Google Wants You To Know A Google Docs Redesign Is Coming (I Wonder Why)

Posted by MG Siegler on July 16, 2009

On the Google Docs blog today, the company took the time to make a non-announcement. Basically, there’s a bunch of words that bury the real story: That Google Docs will soon be launching a “brand new shiny interface.”

Hmmm. I wonder why. Obviously, earlier this week Microsoft laid out its plans for Office 2010, which includes a web-based component meant to take on Google Docs. But once again, there is nothing to actually see right now from Google, instead this is a pre-announcement to let users know that they may be seeing wonky elements over the next few weeks as they tweak things on the fly.

Not surprisingly, the sharing of documents will be a key element to this redesign. Despite it being perhaps the key element of Google Docs, sharing items with others is simply not that intuitive right now. Here’s what Google has in mind for the future:

One thing you’ll probably notice in the next few days is that the “Shared with…” list in the left hand pane will go away. But don’t worry, you can still use Search to do the same thing. Just click on “Search Options” and type the user’s name into the “Shared with:” box. If this is a search you’ll do over and over again, you can click “Save this search” so it will be easily accessible in “Saved Searches”.

Another thing you’ll see is the new Sharing Menu. We feel this is a big improvement over the old one; we’ve moved all the sharing functionality into this one dialog, so now you can completely manage sharing without having to leave the Docs list.

Other than that, Google is adding a bunch of new search operators (which only the hardcore users will care about). And it concludes the post with “They [the new features] will be followed shortly by the new interface and a number of pretty exciting features we have in the pipe.”

Resources: http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/07/16/google-wants-you-to-know-a-google-docs-redesign-is-coming-i-wonder-why/

Google vs. Microsoft: What you need to know

Posted by Ryan Singel on 15 July 09

In less than a week, Google announced an operating system to compete with Windows, while Microsoft announced that Office 10 will include free, online versions of its four most popular software programs -- a shot at Google's suite of web-based office applications.

The fight between Microsoft and Google is over who'll be seen as the world's most important tech company.

And not more than a month and a half ago, Microsoft unveiled its new search engine Bing, which it hopes will steal market share from Google and finally make it real money online.

From the news of it, it's a full-blown tech battle, complete with behind-the-scenes machinations to sic government regulators on each other.

It is, however, not a death match -- it's more of an fight to see who will be the King of Technology, since both companies pull in their billions through completely different siphons and are unlikely to severely wound one another any time soon.

Google pulled in $22 billion in revenue in 2008, 97 percent of which came tiny text ads bought by the keyword and placed next to search results or on pages around the web. Google makes a negligible amount of money bundling its online apps for businesses, charging $50 a head annually -- but mostly it just gives its online text editor, email and spreadsheet programs away.

By contrast, Microsoft sold $14.3 billion worth of Microsoft Word and PowerPoint and other business applications over the last nine months, making a profit of $9.3 billion. It made a further $16 billion in revenue in 2008 through sales of its operating systems, which range from XP installations on netbooks, to Vista, to Windows Mobile to its server software.

Google now plans its own range of operating systems, starting with Android, an open-source OS for small devices like smartphones, and Chrome OS, a browser-focused, open-source OS that will run on notebooks and desktops.

Clearly top executives at each company look over at the others' pots of gold and dream of ways to steal them, or at least make it harder for the other guy to make money.

In fact, they even dislike each other enough to spend money to make the other one lose revenue -- take for example, Microsoft's behind-the-scenes campaign to scuttle last year's proposed Google-Yahoo advertising deal or its ongoing attempts to derail the Google Book Search settlement.

But in reality, the competition is really about creating universes or ecosystems that it hopes consumers will want to live their technology lives inside. And it's about ego -- a fight to be recognized as the world's most important technology company.

Microsoft would love for everyone in the world to be using its Internet Explorer browser to search through Bing to find a story from its MSN portal to email via Hotmail or Outlook to a friend. Add in a smartphone running Windows Mobile and an Xbox in the living room for the kids, and you have a Microsoft family. And though it is much joked about, Microsoft is the dominant platform for software developers of all types, whether they are making small business software, massive online role-playing games or photo-editing utilities.

