I’m not going to go into what you should or shouldn’t do with using images from the web on products although will offer a short story. Years back I owned a somewhat successful info-based website (not related to t-shirts) that received about 40,000 page views daily. I have long since sold the property to a media company that runs about 100+ sites.

The web property I speak of was launched in the mid 90’s and it was quite easy to get noticed and build traffic quickly then.  Today, if building a similar site, it would be lost within an ocean of websites all bidding for the same eyeballs.  Things have changed since the early days, mostly for the worse for those looking to easily capitalize on cyberspace fortunes.

I was always careful with images and only used those that we generated, received permission for, taken from a royalty free source and some that we actually paid for. I had many freelance contributors to the site, all working either for free or for a percentage of ad revenue and being a small operation I obviously couldn’t check everything out although did my best.

Well, one day a certified letter shows up from Getty Images (they seem to own just about everything btw) looking for $20,000 for the unauthorized use of “four” of their images on our site.

These were simply generic pictures, nothing specific that would leave any doubt in my mind regarding their fair use.  Additionally, we weren’t using them on products for resale although that is how Getty always sees the situation. Eventually I settled for $2,000 along with $900 in legal fees.  Honestly, if I wasn’t looking to sell the property, I probably would have told Getty to pound salt!  LOL!

Moral to the story….if there’s any doubt, don’t use it.  Especially on a tangible item for resale such as a t-shirt.

Have been planning to test Google Play and this weekend finally uploaded my iTunes library to it, a total of about 4,500 songs.  It took several hours to complete although now keeps track of any new songs added to iTunes and adds those transparently.  The service also clones your iTunes Playlists, play count and other data and permits the upload of 20,000 songs at no charge.  Your music is now available on “any” computer and up to ten other devices.

Google Play is not as polished as iTunes (yet), but what I like about it is the ability to download my entire library of songs and not be restricted to cloud only storage of my MP3 files.  I don’t know about you, but I feel better actually having all my MP3 files on a disk, right here and not jailed on a server farm permitting me “access” to it.

For me, this was a major plus as my iTunes library source files were scatted throughout many folders in addition to a few external network drives and probably yet another drive on my network server, therefore I’d probably have a difficult time locating everything to centralize a final absolute location for my music.  For some reason my music collection was never that organized?

Now that all files have been uploaded, I can download everything to one system and make a handy backup to a few DVD’s for safe keeping and for this reason alone, the effort was worthwhile.

Another benefit to Google Plus, aside from the fact your entire library is now accessible to play from any computer, tablet, Android phone, etc., is that regardless of the quality of your original source file, playback can be set to high quality 320Kbps.  When playing your music from the cloud, Google Play can detect the speed of your internet connection and adjust the bit rate based on available bandwidth although music will be played at a higher bit rate (up to 320Kbps) when using a fast internet connection.

Most will find the web interface quite “Google-ish” as in very basic and utilitarian but hey, this is Google so what else is to be expected?  Apple diehards will certainly fluff off Google Play and yes, it needs a bit of polish although it certainly is another shot at Apple and a force to be reckoned with.

Google’s Chromebook is basically a cell phone merging with a netbook, although I do believe this is Google’s plan to ultimately replacing the personal computer. Question is, will it really do that?  Can it do that?   Only time will tell, however, with Chromebook Google has fired a nasty shot across the bow of such industry giants as Hewlett-Packard and Dell along with their primary targets of Microsoft and Apple.

It could be that one day, in the not so distant future Fortune 500 companies will be launching a Chrome OS and no longer Microsoft’s Windows.  And to date, when factoring in the poor reception to Windows 8, this possibility inches closer to fruition with each tick of the clock.

Throughout the 90s, Microsoft was the king of computing, with its cash cows of Windows operating systems and industry-standard Microsoft Office software providing it with a seemingly endless stream of revenue. Personal computer manufacturers Hewlett-Packard and Dell were riding high on Microsoft’s success, processor manufacturers Intel and AMD were selling CPUs like crazy, and Apple held nothing but a niche market after the departure of its founder, Steve Jobs.

That golden decade was Wintel’s heyday, and investors were richly rewarded. Between 1990 and 2000, Microsoft stock rose 711,000% under the guidance of founder Bill Gates. However, those happy days could not last forever, and the dot-com crash of 2000 put a ceiling over Microsoft’s explosive growth.

Microsoft, which had already established itself as the world’s strongest tech company, survived the tech crash while other companies went bankrupt, but investor confidence in the tech sector was irreparably shaken. Bill Gates stepped down as CEO in January 2000, handing over the reins to his longtime associate Steve Ballmer.

Between 2000 and 2010, Microsoft stock went nowhere, dropping 3% by the end of the decade. Microsoft investors, frustrated by the lack of progress under Ballmer’s reign, lamented the company’s lost decade. During those ten years, Apple and Google, which Ballmer never considered serious contenders, introduced new disruptive technologies that cast doubt on the future growth potential of Microsoft’s core competencies.

