Events
Event Date Location

iMedia Breakthrough Summit: The Next Wave of Marketing

10/26/2014 - 10/28/2014 Stone Mountain Georgia

Ad Age Data Conference

10/28/2014 - 10/29/2014 New York NY

CIO Perspectives Houston

11/11/2014 San Jose CA

DEMO Fall 2014 

11/18/2014 - 11/20/2014 San Jose CA

IT Roadmap Conference & Expo – Dallas

11/18/2014 Dallas TX

IT Roadmap Conference & Expo – Washington

12/03/2014 Washington D.C.

Email Insider Summit

12/07/2014 - 12/10/2014 TBA

iMedia Agency Summit: The Agency Re-Defined: Balancing Scale, Scrappiness, & Innovation

12/07/2014 - 12/10/2014 Bonita Springs FL

Search Insider Summit

12/10/2014 - 12/13/2014 Deer Valley UT

2015 International CES

01/06/2015 - 01/09/2015 Las Vegas Nevada

digital-media

Tech Marketing Guide to B2B

News, video, events, blogs about Social Media Marketing for high tech business-to-business from IDG Knowledge Hub.

Tech Marketing Guide to B2B

News, video, events, ideas and blogs about Advertising and Marketing for high tech business-to-business from IDG Knowledge Hub.

Tech Marketing Guide to B2B

News, video, events, ideas and blogs about Lead Generation Marketing for high tech business-to-business from IDG Knowledge Hub.

Tech Marketing Guide to B2B

News, video, events, blogs about Mobile Marketing for high tech business-to-business from IDG Knowledge Hub.

Tech Marketer's Guide to B2B

News, video, events, blogs about Technology Business and Marketing for high tech business-to-business from IDG Knowledge Hub.

Subscribe To Latest Posts
Subscribe

The state of UK programmatic advertising in 5 charts

Digiday

Programmatic advertising has become one of the U.K. media industry’s most bandied-about buzzwords, but until very recently, few knew whether it lived up to the hype. The picture is now a little clearer: A recent study conducted by MTM on behalf of the IAB U.K. attempts to quantify how ‘programmatic’ automation and real-time bidding techniques are being applied to advertising transactions.

According to the study, an estimated £500 million ($840 million) changed hands through some sort of automated system in the U.K. in 2013. A full 13 percent of the entire digital display market was traded on an impression-by-impression basis using real-time bidding. Slightly more, 15 percent, involved some other form of software-based automation from the buyer and seller — for example, a private marketplace. Half (51 percent) of spend went directly from an advertiser or agency to the media owner, while nearly a quarter (22 percent) was sold indirectly through an ad network.

When the market is broken down into segments, mobile leads the way in programmatic, while video lags behind. Mobile continues to grow and sees the highest proportion of real-time bidding taking place, due to the fast pace of new product innovation in the market. Video, meanwhile, is still mostly bought and sold through direct or indirect ad networks without the use of automated systems.


The IAB UK predicts as much as 46 percent of total display advertising could be traded using some form of software automation by the end of 2014, such is the rapid growth of the practice. This means over £1 billion ($1.68 billion) could be spent through some form of automated buying and selling process this year.

Click to read more…

The truth about big data: It’s more than technology

IDG News Service

Hey, it must be hard to be the only person on the planet who doesn’t understand big data.

Actually, that’s far from true: You’re in good company. While Gartner finds that 64 percent of enterprises are investing in big data, a similar chunk (60 percent) don’t have a clue as to what to do with their data.

The real problem isn’t one of technology, but of process. The key to succeeding with big data, as in all serious IT investments, is iteration. It’s not about Hadoop, NoSQL, Splunk, or any particular vendor or technology. It’s about iteration.

Big data, big confusion
Though the number of companies embracing big data projects has grown since 2012 — from 58 percent of enterprises surveyed to 64 percent — the level of understanding of exactly what to do with that data hasn’t kept pace, as the Gartner data suggests.

