WORLD INFO 24x7

REUTERS - Samsung Electronics <005930.KS> is the world's largest smartphone manufacturer and biggest user of Google'sAndroid operating system.

And, for some, that's the problem.

Samsung's meteoric rise - in the first quarter of 2011 it shipped fewersmartphones than Apple , Nokia or Research in Motion , but is now market leader - has handed it a dilemma. Does it risk becoming a commodity manufacturer of hardware, squeezed like the PC makers of old between narrowing margins and those who control the software that makes their devices run, or does it try to break into other parts of the business - the so-called mobile ecosystem?

"It comes down to this sense of what it is they want to be," said Tony Cripps, principal analyst at Ovum. "Do they really want to be one of the power players or are they happy enabling someone else's ecosystem?"

To be sure, Samsung isn't in any kind of trouble, and isn't likely to be so any time soon. Juniper Research expects Samsung to remain the No.1 smartphone manufacturer this quarter. The next iPhone upgrade is expected around the third quarter.

"Android has done wonders for them," says India-based Gartner analyst Anshul Gupta.

But still the company has its critics. They worry that Samsung has yet to address the central contradiction of it making devices that use someone else's operating system. By licensing the freeAndroid OS from Google, Samsung saves itself millions of dollars in software development costs and license fees, but leaves itself dependent on Google.

Horace Dediu, a former analyst for Nokia who now works as a consultant and runs an influential blog at www.asymco.com, said a similar debate went on at Nokia in the early years of the smartphone. The conclusion, he said, was obvious: Microsoft had shown that whoever owned the operating system could relegate every hardware manufacturer to be a commodity player.

"So it's a puzzle to me now, years and years on," he said, "to see companies like Samsung continuing to operate within the operating system and ecosystem that other vendors control."

INSIDER TV clip: http://reut.rs/IfWCtc

GRAPHIC: Samsung earnings: http://r.reuters.com/sem87s

GRAPHIC: Android vs Apple vs Windows

http://r.reuters.com/qyg97s

GRAPHIC: Smartphone vendors: http://r.reuters.com/ryh97s

And Samsung, of course, is not alone. Nokia itself has abandoned its own operating system, Symbian, in favour of Microsoft's Windows Phone. But the consequences for Samsung and other Android manufacturers are visible: While each has customized the Android interface, these are "veneers", in the words of Dediu, which "dissolve as soon as you jump into an application of the core platform."

These tweaks also contribute to what is called "fragmentation". As Google rolls out updates to its operating system, they must first be tested and adapted by manufacturers against their own customizations before being pushed out to the handset. This slows down the update process and means many users are stuck with earlier versions of Android. Nearly two thirds of Android devices, for example, run Gingerbread, a version of the operating system that was released in late 2010.

This further weakens Samsung's efforts to differentiate its phones beyond merely the look and hardware specifications. Analysts say Google's efforts to reduce fragmentation by limiting what can be altered in more recent versions of Android compounds such problems. Also, smartphones look increasingly similar as they shift from keyboards to touchscreens.

All this creates a conflict of interest between the two players that at some point may burst into the open. While Samsung says it has welcomed Google's purchase of Motorola , a handset maker, because of the U.S. firm's commitment to supporting Android and its partners, it has also taken steps towards some degree of independence.

For example it last year introduced its own Android software store, Samsung Apps, which has about 40,000 apps - a handful compared to Apple's 500,000 for the iPhone and 450,000 for Android. And last month it announced its own mobile advertising service, AdHub Market, apparently competing with Google's own ad distribution network - its main source of revenue.

FOR BADA OR WORSE?

And while all but a fraction of Samsung's smartphones are currently Android devices, the South Korean group has said it is committed to creating devices for different operating systems - what it calls a multi-platform strategy. Analysts said this has so far been half-hearted.

It has an operating system called bada, for example, which was on fewer than 3 percent of the world's smartphones last year, according to Canalys, putting it ahead of Microsoft's Windows Phone. But that's nothing compared to Android, which was on nearly half of all smartphones shipped. "They've tried to beat the drum for bada, but it hasn't had much traction," said Jake Saunders, a Singapore-based analyst for ABI Research.

Samsung says it plans to introduce more models, but has also said it may roll bada into another operating system called Tizen, and is in any case building an ecosystem that would improve compatibility between the two systems. It was keen to stress, however, that while Android was an important part of its strategy, phones running Windows and bada operating systems were equally important. Given that bada and Windows phones account for less than 5 percent of Samsung's total phone shipments, it suggests Samsung will give greater weight to Windows and bada phones in the months ahead.

But these are small steps given the scale of Samsung's dependence on Android. Samsung, said Ovum's Cripps, is keenly aware of the need to shape a broader strategy. "Especially in the last year there's been quite a lot of thought internally about which way they go with this."

