人類的創造力 從何而來？
‧科學人 2005/11/01
人類以智能創造出文化，甚至發展出科學；然而創造力是怎麼來的？腦中又發生了什麼事？認識創造力，才能讓自己更有創意！
【撰文╱詹志禹】
人類有創造力（creativity）才會有科學。人類擁有文明的歷史至少已經有數千年，西方科學的發展也有400年以上，但是我們對於創造力的研究，卻只是最近50餘年才開始的事。究竟科學家對於創造力有哪些了解？
正在創造中的定義
創造力的概念也許起源很早，但當代心理學對創造力的重視與研究，常歸功於季弗德（Joy Paul Guilford）的研究與倡導，並以他在1950年美國心理學會的會長就職演說為濫觴。不過到目前為止，一般人對於「創造力」的概念仍然相當模糊，經常要問：「創造力究竟是什麼？」
若要認真而且「有創意地」處理這一個問題，至少應考慮四種方式：乖乖回答問題、重新界定問題、證明這個問題無解，或證明這個問題有無限多解。
首先來乖乖回答這個問題。季弗德的智力結構論，將思考歷程區分聚斂性思考（convergent thinking）和擴散性思考（divergent thinking）兩個概念，前者指針對一個問題尋找一個可接受的最佳答案，後者指根據既有的訊息生產大量、多樣化的訊息。擴散性思考雖不等同於創造力，但被視為創造力的潛能或創造思考的主要歷程，可用來預測創造性成果或表現。季弗德認為創造力是人類某些特質的組合，這些特質包括：對問題的敏感度、觀念流暢性、觀念新奇性、思考彈性、綜合能力、分析能力、觀念結構的複雜度，以及評鑑能力等。他也認為創造力在統計上是一個連續分佈，每個人或多或少都有些創造力，這些個別差異可以被測量出來。
受到季弗德的啟發，後來發展的許多創造力測驗，例如托倫斯（E. Paul Torrance）著名的創意思考測驗，主要就是測量擴散性思考的能力，包括：觀念的流暢性（能生產大量觀念）、變通性（觀念具有彈性）、獨創性（觀念獨特）及精密性（品質改善）。這些測驗假定創造力是一種跨領域、一般性的特質，但也有一些學者認為創造力是領域特定的：一個人在某個領域（例如語言）具有創造力，不見得在另一個領域（例如繪畫）具有創造力。所以我們就必須使用領域特定的產物（例如文章或畫作）來測量作者的創造力。那麼，產物的創造性又該如何判斷呢？一般來說都是由該領域的若干位專家形成共識來判斷，很多時候，研究者或測量者並不要求領域專家提出判斷的標準，而是讓他們根據專業直覺去判斷，這種做法認為：「什麼是有『創造性』的產物，我（專家）說不清楚，但當我看到的時候，我就認得出來。」有些時候，專家也會列出判斷標準，這些標準通常同時包括兩項：第一、就該領域而言，此產物是新穎、獨特或前所未見的；第二、就該領域而言，此產物是良好、適宜、有價值或能解決問題的。通常，專利核定機構的判斷標準，也都包含這兩大類。
「新穎」有程度的不同，「價值」也有程度的高低。傑出的文學家、科學家、發明家、音樂家、政治家、教育家、畫家等，創造出來的有形、無形產物，可能具有劃時代的創新性，並且廣受社會的肯定，這種創造叫做「大C」。但是，一般民眾在日常生活或工作當中，也會有頗為獨特的問題解決方式，或頗特別的作品，例如一張與眾不同的卡片或是一間獨樹一格的咖啡屋等，這種創造叫做「小c」。此外，所有的人，包括那些傑出的創造性人物，在兒童、青少年或領域生手等時期，都不可能有劃時代的創造，但這些人難道就沒有任何創造歷程嗎？其實，深刻的學習歷程，就是一種創造和自我突破的歷程，它的「新穎」是相對於「昨日之我」而言，這是一種「縱貫性」的創造，也可以稱為「小c」。「小c」雖然未必一定累積、發展成「大C」，但「大C」一定是由「小c」累積、發展而成。
所以，若要認真回答「什麼是創造力？」這個問題，我們可以得到幾個結論：第一，從思考歷程來看，創造力比較仰賴擴散性思考而非聚斂性思考；第二，從產物來看，創造性產物必須具有「新穎」和「價值」兩大類條件；第三，從人物來看，人人都具有創造力，只是程度不同、領域不同。
美國著名的心理學家奇克森特米海伊（Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi）則跳開「創造力是什麼？」這個問題，轉而提出「創造力在哪裡？」，他認為：我們不能單獨定義「創造力」，而必須整體考量「個人」、「學門社群」和「符號領域」所交織的系統脈絡。例如，畢卡索的作品為什麼具有創造力？這並不是畢卡索創造一個自認為有創意的作品即可（變異），而是學門社群當中，至少有部份守門人（gate-keeper，如蒐藏家、評論家、同儕畫家等），肯定了他的作品（選擇），認定此作品具有創造力，這樣的作品才得以保存在繪畫領域，成為文化遺產。如果畢卡索創作了一件自認為很有創意的作品，但整個相關學門社群都不認為有創意，這件作品終究無創造力可言。這樣的系統演化觀點，認定的創造力都是指社會文化層次的「大C」，但並不否認「大C」最初源於「小c」。
有些人認為：「太陽底下無新鮮事」，「創造力」或「創造性」根本不存在，在上帝創造這個宇宙之後，就再無「創造」可言。依此觀點，「創造力是什麼？」的問題根本不存在。但如果我們願意嘗試去回答這個問題，我們就必須先承認創造力的存在；如果人類的創造力存在，那我們就可以預知：關於這個問題，人類還會創造出更多的答案。定義決定於理論，理論來自於創造；隨著知識的進展，人類可以創造出無限多個關於創造力的定義，這就是創造力的有趣。
【本文出自科學人2005年11月號】
Saturday, November 05, 2005
Wednesday, November 02, 2005
【佳能展】將顯示器置於中心地位！禦手洗社長談今後的業務戰略
將顯示器置於中心地位！禦手洗社長談今後的業務戰略
Nikkei Microdevices
2005/11/02
spacer
spacer 【日經BP社報道】
正在發表主題演講的佳能社長禦手洗
使用SED，演示了“基於視頻的交流”情況。
使用SED，做了“數字TV印表機”的工作演示。
“必須將顯示器置於中心地位。”佳能社長禦手洗冨士夫在該公司於10月26日～28日舉辦的內部展會“Canon EXPO 2005 in Tokyo”的主題演講中，熱情洋溢地闡述了將希望寄託於顯示器業務的想法。
禦手洗舉出了佳能今後將重點發展的5個領域，其中最先介紹的就是顯示器業務。他之所以如此重視顯示器業務，是因為寬帶技術今後將朝著全球化方向發展，通過視頻進行交流的需求預計將會迅速提高。據佳能分析，全球寬帶服務用戶到2010年將由2005年的1億9000萬增加到4億4000萬。禦手洗指出，寬帶的發展將能使用戶同時收發多個視頻內容，由此“就會對能夠以多種方式對各種影像進行處理的大畫面及高畫質家用顯示器產生需求”（禦手洗）。他表示，這種高級數字設備“將會開創一個數字影像時代”。
在此次展會上，佳能重點展出了SED、背投、有機EL三大類顯示器。其中，禦手洗作為“特別希望引起用戶關注的顯示器”而重點強調的是SED。他表示，SED“在質感和立體效果上完全不同於”現有平板顯示器，再次強調了其優越性。
在此次展會上，現場的所有展臺均擺放了36英寸SED面板，向參觀者展示了佳能描繪的“SED將在基於視頻的交流中起著核心作用”的未來藍圖。比如，不僅演示了將具有無線LAN功能的數位相機拍攝的照片輕鬆傳輸給SED，還演示了利用支援數字電視的印表機，列印SED正在播放的與旅遊節目有關的葡萄酒郵購資訊等，盡力地向大家展現了“SED電視將成為家庭資訊中心”（佳能）的未來藍圖。對於SED的投產計劃，在此次演講中僅表示“將在 2006年推出大螢幕電視機產品”（禦手洗）。（記者：田中 直樹）
Nikkei Microdevices
2005/11/02
spacer
spacer 【日經BP社報道】
正在發表主題演講的佳能社長禦手洗
使用SED，演示了“基於視頻的交流”情況。
使用SED，做了“數字TV印表機”的工作演示。
“必須將顯示器置於中心地位。”佳能社長禦手洗冨士夫在該公司於10月26日～28日舉辦的內部展會“Canon EXPO 2005 in Tokyo”的主題演講中，熱情洋溢地闡述了將希望寄託於顯示器業務的想法。
禦手洗舉出了佳能今後將重點發展的5個領域，其中最先介紹的就是顯示器業務。他之所以如此重視顯示器業務，是因為寬帶技術今後將朝著全球化方向發展，通過視頻進行交流的需求預計將會迅速提高。據佳能分析，全球寬帶服務用戶到2010年將由2005年的1億9000萬增加到4億4000萬。禦手洗指出，寬帶的發展將能使用戶同時收發多個視頻內容，由此“就會對能夠以多種方式對各種影像進行處理的大畫面及高畫質家用顯示器產生需求”（禦手洗）。他表示，這種高級數字設備“將會開創一個數字影像時代”。
在此次展會上，佳能重點展出了SED、背投、有機EL三大類顯示器。其中，禦手洗作為“特別希望引起用戶關注的顯示器”而重點強調的是SED。他表示，SED“在質感和立體效果上完全不同於”現有平板顯示器，再次強調了其優越性。
在此次展會上，現場的所有展臺均擺放了36英寸SED面板，向參觀者展示了佳能描繪的“SED將在基於視頻的交流中起著核心作用”的未來藍圖。比如，不僅演示了將具有無線LAN功能的數位相機拍攝的照片輕鬆傳輸給SED，還演示了利用支援數字電視的印表機，列印SED正在播放的與旅遊節目有關的葡萄酒郵購資訊等，盡力地向大家展現了“SED電視將成為家庭資訊中心”（佳能）的未來藍圖。對於SED的投產計劃，在此次演講中僅表示“將在 2006年推出大螢幕電視機產品”（禦手洗）。（記者：田中 直樹）
網路新都年底開台覆蓋率不到一半
2005.11.02 工商時報
網路新都年底開台覆蓋率不到一半
林淑惠/台北報導
台北市網路新都Wi-Fi建置計畫，在延遲長達八個月的興建時程後，已決定十二月底非開台不可，同時確定搭配扶植本土手機大廠方案，將由明基、多普達、倚天三家本土廠商供應Wi-Fi雙模手機。
統一安源資訊公司昨（一）日表示，網路新都Wi-Fi建設在年底開台時，將由原訂九千個基地台約九五％，在開台時降為四、五千個基地台只有五○％覆蓋率，預定明年年中才可能完成九五％到百分百的覆蓋。
統一安源資源針對開台大致擬定幾項規畫案，首先是上網月租費訂在三九九元，另語音服務將只推網內互打，由於國際電話費每分鐘三元多比現行固網費率便宜甚多，可能衝擊中華電信，為避免市場「老大哥」跳腳，決定以「網內互打」提供用戶互相通話。
但中華電信畢竟是電信市場龍頭，針對網路新都案，採取的是柔軟身段的「競合策略」，除了董事長賀陳旦日前表明中華電絕不抵制Wi-Fi立場外，協理石木標表示，數據分公司已在機場、統一星巴克、丹堤咖啡及特定飯店設立了幾百個WLAN（Wireless Lan）網路，並提供伺服器的硬體分兩年抵扣月租一百四十九元的方案，讓用戶在家裡就可以不須透過ADSL固網專線而是WLAN無線上網裝置及服務上網。
市場指出，統一安源未來與跨國公司將合作語音通訊服務，預定用戶未來只須購買以歐元計價的點數卡就可以透過Skype撥話，相較於以目前固網市話五分鐘一．七元來看，Wi-Fi未來在市話、乃至於行動電話的競爭優勢不大，但國際電話勢必威脅現有固網業者的利基。
統一集團旗下的安源資訊是在去年透過公開招標方式，取得台北市Wi-Fi網路架構及相關應用無線規劃、建置，也擁有九年營運權，原本該公司預定投資卅億元資金，卻因為系統更改為北電的Mesh，加上重新評估基地台的覆蓋率，統一安源預估，Wi-Fi的投資金額將超過卅億元甚多。
由於網路新都計畫先從北、高兩市開始興建，台北市的無線網路新雖然延後開台，但仍將領先高雄進度，推出時將是國內第一個提供無線上網環境的指標及示範。
據指出，開台時預定搭配的三款Wi-Fi手機，包括明基P50、多普達（Dopod）700、及倚天資訊的M600。
網路新都年底開台覆蓋率不到一半
林淑惠/台北報導
台北市網路新都Wi-Fi建置計畫，在延遲長達八個月的興建時程後，已決定十二月底非開台不可，同時確定搭配扶植本土手機大廠方案，將由明基、多普達、倚天三家本土廠商供應Wi-Fi雙模手機。
統一安源資訊公司昨（一）日表示，網路新都Wi-Fi建設在年底開台時，將由原訂九千個基地台約九五％，在開台時降為四、五千個基地台只有五○％覆蓋率，預定明年年中才可能完成九五％到百分百的覆蓋。
統一安源資源針對開台大致擬定幾項規畫案，首先是上網月租費訂在三九九元，另語音服務將只推網內互打，由於國際電話費每分鐘三元多比現行固網費率便宜甚多，可能衝擊中華電信，為避免市場「老大哥」跳腳，決定以「網內互打」提供用戶互相通話。
但中華電信畢竟是電信市場龍頭，針對網路新都案，採取的是柔軟身段的「競合策略」，除了董事長賀陳旦日前表明中華電絕不抵制Wi-Fi立場外，協理石木標表示，數據分公司已在機場、統一星巴克、丹堤咖啡及特定飯店設立了幾百個WLAN（Wireless Lan）網路，並提供伺服器的硬體分兩年抵扣月租一百四十九元的方案，讓用戶在家裡就可以不須透過ADSL固網專線而是WLAN無線上網裝置及服務上網。
市場指出，統一安源未來與跨國公司將合作語音通訊服務，預定用戶未來只須購買以歐元計價的點數卡就可以透過Skype撥話，相較於以目前固網市話五分鐘一．七元來看，Wi-Fi未來在市話、乃至於行動電話的競爭優勢不大，但國際電話勢必威脅現有固網業者的利基。
統一集團旗下的安源資訊是在去年透過公開招標方式，取得台北市Wi-Fi網路架構及相關應用無線規劃、建置，也擁有九年營運權，原本該公司預定投資卅億元資金，卻因為系統更改為北電的Mesh，加上重新評估基地台的覆蓋率，統一安源預估，Wi-Fi的投資金額將超過卅億元甚多。
由於網路新都計畫先從北、高兩市開始興建，台北市的無線網路新雖然延後開台，但仍將領先高雄進度，推出時將是國內第一個提供無線上網環境的指標及示範。
據指出，開台時預定搭配的三款Wi-Fi手機，包括明基P50、多普達（Dopod）700、及倚天資訊的M600。
Monday, October 31, 2005
佳能東芝聯手 2010年奪最高市場份額
佳能東芝聯手 2010年奪最高市場份額
Nikkei Electronics
2004/09/16
spacer
spacer
【日經BP社報道】 “雖說SED面板的正式量產時間是2007年，確實比較晚，但我不在乎。因為SED面板的性價比已經超過液晶面板和PDP。本公司的數位彩色影印機和數位相機儘管起步都晚，但如今的地位已經非常穩固。此次也準備通過推出優秀產品奮起直追，希望2010年在大尺寸超薄電視面板領域取得全球最高的市場份額。即使大螢幕超薄電視，本公司與東芝也將登上榜首。”（佳能董事社長禦手洗富士夫）
圖1：雙方社長握手祝賀。東芝準備在2004年10月5日開幕的“2004年日本高新技術聯合展（CEATEC JAPAN 2004）”上展出SED電視樣機
佳能和東芝將於2004年10月成立一家名為“SED”的開發、生產和銷售電視SED面板的合資公司（見圖1）。這家合資公司將於2005年8月以月產僅3000枚的小規模開始量產50英寸SED面板，2007年開始正式量產。2007年底月產計劃為7萬5000枚（見圖1）。
正式量產時所生產的品種計劃為可顯示1080線的HDTV規格。作為畫面尺寸，雖說也將生產40英寸左右的產品，不過將以50英寸產品為主。 “最終將形成一個32英寸以下為液晶電視，更大的為SED電視的產品線”（東芝董事社長岡村正）。打個不恰當比喻，SED面板的結構就等於是有多少個像素就具有多少個電子槍（而每個CRT則只有一個）（見圖3）。因此佳能和東芝強調說在映像效果和耗電量等很多方面優於液晶面板和PDP（見圖4、5）。
佳能正在開發電視版DIGIC圖像處理晶片
在新聞發佈會上，記者集中就佳能的電視機戰略進行了提問。佳能社長禦手洗表示，“在家用電視產品方面，將利用在數位相機等領域中培育的銷售渠道展開商品行銷。將會跟新力和松下電器產業進行競爭”。為了做好跟這些可怕的對手競爭的準備，佳能表示：“SED電視準備自量產開始配備本公司開發的圖像處理晶片。該公司將可在本公司的SED電視中通用。”（禦手洗社長）這就是說該公司正在開發在數位相機中共同配備的電視版圖像處理晶片“DIGIC”。
東芝雖沒有明說，不過似乎準備在SED電視的圖像處理中使用正在與新力等公司聯手開發的微處理器“CELL”。東芝社長岡村在“2004年東京國際數字會議”上曾表示“CELL將主要配備於電視機和家用伺服器”。看來，CELL將與SED面板同時於2005年內開始量產。（記者：大槻智洋）
圖2： SED面板的開發藍圖。銷售目標是2007年達到每年300億日元（約合人民幣23億元），2010年達到每年2000億日元（約合人民幣153億元）。對於2010年來說，年產將達到300萬枚以上，力爭取得20～30%的全球市場份額，居全球首位。合資公司“雖說準備外銷SED面板，不過由於優先考慮向佳能和東芝供貨，因此外銷將要等待一段時間以後。”（佳能社長禦手洗）
圖3：SED面板的基本結構
圖4：畫面尺寸基本相同的SED面板、液晶面板和PDP之比較
圖5：SED面板的耗電量為液晶面板的1/2～2/3，PDP的1/3～1/2
Nikkei Electronics
2004/09/16
spacer
spacer
【日經BP社報道】 “雖說SED面板的正式量產時間是2007年，確實比較晚，但我不在乎。因為SED面板的性價比已經超過液晶面板和PDP。本公司的數位彩色影印機和數位相機儘管起步都晚，但如今的地位已經非常穩固。此次也準備通過推出優秀產品奮起直追，希望2010年在大尺寸超薄電視面板領域取得全球最高的市場份額。即使大螢幕超薄電視，本公司與東芝也將登上榜首。”（佳能董事社長禦手洗富士夫）
圖1：雙方社長握手祝賀。東芝準備在2004年10月5日開幕的“2004年日本高新技術聯合展（CEATEC JAPAN 2004）”上展出SED電視樣機
佳能和東芝將於2004年10月成立一家名為“SED”的開發、生產和銷售電視SED面板的合資公司（見圖1）。這家合資公司將於2005年8月以月產僅3000枚的小規模開始量產50英寸SED面板，2007年開始正式量產。2007年底月產計劃為7萬5000枚（見圖1）。
正式量產時所生產的品種計劃為可顯示1080線的HDTV規格。作為畫面尺寸，雖說也將生產40英寸左右的產品，不過將以50英寸產品為主。 “最終將形成一個32英寸以下為液晶電視，更大的為SED電視的產品線”（東芝董事社長岡村正）。打個不恰當比喻，SED面板的結構就等於是有多少個像素就具有多少個電子槍（而每個CRT則只有一個）（見圖3）。因此佳能和東芝強調說在映像效果和耗電量等很多方面優於液晶面板和PDP（見圖4、5）。
佳能正在開發電視版DIGIC圖像處理晶片
在新聞發佈會上，記者集中就佳能的電視機戰略進行了提問。佳能社長禦手洗表示，“在家用電視產品方面，將利用在數位相機等領域中培育的銷售渠道展開商品行銷。將會跟新力和松下電器產業進行競爭”。為了做好跟這些可怕的對手競爭的準備，佳能表示：“SED電視準備自量產開始配備本公司開發的圖像處理晶片。該公司將可在本公司的SED電視中通用。”（禦手洗社長）這就是說該公司正在開發在數位相機中共同配備的電視版圖像處理晶片“DIGIC”。
東芝雖沒有明說，不過似乎準備在SED電視的圖像處理中使用正在與新力等公司聯手開發的微處理器“CELL”。東芝社長岡村在“2004年東京國際數字會議”上曾表示“CELL將主要配備於電視機和家用伺服器”。看來，CELL將與SED面板同時於2005年內開始量產。（記者：大槻智洋）
圖2： SED面板的開發藍圖。銷售目標是2007年達到每年300億日元（約合人民幣23億元），2010年達到每年2000億日元（約合人民幣153億元）。對於2010年來說，年產將達到300萬枚以上，力爭取得20～30%的全球市場份額，居全球首位。合資公司“雖說準備外銷SED面板，不過由於優先考慮向佳能和東芝供貨，因此外銷將要等待一段時間以後。”（佳能社長禦手洗）
圖3：SED面板的基本結構
圖4：畫面尺寸基本相同的SED面板、液晶面板和PDP之比較
圖5：SED面板的耗電量為液晶面板的1/2～2/3，PDP的1/3～1/2
Tuesday, October 18, 2005
WiMAX發展 跳躍發展 搶占先機
跳躍發展 搶占先機
■ 記者 黃玉珍
繼行政院端出WiMAX發展藍圖，揭示政府發展無線寬頻通訊產業的新方向之後，經濟部昨天更進一步以實際行動，和美商英特爾簽定在台合作發展WiMAX的協議。WiMAX究竟有何魅力 可以讓政府「獨鍾此味」，列為重要的無線寬頻通訊技術選項。
我國無線通訊（Wireless LAN）產品的全球市佔率高達90%，不過，業者賺的大都是「代工」的錢，利潤並不高，因為過去業者切入動作太慢，或是不懂得「參與標準制訂就是搶得市場」的定律。直到最近政府和業界才感受參與標準建置及測試的重要性，二年前也才爭取安捷倫等業者來台設立Wifi實驗室。
但是，全球WiMAX市場仍處於待開墾的處女地，不只尚無標準，而且試驗場也很少。如果台灣能爭取在台設立WiMAX試驗場所，並及早參與國際標準的制訂，對我國掌握WiMAX技術及智財權將有極大助益，進軍全球WiMAX市場自然如虎添翼。
過去，我國無線通訊設備在全球市占率雖高，但是切入領域侷限在終端設備等方面，對利潤頗高的手機基地台等無線通訊設備市場，一直找不到著力點。而WiMAX仍屬萌芽期，如能提早掌握技術，台灣廠商有機會切入WiMAX的基地台市場，有助產業鏈的完整發展及提高附加價值。
政府推動M-Taiwan初期，曾有600萬寬頻到府的宏遠計畫，後來發現受限於最後一哩路，而困難重重。
種種因素相加，讓行政院科顧組、經濟部、交通部等單位會商後，決定採取「跳躍式的發展方式」，略過國際大廠已捷足先登的技術，而選擇還處於萌芽期的WiMAX，作為台灣發展無線寬頻通訊產業的重要技術選項。
【2005/10/18 經濟日報】
■ 記者 黃玉珍
繼行政院端出WiMAX發展藍圖，揭示政府發展無線寬頻通訊產業的新方向之後，經濟部昨天更進一步以實際行動，和美商英特爾簽定在台合作發展WiMAX的協議。WiMAX究竟有何魅力 可以讓政府「獨鍾此味」，列為重要的無線寬頻通訊技術選項。
我國無線通訊（Wireless LAN）產品的全球市佔率高達90%，不過，業者賺的大都是「代工」的錢，利潤並不高，因為過去業者切入動作太慢，或是不懂得「參與標準制訂就是搶得市場」的定律。直到最近政府和業界才感受參與標準建置及測試的重要性，二年前也才爭取安捷倫等業者來台設立Wifi實驗室。
但是，全球WiMAX市場仍處於待開墾的處女地，不只尚無標準，而且試驗場也很少。如果台灣能爭取在台設立WiMAX試驗場所，並及早參與國際標準的制訂，對我國掌握WiMAX技術及智財權將有極大助益，進軍全球WiMAX市場自然如虎添翼。
過去，我國無線通訊設備在全球市占率雖高，但是切入領域侷限在終端設備等方面，對利潤頗高的手機基地台等無線通訊設備市場，一直找不到著力點。而WiMAX仍屬萌芽期，如能提早掌握技術，台灣廠商有機會切入WiMAX的基地台市場，有助產業鏈的完整發展及提高附加價值。
政府推動M-Taiwan初期，曾有600萬寬頻到府的宏遠計畫，後來發現受限於最後一哩路，而困難重重。
種種因素相加，讓行政院科顧組、經濟部、交通部等單位會商後，決定採取「跳躍式的發展方式」，略過國際大廠已捷足先登的技術，而選擇還處於萌芽期的WiMAX，作為台灣發展無線寬頻通訊產業的重要技術選項。
【2005/10/18 經濟日報】
經部與英特爾簽約 推動WiMAX產業體系
經部與英特爾簽約 推動WiMAX產業體系
■ 記者黃玉珍、曹正芬／台北報導
經濟部和英特爾昨天合作推展WiMAX打造成行動台灣新世界，由經濟部長何美玥（左二）、政務委員林逢慶（左一）、英特爾執行副總裁暨行動事業群總經理馬宏昇（右二）、英特爾業務及行銷事業群副總裁暨亞太區總裁蔣安邦（右一）共同站台。
記者曾吉松／攝影
英特爾昨（17）日與經濟部簽約，合作推展WiMAX無線通訊環境，加速實現「行動台灣應用推動計畫（M-Tai-wan）」，將在2007年前建置10 個行動城市、15個無線應用示範區，推廣WiFi或WiMAX技術。最終目標是協助國內網通及電信業者進軍全球無線寬頻通訊市場，成就第三兆元通訊產業。
英特爾與經濟部在英特爾亞太科技論壇（IDF）首日宣布簽訂WiMAX合作協議，WiMAX是新一代廣域寬頻無線技術。這項協議在行政院政務委員林逢慶的見證下，由經濟部長何美玥及英特爾執行副總裁暨行動事業群總經理馬宏昇（Sean Maloney）代表簽署。林逢慶表示，未來四年政府預計投資370億元，落實M-Taiwan計畫，WiMAX是該計畫最重要的項目。
經濟部將推動、發展台灣WiMAX產業體系，積極開發台灣設計代工市場，終極目標為向全球電信市場提供高成本效益的WiMAX相關產品、設備與解決方案。經濟部也將負責協調台灣通訊頻譜之配置，並為WiMAX場測（Field Trial）提供資源與協助。
林逢慶表示，政府自2005年至2008年投資370億元展開M-Taiwan 計畫，其中一項工作是運用「行動台灣應用推動計畫」，在城市各角落佈建無線寬頻設施，WiMAX則是重點之一，寄望台灣能成為世界上規模最大的WiMAX 產業發展基地，取得WiMAX技術領先優勢。
何美玥表示，台灣過去科技產業發展以硬體為主，希望透過經濟部與英特爾合作，為台灣產業創造新機會，台灣不用在既有領域和既有競爭者流血競爭，而能跨越到另一領域，台灣不但提供WiMAX硬體，同時也能提供服務，WiMAX將是台灣科技產業轉型關鍵。
【2005/10/18 經濟日報】
■ 記者黃玉珍、曹正芬／台北報導
經濟部和英特爾昨天合作推展WiMAX打造成行動台灣新世界，由經濟部長何美玥（左二）、政務委員林逢慶（左一）、英特爾執行副總裁暨行動事業群總經理馬宏昇（右二）、英特爾業務及行銷事業群副總裁暨亞太區總裁蔣安邦（右一）共同站台。
記者曾吉松／攝影
英特爾昨（17）日與經濟部簽約，合作推展WiMAX無線通訊環境，加速實現「行動台灣應用推動計畫（M-Tai-wan）」，將在2007年前建置10 個行動城市、15個無線應用示範區，推廣WiFi或WiMAX技術。最終目標是協助國內網通及電信業者進軍全球無線寬頻通訊市場，成就第三兆元通訊產業。
英特爾與經濟部在英特爾亞太科技論壇（IDF）首日宣布簽訂WiMAX合作協議，WiMAX是新一代廣域寬頻無線技術。這項協議在行政院政務委員林逢慶的見證下，由經濟部長何美玥及英特爾執行副總裁暨行動事業群總經理馬宏昇（Sean Maloney）代表簽署。林逢慶表示，未來四年政府預計投資370億元，落實M-Taiwan計畫，WiMAX是該計畫最重要的項目。
經濟部將推動、發展台灣WiMAX產業體系，積極開發台灣設計代工市場，終極目標為向全球電信市場提供高成本效益的WiMAX相關產品、設備與解決方案。經濟部也將負責協調台灣通訊頻譜之配置，並為WiMAX場測（Field Trial）提供資源與協助。
林逢慶表示，政府自2005年至2008年投資370億元展開M-Taiwan 計畫，其中一項工作是運用「行動台灣應用推動計畫」，在城市各角落佈建無線寬頻設施，WiMAX則是重點之一，寄望台灣能成為世界上規模最大的WiMAX 產業發展基地，取得WiMAX技術領先優勢。
何美玥表示，台灣過去科技產業發展以硬體為主，希望透過經濟部與英特爾合作，為台灣產業創造新機會，台灣不用在既有領域和既有競爭者流血競爭，而能跨越到另一領域，台灣不但提供WiMAX硬體，同時也能提供服務，WiMAX將是台灣科技產業轉型關鍵。
【2005/10/18 經濟日報】
Sunday, October 16, 2005
Why your iPod will be out of date in a year
Why your iPod will be out of date in a year
MURDO MACLEOD AND WILLIAM LYONS
THAT new iPod nano may be impossibly slim and stylish but the sad truth is it's already obsolete. Even its bigger, video-playing brother - announced last week - will be old technology by the time it hits the shops next month.
For 2006 is to be the year of the Ultimate Gadget, when the phone, music player, camera, organiser, games machine, and pretty much everything apart from the kitchen sink, is crammed into one attractive, effective and easy-to-use package.
The consumer electronics industry is convinced we're tired of carrying two or three separate devices to deal with our entertainment and communication needs. The marketing gurus call the solution "convergence".
And while many modern mobile phones offer a bewildering array of functions none yet does them particularly well. But a series of recent developments have convinced technology-watchers we are on the verge of getting the electronic equivalent of a Swiss Army Knife:
• Tiny, high-capacity hard drives have been developed which allow thousands of songs and hours of high-quality video to be stored on devices no bigger than a mobile;
• South Korean firm Samsung has developed a tiny computer chip powerful enough to process numerous tasks simultaneously; and has also showcased mobiles containing hard disks;
• Software giant Microsoft is working on a mobile-based version of Windows that will handle a wide variety of jobs; and
• PalmOne already claims to have produced the ultimate gadget, the £400 Treo 650, a handheld computer that incorporates a camera but is likely to appeal more to gadget addicts than mainstream consumers.
Meanwhile, the firm that many would argue started it all, Sony, is not far from the action. Sony Ericsson will unveil its W800i Walkman Phone, which includes an organiser, camera, video camera and player, and music player, later this month.
Apple, the creators of the iPod, is refusing to give anything away but industry sources are convinced its iPod Video is just the beginning of the route to convergence.
