DXPG

Total Pageviews

Tuesday, April 16, 2013

Civil Liberties Fears Dooms House Cybersecurity Bill

The White House on Tuesday threatened to veto a House bill that would allow private companies to share information about computer security threats with government agencies, signaling once again how difficult it is to balance civil liberties and security interests in the digital era.

A similar bill, the Cyberintelligence Sharing and Protection Act, known as Cispa, passed the Republican-controlled House of Representatives last year. It too faced a veto threat from the Obama Administration, along with outcry from civil liberties groups that feared that the government would use it to snoop on private citizens. This year, sponsors of the bill, House Intelligence Committee chairman Mike Rogers, a Republican from Michigan, and C.A. Dutch Ruppersberger, a Democrat from Maryland, tweaked the language in a bid to satisfy critics. The House is expected to vote on the bill this week.

A National Security Council spokeswoman, Caitlin Hayden, on Tuesday described those as “a good faith effort,” but insufficient. Specifically, the administration said private firms should be required to try to “remove irrelevant personal information” when sharing cyber threat information with each other or with government agencies. “Citizens have a right to know that corporations will be held accountable - and not granted immunity - for failing to safeguard personal information adequately,” the White House said in a statement.

Some technology industry groups, most recently TechNet, have backed the bill, while civil liberties advocates rallied against it. The Center for Democracy and Technology said it could cede too much control to a military intelligence agency, while the American Civil Liberties Union organized a petition drive warning that the law could allow government surveillance over e-mail communications and location data of ordinary Internet users.

The administration passed an executive order last February compelling government agencies to tell private firms about cyber risks, but not vice-versa. The president, in his State of the Union address, explicitly cited the need to protect both “national security” and “privacy.”



Amazon Takes a Nibble Out of Apple iTunes Downloads

Amazon is helping Apple celebrate the 10th anniversary of iTunes by gaining momentum on music downloads in the United States.

According to a new study released by NPD Group, the market research firm, in 2012 Amazon rose to account for 22 percent of paid music downloaded in the United States. This is up from 15 percent in 2011.

The report, “Annual Music Study 2012,” found that Apple still dominates the music download world, with 63 percent of all paid downloads taking place through iTunes.

Amazon’s rise seems to be attributed to updates of the company’s color Amazon’s Kindle Fire tablets last year. These tablets are capable of playing music directly purchased from AmazonMP3, the online retailer’s digital music service. The Kindle Fire is capable of accessing more than 18 million movies, TV shows, magazines and books, according to Amazon.

Although Amazon does not share numbers about sales of its Kindle Fire devices, calculations by Forrester Research estimates that Amazon sold close to five million Kindle Fire tablets by the end of last year. In comparison, Apple has sold more than 100 million iPads.

Although there has been huge growth in customers using streaming music services, including Pandora, Rdio and Spotify, NPD Group said in a press release that the number of music downloads in the United States has remained relatively unfazed by these new music outlets.

“NPD estimates that average per-buyer spending on music downloads increased 6 percent, year over year, due largely to increases in music purchasing by teens, along with an increase in the number of consumers purchasing both single song tracks and full albums,” the company said.

The report said 44 million Americans purchased at least one song or album last year.



Google Releases Details About Glass for App Developers

Google’s Internet-connected glasses are coming.

On Monday, Google released information for software developers who want to build apps for Glass, and on Tuesday, it sold its first pairs for $1,500 to people who had signed up at its developers conference last year.

The rules for developers reveal more about what Glass will be able to do and the steps Google is taking to make sure the glasses don’t alarm or confuse people. Google is being more restrictive about Glass than it has been with other products, in part because it wants to slowly introduce the new technology to the public to deal with concerns like privacy.

But despite those concerns, people can rest assured that Glass will be groundbreaking in at least one way â€" its ability to distribute photos of cats. “Each step in human technological advancement provides improved methods for the distribution of cat photos,” Google said. “Project Glass is no different.”

It described some sample apps to inspire developers â€" an app that delivers random cat facts every hour to the glasses, one to merge photos taken with Glass with photos of cats and another to show the nearest pet store.

To start, Google is controlling much about the apps that developers build for Glass, in stark contrast to its philosophy regarding Android, its mobile operating system, where developers have significant freedom.

For instance, to begin, developers cannot sell ads in apps, collect user data for ads, share data with ad networks or distribute apps elsewhere. They cannot charge people to buy apps or virtual goods or services within them.

Google also gave developers some guidance when thinking about how to build for Glass. First, design specifically for the glasses, not for other mobile devices, because the glasses are so different. Make sure apps do not get in the way or send updates too frequently, since people wear the glasses in front of their eyes all the time. Apps should provide timely information, Google said, and avoid doing anything unexpected.

“Surprising the user with unexpected functionality is bad on any platform, but especially on Glass given how close it is to their daily experience,” Google said. “Be honest about the intention of your application, what you will do on the user’s behalf, and get their explicit permission before you do it.”

The apps will be cloud-based, like Web apps, as opposed to living on the device like cellphone apps. Glass apps will be called Glassware, and the library that software developers use to build apps, called an application programming interface, is called Google Mirror.

People wearing Glass see a series of cards with text, images and video that they can swipe through, using their voices or fingers or by moving their heads. These cards are apps, and developers can program them so they read information aloud, use a wearer’s location or share information with other people or apps, for instance.

Google also released a few more details about the hardware. The glasses have adjustable nose pads, and even though the screen is directly in front of the wearer’s eye, it seems to be a 25-inch high-definition screen eight feet away.

The glasses connect to the Internet using Wi-Fi and Bluetooth, include photo and video functions, have 12 gigabytes of usable storage and are synced with Google’s cloud storage. The battery generally lasts a day, Google said, but will be exhausted more quickly if the user watches a lot of video.



Google Releases Details About Glass for App Developers

Google’s Internet-connected glasses are coming.

On Monday, Google released information for software developers who want to build apps for Glass, and on Tuesday, it sold its first pairs for $1,500 to people who had signed up at its developers conference last year.

The rules for developers reveal more about what Glass will be able to do and the steps Google is taking to make sure the glasses don’t alarm or confuse people. Google is being more restrictive about Glass than it has been with other products, in part because it wants to slowly introduce the new technology to the public to deal with concerns like privacy.

But despite those concerns, people can rest assured that Glass will be groundbreaking in at least one way â€" its ability to distribute photos of cats. “Each step in human technological advancement provides improved methods for the distribution of cat photos,” Google said. “Project Glass is no different.”

It described some sample apps to inspire developers â€" an app that delivers random cat facts every hour to the glasses, one to merge photos taken with Glass with photos of cats and another to show the nearest pet store.

To start, Google is controlling much about the apps that developers build for Glass, in stark contrast to its philosophy regarding Android, its mobile operating system, where developers have significant freedom.

