Apple unveils the 'magical' iPad

The Apple CEO Steve Jobs described iPad as an extraordinary device that provides  the best browsing experience... unbelievably great... greater than iPhone.. Steve Jobs captured the audience once again. The last time was the iPhone and now it is the iPad. He has got the attention of the masses.

So what is this magical device? What is unique about it? Why is it getting so much of media attention?
It is a computer.. a computer without real keyboard and mouse.... wait .. not just a computer....  it is a a portable book ...a photo frame... a music box... and what not!

Lets look into its features - It is thin and light, just 9.7 inches when measured diagonally and weighs  about 1.5 pounds. It has LED-backlit that makes it perfect for web browsing, watching movies and viewing photos. It has excellent color and contrast and has a multi-touch screen just like iPhone that work in any orientation. It has both wifi and cellular access. It has 802.11n to support fast wifi network and 3G cellular access if wifi network is not available. And the best part is that it has 10 hours of battery life! And ofcourse like iPhone, you can use your fingers to scroll up and down and pinch to zoom in or out.

Although it is still 90 days to hit the market, I think it will become a popular device very soon - just like the iPohne. Yes, it is a bit pricey - $499 for the lowest end. But then remember even the iPhone was expensive - $399 when it came out but still it sold out and was difficult to get at stores. The iPhone success story is going to drive the iPad market. People believe in Apple coz they saw the technology worked amazingly well in iPhone. The multi-touch screen experience in iPhone and iPod made the consumers yearn for the same experience in their everyday computer.

Is this the first product of this kind? Surprisingly not true. Microsoft has been selling tablet-shaped computers for years. The Microsoft tablet PC is a fully-functional personal computer running Microsoft Windows XP that is geared for pen-enabled, handwriting-enabled, and speech-enabled applications. However, Microsoft Tablet PC has caught on mainly in niche business markets like health care and transportation and has not reached the common man. Maybe because it is expensive or maybe because it is from Microsoft.

The other product that iPad is going to compete is  Amazon's electronic book - Kindle. Compared to iPad, Kindle is a simple device - just half as heavy as iPad, has an E Ink display that is easy on the eyes even in bright daylight, has two weeks of battery life, and 3G wireless with no monthly fees for just $259. It is just an electronic book and not a computer! It is only time that will tell which is going to be more popular.

Barbara Liskov wins ACM Turing Award

The MIT professor, Barbara Liskov has won the 2008 Association for Computing Machinery's A.M Turing Award, one of the highest honors in computer science. It is often referred as the "Nobel prize in computing". She was awarded the Turing award for her work in design of programming languages and software methodology that led to object-oriented programming. Barbara Liskov was the first woman in the United States to be awarded a Ph.D from a computer science department (in Stanford). However, she is the second woman to get the prestigious ACM Turing award. The first one was Frances Elizabeth Allen who won the 2006 Turing award for her work in high performance computing.

I really hope that women like Barbara Liskov and Frances Elizabeth inspire young girls in schools and colleges to take up Science and Engineering.

It is sad but true that today women are in minority in the computing world. This trend is getting worse; young girls are less and less motivated to take up computer science as their subject of choice. Studies show that vast number of girls loose interest in math and technology right in middle school and their interest totally die off by the time they reach high school. As a result women are vastly underrepresented in one of the most economically significant profession of the 21st century.

The open question is that "why are so few women in computing" and "why are women not interested in computer science and technology". Depending on whom you ask, you will get answers varying from "women are not smart enough to understand computers" to "women are not just interested in computers". A simple google search will reveal that numerous women have made countless contributions in science and technology like Madam Curie for discovering the phenomenon of radioactivity; Mary Anderson for inventing a car-window cleaning device commonly called as windshield wipers etc. The big question is that if women are smart and intelligent, then why are they so few in numbers in science and technology? Why are women shying away from technology? This is not a common observation but has become a hot topic of research in academia.

The American society is consumed by stereotyping of kids right from the time they are born. Boys like blue, girls like pink. Boys like to play with cars and guns and girls like to play with barbie dolls and beads. The society is responsible for molding boys and girls in specific ways; making choices for them and promoting stereotyping. This stereotyping spreads in all aspect of their life as they grow older. Math and science are for boys; arts and social science are for girls. Techno gizmo is for boys and fashion dressing-up is for girls.

