Posts Tagged: ken segall

strategy / technology — 5 Comments
1
Jul 10

The brief life of Microsoft Kin

Not a good day for Microsoft Kin

For anyone keeping score, Microsoft’s dual-disaster Kin One and Kin Two phones managed to breathe on their own for a mere 48 days. Not even enough time to have a litter of puppies.

Sources said “disappointing sales.” One can only imagine what those numbers looked like.

It’s not like this comes as a surprise. You could smell disaster in the initial press release. I blogged once about the lunacy initially, and then again when research confirmed that the target audience wasn’t interested. But hey, I was just a singer in the chorus — these phones were ridiculed pretty much everywhere.

The big question is, how does something like this happen? How could Microsoft just put on the blinders and so enthusiastically fling itself off of a cliff?

A favorite pastime among agency people is looking at some of the wretched ads out there and wondering how on earth they ever got through all the internal checkpoints at the agency, and then again at the client. Somehow, unfathomably, blatantly bad ideas don’t always get shot down. In fact, sometimes they are lovingly embraced. Generously, we can call this human error.

But marketers hardly have the exclusive on inexcusable lapses. Hollywood occasionally serves up those delicious combinations of bad casting and bad script — movies that would be instantly rejected by any amateur moviemaker, yet somehow glide from pitch to production to distribution.

So what’s Microsoft’s problem? Untalented managers? Oblivious CEO? Bad research? Engadget is running a story about what happened behind the scenes with Kin, a story that involves a mid-project OS change and a resulting 18-month delay.

Yeah, fine. But I’m sorry, Kin was just bad casting and a bad script. Kin was based on the idea that “young socials” (teens and 20s) would spark to a less-capable phone “made just for them” — when every young person I know is lusting for an iPhone, Droid or whatever. They want text messaging, apps and games — all of which were mysteriously missing in Kin. The one thing they do not want is “My First Sony.”

Inexplicably, Microsoft thought Kin was a good idea. It wasn’t. In fact, it wasn’t even close, which is why it died faster than any product I can remember. For a company in this industry not to recognize the utter wrongness of Kin is even more unforgivable than creating it.

Bookmark and Share
technology — 3 Comments
30
Jun 10

iPhone 4 gets Kubricked

Didn’t take too long for someone to prove iPhone 4 makes a pretty good movie studio. Amazing, considering it will only cost you $199/$299 for the iPhone and $4.99 for iMovie. Well, okay, you do have to spring for the actors… and the composer… and the rigging… and the lighting… and the formalwear for Oscar night… but still.

(See the “making of” video here.)

Bookmark and Share
dell — 4 Comments
29
Jun 10

Dell’s relentless pursuit of profit

There are two ways to make money in the technology business. You can obsess about making great things, and let profit flow as a result — or simply make profit your #1 priority and act accordingly.

My favorite examples of these two extremes, of course, are Apple and Dell. Apple lives or dies by its ability to innovate, while Dell lives or dies by its ability to generate more clicks every quarter. The companies were born for entirely different reasons — and Dell’s DNA is coming back to haunt them.

Yesterday, the New York Times ran an article about a lawsuit against Dell, and the documents that have come to light as a result. I’m not a fan of Dell, but even I felt icky reading this stuff.

Basically, Dell shipped 11.8 million computers between 2003 and 2005 with faulty electrical components that were leaking chemicals. Rather than own up to it, they stooped to the occasion by concealing the problem and putting customers’ businesses at risk. Astonishingly, Dell even tried to sell them more expensive computers to resolve the problem.

As the article states, “The documents chronicling the failure of the PCs also help explain the decline of one of America’s most celebrated and admired companies.” It will leave your head shaking. A few good quotes:

For the last seven years, the company has been plagued by serious problems, including misreading the desires of its customers, poor customer service, suspect product quality and improper accounting. [I continue to be stunned there hasn't been a shareholder revolt.]

A study by Dell found that OptiPlex computers affected by the bad capacitors were expected to cause problems up to 97 percent of the time over a three-year period … Dell hired a contractor to investigate the situation … the contractor found that 10 times more computers were at risk of failing than Dell had estimated. Making problems worse, Dell replaced faulty motherboards with other faulty motherboards… [It's a whole new kind of Ponzi scheme!]

