Thanks for the catches. You're right there were some sloppy errors in this post and I apologize. I write these things myself. We don't have editors. As for the rest, you're entitled to your opinion, but I think the rest reads fine.
Thanks for stopping by.
Ron
In a very interesting read in BusinessWeek last week, writer Peter Burrows describes what he sees as the start of war between Apple and Google with the big prize being the Mobile Ad market.
Burrows further speculates that it's possible this could escalate to the point where Apple will make Bing its default search engine on the iPhone. Hard to know whether this will happen, and if consumers would stand for it, but it certainly could mark a new chapter in the ever-shifting alliances among Google, Apple and Microsoft.
Each Company Has Its Strengths
Google is a search and ad company. As such in any play that involves advertising, Google should have the advantage. But Apple has its App Store and a growing eco system of developers and applications. There are more than 100,000 applications available today in the App Store, a number that dwarfs any similar venture, including the one for Android. It's hard to imagine Google ever catching up in this regard.
Meanwhile, while Google worked with HTC to create what looks like a feature rich phone, it's never going to be able to compete with iPhone. In fact, Flurry reported in a blog post last week Google sold an embarrassing 20,000 Nexus Ones the first week out. Even when you combine the big three Android phone releases this year--the Nexus One, MyTouch and Droid--first week sales only add up to 330,330 units sold the first week.
…
Across04:
I don't agree. All it takes is a the new guy to catch the cell phone buying public's fancy and the phones will sell. Cell phones are very much a fad device and people will switch quickly. Don't forget we are also talking about an expanding worldwide market. There's always going to be room for one more phone, so long as it's innovative and fun and captures the buying public's imagination.
Thanks for you comment.
Ron
Michael:
Could be, but I'm thinking Google has to be very disappointed with these initial figures and I still maintain that a web-only sales model is a bad idea. People want to see and feel a phone before they buy and this method doesn't allow that.
Thanks for your comment.
Ron
The day that Google announced its Nexus One retail strategy, I wrote a post pulling no punches that I thought it was a horrible idea. If first week sales figures are any indication, I am being proven right. What's more, Google appears to be cannibalizing their own ad space to prop up the sluggish phone sales.
Ads Are Their Bread and Butter
Yesterday as I made my way around the web looking at articles where Adsense buys appear, I noticed a trend. Nexus One phone ads dominated, meaning they are using one of the most profitable parts of their business to prop up one that is clearly under performing.
When I pointed out the ad sales conundrum on Twitter, a friend responded out they are free for Google, which is true of course. But the real issue is that this is ad space they could be selling and making money. As I've pointed out more than once in this space, Google's prime business is search and AdSense income. Anything that has a negative impact on these primary business objectives is in my view bad for Google's bottom line.
A Closer Look at the Numbers
MobileBeat has a nice chart showing first week sales figures for several major cell phone releases. Google sold 20,000 Nexus Ones. Compare that with 250,000 Droids sold the first week by Verizon. When you consider the huge release party they held for the press and …
Office 2010 awaits us later this year, and I've been wondering what it could possibly offer customers that would compel us to buy or upgrade to this software. Office software in general progressed about as far as most of us needed it to go somewhere in the 90s. Since then it's been race to add the most bells and whistles, most of which go unused. That's why I was surprised when I saw this InformationWeek article about record downloads of Office 2010 beta software.
In spite of this news, I believe with an ever-increasing number of low-cost and free alternatives, it seems as though in 2010 Microsoft might be at the cross-roads with its Office Suite.
A Look Back At the Last Release
When Microsoft decided to overhaul the Office interface in 2007 by switching from a menu/toolbar interface to the ribbon interface, I was highly skeptical. The result was taking what was fuzzy and familiar and giving us something new. Change in itself is not necessarily a bad thing, but as I wrote in a review at the time, I felt they sacrificed usability at the alter of design orthodoxy. In an effort to make it completely new, they moved and shifted things in a way that didn't make sense to me just to fit with the new philosophy.
