But the Kyoto-based giant recently posted its first loss since establishing itself as a video game company—a development unimaginable only a few years ago. Nintendo’s brand is still strong, but the company no longer has a monopoly on popular games. In fact, the Halo and Grand Theft Auto series have arguably eclipsed anything Nintendo has released in the past decade, not only in sales but cultural reach as well. And the success of Angry Birds and Temple Run suggest that Nintendo’s true rivals may be smartphones, not consoles or even handheld gaming units.

With the recent release of the Wii U, Nintendo is trying to reinvent video games once again by bridging the gap between mobile and console gaming. The company still has two comparative advantages over its competitors: a strong brand anchored around beloved franchises, and a reputation for quality software and innovative hardware. But a number of other critical variables may undermine the company’s latest attempt at disruption.

Playing With Power: Nintendo’s Brand Advantage

Nintendo’s biggest advantage over would-be rivals has always been branding. The company’s stable of heroes (and villains!) nearly rivals Disney and Marvel’s in popularity. Mario became more recognizable to American children than Mickey Mouse in the 1990s, and remains the most popular character in gaming today. Mario and Link (of the Zelda series) are ranked number one and two in Guinness’s ranking of the best video game characters of all time, and are joined on that list by Donkey Kong, Yoshi, and Samus Aran. The company’s roster is even more impressive when you factor in the entire Pokémon franchise, which is affiliated with and owned by Nintendo.

Nintendo also goes to great lengths to preserve its “family-friendly” image. In the early nineties, the company “cleaned up” third-party games by replacing references to alcohol, editing out swastikas and crosses, and covering up exposed breasts on statues. Nintendo’s controversy-free image has been a net gain for company, allowing it to escape criticism about video game violence and expand their audience outside of the traditional gaming demographic.

Analysis: The company’s roster of recognizable characters is a clear benefit, but Nintendo has struggled as of late to translate soaring Q scores into profit. Nintendo is still popular with large audiences, but less so with the most important one—hardcore gamers, who have flocked to Microsoft and Sony’s machines. Nintendo’s predicament today mirrors Disney’s dilemma in the late 1970s and early 1980s, when the company appeared rudderless after the passing of Walt Disney and unsure how to properly connect with the growing teenage demographic.

Hardware

For three decades, Nintendo’s software has been accessible exclusively through its innovative hardware, which is why The New York Times recently described the company as the “Apple of video games.” Every iteration of the Nintendo gaming console has featured a creative design and unique accessories. Many of the company’s innovations (including the directional control pad and rumble function) have now become industry standards. Even its conspicuous failures—such as the Virtual Boy—were treated as learning experiences, and retuned for later software (Mario Tennis) and hardware (3DS) developments.

Yet Nintendo’s innovations have always been geared towards game play, not (strictly) technical capacity. Nintendo’s greatest hardware success had been the Game Boy, which brought handheld gaming to the masses at a reasonable price—and eventually became the most successful video game system of all time. Rival handheld units from Sega and Atari offered color screens and faster processing, but couldn’t compete with Nintendo’s third-party support and the popularity of its Mario and Zelda franchises (not to mention Tetris, the addicting puzzle game which came bundled with the system.) The success of the Game Boy seemed to prove that it was games, not hardware, that won over audiences.

The original Wii also seemed to represent the triumph of game play and innovation over hardware specs. When the console debuted in 2006, Nintendo had fallen behind its competitors in both units sold and gaming cachet. The Playstation 3 and XBox 360 both offered technical firepower that Nintendo couldn’t possibly match, so the company took a different approach with the highly interactive and relatively inexpensive Wii, hoping to draw in a broader audience including women and older gamers. The strategy was an initial success. Nintendo moved 97 million Wiis worldwide and became the best-selling console of its generation. But the system’s novelty soon wore off, and both third-party developers and hardcore gamers moved on—which is why some gaming bloggers refer to the Wii as “the most successful failure ever.”

