Microsoft announced Surface Studio 2, and I think it represents the best effort so far to create the perfect creator’s laptop. It isn’t a cheap date at around $2K for a base configuration that likely won’t meet the needs of many creators, but optioned-up with a professional NVIDIA graphics card, it’s a viable workstation-class PC, even though it lacks the certifications typically required of workstations.  

But I’m talking hardware design here. The target competitor is the Apple MacBook Pro which the Surface Studio 2 appears to overcome with advancements that Apple doesn’t seem to want to match. Apple is known for focusing more on preserving margins than building the best tools for the creators that make up much of Apple’s existing installed base.  

Don’t get me wrong. Many of my peers believe the MacBook is the best creator tool out there due to its performance and battery life, but I think there is room for improvement and Microsoft is exploring that with Surface Studio 2.  

What Does a Creator Need in a Notebook?

Most of the creators I’ve known live on either workstations or gaming rigs that are capable of workstation-performance loads but cost less than a true workstation. Over time, the loading has switched from the CPU to the GPU which means that the perfect creator product not only needs a decent GPU but the option for a professional grade GPU if the creator wants to run advanced applications for animation, editing pictures or specially designing things.  

Creators generally like some kind of pen interface. This means a touch screen, but touch screens are difficult to use with a pen unless they lie flat. In addition, creators often need to stand while sketching, which means the laptop should have a tablet form even though it will be used as a more typical laptop for the paperwork that generally comes with most jobs (email, status updates, directions, descriptions etc.).  

Most recently, creators need access to AIs, and AIs run best on hardware designed for them. The concept of a NPU (Neural Processing Unit) has been brought forward for that purpose, and this not only helps create AI-driven products and offerings but allows the user access to local generative AI instances so they can speed up their workflow and increase their overall productivity.  

MacBook Pro vs. Surface Studio 2

Both products start at around $2K, and both products can be configured with GPUs though the Surface Studio 2 can use one of three GPUs, including a professional grade. The Apple MacBook Pro comes in 14-inch and 16-inch versions, while the Surface Studio 2 only has a 14-inch+ display. Both products have unique displays tied to their platform: Pixel Sense for Studio 2 and the higher resolution retinal display from Apple.  And both products weigh in around the 4- to 5-pound range. Both products should have similar battery life. Microsoft’s listed battery life is higher, but Apple has traditionally been more accurate in its representations, so they should be very similar to each other in this regard.  

But the Surface Studio 2 has a NPU for generative AI creation and potentially improving the productivity of the user. Microsoft is rolling out its Copilot generative AI feature across Windows and Office 365 next quarter. The Surface Studio 2 has a cantilevered touch screen that allows the user to sketch out their ideas and create finished artwork on the screen, and it has the NPU that Apple’s solution lacks, giving a bit more protection against premature obsolescence than the MacBook Pro has.  

Wrapping Up: The Surface Studio 2 Is Better for Creators

This is more about the case design and the inclusion of the NPU than any other factors where the MacBook pro equaled or even exceeded what the Studio 2 offers. But creators often need to be able to draw things, work flat on a table and to present their work. The cantilevered touch screen is far better for this than Apple’s traditional laptop screen, and the NPU in the Surface Studio 2, once the AI technology is available, will allow the Studio 2 to cut down on the amount of work a creator has to do significantly.   

I think the overall difference between the products is that Microsoft has targeted creators very tightly with its Studio 2 while the MacBook Pro is more similar to a high performance generic laptop. It performs admirably as a laptop, but it doesn’t embrace what creators need as well as a targeted product does. 

Sadly, Microsoft continues to under-market Surface, which means Apple’s MacBook Pro will likely outperform it in the market. But if you are a creator, you might consider the Studio 2 as a better tool for what you do than more generic laptops, including the MacBook Pro.  

Source: TG Daily – The Microsoft Surface Studio 2:  Creating the Perfect Creator PC

This week Microsoft announced that Panos Panay, Microsoft’s Chief Product officer, will be leaving the company. Rumors are going around that Panay is going to Amazon to lead its hardware effort (which needs help). Panos Panay was the primary mover for Microsoft Surface, its biggest cheerleader, and the equivalent of Microsoft’s Steve Jobs. But Surface was backed by Steve Ballmer, Microsoft’s prior CEO, and Satya Nadella is the father of Azure and far more wedded to that solution set than either Surface or Windows, both of which get a fraction of the support they once got under Ballmer or Gates. 

Let’s talk about Panos Panay’s departure this week and what it means for Surface and Windows.

Surface

The Surface line of products was created at a time when Microsoft was still focused on competing with Apple, and it was designed to provide an Apple-like experience on Windows. I believe that, had Microsoft made the same commitment to Surface it made to Xbox, it would have given Apple a run for the money. However, having been burned on smartphones once and with all eyes on the financial performance of Microsoft, even under Ballmer this effort was underfunded, and it has languished even more under Nadella who never seemed to give the platform much support.  

While the hardware was generally rated highly, the initial focus was to create a better PC alternative than the iPad, and Microsoft did that for the most part. But in the years following the launch, the interest in tablets as PCs dropped off a cliff. Apple stopped marketing that eventuality because it wanted Apple customers to buy both a tablet and a PC, not merge the classes.  

Over time, it has become clear that Surface just does not fill a need for Microsoft anymore. It lacks a hard connection to Azure; it upsets the other PC OEMs (who do not want to compete with Microsoft); and it has never become anything but a minor annoyance to Apple. 

Panay’s departure means that Surface loses its most powerful supporter and, given the platform has not been strategic for nearly a decade, I expect Surface will be discontinued, sold or spun out eventually.  

Yusuf Mehdi

The expectation is that Panay will be replaced by Yusuf Mehdi. Mehdi is old school Windows and may end up doing a better job with Windows than Panay did because of that history and focus. Windows has also been underfunded and undermarketed of late but not to the extreme that Surface has, and Windows should still be strategic as the primary client for Azure. However, for the last several years, Microsoft hasn’t really focused on Windows, so it remains at risk of becoming the next Internet Explorer due to that lack of focus and funding for the platform.  

I expect Mehdi will work to reverse that trend and improve customer satisfaction with Windows once he takes over. Since he comes out of marketing, he will be motivated to reverse the trend that reduced marketing support over time to better assure the success of that platform. I have known Mehdi to be talented and focused, so his move to Windows leadership should be positive for that platform. Just how positive he can be will depend on his success in restoring Windows support to a more strategic level than it now is.  

Panay at Amazon

Amazon’s hardware business has been a hot mess for some time. There has been no real consistency in product design or execution on products that otherwise were well built but underperforming, given their potential value, in the market. This should be an ideal role for Panos Panay, as he is more a hardware executive at heart, and his influence should improve the consistency between hardware products, as well as up the innovation so the products are more interesting. He has an eye for design, which suggests they will be more attractive and financially successful as well. 

Where Panay was somewhat wasted at Microsoft, he is likely to find Amazon a far more supportive environment for his hardware creativity, so I can hardly wait to see what his new team comes up with there. He has studied Apple closely and should be able to deliver an Apple-like experience with Apple hardware on a budget. This could make things interesting in the consumer electronics market. 

Wrapping Up:

Since Microsoft is a software company with little interest in hardware, Surface was always kind of an odd duck there and so was Panos Panay, the father of Surface. With Panay moving to Amazon’s hardware group, Microsoft can better focus on Windows under Yusuf Mehdi who is more tightly tied historically to Windows than Panay was, and Panay is well positioned to help Amazon turn its hardware into a more powerful solution. This move makes both Microsoft and Amazon potentially stronger, but it reduces the support for Surface inside Microsoft, suggesting it will likely be discontinued, which, given it is not strategic anymore, would remove a distraction that Microsoft does not need and the PC OEMs do not want.  