Competitors Everywhere
In 2010, it's probably going to be less about design, and more about the growing number of free and …
RaLeon:
That's a big problem and they keep changing how they do it constantly and not always for the better.
Thanks for reading.
Ron
InsightsDigital:
I'm right there with you, but they make it harder and harder to do that, and as you point out, the latest version doesn't even provide us with a way to protect a whole list of user data. It's precisely this growing list of unprotected data that troubles me and makes me long for a reasonable alternative to FB.
Thanks for the comment.
Ron
Canadafred:
That's right. I had read that and I completely agree with your assessment. The US will probably be the last place to regulate companies like Google and Facebook. It will continue to be the EU and Canada (and other countries) leading the way on user data privacy.
Thanks for commenting.
Ron
Interesting and that would be fine for US citizens, but what you say makes sense. I know the EU has much tighter privacy standards than the US currently does. I wonder how they get away with this there. But my point is we have the power now by speaking with our feet (so to speak). We just need a reasonable alternative.
Thanks for your comment.
Ron
Yesterday ReadWriteWeb reported that Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg told TechCrunch's Michael Arrington people are not only OK with publicly exposing certain information on the open web such as their pictures and pages they subscribe to, Zuckerberg believes they are ready to give up privacy.
Really Mark?!
Amy Pohler and Seth Meyer of SNL used to do a regular segment called "Really!?!" This is one of those "Really" moments. Really?! Mark, have you ever talked to an actual Facebook user? Really?!
Oh, people definitely want to control their information, Mark, really. The question that hangs out there is what we can do about it?
It's All So Confusing?
So many things trouble me about Facebook it's hard to know where to start, but they regularly change the interface and configuration tools. Even fairly knowledgeable users like myself are constantly challenged by this. I know I get lots of questions from friends and relatives about Facebook, and even though I'm a regular user, I often have to figure it out to find out the answer. It makes me wonder sometimes if they are deliberately trying to confuse the user base.
And What Do You Think They are Doling With That Data
Even if they aren't trying to mess with the users on purpose, the result is often the same as if they were. People are quick to complain about Google and how they may or may not use information, but …
It's always exciting to hear about new technology like the tablet, and the idea of a new Apple tablet is one that sets us all aglow. But while we wait seemingly endlessly for Apple to come through (or not) with its long-rumored product, other manufacturers are flirting with the same idea, and it has me wondering why we need a new device category like tablets at all--beyond short-term technology titillation. Not only that, we've seen a similar device in the past and it turned out, nobody wanted it.
Is There a Compelling Need?
We aren't really looking for another form factor are we? We have smart phones in our pockets and if we want a keyboard and reasonable screen size we have Netbooks, which are ultra-portable and incredibly cheap. With the combination of these two items, do we really, really need a third category to step into the fray? I'm not so sure.
What Will We Do With Them?
Presumably the new tablets will be aimed at non-business users and be used for eBook reading, watching TV and movies and of course playing games. Now, you certainly could argue that a Netbook is a lousy eBook reader, but with a little design imagination to make the screen more ebook-friendly, netbooks could easily provide the same functionality people would likely get from a tablet or eBook reader in a device that has a keyboard and is much cheaper. In fact, the One Laptop Per …
Google announced the long awaited Nexus One today, but the phone itself was only part of the story. Google has decided to distribute the phone exclusively through its own web store, a misguided strategy I think will ultimately backfire on them.
Frankly, I think it's a mistake for the company to get into the hardware business period, but I see their approach as widely flawed, while Google sees it as the height of innovation.
Buying a Phone on the Web
A big part of the Q&A with reporters and bloggers after the launch announcement involved the retail approach. People wondered why Google, whose core business is search and selling ads, would get into the retail business, a question that that representatives failed to adequately answer, and which to me just hangs there (with unasked questions about the phone's battery life). I believe that Google thinks their retail store is akin to the launch of the Apple App Store, a revolutionary approach to retailing, but it's really not.
