Budget Battles Keep Agencies Guessing

“I don’t want to throw darts or rocks at anybody,” said Gov. Neil Abercrombie, Democrat of Hawaii, at the National Governors Association convention last month in Milwaukee, venting his frustration over the budget uncertainty. “I just want to know what the hell the numbers are.”

The budget woes are afflicting, among others, state governments, American Indian tribes, military contractors and cancer research laboratories. Budget experts said that the short-term concerns over next year’s dollar figures were already hampering long-term planning and making government officials hesitant to commit to big projects or to hire needed employees.

“You’re eating away little by little at the infrastructure and effectiveness of government,” said Philip Joyce, a professor at the University of Maryland.

In an interview, Dr. Francis Collins, the director of the National Institutes of Health, called 2013 the “darkest ever” year for the agency, whose budget is at its lowest inflation-adjusted appropriations level in more than a decade. The agency has been awarding grants to an increasingly smaller sliver of applicants as well.

The stopgap measures that have kept the government running have further hobbled the agency, he added. “Continuing resolutions discourage you from trying something new and bold,” he said. “You’re supposed to tread water. And science is very badly served by that tread-water message.”

One researcher who said he had felt the impact of the budget wars is Steven Salzberg, the director of the Center for Computational Biology at Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore and a lauded biomedical researcher. Mr. Salzberg said that he had received about 20 percent less in federal funding than his peers had recommended for his work on the biological underpinnings of cancer and other diseases.

“Less science is getting done,” he said. “That means cures won’t emerge. Five years from now, when your aunt gets cancer and you can’t do anything for her, people won’t stop and think, ‘Jesus, if we only hadn’t had the sequester!’ ”

Shorter grant cycles have forced scientists to rush to get results, he said. Increasing competition for funding has left him and his peers spending more and more time on paperwork, and less and less time on laboratory work. Worst of all, he said, promising young scientists are becoming discouraged and leaving the field.

“The current budget wars are a more extreme or egregious version of what has been going on for a number of years,” Mr. Salzberg said. “They’re wreaking havoc on people’s research plans.”

A broad range of budget officials described similar headaches emanating from Washington. Sequestration has forced programs that normally expect flat or increasing financing to make sudden cuts. Many programs delayed those cuts, and are scrambling to make them now — in some cases with reduced staffs because of furloughs or hiring freezes.

A number of budget issues lingered unresolved during Congress’s long summer recess. Earlier this year, the House and the Senate passed spending bills for the 2014 fiscal year, which begins on Oct. 1, that were about $90 billion apart, but never settled on a final figure.

With lawmakers returning to Washington next week, Congress is expected to pass another stopgap bill, known as a continuing resolution, financing the government for a few more months, but it is unclear whether such funding will stay at current levels or shrink. And if the Republicans who control the House and the Democrats who hold sway in the Senate fail to come to a deal before October, many parts of the federal government could shut down.

The breakdown of the Congressional budgeting process this summer has compounded the problems. Officials said that they had received no word about budget figures from Congressional appropriators — because such numbers do not yet exist.

Disruptions: Smartphone Battles Shift to Software

Eric Risberg/Associated Press Timothy D. Cook, Apple’s chief executive, on Monday at the company’s Worldwide Developers Conference in San Francisco.

SAN FRANCISCO — Last week, Timothy D. Cook, Apple’s chief executive, stood on stage at the company’s Worldwide Developers Conference without a new version of the iPhone or the iPad or some new device.

After showing off new laptop computers and a new, cylindrical Mac Pro, Mr. Cook and other Apple executives spent the rest of their two-hour keynote address discussing the features of Apple’s latest mobile operating system, iOS 7. With the image of a flattened smartphone interface with thin typography on a screen in the background, Mr. Cook proudly noted, “This is the biggest change to iOS since the introduction of the iPhone.”

How does he figure that?

Mr. Cook’s bold claim was based on something that is well understood in tech circles but is easily overlooked by consumers. It is the design of the software, far more than the look and feel of the device itself, that allows a company to leap over its competitors.

Hardware features like processing speed or screen resolution or even how well a camera works offer only fleeting advantages in the constant competition among smartphone manufacturers. And with more than a billion smartphones in the world today, much of them with the same rectangular design meant to fit in your hand yet large enough to be used as a phone, it is hard to imagine a breakthrough in their general look.

But changes to the software are limited only by the skill and creativity of a company’s engineers and designers and are not as easily mimicked since they appeal to softer notions like “experience” rather than speed or weight.

Designers at Apple, Microsoft and Google appear to have been keenly aware of that when they worked on the latest versions of their mobile operating systems, experimenting with ways of making software that is unique yet as intuitive as a road sign.

“I have my home, I have my office and I now I have my phone interface,” said Paola Antonelli, senior curator of architecture and design at the Museum of Modern Art in New York. “When you turn a smartphone off it is an enigmatic monolith; it’s the interface that not only animates it but gives it meaning.” Ms. Antonelli said she hoped to one day include iOS 7 in MoMA’s design collection.