Paul Harris, Professor of Screen Media at the University of Abertay, Dundee, said there is now a demand for an ultimate gadget, but it will have finally arrived when people no longer think of it as a gadget.
"It will become as essential as a kettle in the home," he said. "It will include a telephone, camera, texting, music store. It will allow you to download programmes and songs from anywhere."
Robert Strohmeyer, gadgets editor of the technology journal Wired, said: "As far as the ultimate convergence gadget is concerned, we are almost there. A series of new phones will come out in the next couple of months which will bring all the functions together."
He added: "One in particular, the Samsung i300, has a hard disk and, for song storage, it is up there with the iPod nano and iPod Mini, and it is a phone and organiser. We can expect convergence devices to become much more common about the end of 2006 onwards. But these devices need to be under £200 in order to become mainstream."
There is another important side to the development: style. Merely cramming features onto a Mars Bar-sized piece of electronics will not be enough to sell, according to experts.
Mainstream consumers, and especially women, have little interest in expensive gadgets which are anything other than completely intuitive.
The iPod's success among women has been shown by a huge increase in their numbers downloading music from the internet. New figures show that while in 2004 96% of downloads were bought by men, this year 31% of the customers are female as women have embraced the new technology.
Shane Greeves, executive creative director of marketing agency Future Brand, said: "The element of style is completely crucial. What Apple has pioneered with the iPod is the philosophy that products do not have to be big and chunky; they can be slim and elegant. One of the key factors that attracts women to iPods is its simplicity. Women don't like gadgets and they are technophobes. On a mobile all women want is an address and text and that is it."
Michael Parsons, the editor of the personal technology website Cnet.co.uk, said: "What Apple cracked with the iPod, was making it easy enough to use. Their Clickwheel on the front allowed the user to find one song among 4,000. There needs to be a similar advance in making gadgets easy to use in order to make a 'super gadget' popular among mainstream buyers."
But there are other challenges in the months and years ahead, among them developing batteries which are both small and high-capacity. Colour screens running video use up plenty of power, yet consumers will demand many hours' use between recharges.
Graham Whitehead, manager of future developments at BT Scotland, agrees the ultimate gadget is on its way, but questions whether its appeal will be universal. "Personally, I quite like having an iPod, which plays music and that is it.
"I like having a high-quality digital camera, which is a good camera and nothing else. If the ultimate device has to fit in a pocket, how big can the screen be? Will it be big enough for those of us who are getting on a bit?"
MURDO MACLEOD AND WILLIAM LYONS
THAT new iPod nano may be impossibly slim and stylish but the sad truth is it's already obsolete. Even its bigger, video-playing brother - announced last week - will be old technology by the time it hits the shops next month.
For 2006 is to be the year of the Ultimate Gadget, when the phone, music player, camera, organiser, games machine, and pretty much everything apart from the kitchen sink, is crammed into one attractive, effective and easy-to-use package.
The consumer electronics industry is convinced we're tired of carrying two or three separate devices to deal with our entertainment and communication needs. The marketing gurus call the solution "convergence".
And while many modern mobile phones offer a bewildering array of functions none yet does them particularly well. But a series of recent developments have convinced technology-watchers we are on the verge of getting the electronic equivalent of a Swiss Army Knife:
• Tiny, high-capacity hard drives have been developed which allow thousands of songs and hours of high-quality video to be stored on devices no bigger than a mobile;
• South Korean firm Samsung has developed a tiny computer chip powerful enough to process numerous tasks simultaneously; and has also showcased mobiles containing hard disks;
• Software giant Microsoft is working on a mobile-based version of Windows that will handle a wide variety of jobs; and
• PalmOne already claims to have produced the ultimate gadget, the £400 Treo 650, a handheld computer that incorporates a camera but is likely to appeal more to gadget addicts than mainstream consumers.
Meanwhile, the firm that many would argue started it all, Sony, is not far from the action. Sony Ericsson will unveil its W800i Walkman Phone, which includes an organiser, camera, video camera and player, and music player, later this month.
Apple, the creators of the iPod, is refusing to give anything away but industry sources are convinced its iPod Video is just the beginning of the route to convergence.
Paul Harris, Professor of Screen Media at the University of Abertay, Dundee, said there is now a demand for an ultimate gadget, but it will have finally arrived when people no longer think of it as a gadget.
"It will become as essential as a kettle in the home," he said. "It will include a telephone, camera, texting, music store. It will allow you to download programmes and songs from anywhere."
Robert Strohmeyer, gadgets editor of the technology journal Wired, said: "As far as the ultimate convergence gadget is concerned, we are almost there. A series of new phones will come out in the next couple of months which will bring all the functions together."
He added: "One in particular, the Samsung i300, has a hard disk and, for song storage, it is up there with the iPod nano and iPod Mini, and it is a phone and organiser. We can expect convergence devices to become much more common about the end of 2006 onwards. But these devices need to be under £200 in order to become mainstream."
There is another important side to the development: style. Merely cramming features onto a Mars Bar-sized piece of electronics will not be enough to sell, according to experts.
Mainstream consumers, and especially women, have little interest in expensive gadgets which are anything other than completely intuitive.
The iPod's success among women has been shown by a huge increase in their numbers downloading music from the internet. New figures show that while in 2004 96% of downloads were bought by men, this year 31% of the customers are female as women have embraced the new technology.
Shane Greeves, executive creative director of marketing agency Future Brand, said: "The element of style is completely crucial. What Apple has pioneered with the iPod is the philosophy that products do not have to be big and chunky; they can be slim and elegant. One of the key factors that attracts women to iPods is its simplicity. Women don't like gadgets and they are technophobes. On a mobile all women want is an address and text and that is it."
Michael Parsons, the editor of the personal technology website Cnet.co.uk, said: "What Apple cracked with the iPod, was making it easy enough to use. Their Clickwheel on the front allowed the user to find one song among 4,000. There needs to be a similar advance in making gadgets easy to use in order to make a 'super gadget' popular among mainstream buyers."
But there are other challenges in the months and years ahead, among them developing batteries which are both small and high-capacity. Colour screens running video use up plenty of power, yet consumers will demand many hours' use between recharges.
Graham Whitehead, manager of future developments at BT Scotland, agrees the ultimate gadget is on its way, but questions whether its appeal will be universal. "Personally, I quite like having an iPod, which plays music and that is it.
"I like having a high-quality digital camera, which is a good camera and nothing else. If the ultimate device has to fit in a pocket, how big can the screen be? Will it be big enough for those of us who are getting on a bit?"
Thursday, October 13, 2005
Changes in tech world almost too fast to follow
Thursday, October 13, 2005 - 12:00 AM
Permission to reprint or copy this article or photo must be obtained from The Seattle Times. Call 206-464-3113 or e-mail resale@seattletimes.com with your request.
Changes in tech world almost too fast to follow
By Brier Dudley
Seattle Times technology reporter
It's not another bubble, but wild times are back in the technology industry.
A massive shift has begun, and it's centered on Microsoft, as the company and its competitors reposition themselves — in some cases as partners — for the future.
That's created a wave of tech news this week that feels like the boom of 1999 viewed through a funhouse mirror: Apple rolls out video players, Google bids on America Online, Microsoft makes nice with RealNetworks and does deals with Yahoo!
Industry watchers say it's only the beginning. They expect the pace to continue through the fall as companies jockey for new positions. Microsoft is trying to be more like faster-moving Internet companies, and Internet companies are trying to be more like Microsoft — turning their Web sites into places where people spend the day working and playing, instead of a few minutes visiting.
"I would call it a flood of activity," said Friday Harbor technology commentator Mark Anderson. "That's what's so strange about it — there was nothing doing a month ago, and suddenly we're in full flood here."
Anderson said the driving force is high-speed Internet access. With fast connections finally becoming widespread, software, computers, advertising and entertainment are changing fast. That's creating new business opportunities — Google's recent litany of new initiatives is the best example — and forcing Microsoft to reach out to former rivals like Yahoo!, which already has a strong position in this connected world.
"There is a big change in the competitive landscape," said David Smith, an analyst with the Gartner technology research company. "It's all being driven by what I would call the emergence of the Internet platform."
This shift helps explain why Microsoft reorganized its business last month, Smith said. The company merged its MSN Web business with Windows and put a bigger emphasis on delivering services over the Internet, positioning the company to better compete with Google.
"What's at stake ultimately is their strong position in the industry," Smith said. "The world is changing, and they need to change with it or be left behind."
How it will shake out is anybody's guess. The rumor and speculation mill fired up in mid-September when word leaked that Microsoft was trying to link MSN with its nemesis, AOL, then it kicked into overdrive when Silicon Valley stalwart Sun Microsystems said it was working on technologies with Google.
It has made for good headlines, but it hasn't played well on Wall Street. Microsoft stock is down $2 over the past month, and tech stocks in general were down yesterday after concerns were raised about Intel and Apple sales.
"I think the partnerships are heading in the right direction. It just might take some time to see the tangible results for Microsoft," said Standard & Poor's analyst Jonathan Rudy.
Goldman Sachs analyst Rick Sherlund said Microsoft stock in particular may not be reflecting the action that's under way. Investors may be concerned about competition from Google, or that Microsoft won't catch this next wave.
"I do think that a lot of the roads do point back to Google here," Sherlund said. "Yahoo!, as well as Google, could be in a position to host some competing software as they already are beginning to do with e-mail, and calendaring and contacts are likely closely following."
As for all the rumors about AOL, Sun, Google and others, Rudy said, "it's getting to the point where it's a little ridiculous until something is announced."
"With so many different, disparate rumors going on," he said, "I don't know if anybody has a handle on what's going on."
In the meantime, here's a cheat sheet to help keep track of it all.
Apple and video
Apple's new video iPod was unveiled yesterday, but the $299-$399 device is just part of the story. Apple's trying to extend its leadership role in digital music into video on several fronts. The company upgraded its iTunes service to sell video content for $1.99 apiece. Disney's ABC is providing television shows, including the popular "Desperate Housewives." Lost in the hubbub was news that its iMac desktop computer is morphing into a home-entertainment center to play videos, and now comes with a TV-like remote control.
The Microsoft angle: Video is one place Apple is playing catch-up to Microsoft. Microsoft introduced a portable video player in 2003 and made a content deal with TiVo last January, but its device never caught on like the iPod. On the desktop front, Microsoft has a wide lead with its Media Center PC product, introduced in 2002. Microsoft is expected to announce an updated version and report better-than-expected sales tomorrow.
Yahoo! and MSN Messenger
Microsoft and Yahoo! announced yesterday that their instant-messaging services will now work together. They've been working toward "interoperability" for years, but competition from Google's new communication services apparently sped up the alliance.
The Microsoft angle: Microsoft wants its messaging platform to be used as widely as possible. It's part of a bigger effort to become a major player in communication as consumers and office workers increasingly use a blend of voice, e-mail and instant-messaging services to stay in touch. The Microsoft-Yahoo! alliance also places competitive pressure on market leader AOL.
