting, and other training programs targeted at member needs. Just yesterday I received an email from them, asking me to complete a survey about a new product they want to role out - "Software as a Service" - essentially cloud computing for the non-profit sector. I could not help but think how useful this would have been after the devastation of 9/11. Cloud computing would have kept countless non-profits up and running, despite the loss of physical space. For many non-profits this would allow them to run faster, better, and more updated systems without having to continually purchase new servers and storage space - something that is not typically a priority in many grass-roots organizations. In addition, this would give new organizations the opportunity to quickly come up to speed and have an IT infrastructure without having to make large-scale capital investments. I think NPowerNY is going to get a big response to their new offering - at least I hope so - with this one the sky should be the limit!
NPowerNY
Tuesday, September 30, 2008
Are you Influential - Check your Google Number - another thought...
http://georgerapalje.blogspot.com/2008/09/are-you-influential-check-your-google.html
George brings up an interesting point about the Google Number - although I don't have the same concerns about privacy that he does. I think that it is a given that there is little to no privacy on the internet - you can clear your search history, but companies can still track your web usage, and through tracking cookies websites can identify who has visited or passed through. I think the Google number is an interesting way of identifying connectors and mavens - to steel terminology from "The Tipping Point" - people who bring others together and disseminate information about the market. Through targeted marketing advertisers would be able to more efficiently focus their efforts on people with large spheres of influence. It would be interesting to see how these targeted approached play out in a controlled environment such as Facebook - where it is easy to track linkages among friends and peer groups. Could this viral marketing be the future of on-line advertising?
On another note, I see how this could apply to Facebook, where you essentially sign an agreement when logging into the site, but I do wonder about the legality of it outside of the highly trafficked social networking sites. Does google own your internet "cookies" if you use their browser? their search engine? Where do they draw the line - and how do they establish rules about what kind of data to share - and with whom???
George brings up an interesting point about the Google Number - although I don't have the same concerns about privacy that he does. I think that it is a given that there is little to no privacy on the internet - you can clear your search history, but companies can still track your web usage, and through tracking cookies websites can identify who has visited or passed through. I think the Google number is an interesting way of identifying connectors and mavens - to steel terminology from "The Tipping Point" - people who bring others together and disseminate information about the market. Through targeted marketing advertisers would be able to more efficiently focus their efforts on people with large spheres of influence. It would be interesting to see how these targeted approached play out in a controlled environment such as Facebook - where it is easy to track linkages among friends and peer groups. Could this viral marketing be the future of on-line advertising?
On another note, I see how this could apply to Facebook, where you essentially sign an agreement when logging into the site, but I do wonder about the legality of it outside of the highly trafficked social networking sites. Does google own your internet "cookies" if you use their browser? their search engine? Where do they draw the line - and how do they establish rules about what kind of data to share - and with whom???
Tuesday, September 23, 2008
Free TV? Too good to be true!
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122213209024665825.html?mod=rss_E-Commerce/Media
Recently Netflix signed an agreement with CBS and Disney to allow Netflix users to stream television shows from the networks as part of their Netflix packages. While some may view this as positive, I am disappointed to see what has been a free service move in the direction of pay-per-view. I may be the lone hold-out but I still frequent my neighborhood video store and when I forget to tivo my favorite show I like being able to go online the next day and catch up on what I missed. I am spoiled by websites such as ABC and NBC that still post their content for free, and don’t like the idea of paying once for cable and then paying again through Netflix to watch popular shows (and yes, I know I could give up cable and watch everything on Netflix – but until all the major networks sign on board, it doesn’t make sense to do so.)
I guess it was only a matter of time until the major networks stopped streaming their popular shows for free, however I didn’t expect it to come so soon. Netflix is smart to move in at this juncture – especially as more and more of its business becomes web-based.With the competition in this market, I wonder if companies like Apple and Amazon will move to strike exclusivity agreements with the major networks and movie distributors (if they haven't already). If that happens, will I need to have an iPod, an X-Box and a computer just to see my "must see TV" each week?
(On a related note, I spoke with my grandfather this past weekend and asked him about his plans. He was planning on staying in and watching the two Netflix movies that had just arrived in the mail. If NetFlix can get my 86 year old grandfather on board, it might convert me as well (especially now if I want to get my Disney fix)!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