This isn’t all that surprising, given how hard it is to pull money from data. It’s easy to say “actionable insights,” but far harder to glean them. That’s why data scientists currently outearn most other professions, with an average salary of $123,000, which continues to go up:

Those who do data science well blend statistical, mathematical, and programming skills with domain knowledge, a tough combination to find in any single person. Of these, I’d argue that domain knowledge matters most as it leads to the process of getting value from data, as Gartner analyst Svetlana Sicular hints:

Organizations already have people who know their own data better than mystical data scientists …. Learning Hadoop is easier than learning the company’s business. What is left? To form a strong team of technology and business experts and supportive management who create a safe environment for innovation.

That “safe environment for innovation” is one that affords data practitioners room to iterate.

Innovation is iteration
There are at least two major problems with big data projects. The first is that many companies consider them, well, projects. Big data isn’t a one-off project: It’s a culture of collecting, analyzing, and using data. As Phil Simon, author of “Too Big to Ignore: The Business Case for Big Data,” told me: “Do you think that Amazon, Apple, Facebook, Google, Netflix, and Twitter do? Nope. It’s part of their DNA.”

The way it becomes DNA, however, is the second detail that trips up companies getting into big data: They think it’s a technology issue. While most great big data technology is open source, building out a big data application isn’t as simple as downloading Hadoop or the NoSQL database of your choice. As IDC analyst Carl Olofson highlights:

Organizations should not jump too quickly into committing to any big data technology, whether Hadoop or otherwise, as their solution to a given problem, but should consider all the alternatives carefully and develop a strategy for big data technology deployment.

Such careful consideration happens by iterating. Rather than paying a mega-vendor a mega-check to get started (do this, and you are absolutely doing big data wrong), the right approach is to start small. As Thomas Edison noted, the trick is to fail fast or, as he says, “I have not failed. I’ve just found 10,000 ways that won’t work.”

Big data is all about asking the right questions, hence the importance of domain knowledge. But in reality, you’ll probably fail to collect the right data and to ask pertinent questions — over and over again. The key, then, is to use flexible, open data infrastructure that allows you to continually tweak your approach until it bears real fruit.

Click to continue reading

 

Reports of the iPad’s Demise Are Greatly Exaggerated

Mashable

The tablet is dead. At least, that’s what an array of breathless news reports would have you believe. Yes, it’s true that tablet sales are on the decline in many markets and growing slower than others. But don’t believe the unhype; the tablet isn’t going to suffer the same fate as the netbook.

Apple on Tuesday announced its third quarter 2014 earnings. And in what has become a trend, iPad sales failed to meet analyst expectations. Perhaps even more troubling, sales of the iPad were actually down year-over-year, a rarity in a growing market.

Looking at these figures, you can see that although the iPad is still boasting big sales — especially during the holiday quarter — it isn’t continuing to sell in the numbers many analysts predicted it would.

During the earnings call, Apple CEO Tim Cook attributed the slower sales in part to “market softness in certain parts of the world,” primarily in the United States and Western Europe.

Tablet growth is slowing in developed markets

Apple isn’t the only company seeing a year-over-year decline in tablet sales. According to IDC, the worldwide tablet market grew 11% year over year, but declined sequentially from the first quarter of 2014 by -1.5%.

At the end of May, IDC updated its 2014 worldwide tablet forecast to a growth rate of 12.1% year-over-year. In contrast, tablet sales worldwide grew 51.8% year-over-year in 2013. In other words, the big boom of tablet sales’ glory days are over.

At least, that’s what some pundits and analysts are espousing. And although its true that tablet sales aren’t growing at the same rate in which they were (and are contracting in certain markets, such as the U.S.), that doesn’t mean the category as a hole was a failure or is doomed.

During the earnings call, Tim Cook spoke at length about the slowing iPad sales. He made it a point to note that

“One other point I might add on this, because I think this is interesting,” Cook said. “The market’s very bifurcated on iPad. In the BRIC [Brazil, Russia, India and China] countries, iPad did extremely well. The growth was very high. Like in the China it was [about 50%], in the Middle East it was [about 60%]. Luca may have mentioned those numbers. In the developed countries like the U.S., the market is clearly weaker there.”

Part of the reason that growth might be slowing — or declining — in the United States may simply be a factor of faster market penetration.

According to the Pew Internet Project’s research related to mobile tech, 42% of adults own a tablet computer. That compares favorably with the 58% of American adults that have a smartphone. When once considers that the tablet market is much newer than the smartphone market, the fast adoption rate is likely one reason growth has slowed faster too.

