Sweden in Dec 2010 🐸
New Delhi: It’s 6 a.m. Your morning alarm shrills piercingly. You sit up groggily, stretch, and yawn. It’s time to get ready for school or work– what do you do next? Get dressed? Take a shower? Brush your teeth?
Apparently, 96 percent of Gen Y in India does something else- They check their Smartphones for updates in email, texts, and social media sites, often before they get out of bed. There are 206 bones in the human body, and the Smartphone could plausibly be considered the 207th, as two out of five respondents surveyed for 2012 Cisco Connected World Technology Report (CCWTR) said they “would feel anxious, like part of me is missing,” if they couldn’t use their Smartphones to stay connected.
The interesting findings are revealed in a survey conducted by InsightExpress on 1800 college students and young professionals aged 18 to 30 across 18 countries. The report examines how Generation Y uses the Internet and mobile devices to connect with the world, their behavior and attitudes about the creation, access and privacy of the enormous amounts of data being generated by Smartphones and other connected devices.
Here are 10 interesting findings about Gen Y Indians from Cisco’s CCWTR Report
#10 Smartphone- The New Tooth Brush
For this generation, information is real-time, all the time. Checking their mobile devices for text, email, and social media updates is how they start their day– often even before getting out of bed.
In India, 96 percent of those who have Smartphones will check for updates as part of the morning routine, slightly higher than the global average of nine of 10 respondents who will do the same as part of the morning ritual.
For employers, this is meaningful because it demonstrates that the workforce of the future is more agile, more informed, and more responsive than any previous generation. They live to connect and communicate.
Following its Chinese iPad and iPhone announcements last week, Apple has announced that it will launch the iPhone 5 in South Korea on Friday, December 7, releasing the smartphone in more than 50 additional countries across December.
Currently in 47 countries, the iPhone 5 will be launched in South Korea this Friday, and will then be followed a week later with the opening of sales in Albania, Antigua and Barbuda, Armenia, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, China, Costa Rica, Cyprus, Ecuador, Grenada, Indonesia, Israel, Jamaica, Jordan, Kuwait, Macedonia Malaysia, Moldova, Montenegro, Panama, Paraguay, Philippines, Qatar, Russia, Saudi Arabia, South Africa, Taiwan, Turkey, United Arab Emirates and Venezuela.
On December 21, the smartphone will then reach the Caribbean and Africa, as the device goes on sale in Barbados, Botswana, Cameroon, Central African Republic, Egypt, Guinea, Ivory Coast, Kenya, Madagascar, Mali, Mauritius, Morocco, Niger, Senegal, St. Kitts, St. Lucia, St.Vincent & the Grenadines, Tunisia, Uganda and Vietnam.
It’s also a very agressive strategy, with Apple getting the iPhone 5 to stores and operators in over 100 countries in less than three months (just as it said). It is certainly the fastest rollout of the iPhone to date, and sets a benchmark for its rivals.
For Apple, the expanded launch comes as the company has weathered early supply shortages and has estimated shipping times now displaying a wait of 2 – 4 days. When the iPhone 5 went on sale, it quickly sold out and experienced delays of between 3 – 4 weeks as it became the fastest selling smartphone of all time.
Selling more than 2 million units in its first 24 hours available on preorder, Apple announced in September that it had seen more than 5 million iPhone 5 sales over its first weekend (three days) of general availability, slightly beating the 4 million iPhone 4S sales it recorded in October 2011.
It will be a busy two months for Apple, after the company announced it will launch the iPad mini and 4th-generation iPad on December 7, with the iPhone 5 launching a week later on December 14.
A measure that would require most foods made with genetically engineered ingredients to be labeled in California was significantly behind early Wednesday.
Supporters of Proposition 37 said consumers have a right to know whether food has been genetically altered, particularly when the long-term health impacts are unclear. Opponents argued that the labels would stigmatize foods that are scientifically proven to be safe.
With more than 94 percent the precincts reporting, voters rejected the proposed labeling law. California would have been the first state in the nation to pass such an initiative.
“We said from the beginning that the more voters learned about Prop. 37, the less they would like it,” said Kathy Fairbanks, a spokeswoman for the opposition. “We didn’t think they would like the lawsuits, more bureaucracy, higher costs, loopholes and exemptions. It looks like they don’t.”
The measure calls for genetically engineered foods to include labels on either the front or back of the product. Whole foods, such as sweet corn and salmon, would have a sign on the shelf. Products such as alcohol, beef, eggs and dairy are exempt.
“Whatever happens tonight, this is a win,” said Grant Lundberg, CEO of Lundberg Family Farms, co-chair of Yes on 37. “Never before have millions of Californians come together to support giving consumers a choice about genetically engineered foods.”
Opponents argued that the price of new California labels, or the cost manufacturers will incur by changing over to non-GMO ingredient, would be passed on to consumers. The No campaign calculated that households would pay as much as $400 more a year in grocery bills. But there is no independent study to show that.
Opponents, raising more than $45 million, had the backing of large agribusiness and chemical companies such as Monsanto and Dow, and food manufacturer giants, including PepsiCo. The Yes campaign raised about $6.7 million and was supported largely by the organic industry, consumer groups and alternative medicine organizations.
About 70 to 80 percent of processed foods sold in the United States are made with genetically engineered ingredients such as corn, soybeans, sugar beets and cottonseed oil. The seeds for these crops have been genetically altered in the lab to make them more resistant to pests and invasive weeds.
But proponents of Prop. 37 said research shows the risks of eating genetically engineered foods range from allergies to organ damage. They also contend that because weeds are rapidly becoming resistant to the genetic formula of these plants, more herbicides are being used.
Opponents argued that the fears are misguided. They say genetically modified crops are better suited to survive periods of bad weather and significantly increase per-acre yields, which means feeding more people for less money.
Stacy Finz is a San Francisco Chronicle staff writer. E-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org Twitter: @sfinz