Source: TG Daily – Panos Panay Leaves Microsoft, Putting Surface at Increased Risk

Digital-first business leaders are constantly looking for the next ‘big thing’ in tech to put them ahead of the curve. Back in the noughties, it was operation-improving software. In the 2010s, it moved to cloud-based Software-as-a-Service (SaaS). Cut to the 2020s, it’s all about optimizing your organization’s SaaS portfolio.

Popular SaaS products from Microsoft, Google, Salesforce and more can assist with every business function from marketing to HR. So, it’s no wonder that we’re adding them to our IT portfolios in droves. However, the proverb goes that you can indeed have too much of a good thing — and as companies have accumulated many subscriptions over time, they have unwittingly created inefficiencies that hinder their progress.

So, what can be done to streamline your SaaS stack and restore the benefits of a well-oiled portfolio? Enter application rationalization.

What is application rationalization?

Software application rationalization is the process of assessing your organization’s SaaS portfolio to identify which subscriptions should be retained and which should be consolidated or terminated. The rationale behind the process is to justify the continued use of each tool within the company, by determining which provide business value and which do not.

This typically involves assessing the utilization, performance, and costs associated with each tool in relation to the wider SaaS stack.

Once audited, the applications that are deemed less valuable to business growth can have their number of licenses rightsized or be canceled altogether. This way, you’ll be left with a lean, productive suite of applications that provide an improved return on investment.

How can it assist your business?

Many business leaders are aware that application rationalization can help them to identify and cut unnecessary costs, However, the benefit that is often overlooked is that rationalization can also improve business productivity.

With a streamlined portfolio, companies can enjoy the following benefits for their operations:

1. Fewer workflow inefficiencies

One key benefit of application rationalization is the elimination of workflow inefficiencies that stem from redundant tools. As businesses scale, it’s natural to accumulate subscriptions that overlap in functionality or even duplicate subscriptions to the same product. These incur unnecessary extra costs in terms of both time and resources, with fragmentation in workflows, delays in passing through approvals, and file management confusion.

However, application rationalization can identify these redundancies and support organizations in making informed decisions. It also helps to identify any instances of shadow IT, the use of unauthorized systems for work purposes, which 80% of employees admit to.

As a result, the company can identify the most suitable, valuable tools to prioritize, and terminate subscriptions to others. For example, a business might be using three separate project management tools, each with its own feature set and user base across the organization. Once rationalized, the company can migrate all projects to one ecosystem, streamline project management processes, and reduce confusion.

2. Higher employee engagement

Though they’re built to make life easier, an over-provisioning of software tools can actually hinder your employees — and provide a source of frustration as they try to complete their work. According to project management specialists at Asana, context switching between different apps, tasks and projects is a distraction that stresses out workers and makes them less productive as a result.

But this isn’t news to your staff. One report from Personio asked employees how they feel about their software use in the workplace and found that 37% believe they have too many apps to manage, while 36% claim it disrupts their workflow. Instead of entering deep work, many employees spend valuable time out of their day grappling with unfamiliar tools and tedious software administration.

Application rationalization helps to optimize software use and boost employee morale. When organization trim their portfolio to a leaner suite of tools, staff can enjoy a more fruitful experience at work. This is because they will become proficient in a smaller set of tools, increasing both their productivity and job satisfaction.

3. Streamlined management and procurement processes

As we’ve discussed, application rationalization offers a number of immediate gains for business productivity. However, the process also lays the groundwork for future SaaS management. By maintaining a leaner software portfolio, organizations reduce the complexity of managing licenses, updates, and renewals — resulting in lower administrative overhead and more efficient resource allocation.

This also supports decision making when it comes time to purchase new tools. According to Statista, the average organization now deploys 130 different applications, which has increased consistently since 2015. At the current rate of growth, this is unsustainable for many businesses. However, application rationalization helps to identify gaps in your current software ecosystem so that you can make select and strategic new acquisitions rather than add to your stack indiscriminately.

This results in a cost-effective and agile procurement process which is less likely to fall foul of the pitfalls of portfolio bloating.

So, with a leaner stack of existing tools, you save time and resources in daily operations, SaaS management, and new procurement, all the while improving employee engagement. Application rationalization is no quick process, but offers one of the greatest returns on investment in SaaS — productivity benefits that will last for years to come.

Written by Lara Harper

Source: TG Daily – Uncovering Hidden Efficiency: How Application Rationalization Boosts Productivity

In terms of valuation, Microsoft is the only company that comes close to Apple’s incredibly high valuation. The difference isn’t a breadth of products so much as the fact that Apple sells more products that people relate to than Microsoft does. In the same window that Apple launched its new and impressive iPhone 15 and iPhone 15 Pro, Microsoft just pulled support for its first iPhone competitor in nearly a decade, the first Microsoft Duo. But the announcement created the impression that Microsoft was abandoning the platform which will be problematic for Duo’s future if not the future of Surface because it speaks to commitment, and neither Apple nor Microsoft tend to stick with products that don’t perform well in the market. 

Ironically, I think, especially the iPhone 15 Pro and its related launch effort showcase what Microsoft needs to do to truly compete with Apple with Surface, but Microsoft’s unwillingness to step up suggests that both Surface in general and the Duo line in particular aren’t long for this world. My personal view is that companies should either do things well or not at all. Otherwise, they’re just wasting money.  

Let’s talk about why I think Surface is not long for this world.  

Competing with Apple

I’ve done a lot of work over the years talking to various PC OEMs and Microsoft about how to compete with Apple and, for all of that, little real progress has been made. Apple wins because it provides a better overall experience and does a better job of assuring that experience after the sale. Apple isn’t perfect. It tends to focus excessively on revenue and profit, which leads it to make decisions that aren’t in the best interest of customers and, particularly suppliers and application vendors who Apple tends to bleed to death financially. It is also less than transparent about problems and has been accused of intentionally damaging user phones. That can damage trust, but Apple’s very good at crisis management, which limits the related image and brand damage significantly. 

The elements of Apple’s success are a simple product line of relatively high quality, a dedicated store and in-person support in that store, and a demand generation budget that leads the industry. It works because that formula made Apple the most valuable company in the world. Microsoft isn’t a slacker. It’s the second most valuable company in the world, and for the last several years, the two companies have traded places a lot. In 2000, Microsoft was number one and Apple didn’t even make the top ten, which suggests Apple is advancing far more quickly in terms of valuation than Microsoft, even though Microsoft arguably has a broader product set, is much stronger in the cloud and in the enterprise, and has a significant lead in generative AI, the tech that is driving the market.  

If you wanted a product that would challenge Apple, Apple’s new iPhone 15 Pro showcases what would be needed.  Now, what happens when a company tries to create a competitive effort to displace Apple is that it picks and chooses from the list of what Apple provides, and much like a Triathlon athlete that decides they don’t want to swim, the result doesn’t perform well. If you aren’t willing to complete the solution, which shortly will include both the Apple Watch Ultra and the Apple Vision Pro, then don’t bother. It won’t work.  

Xbox vs. Zune vs. Surface

Xbox is an example of a product that was executed well. Because Microsoft was convinced that Sony was going to go after Windows, it fully funded the Xbox effort. It took massive losses in the early years, but the result was a product that could and does compete very well with Sony. Had Microsoft continued that level of support and promotion, I believe it would be the only console gaming platform in the market at scale. 

With Zune, Microsoft tried to compete with Apple on a budget. It created a compelling argument with early subscription music, the ability to play videos, and a much more robust design. But it didn’t counter Steve Jobs saying that music subscriptions were stupid, didn’t provide any video content, didn’t create an Apple music migration utility (making moving from the iPod to the Zune easy), didn’t market the robust case, and, after it improved the product, Microsoft defunded marketing, so Zune failed.  