Google's ecosystem looks different. It starts with a Google Chrome browser (oddly running only on Windows) with a default homepage set to Google News or a customized Google homepage. From there you might go to Gmail and then click on a Word document sent to you as an attachment which Google will quickly -- and safely -- open for you in its online word processor.

But most importantly, Google wants you to search and travel around the web, hitting web pages that run Google-served ads and Google tracking cookies. You might think that Google is a really cool company to give away all this free technology, while never thinking about the persistent and silent data collection Google is undertaking to profile you in order to deliver you to advertisers for a premium.

So how do the two stack up in four key areas of competition?

Browsers: Internet Explorer in all its variations still retains close to 70 percent of the market (depending on who is counting and how). That dominance remains, even though Microsoft's latest offering IE8 lags behind all the other major browsers in features and advanced web capabilities.

Firefox, Opera, and Apple's Safari have all driven browser innovation over the last five years, but most people have not been convinced to leave IE behind, despite other alternatives being safer and more advanced. Why does it matter? Well, IE installations come with a default home page, don't they?

Google's Chrome browser, on the other hand, is a handsome, whiz-kid of a browser. It's sleek and nimble, and it revolutionizes how tabs are handled. The address bar is the search box (Google as default, naturally). Each website opened runs as its own browser instance and has very low permissions to read and write to files. The sandboxing of tabs means that if a single website hangs or crashes, the rest are unaffected. Meanwhile, lower permissions make it harder for a hacker to bust into your computer through your browser.

Chrome also has less than 2 percent of the browser market share.

Online Search: Google's name now means search to most users. Google's search engine means money to Google. In June, it delivered 78.5 percent of search results pages delivered to U.S. web users. In the first three months of 2009, Google pulled in $5.2 billion in revenue, a majority of which came from AdWords, an auction-based service that triggers ads based on the keywords in a search query.

Microsoft recently debuted Bing, a new search engine it hoped would fare well in comparison to Google. It's got some fine innovations, and shows the company is thinking very hard about better ways to present information to users by finding ways to synthesize data, rather than just retrieving links. Still, despite these improvements, a $100 million ad campaign, and generous press coverage that treats Bing like an underdog, Bing gained only a point in June to get Microsoft 8.2 percent of all searches.

Operating Systems: Microsoft has been making operating systems since 1979 and has spent 28 years perfecting MS-DOS and Windows NT, the frameworks that Windows have been built around. Microsoft is estimated to run on about 90 percent of all laptops and desktops in the world. By copying its competitors' best features, leveraging questionable licensing arrangements and using its base of accustomed users to buy it time against innovators, Microsoft has held on to its lead in the OS market for almost 30 years. That's despite challenges from Digital Research, Apple and IBM.

Microsoft's newest version, Windows 7, will be available in the fall. Early reviews say the OS boots quickly and sleeps fast, and avoids much of the confusing interface decisions that have made many dislike Vista, the successor to Windows XP. Microsoft also dominates in the business world, where nearly every medium to large company standardizes around Microsoft Office. Microsoft is also at work on version 6 of its operating system for handheld devices, which it first launched in 2000.

Its OS advantages are immense. It has millions of users who know nothing else and who like Windows. There are millions who are attached to games or the thousands of desktop apps that are only available on Windows. Thousands of devices just plug in and work on its hardware. And familiarity with Microsoft software is a requirement for a huge number of office jobs.

By contrast, Google first stepped into the OS game in 2007 when it announced its Android operating system for small devices. Google estimates that some 18 phone models will be running its system by the end of the year. Last week, Google announced, but did not show off, a new OS to compete with Windows, dubbing it Chrome OS.

That name signifies that Google's OS will be for the web and browser-based. It hopes to convince developers to write software that runs inside a browser, instead of on top of the OS as developers for Windows and Apples' OS X do. It will also let web developers extend the power of their websites by expanding the capabilities of the browser, allowing websites to lean on the browser for storage and processing help.

Advertising: Google is largely powered by its innovative auction-based text ads on its own site, but then expanded into serving ads on other people's sites with the Adsense program. It bought the ad-serving and behavioral-profiling giant Doubleclick in 2007 for more than $3 billion, and has ventured into mobile, print, radio and television ads.