Apple is making some stark changes to the appearance of its software with the latest operating system, which will be available to consumers in the fall. Jonathan Ive, senior vice president for industrial design at Apple and the executive responsible for the new look, has done away with design metaphors like a wood grain bookshelf for the phone’s virtual newsstand. The new look also eliminates borders. It doesn’t sound like much, but that allows apps to stretch across the screen, which makes the phone feel larger. By doing away with shadows and dark colors, the design makes the phone’s screen feel brighter, too.

Interestingly, until this update, among the digital technology community, Apple was losing its reputation for cutting-edge design as competitors like Microsoft experimented.

“From a design standpoint, Apple’s interface became pretty cheesy and predictable,” said Yves Béhar, the founder of Fuseproject, a San Francisco design agency that helped create the low-cost One Laptop Per Child PC and the Jawbone Up wristband health-monitoring device. “It lacked strength and vision.”

Microsoft, which was regularly criticized in recent years for the staid look of its software, has been pushing the design boundaries as it tries to play catch-up in smartphones. In a recent blog post on the company’s Web site, Steve Clayton, a design manager at Microsoft, wrote that company executives finally understood about three years ago that the look of the software was just as important as what the device could do.

The new appearance of the company’s operating system for mobile devices, Windows Phone 7, consists of an array of flat, colorful squares that can be easily moved around on the screen. Though when that tiles-based look was also applied to the Windows 8 PC operating system, some longtime customers complained it was too drastic.

But it has been good for the mobile business.

In the first quarter of 2013, Windows Phone nudged Blackberry to become the third most popular phone operating system globally, according to a report by IDC, a market research firm. Microsoft shipped seven million Windows Phone 7 devices in the first quarter, compared with 6.3 million Blackberry devices. Blackberry is trying to rebound with a new version of its phone with software that has also changed considerably from older versions.

Mr. Béhar said a good software design would always help sell more hardware.

“We are in an era where the 30-second TV ad doesn’t count anymore,” he said. “The product — the smartphone — is its own form of advertising today and a good experience, where people want to spend more time with the product, is what people see.”

E-mail: bilton@nytimes.com

Microsoft Battles Google by Hiring Political Brawler Mark Penn

SEATTLE — Mark Penn made a name for himself in Washington by bulldozing enemies of the Clintons. Now he spends his days trying to do the same to Google, on behalf of its archrival Microsoft.

Since Mr. Penn was put in charge of “strategic and special projects” at Microsoft in August, much of his job has involved efforts to trip up Google, which Microsoft has failed to dislodge from its perch atop the lucrative Internet search market.

Drawing on his background in polling, data crunching and campaigning, Mr. Penn created a holiday commercial that has been running during Monday Night Football and other shows, in which Microsoft criticizes Google for polluting the quality of its shopping search results with advertisements. “Don’t get scroogled,” it warns. His other projects include a blind taste test, Coke-versus-Pepsi style, of search results from Google and Microsoft’s Bing.

The campaigns by Mr. Penn, 58, a longtime political operative known for his brusque personality and scorched-earth tactics, are part of a broader effort at Microsoft to give its marketing the nimbleness of a political campaign, where a candidate can turn an opponent’s gaffe into a damaging commercial within hours. They are also a sign of the company’s mounting frustration with Google after losing billions of dollars a year on its search efforts, while losing ground to Google in the browser and smartphones markets and other areas.

Microsoft has long attacked Google from the shadows, whispering to regulators, journalists and anyone else who would listen that Google was a privacy-violating, anticompetitive bully. The fruits of its recent work in this area could come next week, when the Federal Trade Commission is expected to announce the results of its antitrust investigation of Google, a case that echoes Microsoft’s own antitrust suit in the 1990s. A similar investigation by the European Union is also wrapping up. A bad outcome for Google in either one would be a victory for Microsoft.

But Microsoft, based in Redmond, Wash., has realized that it cannot rely only on regulators to scrutinize Google — which is where Mr. Penn comes in. He is increasing the urgency of Microsoft’s efforts and focusing on their more public side.

In an interview, Mr. Penn said companies underestimated the importance of policy issues like privacy to consumers, as opposed to politicians and regulators. “It’s not about whether they can get them through Washington,” he said. “It’s whether they can get them through Main Street.”

Jill Hazelbaker, a Google spokeswoman, declined to comment on Microsoft’s actions specifically, but said that while Google also employed lobbyists and marketers, “our focus is on Google and the positive impact our industry has on society, not the competition.”

In Washington, Mr. Penn is a lightning rod. He developed a relationship with the Clintons as a pollster during President Bill Clinton’s 1996 re-election campaign, when he helped identify the value of “soccer moms” and other niche voter groups.

As chief strategist for Hillary Clinton’s unsuccessful 2008 campaign for president, he conceived the “3 a.m.” commercial that raised doubts about whether Barack Obama, then a senator, was ready for the Oval Office. Mr. Penn argued in an essay he wrote for Time magazine in May that “negative ads are, by and large, good for our democracy.”