Instead of having a place like Best Buy or Radio Shack where you can hold the phone in your hands, you go to a web site with no opportunity to see it anywhere live. The web experience is supposed to make up for this, but it's seems just silly to me using 3D animation to show things like the weight of the phone is akin to 53 pennies. Gee thanks, let me go count those …
It will certainly be interesting to find out of this is the case and Google gets into the bandwidth/SIM business. If so, I would welcome this development if for no other reason than to force competition on the current crop of carriers, but I would prefer to see Google then sell this bandwidth to other SIM card sellers to develop the same kind of market place we see in Europe. Let's see what happens, but interesting ideas.
Thanks for the comments.
Ron
Wooee,
Interesting comparison, but we are talking about consumer goods strategy versus a strategy of giving away the basic product (in this case, the Android OS). I'm not sure the two are an apples to apples to comparison, but I'm impressed with your knowledge of history.
Thanks for commenting.
Ron
Dahhboo
Interesting theory, but you would think that the carriers would clamoring for the best phones they could get regardless, wouldn't you? But you're right that in the end we just have to wait and see how this plays out. Should be interesting to watch though, shouldn't it? :-)
Thanks for the comment.
Ron
The carrier matters to the extent it doesn't gouge you (which they all tend to do, let's face it) and it works in your area. I chose AT&T long ago because they worked in my house and Verizon at the time didn't. Years later with family contracts that have different renewal dates, it's pretty hard to switch at this point. I use an iPhone and I've enjoyed it a lot. I haven't had any problem with making calls or dropped calls, even when traveling (except in NYC). It's been great for me. I don't love paying a $30 monthly data fee, but I look at at the cost of doing business.
I've looked at the Droid and I really liked what I saw. My son has a Samsung Impression and it has a very nice keyboard. There are lots of interesting phones out there, but there is usually some sort of trade-off, whether it's carrier, price, keyboard, touchscreen, work compatibility and so forth.
You just have to decide which features are most important to you. To me, the number 1 job of a phone though is that it makes phone calls. May seem obvious, but it's easy to lose sight of that these days.
Ron
Nathan,
Interesting analysis, but I think Android was doing well already, and as I pointed its market share has been growing steadily and expected to continue to do so through 2012 (according to one article I saw). As for the carriers, there is something to be said for this, but there will be Android phones eventually across all carriers whether or not Google gets in the game.
Thanks for taking the time to comment.
Ron
The trouble with that approach, lordram, is that Google is essentially competing with itself in this instance. As I wrote, they don't really need to compete with the system they've already set up and appears to working just fine.
Thanks for commenting.
Ron
I agree with you Jccraig. In fact, I wrote a post on that very subject recently called Could Google Phone Mark End of Network Domination. But at the same time, I still think Google would be better served as company to stay out of the hardware business.
Thanks for your comment.
Ron
Persistent rumors have Google scheduling an event for Tuesday to launch its new Nexus One mobile phone. Engadget was even fortunate enough to procure one ahead of the launch. Whenever Google makes it official, it's clearly an impressive looking device, but ever since I heard about Google manufacturing its own phone, a thought has been nagging at me: Why do it and what are the company's goals in creating its own branded phone?
Why Throw Your Partners Under the Bus?
When Google announced a mobile phone operating system, it made sense to me. It could create a portal of sorts through the mobile hardware to Google services where it could feast on the ad riches associated with that mobile traffic. Then Google created tools for developers and it made the OS open source and free, really free, no strings attached whatsoever. The ecosystem has flourished and Motorola recently released the Droid, a phone with a lot of buzz, that appears to be the best Android-powered phone yet.
As 2009 closed, there were predictions of a big market share boost for 2010. In other words, the plan is working. The system is developing, even flourishing.
As I've written many times, Google's core business is search and Ad Sense. Almost everything the company does comes back to that, so why would it get into the hardware business and essentially sabotage its own business model by competing against those same developers?