Microsoft has struggled to replicate Google's online advertising success. Despite owning MSN.com -- a portal that is second only to Yahoo as a destination -- Microsoft has not made money on the internet. To turbocharge its ad-delivery technology, it paid more than $6 billion in cash in 2007 for aQuantive, a full-service online advertising concern.

Instead, Microsoft's online ad business lost $1.2 billion in 2008, double what it lost in 2007. The company expects 2009 revenues to be higher than the $3.2 billion it took in last year, but has not said it would make a profit.

Contrary to what some might have you believe, the benefits of the Google-Microsoft competition are immense.

Microsoft had largely grown complacent until Google came along to shake up categories. Gmail's massive online storage capability and fancy programming made Microsoft hustle to upgrade its popular, though not user-friendly, web e-mail service. Google Maps led to Microsoft's Live Maps, which now bests Google's efforts in some ways.

Google has been winning the fight for the last few years, showing that it is still nimbler than the software giant from the Northwest. But the pendulum may be slowing, or even poised to swing the other way. With the innovations in Bing and the promise that Microsoft's online Office offerings will be free and more fully featured than the Google equivalent, Microsoft is taking on Google where it matters for users: on the field of innovation.

Resources: http://edition.cnn.com/2009/TECH/07/15/google.microsoft.battle/index.html

In Our Inbox: Hundreds Of Confidential Twitter Documents

Posted by Michael Arrington on July 14, 2009
From: techcrunch

Here’s a dilemma: The guy (”Hacker Croll”) who claims to have accessed hundreds of confidential corporate and personal documents of Twitter and Twitter employees, is releasing those documents publicly and sent them to us earlier today. The zip file contained 310 documents, ranging from executive meeting notes, partner agreements and financial projections to the meal preferences, calendars and phone logs of various Twitter employees.

We’ve spent most of the evening reading these documents. The vast majority of them are somewhat embarrassing to various individuals, but not otherwise interesting. An example - there are a number of documents showing the names of people who interviewed at Twitter for various senior level positions so publishing their names would obviously be distressing for them. Most of these people remain in their current jobs. Some documents show floorplans and security passcodes to get into the Twitter offices. We’re not going to post any of those documents.

But we are going to release some of the documents showing financial projections, product plans and notes from executive strategy meetings. We’re also going to post the original pitch document for the Twitter TV show that hit the news in May, mostly because it’s awesome.

There is clearly an ethical line here that we don’t want to cross, and the vast majority of these documents aren’t going to be published, at least by us. But a few of the documents have so much news value that we think it’s appropriate to publish them.

More posts coming soon.

Windows 7, Office 2010, Google Chrome OS: Never a Dull Tech Moment

Posted by Todd R. Weiss on 13 July 09
From: pcworld

Microsoft is launching Windows 7, Google has fired back with Chrome OS, and today Microsoft is turning up the volume on Office 2010. That's a lot to juggle, and soon you'll be asking yourself: Can I afford to upgrade or can I afford not to upgrade?

Let's first review what's coming down the pike and when. It starts with the official scheduled release of the new Microsoft Windows 7 operating system on October 22.

That's a Big Change Right There

Windows 7 has been getting many accolades from beta testers and reviewers, but that's pretty easy when it's being compared to Microsoft Vista, which was disappointing for many due to wide-ranging hardware and software incompatibilities and other problems, such as software bugs. Lots of users couldn't make their favorite programs, printers, and other peripheral devices work with Vista, highlighting glaring shortcomings.

Then there's the anticipated release of Microsoft's new Office 2010 suites in the first half of next year, with the usual new features and bells and whistles. Users often love the included new features, but do they really need them and the learning curves that are required?

And as if that's not enough change for now, Google last week unveiled its plans for its new Google Chrome OS operating system, aimed initially at netbook-sized computers, for release by the end of 2010.

So what's a tech-loving consumer to do? Are you the upgrading kind? That's going to be a key question.

And if you are, does that mean you'll buy a copy of the new Windows 7 and install it yourself or will you wait and buy a new computer that already has it loaded so you don't have to deal with the install?

And, even more importantly, will you take the plunge immediately upon its release or will you wait a bit to see how it all shakes out for others?

Ah, isn't a new Windows operating system release fun?