For instance, to begin, developers cannot sell ads in apps, collect user data for ads, share data with ad networks or distribute apps elsewhere. They cannot charge people to buy apps or virtual goods or services within them.

Google also gave developers some guidance when thinking about how to build for Glass. First, design specifically for the glasses, not for other mobile devices, because the glasses are so different. Make sure apps do not get in the way or send updates too frequently, since people wear the glasses in front of their eyes all the time. Apps should provide timely information, Google said, and avoid doing anything unexpected.

“Surprising the user with unexpected functionality is bad on any platform, but especially on Glass given how close it is to their daily experience,” Google said. “Be honest about the intention of your application, what you will do on the user’s behalf, and get their explicit permission before you do it.”

The apps will be cloud-based, like Web apps, as opposed to living on the device like cellphone apps. Glass apps will be called Glassware, and the library that software developers use to build apps, called an application programming interface, is called Google Mirror.

People wearing Glass see a series of cards with text, images and video that they can swipe through, using their voices or fingers or by moving their heads. These cards are apps, and developers can program them so they read information aloud, use a wearer’s location or share information with other people or apps, for instance.

Google also released a few more details about the hardware. The glasses have adjustable nose pads, and even though the screen is directly in front of the wearer’s eye, it seems to be a 25-inch high-definition screen eight feet away.

The glasses connect to the Internet using Wi-Fi and Bluetooth, include photo and video functions, have 12 gigabytes of usable storage and are synced with Google’s cloud storage. The battery generally lasts a day, Google said, but will be exhausted more quickly if the user watches a lot of video.



Russian Activist Aleksei A. Navalny: ‘I Am Absolutely Sure We Will Win’

Shortly before his trial on embezzlement charges was to begin, the opposition activist Aleksei A. Navalny, 36, sat down for an interview in the Moscow office of his anti-corruption fund.

Alexei Navaly, a Russian activist, at his office in Moscow.James Hill for The New York Times Alexei Navaly, a Russian activist, at his office in Moscow.

His office was as sparse as a hotel conference room, and the molding had been stripped from his doorway last summer, when he and his colleagues uncovered a microphone and video camera with the help of a wiretap detector. His comments were translated and edited for clarity.

Q.

Do you feel like the possibility of imprisonment has come closer

A.

I am practically sure that they will lock me up. It is just a feeling, I don’t have any inside information or anything. But the case went slow, slow, slow, and the investigators understood that it was a set-up. Then suddenly, at some moment, it started to move very fast, and then faster and faster, and then to the court.

Q.

Soviet dissidents always seemed prepared to sacrifice themselves in order to fight the system, but you always seemed like an optimistic person who expected to win. Do you still feel confident, or has that been changing

A.

I am absolutely sure we will win, and that we are right. The dissidents were spiritual titans. In the Soviet period, it was clear that if you went out to Red Square with a poster, you understood they would put you in prison and there was no other outcome. You might understand that the U.S.S.R. was going to fall apart sometime, but no one expected their concrete deeds to affect it. These were great people who from the beginning came out so they would be put in prison. Our situation is different now. It is not the Soviet Union.

From when I started my work, they always told me I would be locked up. If you scroll through my blog from 2008, when I was writing about Gazprom, you will see comments there like, “You will be put in prison” and “You will be killed for this soon.” So when I do this in Russia, I know there is a possibility I will be put in prison.

So, for dissidents in the Soviet Union, they knew there was 100 percent probability. Now it is less than 100 percent, and we are not in the Soviet Union. I see there is a large number of people who support me and I am sure we will win. I am absolutely sure. I consider that it will happen in some relatively short period of time. But on the other hand, O.K., if it happens in two years or 22 years, either way, we need to do it. To compare me to the Soviet dissidents would be a big exaggeration.

There are certain moments of hope, when it seems to me that it’s happening quickly, like at Bolotnaya and Sakharova, when I think, “Everything is about to change.” And there comes a period of reaction, and it is hard. I understand well that in the next year it will be a hard time for all of us in Russia.

In 2008 and 2009, everything looked much more demotivating. If I had enthusiasm then, I definitely have it now. I just remember what it was like in 2007, when the G.D.P. was growing at 10 percent a year, and everyone loved President Vladimir V. Putin. And even in 2005, when Mr. Putin was doing more or less normal things. You spoke out about the elimination of gubernatorial elections, there were only four people doing it. There was no Internet then, only First Channel, and everything seemed hopeless. Now things look a million times more optimistic, and we have something to compare it to.

Q.

If you compare today’s atmosphere a year or 18 months ago, did you ever have moments when you actually thought, ‘The public wants stability’

A.

I had moments of disappointment connected with my own activities, when I understood I was acting less effectively. I had romantic ideas from articles, including Western articles, about crowdsourcing - it doesn’t work, that was exaggerated. I probably didn’t know how to use it. So my disappointments are related to organizational details, with processes, not with the overall situation.

People want stability. Any new power will provide the same stability, but stability with less corruption. The alternative to Mr. Putin does not mean the collapse of the country, or revolution. It will be an absolutely normal government, except for the trillions of dollars from oil and gas we can use for the people, so they can build a normal life instead of sending it to France. So I have no disappointment in that sense. I see that time works in our favor, technology works in our favor. So everything is getting better.

Q.

Those organizations and people who stopped supporting you - do you consider that a betrayal

A.

As I said, man is weak. People are afraid. I can’t expect each of them to be some kind of heroic person. I’m sorry about some people who would sit there and talk about awful Mr. Putin, and how they support me, and then they disappeared. C’est la vie. There’s nothing I can do about it. We feel growing support, I would say. A lot of people are disappointed that we didn’t win back in December - “what was the reason that the revolution didn’t happen right away, when it happened everywhere, even in Egypt and Tunisia” Well, it didn’t happen. And they are upset and stopped going to demonstrations because it’s useless. O.K., we will convince these people, and we will work with them.



Russian Activist Aleksei A. Navalny: ‘I Am Absolutely Sure We Will Win’

Shortly before his trial on embezzlement charges was to begin, the opposition activist Aleksei A. Navalny, 36, sat down for an interview in the Moscow office of his anti-corruption fund.

Alexei Navaly, a Russian activist, at his office in Moscow.James Hill for The New York Times Alexei Navaly, a Russian activist, at his office in Moscow.

His office was as sparse as a hotel conference room, and the molding had been stripped from his doorway last summer, when he and his colleagues uncovered a microphone and video camera with the help of a wiretap detector. His comments were translated and edited for clarity.

Q.

Do you feel like the possibility of imprisonment has come closer

A.

I am practically sure that they will lock me up. It is just a feeling, I don’t have any inside information or anything. But the case went slow, slow, slow, and the investigators understood that it was a set-up. Then suddenly, at some moment, it started to move very fast, and then faster and faster, and then to the court.

Q.