Analysis: The Wii U, which debuted in the US in November, represents the company’s last, best chance to reclaim its top spot in the gaming hierarchy. The console has many innovative features, include a tablet-style controller that supports two-screen gaming and a TVii service that allows the system to be used as a central hub for your cable, DVR, and streaming services. And early sales have been strong despite a $300+ price tag. But reviews haven’t been as kind: CNET declared that the lack of compelling software and the console’s overall unpolished user experience makes it tough to recommend. Other critics noted that the U feels “less otherworldly” than the original Wii and more “bound to existing technology.”

The Lesson

Although a bitter pill to swallow, Nintendo would seem well-served by expanding the reach of its popular franchises beyond its own hardware. The company’s investorsapparently feel the same way. There are far more gamers on smartphones than there are on consoles, which now represent just 40 percent of the video game market—down from 80 percent in 2000. The Wii U’s tablet controller is very impressive, but it will simply never replace the iPhone or Android as a default mobile device.

However, Nintendo needn’t follow erstwhile rival Sega in getting out of the hardware industry altogether. Developing “casual” games for smartphones and other mobile devices would allow the company more profit margin to focus on developing technologically sophisticated games for its consoles. A Zelda iPhone app could serve to attract a larger audience for the next console edition of the game. Such a move could be the company’s most successful disruption to date..

Some startups, however, are challenging the conventional model and offering different approaches to booking flights that make its easier to both minimize cost and maximize convenience. Hipmunk offers a unique visual design that helps travelers avoid lengthy layovers. Kayak uses a “meta” search function to find the cheapest flights domestically and internationally. And Yapta lets you know when you’re eligible for a refund when ticket prices drop. All of these sites offer diverse booking services, but each has developed a comparative advantage by doing one thing exceptionally well.

Let’s consider each:

Hipmunk

Forbes recently deemed this startup the “best travel site on the Web.” Hipmunk’s website is clean, simple and narrowly focused on one thing: flights. There is a separate tab for hotel reservations, but you aren’t inundated with flashy ads for vacation specials or celebrity-endorsed promotional deals. Hipmunk’s main page offers users an intuitive interface that’s fairly similar to Expedia or any other number of online travel sites (minus the clutter). But the flight listings page (pictured above) is where Hipmunk really stands out.

Flights and airfare are arranged in a visual timetable, not as a text-heavy stack. And the default sorting isn’t by price, but by a category Hipmunk calls “Agony,” which factors in price, duration, and number of stops. This ranking is especially useful for professionals willing to spend a little more money to avoid red-eye flights and four-hour layovers in Phoenix. Flights can be sorted by traditional price / departure time categories, but the results are always displayed in Hipmunk’s clean visual style, which communicates everything you need to know about flight options—including a familiar wi-fi symbol to indicate Internet access.

Kayak

Kayak’s inclusion on this list is slightly misleading, in that this “startup” was recently acquired by Priceline for $1.8 billion. But that astonishing price tag reflects Kayak’s single minded focus on delivering the cheapest airfare available. Most travel sites search for fares within their own internal databases, but Kayak uses a meta search engine that scans the rates of multiple airlines and travel booking sites simultaneously (including some international ones) and sends you to the source to book the ticket.

“Nobody will beat us (on average) on fares in the US and Europe,” Kayak founder Paul English told the New York Times.

Unlike Hipmunk, Kayak’s results page is focused on price and the display is basically a stack of text. But there is a handy sliding filter that lets you adjust arrival and departure time by five-minute increments without having to re-enter your information. And Kayak’s mobile app features a very clean, user-friendly interface.

Yapta

Yapta’s site design is fairly pedestrian, and the prices it offers are competitive but not rock bottom. But Yapta’s unique feature is a winner: it tracks real ticket prices across 23 different airlines and alerts you via email of any drops. If the price goes down after you’ve already purchased the ticket from an airline with a low price guarantee (such as JetBlue, Southwest, or Alaska), Yapta provides you with links to receive a refund. Not all airlines are quite that consumer-friendly, but Yapta alerts can still save you money by allowing you to change your reservation. You’ll probably have to pay a $75 to $150 fee to do so, but it still makes sense for international flights, which can suddenly go down $300 before the departure date.