Google-AOL
The Wall Street Journal yesterday reported that Google and Comcast have teamed up to make a "serious" bid for a stake in Time Warner's AOL service to align themselves with its Internet presence. Last month, the New York Post reported that Microsoft was negotiating to buy a stake in AOL.
The Microsoft angle: Although they used to compete fiercely, Microsoft and AOL have had a partnership since they reached a settlement in 2003 of a Time Warner antitrust suit against Microsoft. Microsoft would like AOL to use its new MSN Search technology instead of the Google system AOL now has. That could boost MSN Search and slow Google, which gets 12 percent of its sales from AOL. Cards on the table may include the MSN Internet-access business that Microsoft has tapered back and Microsoft software that Time Warner may be interested in, such as its television platform and copy-protection technology.
Microsoft-RealNetworks
To settle an antitrust lawsuit brought by RealNetworks, Microsoft agreed this week to pay its longtime competitor $761 million, make Windows a better platform for Real's products and promote Real's Rhapsody music service on MSN.
The Microsoft angle: The deal largely ends Microsoft's antitrust problems in the U.S., and the partnership will help both companies compete with Apple. By adding Real's music catalog to its search service, Microsoft also gains against Google and Yahoo! search operations.
Google-Sun Microsystems
Speculation ran rampant when the two Silicon Valley companies scheduled a news conference last week to announce a new alliance, but the industry shrugged at the actual news: largely that the two will work together on future products. Google, whose chief executive used to work at Sun, will also buy more Sun servers.
The Microsoft angle: A sigh of relief in Redmond? Pundits expected that Sun and Google would work together to deliver word-processing and other productivity software online, taking a bite out of Microsoft's Office franchise, but it hasn't come to pass yet. The news conference did raise questions about the Sun-Microsoft alliance that was formed in 2004 when the two companies settled Sun's antitrust suit against Microsoft.
Brier Dudley: 206-515-5687 or bdudley@seattletimes.com
Permission to reprint or copy this article or photo must be obtained from The Seattle Times. Call 206-464-3113 or e-mail resale@seattletimes.com with your request.
Changes in tech world almost too fast to follow
By Brier Dudley
Seattle Times technology reporter
It's not another bubble, but wild times are back in the technology industry.
A massive shift has begun, and it's centered on Microsoft, as the company and its competitors reposition themselves — in some cases as partners — for the future.
That's created a wave of tech news this week that feels like the boom of 1999 viewed through a funhouse mirror: Apple rolls out video players, Google bids on America Online, Microsoft makes nice with RealNetworks and does deals with Yahoo!
Industry watchers say it's only the beginning. They expect the pace to continue through the fall as companies jockey for new positions. Microsoft is trying to be more like faster-moving Internet companies, and Internet companies are trying to be more like Microsoft — turning their Web sites into places where people spend the day working and playing, instead of a few minutes visiting.
"I would call it a flood of activity," said Friday Harbor technology commentator Mark Anderson. "That's what's so strange about it — there was nothing doing a month ago, and suddenly we're in full flood here."
Anderson said the driving force is high-speed Internet access. With fast connections finally becoming widespread, software, computers, advertising and entertainment are changing fast. That's creating new business opportunities — Google's recent litany of new initiatives is the best example — and forcing Microsoft to reach out to former rivals like Yahoo!, which already has a strong position in this connected world.
"There is a big change in the competitive landscape," said David Smith, an analyst with the Gartner technology research company. "It's all being driven by what I would call the emergence of the Internet platform."
This shift helps explain why Microsoft reorganized its business last month, Smith said. The company merged its MSN Web business with Windows and put a bigger emphasis on delivering services over the Internet, positioning the company to better compete with Google.
"What's at stake ultimately is their strong position in the industry," Smith said. "The world is changing, and they need to change with it or be left behind."
How it will shake out is anybody's guess. The rumor and speculation mill fired up in mid-September when word leaked that Microsoft was trying to link MSN with its nemesis, AOL, then it kicked into overdrive when Silicon Valley stalwart Sun Microsystems said it was working on technologies with Google.
It has made for good headlines, but it hasn't played well on Wall Street. Microsoft stock is down $2 over the past month, and tech stocks in general were down yesterday after concerns were raised about Intel and Apple sales.
"I think the partnerships are heading in the right direction. It just might take some time to see the tangible results for Microsoft," said Standard & Poor's analyst Jonathan Rudy.
Goldman Sachs analyst Rick Sherlund said Microsoft stock in particular may not be reflecting the action that's under way. Investors may be concerned about competition from Google, or that Microsoft won't catch this next wave.
"I do think that a lot of the roads do point back to Google here," Sherlund said. "Yahoo!, as well as Google, could be in a position to host some competing software as they already are beginning to do with e-mail, and calendaring and contacts are likely closely following."
As for all the rumors about AOL, Sun, Google and others, Rudy said, "it's getting to the point where it's a little ridiculous until something is announced."
"With so many different, disparate rumors going on," he said, "I don't know if anybody has a handle on what's going on."
In the meantime, here's a cheat sheet to help keep track of it all.
Apple and video
Apple's new video iPod was unveiled yesterday, but the $299-$399 device is just part of the story. Apple's trying to extend its leadership role in digital music into video on several fronts. The company upgraded its iTunes service to sell video content for $1.99 apiece. Disney's ABC is providing television shows, including the popular "Desperate Housewives." Lost in the hubbub was news that its iMac desktop computer is morphing into a home-entertainment center to play videos, and now comes with a TV-like remote control.
The Microsoft angle: Video is one place Apple is playing catch-up to Microsoft. Microsoft introduced a portable video player in 2003 and made a content deal with TiVo last January, but its device never caught on like the iPod. On the desktop front, Microsoft has a wide lead with its Media Center PC product, introduced in 2002. Microsoft is expected to announce an updated version and report better-than-expected sales tomorrow.
Yahoo! and MSN Messenger
Microsoft and Yahoo! announced yesterday that their instant-messaging services will now work together. They've been working toward "interoperability" for years, but competition from Google's new communication services apparently sped up the alliance.
The Microsoft angle: Microsoft wants its messaging platform to be used as widely as possible. It's part of a bigger effort to become a major player in communication as consumers and office workers increasingly use a blend of voice, e-mail and instant-messaging services to stay in touch. The Microsoft-Yahoo! alliance also places competitive pressure on market leader AOL.
Google-AOL
The Wall Street Journal yesterday reported that Google and Comcast have teamed up to make a "serious" bid for a stake in Time Warner's AOL service to align themselves with its Internet presence. Last month, the New York Post reported that Microsoft was negotiating to buy a stake in AOL.
The Microsoft angle: Although they used to compete fiercely, Microsoft and AOL have had a partnership since they reached a settlement in 2003 of a Time Warner antitrust suit against Microsoft. Microsoft would like AOL to use its new MSN Search technology instead of the Google system AOL now has. That could boost MSN Search and slow Google, which gets 12 percent of its sales from AOL. Cards on the table may include the MSN Internet-access business that Microsoft has tapered back and Microsoft software that Time Warner may be interested in, such as its television platform and copy-protection technology.
Microsoft-RealNetworks
To settle an antitrust lawsuit brought by RealNetworks, Microsoft agreed this week to pay its longtime competitor $761 million, make Windows a better platform for Real's products and promote Real's Rhapsody music service on MSN.
The Microsoft angle: The deal largely ends Microsoft's antitrust problems in the U.S., and the partnership will help both companies compete with Apple. By adding Real's music catalog to its search service, Microsoft also gains against Google and Yahoo! search operations.
Google-Sun Microsystems
Speculation ran rampant when the two Silicon Valley companies scheduled a news conference last week to announce a new alliance, but the industry shrugged at the actual news: largely that the two will work together on future products. Google, whose chief executive used to work at Sun, will also buy more Sun servers.
The Microsoft angle: A sigh of relief in Redmond? Pundits expected that Sun and Google would work together to deliver word-processing and other productivity software online, taking a bite out of Microsoft's Office franchise, but it hasn't come to pass yet. The news conference did raise questions about the Sun-Microsoft alliance that was formed in 2004 when the two companies settled Sun's antitrust suit against Microsoft.
Brier Dudley: 206-515-5687 or bdudley@seattletimes.com
Monday, September 19, 2005
天長地久計畫 張系國出借「時間」
天長地久計畫 張系國出借「時間」
操控時間是人類的大夢，即使權傾天下、富可敵國，也無法阻擋時間的洪流；
張系國在三十五年前的小說著作裡，描述了一個可以儲存和交換時間的機器
──天長地久計，這個過去是「狂想」的點子，今天有了實現的機會。
張彥文
「小姐，願不願意把妳的時間賣給我」？
1970年代的台北街頭，一個二十八歲、經過無數次失敗相親的未婚「老」小姐，在一個下雨的夜晚，碰到了一個很特別的計程車司機……。
「《夜曲》這本小說其實是一個浪漫的愛情故事，愛情就是把你的時間交給一個人，」有「科幻小說之父」稱號的張系國回憶，當年在一個雨夜，因為看到一個女孩子佇立街頭，感覺有些淒涼；又聯想到以前坐計程車時，看過「買賣各種名犬」的廣告，於是念頭一轉，「如果買賣的是時間呢？」
這個靈感成就了《夜曲》這部小說；三十五年後，張系國更帶領工研院和資策會等單位的團隊，把小說裡的概念付諸實現，而這個計畫的名稱，就用了《夜曲》裡面那個貯存時間的機器，叫做「天長地久計畫。」
chronobot時間交換平台
負責對外說明計畫內容的工研院電通所經理邱運輸表示，這個計畫其實是在一個社群與虛擬社區內互助合作的概念，將每一個人的時間量化，每個成員都有一個「時間碼表」，顯示借出或借入的時間。
舉例來說，一個學生正準備一篇報告，要找一個人花兩個小時協助他完成這項工作；他可以透過網路將這項需求送到平台，平台就會透過複雜的運算機制，找出符合需求的協助者。等到這篇報告完成後，這個提出需求學生的時間碼表就會變成「－2」，而幫助他的人則變成「＋2」。
張系國還為了這個平台創造了一個新字──chronobot，「chrono」代表時間，結合機器人的「robot」，產生這個字。在張系國的概念裡，chronobot代表的是電子布告欄（BBS）、部落格（Blog）和時間交換器（Time Exchanger）的綜合概念。
電子布告欄是最早的個人資訊的交換，「就好像從前看李濤的「全民開講」一樣，你罵我、我罵你，但問題卻沒有得到解答，」張系國提出這樣的妙喻，「不過現在「全民開講」的層次提高了，應該還可以快樂地再活一陣子，」張系國特別強調，他說的是「從前」的「全民開講」。
至於現在當紅的部落格，檔次就比電子布告欄高，「以前電子布告欄的版主只是提供一個讓大家鬥螇蟀的平台；部落格的主人自己必須有兩把刷子，」張系國強調，部落格提供的是個人化的知識及資訊，一定要有特色才能吸引人進去看。
至於天長地久計畫中的平台，則是電子布告欄、部落格、時間交換器的演化及組合，這裡面每個人要貢獻自己的力量（體力或腦力），而每個人的貢獻是以時間做為計算單位和衡量的標準。
計畫源自人文關懷
工研院經資中心產業分析師陳右怡，也曾是天長地久計畫團隊的成員，依據她的觀察，天長地久計畫絕對不是一項高科技的產品，而是張系國發自人文關懷的理念。
陳右怡指出，張系國看到許多人六十五歲，甚至六十歲就退休了，子女也長大了，成天待在家裡沒事做，他們的時間其實對社會還有大的價值；相對來說，這些老人也需要一些幫助，尤其是居家醫療照護。那麼，為什麼不建立一個時間交換的機制，既可以讓這些老人的力量釋放出來，又可以讓他們得到良好的照顧？
因此，天長地久計畫目前最主要的開發方向，是朝向社區老人服務應用，包括居家照護、健康檢測服務、送餐及陪伴就醫等方向的規劃。
最讓張系國感到欣慰的部分，就是這項計畫已經開始進行技術移轉給民間企業，由真茂科技在台北市大安區的民輝社區，進行老人送餐、居家照護等服務的試辦計畫。
真茂科技總經理林燕山，在創立真茂之前，曾經擔任過公辦民營的台北市社區工作會館館長，對社區整體營造的工作一直相當投入。
「我剛來台北的時候真是不敢相信，台北人怎麼那麼冷漠？」生長在嘉義農村的林燕山，談起三十多年前的往事，印象仍深刻，因為在他的家鄉，全村只有一支電話（更不用提網路），不論有什麼事，全村的人馬上就會知道，而且會馬上來幫忙。
因為對社區營造的熱情，林燕山和張系國的人文理念幾乎可說是一拍即合。現在在民輝社區，已經開始進行老人送餐服務，也開始試驗小規模的居家照護。
「時間」也能交換智慧
這個平台的概念是時間「交換」，那麼接受照護的老人要回饋什麼？因為老年人最寶貴的是他們的智慧，所以民輝社區成立網路虛擬教室，請老人教導書法、語文、口述歷史等等。
民輝社區的試辦計畫，在硬體部分是由資策會協助建置，資策會電子商務研究所主任邱宏昇表示，天長地久計畫應用在社區的老人照護，不只是要讓老人活得久，更要活得好、活得有尊嚴、活得有價值。
「居家照護的作用是以分散式取代集中式，」邱宏昇解釋，老人院、養生村這類的地方，讓一堆老人集中在一起，不管有病沒病，感覺還是像醫院；但是居家照護，可以讓老人回歸家庭，即使子女無暇照顧，也可以利用這個時間交換的平台，在有需要的時候得到幫助。
「這叫『在地安養』，是更進步的觀念！」邱宏昇興奮地表示。
下一步要做知識交換
「網路世界其實就是一個極大無比的腦！」時間交換的下一步，張系國想做的是知識的交換。
電通所邱運輸舉出一些結合時間與知識交換的可能，例如每年在德國漢諾威舉行的電腦展（CeBIT），各家廠商都會派出大批人力去搜集情資，如果有一個時間知識交換的平台，那麼就可以協調各家廠商分工合作、搜集資料，「省時、省力、省錢，而且得到的資訊還更多！」
邱運輸進一步指出，知識的累積其實是一種加值的過程，因為知識的價值會隨著時間而改變。一項知識在三年前知道的人不多，當時它的價值就高；但是一旦變成常識，它的價值就會下降。而這個知識交換的平台，就是要集眾人之力，提升知識的價值。
所謂知識價值的提升，就是除了知識本身之外，再加入意見、看法、評論等等，「這樣就可以形成一個神經網絡資料庫，而不是單純對與錯的東西，這種工作非集眾人之力無法完成，」邱運輸所強調的這個概念，也正是張系國所說的「極大無比的腦」，「這對free lance（自由工作者）來說，實在是太棒了！」張系國的語調高亢了起來。
天長地久才有力量
天長地久計畫始自於人性，當然最後也要回歸到人性。張系國強調，在時間的交換這個面向，最重要的就是trust（信任）這個要素，不然時間不像是金錢的借貸關係，有人借了不還怎麼辦？
「信任是用錢買不到的！」張系國特別指出，在網路的虛擬世界裡，人跟人不是實質上的接觸，所以「觀其言行」特別重要，就像你如果長時間看一個部落格，發現版主說的都是真話，長期下來就會建立對他的信任。
知識的交換是連接愈多的腦愈好；但是時間的交換可能只適用於實體社區，或是網路上的虛擬社群，也就是人口規模較小、同質性較高，而且比較有互信基礎的一群人。
真茂科技林燕山舉例，在民輝社區裡，有一個憂鬱症患者，需要送餐服務，可是一開始他抗拒別人的幫助，後來慢慢取得他的信任之後，現在他願意接納友善的援手，甚至還成了幫忙送餐的志工，「這不就是一個時間交換最好的例子嗎？我相信人心底的那一塊是可以激發出來的！」林燕山笑著說。
不論是時間還是知識的交換，最終的目標都要歸結到「天長地久」這四個字，因為這個計畫的目的是要建立一個時間及知識的ATM，透過這樣的一個平台機制，可以讓人類的時間及知識無窮地延續下去，讓無所不在的時間形成無所不能的力量！
操控時間是人類的大夢，即使權傾天下、富可敵國，也無法阻擋時間的洪流；
張系國在三十五年前的小說著作裡，描述了一個可以儲存和交換時間的機器
──天長地久計，這個過去是「狂想」的點子，今天有了實現的機會。
張彥文
「小姐，願不願意把妳的時間賣給我」？
1970年代的台北街頭，一個二十八歲、經過無數次失敗相親的未婚「老」小姐，在一個下雨的夜晚，碰到了一個很特別的計程車司機……。
「《夜曲》這本小說其實是一個浪漫的愛情故事，愛情就是把你的時間交給一個人，」有「科幻小說之父」稱號的張系國回憶，當年在一個雨夜，因為看到一個女孩子佇立街頭，感覺有些淒涼；又聯想到以前坐計程車時，看過「買賣各種名犬」的廣告，於是念頭一轉，「如果買賣的是時間呢？」
這個靈感成就了《夜曲》這部小說；三十五年後，張系國更帶領工研院和資策會等單位的團隊，把小說裡的概念付諸實現，而這個計畫的名稱，就用了《夜曲》裡面那個貯存時間的機器，叫做「天長地久計畫。」
chronobot時間交換平台
負責對外說明計畫內容的工研院電通所經理邱運輸表示，這個計畫其實是在一個社群與虛擬社區內互助合作的概念，將每一個人的時間量化，每個成員都有一個「時間碼表」，顯示借出或借入的時間。
舉例來說，一個學生正準備一篇報告，要找一個人花兩個小時協助他完成這項工作；他可以透過網路將這項需求送到平台，平台就會透過複雜的運算機制，找出符合需求的協助者。等到這篇報告完成後，這個提出需求學生的時間碼表就會變成「－2」，而幫助他的人則變成「＋2」。
張系國還為了這個平台創造了一個新字──chronobot，「chrono」代表時間，結合機器人的「robot」，產生這個字。在張系國的概念裡，chronobot代表的是電子布告欄（BBS）、部落格（Blog）和時間交換器（Time Exchanger）的綜合概念。
電子布告欄是最早的個人資訊的交換，「就好像從前看李濤的「全民開講」一樣，你罵我、我罵你，但問題卻沒有得到解答，」張系國提出這樣的妙喻，「不過現在「全民開講」的層次提高了，應該還可以快樂地再活一陣子，」張系國特別強調，他說的是「從前」的「全民開講」。
至於現在當紅的部落格，檔次就比電子布告欄高，「以前電子布告欄的版主只是提供一個讓大家鬥螇蟀的平台；部落格的主人自己必須有兩把刷子，」張系國強調，部落格提供的是個人化的知識及資訊，一定要有特色才能吸引人進去看。
至於天長地久計畫中的平台，則是電子布告欄、部落格、時間交換器的演化及組合，這裡面每個人要貢獻自己的力量（體力或腦力），而每個人的貢獻是以時間做為計算單位和衡量的標準。
計畫源自人文關懷
工研院經資中心產業分析師陳右怡，也曾是天長地久計畫團隊的成員，依據她的觀察，天長地久計畫絕對不是一項高科技的產品，而是張系國發自人文關懷的理念。
陳右怡指出，張系國看到許多人六十五歲，甚至六十歲就退休了，子女也長大了，成天待在家裡沒事做，他們的時間其實對社會還有大的價值；相對來說，這些老人也需要一些幫助，尤其是居家醫療照護。那麼，為什麼不建立一個時間交換的機制，既可以讓這些老人的力量釋放出來，又可以讓他們得到良好的照顧？
因此，天長地久計畫目前最主要的開發方向，是朝向社區老人服務應用，包括居家照護、健康檢測服務、送餐及陪伴就醫等方向的規劃。
最讓張系國感到欣慰的部分，就是這項計畫已經開始進行技術移轉給民間企業，由真茂科技在台北市大安區的民輝社區，進行老人送餐、居家照護等服務的試辦計畫。
真茂科技總經理林燕山，在創立真茂之前，曾經擔任過公辦民營的台北市社區工作會館館長，對社區整體營造的工作一直相當投入。
「我剛來台北的時候真是不敢相信，台北人怎麼那麼冷漠？」生長在嘉義農村的林燕山，談起三十多年前的往事，印象仍深刻，因為在他的家鄉，全村只有一支電話（更不用提網路），不論有什麼事，全村的人馬上就會知道，而且會馬上來幫忙。
因為對社區營造的熱情，林燕山和張系國的人文理念幾乎可說是一拍即合。現在在民輝社區，已經開始進行老人送餐服務，也開始試驗小規模的居家照護。
「時間」也能交換智慧
這個平台的概念是時間「交換」，那麼接受照護的老人要回饋什麼？因為老年人最寶貴的是他們的智慧，所以民輝社區成立網路虛擬教室，請老人教導書法、語文、口述歷史等等。
民輝社區的試辦計畫，在硬體部分是由資策會協助建置，資策會電子商務研究所主任邱宏昇表示，天長地久計畫應用在社區的老人照護，不只是要讓老人活得久，更要活得好、活得有尊嚴、活得有價值。
「居家照護的作用是以分散式取代集中式，」邱宏昇解釋，老人院、養生村這類的地方，讓一堆老人集中在一起，不管有病沒病，感覺還是像醫院；但是居家照護，可以讓老人回歸家庭，即使子女無暇照顧，也可以利用這個時間交換的平台，在有需要的時候得到幫助。
「這叫『在地安養』，是更進步的觀念！」邱宏昇興奮地表示。
下一步要做知識交換
「網路世界其實就是一個極大無比的腦！」時間交換的下一步，張系國想做的是知識的交換。
電通所邱運輸舉出一些結合時間與知識交換的可能，例如每年在德國漢諾威舉行的電腦展（CeBIT），各家廠商都會派出大批人力去搜集情資，如果有一個時間知識交換的平台，那麼就可以協調各家廠商分工合作、搜集資料，「省時、省力、省錢，而且得到的資訊還更多！」
邱運輸進一步指出，知識的累積其實是一種加值的過程，因為知識的價值會隨著時間而改變。一項知識在三年前知道的人不多，當時它的價值就高；但是一旦變成常識，它的價值就會下降。而這個知識交換的平台，就是要集眾人之力，提升知識的價值。
所謂知識價值的提升，就是除了知識本身之外，再加入意見、看法、評論等等，「這樣就可以形成一個神經網絡資料庫，而不是單純對與錯的東西，這種工作非集眾人之力無法完成，」邱運輸所強調的這個概念，也正是張系國所說的「極大無比的腦」，「這對free lance（自由工作者）來說，實在是太棒了！」張系國的語調高亢了起來。
天長地久才有力量
天長地久計畫始自於人性，當然最後也要回歸到人性。張系國強調，在時間的交換這個面向，最重要的就是trust（信任）這個要素，不然時間不像是金錢的借貸關係，有人借了不還怎麼辦？
「信任是用錢買不到的！」張系國特別指出，在網路的虛擬世界裡，人跟人不是實質上的接觸，所以「觀其言行」特別重要，就像你如果長時間看一個部落格，發現版主說的都是真話，長期下來就會建立對他的信任。
知識的交換是連接愈多的腦愈好；但是時間的交換可能只適用於實體社區，或是網路上的虛擬社群，也就是人口規模較小、同質性較高，而且比較有互信基礎的一群人。
真茂科技林燕山舉例，在民輝社區裡，有一個憂鬱症患者，需要送餐服務，可是一開始他抗拒別人的幫助，後來慢慢取得他的信任之後，現在他願意接納友善的援手，甚至還成了幫忙送餐的志工，「這不就是一個時間交換最好的例子嗎？我相信人心底的那一塊是可以激發出來的！」林燕山笑著說。
不論是時間還是知識的交換，最終的目標都要歸結到「天長地久」這四個字，因為這個計畫的目的是要建立一個時間及知識的ATM，透過這樣的一個平台機制，可以讓人類的時間及知識無窮地延續下去，讓無所不在的時間形成無所不能的力量！
Monday, September 05, 2005
液晶、電漿電視機大戰 硬碰硬