Soviet dissidents always seemed prepared to sacrifice themselves in order to fight the system, but you always seemed like an optimistic person who expected to win. Do you still feel confident, or has that been changing

A.

I am absolutely sure we will win, and that we are right. The dissidents were spiritual titans. In the Soviet period, it was clear that if you went out to Red Square with a poster, you understood they would put you in prison and there was no other outcome. You might understand that the U.S.S.R. was going to fall apart sometime, but no one expected their concrete deeds to affect it. These were great people who from the beginning came out so they would be put in prison. Our situation is different now. It is not the Soviet Union.

From when I started my work, they always told me I would be locked up. If you scroll through my blog from 2008, when I was writing about Gazprom, you will see comments there like, “You will be put in prison” and “You will be killed for this soon.” So when I do this in Russia, I know there is a possibility I will be put in prison.

So, for dissidents in the Soviet Union, they knew there was 100 percent probability. Now it is less than 100 percent, and we are not in the Soviet Union. I see there is a large number of people who support me and I am sure we will win. I am absolutely sure. I consider that it will happen in some relatively short period of time. But on the other hand, O.K., if it happens in two years or 22 years, either way, we need to do it. To compare me to the Soviet dissidents would be a big exaggeration.

There are certain moments of hope, when it seems to me that it’s happening quickly, like at Bolotnaya and Sakharova, when I think, “Everything is about to change.” And there comes a period of reaction, and it is hard. I understand well that in the next year it will be a hard time for all of us in Russia.

In 2008 and 2009, everything looked much more demotivating. If I had enthusiasm then, I definitely have it now. I just remember what it was like in 2007, when the G.D.P. was growing at 10 percent a year, and everyone loved President Vladimir V. Putin. And even in 2005, when Mr. Putin was doing more or less normal things. You spoke out about the elimination of gubernatorial elections, there were only four people doing it. There was no Internet then, only First Channel, and everything seemed hopeless. Now things look a million times more optimistic, and we have something to compare it to.

Q.

If you compare today’s atmosphere a year or 18 months ago, did you ever have moments when you actually thought, ‘The public wants stability’

A.

I had moments of disappointment connected with my own activities, when I understood I was acting less effectively. I had romantic ideas from articles, including Western articles, about crowdsourcing - it doesn’t work, that was exaggerated. I probably didn’t know how to use it. So my disappointments are related to organizational details, with processes, not with the overall situation.

People want stability. Any new power will provide the same stability, but stability with less corruption. The alternative to Mr. Putin does not mean the collapse of the country, or revolution. It will be an absolutely normal government, except for the trillions of dollars from oil and gas we can use for the people, so they can build a normal life instead of sending it to France. So I have no disappointment in that sense. I see that time works in our favor, technology works in our favor. So everything is getting better.

Q.

Those organizations and people who stopped supporting you - do you consider that a betrayal

A.

As I said, man is weak. People are afraid. I can’t expect each of them to be some kind of heroic person. I’m sorry about some people who would sit there and talk about awful Mr. Putin, and how they support me, and then they disappeared. C’est la vie. There’s nothing I can do about it. We feel growing support, I would say. A lot of people are disappointed that we didn’t win back in December - “what was the reason that the revolution didn’t happen right away, when it happened everywhere, even in Egypt and Tunisia” Well, it didn’t happen. And they are upset and stopped going to demonstrations because it’s useless. O.K., we will convince these people, and we will work with them.



Neighborhood Mourns Loss of 8-Year-Old Following Boston Blasts

Martin Richard's father released a statement on Tuesday along with this photo. Martin Richard’s father released a statement on Tuesday along with this photo.

BOSTON â€" Bill Richard, the father of the 8-year-old boy who was killed in Monday’s deadly explosions at the Boston Marathon, released a statement on Tuesday thanking everyone for their thoughts and prayers and asking for “patience and for privacy as we work to simultaneously grieve and recover.”

“My dear son Martin has died from injuries sustained in the attack on Boston,” the statement read. “My wife and daughter are both recovering from serious injuries. We thank our family and friends, those we know and those we have never met, for their thoughts and prayers. I ask that you continue to pray for my family as we remember Martin. We also ask for your patience and for privacy as we work to simultaneously grieve and recover.”

The street outside the family’s home in the Dorchester neighborhood of Boston was filled with reporters and television cameras on Tuesday. Mourners had already stopped to leave flowers in the front yard.

A neighbor, Jane Sherman, 64, described the Richard children as “very active, very normal American kids.” Ms. Sherman, a real estate agent, said she would often see the children playing outside the house.

“They’re very happy-go-lucky kids,” she said. “All of Dorchester is devastated.”

The boy’s father, Bill Richard, returned home around 10:30 p.m. on Monday, Ms. Sherman said. “He was white as a sheet,” she said.

Ms. Sherman said she went to his house and asked him if everything was all right, but he did not respond. A friend who was with him then told Ms. Sherman that Martin had died in the attack, she said.

She recalled on Tuesday that the Richard family had been skiing together over the winter. As for Dorchester, she said, it is a “very diverse, wonderful, family-oriented neighborhood.”



Neighborhood Mourns Loss of 8-Year-Old Following Boston Blasts

Martin Richard's father released a statement on Tuesday along with this photo. Martin Richard’s father released a statement on Tuesday along with this photo.

BOSTON â€" Bill Richard, the father of the 8-year-old boy who was killed in Monday’s deadly explosions at the Boston Marathon, released a statement on Tuesday thanking everyone for their thoughts and prayers and asking for “patience and for privacy as we work to simultaneously grieve and recover.”

“My dear son Martin has died from injuries sustained in the attack on Boston,” the statement read. “My wife and daughter are both recovering from serious injuries. We thank our family and friends, those we know and those we have never met, for their thoughts and prayers. I ask that you continue to pray for my family as we remember Martin. We also ask for your patience and for privacy as we work to simultaneously grieve and recover.”

The street outside the family’s home in the Dorchester neighborhood of Boston was filled with reporters and television cameras on Tuesday. Mourners had already stopped to leave flowers in the front yard.

A neighbor, Jane Sherman, 64, described the Richard children as “very active, very normal American kids.” Ms. Sherman, a real estate agent, said she would often see the children playing outside the house.

“They’re very happy-go-lucky kids,” she said. “All of Dorchester is devastated.”

The boy’s father, Bill Richard, returned home around 10:30 p.m. on Monday, Ms. Sherman said. “He was white as a sheet,” she said.

Ms. Sherman said she went to his house and asked him if everything was all right, but he did not respond. A friend who was with him then told Ms. Sherman that Martin had died in the attack, she said.

She recalled on Tuesday that the Richard family had been skiing together over the winter. As for Dorchester, she said, it is a “very diverse, wonderful, family-oriented neighborhood.”