When it comes to Surface, Surface PCs have Apple-level quality and some unique capabilities like PC and tablet functionality that are unmatched by Apple.  But they don’t match Apple’s marketing, so their unique advantages aren’t widely known. The Microsoft store isn’t a Surface store, showcasing a unique Microsoft problem in that Surface arguably competes with Microsoft’s OEM partners, weakening partner support. This forced the stores to also carry products from PC OEMs which weakened the Surface component and made support problematic (OEMs like to support their own products). The stores should be more closely modeled after Apple stores and be Surface-only, but that would have upset the OEMs more and created additional unintended negative consequential damages.   

Microsoft’s two obvious paths to success are to eliminate Surface and focus on making the OEMs more successful, or spinning Surface out with funding so it can fully compete with Apple. Microsoft has yet to do either, but the cheapest path is to eliminate the platform and, given how it just pulled the plug on the original Duo, that is the path Microsoft seems to be heading for.  

Apple has several weaknesses that could be exploited, but you must be willing to call those weaknesses out while matching Apple in the rest of its solutions.  No one seems willing to do that, so what is the point of competing with Apple if you aren’t willing to step up to the competition? 

Wrapping Up:  

Apple’s latest launch was one of the most impressive I’ve ever seen. With its Windows 95 launch and initial Xbox effort, Microsoft showcased that it can perform at Apple’s level but has subsequently chosen not to do so. Microsoft just doesn’t seem to really care anymore. Even Windows is at risk due to a very clear drop-off in support, which reminds me a lot of what happened to Internet Explorer over a decade ago.  

It annoys me to no end to watch companies intentionally underperform and refuse to learn from past mistakes or past successes. Microsoft is a strong company with impressive capabilities, but it just doesn’t seem to have the will to compete with devices anymore, so why keep them? If you don’t want to play the game well, why play it? My hope is that generative AI will eventually keep companies from repetitive mistakes. My fear is that even AI won’t be able to overcome executives who fail to learn from past mistakes.  

Source: TG Daily – The Death of the First Microsoft Surface Duo and Anticipating the Death of Surface 

In terms of demand, it amazes me that Microsoft had the most successful launch of an operating system in history with Windows 95 and nearly the worst product roll-out of that same product, yet internal politics resulted in Microsoft believing the successful part of the launch was the problem to be fixed. It would be like watching a football team where the quarterback threw perfect passes that the receivers couldn’t catch, and then seeing the coach pull the quarterback because he was making the receivers look bad.  

This goes to the heart of the problem with Windows 11: there is virtually no demand generation going on for it, so it’s more surprising that Windows 11 has done so well than that it has done so poorly.  

Let’s explore why Windows 11 is lagging in adoption and the kind of problem that it will create in 2025 if Microsoft executes to plan and pulls support that year.  

Why getting the market to move is important

With every generation of Windows, Microsoft has significantly improved the security of the platform. Historically, the older platforms increasingly become viable targets for hackers because the top tier employees who supported the old platform move to working on the new one.  

In addition, supporting multiple versions of an OS is a problem for developers who then must support the multiple versions and can’t use new features in the new OS aggressively because they still must support the old OS. Given users typically get a free upgrade to the new OS at or around launch, if your hardware supports it, you’d think adoption rates would be far faster over time. Instead, they seem to be slowing down despite the fact that OS upgrades, compared to what they were back in Windows 95 days, are virtually painless.  

From Microsoft’s perspective, a fast upgrade cycle reduces its support costs, reduces its exposure to bad press that results from the old OS being breached, and tends to result in higher customer satisfaction (except when they screw the release up like they did with Vista and Windows 8). Windows 11 is a nice improvement over Windows 10 which was a massive improvement over Windows 8, so why the low adoption rates?  

Microsoft’s demand problem

Despite the fact Microsoft has employed some of the best marketing people I’ve ever met (I’m an ex-marketing director myself), it is like too many tech companies and doesn’t institutionally get marketing. Too often, the marketing experts aren’t given adequate resources, aren’t making key marketing decisions, and the company seems to think that successful marketing is a bad thing going back to that Windows 95 experience.  

And Windows 95 was an amazing launch. There were lines around the block to buy the OS. The market was so hot, Microsoft had trouble keeping up with demand, but it failed to adequately assure the product’s quality or to properly staff support to handle what became a nightmare support load.  

Many of the problems that Windows 95 enjoyed have gone away. For instance, back then drivers were a mess, and Microsoft’s release process allowed for last minute changes after a beta had been approved, both of which resulted in lots of breakage. There was also a lot of older hardware or low volume hardware in the market that wouldn’t run Windows 95 that only got identified when the product was installed. It was a perfect storm of massive demand, poor quality experience and massively underpowered support.  

Over the years, Microsoft has largely fixed the driver and hardware diversity problem. Now they force you to make sure the new OS will work on your hardware before you install it, and, with AI, it has the ability to scale support like never before. But because of that early failure, Microsoft still thinks demand is a bad thing and lament the lack of it, while doing little to fix the problem.  

Fortunately, Microsoft doesn’t have a competitor problem. Unfortunately, older versions of Windows fill that niche and, unlike competition, aren’t forcing Microsoft to focus on customers but reducing costs which doesn’t bode well for the future of this platform. It’s more likely to result eventually in an emerging competitor, most likely a smartphone variant that eventually displaces PCs and makes both Windows and personal computers obsolete.  

Wrapping up

As demand for Windows 11 declines and Microsoft increasingly becomes the Azure company, the ability to support OEMs or even its own PC platform, Surface, declines as well. In Surface’s case, this may be a good thing because, given Microsoft’s licensing model, Surface likely had done more damage to the overall PC market by reducing Microsoft’s support for OEM PCs over time while not fully embracing the Apple model (which included dedicated stores and Genius Bars) that it attempted, but failed, to emulate. You could argue that Surface has been dead for some time, but no one told Microsoft.  

Windows 12 is expected next year and, much like it was with Windows 10, jumping a release from Windows 10 to 12 will likely require new hardware or be painful. Microsoft should have begun building interest in Windows 12 by now, but it’s still struggling to build demand for Windows 11.  

Microsoft’s best defense against an eventual viable smartphone-based PC alternative is to have everyone on its current platform happy. On the current path, 2025 will likely provide the best opportunity for anyone wanting to displace PCs and Windows as a desktop OS. The current PC sales numbers are ugly, and OEMs are looking for a way out. Unless Microsoft steps up, that way out may be with a different vendor entirely. If the right vendor steps up, they could take out Windows and Azure with one better executed hybrid solution.  

This won’t happen overnight, but remember how quickly the iPhone took out even the most powerful vendor prior to that product’s success? Things can happen very quickly in this market, and while Microsoft treats Windows as a legacy product by under-resourcing it, it may soon discover that it is critical to Azure’s success. Losing one will likely do massive damage to the other.  

Microsoft needs to fix its demand problem before that problem fixes Microsoft.  

Source: TG Daily – Windows 11 Adoption Rates and the Lesson Microsoft Refuses to Learn

There was a fascinating series of events surrounding Donald Trump this week. Apparently, he did an interview that many believed was done by someone else as a prank, but Trump appeared to validate it, suggesting it was either done by him or by someone he approved to stand in for him. This showcases both the problem and the promise of Deep Fake technology. It can be used to supplement us, but it too often is used to confuse or mislead us.  

AI has reached the point where it can reliably fill in for others well enough so that the audience can’t tell the difference. When this is done properly, like it is done on the news in South Korea, it lowers staff loading (they use it when their live personality is unavailable or when the news segment is short and a trip to the studio too onerous for the live talent) and benefits the person being emulated.  

When this technology is used by, say, a political opponent it can create damaging false impressions that could change elections, damage reputations or even cause someone to get fired who did nothing wrong. And actors are rightly concerned that this technology could be used to replace them without adequately compensating them, or worse, used to damage their reputations and get them blacklisted. 