液晶、電漿電視機大戰 硬碰硬
■ 編譯劉道捷／綜合紐約四日外電報導
液晶顯示器（LCD）製造商不斷推出更大、更便宜的平面顯示器，已對目前由電漿電視主宰的40吋以上大型電視市場構成威脅，但松下、先鋒等電漿電視主力廠絕不會示弱，這場電視大戰勢必愈演愈烈。
商業周刊報導，南韓、日本與台灣液晶顯示器公司為爭奪全球電視市場，競相興建巨型面板廠，樂金飛利浦計畫十年內，要在坡州市投資250億美元，把七代面板廠擴建八倍。南韓三星電子計畫投資200億美元，擴建大邱的液晶顯示器廠。日本夏普公司的面板廠明年10月完工後，要生產的面板比坡州廠的產品還大。台灣的友達、奇美電等，在這場面板之爭中也不落人後。
液晶面板業者競相蓋新廠，對消費者未來十年要用的電視機，具有驚人的影響。液晶顯示器廠生產的玻璃基板愈大，所能切割的電視面板愈多、愈大，例如，六代面板只能切割三片42吋面板，七代廠生產的基板卻可以切割成七片。生產力如此激增，已經動搖電視產業，每次新一代的工廠出現，都會提高效能，降低成本，例如，比較小的20吋液晶電視機價格已經從2000年的5,000多美元，跌到只剩600美元。價格下跌促使平板電視市場急速擴大，市調業者 DisplaySearch公司預測，今年平板電視市場規模會提高到2,660萬台。新產能開始生產，使廠商的利潤走軟，不過分析師預期面板廠的獲利明年會反彈。
七代面板廠出現，代表大型液晶平板電視逐漸普及，開始侵入到目前為止由電漿電視主宰的40吋以上大型電視市場，威脅靠電漿電視發跡的松下電器與先鋒公司，預期雙方會有一場苦戰。
目前電漿電視控制世界40吋以上大型電視市場的88%。占有全球大型電視市場四分之一的松下電器毫不讓步，計畫投資8.6億美元，在日本關西地區擴建電漿電視廠，估計今年可生產210萬台電漿電視。占有世界大型電視市場8%的先鋒公司也計畫擴廠增產。
去年平板電視市場規模達到210億美元，利益龐大，競爭因此日趨激烈。例如，夏普從8月1日起推出液晶平板電視，對手松下20多天後，就推出價格較低的同尺寸電漿電視產品。雖然電漿電視廠商勇敢面對競爭，卻已經放棄32吋電視機市場，到最後，電漿電視可能放棄50吋以下產品，專攻超大型電視機市場。但分析師指出，三年內，預期液晶面板會全面占優勢，因為液晶面板每年有2億片電腦螢幕市場支持，還有眾多產品應用，不像電漿電視大致只能用在電視機上。
【2005/09/05 經濟日報】
■ 編譯劉道捷／綜合紐約四日外電報導
液晶顯示器（LCD）製造商不斷推出更大、更便宜的平面顯示器，已對目前由電漿電視主宰的40吋以上大型電視市場構成威脅，但松下、先鋒等電漿電視主力廠絕不會示弱，這場電視大戰勢必愈演愈烈。
商業周刊報導，南韓、日本與台灣液晶顯示器公司為爭奪全球電視市場，競相興建巨型面板廠，樂金飛利浦計畫十年內，要在坡州市投資250億美元，把七代面板廠擴建八倍。南韓三星電子計畫投資200億美元，擴建大邱的液晶顯示器廠。日本夏普公司的面板廠明年10月完工後，要生產的面板比坡州廠的產品還大。台灣的友達、奇美電等，在這場面板之爭中也不落人後。
液晶面板業者競相蓋新廠，對消費者未來十年要用的電視機，具有驚人的影響。液晶顯示器廠生產的玻璃基板愈大，所能切割的電視面板愈多、愈大，例如，六代面板只能切割三片42吋面板，七代廠生產的基板卻可以切割成七片。生產力如此激增，已經動搖電視產業，每次新一代的工廠出現，都會提高效能，降低成本，例如，比較小的20吋液晶電視機價格已經從2000年的5,000多美元，跌到只剩600美元。價格下跌促使平板電視市場急速擴大，市調業者 DisplaySearch公司預測，今年平板電視市場規模會提高到2,660萬台。新產能開始生產，使廠商的利潤走軟，不過分析師預期面板廠的獲利明年會反彈。
七代面板廠出現，代表大型液晶平板電視逐漸普及，開始侵入到目前為止由電漿電視主宰的40吋以上大型電視市場，威脅靠電漿電視發跡的松下電器與先鋒公司，預期雙方會有一場苦戰。
目前電漿電視控制世界40吋以上大型電視市場的88%。占有全球大型電視市場四分之一的松下電器毫不讓步，計畫投資8.6億美元，在日本關西地區擴建電漿電視廠，估計今年可生產210萬台電漿電視。占有世界大型電視市場8%的先鋒公司也計畫擴廠增產。
去年平板電視市場規模達到210億美元，利益龐大，競爭因此日趨激烈。例如，夏普從8月1日起推出液晶平板電視，對手松下20多天後，就推出價格較低的同尺寸電漿電視產品。雖然電漿電視廠商勇敢面對競爭，卻已經放棄32吋電視機市場，到最後，電漿電視可能放棄50吋以下產品，專攻超大型電視機市場。但分析師指出，三年內，預期液晶面板會全面占優勢，因為液晶面板每年有2億片電腦螢幕市場支持，還有眾多產品應用，不像電漿電視大致只能用在電視機上。
【2005/09/05 經濟日報】
Thursday, August 18, 2005
TiVo Adds Features to Make Advertising More Interactive
http://www.tivo.com/0.0.asp
這是一家很有創意的公司，他生產的數位電視機上盒有很多有趣的功能，比方說利用cable或者衛星天線來搜尋你要的美國節目，然後download到機上盒的硬碟中，重點是他還可以幫你做節目的剪接讓惱人的廣告節目消失，但是另一面他們似乎也嘗試讓廣告更有效率。另外平時，也可以將機上盒的變成一台電視節目錄影機。
我在patent explorer中發現這家公司的硬碟技術是跟Maxtor一起合作，其他的遙控與設備技術似乎也算是完整，所以在技術上，這種設備的技術性應該可以說算成熟了。比較值得注意的是他未來的service端是不是能夠得到各大電視台的青睞。
某程度上，我覺得這項產品會瓜分掉Blockbuster的市場，同時會擠壓到Apple將i-pod影像化的利潤。
TiVo Adds Features to Make Advertising More Interactive
A WALL STREET JOURNAL ONLINE NEWS ROUNDUP
July 18, 2005 10:09 a.m.
Digital video-recording company TiVo Inc., famous for helping customers skip commercials on their favorite television programs, is taking steps to encourage viewers to watch them.
TiVo, based in Alviso, Calif., announced plans to insert symbols that identify advertisers during commercial breaks, making them more visible even when a customer is fast forwarding through them. Advertisers who sponsor TiVo's "ad tags" can include additional graphics, such as their corporate logos, to the pop-ups. Moreover, the pop-up tags now will be able to lead viewers to additional content, such as infomercials, movie trailers and even mailings.
The company said General Motors Corp. and the WB Television Network will be the first to use the new features. Starting this week, TiVo users who see GM's commercials for OnStar, GMC, Chevrolet or Saturn will see a branded pop-up tag that leads them to special promotional footage or lets them request additional information directly from GM. Viewers who want to follow through won't need to press more than a few buttons or type in their addresses or phone numbers since TiVo already has them on file and can supply them to GM.
But encouraging TiVo customers to download ads could be a tough sell, analysts have predicted. People subscribe to TiVo's service, which allows customers to make video recordings of their favorite TV shows, precisely to avoid commercials.
The new commercial strategy is the latest attempt by TiVo to generate ad revenue for the company, which has yet to turn a profit since its founding in 1997. TiVo said it developed the new features in response to feedback from advertisers. "This is an important growth area for TiVo. These sorts of products are what will get us there," said Kimber Sterling, TiVo's director of advertising and research sales. TiVo's enhanced advertising functions will let it accommodate more advertisers, he added.
The company hasn't divulged how much it has made from advertising, but has emphasized its growing importance. TiVo's focus on advertising is in stark contrast with earlier fears that the company's technology -- which lets viewers skip over commercials -- would make traditional TV advertising irrelevant. TiVo has capitalized on its interactive abilities to create advertising that's more targeted. It also has highlighted its ability to track viewer response to commercials and programs in more detail than traditional TV ads. The company can combine user data as detailed as how often viewers rewind or fast-forward through a particular scene in a show or commercial. These functions make it easier for advertisers to see how their investment is paying off, TiVo says.
Despite the company's loyal following of 3.3 million subscribers, TiVo has labored to increase its subscriber base. In its first-quarter report in May, TiVo reported a loss of $857,000. The company has said it expects to reach profitability in the fourth quarter.
這是一家很有創意的公司，他生產的數位電視機上盒有很多有趣的功能，比方說利用cable或者衛星天線來搜尋你要的美國節目，然後download到機上盒的硬碟中，重點是他還可以幫你做節目的剪接讓惱人的廣告節目消失，但是另一面他們似乎也嘗試讓廣告更有效率。另外平時，也可以將機上盒的變成一台電視節目錄影機。
我在patent explorer中發現這家公司的硬碟技術是跟Maxtor一起合作，其他的遙控與設備技術似乎也算是完整，所以在技術上，這種設備的技術性應該可以說算成熟了。比較值得注意的是他未來的service端是不是能夠得到各大電視台的青睞。
某程度上，我覺得這項產品會瓜分掉Blockbuster的市場，同時會擠壓到Apple將i-pod影像化的利潤。
TiVo Adds Features to Make Advertising More Interactive
A WALL STREET JOURNAL ONLINE NEWS ROUNDUP
July 18, 2005 10:09 a.m.
Digital video-recording company TiVo Inc., famous for helping customers skip commercials on their favorite television programs, is taking steps to encourage viewers to watch them.
TiVo, based in Alviso, Calif., announced plans to insert symbols that identify advertisers during commercial breaks, making them more visible even when a customer is fast forwarding through them. Advertisers who sponsor TiVo's "ad tags" can include additional graphics, such as their corporate logos, to the pop-ups. Moreover, the pop-up tags now will be able to lead viewers to additional content, such as infomercials, movie trailers and even mailings.
The company said General Motors Corp. and the WB Television Network will be the first to use the new features. Starting this week, TiVo users who see GM's commercials for OnStar, GMC, Chevrolet or Saturn will see a branded pop-up tag that leads them to special promotional footage or lets them request additional information directly from GM. Viewers who want to follow through won't need to press more than a few buttons or type in their addresses or phone numbers since TiVo already has them on file and can supply them to GM.
But encouraging TiVo customers to download ads could be a tough sell, analysts have predicted. People subscribe to TiVo's service, which allows customers to make video recordings of their favorite TV shows, precisely to avoid commercials.
The new commercial strategy is the latest attempt by TiVo to generate ad revenue for the company, which has yet to turn a profit since its founding in 1997. TiVo said it developed the new features in response to feedback from advertisers. "This is an important growth area for TiVo. These sorts of products are what will get us there," said Kimber Sterling, TiVo's director of advertising and research sales. TiVo's enhanced advertising functions will let it accommodate more advertisers, he added.
The company hasn't divulged how much it has made from advertising, but has emphasized its growing importance. TiVo's focus on advertising is in stark contrast with earlier fears that the company's technology -- which lets viewers skip over commercials -- would make traditional TV advertising irrelevant. TiVo has capitalized on its interactive abilities to create advertising that's more targeted. It also has highlighted its ability to track viewer response to commercials and programs in more detail than traditional TV ads. The company can combine user data as detailed as how often viewers rewind or fast-forward through a particular scene in a show or commercial. These functions make it easier for advertisers to see how their investment is paying off, TiVo says.
Despite the company's loyal following of 3.3 million subscribers, TiVo has labored to increase its subscriber base. In its first-quarter report in May, TiVo reported a loss of $857,000. The company has said it expects to reach profitability in the fourth quarter.
Monday, August 15, 2005
Microsoft beats Apple to punch on key iPod patent
By TODD BISHOP
SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER REPORTER
Apple Computer's iconic iPod still has the huge advantage in the market -- but rival Microsoft suddenly has some bragging rights in the patent office.
Creating a surprise twist in the portable music wars, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office has denied Apple's application to patent its method of using hierarchical menus to navigate through the iPod's contents.
The basis for the denial: A similar method outlined in a Microsoft researcher's patent application, filed after the iPod was introduced but before Apple sought its own patent.
"I'm sure there's a certain amount of glee among Microsoft executives," said analyst Michael Gartenberg, research director at Jupiter Research. The situation has to be "somewhat frustrating" for Apple executives, he said.
For now, the outcome is uncertain. Apple plans to appeal the ruling, and even if it's upheld, a Microsoft official pointed out that the two companies have a tradition of licensing patented technology to each other.
But analysts said the situation could prove troublesome to Apple. The company would no doubt prefer to avoid paying royalties to its rival, especially in a field Apple popularized.
"It's incredibly embarrassing," said industry analyst Rob Enderle. "That just makes it look like someone at Apple wasn't on the ball in terms of filing the patent at the right time."
But the practical implications may be less significant. Although the Apple patent application at issue focuses on the on-screen menu, many other factors -- including the device's distinctive click wheel and its general trendiness -- also have contributed to the iPod's success.
In a statement on the issue yesterday, Apple spokeswoman Natalie Kerris said the company "invented and publicly released the iPod interface before the Microsoft patent application" cited by the patent office in its ruling.
"Apple has received many patents for inventions related to iPod, and has many more patents pending," Kerris said. "The U.S. patent process is often a lengthy one, involving much back and forth with the U.S. patent office. Apple will continue to pursue this patent application, as well as the many others covering iPod innovations."
The initial rejection of Apple's patent, and the approval of Microsoft's patent, could make it possible for other device makers to more closely follow the on-screen design of the iPod in their own music players. Microsoft works with hardware companies, including Royal Philips Electronics, Samsung Electronics, iRiver and others who use its digital-music software.
Regardless of the outcome, Microsoft doesn't intend to try to block Apple from the market, said David Kaefer, business development director for Microsoft's intellectual property and licensing group.
"We have a long-standing practice of licensing things to Apple and licensing Apple's patents to use in our products," Kaefer said. "Our approach is to recognize that, frankly, we're both mutually dependent on the good ideas of one another."
Apple has ridden the popularity of the iPod to dominance in the digital music field, leaving Microsoft and its hardware partners struggling to catch up. And the stakes go beyond digital music. A Microsoft Windows executive, Will Poole, acknowledged last month that the popularity of the iPod is generating new interest among consumers in Apple's rival Macintosh computers.
The first iPod was introduced in 2001. Apple's patent application for the on-screen menu was filed a year later, in October 2002, according to patent records. The inventors listed on the application include Apple Chief Executive Steve Jobs.
In the meantime, in May 2002, John Platt, a Microsoft researcher, had filed his own application for "auto playlist generation with multiple seed songs." That application has received preliminary approval, pending the completion of final paperwork.
The patent examiner on the Apple case cited Platt's pending patent repeatedly in last month's written decision, saying it precluded approval of the Apple application. Patent language can often be interpreted in multiple ways, and Apple had disputed the examiner's view of the similarities between the applications. But he wrote that he disagreed with the company's analysis.
News of the Apple patent rejection first surfaced in an online report by AppleInsider.com earlier this week.
While it's possible that Apple could ultimately be required to license rights to Microsoft's patent, the issue isn't as clear cut as seeing which company filed its patent application first, said Rob Merges, a UC-Berkeley law professor who specializes in patent issues. What matters instead in the U.S. system is determining who came up with the idea first.
But even if Microsoft prevails in the patent process, it probably wouldn't be in the company's interests to hold Apple's feet to the fire, Merges said.
"If Microsoft plays hardball with this one, Apple may play hardball with the next one, and that's not a good thing" for Microsoft, he said.
The iPod accounts for 75 percent of all MP3 players sold in the United States, according to the NPD Group Inc. Apple has shipped 21.8 million iPods since Jobs introduced the player in October 2001, with 18.1 million units sold in the last four quarters alone.
Ultimately, if Microsoft is to prevail over the iPod in the digital-music market, it will have to work with its hardware partners to come out with more compelling devices, and to give a clearer message to consumers, Jupiter Research's Gartenberg said.
"Microsoft can declare this as somewhat of a minor victory," Gartenberg said. But "at the end of the day, it's going to take an awful lot more than this to unseat Apple from their position."
1. 從Microsoft的發言來看，這似乎是個擦槍走火的事件，並非微軟刻意的佈局，但是這不單事關ipod的專利金支付與否的問題，而且也影響到Apple已經建立了ipod的品牌王國的根基。
2. Apple應該是違反了non-obvious，申請的過程中，examer可能將Microsoft的patent視為prior art，而 i pod上的 click wheel與新穎的設計不足以構成non-obvious的要項。 Apple patent的構成由於寫的太貼近在"menu"上的設計，這與Microsoft的patent相似，因此被退件。 如果apple的patent重新強調新穎的設計，恐怕還是會落在Microsoft的陰影底下，畢竟這樣的寫法只會保護到"設計"的部分，"曲目選擇系統"恐怕還是侵權的。
3. 所以我很期待看到Apple的法務人員將會怎麼寫法，讓patent的claim能夠涵蓋到曲目系統的部分但是又不涉及侵權。若Apple要在Novelty上對Microsoft的專利上做超越，恐怕ipod會有截然不同的設計出現，屆時可能ipod又會出現升級版了。
Apple ipod的專利
Title：Graphical user interface and methods of use thereof in a multimedia player
Assignee Name and Adress: Apple Computer, Inc.
Inventors: Robbin, Jeffrey L.; (Los Altos, CA) ; Jobs, Steve; (Palo Alto, CA) ; Wasko, Timothy; (High River, CA)
Abstract：
In a portable multimedia device, a method, apparatus, and system for providing user supplied configuration data are described. In one embodiment, a hierarchically ordered graphical user interface are provided. A first order, or home, interface provides a highest order of user selectable items each of which, when selected, results in an automatic transition to a lower order user interface associated with the selected item. In one of the described embodiments, the lower order interface includes other user selectable items associated with the previously selected item from the higher order user interface.
