6 ms·

The real Ajay Bhatt, co-inventor of the USB port

73 points by siculars 17y ago

bh23ha 17y ago
I have not idea why they embedded the commercial, but did not even link to hulu: http://www.hulu.com/watch/101471/the-tonight-show-with-conan-obrien-intel-rockstar http://www.hulu.com/watch/101471/the-tonight-show-with-conan...
- chime 17y ago
  Thanks for the hulu link. The embedded control did not work for me despite repeated refreshes. The hulu link did.
- deleted 17y ago
  [deleted]
- Hates_ 17y ago
  The embedding was better for me over Hulu as I'm not in the US.
- nirmal 17y ago
  The hulu version didn't exist when the original was posted. Hulu posts are delayed.
ShabbyDoo 17y ago
That Conan (a) felt like Ajay would be relevant for a general audience, and (b) didn't bring him on for the sole purpose of humiliating him speaks well for the acceptance of engineering in US society. A decade ago, he would have been reduced to caricature -- "nerd" glasses and the like.
- whye 17y ago
  What I don't understand is why Intel didn't use the real Ajay in their ads. Here's someone who they are supposedly honoring as a rock star, and yet when it comes to the ads, instead of using him, they hire an actor. How big of an Intel star can you be, if you aren't good enough to appear on TV?
  - tptacek 17y ago
    How much money do you think an Intel Fellow makes over the course of their career? There are 46 of them. I'm guessing Ajay's just fine with how this played out.
    - whye 17y ago
      Yes, I'm sure he's doing quite well, although I don't think it's a given that he measures his success by the size of his paycheck. As far as a positive portrayal of an engineer -- I think it kind of undercuts the message to have an actor take his place in the commercial.
  - ShabbyDoo 17y ago
    Yeah. You'd think that a day spent shooting a commercial wouldn't be a horrible inconvenience given the value. After all, CEOs often put themselves in front of the camera. Perhaps the real Ajay wasn't deemed nerdy enough?
  - lunchbox 17y ago
    From a NYT article on Intel: The real inventors are not in the ads; they are played by actors. Mr. Bell said he wanted to ensure the commercials were humorous, and avoid arguments with Intel employees over which should be featured. "When you are required politically to cast certain people and get everyone involved, you tend to get this watered-down, feel-good campaign that works really well internally and makes the company itself feel good," but does not appeal to consumers, he said. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/06/business/media/06adco.html http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/06/business/media/06adco.html
    - chaosprophet 17y ago
      That argument does not really hold much water. The fact remains that you are portraying the same person, so these arguments which Intel wanted to avoid would still come up. Considering that, they should just have gone with the real guy.
      - 17y ago
zhyder 17y ago
I found it odd that he didn't share the credit with more people at Intel and its partners, and spoke negatively about Firewire[1]. [1]- Firewire lost mainly because the cheaper+slower USB1.1 became ubiquitous first, and then came the backward-compatible (in connectors/cables) and comparably-fast USB2.0.
- codexon 17y ago
  I'm surprised someone voted you down and that you are still at 1 point. USB 1.0 seems like one of the many interfaces that will eventually end up obsolete just like ISA PCI AGP PCMIA etc... I really don't see anything technically superior about USB (feel free to correct me). The main reason it won out over Firewire was of course Intel and Microsoft backing, and that it was in the sweet spot for the price/feature trade off.
  - weaksauce 17y ago
    It was cheaper because it was not proprietary like the firewire port. I think that was the only issue really. Firewire has a smaller protocol overhead so at a given bit rate the throughput was faster. Did the original firewire spec allow for multiple devices on the same bus or was that included in a later revision?
    - cnvogel 17y ago
      The physical data interface of USB is simpler (only two signalling wires, D+, D- instead of the two differential pairs for firewire). Supply of power to the devices is simpler (+5V instead of >20V with firewire, which needs an additional DC/DC converter on the device). For most primitive low-speed devices (mice, keyboards, toy rocket launchers) the data transfer implementation is simpler (see e.g. the bit-banging software-only V-USB implementation for microcontrollers). So on the low-performance side, the advantage is clear. And end-users like the simplicity of having the same physical port for all their computer peripherals (which can use low- (<1Mbit), full (12MBit) or high (480MBit) speed, without the user knowing or noticing). While I personally think that Firewire is the more elegant, better performing and more flexible communication technology, I can see why USB surpassed it in the marketplace.
brandnewlow 17y ago
My take: They didn't use the real guy because this let them create a little buzz and hold him back to give their ad campaign a second wind. http://www.paulgraham.com/submarine.html http://www.paulgraham.com/submarine.html Interesting that a Tonight Show advertiser initiated this interview, the show said yes, and even admits this interview was prompted by a sponsor. (Also interesting that the ad-block HN crowd isn't complaining about watching sponsored content) Intel's PR and marketing people played this one really well.
- paul 17y ago
  That seems unlikely to me. The "submarine" essay is a good one, but it has caused people here to overestimate the cleverness of PR people. It's better to think more in terms of the press being lazy.
- mustpax 17y ago
  Almost all interview spots on late-night talk shows are pure marketing. Without fail, the interviewee always has a book or a movie coming out. Or, at most, is a former or current politician, seeking publicity for their latest cause (a foundation they set up or the upcoming election, respectively). I think it’s quite respectable for Tonight Show to both acknowledge that this is a sponsored interview and to make light of the fact.
  - raheemm 17y ago
    This monkey will dance for anyone
mooted 17y ago
Dont give a fuck. Just sell things.
mooted 17y ago
Does this really matter? IMHO, this is more of an ego issue to 'nerds' than selling the product in itself. The latter being the purpose of ads.