Girls have less and less motivation to fight the system. Fewer and fewer girls stand against these social norms and make their own choices. Women face more hurdles when they choose a field dominated by men. A woman is not easily accepted for her intellectual or analytical abilities until she proves it; and proves it again; and yet again. Women shy away from situations that require open display of aggressive language or behavior. If she is not aggressive enough, she is considered under-confident. Her aggressiveness depends on her confidence level. Woman's confidence needs strong backing of knowledge and information. Even if a man is 80 percent confident about a subject, he will market it and express it in a way that gives an impression that he is 100 percent confident about what he is saying. On the contrary, even if a women is 110 percent confident about the subject, she will sound 80 percent confident. In total, she displays less confidence in more situations. Apart from personality issues, social and psychological factors also affect in making the woman's life difficult. She mixes her personal and professional life and confuses her priorities. Her first grader kid's math test is as important to her as her project deadline; the parent-teacher conference at school is as important to her as her company meeting. This definitely has an effect in her professional advancement!

I am not trying to justify woman's lack of interest in fields dominated by men; I am just trying to state few reasons that are causing this lack of interest. If we want more women in the field of science and technology, we need to analyze and address the reasons that are causing the women to move away from it. We definitely need to address the stereotyping problem; need to motivate young girls in science and math; need to provide healthy environment to women currently pursuing technology to grow and advance their career.

We definitely need to recognize more women like Barbara Liskov and Frances Elizebeth who are source of inspiration and are role models to the younger generation.

Texas police shake down drivers, lawsuit claim

I was thinking the other day how the current economic downturn is going to impact the society. One of the things that I couldn't stop myself worrying about was the crime factor. More people are out of job, more people are homeless, more people are struggling to make their ends meet. Will this translate to more petty crimes, more thefts, more burglary? Do we need to start worrying about our safety now? Do we need to be careful while walking down the roads? Will the law enforcement authorities be able to cope with the increased law-breaking calls now? Are they well equipped for the tough times?

Although my concerns are valid, I missed out an important factor. It never occurred to me that the law-enforcement authority themselves could pose a threat to the society. It is very disturbing but true that "police" who are there to protect the public are themselves becoming part of the problem. Now who do we go for help?

In California roads, we are seeing more and more cases where the Highway police is ticketing drivers for minor violations. It is scary to spot a cop in the highway, because you could be ticketed for anything that you do or not do. The enforcement of using hands free on mobile phone has given the police a free pass to stop tons of people for talking over the phone while driving. Yes, it is against law now to talk and drive. But if I understand the law correctly, it is okay to talk over the phone using speaker phone or car kits. But couple of my friends were ticketed for talking over the speaker-phone. Should I carry the rule book with me and be prepared to argue with the cop? It doesn't seem like a wise thing to do.

I got ticketed for talking over the phone using both my headphones (using iPhone headset). I thought it was ridiculous to give me tickets for speaking with headphones. But then today I heard of the case where my friend's friend got a ticket for wearing headphones on both ears and riding a bike. A bicycle!!! Makes me wonder, if I will get a ticket next for wearing headphones and walking in the streets.

Like everyone else, police department is going through budget crisis. They want to raise money. Traffic tickets generate instant money with just a little effort. It is definitely much easier than raising taxes to meet the budget. People are definitely going to drive and are definitely going to make some mistake while driving. Catch them... penalize them... ask them to pay huge amount. Make them pay to save your job is the motto of the police department. So they are ready on the roads with their radar guns to catch you if you even drive 5 mphs over the speed limit. They are ready to go behind you if you cross the bold white at a junction or an exit. And of course they will catch you if they spot you not coming to a complete stop while turning right on a red or on a stop sign. Small mistakes are not ignored, they are made big by making the amount you pay big. The headphone offense pinches your pocket by $200. The speeding ticket cuts your pocket $800 or so. And if you do valid big violation like carpool violation, be prepared to shell out $1200 or more if caught.

The only thing I can say is drive carefully and stay out of sight of policeman because he is out there to get your money.

Wall Street Still finds Ways to Hire Foreigners

It was just a decade back when foreigners were rushing to America in search of better opportunities, better jobs and higher standards of living. Today, there is a shift in this trend and people are leaving America for a better opportunity elsewhere. One can debate on this topic - is it right to leave your country, your mother-land in search of better life. Similarly, one can debate on the related topic - is it right for businesses to employ people from other countries, give them better opportunity and more money to make their own business a successful one.

The government is giving money to companies; stimulus packages for businesses to recover from the downturn. In return the government is expecting the companies to seek out Americans for the open job positions. It seems reasonable when it is put in this way. But if you go back in time, a decade back, it was a time when companies lured highly qualified people from all over the world to run their business, make their company grow and expand. The foreigners were behind the growth and prosperity of the business, the economy and the country. Now, the same foreigners are looked upon as people who are taking away the jobs from Americans.