So here we are, two years later, and Microsoft has slid another 13%. Forbes magazine named Steve Ballmer the worst CEO of 2012, investors are up in arms regarding the lack of progress in mobile devices and cloud computing, and a plethora of Wintel companies – Dell, HP and Intel – are all withering as demand for Microsoft products wanes.

Can this decline be resolved by hiring a new CEO, or does the wound run far deeper? How did Microsoft, once considered the market-leading innovator, devolve into a market-following imitator? Let’s take a look at three key factors.

#1: Underestimating the Competition

Here are several quotes that sum up Ballmer’s habit of misunderstanding and underestimating his competitors.

On Apple’s more expensive computers:

“Paying an extra $500 for a computer in this environment – same piece of hardware – paying $500 more to get a logo on it?” 

On Google:

“Google’s not a real company. It’s a house of cards.”

On Windows Phone vs. Android:

“You don’t need to be a computer scientist to use a Windows Phone, but I think you do to use an Android phone.”

On Linux and other open-source alternative operating systems:

“Linux is a cancer that attaches itself in an intellectual property sense to everything it touches.”

These statements are only the tip of the iceberg that is Ballmer’s ego, and symptomatic of the erroneous ways he sizes up competitors, recognizes threats and responds to rapidly shifting market trends.

#2: Always Being Late to the Party

After Bill Gates stepped down, every step Microsoft took indicated that it had devolved from a market innovator into a market follower. As we can see in this chart featuring Microsoft’s major product releases over the past decade, Ballmer has been reactive, rather than proactive, in his major product releases.

That’s not to say that imitators never succeed. Samsung imitated Apple’s designs and took advantage of Android’s flexibility, emerging as the top smartphone manufacturer in the world.Amazon (NASDAQ: AMZN) imitated the iPad and applied a forked Android operating system to create the Kindle Fire, the second best-selling tablet in the United States.

Microsoft’s releases, however, often arrive more than two years after an industry-changing product emerges, usually trailing a mass of swarming imitators. After such long waits, consumers expect Microsoft’s product to be superior, but the quality of its products have been inconsistent at best.

#3: Relying on Windows 8, Surface or Nokia to Turn the Tide

Microsoft is now relying on an all-in bet that Windows 8 will succeed and revive the ailing PC market in 2013. Unfortunately, throughout 2012, PC sales plunged an average of 21%. Laptop sales dropped 24% while desktop sales slid 9%.

The release of Windows 8 in late October 2012 did nothing to reverse the trend, as Microsoft had hoped, due to mixed reviews of its radically different functions and design aesthetics. A steeper learning curve, designed to adapt to Windows 8’s touch screen-optimized tiles, kept traditional laptop and desktop users from upgrading their operating systems.

Meanwhile, the rising price of PC systems, from an average of $433 to $477 this year, discouraged shoppers from purchasing new Wintel machines over the holiday season.

Microsoft is also counting on its new hybrid tablet device, Surface, to make an impression on consumers. Analysts believe Microsoft created the Surface to not only challenge Apple and Google, but also to fully showcase the abilities of Windows 8 and spur other members of its Wintel ecosystem – HP, Dell, Lenovo and others – to produce more innovative hybrid products.

Initial reports claim that the Surface was at the bottom of the barrel during the holiday shopping season, trailing Apple’s iPad, Amazon’s Kindle series and Samsung’s Galaxy Tab series by a wide margin.

Lastly, Microsoft must garner more support for its Windows Phone devices, which are mainly sold by Nokia, HTC and Samsung, which has been lagging both Apple and Google in terms of developer and consumer support.

In the third quarter of fiscal 2012, Windows Phones, including the newly released Windows 8 Phones, claimed a miniscule 3.5% of the smartphone market, compared to Apple’s 14.9% and Google Android’s dominant 75% market share.

Today, the company has become more a liability and less of an asset.  Considering all the aforementioned problems that have plagued Microsoft over the past decade, can Microsoft really turn it all around in 2013 with solid initiatives in mobile technology? Or is it doomed to remain a market imitator, a mere shadow of its former self?

Slowly, deliberately, but surely I’m working on a set of Photoshop Filters and Actions that’ll be marketed primarily to the photography market.  I mean, everyone is running around these days with a camera thinking they’re a photographer.  And for good reason, even low priced point and shoot cameras can take incredible shots.

Below is one of the effects I’ve recently developed.  It’s primarily for faces (so far) and generates a surreal effect. Not quite cartoon and not quite photographic.  The transformation of the Steve Jobs image below is quite unique and I don’t recall ever seeing anything like it.  It took many hours to get it right although further work is needed to refine it for all images from low resolution jpegs to high resolution magazine quality images.

The most pleasing effect is the rendering of the hair and the manner in which the filter smooths the image yet retains sufficient detail and sharpness.  Expect more to come shortly.

Clicking the image will open a full size jpeg.