Dell employees went out of their way to conceal these problems. In one e-mail exchange … a Dell worker states, “We need to avoid all language indicating the boards were bad or had ‘issues’ per our discussion this morning.” [Maybe "the boards were electronically challenged"?]

Dell salespeople were told, “Don’t bring this to customer’s attention proactively” and “Emphasize uncertainty.” [Hell yeah, that'll work. People love uncertainty.]

… hundreds of Dell internal documents produced in the lawsuit show a company whose supply chain had collapsed as it failed to find working motherboards for its customers, including the firm representing Dell in the lawsuit, Alston & Bird. [Hey, what are friends for?]

Every company has a culture, and that culture is what guides employees’ thinking. This isn’t the behavior of an isolated few. It’s a group behavior born of an environment where nothing is more important than the numbers. Unfortunately for Dell, the only known cure for such a failure is leadership.

Bookmark and Share
technology — 10 Comments
25
Jun 10

Finally, at long last, iPhone 4

Past midnight, June 24th. I’ve been playing with my new iPhone for a few hours now. Almost as long as I waited in line for it earlier in the day. Some quick thoughts on the challenge of getting an iPhone and the glory of playing with one.

The line. I thought I was so smart choosing an Apple Store that couldn’t possibly be as crowded as the others. Poor, deluded me. This was my first-ever Apple line experience, and it was a whopper. It ended up costing me almost four hours of my life, but I have to say — it was kinda fun. My new friends and I had a jolly time as we inched ever closer to the door.

Why I had to get in line in the first place. Don’t remind me. I would have had a home delivery if it weren’t for the server overloads on reservation day. The only way I could get a reservation was through the Apple Store app, and in-store pickup was the only option there. Please, Apple, no more fiascos like that, okay?

Apple Store staff. I can’t say enough about these guys. They were professional, enthusiastic, fun and seemingly stress-free, despite the thousands who descended upon them. They frequently patrolled the line, offering candy, bottled water and free touches on a new iPhone 4 to whet our appetites. Once inside, I expected to be shuffled through quickly — but instead I was treated like royalty. They explained every detail, answered every question, and just wanted to help in any way possible. They seemed as happy to give me an iPhone as I was to receive it. Kudos to Ron Johnson and the whole Apple retail group.

Retina display. Somehow even more stunning than expected. The on-screen images really do look like they’re floating on the glass. Type is impossibly crisp. This is the most important feature of iPhone — it’s what you see every second you’re using it. And it’s extraordinary.

The antenna issue. I’ve experienced nothing out of the ordinary. We’ll have to see how this one unfolds. But Steve’s “don’t hold it that way” remark isn’t helping.

The bumper. I don’t like cases. I like a phone that easily slips into my pocket, wear and tear be damned. If it turns out that the bumper is required to overcome the antenna issue, $30 is an insult. In fact, if it’s required, I’d like my money back please.

The dock. Are you kidding me? I have to take off the bumper to use the dock? Now I remember the other reason I don’t like cases. Okay, so I need a bumper… pretty sure I need electricity… looks like a lot of bumpering and un-bumpering ahead.

The form factor. Gorgeous. Feels precision-built. Without the curvy backside, I can’t tell which way it’s facing when I reach into my pocket. I’ll get over it.

Sveltness. I know iPhone 4 is 24% thinner. I can see it when I put the two phones side by side. I appreciate it. I just don’t notice it much in use. Probably because weight-wise, it has some heft.

Where’s FaceTime? I tried FaceTime with two people. In both cases, there was confusion about how to get it going. That’s because it’s turned off by default. You have to first turn it on in Preferences. Huh? If this is iPhone 4′s killer feature, shouldn’t it be turned on by default? I imagine a lot of people were searching for it today.

Oh. There’s FaceTime. Astounding. Makes you feel like you just landed in the future. Front and rear cameras are totally cool. Obviously needs to work over 3G as well as wi-fi, but that’s coming. One horrifying omission: you can’t record a FaceTime chat. If you can record a video using the camera, why can’t you record a video chat using the same camera? Imagine if you could do an interview on FaceTime and post it to your web gallery or blog in seconds. Developers to the rescue?

Camera. Yes, it’s true — Flash on an iPhone! Definitely helps in low light. I would rarely use the old camera. This I will definitely use more.

iMovie. Very limited in its tools — but then I’d never criticize Tim Lincecum because he only has three pitches. The fact that iMovie has any pitches at all in this microscopic format is pretty astounding. Just the ability to stitch together your individual video clips is a mini-revolution. (And mini-magic.)