Click to continue reading

The internet of things – the next big challenge to our privacy

The Guardian

If there’s a depressing slogan for the early era of the commercial internet, it’s this: “Privacy is dead – get over it.”

For most of us, the internet is complex and opaque. Some might be vaguely aware that their personal data are getting sucked, their search histories tracked, and their digital journeys scoured.

But the current nature of online services provides few mechanisms for individuals to have oversight and control of their information, particularly across tech-vendors.

An important question is whether privacy will change as we enter the era of pervasive computing. Underpinned by the Internet of Things, pervasive computing is where technology is seamlessly embedded within the real world, intrinsically tied to the physical environment.

If the web is anything to go by, the new hyperconnected world will only make things worse for privacy. Potentially much worse.

More services and more things only mean more data being generated and exchanged. The increase in data volume and complexity might plausibly result in less control. It’s a reasonable assumption, and it leaves privacy in a rather sorry state.

Many of the future predictions about privacy reflect this bleak diagnosis. If privacy isn’t dead yet, then billions-upon-billions of chips, sensors, and wearables will seal the deal.

But before jumping to such conclusions – and bearing in mind the immense power of established tech-vendors and their interest in this space – there may still be reasons to be positive. In particular, the fundamental differences between pervasive computing and Web 2.0 provide a beacon of hope.

One difference is that with pervasive computing, much of the technology becomes tangible and familiar. This makes issues of privacy more readily apparent to users. Web browsing histories stretching back over time are one thing; Google Glass is quite another.

If you can physically witness aspects of data collection, it short-circuits what has traditionally been a long feedback loop between privacy risk and cumulative effect. The hope is that the increased awareness inspires action.

This ties to a second difference: the technology itself could enable action. Unlike the web, where offerings tend to be one-size-fits-all, pervasive computing is driven by the individual, focusing on customised, person-centric services and experiences.

If the technology supporting this properly places individuals in the driving seat, it could also be used to provide individuals with the opportunity to take control of their personal data.

Moving from the abstract web

It has taken years for the sort of awareness and backlash that we’re now starting to see against Facebook, Google, and other major internet vendors that trade in personal data.

This is a product, in many respects, of the inherent obscurity of data collection by web-based services.

Moving from the web to the Internet of Things, many aspects of technology shift from being abstract and hidden, to being grounded in the real world.

Continue reading…

How to prepare for the flood of wearables into the workplace

CITEworld

If there’s a single lesson for enterprise IT professionals to learn from the consumerization, BYOD, and shadow IT trends that have rocked businesses of all shapes and sizes in recent years, it’s that workers will provide their own technology to solve problems if IT can’t or won’t deliver solutions that offer the ease, polish, and efficiency of consumer products.

After decades of being the arbiter of technology in the workplace and presiding over systems that generally grew and improved slowly and steadily, there was a sudden influx of consumer-oriented smartphones connecting to networks orders of magnitude fast than most corporate networks, app stores offering free or low cast apps that are easy to install, and cloud services that linked all of these technologies together. In just a couple of years, the playing field was massively and irrevocably altered and most IT organizations are still struggling to catch up.

For many IT organizations, learning that lesson and incorporating it into practice has been a rocky experience. Ignoring that lesson has often been equally brutal. Many IT leaders that have failed to consider this lesson have seen their influence, budgets, and staffing cut and seen other executives and line of business managers chipping away at their authority and capabilities.

Responding to this challenge has required enterprise developers and IT professionals, who are managing a range under-the-hood infrastructure along with PCs and devices in the hands of users, to develop new skills. That includes some of the so-called soft skills, like the ability to communicate effectively and collaborate with end users to understand their needs and issues and develop solutions that respond to them. It also includes skills that aren’t quite so easy to define, like understanding how to present information on a mobile device; adopting interface design that as easy to use as the best consumer app out there; and considering context as part of system, app, and network design (is someone in the office, at home, connecting by public Wi-Fi?).

Just as enterprise IT has been starting to get a handle on those challenges and become comfortable with those new skills, things are about to change again.

Welcome wearables

Wearables are poised to make a dramatic entrance into our lives and workplaces, if they haven’t already. Wearables pose many of the paradigm shifting challenges that mobile devices, apps, and cloud services did.