The Hunt, a Social Commerce Site, Draws Celebrity Interest

Tim Weingarten, the founder and chief executive of The Hunt, remembers how he shopped for clothes in the days before the ubiquity of the Internet.

“I used to tear pages out of a magazine in terms of things I wanted to buy,” Mr. Weingarten said. “But now, I’ll see a blazer I like on a social networking site rather than in a catalog or in a store.”

Trouble is, he said, it’s not always easy to figure out where a chic outfit or pair of sunglasses posted on Instagram, Facebook, Pinterest or Tumblr is available for sale. Shoppers are always asking themselves where they can find that item or something similar that meets their budget.

Last summer, Mr. Weingarten introduced an early version of The Hunt, his answer to that dilemma, with the formal introduction following in January.

The Hunt is a shopping site where members upload photographs of items they want and ask the community of users to help them identify the item or similar ones. “The community acts as your personal stylist,” he said.

It has “a couple thousand members” but draws a million people to the site each month, according to the company.

Mr. Weingarten says that The Hunt is part of a quickly changing wave of e-commerce sites like Fab, The Fancy, Svpply, and Wanelo that revolve around visual-heavy shopping experiences.

Of course, the mother of all these visual-browsing sites is Pinterest, but the reclusive start-up does not yet have an e-commerce model in its software. Which is why Mr. Weingarten, among others, believe that he can corner this burgeoning industry, which does not yet have a clear victor. The Hunt is still testing revenue models, but the company believes that collecting affiliate fees on transactions could be lucrative.

Previously, The Hunt raised $2 million during its initial seed round earlier this year. On Tuesday, the company announced it had raised an additional $700,000 in seed financing, led by a roster of celebrities and figures from the entertainment world, including Ashton Kutcher’s A-Grade investment firm and RedOne, the Grammy-winning producer behind Lady Gaga and Jennifer Lopez.

Mr. Weingarten says the celebrities won’t simply be product pushers and promoters. He expects them to help give product directions and improve the site’s usability as the company continues to grow.

“As people spend more time in front of photos and on these Web sites,” he said. “How we shop and what we shop for is going to be transformed.”



Daily Report: Bid for Sprint Scrambles the Wireless Outlook

Smartphones, tablets and computers all pull data from the Internet, but people still pay two different bills: the high-speed connection they get at home and the wireless connection they get outside. Dish Network, the pay-TV operator, wants to bridge that gap, Brian X. Chen and Mark Scott report in Tuesday’s New York Times.

Dish Network said on Monday that it had submitted a $25.5 billion bid for Sprint Nextel, the nation’s third-largest wireless carrier after Verizon Wireless and AT&T. It says that a merger between the two companies could roll television, high-speed Internet and cellphone services into a single package that would be faster and more affordable for consumers.

“It really means that we’re going to give consumers what every consumer wants,” Charles W. Ergen, Dish Network’s chairman, said in a phone interview. “They want broadband and video and voice in their home and want the exact same thing outside the home. And they want it to look and feel and priced outside the same as it is inside.”

Dish Network’s bid is an effort to scuttle the planned takeover of Sprint Nextel by the Japanese telecommunications company SoftBank, which agreed in October to acquire a 70 percent stake in the American cellphone operator in a complex deal worth about $20 billion.

On Tuesday, SoftBank struck back, Mark Scott reported on DealBook. In a brief statement, it said its offer still represented better value for shareholders than Dish Network’s “highly conditional preliminary proposal.”

The markets, though, disagreed. Shares in SoftBank fell as much as 9.3 percent in Tokyo on Tuesday, and finished down 6.8 percent by the end of the day.



Microsoft Takes Aim at Amazon With a New Cloud Service

As president of Microsoft’s server and tools division, a $19 billion-a-year business devoted to databases, servers and other software products, Satya Nadella has a predictable cast of competitors to worry about. There is Oracle, VMware, SAP and a bunch of other makers of highly technical products that make everyday services like banking and airline reservations work, even if the software running them is invisible to most consumers.

But one of Mr. Nadella’s competitors - Amazon - is not like the others.

The Internet retailer is beloved by consumers for its seemingly infinite online selection of merchandise available for one-click purchasing, speedy delivery and Kindle e-readers. Out of view of most of the public, though, it has transformed itself into a huge player in the field of cloud computing. By renting capacity on the industrial-strength servers and beefy Internet connections in its data centers to anyone willing to pay for it, Amazon has become the virtual landlord of choice for technology start-ups, including the likes of Instagram and Foursquare.

Microsoft wants a piece of the action. On Tuesday, the company is opening to general availability a new service that competes directly with Amazon’s cloud offering. (Microsoft has been testing the service with customers for the past year.) And to make sure it’s taken seriously, Microsoft is committing to match Amazon’s prices for its cloud service, which is known as the Elastic Compute Cloud.

“It’s a two-horse race between us and Amazon,” Mr. Nadella said in a phone interview last week, noting the Seattle location of its cloud rival, a short distance away from Microsoft’s Redmond, Wash., headquarters.

Actually, that may be wishful thinking on Mr. Nadella’s part. Google and Rackspace are among the other companies that are fighting with Microsoft for the number-two spot in the cloud market.

The cloud represents a profound threat to Microsoft’s traditional business of selling software that people install on their machines. As a result, the company’s executives for some time now have been blaring their own plans to become serious cloud players.

For its first foray into the business a few years ago with a service called Windows Azure, Microsoft settled on an approach that played to its strengths, offering customers the ability to rent applications like databases and servers for broadcasting video. Amazon, in contrast, was known for more minimalist, low-level services â€" storage space on its servers, computing time and a share of its Internet connections.

If Microsoft’s offering was akin to a garage space outfitted with an arsenal power of tools, Amazon was renting just the garage.

Microsoft’s approach had appeal - the company says it has 200,000 Windows Azure customers - but not as much as what Amazon is offering. While the big companies targeted by Microsoft for its initial Windows Azure services will likely move to aggressively embrace the cloud at some point, the most ardent cloud supporters right now are technically sophisticated start-ups. And what they want is what Amazon - and starting this week, perhaps Microsoft - has to offer.

“They mistimed the market for sure,” James Staten, an analyst at Forrester Research, said of Microsoft.

In Forrester’s surveys of cloud developers, roughly 70 percent say they are using Amazon’s infrastructure, while about 30 percent say they are using Microsoft. (Many customers spread their business across several cloud vendors.)

Mr. Nadella, a Microsoft veteran, said the company is well positioned to become a stronger player in cloud computing because it has a more diverse portfolio of offerings than Amazon, including, of course, software that big customers can install in their own data centers if they want to take full control of their online services.

“It’s still the early part of the cloud market,” Mr. Nadella said. “Clearly they have done a good job in one segment of it. But it will play out.”



