Ankit Business Review

Movie Review : Luck

2009-07-26T14:41:00.008+05:30

As soon as Luck reached the Interval point, I SMSed my friends this – Interval point in ‘Luck’. So far – terrific. What I had seen till then was a thrilling joy ride. I just loved the way the film unfolds. Natural – yet paced. The actors, the locations, the encounters – all of them were too thrilling.

Scene one grips you. Riveting you in the seat. Its pure thrill. And seeing Sanjay Dutt do it all – is pure fun. From then on, Luck starts to engulf you in a rather simple story about a bunch of characters – each with its own set of problems.

The first half primarily focuses on establishing the character. Yes, it takes too much time to do that, but at no point do you feel bored. The characters - complete with their back story and the character conflict - are established in the first half. However, the way it unfolds is not very descriptive, but still very interesting. The visuals in the first half are dark, yet revealing, at times blurred, yet absorbing. The editing was top-notch and never do you feel that you are losing out. At least in the first half.

But second half is where the film actually falters. Not much, but when compared to what was presented to you in the first half – quite considerably. There are moments when you feel that the action could have been faster. Much faster. Second half at times, looks like a dragged-on episode of Fear Factor. Perhaps the writing is to blame here. Not enough is happening in front of the viewers. There are no sharp turns and the thrill-sequences leave much to be desired. One feels let down by all the drama that was built up to the point. The story had potential that could have been tapped well by the director. Still, the second half has its moments.

The climax is perhaps the biggest let-down. The setup was fantastic, and it could have been the most thundering-roaring climaxes any Indian films had seen in recent years – but again a poor imagination, mediocre writing and below-par execution ruins it all. Again, not exceptionally bad, but based on the expectations build by the first half – leaves much to be desired.

For the most part, I liked the dialogues (Soham Shah). However, would have been much better had he trimmed them down a bit. Let me explain what I mean – in one of the scenes, Imran Khan asks Danny – “Tumhe mere bare me itna kaise pata hai”. And Danny replies – “Stock par paisa lagane se pehle company ki poori information nikal leni chahiye”. Now till now, it sounded good. But Danny’s character goes on to explain – “usi tereh, tum par paisa lagane se pehle maine tumhare bare me sab pata kar liya hai”. Clealry, in the explaining part – the dialogue starts losing its effect. (Please note I am writing the dialogues just from my memory. They were not exactly these – and were much better written )

There is not much to write about the story. To be very honest – the story is not something spectacular. The focus here is more on characters and their conflicts, and later on – on visuals. First half just oozes with fast-paced and thrilling photography. The scenes immerse you within themselves. Not much is left to think about the story actually. And you don’t complain, coz it all looks good and keeps you entertained. The drama that is built up till the interval point is so good that you just want to take in every detail that is presented in front of your eyes. And you expect something extra-ordinarily big in the second half. The scene just before the interval when 15 people play the death-game in a desert is just brilliant. Well shots and beautifully executed. Leaves your expectations sky-high.

Sanjay Dutt is as always – fits in the role to a T. The thing is, he has done so many roles in this structure, that when you start writing a story like this, Sanjay Dutt is the only person who fits the bill. The role here is easily an extension of the ones that he plays in Musafir, Plan etc. I would not use the word stereotype, but Sanjay actually looks the part in such roles. His walk still commands attention.

Danny Denzongpa is easily one of the highlights of the film. The man is raw energy. I cannot deny being in awe of him every time he comes on screen. I wish he could do more roles. He is perfect in the role that demanded to look authoritative, demanding, a father-figure, and mean – all at the same time. When Danny speaks – you just have to listen. The way he delivers his dialogues makes you wonder what could have become of Gabbar Singh, had Danny accepted the role in Sholay?

Mithun Chakraborty is another actor that makes you sigh in admiration every time he does an A-grader. Seriously, why are we not using him enough? Forget other stars, Mithun doing a major role in an A-grade Bollywood project is enough for me to go and watch that film. There were two moments in the film where the audience clapped and whistled – both showing Mithun Chakraborty. He still holds a lot of promise.

Imran Khan was good in a role that required him to do action, emote and show a lot of anger. While the guy can do with a little bit of (more) expression, the way he mouths the dialogues is quite good.

Shruti Haasan is a star right from the word Go. She just shines. She’s got a perfect screen-presence, and and got the right kind of looks to become the dominant download on the Internet (the current queen of downloads is Katrina Kaif). This is not to say that she acts perfectly. Far from it, in fact. Her dialogue delivery needs a lot of improvement. It was quite evident that she was not very comfortable mouthing those lines. But with time, this should ease out. She’s got a beautiful face, and trust me – an ahhh-mazing figure – check out the scene where she is emerging from a swimming pool. I can safely say NONE of the current Bollywood brigade has a figure to match.

Ravi Kishan and Chitrashi Rawat are competent. It was actually good to see Chitrashi Rawat in another role after Chak De India.

On the whole, the film was a nice attempt. The focus was on visuals and not so much on the story. Personally I did not felt let down by the lack of story as much as the lack of a competent screenplay. Had there been enough to savour on screen, I could have easily given this one a higher rating.

The film is good in parts. But definitely worth a watch.

Rating – 3-stars

Chalegi?

I think so. The film has created quite some curosity. Though reviews from foreign-film-fed reveiwres have been not so encouraging, the film conects with the masses on some level. In totality, I liked this one better than New York. This one should emerge successful on the box office.

Movie Review : Gulaal

2009-03-15T19:09:00.007+05:30

I went with a lot of expectations for Anuarag Kashyap's Gulaal. And I was not dissapointed. The film is a must watch. The story, right from the first scene, holds your attention. The choice of actors is something I want to pay special attention to. Everyone, fits the role.

Complex characters, with proper, developed backstory. the characters are fleshed out well and are multi-dimensional. I was delighted in the way the film uses the characters to progress the story. Which brings us to another aspect of the film. The story. The story is very well written and has many layers to it. It moves at a good pace, touches several issues and blends them into each other convincingly.

Gulaal shows a different world altogether. Not seen by many in bigger cities. Life in rural Rajasthan is very well captured. Indain cities are more than Mumbai. I'd recommend all college students in cities like Mumbai and Delhi (more, Mumbai) to go and watch Gulaal. Indian colleges are more different than the one shown in Kuchh Kuchh Hota Hai. The college, hostel and ragging shown in Gulaal is a reality in many parts of North India. This is the real India. Welcome to the ride.

Anurag Kashyap shows the local flavour like no one else. The scenes aptly captures the 'mood' of the place.
They way he blends different subplots to finally lead to his climax is worth a mention. Gulaal is definitely one of the most polished narratives I have come across recently. Things are fleshed out well. Characters behave the way they should.

Gulaal is raw energy. Be it in the story, the screenplay or even the set design. Everything falls in place and contributes to the narration. Nothing is rudimentary, nothing is complete, yet, everything looks just perfect. The set design is worth applauding. The deserts conveying the vastness, the buildings conveying the royal, and various other props used to communicate the mood and feel of the film.

Kudos to the casting director, each actor fits the role to a T. Kay Kay Menon looks every bit the royal blood that he plays. Kay Kay is one actor that had carved a niche for himself. In the overtly loud Bollywood style films, work done by Kay Kay still stands apart, thanks to directors like Anurag Kashyap. Kay Kay has grown with every film. And here, we see him evolve again. As Dukey Bana, Kay Kay gives us ample reason to hate the character, while loving the actor.

Another one to take your breath away is Abhimayu Singh. The actor plays the role of Rananjay Singh to almost perfection. You hate the character at first. Then hate him more. And then somewhere you realize that its a lovable character. Rananjay's charcater looks like a side character at first, till you realize its a more developed and powerful character. You start liking it. And all this, while the mannerism and beliefs of the character are the same as they were in the first scene! Kudos to the director for this one, and a pat on the back for Abhimanyu Singh for playing this one in a manner that makes you want more from the actor. I am definitely looking forward to the actor's next.

Aditya Shrivastav is another strong actor in the cast. As the the arch rival, Aditya paints a picture dark enough for everyone to hate, yet you look forward to his next step with interest.

The film's protagonist, Dileep Singh played by Raja Singh Chaudhary is, perhaps, the weak point of the film. You feel more for Rananjay Singh, than you do for Dileep Singh. Dileep's transition is shown convincingly. Kudos, to the director, again. But I felt something lacking in the performance.

A notable performance is of Piyush Mishra, as Prithivi Bana, Kay Kay's brother. Piyush has also given the music for the film and many songs are picturized on him. Piyush's words have that edgy feel that instantly reflects on the mood of the film. I absolutely loved watching him delivering those lines.