專利連結：http://appft1.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-bool.html&r=1&f=G&l=50&co1=AND&d=PG01&s1=%22Jobs%2C+Steve%22.IN.&OS=IN/
Microsoft的patent
（奇怪的是，這篇patent居然以個人名義申請，沒有以Microsoft為assignee做為申請人？這令我百思不解？）
Title：Auto playlist generation with multiple seed songs
Inventors：Platt, John C.; (Bellevue, WA)
Abstract：
The present invention relates to systems and/or methods that generate playlist(s) for a library or collection of media items via selecting a plurality of seed items, at least one of which is an undesirable seed item. Some of the seed items are desirable indicating that a user prefers additional media items similar to the desirable seed items and others are undesirable indicating that the user prefers additional media items dissimilar to the undesirable seed items. Additionally, the seed items can be weighted to establish a relative importance of the seed items. The invention compares media items in the collection with the seed items and determines which media items are added into the playlist by computation of similarity metrics or values. The playlist can be regenerated by adding desirable seed items to the playlist and removing media items from the playlist (e.g., undesirable seed items).
專利連結：http://appft1.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-adv.html&r=1&f=G&l=50&d=PG01&S1=%28%22Auto+playlist%22.TTL.%29&OS=TTL/"Auto+playlist"&RS=TTL/"Auto+playlist"
Saturday, August 13, 2005
智慧機器人產值 三年後300億
智慧機器人產值 三年後300億
■ 記者黃玉珍／台北報導
行政院2005年產業科技策略會議（SRB會議）訂於8月15日起一連舉行四天，首度以「便利新科技，智慧好生活」為主題。行政院政務委員林逢慶表示， SRB會議強調科技與生活的結合，並帶動相關產業提高產值，其中，智慧型機器人產業的產值，2008年的目標是要達到300億元。
「便利新科技」方面，分別選定「軟性電子產品」、「 RFID產業應用」以及「奈米科技生活化」為三大子題。其中軟性電子的未來商機龐大，將朝向可繞式的電子元件發展，包括智慧卡、可撓式電子書、電子報紙、超薄手機、腕帶式數位錶等軟性電子先驅產品的設計，預期未來對全球資訊通信產業將有革命性變革。林逢慶強調，我國可利用兩個優勢產業半導體和平面顯示器為基礎，發展成為全球軟電技術與應用的研發及設計中心，儘早取得國際領先優勢。
RFID技術可應用於食衣住行育樂等各種生活層面，創造一種無所不在、快速又安全的優質生活。林逢慶表示，我國的發展願景是透過公領域RFID應用及民間RFID旗艦應用計畫，帶動台灣RFID整合性產品產業的發展。
林逢慶指出，奈米科技是21世紀科技產業發展最主要的核心技術，將是下一波改變我們生活的新科技。我國在2003年投入206億元，進行六年期的奈米國家型科技計畫。國內投入奈米科技的公司至少250家以上，預期台灣將因新一代奈米技術產品的導入研究，使我國傳統產業再造新契機。
「智慧好生活」議題將討論「智慧型機器人產業」、「智慧化車輛產業」，以及「智慧化居住空間」等三個子題。林逢慶說，智慧型機器人將分三階段發展，現階段至2008年，預估產值將達300億元，政府將以建置產業環境、創造市場以及擴展優勢產業為推動目標，發展的產品領域將以導覽服務、休閒娛樂、家庭服務以及生產製造為重點。
未來也將透過智慧車輛與汽車電子科技的研發，徹底顛覆一般人對汽車只是代步工具的傳統印象，會中將討論智慧化車輛產業發展策略，期以帶動人、車、環境資訊的便利，有效處理道路擁擠、停車及道路救援等問題，達到智慧好生活的目標。
【2005/08/13 經濟日報】
■ 記者黃玉珍／台北報導
行政院2005年產業科技策略會議（SRB會議）訂於8月15日起一連舉行四天，首度以「便利新科技，智慧好生活」為主題。行政院政務委員林逢慶表示， SRB會議強調科技與生活的結合，並帶動相關產業提高產值，其中，智慧型機器人產業的產值，2008年的目標是要達到300億元。
「便利新科技」方面，分別選定「軟性電子產品」、「 RFID產業應用」以及「奈米科技生活化」為三大子題。其中軟性電子的未來商機龐大，將朝向可繞式的電子元件發展，包括智慧卡、可撓式電子書、電子報紙、超薄手機、腕帶式數位錶等軟性電子先驅產品的設計，預期未來對全球資訊通信產業將有革命性變革。林逢慶強調，我國可利用兩個優勢產業半導體和平面顯示器為基礎，發展成為全球軟電技術與應用的研發及設計中心，儘早取得國際領先優勢。
RFID技術可應用於食衣住行育樂等各種生活層面，創造一種無所不在、快速又安全的優質生活。林逢慶表示，我國的發展願景是透過公領域RFID應用及民間RFID旗艦應用計畫，帶動台灣RFID整合性產品產業的發展。
林逢慶指出，奈米科技是21世紀科技產業發展最主要的核心技術，將是下一波改變我們生活的新科技。我國在2003年投入206億元，進行六年期的奈米國家型科技計畫。國內投入奈米科技的公司至少250家以上，預期台灣將因新一代奈米技術產品的導入研究，使我國傳統產業再造新契機。
「智慧好生活」議題將討論「智慧型機器人產業」、「智慧化車輛產業」，以及「智慧化居住空間」等三個子題。林逢慶說，智慧型機器人將分三階段發展，現階段至2008年，預估產值將達300億元，政府將以建置產業環境、創造市場以及擴展優勢產業為推動目標，發展的產品領域將以導覽服務、休閒娛樂、家庭服務以及生產製造為重點。
未來也將透過智慧車輛與汽車電子科技的研發，徹底顛覆一般人對汽車只是代步工具的傳統印象，會中將討論智慧化車輛產業發展策略，期以帶動人、車、環境資訊的便利，有效處理道路擁擠、停車及道路救援等問題，達到智慧好生活的目標。
【2005/08/13 經濟日報】
Wednesday, August 10, 2005
Fusion power - Wasting money on fusion
源自經濟學人的文章
這篇有些重點真的很不錯，比方說
1. "Like the International Space Station, therefore, ITER is at bottom a political animal."
這是在NIS系統觀滿常見的問題，joint research很容易有"留一手"的問題，如同Euro fighter的研發案，最後EU各國都留了一手，如何去解決technology diffusion與regimes的互動問題，可能會是以後擴張NIS的boundary到global perspective時，必須要面對的問題。
2. Fusion的研究費用是否有價值，這也是可以去重新評估的。不過與其以成本去估算這些研究價值，更值得的關心的是fusion power是否可以給我們更多的外部效益？
A step towards commercial fusion power. Perhaps
Get article background
THIS week, an international project to build a nuclear-fusion reactor came a step closer to reality when politicians agreed it should be constructed in France rather than in Japan, the other country lobbying to host it. The estimated cost is $12 billion, making it one of the most expensive scientific projects around—comparable financially with the International Space Station. It is scheduled to run for 30 years, which is handy since, for the past half century, fusion advocates have claimed that achieving commercial nuclear fusion is 30 years away.
The International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor (ITER), as the project is known, is intended to be the final proving step before a commercial fusion reactor is built. It would demonstrate that power can be generated using the energy released when two light atomic nuclei are brought together to make a heavier one—a process similar to the one that powers the sun and other stars.
Advocates of fusion point to its alleged advantages over other forms of power generation. It is efficient, so only small quantities of fuel are needed. Unlike existing nuclear reactors, which produce nasty long-lived radioactive waste, the radioactive processes involved with fusion are relatively short-lived and the waste products benign. Unlike fossil-fuel plants, there are no carbon-dioxide emissions. And the principal fuel, a heavy isotope of hydrogen called deuterium, is present in ordinary water, of which there is no shortage.
The challenges of achieving fusion should not be underestimated. A large volume of gas must be heated to a temperature above that found at the centre of the sun. At the same time, that gas must be prevented from touching the walls of the reactor by confining it in a powerful magnetic field known as a magnetic bottle. The energy released in fusion is carried mostly by neutrons, a type of subatomic particle that has no electric charge and hence cannot be confined by the magnetic bottle. Ensuring that the reactor wall can cope with being bombarded by these neutrons presents a further challenge.
The costs involved are immense. The budget for ITER involves spending $5 billion on construction, $5 billion on operating costs over 20 years and more than $1 billion on decommissioning. Yet the reason why taxpayers should spend such sums is unclear. The world is not short of energy. Climate change can be addressed without recourse to generating power from fusion since there are already many alternatives to fossil-fuel power plants. And $12 billion could buy an awful lot of research into those alternatives.
Part of the reason why commercial fusion reactors have always been 30 years away is that increasing the size of the reactors to something big enough to be a power plant proved harder than foreseen. But fusion aficionados also blame a lack of urgency for the slow progress, claiming that at least 15 years have been lost because of delays in decision-making and what they regard as inadequate funding.
There is some truth in this argument. ITER is a joint project between America, most of the European Union, Japan, China, Russia and South Korea. For the past 18 months, work was at a standstill while the member states wrangled over where to site the reactor in what was generally recognised as a proxy for the debate over the war in Iraq. America was thought to support the placing of ITER in Japan in return for Japan's support in that war. Meanwhile, the Russians and Chinese were supporting France which, like them, opposed the American-led invasion. That France was eventually chosen owes much to the fact that the European Union promised to support a suitable Japanese candidate as the next director general of ITER.
Like the International Space Station, ITER had its origins in the superpower politics of the 1980s that brought the cold war to its end as Russia and the West groped around for things they could collaborate on. Like the International Space Station, therefore, ITER is at bottom a political animal. And, like the International Space Station, the scientific reasons for developing it are almost non-existent. They cannot justify the price.
這篇有些重點真的很不錯，比方說
1. "Like the International Space Station, therefore, ITER is at bottom a political animal."
這是在NIS系統觀滿常見的問題，joint research很容易有"留一手"的問題，如同Euro fighter的研發案，最後EU各國都留了一手，如何去解決technology diffusion與regimes的互動問題，可能會是以後擴張NIS的boundary到global perspective時，必須要面對的問題。
2. Fusion的研究費用是否有價值，這也是可以去重新評估的。不過與其以成本去估算這些研究價值，更值得的關心的是fusion power是否可以給我們更多的外部效益？
A step towards commercial fusion power. Perhaps
Get article background
THIS week, an international project to build a nuclear-fusion reactor came a step closer to reality when politicians agreed it should be constructed in France rather than in Japan, the other country lobbying to host it. The estimated cost is $12 billion, making it one of the most expensive scientific projects around—comparable financially with the International Space Station. It is scheduled to run for 30 years, which is handy since, for the past half century, fusion advocates have claimed that achieving commercial nuclear fusion is 30 years away.
The International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor (ITER), as the project is known, is intended to be the final proving step before a commercial fusion reactor is built. It would demonstrate that power can be generated using the energy released when two light atomic nuclei are brought together to make a heavier one—a process similar to the one that powers the sun and other stars.
Advocates of fusion point to its alleged advantages over other forms of power generation. It is efficient, so only small quantities of fuel are needed. Unlike existing nuclear reactors, which produce nasty long-lived radioactive waste, the radioactive processes involved with fusion are relatively short-lived and the waste products benign. Unlike fossil-fuel plants, there are no carbon-dioxide emissions. And the principal fuel, a heavy isotope of hydrogen called deuterium, is present in ordinary water, of which there is no shortage.
The challenges of achieving fusion should not be underestimated. A large volume of gas must be heated to a temperature above that found at the centre of the sun. At the same time, that gas must be prevented from touching the walls of the reactor by confining it in a powerful magnetic field known as a magnetic bottle. The energy released in fusion is carried mostly by neutrons, a type of subatomic particle that has no electric charge and hence cannot be confined by the magnetic bottle. Ensuring that the reactor wall can cope with being bombarded by these neutrons presents a further challenge.
The costs involved are immense. The budget for ITER involves spending $5 billion on construction, $5 billion on operating costs over 20 years and more than $1 billion on decommissioning. Yet the reason why taxpayers should spend such sums is unclear. The world is not short of energy. Climate change can be addressed without recourse to generating power from fusion since there are already many alternatives to fossil-fuel power plants. And $12 billion could buy an awful lot of research into those alternatives.
Part of the reason why commercial fusion reactors have always been 30 years away is that increasing the size of the reactors to something big enough to be a power plant proved harder than foreseen. But fusion aficionados also blame a lack of urgency for the slow progress, claiming that at least 15 years have been lost because of delays in decision-making and what they regard as inadequate funding.
There is some truth in this argument. ITER is a joint project between America, most of the European Union, Japan, China, Russia and South Korea. For the past 18 months, work was at a standstill while the member states wrangled over where to site the reactor in what was generally recognised as a proxy for the debate over the war in Iraq. America was thought to support the placing of ITER in Japan in return for Japan's support in that war. Meanwhile, the Russians and Chinese were supporting France which, like them, opposed the American-led invasion. That France was eventually chosen owes much to the fact that the European Union promised to support a suitable Japanese candidate as the next director general of ITER.
Like the International Space Station, ITER had its origins in the superpower politics of the 1980s that brought the cold war to its end as Russia and the West groped around for things they could collaborate on. Like the International Space Station, therefore, ITER is at bottom a political animal. And, like the International Space Station, the scientific reasons for developing it are almost non-existent. They cannot justify the price.
Tuesday, August 09, 2005
資訊業 搶進第4C產業
資訊業 搶進第4C產業
■ 記者 何佩儒
台灣硬體製造代工業者在主機板、筆記型電腦等領域，拿到超過八成的全球市占率後，亟思新的市場大餅。汽車零組件及汽車電子產業，已吸引資訊業者目光，成為資訊業者發展3C產業以外的新興第4C產業。
3C產業是多數資訊業者發展訂單的主軸，這3C包括電腦（Computer）、通訊（Communication）及消費性電子（Consumer Electronics）商品，現在有了第4C汽車（Car），而且是電子業的龍頭大哥鴻海及廣達帶頭投入。
包括鴻海透過旗下的鴻揚創投，收購大型汽車線束廠安泰電業100%股權，廣達也已成立汽車電子部門。
今年電電公會更首度成立汽車電子委員會，由理事長許勝雄親自率團，前往大陸參加中國汽車及零組件產業發展國際論壇，拜會中國第一汽車集團等，爭取龐大的汽車零組件及汽車電子商機。
儘管全球汽車產業已相當成熟，但因成本及獲利考量下，車廠的自製率降低，對外採購零組件的比率提升，零組件廠也從過去的代工角色，逐漸成為車廠的研發夥伴。
尤其是汽車內的電子產品日益多元，自然吸引資訊業者目光，從影音系統的螢幕、天線、音響揚聲器、DVD播放器、導航裝置、藍芽無線裝置，甚至車上遊戲機、行車電腦、照明系統、先進後視鏡、電動門窗車用半導體和感測器等，都是資訊業者可以切入的領域。
汽車電子產品將是汽車產業中成長最快速的項目，也是台灣資訊電子產業的下一個重要舞台。找到正確的敲門磚，進入汽車產業的供應鏈體系，是資訊業者最大的挑戰。
【2005/08/09 經濟日報】
■ 記者 何佩儒
台灣硬體製造代工業者在主機板、筆記型電腦等領域，拿到超過八成的全球市占率後，亟思新的市場大餅。汽車零組件及汽車電子產業，已吸引資訊業者目光，成為資訊業者發展3C產業以外的新興第4C產業。
3C產業是多數資訊業者發展訂單的主軸，這3C包括電腦（Computer）、通訊（Communication）及消費性電子（Consumer Electronics）商品，現在有了第4C汽車（Car），而且是電子業的龍頭大哥鴻海及廣達帶頭投入。
包括鴻海透過旗下的鴻揚創投，收購大型汽車線束廠安泰電業100%股權，廣達也已成立汽車電子部門。
今年電電公會更首度成立汽車電子委員會，由理事長許勝雄親自率團，前往大陸參加中國汽車及零組件產業發展國際論壇，拜會中國第一汽車集團等，爭取龐大的汽車零組件及汽車電子商機。