Conclusion

If you haven’t already booked your flight home for Christmas (or a last minute business trip), there are plenty of new booking sites that can save you time and money. And if you end up using multiple sites to book different tickets, you can also always use TripIt to keep the track of them. This free mobile app turns all of your flight, hotel and rental car confirmation emails into single itinerary, and creates an easy-access list of current and past reservations. Maps are also integrated to provide airport directions and terminal layouts.

Safe travels!

Three key media lessons emerged in the storm’s wake: (1) Social media is invaluable, but its limitations are significant. Twitter is useless when your phone is out of batteries. (2) Radio and other traditional news outlets still have an important role to play in emergency broadcasting. But their reach is amplified when they embed themselves within the social media environment. (3) During a disaster, the best news is local news. People will track down local information on whatever platform they can find it.

Hurricane #Sandy

Unlike previous hashtagged natural disasters, #Sandy did not arrive unannounced. When the storm finally made landfall in the late afternoon on October 29th, hatches were battened and smartphones were charged. The resulting deluge of digital data almost rivaled the storm itself. Sandy was the top phrase on Facebook, where users speculated about the storm’s damage and provided updated information about their location and safety. More than 800,000 Instagram photos featured a “#Sandy” hashtag. Some 20 million tweets included storm-related terms. Our infographic below highlights these figures, and details the extent of the storm’s damage.

Social media’s comparative advantage during Sandy was considerable. Emergency information from government officials and news sources was disseminated as quickly as people could retweet it. Videos and images of the damage—from the collapse of a building’s facade in Manhattan to the flooding of the South Ferry subway station—went viral well before they hit CNN. And the absence of a mediating filter made the information feel personal and all the more urgent.

“Proud of Twitter right now,” the company’s co-founder Jack Dorsey tweeted around midnight. Dorsey had good reason to beam. The service remained lag-free throughout the disaster, and served as critical source of information for afflicted residents.

But Sandy also provided social media with some learning opportunities, by highlighting the medium’s known weaknesses. Though much of the information shared on Twitter (and to a lesser extent, Facebook) during the storm was accurate and useful, a former hedge fund analyst using the handle @ComfortablySmug became the Internet’s villain by deliberately spreading false information about power outages and flooding. Fast Company recently compiled a list of tips (and future tweaks) that could make social networks even more useful during emergency situations, and mitigate the danger of perfidious Tweeting.

Radio Free Atlantic

The number of times New York City users loaded their Twitter timelines from mobile devices peaked at about 9 p.m Monday, right around the time an explosion at the Con Edison transformer on the East River knocked out power for much of lower Manhattan. Power outages quickly spread as Sandy knocked out generators and power lines. The Internet itself took a big hit when the storm flooded data centers and took down several major websites—including The Huffington Post, Buzzfeed and the Gawker network.

Smartphones and laptops were still functioning the next the day to receive reports of 8 million people without electricity, but the battery indicators were moving dangerously close to red. By the fourth day, when nearly 5 million households still remained powerless, Twitter and Facebook were mere memories from a forgotten digital age. Traditional communication platforms—broadcast news, pay phones, and especially radio—suddenly took on renewed importance.

“If everything else is gone, people still have a radio,” Tim Scheld, news director at WCBS-AM told the New York Daily News. “It’s not just information. It’s a connection.”

Most radio towers are built to withstand hurricane-strength winds, and backup generators let them operate 8 to 10 days without electricity. Local stations provided emergency broadcasting in the wake of the storm to audiences without any other reliable source of mass communication.

New Jersey’s “Hot Adult Contemporary” station WCZT switched to 24-hour storm coverage as the storm made land, broadcasting interviews with local government officials, live press conferences with Gov. Chris Christie, and updates from correspondents spread throughout the state. But that reporting was complemented with constant Facebook page updates and even text alerts.

Radio outlets thus not only filled in a communications gap during Sandy, they established themselves in Facebook and Twitter feeds and serve as ongoing sources of storm information. WCZT, for instance, is now providing residents with tips to avoid disaster related scams.

All (Streaming) News is Local

Local broadcast television stations also saw their web traffic spike. The websites for stations located in areas affected by Sandy experienced up to three times more traffic during the height of the storm than during a normal weekday.