Deepak Dobriyal was another actor that delivered a knock out performance. I did notice him in Omkara. However, his appearance in 13B was quite brief. In Gulaal, he plays an important role, as the main associate of Kay Kay's character and pulls it off beautifully. He is restrained in just the right way. Another actor I'd like to see more of.

Jesse Randhawa is wasted. Her character is one of the flaws of the movie. Its under-developed, to say the least. There was much that could have been achieved in the Jesse-Raja angle. Else, it could have been done away with completely.

The film is lacking in pace a bit. Specially in the second half. But the first half is absolutely first rate. You do not at once feel like getting up. You want to see everything and know everyone. There are so many characters, all well fleshed out, and so much happening. But nothing goes out of context.

This is by far one of the better films that I have seen. And the credit goes to the director Anurag Kashyap. Anurag definitely has a vision that is different from other directors. Gulaal has been in making since some time now, still you do not feel it. The film looks and feels fresh. Anurag has worked out a good script and has made a wonderful film out of it. Dev D was just the beginning, Gulaal tells us there is more to come.

Gulaal is brilliant writing and riveting performances with splendid direction.

Rating : ****

Movie Review : Slumdog Millionaire

2009-01-10T21:02:00.014+05:30

Slumdog Millionaire's first scene pulls you into the drama. A familiar Indian actor (Saurabh Sukla) builds some confidence. The film starts with intense visuals. With smoke and a strange yellowish tinge to this scene, what we see is a shirtless Saurabh Shukla hurling the choicest of hindi expletives at a young Dev patel, playing Jamal Malik. The drama soon turns less intense and more lively when Irrfan Khan enters the scene. In a local police station of Mumbai. Irrfan Khan plays the police inspector.

The best part of the film comes at the beginning. As the film starts documenting Jamaal's life, the narrative begins with a scene of street kids being chased by the cops. The chase in the slum is an amazing one. Specially because it has cops chasing kids. You can't help but fall in love with the kids. Specially these kids. From a slum in Mumbai. The background score in this sequence, by A.R. Rahman truly lifts the spirits.

A lot is shown in the film about India. Its a film that can be shown not only to people abroad but also to some of the people from the urban India. Many of the intricacies of the slums will be new to many of them watching the film for the first time. As it progresses you tend to smile at how the things have been captured. From the open-air toilets to the 'guides' in Taj Mahal, to the famous Dhobi Ghat at Agra and back to the Mumbai underworld.Of course, the Mumbai underworld part has been overdone in Indian films, most prominently by Ram Gopal Varma. But yes, the lifestyle of Salim sure deserves a mention.

How the film unfolds through the questions faced by Jamal Malik sitting in the hot seat in "Who Wants To Be A Millionaire" is the centre point of the film. There is some heavy product-placement for the show here. The show is almost central to the theme of the film.

Background score by A.R. Rahman is riveting, to say the least. It completely engulfs you into the drama. Most notably, as I mentioned, during the slum-chase scene, the background appears like a character in itself.

The story of Jamal and Latika, as kids, looks interesting. Predictably enough it turns into a love story as they grow up. There's nothing new to the love story. I mean, may be, for the foreign audience, there is some novelty, but the Indian audience has seen enough of the romance-gone-awry-because-of-underworld stories. The story progresses and takes us through various 'phases' of life of Jamal. Interestingly, each phase reflects some intrinsic part of India. Really good to see all this. Specially by a foreign director.

The actors have done commendable job. The Jamaal's childhood character is too adorable. So is Latika's. All the 9 actors have done justice to the roles. Irrfan Khan shines again Saurabh Shukla is competent. Ankur Vikal, the actor playing the antagonist has done a good job. You can feel the terror in his eyes.

All in all, the film quite warm and good. The honesty in the script shows. Though there are a few glitches, they are easily ignorable.Though I found the film a bit over-rated and over-hyped, its still a good watch.

My Rating - ***

Chalegi?

The curosity around the film is enough to make sure it gets the audience. Although its niche theme and treatment would ensure it primarily gets seen in multiplexes.

Movie Review : Ghajini. Less Than Spectacular

2008-12-28T20:13:00.004+05:30

National hysteria. That's the only way to describe the phenomenon that bulit up around Ghajini. One reviewer likened the hysteria over Ghajini to the one that was witnessed when "Coolie" was released, following Amitabh Bachchan's near-fatal injury. Aamir Khan himself dubbed the release as "an event". With youngsters around the nation assuming a hairstyle which - according to the film - is because of an injury rather than a style , the film is close to event, indeed. After a not-so-eventful year Bollywood was waiting for Ghajini. The numbers are big. And from what I've heard, three times as big as Shah Rukh Khan's "Rab Ne Bana Di Jodi".

I witnessed it myself. Crowds going crazy within the theatre when the name of the film came up. They cheered when Aamir bashed up the baddies. And clapped when emoted anger. I've not seen all this in a long while. Ghajini is an event.

Ghajini, on its own, is not very different from the revenge-films that used to be made in the 1980s and early 1990s in Bollywood. Nothing wrong with that, if you can come up with an interesting treatment of the same subject. Which, I expected, the short-term-memory loss angle will add. To say the least, I was dissapointed. The memory-loss angle is not focal to the story. Its not even relevant. The story could have progressed well even in the absence of any such angle. And that is what upset me. I was expecting a lot more.

Without that, the story reduces to an average revenge-action-drama. And the things that can be termed 'watchable' are Aamir Khan, the action scenes and the love story. In that order.

The love story between Aamir and Asin is beautifuly depicted. It involves you. And you actually start wondering whats next? Actually, how well the love story is shot determines, how deeply you feel the loss of the protoganist later. And I must congratulate the team for a good job done here. Later on, everytime Aamir remembers what went wrong with him, you can feel the pain. Kudos to Aamir Khan too, for handling those scenes exceptionally well.

Asin is commendable in a role that did not require much shades. Though it did require to exude certain charm. And Asin had it in plenty. Though its lovable, the love-story could have been much more. Things which could have occured to the couple when they are in love, and which comes back haunting the protagonist.

As the story progresses, Sanjay's (Aamir's character) cause must have looked more and more convincing. This however, is not the case. Only Jiah Khan seems to be convinced. And she gives a decent performance in an under-written role. So, as I put it, thought at times you can feel the pain of the protoganist, you still wish there was more to this story. The story progresses in a pretty uni-dimensional manner. For the most part we already know whats coming. All that we want to see is how Aamir does that.

This brings us to the strongest thing about the film - Aamir. Yes, he is amazing once again. Whether its the expression on finding he's in love, to coming to terms with his loss, to the acute hatred that he has for the villain, Aamir does all this with a zeal that makes you wonder could anyone else ever portray it in any manner other than this. Watch him lifting and throwing the goons one over the other. Watch him beat a muscular cop to pulp. It all looks convincing. Aamir's expressions, mannerisms, body language, everything matches the scene in hand. Its an absolute delight to see him perform anything that he choses to. And add that extra zing to the overall effect.

Pradeep Rawat as the bad guy is just not frightening enough. Its not a problem that he dresses like a 80s-90s ka villain. That is perhaps OK. But he has just not been given enough footage. I mean, come on, make him the worst creature on the planet. Pradeep acts sincerely. And acts well. Just that the role is not written to instill fear in the audience. I badly WANTED that. I WANTED to hate the villain like I have never hated anyone. But this just doesn't happens.

Music is definitely a high-point of the film. Even the sound used for various scenes stand apart. Technically, the film is perfect. Cinematography by Ravi Chandran captures moments beautifully. Watch the song "Guzarish" to understand what I mean by "Perfection". Or even "Behka". Ravi's camera work is an important element in the overall narration of the subject.

The action scenes are dealt well. In fact, very well. The action in Ghajini is gritty, raw and powerful. Not the Matrix kinds, but more of the Sunny Deol brand. And it was a revelation to see Aamir perform all this.

Ghajini is hardcore action. With a back drop of a love story. Had the memory-loss track been dealt with a bit more sensibility, it would have ended up being an absolute must-watch. If there are any flaws, they are in the script.

The film works, primarily because of the curiosity around the film and Aamir Khan. Minus Aamir Khan, Ghajini is quite dumb.Whatever is the case, you just have to see Aamir in the role.

But nonetheless, at the end of the day a movie is a business, and from the latest reports, Ghajini has been doing thunderous business.

Chalegi?

Last heard, Ghajini has broken all records for opening collections in the cinematic history of India.