Microsoft Takes Aim at Amazon With a New Cloud Service

As president of Microsoft’s server and tools division, a $19 billion-a-year business devoted to databases, servers and other software products, Satya Nadella has a predictable cast of competitors to worry about. There is Oracle, VMware, SAP and a bunch of other makers of highly technical products that make everyday services like banking and airline reservations work, even if the software running them is invisible to most consumers.

But one of Mr. Nadella’s competitors - Amazon - is not like the others.

The Internet retailer is beloved by consumers for its seemingly infinite online selection of merchandise available for one-click purchasing, speedy delivery and Kindle e-readers. Out of view of most of the public, though, it has transformed itself into a huge player in the field of cloud computing. By renting capacity on the industrial-strength servers and beefy Internet connections in its data centers to anyone willing to pay for it, Amazon has become the virtual landlord of choice for technology start-ups, including the likes of Instagram and Foursquare.

Microsoft wants a piece of the action. On Tuesday, the company is opening to general availability a new service that competes directly with Amazon’s cloud offering. (Microsoft has been testing the service with customers for the past year.) And to make sure it’s taken seriously, Microsoft is committing to match Amazon’s prices for its cloud service, which is known as the Elastic Compute Cloud.

“It’s a two-horse race between us and Amazon,” Mr. Nadella said in a phone interview last week, noting the Seattle location of its cloud rival, a short distance away from Microsoft’s Redmond, Wash., headquarters.

Actually, that may be wishful thinking on Mr. Nadella’s part. Google and Rackspace are among the other companies that are fighting with Microsoft for the number-two spot in the cloud market.

The cloud represents a profound threat to Microsoft’s traditional business of selling software that people install on their machines. As a result, the company’s executives for some time now have been blaring their own plans to become serious cloud players.

For its first foray into the business a few years ago with a service called Windows Azure, Microsoft settled on an approach that played to its strengths, offering customers the ability to rent applications like databases and servers for broadcasting video. Amazon, in contrast, was known for more minimalist, low-level services â€" storage space on its servers, computing time and a share of its Internet connections.

If Microsoft’s offering was akin to a garage space outfitted with an arsenal power of tools, Amazon was renting just the garage.

Microsoft’s approach had appeal - the company says it has 200,000 Windows Azure customers - but not as much as what Amazon is offering. While the big companies targeted by Microsoft for its initial Windows Azure services will likely move to aggressively embrace the cloud at some point, the most ardent cloud supporters right now are technically sophisticated start-ups. And what they want is what Amazon - and starting this week, perhaps Microsoft - has to offer.

“They mistimed the market for sure,” James Staten, an analyst at Forrester Research, said of Microsoft.

In Forrester’s surveys of cloud developers, roughly 70 percent say they are using Amazon’s infrastructure, while about 30 percent say they are using Microsoft. (Many customers spread their business across several cloud vendors.)

Mr. Nadella, a Microsoft veteran, said the company is well positioned to become a stronger player in cloud computing because it has a more diverse portfolio of offerings than Amazon, including, of course, software that big customers can install in their own data centers if they want to take full control of their online services.

“It’s still the early part of the cloud market,” Mr. Nadella said. “Clearly they have done a good job in one segment of it. But it will play out.”



Microsoft Takes Aim at Amazon With a New Cloud Service

As president of Microsoft’s server and tools division, a $19 billion-a-year business devoted to databases, servers and other software products, Satya Nadella has a predictable cast of competitors to worry about. There is Oracle, VMware, SAP and a bunch of other makers of highly technical products that make everyday services like banking and airline reservations work, even if the software running them is invisible to most consumers.

But one of Mr. Nadella’s competitors - Amazon - is not like the others.

The Internet retailer is beloved by consumers for its seemingly infinite online selection of merchandise available for one-click purchasing, speedy delivery and Kindle e-readers. Out of view of most of the public, though, it has transformed itself into a huge player in the field of cloud computing. By renting capacity on the industrial-strength servers and beefy Internet connections in its data centers to anyone willing to pay for it, Amazon has become the virtual landlord of choice for technology start-ups, including the likes of Instagram and Foursquare.

Microsoft wants a piece of the action. On Tuesday, the company is opening to general availability a new service that competes directly with Amazon’s cloud offering. (Microsoft has been testing the service with customers for the past year.) And to make sure it’s taken seriously, Microsoft is committing to match Amazon’s prices for its cloud service, which is known as the Elastic Compute Cloud.

“It’s a two-horse race between us and Amazon,” Mr. Nadella said in a phone interview last week, noting the Seattle location of its cloud rival, a short distance away from Microsoft’s Redmond, Wash., headquarters.

Actually, that may be wishful thinking on Mr. Nadella’s part. Google and Rackspace are among the other companies that are fighting with Microsoft for the number-two spot in the cloud market.

The cloud represents a profound threat to Microsoft’s traditional business of selling software that people install on their machines. As a result, the company’s executives for some time now have been blaring their own plans to become serious cloud players.

For its first foray into the business a few years ago with a service called Windows Azure, Microsoft settled on an approach that played to its strengths, offering customers the ability to rent applications like databases and servers for broadcasting video. Amazon, in contrast, was known for more minimalist, low-level services â€" storage space on its servers, computing time and a share of its Internet connections.

If Microsoft’s offering was akin to a garage space outfitted with an arsenal power of tools, Amazon was renting just the garage.

Microsoft’s approach had appeal - the company says it has 200,000 Windows Azure customers - but not as much as what Amazon is offering. While the big companies targeted by Microsoft for its initial Windows Azure services will likely move to aggressively embrace the cloud at some point, the most ardent cloud supporters right now are technically sophisticated start-ups. And what they want is what Amazon - and starting this week, perhaps Microsoft - has to offer.

“They mistimed the market for sure,” James Staten, an analyst at Forrester Research, said of Microsoft.

In Forrester’s surveys of cloud developers, roughly 70 percent say they are using Amazon’s infrastructure, while about 30 percent say they are using Microsoft. (Many customers spread their business across several cloud vendors.)

Mr. Nadella, a Microsoft veteran, said the company is well positioned to become a stronger player in cloud computing because it has a more diverse portfolio of offerings than Amazon, including, of course, software that big customers can install in their own data centers if they want to take full control of their online services.

“It’s still the early part of the cloud market,” Mr. Nadella said. “Clearly they have done a good job in one segment of it. But it will play out.”



Microsoft Takes Aim at Amazon With a New Cloud Service

As president of Microsoft’s server and tools division, a $19 billion-a-year business devoted to databases, servers and other software products, Satya Nadella has a predictable cast of competitors to worry about. There is Oracle, VMware, SAP and a bunch of other makers of highly technical products that make everyday services like banking and airline reservations work, even if the software running them is invisible to most consumers.

But one of Mr. Nadella’s competitors - Amazon - is not like the others.