Deep Fake defenses

While the technology industry, particularly Intel, that created this technology is working on detectors to identify and warn about Deep Fakes, the problem is that the folks creating the Deep Fake platforms not only have a significant lead, they also have the initiative. What I mean is that the Deep Fake platforms can be updated to address the ‘tells’ to increasingly make the Deep Fakes more realistic, while companies like Intel must wait until that is done in order to come up with new ways to identify the Deep Fakes. 

While what Intel and others are doing to identify Deep Fakes is certainly important, it would be better to recognize when you are likely being scammed or before sharing that questionable post and increasing the damage that the scammer wants done, and if you more aggressively question images that you want to see rather than taking them at face value.  

We are all skeptical of things we don’t agree with, but confirmation bias tends to make us accept something we want to be true without challenge, which is what the Deep Fake fraudsters want to happen. By the way, this is also how con-artists work. They tell you what you want to hear, and before you know it, some or all of your money is theirs and they are nowhere to be found. So being skeptical when you are seeing something new, particularly if it is tied to some offer, is a good survival trait, regardless of the circumstances.  

In short, your best defense against Deep Fakes is the same best defense against phishing attacks and con artists: always be wary that there are smart people and increasingly smarter technologies that can be used to convince you to do things that aren’t in your best interest.  

Typical triggers to recognize if you are being scammed is being asked to provide information that the caller should already have, being asked to provide the answer to identity challenge questions, being led down a path that would result in you spending or sending any money, and, of course, being told something that you desperately want to be true.  

Wrapping up: Manipulation is an art, but so is avoiding being manipulated

Whether being manipulated by a human or, increasingly, by an AI, manipulation is an art that consists largely of building a false story that is then used to get you to “voluntarily” do something that is often harmful to you or those you care about. Building a defense against manipulation isn’t easy because we want to believe without question that certain things are true. But if we don’t regularly challenge those beliefs to confirm their truth, eventually someone will use this practice against us, and the result will be problematic.  

We naturally question things we don’t believe in and should be open to being convinced that our views are wrong, but more importantly, we also need to question when we agree because that is how we are manipulated with the goal in both cases to be correct, not just thinking we are right.  

I fail at this from time to time myself even though I’ve been trained to be skeptical, but working to be better at detecting fraud is our best defense against the AIs that will evolve to more effectively be used against us.  

Source: TG Daily – Donald Trump’s Fake Real Interview and Anticipating the Deep Fake Problem

Some controversial content appears to only be published for shock value, to gain views any way that it can and often without much of a point to make. If written in the right way however, and at the right time, however, controversial content can still have a place in your content marketing strategy. And without reflecting poorly on your brand.

Read on to discover how you should write controversial content in the right way…

Consider what you are writing and why

You shouldn’t write controversial content for no reason, but there are reasons that are perfectly valid for wanting to do so. Consider your audience, what they want and whether this piece of content will give it to them. It may be that you are writing about a crucial issue that impacts them in which case you should go ahead. If not, it may be a topic worth dismissing for now.

Your New York City SEO company can help you to discern what it is that your ideal audience will accept and what they won’t. This can help you understand whether or not you are creating content for the right reasons.

Tailor your approach – be disruptive not crude

Regurgitating an unpopular opinion, stirring up emotions and making an entirely one-sided argument is not usually the best approach for creating content. However, challenging the status quo, suggesting improvements and ways that you think you can make it better certainly is.

Tailoring your approach to the controversial topic is arguably key in not harming your brand. You can opt to include that you are presenting one opinion or suggestion, that you are playing devil’s advocate, or even add in a touch of humour. If it feels appropriate to do so.

If you are unsure, have a colleague read over your content and give their opinion before you publish it. A second set of eyes is always handy in situations like this.

Give information on both sides

Facts are essential if you are determined to argue a controversial point, especially as a part of your business content marketing strategy. There is little point in alienating a large portion of people to discuss a topic like religion or politics unless it has a direct bearing on your target market. And even then, it is a good idea to show that you have considered both sides.

Clearly present your facts, trying not to get too emotional or drawn into overly subjective arguments along the way.

Be prepared for the response

Finally, if you are writing about controversial topics you should be prepared for there to be a response. You may need to politely respond to critics and reframe your point so that you don’t lose potential customers. All in all, unless there is a real reason to do so, controversial content can be more trouble than it’s worth.

If you do think it is a point worth making and will benefit your business in the long run, remember to check your facts, tailor your approach and even inject a little humour if it feels appropriate. Remember, the key is to not harm your brand, so always make sure you are confident in the message and the tone before you hit post.

Source: TG Daily – How To Write Controversial Content That Doesn’t Reflect Poorly On Your Brand

Considering global economic conditions, HP’s financial results could have been a lot worse. Commercial sales of personal systems held flat, indicating that companies are still buying hardware while consumer sales dropped sharply. This is no surprise given the increase in both inflation and interest rates that are damaging a number of markets now. Printing is still displaying a slow decline, giving HP plenty of time to recover. Wisely, HP has significantly increased its liquidity, which should help if it wants to acquire another company or invest in technologies that will improve its prospects. 

Let’s talk about the market problems HP’s financials showcase, then contrast HP with NVIDIA which appears to be weathering this storm far better than any of the other technology companies.   

Market problems

As we approach the fourth calendar quarter, market problems don’t seem to be mitigating as much as many hoped. Interest rates are at historical highs and are expected to rise as inflation, while reduced, still has not hit an acceptable rate in most countries, including the U.S. Supply problems, while reduced, are significant, and the risks that the supply chain for processors will be severely impacted remain high and tied to China’s threat of attacking Taiwan. 

Sustainability efforts are successfully resulting in lower consumption of renewable resources which continues to adversely impact markets like printing that live on the consumption of renewable resources. While slowed, the effort to go paperless and massively increase equipment reuse and recycling is having an adverse impact on sales, even though these trends are clearly better for the environment. 

So why is NVIDIA doing so well?

NVIDIA caught and owned the AI and metaverse waves

The same problems that are hitting everyone else in the segment also hit NVIDIA, but over a period of two decades, NVIDIA nearly cornered the market on AI, a technology that has recently taken off. 

While traditional markets are in decline, AI interest has gone vertical, and NVIDIA has become practically synonymous with AI. But NVIDIA doesn’t just dominate in AI. It also dominates in the metaverse.

While Facebook did a face plant with its consumer metaverse effort, NVIDIA’s Omniverse has become close to a world standard for construction simulation and digital twins. These are considered to be the future of all construction, particularly construction that will implement advanced concepts like AI-driven robotics. 

In short, with substantial forethought, pre-planning, and impressive execution, NVIDIA was able to break free from its traditional markets that had declined and pivoted to new markets which are exciting and able to overcome the drag created by external market conditions that are hurting most everyone else. 

HP’s potential break-free products

Where HP has a similar opportunity to the AI and metaverse efforts that have catapulted NVIDIA into the limelight this year is in 3D printing. Unfortunately, HP is not yet investing in it to the level that would assure success. HP is only in the commercial market with a technology that will not scale down to small business, maker, or consumer use. 

As we approach a world of 3D printing, the goal would be to allow people to have these printers in their homes, schools, and small businesses much like they have paper printers and once had FAX machines in the past. 

But HP cannot seem to scale down which means its 3D technology, rather than dominating like NVIDIA’s does, is almost invisible instead of giving HP the pop that NVIDIA is getting from AI and Omniverse. 

But if HP can figure out a way to scale its technology both up and down, this could change. So in a way, NVIDIA has highlighted a path for HP to take that will increase HP’s status and financial performance.