儘管全球汽車產業已相當成熟，但因成本及獲利考量下，車廠的自製率降低，對外採購零組件的比率提升，零組件廠也從過去的代工角色，逐漸成為車廠的研發夥伴。
尤其是汽車內的電子產品日益多元，自然吸引資訊業者目光，從影音系統的螢幕、天線、音響揚聲器、DVD播放器、導航裝置、藍芽無線裝置，甚至車上遊戲機、行車電腦、照明系統、先進後視鏡、電動門窗車用半導體和感測器等，都是資訊業者可以切入的領域。
汽車電子產品將是汽車產業中成長最快速的項目，也是台灣資訊電子產業的下一個重要舞台。找到正確的敲門磚，進入汽車產業的供應鏈體系，是資訊業者最大的挑戰。
【2005/08/09 經濟日報】
台灣土地的病情應該講清楚
科學人特別報導】
專訪環保署長張國龍：「台灣土地的病情應該講清楚」
環保署長張國龍，長期投入台灣環保運動。如今，從社運團體到中央部會，如何在環保署施展所長，在部會間如何折衝協調，是他最大的挑戰。
採訪＼李家維、王榮文 整理＼鄭靜琪【更多精采內容在本期科學人雜誌】
科學人封面故事
以下是《科學人》雜誌發行人王榮文與總編輯李家維的訪談紀要：
李家維：您是一位物理學者，同時又長期關心台灣環境保護，現在被任命為環保署長，領導一個重要的中央部會。您有什麼樣的特質，會讓政府對您信任、讓民眾對您有信心？
張國龍：做為一個科學人，在背景的訓練，以及對問題的解決，要比其他不同行業的訓練要好得多。不只台灣的環保署長找科學人來做，美國也一樣找科學人來做，全世界很多重要的OECD（經濟合作暨發展組織）國家，很多環保的中央業務，也都找科學人來負責。
台灣面臨的問題，比世界上其他地方更棘手，而且困難度更高，迫切性更嚴重，原因是西方國家追求經濟的成長，從工業革命到今天，有200多年的時間讓他們調適，發現什麼地方有不妥，可透過自我約束的調整機制，穩穩的往前跨步。
台灣沒有這個機會。外國200多年的經驗，我們用二、三十年的時間就濃縮了，沒有空間，也沒有調適的機制，所以我們累積很多的錯誤，特別是一些政策的錯誤所造成環境的衝擊，是無法逆轉、挽回的。
最明顯的例子就是台灣地下水的污染。過去石化工業為了成本的考量，以為髒的東西只要不見了，眼不見為淨，就把最高污染的廢液，用高壓灌到地下。該地區的地下水就變成永久性的污染，即使現在可以把髒水抽出來，但是，抽不乾淨。
毒物已經被土壤吸附了，不可能用乾淨的水再洗出來。我們不能說外國完全沒有這些問題，但是外國的步調慢了我們10倍，所以他們第一次發現，就可以馬上調整腳步，不再犯第二次錯誤，因為第二次可能是三、五年以後。台灣犯第二次錯誤，可能就是一個星期或一個月以後，來不及調適，造成台灣今日的環境衝擊，到了一個非常困難收拾的地步。
要處理這些問題，不是只從工程面考量，也要各方面的分析，因為工程面的考量可以解決特定的問題，卻可能製造出更多傷害環境的問題。所以我常說，用工程或技術來解決問題，叫做以毒攻毒，所以必須思考如何全盤性的考量，才可以達成社會極大利益的目標。
例如中石化安順廠的戴奧辛污染，目前發現有60公頃遭到重金屬汞與戴奧辛的污染，但我們的調查還沒有結束，預估污染區域可能會增加一倍，大約100多公頃。
這些高污染的地區，如果單純以技術層次來處理，唯一的辦法是挖掉，戴奧辛不溶於水，而半衰期到現在都還測不出來，因為這些東西只在一、二十年前才開始被關心，如果半衰期是200年，初步估計，住在污染地區的人，比一般人容易受到癌症侵襲，但是如果要把污染地區清理乾淨，勢必付出相當高的社會代價。
所以我們要從科學的觀點，以社會利益極大化為目標，來設計如何清理這些地方。
王榮文：如果換算成經濟成本，可以知道必須付出多少錢的代價嗎？有個數字就可以對比經濟發展的關係。張國龍：這個成本會大得驚人。我們要算出來，是將來做為處理的參考。這是錯誤的代價，說不定過去經濟成長得到的好處，拿來重新整理我們的家園，都還不夠。
調查報告不該是機密
李家維：美國能源部在前幾年發起一個影響重大的人類基因組計畫，可能很少人可以清楚說出，美國能源部為什麼要去檢驗人類的基因、序列是如何。但是從這個案例看來，一件重要的事情、對的事情，各個政府單位應該是協調，而且是爭著要去做，而不是爭著去擺脫關係。
環保署與其他中央單位的關係，是緊密連結的，但長期民間對於環保署的印象，不是那麼積極任事。一個多月前，鴨蛋的戴奧辛污染曝光時，我曾打電話給環保署的人員問，住在焚化爐旁邊的居民，身體檢查情形和血液裡戴奧辛含量等問題，得到的答案是：這該是衛生署的業務。
請您說明今後環保署除了要解決本身棘手的困難外，在政府各機構之間將扮演什麼角色？
張國龍：受戴奧辛污染的鴨蛋，消息發佈之後，所有需要承擔責任的部會都相當緊張。
李家維：經濟部做了很長期的隱瞞，環保署之前知不知道詳情？
張國龍：我們一直到今年2月才知道鴨蛋受到污染，這件事與經濟部、農委會和衛生署都有關係，環保署也的確沒有盡到應當盡的責任。例如在設廠時，環境影響評估對戴奧辛的項目，並未注意到這一環。
李家維：這就很不可思議，因為戴奧辛的兩個主要來源，鋼廠相關產業是其中之一，但是竟然沒有列為檢驗標準。
張國龍：環保署在第一個把關上就沒有注意到，可能有很多原因。他們太相信經濟部在主導這樣的設廠時會把關，因為可行性研究報告必須送經濟部，他們對重金屬的檢驗是做了，反而是戴奧辛根本沒有做，環保署對這件事情也沒有做追蹤。如果環保署在一開始就了解到戴奧辛應該是檢驗項目，一定會去追蹤。業者隱瞞之後，我們沒有主動發覺，是我們的責任。
我到環保署之後，希望改變一個文化，就是：從此以後，我們不要把所有的調查報告都看成是機密，所有的報告都應當公諸於世。一個好的負責態度，以及將資訊完全公開，的確可以讓全民參與並監視。
環保署其實應該像一位醫生，我們在檢查大地，就如同一位醫生檢查一個人的身體健康，檢查出有症狀，不是醫生的責任。如同我們檢查到台灣污染的嚴重性，不是環保署的罪過，這是全民為了生活的方便，為了經濟的成長，大家共同造的孽。環保署應該清楚說明：再這樣生活下去，台灣土地生的病會更嚴重。要讓人民了解台灣的污染情況，只有全民共同努力，才有機會改善台灣的環境。
李家維：隨著科技發展，為保護環境，隨時都有新增的檢驗項目和標準，環保署內部如果沒有很堅實的研究人力，就會有困境。目前可能就是如此，您將如何加強資訊的蒐集與人員的在職訓練？
張國龍：台灣的工業設施，其實都是世界其他地方有的工業，我們把它移植過來。很多環境應當關心的項目，如果能蒐集外國的資料，就盡量採用，若沒有外國的資料，就必須自己設計，例如制度上的設計與偵測程序。明顯的例子像台南的安順廠，生產五氯酚鈉，排出很多戴奧辛。當然，世界上也有很多地方生產五氯酚鈉，如義大利，過去二、三十年也發生過很多事故，事件發生後也需要遷村，把該地列為管制區。台灣現在第一步也是把該地列為管制區，接下來比較不同的是，外國案中，他們的廠區背景本來就是開闊的原野，一遷村以後，他們有足夠的時間和空間去想更好的辦法來做處置。
但是台灣的情況完全不一樣，我們發現管制區裡面以及還待偵測的區域，都是漁塭，過去在這裡生產出來的農產品，已經銷售的時間有多長？市場在哪裡？使用者是誰？完全無法追蹤，這就反映出為何台灣癌症死亡率連續多年都是第一位，環境污染絕對是原因之一。
台灣狀況特殊，從國外得不到經驗，就必須自己著手，做善後的規劃，這案例8月會有初步結果，我也物色到了適當的人選，國家衛生研究院吳成文院長也願意與我們合作，做一些與健康有關的風險評估。我們還要再找一群比較技術層面的顧問，看看對漁塭的底泥應該如何處置，因為台灣的特殊狀況，底泥的戴奧辛含量，全球沒有一個安全標準，我們要自己制定。而不同的地域有不同的使用功能，不同的使用功能有不同的含量標準，最簡單的例子，養魚底泥的污染物含量，與種荷花用底泥的污染物含量，可以定不同的標準，這樣才能達到社會利益極大化，接下來就是透過風險評估，做為制定標準的參考。
李家維：剛才談的環境保護都是跟人相關的事情，環保團體還關切很多跟人沒有那麼直接關係的對象，但是它們是這塊土地很重要的成員，例如，台灣原生有4100種植物，其中有1100種是台灣特有的。有不少特有物種，現在處於瀕臨滅絕的狀態，農委會是生態保育的主管機構，但是現在投入的編制與經費，離理想有很大一段距離，況且農委會業務重點是農業生產，這和物種保育有邏輯上的衝突。環保署有沒有計畫，把這樣的業務轉移到署裡，當成核心業務？
台灣像嬰兒，要呵護不要欺凌
張國龍：今天在中央部會裡，的確很多施政項目，追求的目標是互相衝突的，例如交通部的交通建設和農委會對綠地的利用，與環保署的終極目標不同，環保署該做全盤的管控，而時間不能等太久。最近剛好政府要改組，希望把業務導向互相衝突的幾個部會，乾脆納入一個部會，省得協調上大家針鋒相對，以後相關業務就整併成「環境資源部」。目前初步架構都已經設計好了，等立法院氣氛比較好時，就可以公開討論，台灣的永續經營才能落實。
台灣生態這麼豐富的一個島嶼，也是一個非常新生的島嶼，台灣浮出海面只有200多萬年的時間，與地球的46億年比起來，就像嬰兒一樣，這樣的嬰兒應當是所有人都要照護她、珍惜她，而不是趁她不能反抗時去欺凌跟糟蹋。
今天，推動者以開發為導向的，我常稱他們是擴張主義的信徒，而有更多人站在保護的立場，我把他們稱為簡約主義的信仰者。如果更多人能夠投入經驗與心血，很多環保團體，包括想保護瀕臨滅絕物種的團體，很多計畫，包括湖山水庫、蘇花公路，以及又要在北宜公路旁蓋一條北宜鐵路等，環保署會非常嚴肅來看待這些開發單位的要求，我們認為台灣沒有任何本錢再繼續做大規模生態與環境衝擊的開發案。
我來自於民間的環保界，我為什麼會來到這個工作，我的解釋是：政府有決心做環保。因為他們明明曉得我過去的生活態度與我的個性，一輩子到現在我沒有妥協過任何一件事情，他們也曉得一旦環境保護與經濟發展衝突時，我一定會站在環境這一邊。
王榮文：他們不怕你變成麻煩製造者？
張國龍：我相信他們了解我的個性，我也從來沒有隱瞞，他們願意讓我來主持環保署，就表示：萬一衝突時，相信我的判斷。我相信環保團體裡面的朋友，對我來這裡，會比較放心。
所以就任後，我第一次與環保團體見面時，來的團體相當多，我日後會主動到地方表達我的誠懇，因為每個地方都有當地的需求，我會傾聽他們的意見。
垃圾減量，已見成效
李家維：您一定也聽到了對垃圾焚化爐的不同意見，我舉一個切身的經驗，六、七年前我以清華大學代表的身份，和新竹市政府談，清華大學很願意跟市政府合作，解決垃圾問題，例如市政府可以要求科學園區、清大、交大、新竹師院以及各主要公家團體，一起做垃圾減量、資源回收，例如校園產生的樹枝、樹葉都不要離開校園，新竹市的垃圾量會減少1/3，但是新竹市政府很清楚的告訴我：你千萬不要這樣想，也千萬不要這樣做，我們也不可能朝這方向配合，因為焚化爐現在要燒的垃圾還不夠，需要燒更多才能養住這個焚化爐。
這是許多地方都會發生的事情，您怎麼解決這個問題？
張國龍：環保署對垃圾政策已經有一個非常明確的方向，而且這個方向在這幾年來證明是對的。五年前，我們每人每天製造的垃圾有1.24公斤，今天已經可以減少到0.7公斤，在全亞洲，我們跟新加坡一樣好。目前參與的有10個縣市，我們現在還沒有全台灣性的要求垃圾分類，明年1月1日才開始。環保署非常感激人民的誠意與合作的態度，每一次看到阿公阿婆拿著垃圾袋追垃圾車，我真的非常感動，他們是這麼善良，願意幫助。
所以垃圾減量是我們的終極目標，並且我們要減量到Zero Waste。Zero Waste被翻譯錯了，不是零廢棄，應該是零浪費。為了不要造成人民的困擾，依照零浪費的精神，我們強制全部的垃圾要分成三類，一類是資源、一類是廚餘、一類是一般垃圾，前兩類都是可回收利用的。現在的廚餘已經有部份讓養豬業拿去餵豬，有部份做堆肥，將來有些企業會拿去做土石改良的肥料等。希望所有的企業都可以發揮創造力與技術，共同利用這些資源。
資源回收的結果，現在20多座新蓋的焚化爐可能可以關掉幾座，而目前還沒有蓋好的幾座，我們已經發現沒有垃圾了，例如竹南、竹北與南投，我們準備把這三座關掉，目前我們也積極希望行政院達成我們的要求，政府當然在行政與程序上有些困擾，包括賠償、仲裁等，也需要時間。但是從全民與社會整體利益來看，我們不願意繼續浪費，因為蓋好的焚化爐要有一定的處理量才划得來。
李家維：焚化爐的建設是很高額的投資，您有決心做這樣的事情，代表有很大的毅力與風險在其中。還有沒有其他正在做大幅度改變的檢討案例，例如幾年前有電動機車的推廣計畫，後來腰斬了，現在街頭的污染還是很嚴重。對於新燃料的引進與廢氣管制，您有什麼想法？
張國龍：10 ~15年前，台北市的空氣污染大部份來自產業界，大台北地區工廠林立，特別是小型工廠與地下工廠，後來我在台北縣政府時，唯一的辦法就是讓工廠外移到工業區。外移需要誘因，當時的決定就是讓違建的工廠區域做地目變更，有利基了之後，他們才願意遷廠。因為到工業區買土地，設備都需要成本，這些成本過去都是用人民的健康來支付，人民是無辜的。
接下來就是管制工業區的排放，我們很多空氣排放標準都是用外國的，但是外國地廣人稀，我們必須採取更嚴格的標準，雖然大台北空氣改善，但是不盡人意，有很大的原因是交通車輛的廢氣。
要降低廢氣排放量，目前有兩個策略，第一是用油氣混合車，這種車子在高速公路行駛時，就一邊開始充電，一旦進入市區就改用電力，排放量就可以減少，不只讓空氣乾淨，也可以節省很多能源，例如Lexus休旅車一加侖可跑9英里，油氣混合車一加侖可跑29英里，做為城市間的交通工具是適合的。
第二個策略是希望城市內的運輸系統改用不同的燃料，例如PLG（液化瓦斯），廢氣排放量比傳統的柴油汽油低很多，但是過去社會硬體的設計，例如加油站只有柴油與汽油，所以加氣站不足，必須讓每個加油站也是加氣站。
下一目標是希望公部門的汽車、小貨車，都改用PLG，因為PLG的壓力只有兩個大氣壓力，我們拍個手掌的壓力都不只了，所以工業安全是沒有問題的。
【更多精采內容在本期科學人雜誌】
專訪環保署長張國龍：「台灣土地的病情應該講清楚」
環保署長張國龍，長期投入台灣環保運動。如今，從社運團體到中央部會，如何在環保署施展所長，在部會間如何折衝協調，是他最大的挑戰。
採訪＼李家維、王榮文 整理＼鄭靜琪【更多精采內容在本期科學人雜誌】
科學人封面故事
以下是《科學人》雜誌發行人王榮文與總編輯李家維的訪談紀要：
李家維：您是一位物理學者，同時又長期關心台灣環境保護，現在被任命為環保署長，領導一個重要的中央部會。您有什麼樣的特質，會讓政府對您信任、讓民眾對您有信心？
張國龍：做為一個科學人，在背景的訓練，以及對問題的解決，要比其他不同行業的訓練要好得多。不只台灣的環保署長找科學人來做，美國也一樣找科學人來做，全世界很多重要的OECD（經濟合作暨發展組織）國家，很多環保的中央業務，也都找科學人來負責。
台灣面臨的問題，比世界上其他地方更棘手，而且困難度更高，迫切性更嚴重，原因是西方國家追求經濟的成長，從工業革命到今天，有200多年的時間讓他們調適，發現什麼地方有不妥，可透過自我約束的調整機制，穩穩的往前跨步。
台灣沒有這個機會。外國200多年的經驗，我們用二、三十年的時間就濃縮了，沒有空間，也沒有調適的機制，所以我們累積很多的錯誤，特別是一些政策的錯誤所造成環境的衝擊，是無法逆轉、挽回的。
最明顯的例子就是台灣地下水的污染。過去石化工業為了成本的考量，以為髒的東西只要不見了，眼不見為淨，就把最高污染的廢液，用高壓灌到地下。該地區的地下水就變成永久性的污染，即使現在可以把髒水抽出來，但是，抽不乾淨。
毒物已經被土壤吸附了，不可能用乾淨的水再洗出來。我們不能說外國完全沒有這些問題，但是外國的步調慢了我們10倍，所以他們第一次發現，就可以馬上調整腳步，不再犯第二次錯誤，因為第二次可能是三、五年以後。台灣犯第二次錯誤，可能就是一個星期或一個月以後，來不及調適，造成台灣今日的環境衝擊，到了一個非常困難收拾的地步。
要處理這些問題，不是只從工程面考量，也要各方面的分析，因為工程面的考量可以解決特定的問題，卻可能製造出更多傷害環境的問題。所以我常說，用工程或技術來解決問題，叫做以毒攻毒，所以必須思考如何全盤性的考量，才可以達成社會極大利益的目標。
例如中石化安順廠的戴奧辛污染，目前發現有60公頃遭到重金屬汞與戴奧辛的污染，但我們的調查還沒有結束，預估污染區域可能會增加一倍，大約100多公頃。
這些高污染的地區，如果單純以技術層次來處理，唯一的辦法是挖掉，戴奧辛不溶於水，而半衰期到現在都還測不出來，因為這些東西只在一、二十年前才開始被關心，如果半衰期是200年，初步估計，住在污染地區的人，比一般人容易受到癌症侵襲，但是如果要把污染地區清理乾淨，勢必付出相當高的社會代價。
所以我們要從科學的觀點，以社會利益極大化為目標，來設計如何清理這些地方。
王榮文：如果換算成經濟成本，可以知道必須付出多少錢的代價嗎？有個數字就可以對比經濟發展的關係。張國龍：這個成本會大得驚人。我們要算出來，是將來做為處理的參考。這是錯誤的代價，說不定過去經濟成長得到的好處，拿來重新整理我們的家園，都還不夠。
調查報告不該是機密
李家維：美國能源部在前幾年發起一個影響重大的人類基因組計畫，可能很少人可以清楚說出，美國能源部為什麼要去檢驗人類的基因、序列是如何。但是從這個案例看來，一件重要的事情、對的事情，各個政府單位應該是協調，而且是爭著要去做，而不是爭著去擺脫關係。
環保署與其他中央單位的關係，是緊密連結的，但長期民間對於環保署的印象，不是那麼積極任事。一個多月前，鴨蛋的戴奧辛污染曝光時，我曾打電話給環保署的人員問，住在焚化爐旁邊的居民，身體檢查情形和血液裡戴奧辛含量等問題，得到的答案是：這該是衛生署的業務。
請您說明今後環保署除了要解決本身棘手的困難外，在政府各機構之間將扮演什麼角色？
張國龍：受戴奧辛污染的鴨蛋，消息發佈之後，所有需要承擔責任的部會都相當緊張。
李家維：經濟部做了很長期的隱瞞，環保署之前知不知道詳情？
張國龍：我們一直到今年2月才知道鴨蛋受到污染，這件事與經濟部、農委會和衛生署都有關係，環保署也的確沒有盡到應當盡的責任。例如在設廠時，環境影響評估對戴奧辛的項目，並未注意到這一環。
李家維：這就很不可思議，因為戴奧辛的兩個主要來源，鋼廠相關產業是其中之一，但是竟然沒有列為檢驗標準。
張國龍：環保署在第一個把關上就沒有注意到，可能有很多原因。他們太相信經濟部在主導這樣的設廠時會把關，因為可行性研究報告必須送經濟部，他們對重金屬的檢驗是做了，反而是戴奧辛根本沒有做，環保署對這件事情也沒有做追蹤。如果環保署在一開始就了解到戴奧辛應該是檢驗項目，一定會去追蹤。業者隱瞞之後，我們沒有主動發覺，是我們的責任。
我到環保署之後，希望改變一個文化，就是：從此以後，我們不要把所有的調查報告都看成是機密，所有的報告都應當公諸於世。一個好的負責態度，以及將資訊完全公開，的確可以讓全民參與並監視。
環保署其實應該像一位醫生，我們在檢查大地，就如同一位醫生檢查一個人的身體健康，檢查出有症狀，不是醫生的責任。如同我們檢查到台灣污染的嚴重性，不是環保署的罪過，這是全民為了生活的方便，為了經濟的成長，大家共同造的孽。環保署應該清楚說明：再這樣生活下去，台灣土地生的病會更嚴重。要讓人民了解台灣的污染情況，只有全民共同努力，才有機會改善台灣的環境。
李家維：隨著科技發展，為保護環境，隨時都有新增的檢驗項目和標準，環保署內部如果沒有很堅實的研究人力，就會有困境。目前可能就是如此，您將如何加強資訊的蒐集與人員的在職訓練？
張國龍：台灣的工業設施，其實都是世界其他地方有的工業，我們把它移植過來。很多環境應當關心的項目，如果能蒐集外國的資料，就盡量採用，若沒有外國的資料，就必須自己設計，例如制度上的設計與偵測程序。明顯的例子像台南的安順廠，生產五氯酚鈉，排出很多戴奧辛。當然，世界上也有很多地方生產五氯酚鈉，如義大利，過去二、三十年也發生過很多事故，事件發生後也需要遷村，把該地列為管制區。台灣現在第一步也是把該地列為管制區，接下來比較不同的是，外國案中，他們的廠區背景本來就是開闊的原野，一遷村以後，他們有足夠的時間和空間去想更好的辦法來做處置。
但是台灣的情況完全不一樣，我們發現管制區裡面以及還待偵測的區域，都是漁塭，過去在這裡生產出來的農產品，已經銷售的時間有多長？市場在哪裡？使用者是誰？完全無法追蹤，這就反映出為何台灣癌症死亡率連續多年都是第一位，環境污染絕對是原因之一。
台灣狀況特殊，從國外得不到經驗，就必須自己著手，做善後的規劃，這案例8月會有初步結果，我也物色到了適當的人選，國家衛生研究院吳成文院長也願意與我們合作，做一些與健康有關的風險評估。我們還要再找一群比較技術層面的顧問，看看對漁塭的底泥應該如何處置，因為台灣的特殊狀況，底泥的戴奧辛含量，全球沒有一個安全標準，我們要自己制定。而不同的地域有不同的使用功能，不同的使用功能有不同的含量標準，最簡單的例子，養魚底泥的污染物含量，與種荷花用底泥的污染物含量，可以定不同的標準，這樣才能達到社會利益極大化，接下來就是透過風險評估，做為制定標準的參考。
李家維：剛才談的環境保護都是跟人相關的事情，環保團體還關切很多跟人沒有那麼直接關係的對象，但是它們是這塊土地很重要的成員，例如，台灣原生有4100種植物，其中有1100種是台灣特有的。有不少特有物種，現在處於瀕臨滅絕的狀態，農委會是生態保育的主管機構，但是現在投入的編制與經費，離理想有很大一段距離，況且農委會業務重點是農業生產，這和物種保育有邏輯上的衝突。環保署有沒有計畫，把這樣的業務轉移到署裡，當成核心業務？
台灣像嬰兒，要呵護不要欺凌
張國龍：今天在中央部會裡，的確很多施政項目，追求的目標是互相衝突的，例如交通部的交通建設和農委會對綠地的利用，與環保署的終極目標不同，環保署該做全盤的管控，而時間不能等太久。最近剛好政府要改組，希望把業務導向互相衝突的幾個部會，乾脆納入一個部會，省得協調上大家針鋒相對，以後相關業務就整併成「環境資源部」。目前初步架構都已經設計好了，等立法院氣氛比較好時，就可以公開討論，台灣的永續經營才能落實。
台灣生態這麼豐富的一個島嶼，也是一個非常新生的島嶼，台灣浮出海面只有200多萬年的時間，與地球的46億年比起來，就像嬰兒一樣，這樣的嬰兒應當是所有人都要照護她、珍惜她，而不是趁她不能反抗時去欺凌跟糟蹋。
今天，推動者以開發為導向的，我常稱他們是擴張主義的信徒，而有更多人站在保護的立場，我把他們稱為簡約主義的信仰者。如果更多人能夠投入經驗與心血，很多環保團體，包括想保護瀕臨滅絕物種的團體，很多計畫，包括湖山水庫、蘇花公路，以及又要在北宜公路旁蓋一條北宜鐵路等，環保署會非常嚴肅來看待這些開發單位的要求，我們認為台灣沒有任何本錢再繼續做大規模生態與環境衝擊的開發案。
我來自於民間的環保界，我為什麼會來到這個工作，我的解釋是：政府有決心做環保。因為他們明明曉得我過去的生活態度與我的個性，一輩子到現在我沒有妥協過任何一件事情，他們也曉得一旦環境保護與經濟發展衝突時，我一定會站在環境這一邊。
王榮文：他們不怕你變成麻煩製造者？
張國龍：我相信他們了解我的個性，我也從來沒有隱瞞，他們願意讓我來主持環保署，就表示：萬一衝突時，相信我的判斷。我相信環保團體裡面的朋友，對我來這裡，會比較放心。
所以就任後，我第一次與環保團體見面時，來的團體相當多，我日後會主動到地方表達我的誠懇，因為每個地方都有當地的需求，我會傾聽他們的意見。
垃圾減量，已見成效
李家維：您一定也聽到了對垃圾焚化爐的不同意見，我舉一個切身的經驗，六、七年前我以清華大學代表的身份，和新竹市政府談，清華大學很願意跟市政府合作，解決垃圾問題，例如市政府可以要求科學園區、清大、交大、新竹師院以及各主要公家團體，一起做垃圾減量、資源回收，例如校園產生的樹枝、樹葉都不要離開校園，新竹市的垃圾量會減少1/3，但是新竹市政府很清楚的告訴我：你千萬不要這樣想，也千萬不要這樣做，我們也不可能朝這方向配合，因為焚化爐現在要燒的垃圾還不夠，需要燒更多才能養住這個焚化爐。
這是許多地方都會發生的事情，您怎麼解決這個問題？
張國龍：環保署對垃圾政策已經有一個非常明確的方向，而且這個方向在這幾年來證明是對的。五年前，我們每人每天製造的垃圾有1.24公斤，今天已經可以減少到0.7公斤，在全亞洲，我們跟新加坡一樣好。目前參與的有10個縣市，我們現在還沒有全台灣性的要求垃圾分類，明年1月1日才開始。環保署非常感激人民的誠意與合作的態度，每一次看到阿公阿婆拿著垃圾袋追垃圾車，我真的非常感動，他們是這麼善良，願意幫助。
所以垃圾減量是我們的終極目標，並且我們要減量到Zero Waste。Zero Waste被翻譯錯了，不是零廢棄，應該是零浪費。為了不要造成人民的困擾，依照零浪費的精神，我們強制全部的垃圾要分成三類，一類是資源、一類是廚餘、一類是一般垃圾，前兩類都是可回收利用的。現在的廚餘已經有部份讓養豬業拿去餵豬，有部份做堆肥，將來有些企業會拿去做土石改良的肥料等。希望所有的企業都可以發揮創造力與技術，共同利用這些資源。
資源回收的結果，現在20多座新蓋的焚化爐可能可以關掉幾座，而目前還沒有蓋好的幾座，我們已經發現沒有垃圾了，例如竹南、竹北與南投，我們準備把這三座關掉，目前我們也積極希望行政院達成我們的要求，政府當然在行政與程序上有些困擾，包括賠償、仲裁等，也需要時間。但是從全民與社會整體利益來看，我們不願意繼續浪費，因為蓋好的焚化爐要有一定的處理量才划得來。
李家維：焚化爐的建設是很高額的投資，您有決心做這樣的事情，代表有很大的毅力與風險在其中。還有沒有其他正在做大幅度改變的檢討案例，例如幾年前有電動機車的推廣計畫，後來腰斬了，現在街頭的污染還是很嚴重。對於新燃料的引進與廢氣管制，您有什麼想法？
張國龍：10 ~15年前，台北市的空氣污染大部份來自產業界，大台北地區工廠林立，特別是小型工廠與地下工廠，後來我在台北縣政府時，唯一的辦法就是讓工廠外移到工業區。外移需要誘因，當時的決定就是讓違建的工廠區域做地目變更，有利基了之後，他們才願意遷廠。因為到工業區買土地，設備都需要成本，這些成本過去都是用人民的健康來支付，人民是無辜的。
接下來就是管制工業區的排放，我們很多空氣排放標準都是用外國的，但是外國地廣人稀，我們必須採取更嚴格的標準，雖然大台北空氣改善，但是不盡人意，有很大的原因是交通車輛的廢氣。
要降低廢氣排放量，目前有兩個策略，第一是用油氣混合車，這種車子在高速公路行駛時，就一邊開始充電，一旦進入市區就改用電力，排放量就可以減少，不只讓空氣乾淨，也可以節省很多能源，例如Lexus休旅車一加侖可跑9英里，油氣混合車一加侖可跑29英里，做為城市間的交通工具是適合的。
第二個策略是希望城市內的運輸系統改用不同的燃料，例如PLG（液化瓦斯），廢氣排放量比傳統的柴油汽油低很多，但是過去社會硬體的設計，例如加油站只有柴油與汽油，所以加氣站不足，必須讓每個加油站也是加氣站。
下一目標是希望公部門的汽車、小貨車，都改用PLG，因為PLG的壓力只有兩個大氣壓力，我們拍個手掌的壓力都不只了，所以工業安全是沒有問題的。
【更多精采內容在本期科學人雜誌】
Monday, August 08, 2005
聯合新聞網 | 資訊科技 | 數位生活 | 消費冷感 數位化後遺症
消費冷感 數位化後遺症
【黃偉正】
「數位化」為民眾生活帶來了不同的新便利，尤其是有關視聽娛樂的個人或家用產品，近年間無不大肆流行「數位化」趨勢，因而造就了許多功能豐富，款式多樣的新電子產品。但市場上最近也出現許多「另類」的數位化後遺症，值得注意。
功能複雜化 花樣太多眼花撩亂
以家用視聽數位裝置為例，現在已變成單看外觀搞不清楚它擁有什麼功能的情景，即便是業界專家還是市場玩家，遇到一盒AV裝置，在沒有開殼、沒有閱讀規格或沒有人說明情況下，單看裝置外貌、或加看I/O接孔，都不易猜出盒中到底提供那些功能，更遑論一般消費者的理解。
其次，目前數位裝置很流行將外觀「化繁為簡」，主機上只留下最基本的少許按鍵，如電源開關、播放鍵等，期能免除消費者的應用焦慮，主機所有的功能全部佈建在一支遙控器身上，如果失去遙控器，也等於喪失產品大半功能。
此外，也出現遙控器按鍵不夠用的情況，需以單次按與長按來區分不同的命令；或者，藉由韌體設計，將各功能包裹在層層的目錄選單中，再利用遙控器上下左右鍵，配合螢幕資訊顯示來操作；另也觀察到有Set Top Box產品，提供二支不同顏色遙控器來控制內建2個選台器等設計，這些現象顯示，數位影音裝置的複雜使用與整合功能問題愈益嚴重。
過去類比家電產品，較常有各別廠商獨到的工藝表現，但在數位化後功能差異性縮小，廠商只能以不同功能整合、組合，或利用外觀、造型的變化，來進行產品區隔化。導致數位產品不只是功能複雜，是連機種也五花八門，令人眼花撩亂。
未來所謂的「新產品」，也預期將是多了功能、換了應用組合的產品，甚至改了造型、改了按鍵，只要能造就出另種時尚或風格的設計，也叫做是「新產品」。為了營造新產品的流行風潮或改朝換代，添加服務或強塞功能於新產品，成為許多產品線的開發目標，例如：消費者可能還來不及知道是否需要手機相機，也搞不清楚多少萬像素符合使用時，市場上已經「全線」佈滿相機手機了，這不知是對消費者體貼用心，還是營造市場大餅的吸金用心？
買前做功課 須先搞懂品牌功用
而且由於數位產品功能組合十分多樣化，消費者欲了解產品功能規格之間的差異，以及與本身的需求是否合宜，就要十分用功；加上許多個人裝置更帶有鮮明的個人時尚品味，消費者要面對多品牌、多造型機種，要收歛選出自己的產品，也具有相當難度；尤其目前的數位產品，價格其實不比傳統或前一代產品便宜（例如：MP3隨身聽＞CD隨身聽；照相手機＞一般手機），消費者必須要先做些功課，才能出門選購。
消費者收集產品資訊、比較功能規格、聽取別人的使用口碑的事前準備之消費趨勢，未來還會愈來愈明顯且普及，這可由網路漸多的產品交流討論區，以及二手交易網站中的討論聲浪中窺見端倪。因此在網路普及，資訊豐富又易查詢的今天，產品廠商絕對要正視這些坊間的意見流動情形，將會影響到產品的成敗與機會。
數位化消費性產品其實競爭非常激烈，廠商經常以多式樣且快速推陳出新的方式，吸引消費者的注目與購買。但也由於頻度過高，式樣多但功能好像又差不多或根本很難理解比較，消費者已漸出現消費冷感且慣用觀望與等待來對應市場。
例如：手機，多數人已備擁一支堪用手機，在沒有絕對的立即需求下，市場上新機頻出，式樣眾多，加上還沒上市的新產品消息總是捷足先「登」（且留下伏筆：預計xx月上市），如此，想要享受時尚換支手機的消費者，採買的過程將從數天延展至數個月都還可能在觀望等待將屢見不鮮。
回歸基本面 應遵循消費者需求
過去科技的確來自人性，但現在與未來的科技產品，似乎反過來在開發人性以引發消費，而且蔚為風潮。事實上，以行銷的角度來觀察，回歸基本面，以消費者實際需求為依歸才是維持消費忠誠的不二法門，iPOD的暢銷就是最好的見證。
（作者為資策會MIC資深產業分析師）
【2005/08/08 經濟日報】
【黃偉正】
「數位化」為民眾生活帶來了不同的新便利，尤其是有關視聽娛樂的個人或家用產品，近年間無不大肆流行「數位化」趨勢，因而造就了許多功能豐富，款式多樣的新電子產品。但市場上最近也出現許多「另類」的數位化後遺症，值得注意。
功能複雜化 花樣太多眼花撩亂
以家用視聽數位裝置為例，現在已變成單看外觀搞不清楚它擁有什麼功能的情景，即便是業界專家還是市場玩家，遇到一盒AV裝置，在沒有開殼、沒有閱讀規格或沒有人說明情況下，單看裝置外貌、或加看I/O接孔，都不易猜出盒中到底提供那些功能，更遑論一般消費者的理解。
其次，目前數位裝置很流行將外觀「化繁為簡」，主機上只留下最基本的少許按鍵，如電源開關、播放鍵等，期能免除消費者的應用焦慮，主機所有的功能全部佈建在一支遙控器身上，如果失去遙控器，也等於喪失產品大半功能。
此外，也出現遙控器按鍵不夠用的情況，需以單次按與長按來區分不同的命令；或者，藉由韌體設計，將各功能包裹在層層的目錄選單中，再利用遙控器上下左右鍵，配合螢幕資訊顯示來操作；另也觀察到有Set Top Box產品，提供二支不同顏色遙控器來控制內建2個選台器等設計，這些現象顯示，數位影音裝置的複雜使用與整合功能問題愈益嚴重。
過去類比家電產品，較常有各別廠商獨到的工藝表現，但在數位化後功能差異性縮小，廠商只能以不同功能整合、組合，或利用外觀、造型的變化，來進行產品區隔化。導致數位產品不只是功能複雜，是連機種也五花八門，令人眼花撩亂。