Rock On : Movie Review

2008-08-30T23:38:00.004+05:30

As a kid, none of us dreamt of becoming an investment banker when we grow up. Cricketer, actors, rockstars, astronauts, that’s what we all wanted to be. Yet we end up being software engineers, or, like Aditya from Rock On, an investment banker. Thats the theme touched upon by Rock On.

Rock On starts with a promise. Right from the time its promos have been on air, the promise was apparent. With Farhan Akhtar in the lead role, the film promised some novelty in terms of content. I had been looking forward for this one, especially coz I wanted to know what could be compelling enough for Farhan Akhtar to plunge into acting. I am a huge fan of Akhtar and have liked the treatment given to films by him. I specially liked the way he moulded Don.

So, with a rock song, the film begins. The story of four wanna-be rockstars. That much was evident from the promos itself. What’s good about the film is that it delivers what it promises, at least in the first half. There is a rock band. Four rock-crazy men. Discussions around music. Yes including a few technical terms, too. But all that is done in a way that has the viewer engrossed in the cinema. The drama is subtle. All that is needed.

I specially liked the way the film is written. The treatment given is a non-linear one. So the story progresses in present, with regular dosages of relevant flash-backs. I kind-of became a fan of the screenplay writer.

The story progresses through the life of each character, individually. As I said, properly placed in between are the flashback scenes, with all the four together. Yes, the story holds your attention. Nothing is known fully until the intermission. Not about the characters themselves, neither about their past, together. You keep on wondering about things that could have happened. You start thinking and guessing what might have happened. The first half involves you. The songs in between are very well placed too, and have a fresh feel to them. I specially liked “Meri Laundry Ka Ek Bill”. By the time first half ends I almost started feeling that was my story. Meant to be doing something else. Ended up doing something else.

Post interval, the things start being unconvincing. Although I’ll blame the writers for it, but there is a fault of the director here, too. The events in the second half, are just not as convincing. Not that there is some bigger problem with them, just that they did not looked as convincing, as the entire first half did. The first half did seem like a real story, the second half however, looks like a cheesy regular Bollywood film. It becomes too predictable, and at times, boring, too. The sparks that should have emerged from the re-assembling of the major star cast, aren’t seen anywhere. Seems the director-writer lost it in the second half. However, its not completely un-watchable.

Farhan Akhtar can act. And act well. He was restrained, subtle and just perfect in a role that required all this. As an investment banker and as a rock-singer, he is good. He has also sung 6 of the 9 songs in the film.

Arjun Rampal was good. Although, could have been better. After Don, its his second film with Farhan, though this time as a co-actor. He has a long way to go. With roles like this, where the onus is not on one star, he can prove his mettle. The way Saif and Arshad Warsi did. Saif later made a comeback to solo-hero films.

Purab Kohli was charming. This guy deserves far better roles.

Luke Kenny as Rob acted well, too. In fact the way he enacts the desperation in his character was so real, you could feel it.

Prachi Desai is a nice find. From TV, to films, is a big break, and Prachi has made good use of it. Though there are areas she needs to work on, she will definitely benefit from the success of the film.

Overall, a good one-time watch. Had the second half been as good as the first half, the film could have been an absolute must watch. Technically, I am struggling between 2.5 and 3 stars for Rock On. Ok, benefit of doubt. 3 stars from me.

Chalegi?

The promos were good. People were looking forward to watch Farhan in a film based on Rock music. And the film is watchable, at least one. Though there is a tough competition this weekend from C Kkompany, Mukhbir, Chamku, Wall-E and Wanted, none has garnered as much interest, among the Bollywood films, as Rock On. This should give a good stat for the film. Also, the film will do much better in multiplexes and A-centers than in single-screens and B and C centers.

A Response To Film Director Vivek Agnihotri's Blog

2008-07-12T10:49:00.008+05:30

The following post is a comment on film director Vivek Agnihotri's blog post on Bollywood Hungama.

Vivek,

Hi Again.

It was again good to read your post. I would like to differ with a few points put forward by you here, Vivek.

I do not think TV has corrupted the minds of the youth. As you rightly mentioned, the prime audience of India is youth. But i actually do not know any youth who is hooked up to teh Television. Yes, the majority of Indian TV programmes are substandard, I agree. But then, the audience they are targeting at, are pretty happy with them. So, "Kyunki Saas Bhi Kabhi Bahu Thee" might be a dumb TV show. But I am not an audience of it. My mother, grandmother watch "Kyunki. . .", but then, none of them is what you would expect as an audience for a film like "Chocolate". So, there is a disconnection. Well, I Do watch television. Most of the time shows on Discovery Channel, History Channel or National Geographic channel. And, the shows on these channels contain commercial breaks, too. However, how THAT constitutes to the "dumbing down" process, I fail to understand. So no, I disagree, that the television has "systematically uneducated the cinema public".

Second point. The multiplex cinema. Now, I don't understand what you are talking about. Multiplex have made the making of a lot more low-budget movies viable. What you call "multiplex cinema". Look around. "Mithya", "Dharm", "The Blue Umbrella", "Khosla Ka Ghosla" "Bheja Fry" are all movies belonging to this genre. They don't have big stars, flashy sets and dazzling publicity (budgets). But they do have is an interesting storyline which, the filmmaker knows will find favours with the select few audience. You are right. Multiplex are in the "amusement" business. "We also show movies". And its because of this casualness, that a consumer, who comes to shop for Nike shoes, when sees a poster of "Mithya" in the same complex, decides to go for it. In the absence of a multiplex, I doubt that person will ever go to a single-screen theater to see some movie by some unknown maker and having non-existent stars. A multiplex has screens of varying capacity, through which, they can experiment with exhibition. So, a low-budget film can be kept in a low-capacity screen whereas a blockbuster can be sown in a high-capacity screen, thus making the optimum use of the resources and maximizing the benefits for the exhibitor.

The third point. I think, corporatization of Bollywood is the best thing that could have happened to this industry. Yes, there are corporate houses, and their focus is on numbers (money). So, what else do you expect? These are not social-workers, making movies for the repressed, over-worked and over-stressed middle-class Indians. Just to make him feel better, selflessly. Moviemaking is serious business. And so the need for people who can deal with numbers. Agreed, these people might don't know about movies, but they Do know about business. And that's why they handle the business part, while you are given the movie-making part. If, however, as pointed by you, they interfere in the movie-making process, its too bad. Each one should be allowed to do his job. And film industry is changing. Corporatisation, films like "Khosla Ka Ghosla", digital cinema are all signs of a changed Bollywood. Marketing budgets have sure gone up, but well, that is needed.

Well, I must say I am loving this conversation with you, Vivek. Would love to see your comments on this.

Hrithik's Dance Number From Krazzy 4 Goes Viral

2008-03-28T11:01:00.001+05:30

Microsoft-Yahoo-Google : Kuchh Kuchh Hota Hai

2008-02-07T19:05:00.000+05:30

Exactly ten years back, I watched a story of three people. Rahul, Anjali and Tina. Today, I write about three companies. Three companies that are known to shape the course of Web. The three people were connected by love. The three companies are connected by competition. Until now, the companies were operating independently. But suddenly, each one has begun to shape the destiny of the other. Just like the three people. And while the whole nation stayed tuned to that story, the world seems to be waiting impatiently for the nail-biting climax of this story.

So, is it inevitable? Will MS lap up Yahoo ? You bet.

Yahoo’s board is clearly trying not to end up with Microsoft

. Many might be wondering why Yahoo has not said a word about Microsoft’s antitrust reputation, when it could have. I will tell you why. By the unsaid laws of Mergers and Acquisitions, companies are usually averse of discussing the buyer’s antitrust position; that make both the companies end up in an embarrassing situation should the deal goes through. Instead, the target company always tries to put off the deal on the price front, thus trying to show the shareholders that it’s them that they are fighting for. This, however, leads to a deal, as price is something that can easily be worked out. Especially if the buyer is Microsoft.

So, instead of saying anything about Microsoft’s reputation, the board of Yahoo will press harder for a higher price for Yahoo. Microsoft offered a price of $31 per Yahoo share at the time when it was trading for $19. A 62% premium over its share value. Shareholders. needless to say, will be more than happy to let Microsoft have Yahoo. And it’s this heat that Yahoo is facing right now.

Let’s have a look at the options that Yahoo has.

(1.) Says Yes and embrace the MS tag

Shareholders and investors, more than happy. Each one gains some. Yahoo brand lives on. Microsoft integrates its web services and OS to Yahoo’s.

(2.) Says No.