But his approach has ended up souring many of his professional relationships. He left Mrs. Clinton’s campaign after an uproar about his consulting work for the government of Colombia, which was seeking the passage of a trade treaty with the United States that Mrs. Clinton, then a senator, opposed.

“Google should be prepared for everything but the kitchen sink thrown at them,” said a former colleague who worked closely with Mr. Penn in politics and spoke on condition of anonymity. “Actually, they should be prepared for the kitchen sink to be thrown at them, too.”

Hiring Mr. Penn demonstrates how seriously Microsoft is taking this fight, said Michael A. Cusumano, a business professor at M.I.T. who co-wrote a book about Microsoft’s browser war.

“They’re pulling out all the stops to do whatever they can to halt Google’s advance, just as their competition did to them,” Professor Cusumano said. “I suppose that if Microsoft can actually put a doubt in people’s mind that Google isn’t unbiased and has become some kind of evil empire, they might very well get results.”

Nick Wingfield reported from Seattle and Claire Cain Miller from San Francisco.

Microsoft Battles Google by Hiring Political Brawler Mark Penn

SEATTLE — Mark Penn made a name for himself in Washington by bulldozing enemies of the Clintons. Now he spends his days trying to do the same to Google, on behalf of its archrival Microsoft.

Since Mr. Penn was put in charge of “strategic and special projects” at Microsoft in August, much of his job has involved efforts to trip up Google, which Microsoft has failed to dislodge from its perch atop the lucrative Internet search market.

Drawing on his background in polling, data crunching and campaigning, Mr. Penn created a holiday commercial that has been running during Monday Night Football and other shows, in which Microsoft criticizes Google for polluting the quality of its shopping search results with advertisements. “Don’t get scroogled,” it warns. His other projects include a blind taste test, Coke-versus-Pepsi style, of search results from Google and Microsoft’s Bing.

The campaigns by Mr. Penn, 58, a longtime political operative known for his brusque personality and scorched-earth tactics, are part of a broader effort at Microsoft to give its marketing the nimbleness of a political campaign, where a candidate can turn an opponent’s gaffe into a damaging commercial within hours. They are also a sign of the company’s mounting frustration with Google after losing billions of dollars a year on its search efforts, while losing ground to Google in the browser and smartphones markets and other areas.

Microsoft has long attacked Google from the shadows, whispering to regulators, journalists and anyone else who would listen that Google was a privacy-violating, anticompetitive bully. The fruits of its recent work in this area could come next week, when the Federal Trade Commission is expected to announce the results of its antitrust investigation of Google, a case that echoes Microsoft’s own antitrust suit in the 1990s. A similar investigation by the European Union is also wrapping up. A bad outcome for Google in either one would be a victory for Microsoft.

But Microsoft, based in Redmond, Wash., has realized that it cannot rely only on regulators to scrutinize Google — which is where Mr. Penn comes in. He is increasing the urgency of Microsoft’s efforts and focusing on their more public side.

In an interview, Mr. Penn said companies underestimated the importance of policy issues like privacy to consumers, as opposed to politicians and regulators. “It’s not about whether they can get them through Washington,” he said. “It’s whether they can get them through Main Street.”

Jill Hazelbaker, a Google spokeswoman, declined to comment on Microsoft’s actions specifically, but said that while Google also employed lobbyists and marketers, “our focus is on Google and the positive impact our industry has on society, not the competition.”

In Washington, Mr. Penn is a lightning rod. He developed a relationship with the Clintons as a pollster during President Bill Clinton’s 1996 re-election campaign, when he helped identify the value of “soccer moms” and other niche voter groups.

As chief strategist for Hillary Clinton’s unsuccessful 2008 campaign for president, he conceived the “3 a.m.” commercial that raised doubts about whether Barack Obama, then a senator, was ready for the Oval Office. Mr. Penn argued in an essay he wrote for Time magazine in May that “negative ads are, by and large, good for our democracy.”

But his approach has ended up souring many of his professional relationships. He left Mrs. Clinton’s campaign after an uproar about his consulting work for the government of Colombia, which was seeking the passage of a trade treaty with the United States that Mrs. Clinton, then a senator, opposed.

“Google should be prepared for everything but the kitchen sink thrown at them,” said a former colleague who worked closely with Mr. Penn in politics and spoke on condition of anonymity. “Actually, they should be prepared for the kitchen sink to be thrown at them, too.”

Hiring Mr. Penn demonstrates how seriously Microsoft is taking this fight, said Michael A. Cusumano, a business professor at M.I.T. who co-wrote a book about Microsoft’s browser war.

“They’re pulling out all the stops to do whatever they can to halt Google’s advance, just as their competition did to them,” Professor Cusumano said. “I suppose that if Microsoft can actually put a doubt in people’s mind that Google isn’t unbiased and has become some kind of evil empire, they might very well get results.”

Nick Wingfield reported from Seattle and Claire Cain Miller from San Francisco.