AOL’s hyperlocal news sites also saw big visitor surges during the storm. The “Patch” network operates approximately 860 sites across the country, but has especially high penetration in New Jersey, New York and Connecticut. Page views for sites from affected regions were up 88 percent from the previous high.

Independent local sites, such as the Sheepshead Bites in Brooklyn and Baristanet in northeastern New Jersey, also reported record highs in traffic even when their coverage area was without power. In the wake of the storm, these sites functioned as both newspaper and bulletin board for local residents.

“Local is the most important information to consumers. At no time is that more apparent than in local natural disasters,” Patch CEO Jon Brod told Ad Age. “From a traffic and brand building perspective, there’s nothing more powerful.”

Looking Forward

It will interesting to see how these developments are reflected in the next—and hopefully less deadly—disaster. At press time, there were still more than 700,000 customers without power in northeast, and the Nor’easter storm was on its way. Residents in the line of natural disasters clearly need to be prepared for life without reliable Internet or mobile service. Emergency broadcasting services need to reach across all platforms to the people most at risk.

Our last post outlined the difference between the working culture of the United States’ East and West Coasts. Many of these distinctions are so widely acknowledged as to seem cliché. East Coasters are formal; West Coasters are casual. East Coasters take the subway; West Coasters ride a bicycle. East Coasters live to work; West Coasters work to live. But as we noted, anyone who has worked on both coasts will attest that the “grain” of truth in these stereotypes could fill a beach. Whether we’re talking New York / L.A, Cambridge / Palo Alto, or Chicago / Seattle, there really are significant differences in lifestyles and business practices across the coastal divide.

Today we release a follow-up infographic identifying real world dignitaries from both coasts who exemplify the best the Atlantic and Pacific regions have to offer, respectively. But the world of fiction also offers a wealth of characters and settings that illustrate each coast’s distinct pleasures and discrete vices.

Like the image? Feel free to use it on your own blog.

For instance, the Joads in Steinbeck’s The Grapes of Wrath are symbolic of generations of fortune-seekers from the Conquistadors to the Kardashians who have headed west to fulfill their dreams. The family leaves Depression-ravaged Oklahoma for California, where they are assured that “it never gets cold” and you can “reach out anywhere and pick an orange.” This vision of golden-hued prosperity ends up being a mirage, but the family perseveres—just like Khloe did when Lamar Odom was traded to Dallas.

Jay Gatsby, the titular character in Fitzgerald’s The Great Gatsby, is a rather tragic testament to East Coast traditionalism. Gatsby is born as “James Gatz,” and grows up in poverty in rural North Dakota. Unwilling to accept his status in life, Gatz reinvents himself as Jay Gatsby and makes a fortune bootlegging liquor. But Gatsby seals his fate when he falls in love with patrician Daisy Buchanan, who can accept neither his ill-gained money nor his humble beginnings. Even in the swinging Jazz Age, social climbers were expected to advance one rung at a time. But had Gatsby been born only two generations later, he would have been husband material in that other classical work of American literature, Sex and the City.

Jeffrey Lebowski, known by the sobriquet “The Dude,” is the protagonist of the Coen brothers’ cult film The Big Lebowski—and a perfect personification of the West Coast’s laissez whatever counter culture. The Dude is a full-time slacker and part-time bowler living in Venice, California. Like a character in Shakespeare’s “Twelfth Night,” The Dude stumbles into a series of mishaps stemming from mistaken identity. But the film’s plot is almost an afterthought. Like the Raymond Chandler novel The Big Sleep from which it draws inspiration, the film is really about Southern California and the voluminous cast of kooky and eccentric characters inhabiting its environs.

If The Big Lebowski captures the cultural milieu of L.A., then Gus Van Sant’s Good Will Hunting nails the je ne sais quoi of Boston—although none of the film’s protagonists would ever use that French expression. Matt Damon plays a troubled math prodigy and Ben Affleck his faster-of-tongue, slower-of-brain best friend. But the real star of the movie is the Boston accents the characters use throughout. ”This is a Hah’vahd bah, huh?” “My boy’s wicked smaht!” “How you like them apples?” Other than “Valley girl,” the West Coast doesn’t have a distinct dialect, while the East Coast has hundreds.