What …
Last post of the year from me and I've decided to ask five questions that could have some bearing on the areas I cover in this space in the next year. If you read me regularly, you know I write a lot about Google, Apple and Microsoft. I'm also fond of eBooks and cell phones (and assorted other technologies).
So I decided to ask five questions, and if I remember a year from now, perhaps I'll revisit my questions and see if there were clear answers.
Can Apple sustain white hot earnings growth?
I've written several times this year about Apple's incredible earnings growth during what many have called the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression. That Apple has been able to sell high-priced gadgets and computers in this environment bodes well for them, but can they maintain this growth in the coming year?
I'm betting they can, especially if they release the highly anticipated Tablet, but nothing is guaranteed, and you have to wonder at what point you reach market saturation and the growth stops.
Will Microsoft find a way to capitalize on mobile computing?
One of the hottest areas in computing these days is mobile computing, but it appears to be a battle that Microsoft is losing badly. Gartner reported that Microsoft lost close to an astounding one third of its Mobile OS market share in 2009 and reviews of Microsoft Mobile 6.5 were so bad, …
I can tell you that Sony has a Reader kiosk in the same mall, so I got a look at both of them (albeit briefly) and my wife who was with me commented on the fact that the Sony had the flash and delay and the Nook didn't. Since this was a one or two page flip, it's hardly a comprehensive test, but it's what we found to be the case in our quick test of the two units.
Ron
The other day I walked into Barnes & Noble in Boston, and there was the Nook sales desk front and center. Being a gadget geek, it screamed for me to come over and check it out, and I did not resist the siren's call. I picked up one of the two display units off of the counter and began asking questions. Although I only had a few minutes with it, my conclusion: it's a very nice device, but definitely geared toward the casual reader, more than a student or researcher, as you would expect from a Reader developed by a book store chain.
Look and Feel
I had read about the Nook of course, but it's one thing to read a list of features, and another altogether to get your hands on it. I like the feeling of it, the tapered edges, the weight and size, not too heavy or too large and the way it felt balanced in my hand. As with all eBook Readers, having a device that doesn't open like a book was a problem, but like its competitors, there are a plethora of covers (some as expensive as $130) to choose from that make it feel more like you're actually holding a book.
The one possible downside was the plastic case, which kept the weight down, but also made me wonder how it would hold up to a few tumbles to the ground, something that was sure to happen …
Yesterday, the Federal Appeals Court ruled in what appears at first blush to be a shocking decision, that Microsoft must stop selling Word 2007 by January 11, 2010. But a closer look at the decision suggests that this isn't as big a deal as it first seems.
Sure, Microsoft has to pay Canadian developer i4i close to $300 million, but that's really chump change for a company that has tens of billions in cash reserves. Microsoft itself has tried to minimize the impact calling the disputed tool, "a little used feature." Regardless, it appears, this has no impact on product already sold and the disputed code has been removed from upcoming Office 2010, leaving Microsoft with little real damage.
Could Have Been Worse
One thing Microsoft did by appealing was buy itself some time to get past the current version of Word and remove the feature in dispute. It could still have a short-term affect on sales, but most people at this point would probably be holding off until Office 2010. Doesn't really make sense to buy Word 2007 in any quantity that would matter to Microsoft with 2010 just around the corner. It remains to be seen if this would affect larger OEM partners like Dell and HP, but Microsoft insists that the delay has bought them enough time to remove the feature from Word 2007, and they will meet the deadline to remove it. If that's the case, Microsoft has had …
I have the feeling this deal will still happen some time after the holidays. Too much money on the table, and as I say, it just makes so much sense.
Ron
I write a lot of about the battle among large technology corporations in this space and the importance of competitive checks and balances. Yet Comcast seems to be growing into a super power with control over the very pipes that provide many of us with internet access, but without any real competition and often with government support.