Wrapping up:

HP did well in a very difficult quarter, but it needs a breakout technology like NVIDIA’s that will allow it to move beyond the performance of its legacy products. In 3D printing, HP has that technology, but it’s a technology that doesn’t scale. Until HP can get a scalable 3D printing technology or find another breakout technology, HP, like most of its peers (perhaps except Apple which uses a different sales and customer care model) won’t be able to rise to its full potential.  

Sometimes you must step out of your comfort zone to step up in the market. HP has a good team and great products. It just needs to push like NVIDIA did to create a better tomorrow for both the company and its customers. 

Source: TG Daily – HP’s Financial Results Showcase Market Problems

Late last year, Intel sent me two of its latest ARC graphics cards. While I was excited about the physical design of the cards in terms of looking good in a case, I couldn’t for the life of me get them to work on my AMD test rig, and others were having driver issues with the cards, as well. Around six months later, I built an Intel test rig. The cards, which had a list price under $300, performed in line with cards costing closer to $500, making them one heck of a bargain until Intel discontinued them. 

Last week Intel announced a significant performance improvement with their A750 Graphics card, enough of an increase to make them even more of a bargain at just under $250. 

Performance bump

Typically, users don’t notice a performance increase under 20%. Since a typical generational increase in performance is closer to 10%, you’d want to skip generations because paying a ton of money for a performance increase you wouldn’t really notice would be pointless. However, Intel reports that its new A750 card gives up to a 77% performance increase with this update on some games, and over a 20% improvement on most tested games. 

This is by no means competitive with high-end cards that cost nearly or over $1K, but it should allow the card to still outperform cards costing twice as much, making them a bargain.  It is doubtful that Intel can continue to display generational performance increases of this level, but this jump makes the cards an attractive option not only for those using older cards and imbedded graphics, but for those that had bought the earlier Intel cards. 

Generally, I recommend avoiding first generation products, but Intel has improved their offering enough since it was launched to make it feel more like a more mature 2^nd generation product.     

Bundles

One of the things that NVIDIA can’t do (but AMD could and doesn’t) is create bundles where you buy both a processor and a graphics card at a discounted bundle price. With this latest GPU release, Intel is pulling another rabbit out of its hat because it will be offering bundles starting at $419 for both a GPU and a new CPU. This bundled price is for a 12^th Gen i5. Typically, you’d probably want to get a 13^th generation processor, so I expect bundles with the later or more powerful processor to be more expensive.  

Given much of the loading these days is on the GPU not the CPU, a bundled, upgraded i5 processor with this card should be a pretty good deal if you are on an older CPU platform and it’s time to do a swap. 

Bundles to PC design change

Back before Intel’s CEO Pat Gelsinger first left Intel, he led an effort to create more creative and interesting PC designs. This bundle pricing reminds me that desktop PC architectures are well past the time when they should have been improved to make upgrading desktop systems easier. It isn’t that different in terms of components (motherboard, socketed processor, slotted GPU and accessories) than things were over 20 years ago. Yes, the sockets and slots have been upgraded, but it still requires you to pull the motherboard (which is a pain given all the secondary connections for fans, switches, and ports) needed to pull it off. 

Years ago a company called the Panda Project put forth an idea to change motherboards to a passive model so that everything could be added as an accessory. In effect, you’d just swap out boards to update the processor, GPU, chipset and memory type which would allow you to upgrade any system indefinitely just by swapping out a few cards. This would reduce the upgrade process, when you’d typically need a new motherboard from hours to minutes and make upgrading the chipset and processor far more convenient, potentially increasing the market opportunity for CPUs.  

I can imagine a future where one card updates the CPU, GPU, NPU (Neural Processing Unit) and then you’d clamp on your cooler, which could cool the entire card, and you’d be done without feeling like you were building some kind of science experiment from scratch.  And it would be far more sustainable than our current designs, as well, because users were even more motivated to upgrade rather than replace an aging PC. 

Intel is one of the few companies that could do something interesting here, and this bundled pricing suggests such a move may be in their future. 

Wrapping up:

Intel has made incredible progress with its graphics cards. Beginning with hardware that was hardly usable at the end of last year, it has turned its GPU offerings into one of the biggest bargains in the market and, for a new player in the discrete GPU space, which is over-the-top amazing. Hats off to the Intel folks who have done something truly impressive here.  

I can hardly wait to see what happens next. 

Source: TG Daily – Intel ARC Graphics: Bad Start, Impressive Progress

In an increasingly digital world, the need for online privacy and security has become paramount. Virtual Private Networks, or VPNs, have gained immense popularity as tools that offer anonymity, data encryption, and unrestricted access to online content. While there are both paid and free VPN options available for Windows users, this article will delve into the pros and cons of utilizing free VPNs for Windows.

Benefits of Free VPNs for Windows

1. Cost-Efficiency: The most apparent advantage of using a free VPN for Windows is the absence of a financial commitment. Users can enjoy many of the basic features of a VPN without having to pay a subscription fee.
2. Anonymity and Privacy: Free VPNs can provide an extra layer of privacy by masking a user’s IP address. This makes it challenging for websites and online services to track browsing habits and personal information.
3. Access to Restricted Content: Some free VPNs offer users the ability to bypass geographic restrictions and access content that might be blocked in certain regions. This can be particularly beneficial for users looking to access streaming services or websites that are not available in their country.
4. Public Wi-Fi Security: Free VPNs can be useful when connecting to public Wi-Fi networks, which are often less secure and more susceptible to cyberattacks. The encryption provided by a VPN can help protect sensitive data from potential hackers.
5. Circumvention of Censorship: In regions with strict internet censorship, a free VPN can help users bypass these restrictions and access the open internet.

Risks and Limitations of Free VPNs for Windows

1. Limited Features: Free VPNs typically offer a limited set of features compared to their paid counterparts. This can include restricted server locations, slower connection speeds, and a smaller number of supported devices.
2. Data Logging and Privacy Concerns: Some free VPNs may log user data and browsing activity, potentially compromising the very privacy they are supposed to protect. Users need to carefully review a VPN’s privacy policy and terms of service to understand how their data is being handled.
3. Security Vulnerabilities: Not all free VPNs are created equal in terms of security. Some may lack the necessary encryption protocols and may even contain malware or malicious code.
4. Unreliable Performance: Free VPNs often have limited server resources, leading to slower connection speeds and unreliable performance, especially during peak usage times.
5. Intrusive Ads and Tracking: To sustain their operations, many free VPN providers resort to displaying advertisements and tracking user activities, which can be intrusive and compromise user privacy.
6. Hidden Costs: While a VPN might be advertised as free, hidden costs can arise. These might include fees for premium features, data usage limitations, or subscription upgrades.
7. Susceptibility to IP Blacklisting: As free VPNs are sometimes used by spammers and malicious actors, their IP addresses can be more likely to be flagged and blacklisted by websites and services.

Conclusion

Free VPNs for Windows can offer a convenient way to enhance privacy, access restricted content, and improve security, especially for casual users. However, the decision to use a free VPN comes with its own set of risks and limitations, including potential privacy concerns, security vulnerabilities, and performance issues. Users must carefully evaluate their needs and priorities before selecting a free VPN, ensuring that it aligns with their desired level of online security and privacy.

Ultimately, while free VPNs can serve as a stepping stone into the world of online privacy, users who require more robust protection and a wider range of features may need to consider investing in a reputable paid VPN service. Whichever option users choose, it’s essential to stay informed about the latest developments in the VPN landscape and maintain a proactive approach to online security.

Written by Adam Eaton

Source: TG Daily – Exploring the Benefits and Risks of Free VPNs for Windows

Smartphones have become an integral part of our daily lives, and with the increase in notifications and social media, many will agree that it can be hard to put our phones down. The constant need to check for messages or updates can lead to anxiety and detachment from the real world. 