Speed. Thank you, thank you, thank you. Not once did I wish it were faster. I’d really grown weary of the many delays built into previous iPhones. They’re gone.

Last thought. iPhone does more than one can imagine, and excels at virtually everything. I’ll try to remember it’s just a piece of technology. But for now, I’m making sure its screen is sparkly clean and tucking it in for the night.

Bookmark and Share
strategy / technology — 18 Comments
24
Jun 10

Android: thinking different

A little clarification before I ramble about Android: I think it’s great that iPhone has serious competition. Android has improved quickly. I know people who love their Droids and we’re still friends. All is good.

But Android and iPhone have different philosophies, and it’s easy to see why. Each entered the market in entirely different circumstances.

Apple made something that didn’t exist before. It was shocking. It sent all the phone companies back to the drawing board. Google entered the phone market as a result of the iPhone revolution. Their challenge wasn’t “How can we build the best phone in the world?” It was “How can we do battle with iPhone?”

Google clearly saw what they were up against: multi-touch interface, beautiful mobile OS and an App Store with a seemingly insurmountable lead. So they acquired Android. They’d acquired Android in 2005. Now they needed to acquire a guiding philosophy. What they chose was a fairly obvious one:

“We’re not iPhone.”

In effect, Android is Google’s “think different.” Don’t want to get stuck with AT&T? We’re everywhere. Apple too strict with app approvals? No approvals here. No Flash on iPhone? We got it. (Almost.) Only one model of iPhone? Androids abound.

Of course, if you’re an Apple fan you can come up with plenty of reasons why Apple’s approach is superior on all counts (well, maybe not the AT&T part). But that’s not the point. This is marketing. This is Google latching onto some negative perceptions and running with them. And it’s working pretty well for them.

One little problem. When “being different” is your guiding philosophy, “being the best” is not. Your decisions can have unintended consequences. Like this one:

Security vendor SMobile Systems just issued a report saying “as many as 20% of applications on the Android Market let third parties access private or sensitive information.” This includes access to content of email and text messages, user location, etc. Google responds that none of this can happen without the user first approving, but then adds: “we will disable any apps that are found to be malicious.”

Well, that’s the problem with being the anti-Apple. You can shun a process for the sake of being different, but the laws of human behavior dictate that malicious apps will inevitably appear. It’s fabulous that Google will disable them after they’re reported — but I doubt that will comfort those who are victimized before Google notices.

If I were Google, I’d worry about what happens when one of those sneaky apps causes widespread damage before it’s plucked out. That’s when people might start to choose iPhone simply because “it’s not Android.”

Bookmark and Share
strategy / technology — 1 Comment
22
Jun 10

Dancing with Steve Ballmer

Confession: I have a secret fascination with Steve Ballmer.

Certainly not because he’s any kind of visionary. I just find it fascinating to watch the charisma-challenged CEO perform his dance with words, putting a spin on things that are no longer very spinnable.

I thought I knew the man pretty well by now, but I did have a revelation watching this CNN Money interview. Ballmer will spin his little heart out — but he does some serious cogitation in an attempt to avoid the big fib. In fact, he resists the temptation even when the Microsoft-friendly interviewer lobs a softball to which he need only reply, “Yes.” You can see his brain working hard not to say the thing that will haunt him later.

Here are are some of my favorite moments from his exchange with interviewer Poppy Harlow (who has one of the greatest names in journalism).

Poppy: You are pretty confident about where you’re going in mobile. Can you win in mobile?
Ballmer: We can do very well in mobile.

[Geez. The lady just said you had confidence. Show some!]

Ballmer: The first step is to go from declining to growing. I think we’ll do a nice job of that.

[One moment please. I’m having an inspiration overload.]

Ballmer: We have a very well, kind of, received at least, by, uh, what we call the blogosphere [ah, so that was yours — catchy!], a very well received product in Windows Phone 7 which ships this year — WHOOSH! — and we’ll take off from there.

[Right. “Well received,” but unshipped, and with no firm date set. Nice job with the sound effect too. Even Steve Jobs doesn’t do this.]