The Internet retailer is beloved by consumers for its seemingly infinite online selection of merchandise available for one-click purchasing, speedy delivery and Kindle e-readers. Out of view of most of the public, though, it has transformed itself into a huge player in the field of cloud computing. By renting capacity on the industrial-strength servers and beefy Internet connections in its data centers to anyone willing to pay for it, Amazon has become the virtual landlord of choice for technology start-ups, including the likes of Instagram and Foursquare.

Microsoft wants a piece of the action. On Tuesday, the company is opening to general availability a new service that competes directly with Amazon’s cloud offering. (Microsoft has been testing the service with customers for the past year.) And to make sure it’s taken seriously, Microsoft is committing to match Amazon’s prices for its cloud service, which is known as the Elastic Compute Cloud.

“It’s a two-horse race between us and Amazon,” Mr. Nadella said in a phone interview last week, noting the Seattle location of its cloud rival, a short distance away from Microsoft’s Redmond, Wash., headquarters.

Actually, that may be wishful thinking on Mr. Nadella’s part. Google and Rackspace are among the other companies that are fighting with Microsoft for the number-two spot in the cloud market.

The cloud represents a profound threat to Microsoft’s traditional business of selling software that people install on their machines. As a result, the company’s executives for some time now have been blaring their own plans to become serious cloud players.

For its first foray into the business a few years ago with a service called Windows Azure, Microsoft settled on an approach that played to its strengths, offering customers the ability to rent applications like databases and servers for broadcasting video. Amazon, in contrast, was known for more minimalist, low-level services â€" storage space on its servers, computing time and a share of its Internet connections.

If Microsoft’s offering was akin to a garage space outfitted with an arsenal power of tools, Amazon was renting just the garage.

Microsoft’s approach had appeal - the company says it has 200,000 Windows Azure customers - but not as much as what Amazon is offering. While the big companies targeted by Microsoft for its initial Windows Azure services will likely move to aggressively embrace the cloud at some point, the most ardent cloud supporters right now are technically sophisticated start-ups. And what they want is what Amazon - and starting this week, perhaps Microsoft - has to offer.

“They mistimed the market for sure,” James Staten, an analyst at Forrester Research, said of Microsoft.

In Forrester’s surveys of cloud developers, roughly 70 percent say they are using Amazon’s infrastructure, while about 30 percent say they are using Microsoft. (Many customers spread their business across several cloud vendors.)

Mr. Nadella, a Microsoft veteran, said the company is well positioned to become a stronger player in cloud computing because it has a more diverse portfolio of offerings than Amazon, including, of course, software that big customers can install in their own data centers if they want to take full control of their online services.

“It’s still the early part of the cloud market,” Mr. Nadella said. “Clearly they have done a good job in one segment of it. But it will play out.”



India Wants to Make Its Own Computer Chips

India, Long the Home of Outsourcing, Now Wants to Make Its Own Chips

NEW DELHI â€" The government of India, home to many of the world’s leading software outsourcing companies, wants to replicate that success by creating a homegrown industry for computer hardware. But unlike software, which requires little infrastructure, building electronics is a far more demanding business. Chip makers need vast quantities of clean water and reliable electricity. Computer and tablet assemblers depend on economies of scale and easy access to cheap parts, which China has spent many years building up.

Dell computers at a plant in the state of Tamil Nadu. Dell assembles products in India, but does not make components there.

So the Indian government is trying a new, carrot-and-stick approach.

In October, it quietly began mandating that at least half of all laptops, computers, tablets and dot-matrix printers procured by government agencies come from domestic sources, according to Dr. Ajay Kumar, joint secretary of the Department of Electronics and Information Technology, which devised the policy.

At the same time, it is dangling as much as $2.75 billion in incentives in front of chip makers to entice them to build India’s first semiconductor manufacturing plant, an important step in building a domestic hardware industry.

But like so much of India’s economic policy, it’s doubtful that either initiative will have the impact the government is intending.

“Nobody disputes India’s need to build up manufacturing. Not doing so would be fiscally irresponsible,” said Gaurav Verma, who heads the New York office of the U.S.-India Business Council. But Mr. Verma said that India’s efforts to force international companies to manufacture in the country are futile. “The government needs to not mandate this, but create an ecosystem.”

The domestic purchasing mandate, known as the “preferential market access” policy, seeks to address a real problem: imports of electronics are growing so fast that by 2020, they are projected to eclipse oil as the developing country’s largest import expense.

India’s import bill for semiconductors alone was $8.2 billion in 2012, according to Gartner, a research firm. And demand is growing at around 20 percent a year, according to the Department of Electronics and Information Technology.

For all electronics, India’s foreign currency bill is projected to grow from around $70 billion in 2012 to $300 billion by 2020, according to a government task force.

“The problem we are facing is that the demand is growing so much that it is reaching nonsustainable levels,” said Dr. Ajay Kumar, joint secretary of the agency.

Dot-matrix printers, outdated in most of the world, are one of the few electronic products that India manufactures. Around 400,000 dot-matrix printers were sold in India in the year ended March 31, an increase of 2 percent from the year before, according to the Manufacturers’ Association for Information Technology, a computer industry trade group in India.

The government accounts for about 40 percent of the country’s electronics purchases, according to PVG Menon, president of the Indian Electronics and Semiconductor Manufacturing Association.

Officials hope to use that purchasing power to jump-start manufacturing of other computer goods. However, the government has adopted a broad definition of what it considers locally made, since so few electronics are currently manufactured here.

If at least 30 percent of a computer’s components are made in India, then it would qualify. The policy also allows prospective suppliers to show “value addition” in lieu of actually manufacturing the goods in India, said Dr. Kumar. For example, India does not manufacture hard drives, but it assembles and tests them. Under the policy, a hard drive that is assembled in India would be considered to be made there.

Computer makers contacted for this article declined to discuss how the new policy would affect their sales.

The big fish the government would like to land is a factory to produce microprocessors for computers.

A computer processor typically accounts for 25 to 35 percent of the total cost of a PC or laptop. India hopes that such a plant, which could cost as much as $5 billion to build, would help spur a bigger high-tech manufacturing industry, said Dr. Kumar.

According to Indian media reports, two consortiums have been in talks with the government to build microprocessor foundries.

The first is led by the Jaypee Group, one of India’s largest construction companies, which built the country’s Formula One track in Uttar Pradesh. It has partnered with I.B.M., which will provide the technology.

The second bid is from the Hindustan Semiconductor Manufacturing Corporation, an American company that, despite its name, does not manufacture any chips. It has partnered with the Geneva-based chip maker
STMicroelectronics.

But Ron Somers, president of the U.S.-India Business Council, said he doubted that India could provide a new chip-making facility with the basic infrastructure it needed to even keep the lights on. There have been several failed attempts to set up chip plants in the past. The most recent was in 2008 by SemIndia, a United States company run by Indian-American entrepreneurs. It ended acrimoniously when a dispute arose over the terms of the agreement between the company and the state of Andhra Pradesh where the plant was to be housed.