Yahoo can only say No to Microsoft’s offer on the price point. As I said earlier, there by showing the investors that it’s a better price that it’s fighting for. Then however, it will have to have some kind of arrangement with some other investor. Probably Google? Yahoo, the brand might be lost as the agreement might force Yahoo to put Google search box on Yahoo home page. Yahoo, in this case, doesn’t seems to gain much. Google, on the other hand, gains everything that it could have ever asked for. A whopping 75%+ share of the online search market.

Google CEO Eric Schmidt has reportedly been in touch with Yahoo CEO Jerry Yang, trying to figure out some sort of deal under which Yahoo will outsource its search business to Google.

So, really, what options do Yahoo have? I found the following matter in an online article titled Yahoo Running Out Of Options

It looks as if Yahoo will be dragged down the aisle by its suitor, Microsoft, no matter how loudly Google speaks its piece.

On Monday, other potential mates with deep pockets denied they would try to beat Microsoft Corp.’s $44.6-billion offer even as investment bankers tried to help Yahoo remain unhitched.

But Yahoo Inc.’s board of directors can’t simply say no to such a strong offer without providing a better alternative, analysts said, and few options have emerged that wouldn’t outrage shareholders or antitrust regulators.

“Yahoo does not want this to happen,” analyst Charlene Li of Forrester Research said.

“But I’m not sure it has much of a choice.”

And that, is pretty much what the truth is. Yahoo needs a solid reason to say No to Microsoft’s offer. It needs to convince its shareholders that it has a better alternative. If it can’t, it has to accept Microsoft’s offer. Saying No to Microsoft would possibly result in a shareholders rebellion.

With the drama getting political, each side has started lobbying to attract authority’s attention. Microsoft has been lobbying to inform the senate and the concerned authorities about the deal and its beneficial aspects. Authorities hate surprises and Microsoft knows that. Google has been shouting about foul play, too. Microsoft made a huge hue and cry about the antitrust issues when Google bought DoubleClick. Google’s crying is not just about striking back. This is about business. This is how.

Globally, advertising is a $ 400 billion business. What Microsoft is aiming at is not just online advertising, but a far wider domain of digital advertising which will encompass, in the not-so-distant future, all digital mediums like cell phones, PDA’s, set-top boxes (and hence TV screens), gaming consoles, MP3 players and much more. As we see the emergence of a more connected world, we will have more and more people accessing content on all these hyper-connected devices. And the pie of digital advertising will keep growing. Yahoo is one company that has the kind of content that can be fed up to all these billions of devices. The recent takeovers of the new-age digital marketing agencies by conventional advertising conglomerates prove that digital advertising is going to take up in a big way.

Google knows this, and it wants to keep Microsoft away from all that money. It has been lobbying to generate interest against Microsoft’s Yahoo bid. It has gone so far as to contact Yahoo and offer any assistance in combating Microsoft. However, Google will not make an offer for Yahoo’s outright buy. That’s ‘coz of regulatory issues. As of end of 2007, Google had a 58% share of the search market. Yahoo had 17%. A Google-Yahoo merger will create an entity that will have a market share of 75% +. That will be a strict no in the eyes of the antitrust authorities. So, Google buying Yahoo is clearly out of question.

There are opinions on how Microsoft should focus on its core business and should not buy Yahoo. An article by Fortune magazine had the following to say,

Microsoft is buying an empty bag. At the risk of climbing even further out on a limb here, let me make an alternative suggestion. Microsoft should move in the opposite direction: Unbundle what it already has. Get rid of everything that isn’t core! Microsoft is the monopoly provider of desktop operating systems. Guess what? It’s a great business! (Or would be if it did a better job of improving it rev to rev. Vista was a disgrace.)

Want to juice the stock price? Get rid of everything that’s unrelated to the business of improving the OS — search, xBox, Zune, etc. That OS, by the way, is quickly starting to move up into the cloud. It’ll be enough of a challenge to maintain Windows’s dominance as that happens.
It will take incredible focus and innovative thinking to maintain Windows. Don’t get distracted by Google (which, by the way, ought to get back to it’s knitting, too. Targeted search is a great business. Google (GOOG) ought to get out of everything else and it’s stock price would double.)

That, in my opinion, however, is the most stupid advice that someone could give Microsoft. Knowing Microsoft, I can say that once they are determined, they do whatever it takes to emerge triumphant. Remember Playstation was always a leader in gaming consoles when Microsoft introduced Xbox. It, didn’t work. They introduced Xbox-360, and that is giving some serious competition to Sony’ Playstation 3. Again, iPod was the leader in portable music player market and anyone even attempting to thwart that position would have been termed a lunatic. Figures say Zune 2 has been doing pretty descent business lately. Again, in online rich media platforms, Adobe’s Flash is considered somewhat of a de facto standard. Microsoft introduced Silverlight last year to combat that, and the reports have been good.

So it’s clear that Microsoft would never want to stay out of the race for online ad-revenues. Online search is still closer to Microsoft’s original business (rather than “core business”) than either gaming consoles or portable music players. Microsoft has to crack it. The current bid only shows how determined it is.

So, Yahoo will end up in Microsoft’s kitty eventually.

Microsoft is a technology behemoth and Yahoo, practically, is a media house (minus the TV channels and Radio Stations and Printing press). Combining the tech prowess of Microsoft with the media reach of Yahoo has the potential to offer the kind of content, in a manner that will touch all the aspects of a user’s life. Yahoo already has online channels on most of the domains from politics to entertainment to sports to fitness. The business of online ads thrives on the model that the user spends more time on the Internet. If the content can be presented to him in a seamless manner, the possibility of a user spending more time on MS-Yahoo platform than Google’s increases manifold.

The possible “bundling” of Microsoft’s OS with Yahoo’s offering can offer content within a familiar environment, thereby creating the ease-of-use experience for the user. So, in a totally connected world, we could have services like weather, news and stock prices are automatically delivered at appropriate places within our working environment.

Microsoft would do well to keep Yahoo as the face of everything Web that it attempts. Online, brand Yahoo is stronger and has a higher perceived value than Microsoft. So, while the applications might be developed by MS-Yahoo joint effort (no, no “sole Microsoft” developer working on any projects. They need to have the sex appeal of Yahoo services), they will be pushed by the Yahoo brand.

The up point of a MS-Yahoo deal is that Yahoo lives on. One of the sexiest things about Yahoo is it brand. And if the folks at Redmond are even 30% as intelligent as I imagine them to be, they will work damn hard to promote and push that brand. Microsoft is amazing at marketing, only this time it needs to push Yahoo aggressively.

Some services might be merged like Microsoft’s photo-sharing service may be merged with Flickr, the messengers can be unified and the MSN home page can give way to content from Yahoo. But I see most of the Microsoft’s services being merged in Yahoo.

Paul O’Brien, a six year veteran of Yahoo and the head of marketing at local events search startup Zvents says

“Yahoo will never catch up with Google in search. They can continue to be a portal, but there is not much room for growth there. But Yahoo is still a sexy company. Combining with Microsoft puts their properties in front of everyone who has a computer. If I were still at Yahoo I would think this is good news, it’s a new opportunity and new blood.”

New blood. New face. Yahoo. That’s what’s in store for the consumer Internet. Microsoft would do great service to the consumers and much more than that, to itself, to keep Yahoo alive. As a brand.

Box Office Analysis – 22-Jan-2008

2008-01-22T18:52:00.001+05:30

Rank	Movie	Weekly Nett Gross	Total Nett Gross	Verdict
1	Halla Bol	11,86,00,000	11,86,00,000	Flop
2	Taare Zameen Par	7,04,00,000	45,84,00,000	Super Hit
3	Welcome	4,65,00,000	70,91,00,000	Blockbuster
4	My Name Is AG	61,00,000	61,00,000	Disaster
5	Om Shanti Om	9,00,000	86,27,00,000	Blockbuster
6	Jab We Met	4,00,000	30,51,00,000	Super Hit

Source : BoxOfficeIndia.com

Last week's release Halla Bol has been a flop. Justified, given its loose story and lack of curiosity within the audience. The movie starts off pretty well, but somehow, never really takes off. The kind of energy that was witnessed in Santoshi's earlier films (Ghayal, Ghatak) was solely missing. Prashant pointed out that Ajay Devgan is no Sunny Deol. However, Ajay does seem to capable enough in the role. The role was substantially different from the earlier Sunny Deol flicks. The topic was more contemporary here and the setting was more subtle.

Taare Zameen Par has emerged a Superhit. This is rather interesting as TZP did not had a bumper opening. As I predicted, Welcome shattered opening records of many when it opened side-by-side Taare Zameen Par. TZP initially suffered due to Welcome but being an excellent movie that it is, picked up slowly as the word-of-mouth spread. Aamir Khan has made an excellent movie and everyone who is seeing the movie is making sure that at least five others go and watch it.