The needs of an effective smartwatch app are different from the needs of a smartphone or tablet. There’s no keyboard, screen real estate is very limited for both display or touch input, voice is the most likely candidate for entering data despite the focus on text-based input that has dominated previous phases of computing (including smartphones), and the best smartwatch apps to date are pared down to focus on a single task and execute it as efficiently as possible.

Google Glass and its impending competitors have a completely different set of needs and capabilities. Information needs to be displayed in a way that is as distraction-free as possible, considering that users will be interacting with the real world while using the device in a way that hasn’t been true with smartphones. Interacting with that information will almost certainly be a more more persistent experience than quick glances at a smartwatch or smartphone.

Wearables will also make understanding context more important, both in the apps designed for them and the smartphones paired with them. Context will become more granular, particularly if technologies like iBeacons or other smart devices are part of the equation. It won’t be a matter of understanding the difference between a user being at work or home. It’ll mean understanding if the user is at her desk or in a conference room, what meeting is going on in that conference room and who else is attending, if the meeting is so important that notifications should be disabled, and if she’s speaking or presenting and will immediate access to other data be needed?

Continue reading

6 reasons to reconsider time spent with media when considering ad placement

INMA

Time spent with media seems to be the hot topic based on the number of times I have been shown this chart of Internet trends, created by Mary Meeker of Kleiner Perkins Caufield Byers. The chart details the amount of time spent with a medium compared with ad dollars spent in the United States.

People argue that newspapers get too many advertising dollars for time spent with that particular medium. This is one statistic from one source. It is one piece of the puzzle – like only considering hair colour when looking at the overall population.

  1. Consider how strange it is to look at time spent. If we analysed most people’s days in terms of time spent, the conclusion would be that we love working and sleeping. Both activities are a necessity for most people, but not how they would choose to spend their time.
  2. What we spend most of our time doing does not necessarily represent a good opportunity for advertising. If we spend most of our time working and sleeping, logic would argue that these are the biggest ad opportunities in our lives. However, they are not. In both cases, we are generally unavailable during these hours as we are consumed by other tasks.
  3. The time-spent argument does not peel away the content and get at time spent with ads – and this is what the advertisers really want to know. This information would be more revealing.

    People spend hours watching television each week, but do they fast-forward through or record the show and, therefore, not watch the ads? Time spent with ads on television might be close to zero for some people.

    What about advertisement engagement with radio programming? Do people change channels when ads come on?

  4. Do users want ads? In many cases – NO! The user would be happy to avoid them or not have them at all. When reading the newspaper, both print and Web users tell us they want ads.

    Newspapers provide local advertising information that, in many cases, is not readily available anywhere else. And let’s not forget about the deals and offers the medium highlights, as well.

  5. Engagement must be a factor. “Lean-in” media are those that users give their full attention to, such as newspapers and their corresponding Web sites.

    “Lean-back” media allow the user to do other things at the same time. For example, outdoor ads can been seen during a drive, when the radio is also on, and there is a discussion in the car with the other occupants. This does not allow for full engagement.

  6. It is also essential to consider a user’s frame of mind. If users are rushed and focused on something else, ads that they encounter may be fleeting, if they’re seen at all. Other media are used in a relaxed state of mind when users would be open to messages, with time to explore ideas and ads.

    Newspaper readers on all devices are looking for interesting content and ads provide this, too.

Time spent should not be viewed in isolation, and it may not even be the best criteria when determining where to place ad dollars. It is easy to track and present, so it is used as shorthand “proof” but it misses other key factors.

Think about the whole situation when considering time spent with media. Don’t judge based simply on the colour of our hair.

Brands ‘not ready’ for digital era

Warc

Many brands are still “not ready for the digital era” as their marketing departments lack the skillsets necessary to thrive in the connected age, a leading executive has argued.

Speaking at the 2014 Association of National Advertisers (ANA) Digital & Social Media Conference, Bob Liodice, the organisation’s president/ceo, asserted that technology was a “critical enabler” for brands.

But exploiting the opportunities currently available – from formulating one-to-one conversations to driving innovation and pursuing purpose-driven branding – will require a significant shift in skillsets.

