Technology

Strategy / Technology — 5 Comments
26
Feb 10

Battle of the androids

Now now, Google - play nice

Back when Google launched its Nexus One phone, I thought it was odd that Google had chosen to compete with its own partners.

It’s interesting that after the Droid (the best Android phone) came the Nexus One (the best Android phone), and now, just announced at the Mobile World Congress, we have HTC’s Desire (the best Android phone). And yes, that’s the same HTC that builds Google’s Nexus One.

Of course on one level this is a silly thing to point out. After all, hundreds of PCs run Windows, and the fact is some PCs are better than others for a hundred different reasons. That’s called choice. The only difference is that Microsoft does not manufacture PCs. They don’t serve up the “best” version of the same product they’re asking their partners to make. That’s called evil.

Absolutely, competition is good. Customers benefit as the various Android-makers try to outdo each other with new reasons to buy their own devices. But for all of Google’s “partners,” there is something extremely unholy about competing with the guy who controls the OS your product depends on, and knows every new feature that’s on the drawing board.

It hurts a little to see Google move in this direction. We were all rooting for them for so long. The brainiest, coolest company out there. This is starting to feel like the end of the movie, when we find out that the least likely person in the room turns out to be the serial killer.

Strategy / Technology — 4 Comments
19
Feb 10

Apps of the world, unite

The Mobile World Congress met in Barcelona this week. Think of it as the United Nations of mobile technology companies — with about as much ability to influence world events as the real United Nations.

The biggest deal coming out of the 2010 Congress was “App Planet.” The idea was to lay out a vision for unified standards that would make life better for developers and customers. The official website says: By pulling all the key players together in one place at one time, we will make App Planet the new Centre of the Apps Universe for the four days of Mobile World Congress.

Only problem: key player #1 — Apple — did not attend the conference. So it seems that the real point of Planet Of The Apps was to do collectively what no one has been able to do alone: create a credible challenge to Apple’s world-leading app platform. If nothing else, it allowed 200 companies to take some time off from brutalizing each other in the normal course of business.

Given the importance of App Planet to this gathering, it surprised many when Steve Jobs was named recipient of the Congress’s Mobile Personality of the Year Award. Yes, the same Steve Jobs who will never in a million years support the global app standards being developed by this brotherly group. I guess they just like his personality.

It’s not like they didn’t have the chance to honor one of their own. The nominees beaten by Steve Jobs were the bigshots of the planetary app movement: Eric Schmidt (CEO, Google), Mike Lazaridis (co-CEO, Research In Motion) and Pete Chou (CEO, HTC). Apple sent no one to collect the award, indicating their respect for this particular honor.

I really don’t have anything against technology companies banding together to move things forward. I just think it’s safe to say that if any of the participating companies were in Apple’s position today, they’d be as far away from this Congress as possible — even if it meant not being on hand to pick up the Mobile Personality of the Year award.

Strategy / Technology — 10 Comments
17
Feb 10

Android: desperately seeking numbers

Quantity again stalks its old nemesis, quality

Hard to believe iPhone ever existed without apps, isn’t it? Especially since apps have become the biggest differentiator between Apple and its competitors. At last count, iPhone boasted about 150,000 apps to Android’s 20,000.

(Ironic that Apple should wield such a lopsided advantage here, since it was stuck on the pathetic side of the app equation in the early days of the PC wars.)

So what do you do if your mission in life is to get Android’s numbers closer to iPhone’s? Well, one quick fix is to simply lower your standards. Even better, you can nix your standards altogether.

Sensing opportunity when critics started attacking Apple for its flawed app approval process, Android simply did away with those pesky approvals. You develop ’em, they’ll sell ’em. Power to the people.

Once the giddiness subsides, however, reality sinks in. If you think Apple’s huge library of apps contains a few clunkers, wait till you see what qualifies for sale in the Android Market. Without a vetting process, they’re not just welcoming bad apps. They’re welcoming nasty apps. Even outright dangerous apps. But they sure are pumping up the numbers.

Maybe Apple isn’t so big-brotherly after all? Maybe there’s something to be said for that quaint idea of quality control — for letting customers buy with a degree of confidence.