Welcome was destined to be a blockbuster. What else can I say about it. After Shah Rukh Khan, Akshay Kumar is the biggest draw at the box-office today. Even bigger than Aamir Khan. Though, as a friend pointed out, Aamir Khan has a stronger brand. So, Welcome has shattered box office records to emerge a Blockbuster. The biggest comedy hit ever. It didn't matter how the film actually was. In my opinion, it was an strictly average film. But that hardly matters. All that matters is Akshay Kumar

My Name Is Anthony Gonsalves is a disaster. Although the promos looked descent, they didn't raise the curiosity much. The presence of Amrita Rao might have helped it get some audience. Mostly fans of Rao. But given its strictly average execution, the film was bound to flop.

Om Shanti Om is a Blockbuster. An All-Time-Blockbuster in certain circuits. For me, it's a bad product with an excellent star value and over the top publicity. But what the hell, at the end of the day, cinema is about business, and going by that, Shah Rukh is a tycoon.

Jab We Met had to be a Superhit. There was no other way. The movie was very good, the music was topping the charts, and the hype surrounding the film and Shahid-Kareena breakup couldn't have come at a better time. But a very
good movie, indeed. It held on to the theatres for long as the film had tremendous repeat value. And we all know in the long run, films that hit the bull's eye are not necessarily the ones with the best story, direction or even acting, but the ones having the maximum repeat value.

Jab We Met : Movie Review

2007-10-27T12:43:00.000+05:30

In your face promotions. Catchy music. A real-life couple. And the controversy of their break-up. Is that all that’s to "Jab We Met". Not at all. The film is a hilarious roller-coaster ride through the lives of Aaditya (Shahid) and Geet (Kareena). The film starts well, and picks up speed with the introduction of Kareena. Infact, this is her best role to-date. As a Sikhni - as she reminds Shahid in one of the scenes - she is a complete charmer. She talks, laughs, smiles, frowns and....what more...runs, tells stories, catches and misses the trains, knows karate and wins your heart. As the unstoppable chatterbox who, by default, always stays happy, Kareena is complete charmer. Watch her and love her.

Shahid. For long, its been evident that Shahid has potential. Here, he proves it yet again. Shahid shows the maturity that was required to play the role. He makes just the right action at the right places. Descent dialogue deleivery and nice espressions. Shahid expresses like he never had. Aaditya, the characer is pareshaan, hairaan, confused not-in-mood. Shahid handles all these expressions adroitly. Although the director is responsible for much of this, I have to give it to Shahid to be able to carry all this. From this film, he is a star.

Imtiaz Ali, the director is very adept in the art of story-telling. Its the treatment of the film that marks it apart from films of similar genre. Watch the first scene of the film to understand what I mean. The way he has handled the scene. Nothing is said. No words exchanged. Yet, everything is established. We know what’s is going on, what has gone wrong and how the character is feeling. All without a word. Superb ! I have never seen such a scene! Do NOT arrive late for the movie lest you should miss this one scene. Imtiaz Ali is a director to watch out for. Good going.

Kareena-Shahid pair rock as a jodi. trust me, the film works primarily because of thje electrifying chemistry between these two. You can actually feel the sparks flowing !

Music is foot tapping and good. Some of the songs are already topping the charts. You actually want to dance when Shahid breaks into "Nagaada Baja", and specially towards the end when "Mauja Mauja" plays on the screen.

The film gets a bit slow in the second half but that is OK. What is not OK is the sub-plot of Shahid's mother . Its poorly developed. It could have been much meatier. Not that it disturbs the story in any way, but while you are telling a story, be sure to develop all the references properly.

One thing. What's with the poorly done Visual Effects? I mean, you can spot the nakli train and the fake background when the camera is positioned in the car. Also, the background outside the train in the introduction scene of Kareena is clearly fake. I remember reading Prime Focus's name in the opening titles. Come on guys, you are the number one visual effects facility in India, you can do better.

In all, I enjoyed the film. And so should anyone who chooses to watch it.

Rating
*** and 1/2

Chalegi ?

Definitely Chalegi.
The pre-release promos were good and have successfully managed to create enough curosity in the viewer's mind. The music is a success. And the controversy involving Shahid-Kareena could not have come at a better time. The audience is going to come to the theatre based on these factors. After watching the movie, they will spread the word, and the movie is sure to get some audience coming back as it's got a descent repeat value. Other releases of the week John Abraham's "No Smoking" and Vikram Bhatt's "Mumbai Salsa" have not managed to get this much attention, and moreover both of these are more of multiplex cinema, so "Jab We Met" can look at a rocking first week. And this one won't be a regional or multiplex success. It's going to be a pan-India hit.

Happy Viewing

Govinda and the General Theory of Relativity

2007-07-21T16:51:00.000+05:30

"Govinda ! I don't like Govinda.". Said my French instructor. And she asked many in that "high-profile" class of students. Many said that they don't like Govinda movies. Where as I was dying to watch "Partner", the latest Govinda-Salman Khan starer, directed by David Dhavan, here was a class of people, who, as a rule, seemed to dislike Govinda.

"Blood Diamnod is the movie that I'm going to watch", said a girl. I watched "Blood Diamond" long time back. It's an excellent movie. Thought-provoking, hard-hitting and definitely entertaining. A kind of film liked by many. But Govinda's a different stuff, clearly. I don't know why people go to movies, but I go for entertainment. The work that I do requires me to think, and ponder over, design and come up with complex solutions. One of the most mentally-intensive work. And I am in no mood for doing the same through the movie that I go on weekend. When in a theatre, I want to sit back, relax and get entertained. And if the movie in question provides me that, I'm all for it. And Govinda seems more or less like a guarantee that I'll get all this.

They say Govinda flicks are no-brainers. Yes they are. But if you are so desperate to excercise your brain, solve Sudoku. Why are you going for a movie. Govinda, in the past has been tagged as "Entertainer No. 1" by a certain section of media, and it's this job of his that he does extremely well. I mean, movies are supposed to be fun. They are supposed to entertain. That's the expectation that I have from a movie. If all a movie has to display is differential equations of 42nd degree with the general theory of relativity thrown in, then I don't call it a movie. Its a documentary. And I'm not sure how many of those terming Govind flicks as "no-brainer" understood what I just said.

I'm no big Govinda-fan but Govinda's sense of timing is the best in the industry. In comedy, timing is all that matters. Over the years I've seen numerous hindi films, and among the current lot, Akshay Kumar and Paresh Rawal are the closest that come to Govinda in terms of comedy. Nobody can even think of touching Govind's style and sense of comic-timing.

I am actually looking forward to watching "Partner" tomorrow.

This was not a review. That's "coming soon".

I know you hate Microsoft. Now all I want to know is , why ?

2007-07-14T13:59:00.000+05:30

Why ? Why is it ? Why do we do it ? Why do we all hate Microsoft ? It's just a very sensible and sincere questions, can somebody answer it genuinely, without terming me as a "Microsoft Evangelist". I mean , what I did was (a.) Raise some doubts about the ability of Microsoft to maintain the lead in an increasing competitive world and (b.) Based on a few observations, stated , in my humble opinion, that Microsoft seems to be a company that's very well aware of the changing dynamics of the marketplace and is working hard towards keeping up with the market. Was anything fundamentally wrong with this observation ? Well, my friend Ramjee thought so. Barely hours after I posted my last blog entry "Microsoft : Will the dominance continue? Yeah baby", Ramjee told me that "That was the most hard-core pro Microsoft stuff I have seen recently." Yeah right. And what do you have to say about the post that I wrote before that ? The one titled "Microsoft : Will the dominance continue?" where I raise doubts about the ability of Microsoft to be the king of the technology world. Did you actually read it ?

Let me take on his points, one-by-one. I post his comments in black followed by my reply in red.

Now I don't contradict what ever you have mentioned over here. It is true. But, then doing many things does not guarantee that it is the right thing that is being done. (Keep that in Mind).

Very well. Doing many things definitely do not guarantee that the right thing is being done. But whn you are spending billions of dollars on 'doing' many things. When you have top researchers from elite universities consulting on each such 'things'. When you have dedicated teams of engineers working on many such 'things', there's a high chance that at least 'some' of these things ought to be right. Right ?

Also one thing that one should understand as a technologist in business is, "Best Technology Does not Win". It is the cardinal rule.

