Jake (of NoteLeaf):
We humans are used to thinking in terms of true or false, yet often, the concept of probability eludes us. It is possible to have a successful startup anywhere, is a true statement (proof: [insert example of one local web startup], QED.), but that doesn’t mean it’s probable.
If only.
FIFA:
The notion of traditional footballing powerhouses is becoming obsolete, Brazil coach Dunga said after reigning champions Italy were eliminated from the FIFA World Cup on Thursday.
First, France. Now add Italy to the list of nations that were either not ready, not threatened, felt entitled, or simply didn’t have the skill to advance out of their Group.
A second point Dunga eloquently makes is that many of these “lesser” teams have players that are playing in the best European club, notably shown by the Ivory Coast and Cameroon.
It should also be noted that while England and Germany just barely booked their ticket to the next round, notable powerhouses like Spain still have to make sure they get in on their last game.
Chile 1 – Honduras 0
Chile hasn’t had a World Cup victory in almost five decades. They played today like they wanted to change that and so it’s no surprise they did. I’d watch out for the Chilean team and not totally underestimate them. Deserved win.
Spain 0 – Switzerland 1
Well, I suppose this is the big upset today. I remember reading the blogosphere yesterday and seeing a lot of semi-arrogant and unfounded claims that this will be an easy game. A complete yawner that may not even be worth watching. Or, as Tim Bray eloquently said:
The interesting game, since Group H is a complete yawner which will deliver Spain and some cannon fodder to the round of 16, is South Africa-Uruguay of course, since Group A is so wide-open.
There’s this notion in world football that only a handful of nations possess the skill to advance in this tournament. That’s the part I hate and disagree with. While historically that might have been true, it’s just not that accurate today. If you remember correctly, the tournament was expanded to include 32 teams back in 1998, allowing more teams from the regions of Africa, Asia, and North America to compete.
The game of football has changed dramatically and a lot of nations that have historically not been that strong are now pulling huge upsets. The audacity of the stereotypical superstars (Brazil, England, France, Spain, Italy, Germany, etc) is just unfounded now. It doesn’t even make sense.
If you got anything from this game, it should be just how the playing field is now ever more level, fair, and balanced. Today, Switzerland pulled an upset with Spain, previously ranked the world’s number one team. The United States, back in the Confederations Cup, pulled a similar upset. Egypt defeated the defending World Cup winners in the Confederations Cup as well. And so far, in this tournament, these supposed superstars have largely been absent, with the exception so far of Germany.
Argentina barely pulled a win against Nigeria. Brazil beat the unknown and inexperienced North Korean squad by one measly goal. France, with all its might, couldn’t even score against a team from Uruguay playing with one man down.
So, don’t think of this game as a huge upset…because it’s been coming for a long time. This is to be expected. Teams that qualify for the World Cup, whether they are France, Brazil, Slovenia or Switzerland, are playing on the most level of playing fields. At this point, literally anyone can win this tournament.
Does Europe really deserve 13 spots of the 32 today? Especially given the fact that a continent like Africa only gets 5 spots? Would a capable African team (like Egypt) have deserved a spot more than some of these European teams? Historically, there might have been some reason or excuse to back this policy up. Today, that’s no longer the case…and we’re only going to see that more as the World Cup continues on.
Can’t wait for Day 7.
South Africa 0 – Uruguay 3
Wow.
The World Cup hasn’t had that many high-scoring games so far. This one was fun to watch. Uruguay won the FIFA World Cup twice decades ago…is there even a chance it could replicate that success? Who knows. All I can see is just how interesting that group is. The supposed favorite (France) is starting to look rather poor. Uruguay’s very much on top of that group, at least at the present time. If they keep playing like this, France might really face some trouble even getting to the Top 16.
Mr. President:
But even though the mainstream press gives me a hard time, I hear that I’m pretty big on Twitter, Facebook (or as Sarah Palin calls it: “the socialized media”)
I first heard of Lala.com in October of 2008. The company behind the website had existed for years before that, starting as a CD swapping service (one with questionable legality issues) and then turning itself into a music hub (that ended up failing).