未來所謂的「新產品」，也預期將是多了功能、換了應用組合的產品，甚至改了造型、改了按鍵，只要能造就出另種時尚或風格的設計，也叫做是「新產品」。為了營造新產品的流行風潮或改朝換代，添加服務或強塞功能於新產品，成為許多產品線的開發目標，例如：消費者可能還來不及知道是否需要手機相機，也搞不清楚多少萬像素符合使用時，市場上已經「全線」佈滿相機手機了，這不知是對消費者體貼用心，還是營造市場大餅的吸金用心？
買前做功課 須先搞懂品牌功用
而且由於數位產品功能組合十分多樣化，消費者欲了解產品功能規格之間的差異，以及與本身的需求是否合宜，就要十分用功；加上許多個人裝置更帶有鮮明的個人時尚品味，消費者要面對多品牌、多造型機種，要收歛選出自己的產品，也具有相當難度；尤其目前的數位產品，價格其實不比傳統或前一代產品便宜（例如：MP3隨身聽＞CD隨身聽；照相手機＞一般手機），消費者必須要先做些功課，才能出門選購。
消費者收集產品資訊、比較功能規格、聽取別人的使用口碑的事前準備之消費趨勢，未來還會愈來愈明顯且普及，這可由網路漸多的產品交流討論區，以及二手交易網站中的討論聲浪中窺見端倪。因此在網路普及，資訊豐富又易查詢的今天，產品廠商絕對要正視這些坊間的意見流動情形，將會影響到產品的成敗與機會。
數位化消費性產品其實競爭非常激烈，廠商經常以多式樣且快速推陳出新的方式，吸引消費者的注目與購買。但也由於頻度過高，式樣多但功能好像又差不多或根本很難理解比較，消費者已漸出現消費冷感且慣用觀望與等待來對應市場。
例如：手機，多數人已備擁一支堪用手機，在沒有絕對的立即需求下，市場上新機頻出，式樣眾多，加上還沒上市的新產品消息總是捷足先「登」（且留下伏筆：預計xx月上市），如此，想要享受時尚換支手機的消費者，採買的過程將從數天延展至數個月都還可能在觀望等待將屢見不鮮。
回歸基本面 應遵循消費者需求
過去科技的確來自人性，但現在與未來的科技產品，似乎反過來在開發人性以引發消費，而且蔚為風潮。事實上，以行銷的角度來觀察，回歸基本面，以消費者實際需求為依歸才是維持消費忠誠的不二法門，iPOD的暢銷就是最好的見證。
（作者為資策會MIC資深產業分析師）
【2005/08/08 經濟日報】
Tuesday, August 02, 2005
The Value of Inventive Services
這篇文章很有趣, 某程度上他解釋了Hannspree在business model的缺陷, 同時也解釋了製造業跟服務業的分野, 越來越模糊的關係, even 可以回過頭想想我們自己的研究案....
It's the biggest part of the economy these days, but many companies' innovation remain focused on products. Here's why that needs to change
Ask most executives how innovation can spur their growth, and they'll immediately think about changes in their product lineup. Wrong. They should be thinking "services."
As a percentage of GDP today, services comprise 82% of our economic output. The number has been increasing for years. The crossover point from products to services actually happened in 1987. Yet when we think of innovation, most of us are still thinking products -- iPods, Mini Coopers, Treo's, and the like still dominate our mindshare about what's cool.
And yes, they are cool, but cool isn't what's making the most money or growing at the fastest rate these days. Look at General Motors (GM). In 2004, the carmaker lost $95 million on revenues of $193.5 billion. However, this loss was significantly underwritten by GM's financial-services arm, which made $2.9 billion, according to its annual report.
Yes, without financial services, GM's loss would have totaled $3 billion. The company's stock and bonds took a big hit in the aftermath of its earnings report, but I wonder what further damage would have been wrought had financial services not been there to buoy the company.
BIGGEST PROMISE. In terms of growth, GM's On-Star service has grown to 3.3 million subscribers that pay an average of $300 per year for it. Although On-Star had a slow start, it's now in ramp-up mode due to the decision to make it standard equipment on all GM vehicles -- that would be over 8 million per year. If just half of these drivers decide to keep the service, On-Star's revenue moves into the range of $2 billion, with profit margins that most certainly beat the industry average for automobiles.
And so it goes. For almost every leading big corporation -- and, paradoxically, especially those that make products -- growth in services holds the most promise for successful differentiation and sustained profitability for the future.
With this palpable shift to services in our economy, one would think that service providers would be looking to every tool available to drive better, faster, and cheaper innovation. Yet after studying over 150 services businesses over the last 18 months, my colleagues and I at Peer Insight have determined that service innovation as a discipline is still in its infancy. Here's why:
Dearth of Information
First of all, there just isn't a lot of information or rigor around the topic. While reams of books and articles abound on the topic of product innovation and product development, very few focus specifically on services and the distinctions therein.
And you would be hard pressed to find a course on service development or innovation on any B-school campus, reflecting the dearth of academic concentration in the area. Today, few universities even teach service management, and if they do, the emphasis falls to quality management and the operational excellence associated with existing service environments, never the invention and nurture of new service concepts. Further, there are few public forums where professionals involved in service innovation can learn from exemplars.
Second, although we have found that the best service innovators draw on the conventional wisdom associated with product development, most aren't using the latest tools, such as ethnographic research and rapid development techniques, to drive innovation. Just as important, they don't understand the basic distinctions between product- and service-innovation environments. Before rushing off to innovate in services, managers would do well to understand their uniqueness.
Climate Change
By far the biggest distinction between products and services is that services are intangible, and therefore much more complex when it comes to buying decisions.
Because you can't touch them and feel them ahead of consuming them, conveying the brand promise is paramount for service providers. This requires more brand savvy and investment than that for products. This is how you know the difference between a Ritz-Carlton, a Sheraton, and a Holiday Inn Express by just hearing their names. Largely business-to-consumer companies are further along the learning curve on this than business-to-business companies, who often think of brand management as just having a recognizable logo.
Things that make the offering tangible help facilitate the diffusion of intangible services. My business partner's favorite example of a service made tangible is the toothbrush he receives from his dentist after each visit that has the month he needs to return imprinted on it. The implicit message? "We care about you and your teeth -- let us serve you."
DISCREET EVENTS. Another difference from products is that with services, ownership isn't conveyed. Customers merely "rent" capacity for periods of time. Since people are so vastly different, service innovation requires extraordinary skill in anticipating customer needs, especially because of the wide range of situations confronted in the field. There are empathic design research methods that help discover which latent needs could be put to good use here. But they have yet to be deployed widely in the service sector.
A third difference is that with products, consumption is a discreet event that happens after the purchase is made. With services, supply and consumption happen simultaneously. This has enormous organizational consequences. It requires massive, 24/7 command, control, and logistical capabilities. Think of Hertz, Marriott International, or Citigroup. These are far different systems to build out than your average production line and require an even higher degree of cross-functional integration than found in manufacturing.
In service environments, the proverbial "customer journey" happens over multiple touch points. It's very complex. It often involves a large number of interactions between people and machines and among people. Therefore, services are much more dependent on big investments in information-technology development, as well as good old fashion employee training.
THINKING BIG. Finally, research and development groups don't tend to exist in most service companies. This makes it more difficult for innovation expertise to find a home. By comparison, product-based companies regularly invest billions to understand where their future revenue streams will come from.
Conversations I have had with managers of service innovation at many big companies suggest that the tendency is to support Six Sigma-type quality improvements. This approach can spawn incremental ideas, but never bold, game-changing concepts, or paradigm-breaking moves.
Just look how long it took for banks to get their ATMs to "speak" Spanish. It shows how difficult it is to implement rather easy improvements if there's little appetite and budget for innovation.
A View to the Future
So what should companies do to innovate, given the clear differences between products and services? There are a number of innovation tools, both old and new, that can be applied to service environments. My advice to anyone trying to innovate in a service environment would be to:
• Get your senior leadership team's attention around the issue. Bold moves are impossible without their support.
• Constrain the problem around where to play. Focus in terms of solving customer needs. What are the issues and opportunities? How do these relate to your current set of offerings? What's the competitive environment like?
• Lay out the end-to-end customer journey you envision for the new service. Where will you be able to provide a compelling value proposition that can provide a more convenient solution or save customers time or money? How does this influence your potential business model? Zip Car reinvented the urban auto rental business with this type of approach.
• Once you have a solid concept around the value you would like to provide, seek feedback from important stakeholders. Start with the end customer, of course, but also include other important players in the service environment's ecosystem. If FedEx hadn't acknowledged the critical role administrative assistants play in getting packages out, they never would have invented one of its critical management tools, FedEx Ship Manager.
There are a growing number of tools and metrics for service innovation. At Peer Insight, we're gathering evidence from dozens of companies that reveal many of the key principles of successful service innovation. We have organized them into 17 disciplines that allow companies to benchmark themselves. My next column will deal with how service managers can use this framework.
It's the biggest part of the economy these days, but many companies' innovation remain focused on products. Here's why that needs to change
Ask most executives how innovation can spur their growth, and they'll immediately think about changes in their product lineup. Wrong. They should be thinking "services."
As a percentage of GDP today, services comprise 82% of our economic output. The number has been increasing for years. The crossover point from products to services actually happened in 1987. Yet when we think of innovation, most of us are still thinking products -- iPods, Mini Coopers, Treo's, and the like still dominate our mindshare about what's cool.
And yes, they are cool, but cool isn't what's making the most money or growing at the fastest rate these days. Look at General Motors (GM). In 2004, the carmaker lost $95 million on revenues of $193.5 billion. However, this loss was significantly underwritten by GM's financial-services arm, which made $2.9 billion, according to its annual report.
Yes, without financial services, GM's loss would have totaled $3 billion. The company's stock and bonds took a big hit in the aftermath of its earnings report, but I wonder what further damage would have been wrought had financial services not been there to buoy the company.
BIGGEST PROMISE. In terms of growth, GM's On-Star service has grown to 3.3 million subscribers that pay an average of $300 per year for it. Although On-Star had a slow start, it's now in ramp-up mode due to the decision to make it standard equipment on all GM vehicles -- that would be over 8 million per year. If just half of these drivers decide to keep the service, On-Star's revenue moves into the range of $2 billion, with profit margins that most certainly beat the industry average for automobiles.
And so it goes. For almost every leading big corporation -- and, paradoxically, especially those that make products -- growth in services holds the most promise for successful differentiation and sustained profitability for the future.
With this palpable shift to services in our economy, one would think that service providers would be looking to every tool available to drive better, faster, and cheaper innovation. Yet after studying over 150 services businesses over the last 18 months, my colleagues and I at Peer Insight have determined that service innovation as a discipline is still in its infancy. Here's why:
Dearth of Information
First of all, there just isn't a lot of information or rigor around the topic. While reams of books and articles abound on the topic of product innovation and product development, very few focus specifically on services and the distinctions therein.
And you would be hard pressed to find a course on service development or innovation on any B-school campus, reflecting the dearth of academic concentration in the area. Today, few universities even teach service management, and if they do, the emphasis falls to quality management and the operational excellence associated with existing service environments, never the invention and nurture of new service concepts. Further, there are few public forums where professionals involved in service innovation can learn from exemplars.
Second, although we have found that the best service innovators draw on the conventional wisdom associated with product development, most aren't using the latest tools, such as ethnographic research and rapid development techniques, to drive innovation. Just as important, they don't understand the basic distinctions between product- and service-innovation environments. Before rushing off to innovate in services, managers would do well to understand their uniqueness.