EMBRACING ECOSYSTEM

If it wants to avoid merely competing at the bottom end of the market with ZTE and Huawei, analysts agreed it must develop an ecosystem that embraces software, content, other devices and all the players that help make that happen. This would inevitably pit it against Apple, Amazon , Google and Microsoft. All have different business models, said Cripps, but the same goal: to "own every element of the consumer's online and mobile experience."

In some ways, Samsung is well positioned for this.

"Samsung is not just a phone maker like HTC so it does have the potential to create platforms which deliver content and web services to TVs, PCs, phones and media players, and connect them," said Caroline Gabriel, research director at Rethink Technology Research.

This is Samsung's competitive advantage, said Gabriel, as the world shifts more to web-based technologies like HTML5, which reduce the relevance of individual operating systems and platforms like Apple's iOS and Android. Instead, applications will be more like web pages, which can run on any device.

Samsung can draw on its extensive supply chain, manufacturing capability and research and development facilities to make this happen, Gabriel noted, but its challenge is to overcome silo-like systems within the company and to learn how to develop relationships with the outside world.

"Samsung has no track record of building a developer ecosystem and even in the web that's going to be a challenge," she said. "It may have thought Google would be a solution, but Google is too controlling."

MAKING IT APP-EN

It also requires deeper changes, said Ovum's Cripps - not only to be the first Japanese or Korean company to break into a world dominated by U.S. players, but to succeed where once- dominant players like Nokia, RIM and Microsoft have stumbled. "I can well understand any doubts they may have internally about how they should push ahead with this," he said. "It is genuinely very, very difficult."

Samsung has made some tentative steps, for example into wedding its Smart TV business into partnerships with content providers. And developers like Singapore-based Jon Petersen say the company has put out feelers to outsiders to help work on software applications - in apparent recognition of its own weaknesses. Such weaknesses were visible even with the app it published ahead of Thursday's S3 launch: nearly a third of reviewers gave it the lowest rating, complaining it didn't work properly.

For now, no one denies Samsung's pre-eminence.

"The zeitgeist right now is definitely towards high-end Android devices of which Samsung is clearly the leader so I don't think there's any instant danger," said Cripps. "It's more a case of what Samsung wants to be in five years' time and planning towards that."

REUTERS - Shares of Google and Apple are probably better long-term bets than Facebook , and investors would do well to skip its highly touted IPO, Barron's wrote in its May 14 edition.

Facebook shares, if priced at $35, would be at a discount from a recent high of $44 in private trading on SharesPost in late March so could get a pop on the first day of public trading, the financial weekly wrote. The stock may be in the high $30s after the dust clears.

"Facebook is one of the greatest companies of our time, but it doesn't necessarily mean that it will be one of the greatest stocks," Dan Niles, senior portfolio manager at AlphaOne Capital Partners, told Barron's.

At $35, Facebook shares could be discounting $15 billion in annual ad revenues in a few years and $1.50 to $2 a share in profits. A doubling in Facebook's market value may require $30 billion or more of revenue by 2017, five to six times what the company is expected to generate this year. These revenues could produce $3 a share in earnings power and support a $70 stock, according to Barron's.

The company is seeking to raise about $10.6 billion by selling more than 337 million shares at $28 to $35 a share, which would value Facebook at $77 billion to $96 billion. Trading is expected on May 18.

Better bets probably are Apple and Google, proven growth companies with much lower valuations and cash-laden balance sheets, Barron's wrote. "Connect your friends on Facebook. Stay away from the stock."

SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - Facebook Inc aims to raise about $10.6 billion in Silicon Valley's largest IPO, dwarfing the coming-out parties of tech companies like Google Inc and granting the world's largest social network a market value close to Amazon.com's .

The eight-year-old social network that began as Mark Zuckerberg's Harvard dorm room project indicated an initial public offering price range of between $28 and $35 a share on Thursday, which would value the company at $77 billion to $96 billion.

The size of the IPO reflects the company's growth and bullish expectations about its money-making potential as a hub for everything from advertising to commerce.

"We certainly haven't ever seen a tech IPO on this grandiose a scale," said Lise Buyer, a principal with the IPO advisory firm Class V Group.

Buyer, who worked on Google's 2004 IPO, said the question about a company "that's already this big and that is raising this much money is how many of the glory days of growth are in the past versus how many are ahead."

Facebook stands to raise as much as $12 billion at the upper end of its planned range. If an over-allotment or "greenshoe" option is triggered, the company could sweep up a maximum of $13.6 billion, according to a Thursday prospectus.

Facebook is only getting about half, or $5.6 billion, of the estimated $10.6 billion that it would raise at the midpoint of its planned IPO range. About $4.9 billon will go to some existing shareholders.