Poppy: Looking at making the technology behind the phones, but not the phones themselves — that’s the right move, that’s the way to go?
Ballmer: Well that’s where we are [this brazen talk must end!], and it certainly has served us very well in the PC business, and we’re driving ahead in phones.

[When in doubt, cling to the PC model. “The people” love that.]

Poppy: What’s your hope for phones that use Microsoft technology?
Ballmer: We’ll give people choices … one of the advantages of the PC ecosystem — PC and now the phone — is to give people a range of choice.

Well, Steve, you know I’m not going to give up on you. But honestly, you need to change a couple of things. First, you should drop this bit about phones being just like PCs. If they were, Microsoft would be leading the charge and Apple would be insignificant. Second, it’s not nearly enough to stand for “offering choice.” Apple offered choice to an existing smartphone market. The League of Android gave people umpteen more choices. We still have BlackBerry and others. We’ve got choices out the wazoo.

If you’d like to show up at the party (three years late), you’ll need more than a tired slogan. Try making a phone people can get excited about.

Bookmark and Share
advertising / strategy / technology — 4 Comments
17
Jun 10

Welcome, iAds … maybe

One juicy part of the new iOS platform is iAds. Presented with much fanfare, iAds let developers put ads inside their apps, so people can plunge into an ad without leaving the app. Apple owns a burgeoning new in-app ad market, and developers own a new revenue stream.

Only one flaw with this plan: we have to look at the ads. In the frenzy over all the money this will make — for developers and for Apple — it’s easy to forget a basic fact of marketing. Nobody actually likes ads.

I’m reminded of the project briefs that were handed out to creative teams at one of my previous agencies. Every brief started with the same paragraph, which went something like this:

The customers don’t like you. They didn’t invite you in. They resent the intrusion. They wish you’d just go away. Now then … what were you going to say to them?

My point is, ads aren’t exactly the #1 draw in customers’ minds.

Sure, ads help make the world go ’round. But they’re also the number one cause of distraction and clutter. It’s not just you and me who think ads get in the way. Apple thinks it too. One of the coolest new features in Safari 5 is Reader — which allows the reader to strip the ads out of articles, making them easier to read.

So on one hand, Apple creates a whole new way to get ads into our lives. On the other, they create a whole new way to take ads out of our lives.

This gives my inner cynic a lot to work with.

First there’s the fact that Apple takes a cool 40% cut on every iAd, while they have zero financial interest in the ads Safari strips away. Second, there’s the perception that the iAd platform is so cool, the ads will be cool. Uh, right. And then there’s the idea that the added revenue from iAds will help developers keep their app prices down, or even make them free. Don’t hold your breath for that one.

Mind you, I’m not complaining — just pointing out some sobering truths. Ads are a fact of life, and Apple has done a great job of creating a rich platform they can control and profit by. I just don’t expect to be squealing with delight as iAds begin to sprout up across all my favorite apps.

Bookmark and Share
strategy / technology — 5 Comments
14
Jun 10

Dell exposes itself in public

In case anyone missed the news, Dell is entering the tablet market — sort of — with a mini-5-inch touchscreen device called the Streak.

The name is actually perfect. Just as “streakers” used to run through public places stark naked, the Streak does a darn good job of exposing the real Dell: a company that wishes it could innovate, but lacks a few essential ingredients.

Let’s back up a bit to fully appreciate this one. We’ve got phones and we’ve got laptops. Apple just shook things up by putting a brand new product — iPad — in that space between a phone and laptop.

Now Dell comes along and puts the Streak in some imagined space between a phone and an iPad. Might they next put a product between a phone and the Streak? With a little luck, this could go on forever.

The Streak is too big to be a good phone and too small to be a good tablet. It is truly the Dell version of innovation — a faint echo of someone else’s good idea.

Dell’s problem is that they’re not an innovator, they’re a money-making machine. And unfortunately, they’re a money-making machine that doesn’t make any money. The revolution they created — the direct sales model — has long since been bettered by others. With an almost invisible profit margin, they can only make money when they sell products by the zillion. And that’s not so easy these days.

“If only we could be seen as an innovator,” Dell thinks, “then people would be willing to pay more for our products.” Bingo. That’s Apple’s not-so-secret secret. But wishing you could be an innovator doesn’t make you one. Dell has been wishing for a few years now, and all we get are wild colors for our laptops, me-too smart phones and a super-thin computer that costs too much and impresses too little.