Here are Some Options for You.

If you are getting a stomach ache just thinking about doing the upgrade to Windows 7 by yourself on your present computer, then maybe you should consider replacing your machine. The upgrade itself is usually not a big problem, but there are plenty of landmines out there and you never really know what could happen.

The next issue is timing -- do you want to buy it right away on October 22 or do you want to wait to see how others are faring with it and read the first news reports from new users?

I think that's always a good idea.

Back in August 1995, when we were still using Windows 3.11 for Workgroups and DOS 5.22 on our early Intel Pentium-running computers, Microsoft released Windows 95. It was a huge splash and millions of people filled stores at midnight to try to be first in line for a copy. Talk about hoopla!

I admit, I was there, too, watching the chaos and feeling the excitement in the air.

But I didn't buy it and install it until six months went by; just to be sure it was worthwhile. By then, I was prepared, psyched, and the upgrade went beautifully. That was definitely a worthwhile move up the Windows food chain.

The same sort of upgrade worry has surrounded the release of every new Windows version. It happened again with the upgrade from Windows 98 (and the widely-despised Windows Me) to Windows XP, though that was an absolutely worthwhile upgrade to perhaps what has been the best Windows operating system built so far for consumers.

In the last couple years, some people have been so averse to using Vista that they've gone to extremes to find computers they can still buy that run Windows XP.

But Will You Pay for These Innovations?

So, what are you thinking about the upcoming releases of Windows 7, Office 2010, and Google Chrome OS?

Obviously, the money issue comes into play for Windows 7 and Office 2010, because consumers like you will have to decide if the products are worth the money to buy them.

Chrome OS is open source and will have free versions when it eventually is ready, so there's no money issue there.

I guess I just wonder, with all the economic uncertainly that lingers and people worrying about their jobs, houses, bank accounts and college funds, where do the newest Windows programs rank up on their scales of importance?

For the zaniest tech-lovers, they'll buy it right away and play with it.

What about the rest of you?

Tell us what you are thinking.

Will you be there at a midnight Windows 7 launch in your local Best Buy or Staples store, waiting to bring all of that exciting shrink-wrapped code home for your computer? Or will you wait another year to see what Google Chrome OS might be able to do for you in the future?

Push Notifications On The iPhone Are Great, But…

Posted by MG Siegler on July 12, 2009
From: techcrunch

After being scarce for the first couple of weeks following the new iPhone 3.0 software rolling out, apps with Push Notifications are now rolling out at a healthy clip. And that’s great, because the feature is really useful. To a point.

The issue I’m noticing now is that if you have too many apps with Push Notifications turned on, the whole system becomes a lot less useful. You see, Push Notifications are basically Apple’s way to get around allowing third-party apps to run in the background of the iPhone. So apps can now send these push messages to your phone to let you know if there’s some kind of message or update that you should open an app for. But if you have a lot of push messages coming in, I’m finding that you either have to pull out your phone every couple minutes, or risk still missing notifications that you probably want to see.

The problem is that the Push Notification message indicators are not built for heavy use. If you have multiple push messages coming in to you phone, only the latest one will be shown on the screen. And even when you unlock your phone, it’s hard to tell which push messages have come in. Though you can set a badge on app icons to let you know there is a message, if it was overridden by another message, you are forced to open the app to figure out what it was.

And let’s be clear: It’s not like I’m using Push on a ton of applications. I’m basically only using it (regularly) on three right now: Foursquare (a location-based social network [iTunes Link]), GPush (which does push for Gmail, which sadly isn’t approved in the App Store, yet), and Boxcar (which does Twitter @replies and DMs [iTunes Link]). At one point, I had it on for AIM too, but that got to be too much to handle in and of itself.

Between just those three, I’m getting pinged every few minutes during the regular hours of the day (if not more often during peak hours). And while that’s fine, because I can change things like the audio notifications, I want to be able to see a full list of what has come in since I last looked at my phone. Google’s Android platform handles this in a much nicer way, with a top drop-down menu that breaks up your notifications (which are also a bit different since applications can run in the background on Android). Of course, that is only after you unlock your phone, but still, that would be much more ideal than the current iPhone method.