Wow ! You've already assumes that all the technologies being developed at Microsoft are actually the "best technologies". Ahaan, thats a surprise, even for me

ipTV has been on radar of Microsoft ever since I know of them. (late 90's). However they haven't done anything significant to enhance the user experience. Today you have startups like joost, and host of others. M$ does not stand a chance here

So, what other companies you know of, that are selling a better IPTV platform than Microsoft ? "Joost" did you say ? Check it out again. The two are totally different things. Microsoft develops and markets platform technologies that allow telecom players to deploy IPTV services on TV, using their telecom networks. Three players in India are working on it. Airtel - already launched the pilot project in Gurgaon. Reliance - testing IPTV in Uttar Pradesh and Hutch-Vodafone. None of them has yet started the commercial rollouts. If and when the IPTV takes off, Microsoft will be supplying the integration and the deployment solutions for all of these. Secondly, Microsoft is having another technology called "LiveStation". This one is the closest that comes to Joost. If you wanna compare Joost with, compare it with Livestation.

Coming to convergence, where is convergence?? Do you see once device doing all the things that yo u need? That's a big NO!!
you have more and more devices doing more and more things, giving you the ability to interact seamlessly. Is that what you mean by convergence?

Where is convergence ???? Dude, you sure you wanna ask that question ? OK. Let me tell ya. When I use my mobile phone for checking my mails, listening to music, carrying around my data, as a phonebook and to organize my rendezvous , I call it convergence. "Do you see one device doing all the things that you need". No certainly not. My phone still cant wash the dishes, or mop my floor, or cook pasta. Stupid thing it cant even tell me how to propose to a girl. If that's what you mean by "One device doing all the things that you need", then you are right, we are not there yet.

Exactly DEC failed, Microsoft may not face the same fate (they are smart enough), but they are not good enough!

MS has over 90% share in desktop operating systems. If that's not "good enough", I don't know what is !

x-box ok!! was sure beaten by psp-2. Check out the figures for x-box 360. (M$ sells it at a loss). And mind you it is not a hot cake you made it out to be! Nintendo wii has overshadowed any gaming console ever in the history. WII is innovation not x-box 360. Adding more features to an existing mediocre product does not make it better

Firstly, it was NOT beaten up by PSP-2, but by PS-2.
"MS sells it at a loss" ! You have ANY idea how this business works ? OK ! Now, let me educate you on this one. Companies develop consoles which they sell to the customers at a loss. Yes, thats the part of the business. The idea is that discounted price will entice more and more customers into buying the consoles. And once people have the consoles, they WILL buy the game titles. The companies make money on these game titles. That's the business model, dude. Even Playstation is sold for a loss. Check your stats. This is just to say that HP is not doing a good business on printers because every printer that they sell, they sell it at a loss. It's the same thing. HP makes more than it loses out on the printer cartridges. The cartridges make the money. Not the printer. We have a similar situation in Media. where the newspapers are sold at losses. So the Bennett & Coleman company (thats the company behind The Times of India, in case you did not know) loses a good deal on every newspaper copy that's sold. The money flows in through the advertisements. Thats the business model.

And Nintendo surely did a splendid job. I'm myself a fan of Wii and the way its outselling any other gaming console in the history. But whoever says if thats a winner, others can't. The fact remains (and I can support it with data), that X-Box 360 is a commercial success for Microsoft. Although I'm not claiming its the # 1 gaming console.

Coming to execution, VISTA!!!

Agreed.

Yes M$ surface is great. No doubt about that. But how is it going to revolutionize stuff. Wait and watch, there are a few startups in the space which I am sure by end of the year will make surface look like a kiddo.

What startups ? And what are these technologies ? Be specific. List the technologies if you know of them.I liked what I saw.And if there are others doing things better, I would be interested in seeing them as well. Trust me, nobody wants this space to evolve better than me.

M$ was smart and lucky with IBM (read the story about it).

Irrelevant comment. 25 years is a long time. And a company has to have more than "luck" to be at the top for 25 long years.

there are many things that you haven't broached which will make the difference.
1) The world of tomorrow is no longer based on desktops. Its connected world.
2) User power is the name of the game today.

Nobody is doubting that. However, how you concluded Microsoft is not aware of these two factors, when you are, I fail to understand.

In the end, I don't want M$ to go

And that, is the whole point. You don't WANT Microsoft to go. That's it. You have any reason to support that ? I'm not pro-Microsoft or something like that. Give me a valid reason for thrashing Microsoft and watch me at my best. But the reason that "I don't want M$ to go" just doesn't cuts in. No , I refuse to be partial. I need reasons to believe in. I need evidences. Baseless assumptions and views just doesn't makes sense to me.

M$ will not vanish off as many other companies did, but it no longer can sit on the huge cash piles and say, I am the King. It has to slog it out just like any one.

Agreed. Look harder, you can see that happening.

Another of my friend recently attended an Open Source Conference in the city yesterday and on coming back told me how Windows will lose out on market share completely in four years. Wow ! Predictions ! Let me tell you when I first heard this prediction. It was mid-1998. That was about 9 years back. I started reading about Linux and all. And everyone predicted the death of MS in two years flat. Four "two years" have passed since then, and Microsoft still beats Linux base 9 : 1.

I'm all for the open source movement and free software. I personally feel softwares should be available to anybody and everybody. And it should be completely customizable. And the open source community and Linux users do a great job doing all that. And I would expect Microsoft to come up openly in support of the Open Source movement. Although this may seem contradictory in the beginning, a closer look at Microsoft will tell us that Microsoft is actually more pro-open source than some of its contemporaries like Apple. Whereas Apple maintains a tight-lip about the technologies used in their products, Microsoft is very well known to go out and help developers build applications around their platform and products. Microsoft , in this sense, is more pro- Open Source than Apple.

All I want to say is, can we stop thrashing MS and Mr. Gates , without any reason ? Agreed, there are products better than Microsoft's but hey, Microsoft doesn't makes crappy products as well. For, if it's granted that they do, then I must say to continue making crappy products for 25 years and still stay at the top is a real feat and hats off to Bill Gates for fooling us for this long.

Microsoft : Will the dominance continue ? Yeah baby !

2007-07-13T15:55:00.000+05:30

My last post raised questions about the ability of Microsoft to sustain its competitive edge. As mentioned earlier, one of the strengths of Microsoft has been to churn out new products. Products that people will like. We are now witnessing an era where convergence of the products and services have reached a point where the boundaries between different engineering functions of technology companies has started to blur. So, we have "Apple Computers" change its name to "Apple Inc." and produce products like iPod , iTV and iPhone.

This shift is desirable in the present scenario. Even unavoidable, if I might say. Innovation has always been the foundation of the business in technology companies. We have seen mammoth corporation fall in the past just because they refused to change with time or underestimated the customer. Remember what happened to Digital Equipment Corporation after the advent of the Personal Computers ? Digital used to make minicomputers and its machines were in huge demand in the 1970s and 1980s. As per Wikipedia "Its PDP and VAX products were arguably the most popular minicomputers for the scientific and engineering communities during the 1970s and 1980s". But how many of us reading this blog have ever heard of a company by that name ?

Digital refused to acknowledge the emergence of the PC. It had a glorified past. One where large industrial and scientific applications were designed to run on the proprietary architecture produced by Digital. Digital products served the needs and served it well for a good number of years. And then, something happened. Apple Computers introduced the first personal computer. They called it "Macintosh". That was in 1984. (Its an amazing video, Steve Jobs unveiling the first Mac. Watch it here ). Soon after IBM followed and produced its first PC. The operating system , was designed by Microsoft, called MS-DOS. And soon after that, Compaq successfully cloned the IBM PC. This was made possible b'coz of IBM's decision to open up the architecture of the PC. Compaq soon rose to heights in no time selling clones of IBM PC. In the meanwhile, Digital was still harvesting (or so it thought) the benefits of its minicomputers, thinking personal computer were too "hobbyist" to pose any serious threat to its business. What happened next was that Digital started losing out on the Compaq and IBM machines. Compaq finally bought Digital in 1998.

The advent of new-age consumer-centric companies point to the increased sense of urgency in the businesses worldwide. Even when the Windows and the Office platform were selling like hot cakes, Microsoft felt the need to come up with an X-Box and a Zune. It faltered in its first attempt at gaming, in X-Box. The competition, Sony's Playstation 2 was a winner then. Microsoft, however was determined to learn its lessons, and redesigned the console. What came out was a pleasant product in the form of X-Box 360. Microsoft, notorious for over-extending deadlines, surprisingly did a good job this time of introducing the product a good six months prior to the competition (Sony's Playstation 3).

Zune, the hardware media player from Microsoft fell flat on its face though. The customers didn't find any compelling reason to 'upgrade' to the new Microsoft offering. Plagued by jerky DRM and half-baked features (read wireless sharing), the offering failed to make an impact. But thats secondary. What's important here is that Microsoft attempted a product in a category that it had no business in previously.