The fact is, the App Store is not perfect. No one’s ever sold software on this scale before, and surely Apple will make some mistakes along the way. I do hope they invent ways to make the approvals process more fair — but I’m grateful they have an approvals process in the first place.

Strategy / Technology — 7 Comments
16
Feb 10

Ain’t so easy this time

This one may take a little work

Some people look at iPad and see the future. Others radiate less happy thoughts, ranging from “ho hum” to “major dud.”

Gee. Whatever happened to that air of inevitability, that “instant hit” thing that came along with iPod and iPhone?

Personally, I believe iPad will shake things up in a hundred different ways. But even those who agree with me can’t escape the feeling that something is different this time around. That avalanche of positive vibes didn’t quite materialize.

Two reasons for this:

For starters, iPad isn’t here yet. It’s a bit hard to judge this kind of technology by analyzing specs. Multiple multitouches are required.

Far more important: market conditions for iPad are strikingly different from those encountered by iPod and iPhone.

iPod actually sneaked in the back door. Music players were becoming popular, but the category was leaderless and uninspired. Apple swooped in with its irresistible combination of fun, cool and easy.

iPhone’s entrance was the antithesis of this. Thanks to iPod’s success, iPhone was hotly anticipated. This time the category was filled with heavyweights — but the natives were restless and anxious for something better. The competition awaited Apple’s entrance, then started copying their little hearts out. Droid, Storm, Pre, none of them would exist were it not for iPhone.

iPad faces entirely different circumstances. It was also hotly anticipated, but given the success of iPhone’s touch technology and the App Store, it wasn’t too hard to figure out where Apple was headed. A legion of competitors has met iPad with new ideas for netbooks, tablets and hybrids. The fact that some are in concept form is made less pitiful by the fact that iPad isn’t a real product yet either.

Google's take: looks cool, but still vaporous

HP has a neat idea, Google is previewing tablet concepts, the JooJoo tablet is making some waves, and Microsoft continues to taunt us with its Courier tablet.

Apple’s competitors are not uninspired — they’re duly inspired by Apple’s previous successes and motivated never to let such a nasty thing happen again. Though the odds are that it will — simply because Apple continues to enjoy its multi-part unfair advantage:

• Great design/superior software
• The world’s undying attention
• Far better marketing
• 150,000 apps
• A sea of developers chomping at the bit to get in on iPad’s ground floor

Looking forward to all of this becoming less theoretical in the coming months…

Technology — 5 Comments
9
Feb 10

Human enslavement alert!

As a card-carrying technology fan, I am duty-bound to be fascinated by robots. However, I do find myself getting a little jaded by the frenetic pace of robotic invention. In the last year alone, I’ve seen robots walk, jog, fly, roll, even perform as teachers and fashion models. Hell, they just had a Heineken Bot serving beer at a recent fair in London. But even in this state of C3POverload, I had to raise an eyebrow last week.

In two separate leaps, our robot friends became both scarier and sluttier. This probably brings us that much closer to the first Cylon uprising, but I see no reason to dwell on the negative. In fact, while we still have our freedom, there’s much to admire.

BigDog: just don't let him sleep on your bed

Starting with the creepy, there is BigDog. This is a four-legged robot developed for the military by Boston Dynamic. BigDog can travel over any surface, even jump like a horse (should work well in military parades). In principle, however, BigDog is really just Mule 2.0. Its mission is to carry 400 pounds of gear for our troops. As a pleasant side-effect, it will also scare the living daylights out of any enemy who might be watching. Think mutant horse buzzing like a giant mosquito. If you can deal with the bad dreams, don’t miss BigDog’s video. (Friendly tip: wash it down immediately with the BigDog parody.)

Roxxxy: in certain ways, creepier than BigDo

The other breakthrough was unveiled at that hotbed of scientific invention, Adult Entertainment Expo in Las Vegas. This robot’s name is Roxxxy, and she’s designed to… well, let’s just say she’s an easy conquest. Billed as the world’s most sophisticated talking sex robot, Roxxxy is 5′7″, 120 pounds, equipped with voice recognition, conversational ability and five different personalities (just like many of our real-life mates). A male version, Rocky, is in the works.