Facebook's stock could begin trading as soon as May 18, according to a road showschedule obtained by Reuters. The offering's price range can be adjusted depending on Wall Street's response during the road show.

Investors are expected to flock to the highly anticipated IPO, although there have been growing concerns about the social network's longer-term growth and Zuckerberg's majority control.

Facebook will trade at 13 to 16 times the revenue that GreenCrest Capital analyst Max Wolff believes it will generate this year. By comparison, Google, the world's dominant Internet search engine, currently trades at 5.5 to 6 times expected 2012 revenue, he said.

Google's valuation was higher when it went public in 2004, though Facebook's IPO valuation is still higher than Google's was back then, Wolff noted.

But some observers said the rich premium was unlikely to deter investors.

"People are going to be very comfortable with this valuation," said Sam Schwerin of Millennium Technology Value Partners, which owns Facebook shares worth roughly $200 million. The firm is not selling in the IPO.

"A price range of $28 to $35 will be a relief to some people who are concerned that they may try to take the highest possible price because of high demand," he said.

"The amount being raised is noteworthy. Selling stockholders are raising about $5 billion in the IPO, which is a lot."

Facebook executives are due to hit the road on Monday, presenting their investment case to audiences. They will start in New York, go to other major cities such as Chicago and Boston, and end up on Facebook's home turf in Menlo Park, California, according to the schedule.

Zuckerberg is expected to participate in the two-week road show, a source has said, although Chief Operating Officer Sheryl Sandberg and Finance Chief David Ebersman will lead the briefings.

<^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

User growth over the years http://link.reuters.com/mut36s

Bankers fees -- how low? http://link.reuters.com/fep 36s

Top Ten global IPOs http://link.reuters.com/myn36s

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^>

TANTALIZING WALL STREET

Zuckerberg's involvement in the road show will be key for investors with concerns about Facebook's long-term strategy and money-making potential, said Brian Wieser, an analyst with Pivotal Research Group.

Zuckerberg's control of the company -- which was underscored when he orchestrated the $1 billion acquistion of mobile app maker Instagram last month -- means that investors need to "get comfortable" with the 27-year-old CEO, said Wieser.

Last week, Facebook reported its first quarter-to-quarter revenue slide in at least two years, a sign that the social network's sizzling growth may be cooling just as it prepares to go public. Some observers have also flagged the company's lack of revenue on mobile devices such as smartphones as an area of concern.

Dressed in a gray t-shirt and jeans, the copper-haired Zuckerberg appeared in a 31-minute road show video posted online on Thursday. In the video, Zuckerberg predicted that in five years almost every software app would be integrated with Facebook.

Facebook generated the lion's share of its $3.7 billion in revenue last year from online advertising. It also collects fees when consumers use its special Credits currency to purchase virtual goods in social games such as Zynga's Farmville. The company has said it may expand the use of its payment business beyond games.

Facebook, which plans to list its stock on the Nasdaq under the ticker "FB" , has long tantalized investors with the prospect of a mega IPO.

As a private company, shares of Facebook have traded briskly in secondary markets for the past couple of years, as investors sought to get a piece of the fast-growing company ahead of its expected IPO.

The IPO price range indicated in Facebook's filing on Thursday would value the company a hair below the level it has traded at in the secondary markets in recent months, with some trades valuing the company at slightly more than $100 billion.

But some investors think Facebook, which touts 900 million users worldwide, is setting itself a fairly conservative target.

"The price range may be tactical. They will likely walk the range up," Schwerin argued.

Facebook plans to sell 337.4 million shares, or 12.3 percent of the company, in the offering. The capital-raising target far outstrips big Internet IPOs that came before it. Google raised just shy of $2 billion in 2004, while last year Groupon tapped investors for $700 million and Zynga raked in $1 billion.

At the top end of the IPO range, Facebook would rival the market value of Amazon.com and Cisco Systems Inc , which are worth just over $100 billion, and surpass the combined market value of older technology companies Hewlett-Packard Co and Dell Inc .

Among existing shareholders, the largest seller in the IPO will be venture capital firm Accel Partners, which will make about $1.2 billion assuming the shares sell at the $31.5 mid-point. Zuckerberg is selling the next largest chunk of shares, worth a little under $1 billion.

Facebook said that a "substantial majority" of the proceeds from Zuckerberg's stock sale will be used to satisfy taxes he will incur from exercising his options.

In its prospectus, Facebook said the "lock-up" period, during which employees cannot sell shares after the IPO, would range from 151 days to 181 days.

Facebook also added two new underwriters, including online broker E*Trade Securities. The broker caters to retail clients who some have speculated may try to pile into the IPO.

"No doubt Facebook doesn't want to upset the average mom and pop out there," said Craig Huber, research analyst, at independent research firm Huber Research Partners.