Finally, there’s Jason Reitman’s film Up in the Air, which captures the peripatetic lifestyle of so many perpetual travelers jetting back and forth between coasts. George Clooney’s character, Ryan Bingham, has no real office. He works out of his business class seat as he crisscrosses the country. Bingham gives motivational speeches using the metaphor “What’s in Your Backpack” to extol the virtues of a burdenless lifestyle free of relationships and possessions. “Make no mistake,” he tells his audience, “moving is living.” But for the rest of us, living is finally finding a place to settle down, whether on the East Coast, West Coast, or the vast expanse in between.

The temptation to check for messages can be an overwhelming distraction during family meals, children’s soccer games, and quality time with one’s spouse. The importance of work-life balance is espoused in hundreds (if not thousands) of books and magazine articles, many outlining specific steps you can take toward professional-personal equilibrium. But the best answer to dealing with your smartphone is surprising simple:

“Just turn it off,” says Dan Markovitz, “You don’t think you can turn it off, you actually can.”

Markovitz is president of TimeBack Management, a productivity consulting firm. He notes that the problems associated with smartphones and 24-hour employee access are common refrains. But no matter where you are in the corporate hierarchy, he stresses the need to set boundaries and determine priorities.

“It’s important to recognize that input [in the form of emails and other requests for your time] is always going to be there,” Markovitz told me “It’s your own choice as to when you want to say goodbye. Figure out what’s important to you personally, what’s important to you professionally. Figure out when you want to be with your family, pets, and when you want to be answering email.”

Turn off, tune in, check out.

Facebook COO Sheryl Sandberg recently admitted to leaving work every day at 5:30—a revelation only slightly less surprising than if she had revealed she was born on Krypton. (She’s not, as far as we know.) Many applauded her commitment to family and personal life, and urged others to follow suit. Others noted that Sandberg likely has resources at her disposal—such as nannies and cooks—that many working mothers and fathers simply can’t afford. Many professionals would surely like to get home at a reasonable hour but simply feel like they can’t.

“There are realities of every job—both spoken and unspoken,” says management consultant Star Dargin. She argues that its much easier to set time boundaries and work limits if you delineate your position and responsibilities with your employer.

“Clarity is a good thing,” Dargin stresses. “Understand and be clear about when you have to do it and what’s required for the job.”

Many employees would feel better about leaving work if they felt that their tasks were complete. The agitation that comes from leaving things unresolved drives them to stay longer, even if added hours only serve to create more vexation.

Dargin suggests resolution can come by setting deadlines on things that don’t have deadlines.

“Freelancers and part-time employees working 20 to 30 hours a week often get more done,” she says, because of self-imposed deadlines and “their laser-like focus and clear priorities.”

Markovitz notes that before many workers leave the office, they fill their heads up with to do lists for the next day, and worries and concerns about ongoing projects. He suggests that you instead make it a point to empty your head of all of the work clutter before you leave the office. Sometimes that step can be as simple as jotting everything down onto a notepad. Once everything from important project details to more trivial concerns is written down in front of you, it’s easier to put it aside for the next day.

Daily Stack from Anders Højmose on Vimeo.

Making Technology Work for You

If workers were better able to manage their time during the day, they would feel less agitated in their off-hours. Both Dargin and Markovitz stressed that technology is not an obstacle but an advantage to time management when used correctly.

For instance, Markovitz suggests replacing a simple to-do list with a time allocated calendar that represents tasks in a more visual fashion.

“A simple list provides the illusion that we’ll get all of that done,” he says. “But there’s an infinite amount of stuff you want to do, and a limited amount of time to do it. A calendar lets you know what you can do.”

Markovitz argues that moving to a calendar helps workers distinguish between big tasks and little tasks, which in turns helps you prioritize a limited resource—your time.

“Big tasks that are going to consume a lot of time need to go calender,” he say. “You don’t have to schedule email to follow up phone calls. Big things will never get done unless you’ve put them on the calendar and block out time and commitment [to finish them].”