October of 2008 though was different. That was the special month when the innovative company re-defined itself for the third time and launched a brand new product. Blogs hailed it as a revolution, and that’s precisely what it was.
At the time, the only way to buy music was iTunes/Amazon for $0.99, regular CDs, or some subscription model. Lala came in and started charging $0.10/song for unlimited online streaming, and that was brilliant. It launched with a lot of support and had a 175,000 song catalog populated by the four major record labels.
Since I almost always listen to my music on the computer, I thought I would give it a shot and I ultimately got addicted. Today, it’s the only music application I use and I absolutely love it. Lala’s future certainly looked promising, as they started work on an iPhone app and slowly started adding independent artists. It certainly seemed, at the time, that Lala (with $35.1 million in total funding) was quite possibly going to redefine how we purchased music.
That all changed on another date: December 4, 2010, when Apple Inc ultimately bought the startup (which apparently was in monetary turmoil) for a paltry $17m.
As an apparent Apple fanboy, I wasn’t sure how to feel about that purchase. On one hand, I was glad that Lala, given its extensive cash drain, got bought by a company with deep pockets. I quitely hoped that the sale simply meant that Lala wouldn’t be going anywhere. On the other hand, however, I was a bit scared. While I completely respect Apple, I was afraid they might be simply buying Lala to stop the competition. It certainly wouldn’t be the first time a large technology company bought a smaller company only to ultimately shut it down.
Ever since that point, I have slowed down my rate of purchases on Lala, in fear that one day I wouldn’t have access to the hundreds of songs I bought. Sadly, the apparently inevitable happened; earlier today, Lala announced that the service is shut down. They’re no longer accepting new users and old users like me have only until May 31st to use the website. After that, I will simply have my Lala money converted to iTunes store credit.
The web understandably up in arms in anger over this. The money I spent to get hundreds of songs on Lala will most likely only get me tens of songs on iTunes. I can no longer listen to my songs online, and any hope that I might be able to listen to Lala on my mobile device have been hopelessly shattered.
Is this the end of Lala? The real answer is maybe.
May 31, 2010 is a very interesting date, as it’s days/weeks before two major Apple events. The WWDC is occuring in early June and Steve will take the stage with Walt at All Things D. iPhone 4 will also most likely be released in early June.
How awesome would it be if Apple is simply killing Lala to replace it with a better more innovative iTunes in the cloud? Could the reason behind shutting down Lala.com simply be to replace it with iTunes.com? I sure hope so.
A lot of people are skeptical about Apple moving iTunes to the cloud, at least completely, and that makes sense. As it stands, iTunes revenue is a huge part of Apple’s profits and surely the first people that would object to moving tunes to the web and slashing the prices would be the major record labels that supply all the content. So, a complete move is highly unlikely.
But what about a compromise? Surely, Apple can give us a choice – offering a joint-service model of sorts – between owning “streaming rights” to a song and owning the actual song itself.
Such a move would be unprecedented and would definitely has the potential of reshaping an industry that terribly needs a new way of doing things.
Perhaps that’s why Apple bought Lala. Perhaps Steve Jobs isn’t finished with reinventing the music industry. We’ll certainly know for sure soon, but my money will be on the forthcoming launch of iTunes.com and I simply can’t wait for that moment.
Michael Arrington:
Hewlett-Packard has killed off its much ballyhooed Windows 7 tablet computer, says a source who’s been briefed on the matter.
This is a great sign, especially for everyone out there who was afraid of HP not taking webOS seriously. Is a webOS tablet in the works? I hope so…as I’ve said before, Palm’s webOS is really the only true competitor to Apple’s iPhone OS.
(Google’s Android, in my humble opinion, isn’t really after iPhone OS. It’s really killing Microsoft’s Windows Mobile.)
TechCrunch:
In a brief message that was just posted on the Lala.com website, Apple has announced that the service will be shut down on May 31st, 2010. Apple will not be accepting new users, and existing users will be able to log in only until the end of next month.
As a big fan of Lala, this is really painful…unless it signals iTunes.com/iTunes in the Cloud. If that’s the case, then I’m really really really going to be happy.