But better would be some sort of way to break up these messages when you still have the phone locked. I’m thinking first of all maybe breaking up Push Notifications, text messages and calls by colors, and displaying them in a list on the screen. Then then having some way to further break down Push Notifications on that screen, maybe placing the app icon next to each and saying something like (4) new Foursquare messages, like Apple currently does for text messages.

This guy did a nice mock-up last year, but that was before Push Notifications were even available. And Apple has been thinking about this too, according to its patents. A system that is something like this (right) is needed even more now.

Naturally, this should all be user-adjustable in the settings, but it seems like an easy enough thing to do. Because as many people are shortly going to find out, the current way of handling Push Notifications just isn’t cutting it unless you’re only using one app that gets messages once every few hours. And with more Push-capable apps coming everyday, the problem is only going to get worse.

Microsoft's Office head talks Google and more

Posted by Ina Fried on 10 July

From: cnet

Stephen Elop is convinced that even in a world of free, browser-based productivity software, consumers and businesses will continue to pay for Office.

Microsoft will bow to reality with Office 2010, adding browser-based versions of Excel, Word, PowerPoint, and OneNote. But, in an interview this week, the head of Microsoft's Business Division says that there is still plenty of life in the full version.

"At the highest level, what we're able to put forward to our customers is not just the best productivity experience, but one that spans the PC, the browser environment, the Web environment, services, and so forth, and the mobile device," Elop said. "So, it's the best productivity experience across the PC, the mobile phone, and the browser."

At its worldwide Partner Conference on Monday, Microsoft will give people a feel for how this works and is expected to start broader testing of the first piece--the desktop applications.

As for Google, Elop said that most businesses still think of Google as a search company or are just kicking the tires on Google Docs. He shrugged off the fact that Google this week brought the products out of beta.

"I've heard that the word was dropped," Elop said. "I didn't notice that anything else had changed. So I don't know if the software suddenly got better, or they just changed the name."

He also said it is too soon to have an opinion on Google's just-announced Chrome OS.

"We haven't seen it," he said. "We don't know anything other than what has been written in a blog."

In a wide-ranging interview, Elop shared more views on Google as well as his perspectives on Office, business software, and the broader economy.

What are customers asking for from Office? What's the most common thing that large businesses ask you for when you're talking to them about Office?
Elop: You know, when you boil it all down, everything we do essentially in the division, when you're with a CEO or a CIO or whatever the case may be, the base conversation is about productivity. It's about how can you help me solve this problem, and that problem often is about the productivity of some aspect of their business, of something they're trying to achieve competitively, or whatever.

Certainly in today's economic setting, cost savings comes into it. How can you help me save money in getting what we need to get done? How can you help me solve these problems, but do so in a more cost-effective way?

You mentioned cost savings. How is the business environment relative to investment in software and other technology compared to, say, when we spoke in February?
Elop: You know, when we spoke in February, I think there were a lot of people who didn't know what was going on.

I think people may not agree as to what's going on in the economy right now. Everyone has different opinions. But at this point people have opinions. And because people have opinions about what's going on in their business or their part of the economy, on that basis they begin to make plans. The plans will be different than the plans they might have had six or nine months ago, but they can actually establish a plan, and therefore a budget, and decide, OK, in our business we're going to do this, we're going to invest in these ways, and so forth. I don't want to say there's increased confidence as much as there is less ambiguity in people's minds. They've decided what it means to them.

Now, at Microsoft, you've heard Steve (Ballmer) talk a number of times about how we view what's happened as being a reset in the economy, that it's not a bounce back to the way things were, but things have reset, and things need to stabilize here even more, and then we'll see things begin to grow as increases in productivity in the economy kick in.

The product lineup that you guys are going to have going into next year, what does that add to your arsenal, particularly Office 2010?
Elop: I think at the highest level, what we're able to put forward to our customers is (not) just the best productivity experience, but one that spans the PC, the browser environment, the Web environment, services, and so forth, and the mobile device.

When people look at Office 2010 in the broadest sense, and that's both the client applications, it's the services offerings, it's the server products, it's the Web applications, all of those pieces together. Certainly what customers are recognizing as they've had pre-briefings and the early experimentation with the products is that we're at some form of generational shift into this world of software plus services, and Office 2010, I think, is surprising people as it relates to the extent to which we've fully embraced software plus services.