Markovitz notes that any number of software programs—from Google Calendar to Outlook—can accommodate this visual approach to time management. But one more novel tool is the Daily Stack (see video above), a simple product that allows users to track work flow through physical representations of their tasks. The “stack” consists of a series of wood blocks with different colors and shapes, each representing a different assignment. The time interval for each task is determined by the size of the block. The base of the stack plugs into the computer, and communicates with a time tracking program.

This innovative approach to time management was created by designers Sebastian Rønde Thielke and Anders Højmose during a workshop at the Copenhagen Institute of Interaction Design. According to Højmose, it’s still technically a prototype. True to fashion, Højmose is working on it while he finishes his masters at the Royal Danish Academy of Fine Arts, and launching a creative agency.

It’s a bit of a paradox: perhaps what he really needs to finish development of the Daily Stack is… the Daily Stack.

What about you? Do you have any tips for creating a boundary between home and work? Any other novel approaches to visualizing assignments and organizing your schedule? Let us know.

Want to use this image on your own blog? The embed code is below:

Category: Mad Men
Character: Megan Draper
Trait: Optimist
At Don’s 40th birthday surprise party, his young bride Megan performed a provocative French number—Zou Bisou Bisou—to the satisfaction of Don’s Sterling Cooper Drake Price co-workers and millions of jaws agape viewers at home. Megan didn’t seem to care that she had been yet another revolving door secretary the season before who had simply stumbled into a marriage proposal. Given her chance to shine, Megan projected pure confidence as she shimmied and shook her way to fame.

Category: Mad Men
Character: Betty Francis
Trait: Pessimist
Meanwhile, poor Betty has married the world’s most considerate campaign strategist and still can’t seem to find happiness. Every season brings a new coping device for her barely concealed misery, from the therapist’s couch to the equestrian lessons to the sage counsel of Glen Bishop. But for Betty, the bin of Neapolitan ice cream is always half empty.

Category: Star Trek
Character: Geordi La Forge
Trait: Optimist
Lieutenant Commander Geordi La Forge quickly climbed through Starfleet ranks from helmsman to chief engineer. La Forge can single-handedly correct imbalances in the impulse engines, re-calibrate the magnetic fields holding the ship’s antimatter supply, and shimmy the Heisenberg compensators until the subatomic particles correctly materialize in the transporter bay. His mechanical ability is seeming endless, but his vision is quite limited. Geordi La Forge is naturally blind, but you’ll never hear him complain. He’s too busy tweaking the plasma injectors and warpfield coils by the Bussard ramscoop.

Category: Star Trek
Character: Worf
Trait: Pessimist
Worf is the first Klingon main character to appear in a Star Trek series, but his cold attitude and aggressive posturing suggest he should have been the last. Of course, Worf has a tragic backstory that’s supposed to explain his moodiness. His parents were killed during a surprise attack by the Romulans on the Khitomer outpost deep in the Beta quadrant. And his Klingon heritage has reinforced in him the virtues of honor and bellicosity. But Worf never seems to acknowledge how awesome it is to be jetting around the United Federation of Planets at 4 billion miles per second with all of his Enterprise bros.

Category: Superheroes
Character: Superman
Trait: Optimist
Superman wears baby blue tights that are at least two-sizes too small. Working from this sartorial base, he accessorizes with a bright red pair of underwear threaded with a yellow belt, a billowing cape, knee high boots, and—displayed prominently across this chest—a shield emblazoned with his initial. At the end of the 90s he briefly sported a Kenny Powers-esque mullet. It’s a bold fashion statement, but Superman emerges from the phone booth without a hint of self doubt.

Category: Superheroes
Character: Batman
Trait: Pessimist
Batman frequents the same Costume Warehouse as Superman, but is a far less adventurous shopper. He fills his cart with dark hues—brooding blacks and gloomy greys—which he only seems to wear at night. Whereas Superman proudly shows off his chiseled face, flowing locks and jutting jaw, Batman conceals his countenance behind a mask with giant, pointy ears. Bruce Wayne is truly a the most tragic of tragic figures: a fashion pessimist. The original Goth super hero, this is just another reason he’s also known as the Dark Knight..