At $7,000, Roxxxy is far more affordable than BigDog, but you really shouldn’t make this decision based on money. I get the feeling that in the end, Roxxxy is the kind who might just break your heart.

Naming / Technology — 3 Comments
2
Feb 10

Suing Apple for fun and profit

Fujitsu iPad: no multitouch — just multibutton

Take that, Apple. Turns out Fujitsu makes an iPad too. And by my count, it has 24 more buttons than yours. Okay, so their touchscreen is a tad smaller (3.5 inches), but they did start selling this little eyesore long before iPad was a twinkle in your eye (2002). Their lawyers are currently huddling to consider a lawsuit.

Meanwhile, they’re talking tough in China too.

Hey Apple! You stole our design!

Shenzhen Great Loong Brother Industrial Co., Ltd. believes iPad is way too similar to their magical P88 Tablet PC — which itself looks way too similar to Apple’s iPhone. “We don’t understand,” says company executive Huang Xiaofang, “why did they make the same thing as us?” Some mysteries may never be solved. Yet they’re considering a lawsuit as well.

But wait, there’s more.

Sorry, it's just so confusing

Lingerie maker Coconut Grove Pads owns the right to market iPad-brand padded bras — so they’re a bit shaken by Apple’s new baby too. And they may have a case. One can only imagine the loss of income these guys would suffer as confused bra shoppers accidentally purchase an Apple iPad instead.

How times have changed. In days of old (AAPL @ $14), there just wasn’t much incentive to sue Apple. There’s only so much blood you can squeeze from a stone. But man, that $29 billion in cash reserves today looks pretty darn appetizing.

I do hope the courts find no merit in these cases. It would totally pop my bubble if I were to discover that Jony Ive found his inspiration on Shenzhen Great Loong Brother Industrial Co.’s website.

Strategy / Technology — 12 Comments
1
Feb 10

iPad: joining the revolution-in-progress

We now return to the revolution — already in progress

Now that I’ve done the research, I’ve narrowed it down to two possibilities. Apple has either (a) created another technology masterpiece, or (b) suffered its most humiliating failure.

The sad fact is, months of over-hype force an instant response. Not enough “new” = disappointment. Attack on the mother ship = knee-jerk defense.

Now that we’ve had a chance to sleep it off, I think we should look at the forest, not the tree. iPad isn’t a revolution in itself — it’s actually Part III of a revolution that started seven years ago. Some of its most important features came well before the hype began.

Apple started down this path with iPod. That’s when the company demonstrated its ability to combine software genius and gorgeous design — and immediately grabbed a 70% market share. iPod was technology you could fall in love with, small enough to fit in your pocket. At the start, it was all about music. Then it matured with photos, movies, podcasts, radio and TV shows.

iPhone was Part II of the revolution. Adding phone and Internet to iPod’s capabilities, the pocket device was now a full-fledged computer. It just didn’t feel like one. The spectacular advance was the multitouch screen, which gave us a whole new way to interact. Competing against a legion of high-powered villains, iPhone was an instant success — because its technology matched up so well with human behavior. Then came the App Store, which gave iPhone and iPod an advantage of monolithic proportions.

At this point, all the pieces were in place: advanced OS, multitouch screen, intuitive interface, Internet, email, music, movies and 140,000 apps. No need to think about file systems, viruses, all those ancient concerns — you could just do what you want to do. For a great many people, iPod/iPhone had become all the computer they really need, except for one thing. It was all in miniature. Cue Part III of the revolution. iPad is the life-size version of the technology that the world’s already fallen in love with. And I suspect it’s a device whose potential may be seriously underestimated.

“Where are the new killer features?” iPod and iPhone have already laid the groundwork for iPad, so yes, parts of it feel familiar. This is both a strength and a weakness. The theory is that the features people already know and love are far more scintillating in the new iPad format. Hard to say until the product ships. One thing we do know: with a bigger screen, more powerful processor and even more responsive multitouch, iPad developers will be having the time of their lives.