I think it is time for us to see beyond borders. We have to view this in global sense. People choose to live in a particular place for a number of reasons. People may choose a place because of better career opportunity or for a particular lifestyle or to live with their family and friends or just because of great weather. It could be a personal choice or could be due to immigration laws. It could be something that they can control or something that is just the way the life is for them.

What bothers me is the ethical discussion and debates around this subject and the way it influences the thinking of people and the laws of the place. It is basic human characteristic to seek out better opportunity for himself. There is nothing right or wrong about it. It is just human. A decade back, this country was viewed as the happening place for technology and so people moved here. Today, if the happening place shifts from America to China, there will be movement to that part of the world. People will go where there is opportunity. Companies will give jobs to the best people who make their business prosper. Period.

The people living at a particular time make up the country; a sum total of people from different regions of the world. The country should try to provide the best opportunity to the people who live there; the people living in a place have to give their best to the society they are living in. This is my view of globalization!

Santa Clara killer opened fire on family during housewarming

This was a terrible terrible thing that happened. I have close friends who live in that community. It is a place that I visit almost every week. I would have driven through those roads so many times. The fact that it is in a familiar territory and people from the same background were involved makes it a shocking news.

It is no doubt an act of a madman. What could have prompted a reasonable software engineer working in yahoo take such an action - anger? hatred? jealousy? Maybe a combination of all. How can one differentiate a normal person from a person who is capable of doing such gruesome act? He is just one of us but still far from being one of us.

Would he have done such a thing had he been in India? Yes, but maybe not in this scale. Maybe it would have been worse and more gruesome. Maybe he would have used a conventional weapon like a knife, maybe it would have been more bloody. But definitely he would have found it more difficult to kill people with so much ease. It would have taken him more time and more efforts compared to what he did in minutes. Yes, homicides and killing are common in India too but it is still not easy for a common man to carry out such an episode with so much ease. Guns are not legal. They are not easily accessible to common man. Yes, of course one can still buy it in black market.

In my opinion the fact that any one can posses a gun makes these violence a sad reality. The gun laws in this country allows any one above the age of 18 to posses a guns. The private firearm ownership is 49% or higher. The availability of the weapons in the house not only makes it easy to conceive and plan such activity but also makes it easy for children to get hold of these weapons and carry out shooting incidents in schools. I strongly believe that banning the firearms will bring down the homicide rates drastically and will make our schools safer. But unfortunately there are lot of people who do not believe in this philosophy. They stand by the second amendment. In the Bill of Rights, the second amendment to the Constitution reads:

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed."

Gun control proponents argue that the use of the word "people" in this Amendment, refers not to the civilian population of the United States, but to the State National Guard Units. Gun rights proponents have argued that the use of the word "Militia" in this Amendment, refers not to the State National Guard Units, but to the citizens of the United States.

The gun proponents argue that the gun control will only prevent the righteous people from buying the weapons. It is not going to prevent the criminals or the gangsters or the mobsters from getting the guns. It is not going to bring down the homicide. In fact they argue that it will increase. According to them, if only the school teachers had guns to defend themselves, the school shooting could have been stopped by the teacher effectively with fewer or no casualty.

It is true that gun control will not make the crime disappear from the streets, but definitely it will make it difficult and fewer in number. Only seasoned criminal will be possesing firearms. And yes, it would definitely have made it a lot difficult for a software engineer to go to a shop, buy a gun and murder 6 members of his family!

GM's CEO: Bankruptcy Possible Before 60-Day Deadline

GM and Chrysler are both on the brink of filing bankruptcy. The Obama administration is trying to help them out but are not exactly bailing out the auto makers. The government wants GM to carve out its recovery path before it can promise more money. Maybe the Obama administration had a bitter experience of bailing out AIG unconditionally. Maybe the government wants to be more proactive on how they control the money before even promising to give the money. Not a bad strategy.

So what happened to GM and where are they? Here is a short history lesson.
General Motors Corporation (GM) was founded in 1908 and it is world's second-largest automaker after Toyota, ranked by 2008 global unit sales. GMs cars and trucks include Buick, Cadillac, Chevrolet, GMC, GM Daewoo, Holden, Hummer, Poniac, Saab and Saturn. The company went through its own ups and downs. In 1990s the US economy was on the rise and GM gained a huge market share by producing enormous sale of light trucks and sport-utility vehicles. In 2004, GM redirected resources from the development of new sedans to light trucks and SUVs. The SUVs were gas guzzlers but still very popular and kept the automaker revenue high. However in 2008, there was a rapid rise in gas price that resulted in steep drop off sales of SUVs. The declining sales of SUV caused the GMs profit margin and the GM stocks started sliding down. The stocks that were in the range of $20 slid to $2.5. The financial crisis, namely the recession that shook the Wall Street also shook GM and Chrysler. It became evident that they would need an external helping hand to keep them from sinking. The federal government loaned $13.4 billion to the struggling automaker so that they can continue floating. Recently, Obama administration evaluated the company's status and gave it a failing grade for its efforts to come out of the crisis. Government is not ready to give more taxpayers money to bailout unless the company shows promising signs of recovery in terms of restructuring the products, finances and the management. The Obama administration has given a grace period of 60 days for the GM to come up with radical changes else it may have to face bankruptcy. As the first step, the GM CEO Rick Wagoner stepped down to give way to changes that could be brought by a new vision and new direction by a new person, the next CEO, namely Fritz Henderson. Fritz understands the urgency of the situation. He has a great challenge of saving the company from bankruptcy.

