Serving coffee with Google Maps

I’ve asked my students in Reinventing the News to file brief reports on coffee shops on and near (and in some cases not so near) the Northeastern University campus so that we can compile them all into a Google Maps presentation. I figured it was only fair that I do it, too. So here is my report on Cappy’s II, a small, storefront-style eatery located at 309 Huntington Ave.

When you think of Cappy’s II, you think of pizza, subs and big salads. My only previous visit had been to pick up a Caesar salad to go. It was quite good. But I’d never thought about Cappy’s for my morning coffee run. It’s a bit too far up Huntington, and I’ve become accustomed to Au Bon Pain, which is closer to my office.

I arrived at Cappy’s at about 8:45 a.m. Before walking inside, I took some photos. That elicited a few suspicious questions when I approached the counter. But once I explained what I was doing, I was greeted in a friendly manner.

It was after the breakfast rush but long before lunch, so I had the place pretty much to myself. A medium coffee set me back a reasonable $1.50 plus tax. I asked for half-and-half, and my server, Eleni Athanasiou (in photo), added it for me before handing it to me. Though I prefer self-serve (it’s why I like Starbucks better than Dunkin’ Donuts, even though the coffee at Dunks is pretty good), she got the mix just about right.

Though Cappy’s mainly caters to the takeout crowd, there are some tables, including a few that are out of the way enough to enjoy a relaxing meal. It’s got a full breakfast menu, which would make it a pretty good spot for a morning meeting. All in all, it was an enjoyable experience.

Cappy’s II is open seven days from 7:30 a.m. to 12:30 a.m.

The pros and cons of Google Reader

Summer is the time for media experimentation, so I’m giving Google Reader a whirl as my RSS aggregator.

Aesthetically it’s a much nicer experience than NewsFire. But the disadvantage of a Web-based aggregator is that you don’t get to choose how frequently it scours the Web for new material. Stuff I put up a while ago still isn’t visible — which makes me wonder about my other subscriptions.

Anyone know how often Google Reader updates your feeds?

Mapping the news

[googlemaps https://maps.google.com/maps/ms?ie=UTF8&hl=en&s=AARTsJqk45NKetz9D5BTerMp52vrwyCpPA&msa=0&msid=110849334117410151532.00045173201c2c61999fb&ll=42.596565,-70.878296&spn=0.353826,0.583649&z=10&output=embed&w=425&h=350]
Among the more important skills that young journalists need to learn is how to incorporate mapping into a news presentation. The easiest way to do this is with Google Maps. I’ve put together a demonstration based on today’s Salem News, mapping the addresses where five stories took place.

This is far from the best application of mapping and journalism. I just wanted to see if I could get it to work. One glitch: Whenever I type in an address, I get a non-removable red marker. Since the Ipswich story is the last one I mapped, you’ll see a red marker partially hidden behind the blue marker. Anyone know how to get rid of that?

You’ll probably need to click on “View Larger Map” in order to see anything.

Update: Hmmm … the glitch seems to have magically disappeared.

Microsoft’s Yahoo bet

The headline at Wired.com says it all: “Microsoft Bids for Yahoo: Do Two Losers Make a Winner?” And if you read Betsy Schiffman’s article, the answer would appear to be “no.”

Microsoft’s proposed $44.6 billion acquisition of Yahoo is the biggest media story of the still-new year. Yet news organizations seem to be straining to imbue this with the excitement they think it deserves. When it comes to the “what does it mean?” graf, everyone is coming up short. In fact, it may not mean all that much.

Carolyn Johnson writes in the Boston Globe today that this may be all about the coming cell-phone wars, where Google doesn’t have anywhere near the head start that it does on the desktop. Even here, though, Google’s efforts to develop cell-phone software — the so-called Google phone, a.k.a. the “Android” — is the subject of much excitement. Everyone wants to know if Android-enabled phones will be cooler/ cheaper/ faster than the Apple iPhone. So even if Google’s cell-phone efforts are not that far along, they’re still considerably ahead of where Microsoft and Yahoo are.

I’m hard-pressed to say how this could affect the financially struggling news business except to note that this is all about online advertising. If competition between Google and Microsoft/Yahoo somehow helps the pie grow, then that can only be good. At the Online Journalism Review, Robert Niles is asking whether Microsoft should buy Yahoo. Only 19 people had responded by this morning, and they were evenly split.

Microsoft has not been an interesting company for many years. Its success is built almost entirely on two monopoly products, Windows and Office, which have their roots in the 1980s and which came to full fruition in the mid-’90s. The company has done a nice job in recent years with its Xbox video-game systems, but that’s essentially a side project. Contrast that with the iPod, which Apple used to rekindle interest in its Macintosh computers.

Yahoo? Enormous numbers of people go there, so I guess the company is doing something worth saving. But it’s fallen way, way behind Google in online advertising, and I don’t find what it offers to be particularly innovative or compelling. (I do like Flickr, the social network for photography that Yahoo bought a couple of years ago. But Flickr users are already protesting the Microsoft takeover, which could provide a shot in the arm to Picasa, Google’s own underdeveloped photo service.) I don’t use Yahoo Mail for anything more than diverting stuff I don’t want to a mailbox I never check. By contrast, I like Google’s Gmail so much that I now use it for everything. I also use Google Calendar, Google Documents, Blogger (of course), Google Earth and several other Google services. The company’s “cloud computing” concept is taking over my life.