Apart from these, two recent technologies from Microsoft have forced me to rethink about Microsoft as a company. One of them is called Microsoft Surface. Surface (codename : Milan) is developed as a hardware and software combination technology that allows a user, or multiple users, to manipulate digital content by the use of natural motions, hand gestures, or physical objects. Surface is essentially a Windows Vista PC tucked inside a black table base, topped with a 30-inch touchscreen in a clear acrylic frame. Five cameras that can sense nearby objects are mounted beneath the screen. Users can interact with the machine by touching or dragging their fingertips and objects such as paintbrushes across the screen, or by setting real-world items tagged with special barcode labels on top of it.

Surface has been optimized to respond to 52 touches at a time. During a demonstration with a reporter, Mark Bolger, the Surface Computing group's marketing director, "dipped" his finger in an on-screen paint palette, then dragged it across the screen to draw a smiley face. Then he used all 10 fingers at once to give the face a full head of hair.

In addition to recognizing finger movements, Microsoft Surface can also identify physical objects. Microsoft says that when a diner sets down a wine glass, for example, the table can automatically offer additional wine choices tailored to the dinner being eaten.

Surface features multi-touch technology that allows a user to interact with the device at more than one point of contact. For example, using all of their fingers to make a drawing instead of just one. As an extension of this, multiple users can interact with the device at once. The computer's "vision" is created by a near-infrared, 850-nanometer-wavelength LED light source aimed at the surface. When an object touches the tabletop, the light is reflected to multiple infrared cameras with a net resolution of 1280 x 960, allowing it to sense, and react to items touching the tabletop.

Another technology thats come to my notice is "Photosynth". Now this one is completely rocking. I suggest having a look at it before you read up any further. Here's the link.

The program works by analyzing multiple photographs taken of the same area. Each photograph is processed by noting specific features, like the corner of a window frame or a door handle. Photos that share features are then linked together in a web. When the same feature is found in multiple images, its 3D position can be calculated. Photosynth's 3D model is a cloud of points showing where these features are in space. This model enables the program to show a particular area from various angles, based on the different angles found in the photos. While the process works when only two photographs are used, it is better with more.

Think about it. The implications of such a technology can be immense. What if this can be coupled togeather with Google Earth and Microsoft Maps. The results will be wonderful. And needless to say, immensely useful. You can then walk or fly through a scene to see photos from any angle, zoom in or out of a photo , see where pictures were taken in relation to one another and find similar photos to the one you're currently viewing . No surprise I found the video link under the heading "Ridiculously Cool Technology"

Microsoft, once known for being an Operating System company, is trying hard to shed that image. It, however has no intentions to renounce that position. Microsoft is the king of the Operating System and it tends to be at the top in that category for a good number of years. The research going on in Microsoft on the next-gen OS, "Vienna" prove that point. With an entirely new file system in place, Vienna, Microsoft claims, is what can change the way users interact with the computers today. It is said, the physical location of a file will become irrelevant if Microsoft has its way. Good idea, as we don't really give a damn about the physical location of a file anyways. All we want is some information and if this can be classified, without having to worry about its 'geography', well and good.

Microsoft could have easily been a long forgotten company that once supplied IBM with its first ever operating system. But it chose to be different. Churning out products like Windows, Office, Visual Studio made sure Microsoft remains in sight. And now, there is another shift happening in customer preferences. And Microsoft is taking note of it.

Microsoft has enough projects in its kitty to keep the users interested. And users ARE interested. Zune, X Box, Vienna, Surface, Photosynth. Hints galore. Microsoft is here to stay. And stay for long.

For your convenience, the Photosynth video is posted below.

Microsoft - Will the dominance continue ?

2007-04-24T17:36:00.000+05:30

"With great power comes great responsibility." No one understand this better than Mr. William H. Gates. Watching Peter Parker think these lines in the closing scene of Spiderman reminded me instantly of Bill Gates. The dude has earned his fortune. And a lot of it. His products are the reason most of the people use computers today. Even for trivial things like watching movies. Or listening to music. "Windows" has acquired a completely new definition. Yes, its still the small opening that offers us glimpses of hitherto unseen 'vistas'. Only, the vistas are composed of "bits" this time. And Windows is capable of a lot more than allowing us to "view" the world.

A lot has changed since Microsoft introduced first Windows in November 1985. Although a GUI, Windows shot to instant stardom with the launch of Windows 95 in, well, 1995. Computer became a lot more easier to use now. It was no longer just for the engineers or the office folks. People started buying computers for their homes. And Bill Gates had everything to do with it. Had it not been for Windows, PCs would not have been so popular and omnipresent as they are today. Yes, GUI did exist before Windows. Apple had it first, but remember, the proprietary nature of Apple as a corporation prevented other clones of the machines, and so, never really got that critical mass.

Windows continued to dominate the world client operating system market for long, and it still does. What with over 90% of all people using the Windows OS. Microsoft always emerged as a smart company. So, although it already had the largest selling software in world history, it was prompt enough to introduce other softwares like the Office suite of products. The world, already familiar with the Microsoft Windows familiar platform, jumped to have another piece of software giving them the same look-n-feel. Perhaps, one of the two great strength of Microsoft is to keep churning out products that people will like and keep updating its existing portfolio with newer releases. OK, I said "two" strengths. So, whats, the second, you ask ? The seconds is the immense amount of support that Microsoft gives to the developers community to develop products on the Windows platform. They know and know this very well, they cannot make every software in the world. So, they invited people to participate and build softwares that others might feel useful. Their Visual Studio suite of development application is an excellent development platform. They also keep releasing the latest APIs of their softwares and holding events that attract fresh developers to the Microsoft platform. From giving free Visual Studio copies to the engineering students, to providing complete source code of some of its web applications (Yes , yes, NOT Windows) to striking an alliance with Novell, the prominent name in the Open Source community, Microsoft does it all and does it right.

So, the latest release form Microsoft is out. They call it "Vista". Microsoft Windows Vista. Beautiful eye-candy, secure and robust. Thats the claim. Well, it had to be. These are the issues reported with any previous release of Windows. This time, they say, its different. Any release HAS to be better than the previous one. Thats for sure. Now the important question is "Is there a compelling need to upgrade to Vista". And the market sentiment says "No". Users can still do without Vista, thats what's out in the open. What with its requirements of 1GB RAM, how many present computers are actually geared to handle the OS ? One of my colleagues narrated an incident. He went to a computer showroom. The guy at the showroom told him that they never demonstrate a new customer a computer running on Vista 'coz its painfully slow and gives a wrong impression on the prospective customer.

So, what went wrong. Well for one, I think, Microsoft did really bad in managing the software development process in the new OS. Under immense pressure of meeting the already-missed deadlines, they put in code that has bloated the software to no limits. Vista could have been a lot leaner. The programmers need to use their creativity. But the market pressure was just too much. Why, I fail to understand. Many complain, it took Microsoft 5 years to come up with an OS. Now why would you need an operating system upgrade every year, I completely fail to understand. Even now, we are claiming we could do for few months without upgrading to Vista.

Microsoft has made a bad image of itself in the past by making softwares that have been, at times, sub-standard. It hung, crashed and lost the important data. The reputation was build mainly 'coz of Windows 98. Even while the following release, Windows XP was better, the image continues. And even as we use Windows, there is an increasing affinity and above that, sympathy for the Linux and the open source movement.

Microsoft now has a challenge to maintain its dominance. And for this to happen it needs to change it image. It needs to become more user-friendly. The software needs to be changed, COMPLETELY. Perhaps with the introduction of its next-gen file-system, WinFS, it will achieve that. The user HAS to be in the center of all activities. And the total cost of ownership of Microsoft products needs to be brought down drastically.

The open source movement is taking more and more people into confidence. Although, its far to think that Linux will take over Windows as the most widely used OS, anytime soon, the shift is clearly visible.

Mr. Gates has ruled the world for long. And if he wants to continue doing so, he better act now.

Movie Review : Eklavya

2007-02-22T02:29:00.000+05:30

"Ek to now you are coming with the Business Plan". That was my CEO.
"Yes. I have the business plan". Thats all I could say.
"Thats my point."
"Mine too."
"Arrey, you were supposed to hand this to me by 11 am". He was still not angry.
"Oh, were we?" Somehow, I always miss to hear about the deadlines. That I miss the deadlines too should be quite evident. Its directly derivable form the last statement. It was 7 pm. I was more than 8 hours late.