Most places in this country get internet access through one or at most two providers. That kind of concentration of power is increasingly a threat to the very foundation of business and society, as so many of us use the internet on one level or another to do our jobs, get our information and connect to one another.
Low Competition and Not forced to Share Pipes
Unlike the phone companies, which years ago were forced to share their copper wires with competitors who offer cheaper service, the US Supreme Court ruled years ago that cable companies did not share the same obligation; which is a puzzling decision when you think about it. If phone companies have to share their wires, why don't the cable providers? In fact, when that decision was made back in 2005, most cable companies didn't offer phone service. They now do, yet they are still not required by regulators to behave in the same fashion as the phone companies. The only difference here mind you is the type of wire.
Perhaps the only real difference is Comcast's power base and the millions it's …
TechCrunch reports that Google is in advanced stage negotiations to purchase Yelp, the online local business review service. This is a deal that makes so much sense for Google, it makes me wonder why they haven't done it already. As I wrote yesterday, mobile is a big part of the Google strategy and Yelp plays right into that and the ability to expand Google's ad network to the highly lucrative local market.
What Yelp Offers
Yelp provides a service that lets people review everything from restaurants to colleges. People rate the businesses, and then participants rate the raters. There is a social aspect to the ratings, where you set up a profile and share information with other like-minded people. Businesses can proactively set up their own pages and Yelp makes money selling local ads. According the site's About page, 26 million people visited Yelp in the last 30 days.
There is an excellent iPhone App (and it's also available on Android), that provides a way to find the businesses you want with a quick search from their Nearby links. You get access to a listing of a particular business type, ratings, a map and directions, offering a very efficient way to find a business that suits your tastes, even when you are not in a familiar place.
What It Would Give Google
This plays to Google's sweet spot on just about every level. It uses advertising as …
When Google announced Android and Chrome, it was easy to think that they were going after Apple's core business, and when news of Google's own phone leaked last weekend, that seemed to only reinforce the idea, but I see the two companies with very different goals. Yes, they are both going mobile in a big way, but the bigger the mobile world from Google's perspective, the better, regardless of the phone or OS.
Apple's All About Hardware, Baby
For Apple, the mobile market is about selling iPhones and cultivating the iPhone ecosystem in the extremely successful and oft imitated App Store. News came out the other day that the Android's app store had reached 20,000 applications, which prompted PC Mag's Lance Ulanoff to Tweet:
RT @mike_elgan: Android apps hit 20,000. http://bit.ly/5nYzIR Me: and the AppStore said, "Talk to me when you hit 100,000"
What's more in its latest earning report, Apple reported it sold 7.4 million iPhones. The San Jose Mercury News reported in October that this resulted in some serious cash for Apple:
Perhaps more tellingly, the number of iPhones Apple sold in the most recent quarter were up 41 percent from its third quarter. And the revenue it raised from such sales hit $2.3 billion, which was up 185 percent from the year-ago period and 36 percent from the third quarter.
These numbers paint a clear picture that the iPhone is …
Thanks, Philippe. Maybe we can do a Q&A sometime on differences between US and Europe cell phone systems.
Ron
You definitely lose something in the transition from one approach to another, but you also gain things that weren't possible in the old way. It's a trade-off. I'm not making a judgment on which is better, just saying that there are ways to discover things in the digital world too. And I want to say, I'm with you MktgRob, at least on some level. I love to browse books stores and record stores and even library shelves, but I've made wonderful friends and discoveries online that just wouldn't have been possible without technology. I have a dear friend and colleague I would never have met without technology, so there's something to be said for both sides. I don't see technology completely eliminating this type of interplay in the analog world. We will have both for a long time to come.
Ron
Thanks for all the great information on this. These are fantastic comments and certainly are helping me fill in some of my information gaps about how all of this works.