What Dell really needs is a product that will stand out from their current product line. By all appearances, the Streak is going to fit right in.

Bookmark and Share
apple news / naming / technology — 9 Comments
9
Jun 10

Welcome, iPhone 4

Despite the lost prototype fiasco, I thought the iPhone 4 intro was still pretty darn interesting. Guess there’s a bit of a difference between Gizmodo ripping the cover off and Steve Jobs walking us through the features. Some quick reactions to the phone, the event and the marketing:

A4 processor. Thank you! If iPhone performance = iPad performance, I will be euphoric.

24% thinner. Excellent. I hereby cease secretly envying my son’s iPod touch.

FaceTime, the technology. Totally love it. Dual switchable cameras and no-setup software are so very Apple. And tremendously cool.

FaceTime, the video. Anyone notice that Apple seems to be getting sappier as it gets bigger? I miss the edgier stuff. Whatever, maybe I know too much about how ads get made for my own good. Since the phone isn’t shipping yet, I assume we’re looking at actors from central casting getting misty-eyed on cue. But that’s just me.

iPhone 4, the video. Polished and professional. But, as noted in the past, these launch videos have become formulaic. Same cast of characters, familiar hyperbole. Wish they’d stray just once to prove it can be done. Apple = creativity.

The Glitch. It’s a shame, but meaningless in the end. Once, when Bill Gates publicly suffered a horrible tech problem on stage, we agency mischief-makers turned it into a 30-second ad for Apple. Steve wasn’t interested. “This stuff happens to all of us,” he said. Let’s see if the courtesy is returned.

Renaming the OS. In a post back at launch time, I thought it odd that something called iPhone OS would power things that weren’t phones. That mismatch is indicative of the thinking in effect when the moniker was selected. This was just a no-brainer — with three i-devices running the same OS, the new name is perfect. iOS forever.

Retina Display. Can’t wait to see it in person.

5-Megapixel Camera. Pixels aren’t everything, but all the camera improvements together should bump up the quality nicely. I may actually start using this camera.

iMovie. I love surprises. iMovie for iPhone was a good one. In glorious 30fps 720p. Well done.

Unified Mailbox. Good lord, what took you so long.

Folders. My app screens had become agonizingly complicated. Much appreciated.

iBookstore. Will please many, but not me. I’ve tried to read on an iPhone and it’s too damn tiny. If the gods meant us to read on iPhone, they would never have given us iPad.

Bookmark and Share
technology — 5 Comments
7
Jun 10

Battle of the Steves

"PCs in greater and greater number"

Probably the last thing this world needs is a demonstration of the difference between Steve Jobs and Steve Ballmer. Nonetheless, we got a pretty good one at the D8 Conference.

One of Jobs’ more interesting moments was his view of the PC’s future. He noted that trucks were largely replaced by cars only when cars sprouted consumer amenities. We still need trucks, but not for as many things. Similarly, we will continue to need PCs, but not for as many things. Tablet-like devices will just make most things so much easier.

Seems pretty obvious.

Then comes Ballmer’s interview. His duty, of course, is to disagree with Jobs. Hearing Mossberg’s summary of Jobs’ statement, Ballmer jumps in. “People will be using PCs in greater and greater number for many years to come,” he says, but “I think PCs will continue to shift in form factors.” He goes on talking about changes in “semiconductor infrastructure” (now he’s talking our language) to support Windows in different devices, and so on.

Aha. So iPads won’t rule the world. PCs will still be around, but in a different form. Mossberg presses Ballmer by asking if the iPad is actually a PC by this argument, to which Ballmer says, “of course it is.”

So what’s Ballmer’s point again? He’s basically just agreed with Jobs that future devices will take different forms than conventional PCs. He’s just insisting that we continue to call them PCs. Now that’s leadership.

Personally, I wish politicians and corporate executives would learn that being human is more important than disagreeing with their competitors. Ballmer would score more points if he simply said, “I don’t disagree with what Steve Jobs said on this stage. New devices will obviously take over many of the PC’s functions, and Microsoft is working hard to build this future.” He could always hope nobody mentions the now-abandoned Courier project.

My point is that disagreeing for the sake of disagreeing is conventional, uninspiring and pointless. If Microsoft wants to help build the future, they’re not going to do it by clinging to words like “PC.”

Bookmark and Share
← Older Entries
Newer Entries →