As Robert Guth emphasizes (sub. req.) in the Wall Street Journal, Microsoft has not been Bill Gates’ company for some time. Steve Ballmer is firmly in charge, and that will become clearer later this year, when Gates retires. Ballmer is fiercely competitive, but if he shares Gates’ vision for how to shape technology markets, he’s never really demonstrated it. (Even Gates never had much vision regarding how good software should work, a shortcoming with which tens of millions of us must contend every day.)

Let’s not forget, too, that though Yahoo and Google have both been criticized for helping the Chinese government with its efforts to censor the Internet, Yahoo went quite a bit farther — actually providing information that helped the government arrest dissidents. Its fierce competitive culture aside, Microsoft has a reputation for being socially conscious. So maybe Microsoft will curb Yahoo’s excesses. But that has nothing to do with catching up to Google, either.

This John Markoff piece in the New York Times seems to get it directionally right. Google isn’t perfect by any means. Someday, someone will come along and knock it off its pedestal. But that challenge is not likely to come from two of yesterday’s giants. Microsoft still makes a ton of money, and will for years to come. That should keep Yahoo afloat.

Still, when Google one day feels the heat, in all likelihood it’s going to come from people who today are still in college or even high school. At the Guardian, Jack Schofield offers some sound advice to Microsoft, arguing that the deal might make sense if Ballmer and company transform Yahoo into their consumer division. His conclusion: “But is Microsoft ready to take that step? I think not.”

Photo (cc) by Erwin Boogert. Some rights reserved.

More powerful than Googlezon!*

One of my favorite bomb-tossers, John Ellis, has uncorked a doozy. In a column for the Web site RealClearMarkets, Ellis proposes that Google make an offer to the New York Times Co. that it can’t refuse. Ellis’ arguments:

  • Mega-wealthy Google could easily afford to buy the Times Co., the price of which will only keep dropping.
  • Even though the Times Co.’s controlling stock is owned by members of the Sulzberger family, who don’t want to sell, there’s a point beyond which the family can no longer screw other shareholders.
  • Rupert Murdoch seems determined to transform the Wall Street Journal into a serious competitor to the Times on all kinds of news, not just financial — and he can afford to run the Journal at a loss.
  • Google, like Murdoch, doesn’t need to turn a profit with a small investment like the Times — but may make money anyway if it can leverage Times content across multiple platforms.
  • Times Co. chairman Arthur Sulzberger Jr. isn’t getting it done, and has been in charge for so long now that it seems clear that’s not going to change.

Ellis, a former Boston Globe columnist, offers some provocation for us locals as well, suggesting that Google could get the price down to a mere $3 billion or so by selling off the Times Co.’s other properties, including the Globe, the Worcester Telegram & Gazette and its share of the Red Sox and of New England Sports Network. (If the right buyer for the Globe can be found? Go ahead, make my day. But that’s a big if.)

Ellis’ piece is a suggestion, not a prediction. Still, it’s worth noting that in October 2006, when it looked as though a group headed by retired General Electric chairman Jack Welch might buy the Globe, Ellis wrote: “Mr. Sulzberger would be a fool, of course, to sell the Globe to anyone at this juncture.”

He was exactly right. Which raises the question of whether Times Co. executives now would be fools not to sell the Globe.

Ellis’ proposal is logical, if unlikely to happen. But given that all of our great news organizations are going to have to find new, once-unthinkable ways of surviving, I can imagine a worse fate for the Times than landing in the arms of Google, which generally, though not always, lives up to its “don’t be evil” philosophy. Better Google than Murdoch, certainly. (Via Romenesko.)

*Click here for reference.

Heavy grading, light blogging

I’m up to my neck in end-of-semester grading, and I’m coming down with a cold. So don’t look for much fresh content this week.

I do want to call your attention to a conference held at Southern New Hampshire University last week on blogging the New Hampshire primary. We ended up talking about everything but that, but that’s OK. The New England News Forum, which sponsored the discussion, has an account here. Christine Stuart of CT News Junkie writes it up here.

Also, Robert Weisman of the Boston Globe reports that Google’s Street View will arrive in Boston today at 10 a.m. I’m figuring there’s a pretty good chance I’ll be captured coming out of the Northeastern Au Bon Pain with a medium regular.

Gmail changes quietly

I noticed some changes to the Gmail interface yesterday as I was catching up on my mail. (That’s not quite an accurate statement. I’m never caught up on my mail.) It seems slightly more attractive, and “Contacts” has been beefed up considerably. But it also seems to be slightly slower.

I switched to Gmail last spring, and, for the most part, I’m glad I did. My mail is now available on any machine on which I happen to find myself, and searching is lightning-fast — a real boon, given that I can’t remember where I’ve filed anything. (Although Gmail’s labels are much more flexible than folders.)

My one complaint: Gmail lets me set up several different identities, so that I can send outgoing mail so that it looks like I’m using either my Northeastern account or my personal account. But my official Gmail address, which I do not use, gets stamped on my mail anyway. That’s led a few of my contacts to start using my Gmail address. I guess I’d put that in the “mildly annoying” category.

Nothing specific at the Gmail Blog about what’s going on, although I suppose this is related somehow. Thoughts?

Bug alert! Unless I’m doing something wrong — always a possibility — it looks like you can’t save changes in someone’s contact information.