Don't judge a book by its cover. This is exactly what I was thinking while test-driving the Micra Diesel over the weekend. Nissan Micra may be a tiny car for many, but only in the appearance. It is as big as, or even bigger than, any other contender in the segment. The diesel variant powered by a mighty 1.5-litre 63bhp unit borrowed from the Renault Logan, makes the diesel Micra a cute little monster indeed.

And it's worth the customers wait — especially those who ask for the diesel variant as soon as the petrol version is launched. Thankfully, Nissan didn't keep its customers waiting too long. Within six months of the petrol variant launch in the Indian small car market, Nissan introduced the diesel variant. At first glance, you will hardly see any difference between the petrol and diesel Micras. But, the diesel variant comes with 15-inch alloy wheels and rear spoilers, which are missing in the petrol variant. Inside, it gets leather wrapped gear-knob and steering wheel with a chrome logo on it. Otherwise, everything else remains the same.

Nissan is offering two diesel variants — XV and XV Premium. Interestingly, both sport all exciting USPs of Micra such as Push Button Ignition, Keyless entry, Auto-fold door mirrors and driver air bag. The lower variant just lacks the 15-inch alloy wheels, auto air conditioning, rear spoiler and fog lamps. One big disadvantage of the diesel Micra, though, is that it doesn't have ABS even as an option. To cut further costs, Nissan has also decided not to offer passenger airbag on the diesel variants. Looks like safety measures aren't top of mind this time.

Driving Experience

But such minor deterrents can be quickly forgotten once you experience the drive in this little monster. Simply push the Ignition button and the car comes to life not with a roar, but with a whisper. Yes, you can barely hear the engine inside the cabin. Although there's a fair amount of turbo lag as you start moving, things change in seconds and the Micra flies like a champ. You'll be amazed at the lightness of the power-steering at just 9.3 metres turning radius, which makes city-driving fun.

Under the curvy bonnet is the 1.5-litre CRDI K9K Diesel Engine that delivers 63bhp at 4000rpm and 160 Nm of torque at 2000rpm. It is mated to a 5-speed manual gearbox. The gearshifts are moderately smooth but the clutch is tougher compared to the petrol Micra. The third gear, however, offers a wide enough power band which translates into less gearshifts in city traffic.

On the highway, the car is a true performer as it seamlessly goes past 140 km/h but after that the engine starts gasping on to a maximum speed of 170+. However, the Micra is incredibly stable even at higher speeds, thanks to good aerodynamics brought togetherby the uniquely shaped cabin with a slightly raised roof end, plus rear spoiler. The compact suspension built for the V-platform absorbs plenty of punishment meted out by our roads although there is some amount of body roll and thumps and thuds. Braking is not that great, either.

The most disappointing part of the Micra is its rear seat. Although the car offers best-in-class leg, shoulder and headrooms, the seats lack proper cushioning, thigh and shoulder support. There is no head support, either. Nissan needs to seriously re-look at this feature, I'd say.

Nissan Micra is a package of many 'firsts' and best-in-class features, so one isn't surprised at the breakthrough in terms of fuel efficiency. Leaving all its contenders behind, the diesel-powered Micra delivers 23.08kpl (ARAI certified) — which essentially means one tankful will probably last you till the end of time.

The XV variant is priced at Rs 5.58 lakh while the XV Premium will cost Rs 6.04 lakh (ex showroom, Delhi).

London, May 14 (IANS) A few hundred thousand billion free-floating life-bearing earth-sized planets may exist in the space between stars in the Milky Way, says a study.

The idea is being propounded by an international team of astronomers led by Chandra Wickramasinghe, professor and director of the Buckingham Centre for Astrobiology at the University of Buckingham.

They have proposed that these life-bearing planets originated in the early universe within a few million years of the Big Bang, and that they make up most of the so-called "missing mass" of galaxies, the journal Astrophysics and Space Science reported.

The scientists calculate that such a planetary body would cross the inner solar system every 25 million years on the average and during each transit, zodiacal dust, including a component of the solar system's living cells, becomes implanted at its surface.

The free-floating planets would then have the added property of mixing the products of local biological evolution on a galaxy-wide scale, according to a statement of Buckingham University.

Since 1995, when the first extra solar planet was reported, interest in searching for planets has reached a feverish pitch. The 750 or so detections of exo-planets are all of planets orbiting stars, and very few, if any, have been deemed potential candidates for life.

The possibility of a much larger number of planets was first suggested in earlier studies where the effects of gravitational lensing of distant quasars (most distant objects) by intervening planet-sized bodies were measured.

Recently several groups of investigators have suggested that a few billion such objects could exist in the galaxy.

Wickramasinghe and team have increased this grand total of planets to a few hundred thousand billion (a few thousand for every Milky Way star) - each one harbouring the legacy of cosmic primordial (beginning) life.