Critics warn that India’s efforts to encourage a high-tech revolution may come to naught once again unless it reduces some of the barriers to doing business in the country.

In the case of some electronics, the import duty on a finished product is cheaper than on the component parts, said Mr. Menon. Costs are also higher because of a lack of reliable power and the extra time it takes to move goods on the country’s poor roads.

Spurred by the new “Buy India” requirements, Dell, the largest PC retailer in India, explored the possibility of setting up manufacturing facilities there. Dell assembles computers in India, but does not manufacture any components.

“They flew in their suppliers from China and Taiwan to see if they could set up facilities. They said no,” said an industry official, who requested anonymity since he was not authorized to speak on behalf of the Texas-based company. “The market is too small, and logistically it is a nightmare.”

Dell declined to comment.

India has a model for success, said Mr. Verma of the business council: its automobile industry. In the 1980s, India opened its automotive industry to foreign companies, and in 1982, Suzuki Motor bought a majority stake in Maruti Udhyog. The joint venture produced the Maruti 800, India’s first affordable car.

However, the real watershed moment came in 1991, when India dropped its local manufacturing requirements. The industry exploded, and there are now about 40 million cars on Indian roads.

“India now has the sixth-largest auto industry in the world because of the ecosystem the government created,” Mr. Verma said.

Pamposh Raina contributed reporting.

A version of this article appeared in print on April 16, 2013, on page B2 of the New York edition with the headline: India, Long the Home of Outsourcing, Now Wants to Make Its Own Chips.

India Wants to Make Its Own Computer Chips

India, Long the Home of Outsourcing, Now Wants to Make Its Own Chips

NEW DELHI â€" The government of India, home to many of the world’s leading software outsourcing companies, wants to replicate that success by creating a homegrown industry for computer hardware. But unlike software, which requires little infrastructure, building electronics is a far more demanding business. Chip makers need vast quantities of clean water and reliable electricity. Computer and tablet assemblers depend on economies of scale and easy access to cheap parts, which China has spent many years building up.

Dell computers at a plant in the state of Tamil Nadu. Dell assembles products in India, but does not make components there.

So the Indian government is trying a new, carrot-and-stick approach.

In October, it quietly began mandating that at least half of all laptops, computers, tablets and dot-matrix printers procured by government agencies come from domestic sources, according to Dr. Ajay Kumar, joint secretary of the Department of Electronics and Information Technology, which devised the policy.

At the same time, it is dangling as much as $2.75 billion in incentives in front of chip makers to entice them to build India’s first semiconductor manufacturing plant, an important step in building a domestic hardware industry.

But like so much of India’s economic policy, it’s doubtful that either initiative will have the impact the government is intending.

“Nobody disputes India’s need to build up manufacturing. Not doing so would be fiscally irresponsible,” said Gaurav Verma, who heads the New York office of the U.S.-India Business Council. But Mr. Verma said that India’s efforts to force international companies to manufacture in the country are futile. “The government needs to not mandate this, but create an ecosystem.”

The domestic purchasing mandate, known as the “preferential market access” policy, seeks to address a real problem: imports of electronics are growing so fast that by 2020, they are projected to eclipse oil as the developing country’s largest import expense.

India’s import bill for semiconductors alone was $8.2 billion in 2012, according to Gartner, a research firm. And demand is growing at around 20 percent a year, according to the Department of Electronics and Information Technology.

For all electronics, India’s foreign currency bill is projected to grow from around $70 billion in 2012 to $300 billion by 2020, according to a government task force.

“The problem we are facing is that the demand is growing so much that it is reaching nonsustainable levels,” said Dr. Ajay Kumar, joint secretary of the agency.

Dot-matrix printers, outdated in most of the world, are one of the few electronic products that India manufactures. Around 400,000 dot-matrix printers were sold in India in the year ended March 31, an increase of 2 percent from the year before, according to the Manufacturers’ Association for Information Technology, a computer industry trade group in India.

The government accounts for about 40 percent of the country’s electronics purchases, according to PVG Menon, president of the Indian Electronics and Semiconductor Manufacturing Association.

Officials hope to use that purchasing power to jump-start manufacturing of other computer goods. However, the government has adopted a broad definition of what it considers locally made, since so few electronics are currently manufactured here.

If at least 30 percent of a computer’s components are made in India, then it would qualify. The policy also allows prospective suppliers to show “value addition” in lieu of actually manufacturing the goods in India, said Dr. Kumar. For example, India does not manufacture hard drives, but it assembles and tests them. Under the policy, a hard drive that is assembled in India would be considered to be made there.

Computer makers contacted for this article declined to discuss how the new policy would affect their sales.

The big fish the government would like to land is a factory to produce microprocessors for computers.

A computer processor typically accounts for 25 to 35 percent of the total cost of a PC or laptop. India hopes that such a plant, which could cost as much as $5 billion to build, would help spur a bigger high-tech manufacturing industry, said Dr. Kumar.

According to Indian media reports, two consortiums have been in talks with the government to build microprocessor foundries.

The first is led by the Jaypee Group, one of India’s largest construction companies, which built the country’s Formula One track in Uttar Pradesh. It has partnered with I.B.M., which will provide the technology.

The second bid is from the Hindustan Semiconductor Manufacturing Corporation, an American company that, despite its name, does not manufacture any chips. It has partnered with the Geneva-based chip maker
STMicroelectronics.

But Ron Somers, president of the U.S.-India Business Council, said he doubted that India could provide a new chip-making facility with the basic infrastructure it needed to even keep the lights on. There have been several failed attempts to set up chip plants in the past. The most recent was in 2008 by SemIndia, a United States company run by Indian-American entrepreneurs. It ended acrimoniously when a dispute arose over the terms of the agreement between the company and the state of Andhra Pradesh where the plant was to be housed.

Critics warn that India’s efforts to encourage a high-tech revolution may come to naught once again unless it reduces some of the barriers to doing business in the country.

In the case of some electronics, the import duty on a finished product is cheaper than on the component parts, said Mr. Menon. Costs are also higher because of a lack of reliable power and the extra time it takes to move goods on the country’s poor roads.

Spurred by the new “Buy India” requirements, Dell, the largest PC retailer in India, explored the possibility of setting up manufacturing facilities there. Dell assembles computers in India, but does not manufacture any components.

“They flew in their suppliers from China and Taiwan to see if they could set up facilities. They said no,” said an industry official, who requested anonymity since he was not authorized to speak on behalf of the Texas-based company. “The market is too small, and logistically it is a nightmare.”

Dell declined to comment.

India has a model for success, said Mr. Verma of the business council: its automobile industry. In the 1980s, India opened its automotive industry to foreign companies, and in 1982, Suzuki Motor bought a majority stake in Maruti Udhyog. The joint venture produced the Maruti 800, India’s first affordable car.