How do you see the balance of Web applications and desktop programs? You guys have obviously talked about it's not just about putting Office in the browser. What are the kinds of things that you think are best done via the browser, what are the things that are best done in a desktop program, and how does that inform sort of the way you guys have designed those two products?

Elop: First of all, it's helpful to look at specific scenarios. I'll just use a personal example. I was at my parents' home recently, I needed to edit a document, I hadn't carted my PC around with me. I had my father's PC connected to the Internet. I was able to use a Web application to quickly look at a document, make some lightweight changes, and pass that document along without interrupting the fidelity of the document, being a part of the collaborative experience with others at Microsoft. There's a specific scenario where the Web application played an important role.

imilarly, if you look in the mobile environment, there are scenarios related to, for example, taking a picture as part of some work that you're doing. You're unlikely to take a picture with a Web browser, or a notebook computer.

The second part of the answer, though, is that while there are specific scenarios that are best advantaged within each of the different ways of delivering our technology, the best experience comes from the combination of all of those things. So, we think less about the Web applications as standalone word processor things, and far more about it as a complement to the trio of the phone, the PC, and the browser environment. We think about the best experience being the sum of those things working well together.

Your preference, and certainly the way you guys are investing in the Web applications, is as an adjunct to the desktop, not a replacement. That said, how common do you think it will be that businesses license just the Web applications for at least a portion of their employees?
Elop: Well, we hope that it's very common to the extent that there are, let's say, workers in a business (where) today a company has said, look, there's one PC for 100 employees on a shop floor, or something like that. To the extent that they now license those workers for a lightweight browser experience in some way, shape, or form, and they're now part of the Office family, that's a positive thing for us. It brings them into the whole environment of productivity that we're trying to deliver.

So, those scenarios we think will be relatively common. It could be factory floor workers, it could be retail employees, and outlets around the world, and there are all sorts of scenarios that we think have been under-served from participating in the productivity experiences that some of these applications will serve to support.

I guess the other piece of that question is whether you expect that there will be a portion of customers that attempt to move some part of their workforce that has access to desktop Office to just browser-based versions?
Elop: I mean, by definition there will be some. Do I think it's a huge proportion? No, I don't. And the reason for that is because, particularly in that we're talking about the commercial setting, where we believe that the productivity experiences that we deliver in the rich client applications, with the Web applications as a complement to that, is still going to be a compelling experience that people are going to be saying, hey, I want people participating, for example, in collaborative editing of documents, in collaborative sharing of PowerPoint presentations, as examples.

For example, our multi-user authoring feature. There are examples like that which we believe represent improvements in productivity for these customers that are delivered through the rich client application. So while you'll always be able to point to some examples of someone somewhere making that decision, we don't believe that's going to be the dominating force.

How often do customers bring up Google apps in meetings, and is it usually when you're talking about the product, or when you're talking about price?
Elop: Customers are aware of Google in different ways. Sometimes just from a search perspective, sometimes they're aware of things like Google Docs and so forth. And our experience is it may lead to a discussion around what is software plus services, what is Microsoft's view on it. And the tendency is not, obviously in our conversation, to dwell on their price versus our price, or things like that, because it's two very, very different things.

When you put side by side, for example, the full range of on-premise and in the cloud services like Exchange, SharePoint, (Office Communications Server), and so forth, the full range of rich client applications and soon Web applications and so forth, combined with many years of enterprise support, of an understanding of how we're going to take care of mission-critical capabilities, it's a whole different conversation. And so that's why in the context of a large-scale customer who is engaging these things I think there's tire kicking, or they may look at these things, but there's a clear understanding that... enterprises have some very specific and far-reaching requirements that Microsoft over many years has figured out how to deliver.

Well, they're out of beta now, is that a significant move?
Elop: I don't know. I've heard that the word was dropped, I didn't notice that anything else had changed. So I don't know if the software suddenly got better, or they just changed the name. I couldn't interpret what it meant.

As someone who has been in this industry a long time, what do you make of Google's announcement that they're moving into the operating system realm with Chrome OS?
Elop: Well, let me just challenge the premise of your question. They've announced a couple of times now that they're moving into the operating system business, because there's the whole Android thing, and now there's Chrome.