“We need to build skills,” Liodice said. (For more, including insights from senior marketers from Unilever, Ford and more, read Warc’s exclusive report: ANA’s Liodice outlines challenges (and opportunities) for the digital age.)

At present, he continued, the majority of organisations do not have the requisite talent in place to move ahead at the desired speed.

“Survey after survey suggests that we’re not ready for the digital era,” Liodice said.

“We found, in one survey, that only 25% of marketers said that they have the skillset necessary to be able to take advantage of the opportunities that are now afforded to them.”

Taking the next step, he reported, would demand a transition in mindset away from the existing marketing model towards a genuinely integrated approach.

“We essentially need to make a change from digital marketing to marketing in a digital age,” the ANA’s president/ceo asserted.

Marc Pritchard, Procter & Gamble’s global brand building officer, has put forward a similar theory, as he reflected that traditional ideas of digital marketing were almost “dead”.

Liodice drew attention to other marketers who had elaborated on such themes, like Joe Tripodi, evp/chief marketing and commercial officer at soft drinks giant Coca-Cola, who has called on brands to “embrace the values of millennials”.

Antonio Lucio, global chief brand officer at financial services group Visa, has further asserted that millennials are the most “equipped” to drive change, adding that “digital natives will rule the world”.

Yusuf Medhi, chief marketing and strategy officer for the XBOX games console at Microsoft, has equally encouraged marketers to “consume new technology – use it, spend time with it and learn from people it has benefitted”.

Ready or Not, the Internet of Things Is Coming

eMarketer

Think the net neutrality debate is all about streaming videos? Think again. It’s actually much more than that: It’s about streaming your life. Internet connectivity might seem ubiquitous today, between the use of PCs, mobile devices, and smart TVs, but there are major swaths of daily life that aren’t connected yet that soon will become so, such as homes and cars, according to a new eMarketer report, “Key Digital Trends for Midyear 2014: The Internet of Things, Net Neutrality, and Why Marketers Need to Care.”

176056 Ready or Not, the Internet of Things Is Coming

Connecting all the unconnected devices, machines and systems will involve vast numbers of new internet-enabled objects and large sums of money. In a relatively untapped market with seemingly limitless potential, forecasts tend toward the sky-high:

  • International Data Corporation predicts the worldwide market for “internet of things” (IoT) solutions will grow from $1.9 trillion in 2013 to $7.1 trillion in 2020.
  • MarketsandMarkets gives the IoT market a more conservative—but still lofty—valuation of $1.029 trillion in 2013, increasing to $1.423 trillion by 2020.
  • Gartner forecasts 26 billion connected objects worldwide by 2020 (a figure that does not include PCs, smartphones and tablets).
  • IDATE projects 80 billion internet-connected things in 2020, up from 15 billion in 2012. This figure does include PCs, TVs and smart devices, but the vast majority (85%) will be objects like car tires or shipping pallets that may communicate with the web via an intermediate device. Devices that communicate directly, such as PCs, TVs and mobile phones, will make up 11% of the total in 2020.
  • Cisco Systems predicts 50 billion things will be connected by 2022, yielding $19 trillion in new revenues ($14.4 trillion of which will accrue to private-sector corporations).

“There’s no doubt the world is moving toward a more connected future, but the speed with which consumers and enterprises make the transition to the internet of things is still to be determined,” said Noah Elkin, executive editor at eMarketer. “The timing of adoption will determine just how much money and how many things are involved.”

What businesses need to know about Touch ID and iOS 8

CITEworld

Apple introduced Touch ID along with the iPhone 5s and iOS 7 last fall. At launch, the technology was limited to two purposes – acting as a shortcut for a user’s passcode to unlock the device, and acting as an alternative to a user’s Apple ID and password when making purchases from Apple’s iTunes Store, App Store, and iBookstore.

With iOS 8, Apple is expanding the capabilities of Touch ID significantly by giving developers the APIs needed to use Touch ID as an authentication/authorization method in third-party apps. This is a powerful expansion of the technology, and one that could be applied to a wide range of different types of apps.

It’s easy to see the value of Touch ID in mobile commerce apps, as well as in mobile banking apps – PayPal was one of the first companies to express an interest in integrating Touch ID into its app and services. Password managers like 1Password from Agilebits are also prime uses for the technology. Apps that store confidential or sensitive information — like health and medical apps — can also benefit from integrating Touch ID.