73 points by siculars 17y ago

I have not idea why they embedded the commercial, but did not even link to hulu: http://www.hulu.com/watch/101471/the-tonight-show-with-conan-obrien-intel-rockstar http://www.hulu.com/watch/101471/the-tonight-show-with-conan...

chime 17y ago
Thanks for the hulu link. The embedded control did not work for me despite repeated refreshes. The hulu link did.
deleted 17y ago
[deleted]
Hates_ 17y ago
The embedding was better for me over Hulu as I'm not in the US.
nirmal 17y ago
The hulu version didn't exist when the original was posted. Hulu posts are delayed.

ShabbyDoo 17y ago

That Conan (a) felt like Ajay would be relevant for a general audience, and (b) didn't bring him on for the sole purpose of humiliating him speaks well for the acceptance of engineering in US society. A decade ago, he would have been reduced to caricature -- "nerd" glasses and the like.

whye 17y ago
What I don't understand is why Intel didn't use the real Ajay in their ads. Here's someone who they are supposedly honoring as a rock star, and yet when it comes to the ads, instead of using him, they hire an actor. How big of an Intel star can you be, if you aren't good enough to appear on TV?
- tptacek 17y ago
  How much money do you think an Intel Fellow makes over the course of their career? There are 46 of them. I'm guessing Ajay's just fine with how this played out.
  - whye 17y ago
    Yes, I'm sure he's doing quite well, although I don't think it's a given that he measures his success by the size of his paycheck. As far as a positive portrayal of an engineer -- I think it kind of undercuts the message to have an actor take his place in the commercial.
- ShabbyDoo 17y ago
  Yeah. You'd think that a day spent shooting a commercial wouldn't be a horrible inconvenience given the value. After all, CEOs often put themselves in front of the camera. Perhaps the real Ajay wasn't deemed nerdy enough?
- lunchbox 17y ago
  From a NYT article on Intel: The real inventors are not in the ads; they are played by actors. Mr. Bell said he wanted to ensure the commercials were humorous, and avoid arguments with Intel employees over which should be featured. "When you are required politically to cast certain people and get everyone involved, you tend to get this watered-down, feel-good campaign that works really well internally and makes the company itself feel good," but does not appeal to consumers, he said. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/06/business/media/06adco.html http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/06/business/media/06adco.html
  - chaosprophet 17y ago
    That argument does not really hold much water. The fact remains that you are portraying the same person, so these arguments which Intel wanted to avoid would still come up. Considering that, they should just have gone with the real guy.
    - 17y ago

zhyder 17y ago

I found it odd that he didn't share the credit with more people at Intel and its partners, and spoke negatively about Firewire[1]. [1]- Firewire lost mainly because the cheaper+slower USB1.1 became ubiquitous first, and then came the backward-compatible (in connectors/cables) and comparably-fast USB2.0.

codexon 17y ago
I'm surprised someone voted you down and that you are still at 1 point. USB 1.0 seems like one of the many interfaces that will eventually end up obsolete just like ISA PCI AGP PCMIA etc... I really don't see anything technically superior about USB (feel free to correct me). The main reason it won out over Firewire was of course Intel and Microsoft backing, and that it was in the sweet spot for the price/feature trade off.
- weaksauce 17y ago
  It was cheaper because it was not proprietary like the firewire port. I think that was the only issue really. Firewire has a smaller protocol overhead so at a given bit rate the throughput was faster. Did the original firewire spec allow for multiple devices on the same bus or was that included in a later revision?
  - cnvogel 17y ago
    The physical data interface of USB is simpler (only two signalling wires, D+, D- instead of the two differential pairs for firewire). Supply of power to the devices is simpler (+5V instead of >20V with firewire, which needs an additional DC/DC converter on the device). For most primitive low-speed devices (mice, keyboards, toy rocket launchers) the data transfer implementation is simpler (see e.g. the bit-banging software-only V-USB implementation for microcontrollers). So on the low-performance side, the advantage is clear. And end-users like the simplicity of having the same physical port for all their computer peripherals (which can use low- (<1Mbit), full (12MBit) or high (480MBit) speed, without the user knowing or noticing). While I personally think that Firewire is the more elegant, better performing and more flexible communication technology, I can see why USB surpassed it in the marketplace.

brandnewlow 17y ago

My take: They didn't use the real guy because this let them create a little buzz and hold him back to give their ad campaign a second wind. http://www.paulgraham.com/submarine.html http://www.paulgraham.com/submarine.html Interesting that a Tonight Show advertiser initiated this interview, the show said yes, and even admits this interview was prompted by a sponsor. (Also interesting that the ad-block HN crowd isn't complaining about watching sponsored content) Intel's PR and marketing people played this one really well.

paul 17y ago
That seems unlikely to me. The "submarine" essay is a good one, but it has caused people here to overestimate the cleverness of PR people. It's better to think more in terms of the press being lazy.
mustpax 17y ago
Almost all interview spots on late-night talk shows are pure marketing. Without fail, the interviewee always has a book or a movie coming out. Or, at most, is a former or current politician, seeking publicity for their latest cause (a foundation they set up or the upcoming election, respectively). I think it’s quite respectable for Tonight Show to both acknowledge that this is a sponsored interview and to make light of the fact.
- raheemm 17y ago
  This monkey will dance for anyone

mooted 17y ago

Dont give a fuck. Just sell things.

mooted 17y ago

Does this really matter? IMHO, this is more of an ego issue to 'nerds' than selling the product in itself. The latter being the purpose of ads.