I have been working on this the entire night.(and also the entire day, today) And now, badly needed an escape. I wanted to watch Eklavya. Too much peole have said three much about it, making it an apt cause for a foursome to go for it. However, I could manage only two more, so, it was a threesome. My review ? Read on.

The credits were rolling. Midhun said the movie was over. Not that I thought otherwise. I movie was over. For sure. But the experience wasn't. I sat there, completely sunken in the imagery of the movie and aura of Mr. Bachchan. It was sheer poetry. There is no other way to describe this movie. Brilliant executon. Crisp editing. Riveting performances. Stunning visuals. And Sexy execution. Hats off to you Mr. Chopra.

From the first frame, you know that this one is going to be a visual treat. And treat it sure emerges as. The very first scene, Boman Irani with Sharmeela Tagore gives you a glimpse of what lies ahead. Soon after the scene where Saif comes form London and meets Mr. Bachchan is handeled superbly. Note the performances, the direction and the camerawork. Not a word is spoken. Everything is expressed.

The camera work is breathtaking. Simply superb. The camera itself has a distinct character of itself. The closeups. The scenic Rajasthan. The zoom outs. All masterly strokes.

And in the end, it has to be about Mr. Bachchan. In a towering performances, he shines. I now wonder what can I say about him that I had not said already. Mr. Bachchan in Eklavya is mesmerising, if that can capture the mood correctly.

An absolute must-watch.

Ladies n Gentleman...Boys n Girls....

2007-01-27T19:56:00.000+05:30

Ladies n Gentlemen, boys and girls. The best episode of SRK-KBC so far. By any standard.

This time Shah Rukh faces one of his biggest fans. Girls.

Shah Rukh is a star. And in today's episode, episode 4, he proves that yet again. Shah Rukh was confident (ok, yet more confident) and completely in control of the situation. Not once did I feel that he was nervous. He has made his mark in the show, and what’s better, he very well realizes this. He was funny, friendly, witty and lovable. "Take a break. But jaldi aaiyega, kyunki main.. aapka... intezaar kar raha hoon." When he announces, you actually want to come back.

The studio audience was completely under the spell of the man today. His charm seemed to have worked on the young and the elderly alike. The girl on the hotseat, Vasu Jaitly, from Delhi was completely in love with SRK.Vasu had seen "Dilwale Dulhaniya Le Jayenge" 50 times.She proposed to Shah Rukh. He confirmed coming Sunday as the tentative date for marriage. And the bride's father gave his blessing. All in the span of one episode. Reciting dialogues from "Dil To Pagal Hai", holding hand of Vasu, Shah Rukh was the Cupid God that Chopras and Johars had made him. You can listen the girls in the audience gushing as SRK looked into the eyes of Vasu, still holding her hand. He then kissed thr girl on forehead, and convinced us all that if, after Bachchan, there is someone who can be trusted with KBC, its Shah Rukh.

Here is the video. Notice what happens towards the end of the first video. After Shah Rukh announces the break. Lisen the audience gushing. I've kept that video just for that.

The second video has the complete Episode 4.

And here is the complete episode

Shah Rukh gives away his wristwatch to KBC participant

2007-01-24T16:18:00.000+05:30

Shah Rukh was trying. And trying hard. But the guys watching the show were not convinced. Most of them left after the first break. Shah Rukh was clearly ,more confident today. Although it was clear that he was running out of jokes. The strategy is clear now. "Humour" is the distinguishing factor. Whereas AB was subtle , authoritative and friendly, SRK is in-your-face, funny, and yes, friendly. He is trying more and more to make that connect with the participant, and at times , it shows. One thing missing, though, is the one question to the participant, "What will you do if you win". Man, that one really threw some interesting things. And Big B was good at that one. I am not sure, but this may be a part of Shah Rukh's strategy to differentiate it from AB-KBC.

One interesting that happened was, when his first participant, Rama Krishna Guggilla, lost out on a question, Shah Rukh felt so bad that he gave away his wrist watch to him. I later learnt that the watch was a Tag Heuer 2000 Aquagraph worth Rs. 1.28 lacs. And I DO NOT think he was asked by the producer to do so. This was clearly his personal gesture. The participant was dumbfounded. (http://inhome.rediff.com/movies/2007/jan/23kbc.htm)

The ratings for the new show have been very good. The best in class, infact. The show got a rating of 5.35 from aMap, a TV rating agency.
( http://www.business-standard.com/iceworld/storypage.php?leftnm=8&subLeft=4&amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;chklogin=N&autono=272389&tab=r )
Adlabs, the new producers of KBC mut be peretty much happy. Seems like the gamble that Star Plus played is paying off. Although, its still early to make such an statement. The studio audience seems to love Shah Rukh (what else are we expecting). They just laugh their hearts off on his jokes and one-liners.

The image of Mr. Bachchan hosting the show is so itched in the minds of the TV audience that they are feeling it difficult to accept Shah Rukh. And thats what I said in the beginning of this article. People just left. For some, Shah Rukh was not hot enough. For die-hard Bachchan fans, this won't change. But otherwise, SRK is doing quite a good job, actually. This is his show. And he is making a conscious attempt to make this clear.

And yeah, I loved the rap song in the beginning of the show. For all you guys , the video is posted below.

K...K...Kaun Banega Crorepati

2007-01-23T01:07:00.000+05:30

It's not easy when you are trying to fill in a place that has been immortalized by one of the most lovable persona of India. And being Shah Rukh Khan hardly helps !

Shah Rukh's stardom is second only to Mr. Bachchan. So, when a question comes as to who will step in Mr. Bachchan's shoes, Shah Rukh's name is the only one which, although distant, seems visible on the horizon.This explains Don and this explains KBC - 3.

Shah Rukh has energy. Loads of it. And he uses it here in just the right balance. Let us admit, like Mr. Bachchan, Shah Rukh is a veteran. Okay, not exactly like Mr. Bachchan, but he still is a veteran. And here, it shows. He has a sense of what he is stepping into. He knows, more than anybody else dictating their verdict, that imitating Mr. Bachchan is impossible, to put it lightly. So, he doesn't even try. Instead, Shah Rukh brings his own style into a show known mostly for just one reason. Mr. Bachchan. Shah Rukh, smiles, laughs, jokes, talks and entertains us to the hilt. Atleast, that was the idea. In his debut episode as a host, Shah Rukh makes it absolutely clear that there won't be any complicated(well, with Mr. Bachchan, it was NEVER complicated) hindi nor will there be any 'lock'ing the answer options. He tells us straight, this time, there's gonna be a lot of talking. And also that he will wear the "coat" the way we wants him to. The idea was to create a distinct identity of his own. And , to an extent, he succeeds in that. Ten minutes into the show and you are aware that this is SRK KBC.

Shah Rukh looks very conscious in the first 40 minutes of the show. Thats the time he spends with Prasenjit Sarkar, the rollover contestent form KBC-2. Oops, Dwiteeye ! And I keep on guessing, why is he so nervous now. I mean, one can understand when you are nervous because you are infront of Mr. Amitabh Bachchan. But what's with being nervous because you are infornt of the person left over by Mr. Bachchan ! Man, Bachchan Saahab, surely has an aura.

It's only after the fastest-finger first round, when Rama K Gugilla comes to the hot-seat, when Shah Rukh really comes into the form. From here on, you just never want to change the channel. Shah Rukh makes you smile, laugh, giggle, and love him. He is friendly , energetic, entertaining, composed but in no way subtle, . His jokes are direct. His sense of humour , visible. And he does all this while making it sure that all his contestents feel completely at ease infront of him. As they felt infront of Mr. Bachchan. Shah Rukh is completely in-charge from now on. He asks the contestent wether he can call him 'Gugs Gugilla'. He tells his wife to wish him best of luck and say 'I love you'. He prohibits him form saying, "I quit", rather, the drill is now to say, "Shah Rukh, main aapse gale milna chaahta hoon". He addresses the audience as “ladies and gentleman, boys and girls” and he opts to hug the contestants rather than just shake hands with them.

Shah Rukh is one of the best hosts. We know this from the stage shows we have been seeing, and from here on, he shows this quality of his quite aptly.

So, are we impressed ? Let me put it this way, Shah Rukh doesn't dissapoints atleast. And given what Bachchan Saahab did to this role, it's no mean task. Shah Rukh clearly becomes more confident towards the end of the show, when he is purely brilliant. The change, in those parts , is a welcome one. So, my guess is, the next few episodes are going to be rocking. Shah Rukh, after the first 40 minutes, has come to ease with the format and now its just a matter of few episodes that can take KBC to the heights that it enjoyed in earlier times.

One last word. I missed Bachchan Saahab