However, the real watershed moment came in 1991, when India dropped its local manufacturing requirements. The industry exploded, and there are now about 40 million cars on Indian roads.

“India now has the sixth-largest auto industry in the world because of the ecosystem the government created,” Mr. Verma said.

Pamposh Raina contributed reporting.

A version of this article appeared in print on April 16, 2013, on page B2 of the New York edition with the headline: India, Long the Home of Outsourcing, Now Wants to Make Its Own Chips.

India Wants to Make Its Own Computer Chips

India, Long the Home of Outsourcing, Now Wants to Make Its Own Chips

NEW DELHI â€" The government of India, home to many of the world’s leading software outsourcing companies, wants to replicate that success by creating a homegrown industry for computer hardware. But unlike software, which requires little infrastructure, building electronics is a far more demanding business. Chip makers need vast quantities of clean water and reliable electricity. Computer and tablet assemblers depend on economies of scale and easy access to cheap parts, which China has spent many years building up.

Dell computers at a plant in the state of Tamil Nadu. Dell assembles products in India, but does not make components there.

So the Indian government is trying a new, carrot-and-stick approach.

In October, it quietly began mandating that at least half of all laptops, computers, tablets and dot-matrix printers procured by government agencies come from domestic sources, according to Dr. Ajay Kumar, joint secretary of the Department of Electronics and Information Technology, which devised the policy.

At the same time, it is dangling as much as $2.75 billion in incentives in front of chip makers to entice them to build India’s first semiconductor manufacturing plant, an important step in building a domestic hardware industry.

But like so much of India’s economic policy, it’s doubtful that either initiative will have the impact the government is intending.

“Nobody disputes India’s need to build up manufacturing. Not doing so would be fiscally irresponsible,” said Gaurav Verma, who heads the New York office of the U.S.-India Business Council. But Mr. Verma said that India’s efforts to force international companies to manufacture in the country are futile. “The government needs to not mandate this, but create an ecosystem.”

The domestic purchasing mandate, known as the “preferential market access” policy, seeks to address a real problem: imports of electronics are growing so fast that by 2020, they are projected to eclipse oil as the developing country’s largest import expense.

India’s import bill for semiconductors alone was $8.2 billion in 2012, according to Gartner, a research firm. And demand is growing at around 20 percent a year, according to the Department of Electronics and Information Technology.

For all electronics, India’s foreign currency bill is projected to grow from around $70 billion in 2012 to $300 billion by 2020, according to a government task force.

“The problem we are facing is that the demand is growing so much that it is reaching nonsustainable levels,” said Dr. Ajay Kumar, joint secretary of the agency.

Dot-matrix printers, outdated in most of the world, are one of the few electronic products that India manufactures. Around 400,000 dot-matrix printers were sold in India in the year ended March 31, an increase of 2 percent from the year before, according to the Manufacturers’ Association for Information Technology, a computer industry trade group in India.

The government accounts for about 40 percent of the country’s electronics purchases, according to PVG Menon, president of the Indian Electronics and Semiconductor Manufacturing Association.

Officials hope to use that purchasing power to jump-start manufacturing of other computer goods. However, the government has adopted a broad definition of what it considers locally made, since so few electronics are currently manufactured here.

If at least 30 percent of a computer’s components are made in India, then it would qualify. The policy also allows prospective suppliers to show “value addition” in lieu of actually manufacturing the goods in India, said Dr. Kumar. For example, India does not manufacture hard drives, but it assembles and tests them. Under the policy, a hard drive that is assembled in India would be considered to be made there.

Computer makers contacted for this article declined to discuss how the new policy would affect their sales.

The big fish the government would like to land is a factory to produce microprocessors for computers.

A computer processor typically accounts for 25 to 35 percent of the total cost of a PC or laptop. India hopes that such a plant, which could cost as much as $5 billion to build, would help spur a bigger high-tech manufacturing industry, said Dr. Kumar.

According to Indian media reports, two consortiums have been in talks with the government to build microprocessor foundries.

The first is led by the Jaypee Group, one of India’s largest construction companies, which built the country’s Formula One track in Uttar Pradesh. It has partnered with I.B.M., which will provide the technology.

The second bid is from the Hindustan Semiconductor Manufacturing Corporation, an American company that, despite its name, does not manufacture any chips. It has partnered with the Geneva-based chip maker
STMicroelectronics.

But Ron Somers, president of the U.S.-India Business Council, said he doubted that India could provide a new chip-making facility with the basic infrastructure it needed to even keep the lights on. There have been several failed attempts to set up chip plants in the past. The most recent was in 2008 by SemIndia, a United States company run by Indian-American entrepreneurs. It ended acrimoniously when a dispute arose over the terms of the agreement between the company and the state of Andhra Pradesh where the plant was to be housed.

Critics warn that India’s efforts to encourage a high-tech revolution may come to naught once again unless it reduces some of the barriers to doing business in the country.

In the case of some electronics, the import duty on a finished product is cheaper than on the component parts, said Mr. Menon. Costs are also higher because of a lack of reliable power and the extra time it takes to move goods on the country’s poor roads.

Spurred by the new “Buy India” requirements, Dell, the largest PC retailer in India, explored the possibility of setting up manufacturing facilities there. Dell assembles computers in India, but does not manufacture any components.

“They flew in their suppliers from China and Taiwan to see if they could set up facilities. They said no,” said an industry official, who requested anonymity since he was not authorized to speak on behalf of the Texas-based company. “The market is too small, and logistically it is a nightmare.”

Dell declined to comment.

India has a model for success, said Mr. Verma of the business council: its automobile industry. In the 1980s, India opened its automotive industry to foreign companies, and in 1982, Suzuki Motor bought a majority stake in Maruti Udhyog. The joint venture produced the Maruti 800, India’s first affordable car.

However, the real watershed moment came in 1991, when India dropped its local manufacturing requirements. The industry exploded, and there are now about 40 million cars on Indian roads.

“India now has the sixth-largest auto industry in the world because of the ecosystem the government created,” Mr. Verma said.

Pamposh Raina contributed reporting.

A version of this article appeared in print on April 16, 2013, on page B2 of the New York edition with the headline: India, Long the Home of Outsourcing, Now Wants to Make Its Own Chips.

Live Updates in the Aftermath of the Boston Marathon Explosions

The mother and sister of an 8-year-old boy who died are among the 130 people being treated for injuries at Boston hospitals from the twin explosions at the Boston marathon. Seventeen people are in critical condition. Police spent the night searching a condo in Revere, Mass., owned by a “person of interest,” but officials emphasized they have no suspects. No one has claimed responsibility.
Live streaming video coverage from WCBV-TV in Boston.

Auto-Refresh: ON
Turn ON
Refresh Now