The first thing that comes to my mind is that how come GM along with Chrysler is so badly affected while Ford and other international automakers survived or rather holding on even in these bad economic times. What did GM do that pulled its stock so down? Well, lot of mistakes. They were stuck in improving the existing models. They spent more time and energy in changing the looks and interiors of the vehicles and in the process lost the hybrid car market. It is sad but true that GM was a pioneer of the hybrid cards. It was ahead in the game a decade back. The GM engineers built the EV1, the first modern production electric vehicle that was introduced in 1996 in limited "lease only" agreement. The EV1 had bunch of issues - the technology was new, the market was not ready and the innovations around the hybrid cars like the batteries etc were still not mature. The cars performed badly. The EV1 were not profitable and therefore GM discontinued it in 1999. This was one of the worst decisions taken by GM - axing the EV1 electric-car program and not putting more resources into the hybrids. Instead, GM redirected its resources towards SUVs. Yes, SUVs made more profits at that time but it fell through when the gas prices rose.

Great companies are built on creating new markets, not incresing market share in existing ones. This was the vision of Tata's when they decided to put a car for a price of $2500 or less on the roads of India. India's no. 1 requirement was cheap car - less power, less speed but more efficient was the motto. Today, the Tata Nano is a reality - a car that the middle class in India can afford. GM needs to learn a lesson from the Tata's, think ahead, envision the 21st century auto requirements and build a futuristic car. If GM has to emerge again and raise up, they have to build something new, something different, something that is more aligned with today's needs - a cleaner, safer, hi-tech, fuel efficient car!

Seattle Paper Shifts Entirely to the Web

The Seattle's popular newspaper, the Seattle Post-Intelligence is ceasing publication starting tomorrow. The paper published its final print and is transforming to an online-only version. Seattle P-I lost $14 million in 2008. The staff is reduced from 165 to 20 and the newspaper is reduced to little of original reporting and more of links to other news sites. It is the first one to go out of print, but surely not the last one. There are many more to follow the same path. The next in line may be our hometown newspaper - The San Francisco Chronicle! It has lost $50 million last year and may loose more this year.

Are the newspapers going out of business due to the current economic downturn? Yes, of course. The recession bug has not left any sector untouched. But maybe this was bound to happen. Maybe it is an evolutionary change. Maybe it is inevitable!

If I see myself, I read news only online. I don't care for paper newspaper. I go to my favorite bookmark news paper sites, read through the headlines and get all the news that I want in an hour or so and I don't even need to bother to recycling the paper. Are there still people who write paper letters and send paper greeting cards? Maybe few, but they are definitely the last few clinging to the old ways. Newspapers are giving way to e-papers, books are giving way to e-books, bookstores are giving way to e-stores and so forth. But is this the case with everyone? Of course not. If you go to your local coffee joint early afternoon, you will find a lot of people, typically from the older generation, reading paper and sipping coffee. Reading newspaper is an enjoyable pass time for them. They love to hold the paper, do the crosswords and cut the coupons.

All said, I still have a fascination for paper books. The same me who detest "paper" newspaper, love to read from a real book instead of an e-version of the same book. Why? Because I develop a special bond with my book. I like to hold it, open it, smell it and read it. It is personal. I agree that it doesn't have the fancy features of an e-version of the book. It doesn't have the much wanted "find" button. But still, e-book lacks the charm that a paper book has. The joy of possessing a good book, arranging it in the bookshelf is never the same as that of having an e-version of it stored in the hard disk.

Maybe there are people who feel the same way for the paper version of newspaper. Maybe they are dreading to live in a world with no real newspaper. So am I, dreading to live in a world void of real books. Maybe I should get inspired from the quote below, buy more books and bookshelves and prepare myself for the future:

"I would be most content if my children grew up to be the kind of people who think decorating consists mostly of building enough bookshelves." ~Anna Quindlen