Studies have shown that excessive smartphone use can lead to decreased productivity, social and mental health problems.

And although many big tech giants are trying to make us even more dependent on their products and services, many addiction treatment specialists are expanding on how therapy and counseling can help individuals regulate their use. 

Elisabeth Dantendorfer, clinical manager at CATCH Recovery clinic in London, believes that excessive smartphone and social media use has a similar effect on the mind to substances. 

“In essence, you are creating an environment of instant gratification and reward. Compulsive behaviours in any form can hijack the reward pathways in the brain, which in turn can leave some individuals craving more of the activity they enjoy”. 

She added: “The difficulty is that smartphones are an integral part of our lives now, so unlike substance abuse, moderation is the main goal in treatment. 

The Dopamine Rush from Notifications

Notifications on smartphones can trigger the release of dopamine, a neurotransmitter associated with the feelings of pleasure and being rewarded. When we receive a notification, the brain experiences a small rush of dopamine, creating a sense of satisfaction and making us want to check our phones more frequently. This cycle of reward and reinforcement can lead to a dependence on notifications and, ultimately, on smartphone use. 

Research has shown that the frequency and predictability of notifications can further increase their addictive potential. For example, intermittent notifications (where notifications are received at random intervals) have been found to be more addictive than constant notifications. Additionally, notifications that provide social feedback (such as likes or comments on social media) can be particularly potent in triggering dopamine release and reinforcing smartphone use. 

It’s important to note that not everyone who receives notifications will develop a dependence on their smartphone. However, notifications can exacerbate problematic smartphone use for those vulnerable or who have underlying mental health issues. By understanding the science behind notifications and smartphone addiction, we can take steps to manage our phone use and reduce the negative impact on our mental health and wellbeing.

The Use of Colors & Features for Keeping Us Hooked

It’s no coincidence that app icons and interfaces sport specific color schemes. App developers cleverly use colors to keep users hooked and addicted to their apps. Colors can influence emotions and behaviors, which is why app developers use them strategically. For instance, red creates a sense of urgency and prompt action, while blue is associated with trust and calmness.

App developers can make their apps more visually attractive and engaging by appealing to our subconscious. This results in users scrolling and clicking for extended periods, increasing engagement and usage. Nonetheless, it’s critical to be mindful of this tactic and use apps wisely. While getting caught up in the colorful and visually appealing interfaces is easy, taking breaks and limiting usage if necessary is crucial.

Four Things to Do to Limit Your Smartphone Use

1. Set boundaries: Limit your phone use to specific times, such as during lunch or after work. This helps you stay focused and avoid distractions.

2. Turn off notifications: Notifications can be a considerable disturbance. Turn them off or restrict them to essential messages only.

3. Use apps to help: Many apps can track your phone usage and set limits. For Apple users, the Screen Time feature allows users to track their phone usage and set time limits for specific apps. Android users can use the Digital Wellbeing feature to monitor their app usage and set screen time limits. Another popular app for both Apple and Android users is Moment, which tracks phone usage and offers personalised coaching to help users reduce their screen time. Forest is another app that encourages users to stay off their phones by growing a virtual tree that dies if the user leaves the app. These apps can help users be more mindful of their phone usage and maintain a healthier relationship with technology.

4. Find alternative activities: Consider engaging in activities such as reading, going to the gym or running, or spending quality time with loved ones instead of immediately reaching for your phone.

Written by Lara Harper

Source: TG Daily – How Excessive Smartphone Use Affects Us

Netflix’s “The Monkey King” is an animated feature that brings to life the 16th-century Chinese novel “Journey to the West”. The film is about a stick-wielding monkey who teams up with a young girl on an epic quest for immortality, battling demons, dragons, gods — and his own ego — along the way¹.

The titular character, voiced by Jimmy O. Yang, is portrayed as a modern antihero. He is a selfish, arrogant jerk from the beginning, fighting for acceptance and displaying an anti-authoritarian attitude². Accompanying him on his journey is a young village girl named Lin, voiced by Jolie Hoang-Rappaport, who challenges his selfishness².

The film’s unique style is inspired by the textures of Chinese brush paintings and ink on paper². The magical fighting stick, a key element in the original tale, is transformed into a character in this adaptation².

“The Monkey King” was released on Netflix on August 18³. It’s an action-packed family comedy that modernizes and animates a Chinese folktale with a heroic jerk and a magical fighting stick².

Reviews

The film has received mixed reviews from critics. According to Mashable¹, the film’s take on the story is aimed more at younger viewers. However, Roger Ebert² criticized the film as “aggressively mediocre,” offering “too little humor, heart, or action to entertain all but the youngest in the family.” MSN³ described it as a “frantic fable” that modifies ancient mythology into something vaguely familiar.

Despite these criticisms, there were some positive aspects highlighted by reviewers. The Guardian⁴ praised the film as a “lively Netflix animation” that revives an ancient Chinese classic. They particularly enjoyed Bowen Yang’s performance as the Dragon King, describing it as “spiteful” and “effete”.

In conclusion, “The Monkey King” offers a fresh take on an ancient tale with its unique animation style and modern characterization. However, its reception has been mixed, with some critics finding it lacking in humor and heart. Despite this, it remains an interesting addition to Netflix’s animated offerings.

(1) ‘The Monkey King’ review: Fantasy with a frustrating hero. https://mashable.com/article/the-monkey-king-netflix-review.
(2) The Monkey King movie review & film summary (2023) | Roger Ebert. https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/the-monkey-king-movie-review-2023.
(3) ‘The Monkey King’ Review: Netflix’s Frenetic Animated Fable. https://www.msn.com/en-za/news/world/the-monkey-king-review-netflix-s-frenetic-animated-fable/ar-AA1fpTFf.
(4) The Monkey King review – lively Netflix animation revives ancient …. https://www.theguardian.com/film/2023/aug/16/the-monkey-king-review-lively-netflix-animation-revives-ancient-chinese-classic.

Source: TG Daily – Netflix’s Monkey King: A Modern Take on an Ancient Tale

Meta, previously known as Facebook, had a perfect storm opportunity. While Elon Musk was effectively killing Twitter real time and forcing most of his users and advertisers to look for alternatives, Facebook quickly surfaced Threads and immediately captured 100M users, showcasing that if Zuckerberg had just fully funded this service, Threads would have most, if not all, of Twitter’s old revenue stream. 

Sadly, Zuckerberg once again didn’t execute quickly. There is still time to correct this mistake. If not, Threads is likely to fail. Let’s talk about what Zuckerberg and Meta did wrong and how they might correct it before Threads follows Myspace into obscurity.  

Replacing Twitter

To replace any service, you must not only convince current users to leave their old service (something Musk has been very good at doing at Twitter and even changing the name so the site looks like a Port site), but you must also create a place for them to land that is very similar to what Twitter provides. Twitter has things like hashtags and its platform runs on both mobile and PC platforms.  

Zuckerberg left out anything like a hashtag and he rolled the application out on mobile platforms only, even though those of us that were posting on Twitter most of the time generally did so off our work PC, largely because it’s easier to post links and interact with something that is running on the same platform that you are working from.  

Someone at Facebook must not have realized how many Twitter users used PCs to interact with the service. There is a workaround to install it on a PC, but it isn’t for the faint of heart. Threads didn’t really need a PC app. Theyt could have just put up a web interface and that would have been fine. Given Facebook has a massive and successful web presence, you’d think they’d at least have a web interface for Threads, but they don’t. 

Ideally, Threads should have been subordinate to Facebook, Meta’s more popular app, and not Instagram which hasn’t been doing as well. Even getting Threads to work is somewhat problematic because it uses your Instagram password but, if you use Facebook to log into Instagram (which I did), getting Threads to accept the Facebook password was a problem. I got in, but it was neither quick nor easy, suggesting Meta’s human factor folks either weren’t engaged or they don’t really know what they are doing (I’d bet the former).  