“It’s just an oversized iPod touch.” Well, yeah. And that’s the reason iPad has the potential to change everything. iPod touch and iPhone offer a tiny window (literally) into a potentially world-changing way of computing. iPad is built on the same foundation — but blows away the limitations.

“No multitasking? What a joke.” Maybe yes, maybe no. Apple is creating a less complicated, more interactive world. They’re handing us a beautiful screen on which we can easily communicate, watch, listen, share, browse and create. Obviously iPad will continue to evolve. I expect multitasking will appear to some degree soon — and naturally we’ll see bigger screens and faster processors. There’s also that “little” matter of the global revolution in magazines and newspapers we were expecting.

Oh, and don’t go thinking that Part III is the revolution’s finale. By the time it’s over, we’ll be well conditioned for Part IV — at which time the whole idea of laptops and desktops may start to change.

If you’re interested, Andy Ihnatko had a good, level-headed review in the Chicago Sun-Times following his personal interaction with iPad at the launch event.

Naming / Strategy / Technology — 29 Comments
28
Jan 10

iPad: the day after

First the Jesus phone, now this?

Some stream-of-consciousness thoughts about yesterday’s launch of iPad:

Understatement of the day. CNN included this statement in their pre-event coverage: Apple CEO Steve Jobs is said to have taken an active role in the development of the company’s rumored tablet device.

The name iPad. It had been growing on me prior to launch. Back-rationalizing aside (or is that back-pedaling?), there’s a lot of logic to it. My idealized version of Apple just isn’t quite so logical. The good news is: the name is short, heavily branded and looks damn good on the device. Remember, names are only scrutinized at the beginning. After that, they’re just names. (Google? Get out.) And yes, this does give our little friend i a new lease on life.

Home-grown processor. A double big deal. Those who played with iPad after the show reported that it’s wicked fast. Even better, Apple makes the A4 processor themselves. That’s a ton cheaper than buying it from Intel, and clearly the main reason it’s as affordable as it is. Good name, too. I can just imagine the conversation. “It’s Apple’s first processor, so let’s call it A1.” “Nah, doesn’t sound very advanced. A4 is three generations faster.”

Leaks hurt. When product details leaked in advance of past Macworld shows, the event never seemed quite as exciting. Yesterday felt a bit like that — because so much about iPad had been rumored or predicted with fair accuracy. iPhone looked nothing like the rumors had it.

Professional jealousy. I know from experience that all this fanfare and anticipation often grates on other technology companies. “5% of the market share, 95% of the PR,” they moan. Hey, nothing’s stopping Dell from holding a major press event to announce their newest Inspiron.

User switching. iPad feels like the perfect device to keep on the coffee table for the whole family to use. So how does email work when you pass the device to another user? Log off/log on? Fast user switching? Just curious.

Category overload. Steve took special care to present iPad as a third category of product, positioned between iPhone and MacBook. He even concluded the show by asking “do we have what it takes to establish a third category of products?” I get that. Not to be a stickler, but Steve did introduce iPhone three years ago as Apple’s third category of products. Those are the product tabs currently on apple.com (Mac, iPod, iPhone). So how many categories of product does Apple now sell? Three or four? Will the tabs on the website change, or does iPad join forces with iPhone? (Even though it is actually more similar to iPod touch.)

Multitasking. Missing in action. Big problem. Especially when even Droid is out there multitasking its little heart out. iPad runs zillions of apps — but only one at a time. Fix, please.

No camera. Big problem #2. How can you have offer such a natural, trend-setting, socially-minded device without the ability to video chat? Probably some physical reason why, but Apple has bent the laws of physics before.

Where’s iLife ’10? Okay, so I was wrong about this prediction. But now that I am humbled, I do remember how Mac OS X was once delayed for six months because Apple’s software resources were focused on developing iPhone. We have to remember that Apple isn’t Microsoft. (Like that’s tough to remember.) They don’t have thousands of programmers. When they have a major challenge, it’s all-hands-on-deck time. Maybe we’ll get a new iLife by spring? I will continue to predict until I get it right.

Apple logo. Is that big Apple logo on the back facing the right way? It’s correct in portrait position, but it’s sideways in landscape position. The images on apple.com seem to be a 50-50 mix of vertical and horizontal orientation, so there is no right or wrong here. I think it’s time for the world’s first accelerometer-based swiveling logo.