We haven't seen it. We don't know anything other than what has been written in a blog. So it's very hard for us to know, without seeing what they're doing, to comment on it.

You have architected part of Office 2010 to run in the browser-based Office Web apps. If I'm not mistaken Chrome isn't one of the supported browsers, but it might, in fact, work in Chrome. Do you guys see Chrome as an important browser to develop for?

Elop: It depends on how you define important. From a market share perspective Chrome is very low. So I think we're driven by customers on these things. There are other browsers that have greater market share, and that's where we've concentrated our first efforts.

Shuttle launch delayed to assess lightning strikes

Posted by William Harwood on July 11, 2009
From: cnet

Already a month behind schedule, launch of the shuttle Endeavour on a 16-day space station assembly mission was delayed at least 24 hours, from Saturday to Sunday, to give engineers time to evaluate the effects of multiple lightning strikes at the launch pad during a severe thunderstorm Friday.

Eleven lightning strikes were recorded within 1,800 feet of the launch pad 39A, and while the shuttle is protected from lightning-induced electrical surges, NASA managers decided more time was needed to make sure no critical systems were affected.

"We've seen nothing so far that indicates anything was actually affected by the lightning strikes," said Mike Moses, director of shuttle launch integration at the Kennedy Space Center. "So I fully expect this to be a positive story, but we have a lot of equipment that has to be checked and that's what takes time."

Assuming no problems are found -- and assuming predicted afternoon thunderstorms cause no additional trouble -- NASA will reset Endeavour's countdown for a launch Sunday at 7:13:55 p.m. EDT. Forecasters are predicting a 70 percent chance of acceptable weather.

Friday afternoon, however, severe storms rumbled across the space center bringing torrential rain and electrical activity. "It was snap, crackle, and pop out there," one official said.

"If you were here in town yesterday, you saw a pretty spectacular electrical storm here at the Cape yesterday afternoon," Moses said. "We have several different systems out there monitoring lightning and we have a bunch of different rules and regulations and guidelines. But the bottom line is, we took 11 strikes within the point-three nautical miles (1,800 feet) of the pad."

The fixed gantry at the pad features a huge lightning mast that is connected to the ground by a catenary wire system anchored on the north and south sides of the complex. Seven of the 11 strikes hit the wires and two of those were above the threshold that requires additional analyses.

"We don't have any attached strikes to the orbiter itself, to the external tank, to the SRBs (boosters)," Moses said. "But we do know from our camera system that we took strikes on the lightning mast, the water tower, the wires themselves. So there were seven different events.

"With a lightning event, you have the initial spike of electricity that you are worried about, but then you also have a very fast-moving electrical field, which causes a magnetic field that can induce voltage on circuits that aren't even connected to it."

Two of the lightning strikes Friday resulted in 110-volt surges in the shuttle's electrical systems, just enough to qualify the strikes as official "lightning events."

"Strikes that close to the pad kick off extensive data analysis to make sure there are no problems," Moses said. "We have a panel, called the E3 panel, the electromagnetic effects panel, they take a look and decide if that strength of strike was big enough to then cause concern for the integrated stack, the orbiter, the ET, the SRBs. And if it was, then our engineering review panel will then go off, gather more data, and determine if a re-test is required."

By early today, engineers had determined Endeavour's external tank was in good shape, as were the shuttle's main engines and associated ground systems. The shuttle's payload also appears unharmed, although additional checks are planned.

The additional day was required primarily to make sure the shuttle's sensitive electronics were undamaged, along with the critical pyrotechnic systems needed to safely operate the ship's twin solid-fuel boosters.

"Those two areas decided they did need a little more retest to make sure that their systems are good," Moses said. "Part of the problem is, that retest can take different forms. If you think about it, on the SRBs, one of the things we're worried about are the pyro systems to separate the SRBs away from the external tank. Well, you can't really go check that system and turn it on because you don't want to go fire off those pyros.

"So we have various levels of tests we can do on some circuitry, but you've really got to make sure you're really checking what you need to check. So the teams were pretty confident we have enough data on other buses (circuits) to know that that (pyro) circuitry was OK, but we weren't quite there this morning."