You must also market the new service so that negatives, which will always exist in a switch because you can’t just clone Twitter, don’t become a major impediment to people becoming familiar with the service.  It continues to amaze me that a service like Facebook or Threads that lives off ad revenue doesn’t know how to market its own products. I should be seeing things on Facebook that would pull me to Threads, but I don’t.  

Wrapping up: 

Threads could have and might still (it isn’t dead yet and Musk continues to upset Twitter users) displace Twitter like Facebook displaced Myspace years ago. However, a failure to execute, market and assure the success of Threads has all but destroyed this opportunity. To be truly successful Threads needs to be easier to join, it needs to be marketed until it gets to a sustained critical mass, and it needs to be far more like what Twitter was to capture and hold a large audience.

Fortunately, Musk continues to motivate Twitter users to leave, so Zuckerberg has some time to fix his alternative. But if he continues to fail to execute, this will simply continue to showcase that Zuckerberg is a one-trick wonder who gained his position mostly by luck rather than skill and who hasn’t learned enough yet to create successful new offerings that can capture and hold a large audience.  It is sad to watch because, like most of you, I wanted Threads to work because I’m fed up with Musk. But Zuckerberg just couldn’t step up enough to make it happen yet. I hope that Threads doesn’t become the next Myspace.  

Source: TG Daily – Why Meta’s Threads Is Failing

With the rise of cryptocurrencies, investors have plenty of options for investing and trading. Cryptocurrency technology has revolutionised the world’s financial markets, from stocks and commodities to derivatives and foreign exchange. In particular, one area that appears particularly attractive for traders is Forex currency trading using digital or cryptocurrencies.

As more people look to cryptocurrencies as an investment option, the question remains: why are they such a good choice for forex trading? This article seeks to answer this question by exploring the critical advantages of opting for digital currencies over traditional fiat money when engaging in currency trades on foreign exchange markets.

Introducing Cryptocurrencies – What Are They and How Do They Work

In recent years, the world has witnessed a remarkable rise in using cryptocurrencies, an innovative digital currency that operates independently of any central authority. While still in their infancy, these virtual currencies have garnered immense popularity worldwide, including in the United Arab Emirates, where their use is gaining ground. 

For the uninitiated, understanding how cryptocurrency works can be a daunting task. Still, it is fundamentally a decentralised system that uses encryption techniques to secure transactions and control the creation of new units. Cryptocurrencies serve as a medium of exchange, just like traditional currencies, but with unique features that set them apart from their fiat counterparts. 

As the world becomes increasingly digital, the role of cryptocurrencies is bound to become more significant, and understanding their workings is becoming ever more crucial. Cryptocurrency UAE is an excellent resource for further information on the topic. 

Benefits of Trading Cryptocurrencies for Forex Traders

Cryptocurrencies bring many advantages to forex traders, making them an increasingly attractive option. Firstly, digital currencies are traded 24/7, offering greater flexibility than traditional currencies. It is especially beneficial for UAE traders who may need help accessing markets during off-hours due to time zone differences. 

Furthermore, digital currencies are often more volatile than traditional ones, providing traders with increased profit opportunities. In addition, the decentralised nature of cryptocurrency transactions means they are less vulnerable to market manipulation or fraud, making them a safer option for trades. Finally, cryptocurrencies require fewer fees and commissions than other forms of currency trading, providing forex traders with greater returns on their investments. 

Advantages to Trading Crypto vs Traditional Currencies

When trading cryptocurrencies, several advantages make them a viable alternative to traditional currencies. Firstly, their decentralised nature means that transactions via crypto are not subject to the same government regulations as those involving fiat money. 

It makes them harder for hackers and other cybercriminals to access since outside forces cannot manipulate them. Furthermore, cryptocurrencies are often not subject to the same fees as traditional currencies, such as exchange rate fees. It makes them a cost-effective option for investors and traders seeking to maximise their returns on forex trades.

Another advantage of trading in digital currency is that it is globally accepted, making it easier for those from different countries to transfer funds without going through multiple foreign exchange markets. Finally, trading cryptocurrencies is quicker and more convenient than traditional currencies due to eliminating many bureaucratic processes.

Tips for Smart Trading with Cryptocurrencies

Although cryptocurrencies have many advantages for forex traders, it is essential to remember to be smart when trading with them. As with any other form of currency, numerous risks must be considered. 

The best way to ensure success in crypto trading is by researching and comprehensively understanding the markets before taking on any trades. Additionally, it is vital to use reliable trading platforms that provide adequate security measures to protect funds and personal information. Finally, it is advisable to only trade with money one can afford to lose, as there are no guarantees of success in the volatile crypto market. 

Understanding the Risks Involved in Crypto Trading

As with any other form of investing, it is essential to consider the risks associated with trading crypto. Cryptocurrencies are highly volatile and can be subject to sudden changes in value due to market forces or hackers. 

Governments worldwide have been slow to respond to the rise of digital currencies, meaning they may not be as reliable an investment option as traditional currencies. Finally, investors should be aware that crypto trading is still relatively new, and there are no guarantees of success. 

Making the Most Out of Crypto Trading Opportunities

Despite the numerous risks associated with trading cryptocurrencies, there is no denying that they present an incredibly lucrative investment opportunity. By staying informed and using innovative strategies to manage risk, investors can make the most out of their crypto trading ventures. 

Those who take the time to understand the fundamentals of digital currency transactions will find that they are well-positioned to take advantage of the numerous opportunities that the market presents. With knowledge and opportunity, one can potentially reap significant rewards when trading crypto. 

Written by Callum Jackson

Source: TG Daily – Why Are Cryptocurrencies a Good Option for Forex Trading?

The novelty of medical technology is without dispute. In all except the most extreme medical emergencies, such as a broken bone, we rely on modern medical technology. Technology has always been present and undeniable, from plaster to robotic surgery. Nonetheless, the patient is the driving force behind all advances in medicine 

Enhanced Electronic Health Records

Several fundamental aspects of medical care have been enhanced by technological developments over the years. The widespread adoption of electronic health records is one example. Paper file systems for patient records are so last century; they made it difficult for doctors at different hospitals to work together on patient care. The Electronic Health Record (EHR) adoption rate has increased since the Health Information 

The Technology for Economic and Clinical Health (HITECH) Act was passed. Providers may streamline many parts of patient care with the use of EHRs, even while the healthcare system as a whole is still working through existing hurdles linked to interoperability. By giving doctors a more complete view of a patient’s health history, EHRs are transforming healthcare around the world and allowing for more nuanced, individualized treatment plans.

Personalized Treatment

The utilization of devices and wearable technologies to boost patient participation is just another manner in which technology is advancing the healthcare system. Insight from such gadgets can be used to develop hyper-specific, individualized approaches to health and fitness. For instance, you could use Medical Wave for brand of the best shockwave technology to streamline the healing process. 

Care, coaching, and health suggestions can be made that are tailored specifically to an individual’s ailments, aspirations, and way of life through the use of data analysis. Understanding the individual and their unique motivations, and then tailoring solutions to that person’s way of life in small, digestible pieces is preferable than presenting a prepackaged piece of content that fits a broad answer to a health system.

Greater Patient Care

Technology can improve patient participation, which in turn can help doctors develop more precise, individualized treatment regimens. Wearables such as fitness bands and other wirelessly connected gadgets can monitor one’s blood pressure and Electrocardiograph (ECG), providing patients and specialists with access to individualized data. These gadgets can display data including calorie intake, activity status, scheduled tasks, blood pressure readings, and more.  