Category: 30 Rock
Character: Kenneth Parcell
Trait: Optimist
Kenneth Parcell is a perpetually-chipper page from the backwoods of Stone Mountain, Georgia. Parcell’s father was a poor pig farmer, and Kenneth volunteers that he and his family “have eaten [their] share of rock soup and squirrel tail” but have had “lean times” as well. Despite his impoverished upbringing, Parcell projects pure optimism no matter what menial task he is assigned.

Category: 30 Rock
Character: Pete Hornberger
Trait: Pessimist
Life has given Pete lemons, and he has devoured them tart and raw, then asked for another. As a teenager he was cursed with baldness after he hit a Gypsy’s child with his car. He was briefly the “fourth guitarist in Loverboy,” but left the band on a college scholarship to study “TV budgeting.” Pete later qualified for the Olympic archery team, but was denied the opportunity to compete after President Carter decided to boycott the Moscow games. Today, Pete is a sinkhole of self-loathing and repressed rage.

Category: Game of Thrones
Character: Littlefinger
Trait: Optimist
Petyr “Littlefinger” Baelish has risen from a poor minor noble to one of the most powerful officials in the Seven Kingdoms, but his ambitions don’t end there. Baelish is a schemer, dreamer, and double crosser with a steadfast resolution never to be bettered. He thrives in time of chaos of disquiet, and his naked ambition has served him well during the violent dynastic struggles among the kingdom’s noble families for control of the Iron Throne. Always two steps ahead of embattled noblemen who despise or discount him, he’s confident he’ll be the true winner of the Game.

Category: Game of Thrones
Character: The Hound
Trait: Pessimist
Sandor “The Hound” Clegane is a more than able warrior in the service of House Lannister, whose only calling seems to be violence. His face is scarred from childhood burning at the hands of his brother Gregor. This sadism seems to have contributed to his rather scalding demeanor and lack of chivalry. Although his natural aptitude for killing has won him a prized role as the bodyguard of the young King, Joffrey Baratheon, he seems to expect nothing more than the poor treatment he receives at the King’s hands.

The clash between streaming titans provides insight into the way connected customers prefer to receive digital content and suggests emerging best practices for providing it.

Although each service offers distinct interfaces and modifications, they can broadly be broken down into two categories: personalized experience and comprehensive selection. Jango, MOG, Pandora, and Slacker specialize in user-created “radio” channels that intuitively generate upcoming songs based on your endorsement of past selections. Grooveshark, Last.fm, Spotify and others specialize in an all-you-can eat audio buffet. Spotify has more than 15 million tracks you can can choose from, almost all from complete albums. Some of these buffet services also offer radio stations, although they may lack customizable features.

The two standout services are Pandora and Spotify, although Slacker is quickly winning adherents. The two services’ respective strengths and weaknesses are emblematic of the personalized experience and comprehensive selection models.

Pandora is the commercial front end of the Music Genome Project, an ambitious effort to deconstruct and analyze the structure of particular songs to identify common musical attributes they share with other compositions. Pandora’s staff of musicologists break down your favorite Rihanna song into individual components, such as: “rhythmic intro,” “modal harmonies,” “four-on-the-floor beats,” “subtle use of staccato synths,” “prevalent use of groove,” and “joyful lyrics.” Pandora then reverse engineers this information through an algorithm to suggest other songs you might enjoy based on a small music sampling. If you tell Pandora you like Vogue, the next three songs might be Can’t Get you Out of My Head by Kylie Minogue, Telephone by Lady Gaga and Shake by Little Boots (below).

Personal music preference is seemingly so subjective a concept as to defy mathematical deconstruction. Part of the fun of Pandora, then, is seeing how often the Genome algorithm is up to the challenge of deciphering your musical identity. It can be thrilling—and flattering—when the next song really does match up with your music tastes. But you’ll likely feel deflated when the Eagles pop up after all the effort you put in “liking” obscure 70s psychedelic songs.

Pandora’s artificial artistic intelligence brought users rushing to use the service as word spread of its uncannily accurate selections. It was—and is—an excellent way to discover new artists and tracks, all downloadable via iTunes and Amazon links. Pandora further capitalized on its success with a popular mobile app, and even IPO’d in June 2011. Its “cool factor” market niche seemed secure.