Climate Change
By far the biggest distinction between products and services is that services are intangible, and therefore much more complex when it comes to buying decisions.
Because you can't touch them and feel them ahead of consuming them, conveying the brand promise is paramount for service providers. This requires more brand savvy and investment than that for products. This is how you know the difference between a Ritz-Carlton, a Sheraton, and a Holiday Inn Express by just hearing their names. Largely business-to-consumer companies are further along the learning curve on this than business-to-business companies, who often think of brand management as just having a recognizable logo.
Things that make the offering tangible help facilitate the diffusion of intangible services. My business partner's favorite example of a service made tangible is the toothbrush he receives from his dentist after each visit that has the month he needs to return imprinted on it. The implicit message? "We care about you and your teeth -- let us serve you."
DISCREET EVENTS. Another difference from products is that with services, ownership isn't conveyed. Customers merely "rent" capacity for periods of time. Since people are so vastly different, service innovation requires extraordinary skill in anticipating customer needs, especially because of the wide range of situations confronted in the field. There are empathic design research methods that help discover which latent needs could be put to good use here. But they have yet to be deployed widely in the service sector.
A third difference is that with products, consumption is a discreet event that happens after the purchase is made. With services, supply and consumption happen simultaneously. This has enormous organizational consequences. It requires massive, 24/7 command, control, and logistical capabilities. Think of Hertz, Marriott International, or Citigroup. These are far different systems to build out than your average production line and require an even higher degree of cross-functional integration than found in manufacturing.
In service environments, the proverbial "customer journey" happens over multiple touch points. It's very complex. It often involves a large number of interactions between people and machines and among people. Therefore, services are much more dependent on big investments in information-technology development, as well as good old fashion employee training.
THINKING BIG. Finally, research and development groups don't tend to exist in most service companies. This makes it more difficult for innovation expertise to find a home. By comparison, product-based companies regularly invest billions to understand where their future revenue streams will come from.
Conversations I have had with managers of service innovation at many big companies suggest that the tendency is to support Six Sigma-type quality improvements. This approach can spawn incremental ideas, but never bold, game-changing concepts, or paradigm-breaking moves.
Just look how long it took for banks to get their ATMs to "speak" Spanish. It shows how difficult it is to implement rather easy improvements if there's little appetite and budget for innovation.
A View to the Future
So what should companies do to innovate, given the clear differences between products and services? There are a number of innovation tools, both old and new, that can be applied to service environments. My advice to anyone trying to innovate in a service environment would be to:
• Get your senior leadership team's attention around the issue. Bold moves are impossible without their support.
• Constrain the problem around where to play. Focus in terms of solving customer needs. What are the issues and opportunities? How do these relate to your current set of offerings? What's the competitive environment like?
• Lay out the end-to-end customer journey you envision for the new service. Where will you be able to provide a compelling value proposition that can provide a more convenient solution or save customers time or money? How does this influence your potential business model? Zip Car reinvented the urban auto rental business with this type of approach.
• Once you have a solid concept around the value you would like to provide, seek feedback from important stakeholders. Start with the end customer, of course, but also include other important players in the service environment's ecosystem. If FedEx hadn't acknowledged the critical role administrative assistants play in getting packages out, they never would have invented one of its critical management tools, FedEx Ship Manager.
There are a growing number of tools and metrics for service innovation. At Peer Insight, we're gathering evidence from dozens of companies that reveal many of the key principles of successful service innovation. We have organized them into 17 disciplines that allow companies to benchmark themselves. My next column will deal with how service managers can use this framework.
Tuesday, July 19, 2005
Apple Looks to Sell Videos -- and Maybe iPods to Play Them
從這篇報導來看, iPods似乎走向垂直整合的產品. 也許是受到Sony最近宣示要搶回mp3 player的市場, Apple才release這份消息....By NICK WINGFIELD and ETHAN SMITH
Staff Reporters of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL
July 18, 2005; Page B1
Apple helped ignite the digital music craze. The next possibility: video.
The Cupertino, Calif., computer and electronics company has recently held discussions with major recording companies, seeking to license music videos to sell through Apple Computer Inc.'s iTunes Music Store, according to several people in the media industry briefed on the discussions. The negotiations are a possible prelude to a version of Apple's hit iPod that would play video, a widely expected gadget that Apple has told some entertainment-industry executives that it could announce by September.
An Apple spokeswoman, Natalie Kerris, declined to comment on "rumors and speculation" about the company's plans.
Any foray into video would represent a major gamble by Apple that it could translate its smash success in digital music into a broader entertainment franchise. If successful, such efforts could help create a significant new source of income for media companies that are stepping up efforts to distribute video content on the Internet, in part to counteract the growing volumes of pirated movies, television shows and other programs being traded online.
So far, commercial movie-download services haven't widely caught on, nor have devices from Creative Technology Ltd., Samsung Electronics Co. and others that have hard disk drives onto which users can transfer video files from their PCs. Apple Chief Executive Steve Jobs, in fact, has derided the consumer appeal of watching feature-length movies on portable devices with small screens.
Yet Mr. Jobs has made a practice of criticizing product categories that Apple later adopts; he dismissed music players that use a form of storage hardware called flash memory rather than hard drives, for example, until Apple began offering the iPod Shuffle based on the technology. What's more, some analysts consider it telling that Mr. Jobs hasn't spoken out against all forms of video on portable devices, such as television programs, clips from personal camcorders and other short-form content.
Music videos, too, make sense because of the iPod's ready-made audience of music lovers. Apple in recent months has started bundling a limited number of music videos when iTunes customers purchase an entire album on the site. Users who pay $9.99 for the latest album by the White Stripes, for example, get a video for a song by the rock duo called Blue Orchid that can be downloaded to a computer.
Building on that effort, Apple has approached the four major music companies, Warner Music Group Corp., EMI Group PLC, Vivendi Universal SA's Universal Music Group and Sony BMG, a joint venture between Sony Corp. and Bertelsmann AG, to license music videos for sale through iTunes, according to people in the media industry. The videos, which could go on sale as early as September, would likely be sold for $1.99 each, with the possibility of a discount if consumers buy a music video and a song at the same time, these people say.
For music companies, a deal with Apple would represent another attempt to generate income for the music videos they sometimes spend hundreds of thousands of dollars creating. Music companies are still smarting from their two-decade-old strategic blunder of letting cable network MTV air video content for next to nothing, a decision that gave them little participation in the creation of what has become a hugely successful business for Viacom Inc.
Global music companies recently reached arrangements to charge online services like Yahoo Inc. and Time Warner Inc.'s AOL to broadcast music videos over the Internet.
Apple has also approached some media companies with television-production arms about licensing shows, one media executive said, though securing rights to sell television shows over the Internet is highly complex and is likely to take longer than other forms of video.
If Apple succeeds in creating a video-distribution service, analysts expect the company to follow up with a portable hardware device capable of playing the content, just as it has used iTunes Music Store -- which makes little money as a separate business -- to help promote sales of the highly profitable iPods. The three-year-old iPod line has led a renaissance at Apple, accounting for about a third, or $1.1 billion, of the company's $3.52 billion in total revenue last quarter.
Speculation about Apple's product moves is rampant, and frequently wide of the mark. Yet many analysts consider a video iPod a virtual certainty, in part because of Apple's strength in video software, including the Quicktime movie format and Macintosh video-editing software such as Final Cut Pro and iMovie.
In one potential clue about the company's plans, Apple recently licensed a chip from a subsidiary of Broadcom Corp. that could be used to display video on portable devices, though it can also be used to power more sophisticated graphics, a person familiar with the matter said.
"I believe it's inevitable," Richard Doherty, an analyst with Envisioneering Group, a research and consulting firm in Seaford, N.Y., says of a video iPod.
By adding video to iPods, Apple could help maintain the popularity of the devices, which have nabbed more than 90% of the market for hard-disk based music players. One threat may come from cellular phones as handset makers add increasingly sophisticated entertainment functions to the devices, including the ability to download music and video. Verizon Communications Inc., for instance, recently added a limited number of music clips to its mobile video service, which users access for a fee; other carriers are expected to follow soon.
Mr. Jobs has also fielded questions about the prospect of video iPods as head of Pixar Animation Studios, the Emeryville, Calif., movie studio responsible for "Finding Nemo" and "The Incredibles." In a conference call in May with Pixar investors and analysts, Mr. Jobs declined to say whether Pixar plans to make its library of movies available for portable video players, though he said Pixar had discussed the subject with Walt Disney Co., its movie-distribution partner.
"So far there really hasn't been a successful portable video device other than those that play industry standard DVDs, and that we participate in just because we sell DVDs," Mr. Jobs said in the call. "So who knows what's down the road?"
Monday, July 18, 2005
台幹大鬧上海灘
台幹大鬧上海灘2005/07/18
中國，創新的搖籃或墳墓？
在回答這個沒有絕對答案的問題前，先告訴你這幾個月我所經驗的一件小事。
有天當我在辦公室裡得意揚揚地告訴上海同事們，我在路邊買的盗版DVD，每片價格已從剛來時的8元人民幣，降到5元一張只有上海人才買得到的道地價格，忙著在鍵盤上運指如飛的的上海姑娘曉雯，突然不解的抬起頭望著我道：「現在誰還在買碟啊？」
是啊，現在誰還買碟啊？在同事的大笑聲中，我極不服氣地聽從指示，用百度(中國最有名的搜尋引擎。相信我，這比google好用很多。)在茫茫網海撈針。出乎意料地，我找到一堆網站。上去試了一下，簡潔的網頁要我用手機發送一個附有特定代碼的簡訊到某個電話，一分鐘後，我馬上拿到我的通關密碼。「不滿意隨時可以短消息回覆退訂。」服務真好，起碼網頁上是這樣說的。
五分鐘後，我已在線上開始看起台灣還沒有上演的世界大戰了。畫面的流暢、一月只要三十元人民幣的價格，可下載，可線上收看，內容涵蓋各式片種，還附有劇情說明和網友點評，就連台灣的各式節目一應俱全。「是啊，有了這個，現在誰還要買碟啊？」我只能洩氣的喃喃自語。
我知道這些網站幹得都是不要錢的勾當，我也知道這些網站完全視著作權於無物。但我不得不佩服，他們成功地玩出一個連比爾蓋茨（微軟最近苦心研發，希望進軍 IP電視）都看傻眼的商業模式。十分鐘裡，他已從我口袋中掏走錢。我相信即使日後網站因為版權等等因素要漲月費，我也會心干情願地買單。可以隨時看、可以在任何地方看（當然，你必須要用寬頻網路和電腦），還有豐富的互動內容，這種線上電影院去那找？
在中國，最讓我看了頭皮發麻的就是科技的應用。這裡，根本沒有章法可言，沒有所謂循序漸進這檔事。有時候憑著全民大煉鋼時代留下，全憑雙手超英趕美的土法精神就提槍上陣，但也因為如此，創新由此產生。
當台灣最近二天正為了3G開台熱烈慶祝，大陸的3G還在只聞樓梯響，不見人下來的情況。但這表示大陸的行動科技和所帶動形成的行動經濟圈比較落後嗎，答案是否定的。
例如對簡訊的應用，大陸的玩法就讓我這個跑了很多年的前電信記者瞠目結舌。前面談到的線上小額付費機制就別提了，只要你高興，幾乎每個電視節目你都可以發短信去互動留言表達意見，更別說還可以用短信當電子機票或訂計程車。
之前還親自訪問過一個一夜暴富的年輕小伙子，他只不過就是憑著一個以互動簡訊為平台，讓手機使用者可以尋找同年同月同日生的陌生人並且交談，一年之間擁有上百萬個註冊會員，快速積累千萬身價。他靠的是什麼？就是用年輕人愛交朋友愛瞎聊的個性，去充份開發簡訊運用的可能性。這例子真該讓台灣那些每次只會拿一堆炫麗科技名詞嚇唬消費者，只會感嘆消費者不長進無福消受新奇服務的電信業者好好拿去研究反省才對。
市場規模大小是創新是否得以延續或被驗証可行的原因之一，但創意卻是推動創新最不可缺的力量。兩者如果能夠結合，那力量之大猶如愛因斯坦的相對論一般，套句這裡愛用的口頭禪：「是炸開的。」中國，現在看來很有這個條件。
上海因為高樓處處，每棟樓動輒數十層，電梯就算再多也不夠用，所以一樓往往都是大排長龍等電梯的景象。這等電梯的幾分鐘空檔，究竟該做什麼？這個長以以來未曾有人解答的問題，有個才三十多歲名叫江南春的年輕人決定用他的方法試試看。
從三年前開始，江南春在每個電梯口前裝設液晶螢幕，利用ADSL線路日夜推播，針對辦公樓進出族群量身訂做的廣告，這個看來並不高明的主意，讓他在今年七月十四日登上納斯達克主席台敲響開市鐘，並為它贏得６億人民幣的身價。這個被大陸廣告界喻為第五大媒體的公司，叫做分眾傳媒。如今它已在全中國數十個城市佈下最少十萬台以上的液晶電視，讓上千萬個搭電梯的人每天最少都得看上六分鐘以上的廣告。
神奇吧！這種利用現實缺陷再利用的創新（跟IPOD SHUFFLE因為省成本拿掉液晶顯示選曲功能，讓消費者只能瞎聽歌曲，卻能另創「生活就是隨機」的行銷口號獨樹一幟的作法同出一轍）真讓人佩服的五體投地。
中國式的創新讓人驚喜，這其中包含了因地制宜、因為科技進步，不用再多花基礎建設成本一步到位（如偏遠地區乾脆不建固網，直接架設無線基地台）、刻意漠視法律，不受西方世界的條框約束等因素的混合，才造就這般新天新地景象。
中國的廣大市場，是提供創新實驗的泛土，但很不幸的，中國卻也是創新的墳墓。
中國對知識產權的維護尚未到位，固然造就許多創新商業模式的可趁之機，但接踵而來的，其他人的快速模仿，馬上讓這些創新淪為削價競爭下的犧牲品。例如之前談到的電梯廣告，如今市場上最少有十多家與其競爭，連名稱都取得相近，例如聚眾、大眾傳媒等等，魚目混珠、龍蛇雜處的情形相當嚴重。但分眾卻也無法仿效亞馬遜書店，把「點擊紀錄購買行為」這種讓人難以服氣的創新，堂而皇之地在美國註冊並受到保護，只能任由眾業者如同土狼般嘶咬這塊市場肥肉。
中國之所以是創新者墳墓的另一個原因，是因為創新的本質往往沒有更深一層的不可取代性，很多都是取巧變通下的產物，初遇時偶有驚喜，但細究之後也就沒什麼。中國游資太多，人工便宜，地方廣大，資訊流通沒有想像中快速，一旦有好點子出現在市場，三兩下馬上被「克隆」（CLONE），有時還能青出於藍更勝於藍。君不見蘋果I –TUNE和I-POD成功後多少人眼紅，但能跟上者幾希？有誰又能真正參透其創新本質？無怪乎執行長賈布斯老神在在。
中國究竟是創新的搖藍還是墳墓？這答案目前看來一半一半。
中國，創新的搖籃或墳墓？
在回答這個沒有絕對答案的問題前，先告訴你這幾個月我所經驗的一件小事。
有天當我在辦公室裡得意揚揚地告訴上海同事們，我在路邊買的盗版DVD，每片價格已從剛來時的8元人民幣，降到5元一張只有上海人才買得到的道地價格，忙著在鍵盤上運指如飛的的上海姑娘曉雯，突然不解的抬起頭望著我道：「現在誰還在買碟啊？」
是啊，現在誰還買碟啊？在同事的大笑聲中，我極不服氣地聽從指示，用百度(中國最有名的搜尋引擎。相信我，這比google好用很多。)在茫茫網海撈針。出乎意料地，我找到一堆網站。上去試了一下，簡潔的網頁要我用手機發送一個附有特定代碼的簡訊到某個電話，一分鐘後，我馬上拿到我的通關密碼。「不滿意隨時可以短消息回覆退訂。」服務真好，起碼網頁上是這樣說的。
五分鐘後，我已在線上開始看起台灣還沒有上演的世界大戰了。畫面的流暢、一月只要三十元人民幣的價格，可下載，可線上收看，內容涵蓋各式片種，還附有劇情說明和網友點評，就連台灣的各式節目一應俱全。「是啊，有了這個，現在誰還要買碟啊？」我只能洩氣的喃喃自語。
我知道這些網站幹得都是不要錢的勾當，我也知道這些網站完全視著作權於無物。但我不得不佩服，他們成功地玩出一個連比爾蓋茨（微軟最近苦心研發，希望進軍 IP電視）都看傻眼的商業模式。十分鐘裡，他已從我口袋中掏走錢。我相信即使日後網站因為版權等等因素要漲月費，我也會心干情願地買單。可以隨時看、可以在任何地方看（當然，你必須要用寬頻網路和電腦），還有豐富的互動內容，這種線上電影院去那找？
在中國，最讓我看了頭皮發麻的就是科技的應用。這裡，根本沒有章法可言，沒有所謂循序漸進這檔事。有時候憑著全民大煉鋼時代留下，全憑雙手超英趕美的土法精神就提槍上陣，但也因為如此，創新由此產生。
當台灣最近二天正為了3G開台熱烈慶祝，大陸的3G還在只聞樓梯響，不見人下來的情況。但這表示大陸的行動科技和所帶動形成的行動經濟圈比較落後嗎，答案是否定的。
例如對簡訊的應用，大陸的玩法就讓我這個跑了很多年的前電信記者瞠目結舌。前面談到的線上小額付費機制就別提了，只要你高興，幾乎每個電視節目你都可以發短信去互動留言表達意見，更別說還可以用短信當電子機票或訂計程車。
之前還親自訪問過一個一夜暴富的年輕小伙子，他只不過就是憑著一個以互動簡訊為平台，讓手機使用者可以尋找同年同月同日生的陌生人並且交談，一年之間擁有上百萬個註冊會員，快速積累千萬身價。他靠的是什麼？就是用年輕人愛交朋友愛瞎聊的個性，去充份開發簡訊運用的可能性。這例子真該讓台灣那些每次只會拿一堆炫麗科技名詞嚇唬消費者，只會感嘆消費者不長進無福消受新奇服務的電信業者好好拿去研究反省才對。
市場規模大小是創新是否得以延續或被驗証可行的原因之一，但創意卻是推動創新最不可缺的力量。兩者如果能夠結合，那力量之大猶如愛因斯坦的相對論一般，套句這裡愛用的口頭禪：「是炸開的。」中國，現在看來很有這個條件。
上海因為高樓處處，每棟樓動輒數十層，電梯就算再多也不夠用，所以一樓往往都是大排長龍等電梯的景象。這等電梯的幾分鐘空檔，究竟該做什麼？這個長以以來未曾有人解答的問題，有個才三十多歲名叫江南春的年輕人決定用他的方法試試看。
從三年前開始，江南春在每個電梯口前裝設液晶螢幕，利用ADSL線路日夜推播，針對辦公樓進出族群量身訂做的廣告，這個看來並不高明的主意，讓他在今年七月十四日登上納斯達克主席台敲響開市鐘，並為它贏得６億人民幣的身價。這個被大陸廣告界喻為第五大媒體的公司，叫做分眾傳媒。如今它已在全中國數十個城市佈下最少十萬台以上的液晶電視，讓上千萬個搭電梯的人每天最少都得看上六分鐘以上的廣告。
神奇吧！這種利用現實缺陷再利用的創新（跟IPOD SHUFFLE因為省成本拿掉液晶顯示選曲功能，讓消費者只能瞎聽歌曲，卻能另創「生活就是隨機」的行銷口號獨樹一幟的作法同出一轍）真讓人佩服的五體投地。
中國式的創新讓人驚喜，這其中包含了因地制宜、因為科技進步，不用再多花基礎建設成本一步到位（如偏遠地區乾脆不建固網，直接架設無線基地台）、刻意漠視法律，不受西方世界的條框約束等因素的混合，才造就這般新天新地景象。
中國的廣大市場，是提供創新實驗的泛土，但很不幸的，中國卻也是創新的墳墓。
中國對知識產權的維護尚未到位，固然造就許多創新商業模式的可趁之機，但接踵而來的，其他人的快速模仿，馬上讓這些創新淪為削價競爭下的犧牲品。例如之前談到的電梯廣告，如今市場上最少有十多家與其競爭，連名稱都取得相近，例如聚眾、大眾傳媒等等，魚目混珠、龍蛇雜處的情形相當嚴重。但分眾卻也無法仿效亞馬遜書店，把「點擊紀錄購買行為」這種讓人難以服氣的創新，堂而皇之地在美國註冊並受到保護，只能任由眾業者如同土狼般嘶咬這塊市場肥肉。
中國之所以是創新者墳墓的另一個原因，是因為創新的本質往往沒有更深一層的不可取代性，很多都是取巧變通下的產物，初遇時偶有驚喜，但細究之後也就沒什麼。中國游資太多，人工便宜，地方廣大，資訊流通沒有想像中快速，一旦有好點子出現在市場，三兩下馬上被「克隆」（CLONE），有時還能青出於藍更勝於藍。君不見蘋果I –TUNE和I-POD成功後多少人眼紅，但能跟上者幾希？有誰又能真正參透其創新本質？無怪乎執行長賈布斯老神在在。
中國究竟是創新的搖藍還是墳墓？這答案目前看來一半一半。
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)