The health of their patients, including their compliance with treatment programs, may be monitored more effectively by specialists. This is especially important for older patients or those who live alone, as their loved ones or concerned medical professionals will be notified immediately if anything out of the ordinary is noticed. These technology aids guarantee first-rate service for patients, raising the bar for everyone’s healthcare. 

Reduction in Medical Errors

Because they occur so frequently and are an inevitable byproduct of human performance, medical errors are becoming an increasing public concern. The development of systems that have been shown to decrease medical errors and increase survival rates has been helped, thankfully, by technological advancements. The clinical decision support (CDS) system supplies the doctor with general medical data and individual patient details. 

The goal is to improve the healthcare provider’s decision-making process by filtering relevant information and presenting it at key moments. Evidence-based standards and advice; processes and protocols; regulations and suggestions for care, etc. are all within its purview. As the CDS system has been shown to decrease both major and total drug errors, it is clear that such a system has the potential to significantly improve healthcare.

Endnote

Technology is revolutionizing the healthcare industry in so many beneficial ways. Be sure to invest in the right technology because health is a vulnerable aspect of human lives. 

Written by Adam Eaton

Source: TG Daily – 5 Benefits of Technology in the Healthcare Industry

Summer is synonymous with music festivals – those exhilarating gatherings that bring together music enthusiasts for a spellbinding experience. But have you ever wondered if you’re truly getting your money’s worth when you purchase those festival tickets? Love Discount Vouchers has delved into the heart of festival finances, unveiling the financial realities behind the euphoria. From remarkable savings to unexpected losses, the research is your compass to navigate the festival season strategically.

The Enigma of Festival Value: Unveiling the Truth

The allure of festivals is undeniable, with each event promising an unparalleled blend of music, camaraderie, and memories. However, as ticket prices soar, the value proposition becomes an important consideration. Love Discount Vouchers have meticulously dissected the financials, comparing the cost of festival tickets against the price of attending the top headlining acts’ individual concerts. The results are enlightening and eye-opening and undoubtedly unveil the best-priced festivals.

Emerging as champions of value are the Reading Festival and Leeds Festival, offering festival-goers a substantial surplus of £213.66. Not far behind are Boundary Brighton, Bloodstock Open Air, and Parklife, providing savings ranging from £106.77 to £176.60. These festivals don’t just deliver auditory pleasure; they also come with a financial edge.

Conversely, some festivals may leave you reevaluating your budget. Wireless Festival, Glastonbury, NASS Festival, We Out Here, and Isle Of Wight Festival find themselves in the lower ranks, with potential losses ranging from -£50.05 to -£82.98. These insights empower you to make informed choices, ensuring that the festival you choose aligns with both your musical preferences and your financial considerations.

Unlocking Savings Beyond Tickets: Love Discount Vouchers Advantage

As you embark on your festival journey, remember that savings extend beyond just the ticket price. Love Discount Vouchers is your gateway to maximising value across various aspects of your festival experience. This platform offers a treasure trove of discount codes, vouchers, and promotions that enable you to save money on your favourite brands. By leveraging our resources, you can revel in the festival season while staying within your budget.

In conclusion, the curtain is rising on the festival season, and the stage is set for unforgettable memories and musical encounters. Love Discount Vouchers’ research sheds light on the financial dynamics behind the scenes, allowing you to select festivals that not only resonate with your spirit but also align with your financial goals. As you dance to the rhythm of the festivals, let Love Discount Vouchers be your trusted companion in securing unbeatable deals and offers that enhance your journey. Whether it’s about making prudent financial decisions or immersing yourself in the festival vibe, your summer adventures are bound to be memorable and financially savvy.

Source: TG Daily – Festival Finances Decoded: A Deep Dive into UK Festival Value

This month, NVIDIA’s CEO Jensen Huang again delivered the keynote at ACM SIGGRAPH (it’s worth watching), the premier conference for computing graphics and interactive techniques. Lenovo was there to announce its support with impressive new hardware offerings, many of which take advantage of NVIDIA’s technology. But the major news was that the Pixar technology to create metaverse objects is moving to a standard supported by the newly formed Alliance for Open Universal Scene Description (AOUSD) which should be a game changer. 

NVIDIA is setting the market on fire with its AI success as it works aggressively to make existing entertainment technology obsolete and move us into the age of the metaverse and AI. This morning, I was on a panel discussion, Industry 5.0. The panel spent the end of the presentation talking about the metaverse, AI and electronic immortality. I talked about NVIDIA’s latest USD announcements and Huang’s ACM SIGGRAPH keynote. 

Let’s talk about the future of electronic games, entertainment and the digitization of reality. 

Gaming

I’m a gamer, but one of the issues with video gaming is that your avatar must be created for every game and rarely looks anything like you. This creates two problems. First, since your identity and appearance changes for every game, it’s much harder to identify with the character and harder for others to connect the character, assuming you want them to, to the person they previously played with. The other problem is that scenes often must be created from scrap even if they emulate real places. 

USD creates the promise of a consistent avatar that may or may not look anything like you but would look the same in every game in the future. This way, even if the avatar looks nothing like you, the people you play with will connect you to that avatar and allow you to create a more pervasive presence across all the games you play.

In addition, once elements in the game are created, they can be shared by others. This shortens the time-to-market and increases the overall realism of the game. Highly detailed objects are expensive to create so providing broad utility for them, even if they are 3D scanned from real objects, is good so they can be reused to make more realistic environments more cheaply.  

Entertainment

In the U.S., we are currently experiencing a writers and actors strike. Because they are no longer incurring the related costs of creating content, studios are enjoying huge savings. However, that revenue will slowly decline as existing content is consumed and no new content is being created. 

But the studios are looking at using AI and the metaverse to create content inexpensively, much as they create less expensive content today by producing it in other countries to avoid union backlash. 

The result should be more inexpensive content created with fewer and fewer humans involved, allowing studios to ramp content back up without taking as significant a hit as they would if they agreed to the union demands. In short, AI and the metaverse should allow studios to benefit from the strikes. 

This is not just good news for the studios. Writers and actors could create their own content with this technology. A number of actors have already done this. This would allow a far larger number of creators to create unique projects that they want to do, rather than having to do projects they don’t care for to maintain their ranking and income. 

Regardless of how this ends, entertainment will forever be changed. 

Digitized reality and digital immortality

The problem with the metaverse is the lack of immersion. Whether we are talking about gaming, working or learning remotely, experiencing simulations or creating digital immortality, immersion is lacking. But if you can create more realistic objects and blend reality with high visual accuracy with the metaverse, you can create more realistic virtual offices, schools, remote locations (explore mars without going there as Microsoft once showcased with HoloLens) and create an environment in which you could place a digital twin of a human. Because, at least initially, digital immortality will need to be created in the metaverse because our ability to transition a living entity from the metaverse to the real world is decades away. 

We talked about this today on the World Talent Economy Forum and while there was some disagreement on whether the digital immortal that was created could be differentiated from you, the potential for this transformative technology was supported. As we combine NVIDIA’s Omniverse, human digital twins, and these new USD-based elements, we have the potential to not only create digital immortals but simulations that can explore past and future events visually in real time and provide a place for these increasingly accurate human digital twins to reside. 

The question to noodle on is: If you could create a virtual world that was your ideal world with a human digital twin that was your customized ideal companion, would you ever leave it? 

Wrapping up:

With the advancements announced by companies like NVIDIA and Lenovo at ACM SIGGRAPH, we have the potential to change gaming, entertainment and even our reality over the planning horizon. While full immersion, where the metaverse could be indistinguishable from the real world to a user, is still some time off, our ability to create simulations, more consistent gaming experiences and entertainment that is both more realistic and less expensive has never advanced so fast. 

This year at ACM SIGGRAPH, I saw the future and it looked amazing. 

Source: TG Daily – NVIDIA and Lenovo at SIGGRAPH: Video Games and Reality Could Be Forever Changed