Questionable icon. My eyes, my eyes. What’s with the iBooks icon? Click the right arrow on the iPad Gallery page to see the icon lineup. They’re all colorful and beautifully designed — until you get to iBooks. It’s Zune brown, and feels a few decades behind. Can we send that one back?

Overall: iPad has a lot to love, but nirvana is still up the road apiece. But that’s not necessarily a bad thing — Apple’s starting point is light years beyond the other guys’ ending point.

Strategy / Technology — 42 Comments
27
Jan 10

Welcome, iPad

Hello, iPad — what took you so long?

Damn, I love the smell of new technology in the morning. Now the smoke has cleared, iPad is among us and the conversation can get even more intense — because we’re talking reality, not theory.

For some, the product can never live up to the hype. Personally, I love this thing. I want one now. I have no doubt it will play a huge role in defining how we interact with our technology well into the future. However, I do think Apple left vital parts of its body unshielded, and will suffer some hits for it.

I have one major disappointment.

I was really expecting Steve to be in his best revolutionary form today. Maybe a reference to the fact that the print industry hasn’t changed in principle all that much since Gutenberg; that every day we print millions of tons of paper only to see it thrown away at night; that Apple has now developed the technology to bring magazines and newspapers to vibrant life, in a way that will ignite a new era of publishing. I expected him to have the CEOs of the major publishing companies and booksellers on stage at the scene to talk about how iPad will create a revolution in print — just as iPod created a revolution in music.

Sports Illustrated has had a demo of their tablet-ized magazine on YouTube for quite a while now, and it gives us a glimpse of the new world.

We didn’t see this revolution today. The NY Times demo was almost off-handed in the scope of things. For all the rumors about Apple being in talks with the major publishing companies, we saw none of that.

So count me in for an iPad, because there’s an awful lot of fun built into it, ready to go. I’ll be here, with a full 10-hour charge, anxiously waiting for the real revolution to arrive.

Naming / Strategy / Technology — 13 Comments
26
Jan 10

’Twas the night before tablet…

Almost showtime

Only a few hours till T-Day. I’ll be damned if I’m going to be left out when they count all the blogs that hyped the tablet today. Just a few miscellaneous observations:

Steve. Everyone is so focused on the tablet, nobody’s even mentioned Steve’s health lately. But the Steve-watch will be back in the news, for sure. Expect many reports to start with “A healthier-looking Steve Jobs took the stage today to announce…” At least I hope they do.

Ressurection. For those who think Apple might recycle the Newton or iBook names — forget it. Impossible to imagine Apple naming a thoroughly new device after a thoroughly dead device. Remember also, there are still lots of iBooks out there. How confusing would that be? I’m crossing my fingers for something more imaginative, but the Vegas oddsmakers are heavy on iSlate. iPad is making a late surge around the home stretch.

To i or not to i. Keep an eye on that pesky little letter — for the future starts here. Should the tablet escape without an i, it will be a good indication of where things are going. If the i sucks the tablet into its orbit, assume we’ll be living with it for the rest of our natural lives.

Collateral damage. Black-and-white e-readers, anyone? I’m sure you’ll see some great deals real soon.

The warm-up act. I believe we’ll see more than the tablet tomorrow. We’ll need a major iTunes Store update to present all the new media that will be available there. It’s time for the annual iLife update too. After Steve shows us how magazines will reinvent themselves on the tablet, imagine if he shows us a fantastic new way to share our lives. Use the new features in iLife to create your own “magazine” with words, pictures and videos. It may even call for a new iLife app. iMag? iPub? iNews?

Unfathomably moronic. Rob Enderle says the venue for the announcement indicates that Apple wants to “distance itself from this offering,” as if it’s “a product the company isn’t that sure of.” I had no idea human beings were even capable of such dribble.

Macworld who? Just a year ago we were sobbing over Apple’s rejection of Macworld. We’re better now. Way better. Didn’t exactly seem to hurt the buzz factor, did it?

That’s it. No more tablet talk till we see the whites of its eyes. Enjoy the show.

← Older Entries