Business and productivity apps, especially those designed to provide secure access to a company’s corporate resources and cloud services, are also areas where Touch ID could be implemented. That raises questions for IT leaders in many organizations to ask themselves:

  • Is it a good idea to build Touch ID into our internal apps?
  • Should we allow, encourage, or support Touch ID in apps from cloud storage and collaboration vendors?
  • Are there reasons to avoid Touch ID, either in enterprise or third-party apps?

Given that it seems almost certain that Apple will expand the well-received TouchID to any additional iOS devices launching later this year, these aren’t hypothetical questions. They’re questions that organizations will likely face as soon as Apple releases iOS 8 this fall.

Touch ID and the Secure Enclave

At a hardware level, Touch ID includes two primary components: Touch ID Sensor, the fingerprint scanner built into the device’s home button, and the Secure Enclave, a coprocessor that is integrated into Apple’s A7 chip. The Secure Enclave is connected to the Touch ID Sensor and is responsible for processing fingerprint scans. Each Secure Enclave has a unique identity (UID) provisioned during the A7’s fabrication process that cannot be accessed by other iOS components, and that is unknown even to Apple.

Touch ID is actually just one function of the Secure Enclave. Additional functions like cryptographic protection for data protection key management were identified in the iOS Security Guide that Apple released in February. Additional details were discussed during the Keychain and Authentication with Touch ID session at Apple’s Worldwide Developers Conference last month, which can be streamedfrom Apple’s developer site (and a PDF of the presentation slides from the session is also available). Going forward, it seems clear that the Secure Enclave will be a key part of iOS security functions, beyond merely handling fingerprint identification.

It’s also worth mentioning that although the Touch ID Sensor is currently only available on the iPhone 5s, the additional functionality of the Secure Enclave is built into any iOS device with an A7 chip, which currently includes the iPad Air, iPad mini with Retina Display in addition to the iPhone 5c, opening the door for more security features down the line.

Touch ID and a user’s passcode

Apple hasn’t envisioned Touch ID as a standalone biometric authentication system (or part of a multi-factor authentication solution). That means that it isn’t a replacement for a passcode. An iPhone 5s user must supply a passcode to enable Touch ID and once enabled, Touch ID is effectively a shortcut or pointer to a passcode.

The value that Touch ID offers is that it boasts the benefits of a complex passcode without the hassle of typing it dozens or hundreds of times a day – it makes a complex passcode easier to use.

Continue reading

Report: Samsung and Google Butt Heads Over Smartwatches

Mashable

Are Google and Samsung fighting over Tizen’s role in wearables? According to a new report, the answer is yes.

According to The Information, Google CEO Larry Page met with Samsung Vice Chairman Jay Y. Lee at the Allen & Co. conference in Sun Valley. The purpose of the meeting? To discuss Samsung’s plans for wearables.

Evidently, the meeting wasn’t a success. The report reveals Page was unhappy to hear that Samsung still plans to focus most of its wearable efforts on its own Tizen operating system rather than giving more support to Android Wear.

Although Samsung has made a smartwatch that runs Android Wear — the Gear Live — the bulk of its smartwatch efforts are focused on Tizen.

Google and Samsung have a decidedly complicated relationship. Samsung is the most successful Android OEM by a large margin. As a result, Samsung wants to be able to differentiate and customize its experience. Sometimes, however, things go too far. In January, Samsung agreed totone down the extent to which it customizes Android’s user interface. Still, that hasn’t stopped Samsung from creating its own app store and doing its part to maintain the Galaxy branding.

With wearables, the situation becomes even more complex, because Samsung is essentially selling two competing devices. The Gear 2 smartwatch runs Samsung’s own software and works only with Galaxy smartphones. The Gear Live, on the other hand, has to follow Google’s rules and will work with any Android 4.3 or higher device — even if it’s made by someone other than Samsung.

The wearable market — especially the smartwatch part of it — is still new enough to allow Samsung to support both platforms. Assuming the smartwatch truly does go mainstream, however, Samsung may have to choose a platform and commit to it. For Google, the question then becomes, what does it need to do to keep its most important partner committed, without ceding control of its platform.

Click here to see more