But then came Spotify, an unexpected contender from Sweden.

When the service debuted in the United States last summer, after several years of continued growth and success in Europe, many business observers questioned whether there was room for yet another music service to enter the US market. Their concerns were not without merit. The US already had demographic-refined terrestrial radio stations, satellite radio service like Sirius XM and incumbent Internet radio companies. But skeptics overlooked the company’s glowing reviews and thousands of satisfied European users. When the service hit Britain in 2009, the Guardian published an editorial highlighting the service’s ability to “align the interests of musicians and audiences” and give users “free access to literally millions of works – from William Lawes to Lily Allen.”

Indeed, Spotify’s massive library of millions and millions of tracks and albums remains its greatest asset. Spotify notes that it would “take you more than 80 years of non-stop listening just to get through it.” The company has deals with the four major record labels, meaning that nearly every artist from Adele to Zappa is available for your perusal. Spotify today is the massive streaming content library Netflix wants to be tomorrow.

As more users opt for a paid subscription to avoid the endless advertisements that pop up between songs on free accounts, it will likely prove profitable. The company has gained 3 million US subscribers since it launched here last June. About 20 percent—or 600,000—pay for upgraded service, while the rest opt for the free version. In January, Spotify announced that it had 3 million paid subscribers globally.

One crucial component to Spotify’s success has been its close relationship with Facebook. Spotify requires new users to sign up through their Facebook accounts. Users are given the option of using a Facebook Ticker to share their listening selections with their newsfeed audience. Although this is free advertising for Spotify, for some it raises serious privacy concerns about personal information access. Still, the Facebook partnership has been an enormous success and lines up with the company’s stated goal of becoming the “OS of Music.”

Spotify’s willingness to cut direct deals with record labels just might help it reach that goal. Spotify recently launched twelve new apps backed by the major labels. Pandora lacks such deals, as do many other services. Because of this, Pandora pays a hefty sum in royalties—a significant strike against its business model. Still, the company’s growth rate has remained strong since it went public last June. Figures released in March indicate that Pandora streams over one billion listener hours per month, an astounding 88 percent growth from a year earlier. Pandora’s share of the total American radio audience was up to to 5.74% as of February, and mobile users now account for over 70% of Pandora’s usage.

The competing Pandora and Spotify models reflect back not only on the marketing efforts behind them but also also on the customers who use them. Which service you choose likely depends on how you prefer to listen to music.

Many customers prefer streaming music function as a surrogate radio, with a mix of songs playing all day in the background. Pandora is obviously a good choice for this crowd, but then so is traditional radio and satellite services like SiriusXM. Where Pandora adds value is with its intuitive algorithm, which attracts a more discerning clientele looking to avoid both the ubiquity of Top 40 hits and the more miss than hit playlists at niche radio stations. Pandora is perfect for people who know what they like and don’t mind hearing it all day long.

Spotify offers a more interactive option, attracting a broad crowd interested in sampling new albums and seeking out favorites from the past. Its functionality also makes it a perfect replacement for iTunes as your desktop music app. But it’s also easy to get lost in Spotify’s infinite music aisles. Although it’s possible that some people will seek out friends’ shared playlists—or President Obama’s eclectic mix—most users will probably revert back to the same sort of artists and albums they used to lug around in massive CD folders.

Of course, there’s nothing to stop you from using both services. Some days it’s fun to track down albums like Low on Spotify and listen to them in their entirely. Other times it you may feel like plugging Bowie into Pandora and seeing what comes next.

At the moment, the scorecard would probably favor Spotify. The service offers an on-demand music library across platforms, while Pandora and other “radio” providers do not. Spotify should have no problem integrating curated radio features, while Pandora will have a difficult time matching Spotify’s massive selection without direct deals with labels. Pandora could still continue on as a specialized service, but it could also be bought out by Spotify or another competitor.

One clear lesson for streaming service providers is that customers want apps that can multitask. Both Spotify and Pandora have succeeded because it’s so easy to use their services on different platforms. Spotify works perfectly on smartphones, while Pandora is establishing itself in the lucrative automotive market.