Regards,
Ron
Hi Calico:
I'm thinking you will be able to buy disposable 30-day SIM cards from kiosks you'll find all over the place. They are very common in Europe. The SIM cards may come from the networks themselves, but my guess is that the networks will sell pools of bandwidth to different providers who will market their own cards. I expect the networks will also have to open their pipes to alternatives, just as the land lines have been forced to do. So one way or another, I think there will some sharing going on.
News "leaked" this weekend of an unlocked Google-branded phone. On the upside, an unlocked phone means you aren't tied to any particular carrier, nor are you required to sign a contract, but on the downside, you don't get the large provider subsidy on the phone cost in exchange for the contract lock-in. I'm wondering if Google releases a really nice unlocked phone for a reasonable price, if it could mark the beginning of the end of large network domination in the U.S.
The Rest of The World Doesn't Operate this Way
If you go to Europe, you'll find network stores similar to AT&T and Verizon, but you are hardly limited to these options as you are for the most part in the US. Instead, you can walk into just about any department store and find a variety of unlocked phones available for sale without restriction. There are plenty of reasonably-priced choices and when you walk out, you can go to one of the many kiosks that sell SIM cards, plug it into the phone and you're good to go. No contract, no hassles, no problem.
We Aren't Trained this Way
In the US we are trained to go to the phone store (or consumer electronics store of choice) and pick out a phone. We find the one we want. We sign a contract and the cheaper the phone, usually the greater the commitment. For instance, Radio Shack has a displayed price for AT&T phones, …
I came across an interesting post today by the Kansas City Star's Eric Adler suggesting that technology is robbing us of serendipity, those playful moments of spontaneous discovery.
For example, he wonders when the last time a young person went into a library or book store and just found a book on the shelves. Are search engines and the web robbing us of this experience? In my view, while technology is altering the way we experience the world, it isn't necessarily completely removing serendipity from the equation.
Suggestions Engines
When I discussed this idea with my wife, she was quick to point out that the very nature of the web leads us down the path of serendipity (to the chagrin of some content owners). We click a link to see a related piece and we are off on our own internet-driven adventure. One link may lead to another and another and before we know it, we may discover information and web sites we never knew existed, voices we never would have heard.
Adler points out that we have suggestion engines on Amazon and iTunes, for example, that may drive us to content we might never have tried. You see the same thing in YouTube after every video plays. It's the 21st century version of perusing the stacks or flipping through album covers. But Adler (and his sources) wonder if it's too homogenized because it continues to suggest things within the confines of your comfort …
My son needs a new phone, so yesterday at my suggestion, we took a trip to the local AT&T retail store to get a look at the options up close and personal. Instead of eager sales people trying hard to sell us phones, we found they preferred to send us over to the Mall to retail partners Best Buy and Radio Shack. Seems to me if you are going to spend the capital to keep a brick and mortar operation going, you might want to try to be a bit more enthusiastic about selling phones.
Why Are We Here?
The second I walked in I noted the store had been remodeled since my last visit. There were two long counters against the far wall and lots of empty space against the back wall. Most of the phones were displayed on the left side of the store. The iPhone had a kiosk devoted to it in the middle of the store. There were also a couple of rows of accessories.
We looked around at the available phones and realized any of the nicer phones required you to purchase a data plan that cost between $20 and $30 per month. For my middle schooler, all I want is a nice phone for texting. He doesn't need internet access on his phone, and at that price, it wasn't an option. When we explained this to the salesman behind the counter, he suggested we go to Best Buy or Radio Shack …
We've been hearing about an Apple Tablet for such a long time now, it feels like it should exist, yet it doesn't. With each Apple event, the rumors are so vivid, we actually believe them. Then the announcement comes, the shiny new ipods and Mac Books and other equipment are marched out, and we are left open-mouthed, shocked sitting in the empty auditorium thinking they must have forgotten something.
And here we are, another quarter removed from the September event, and once again the Apple Tablet rumors are heating up, downright sizzling, and we fall for them hook, line and sinker. Perhaps sooner or later the rumors have to prove true.
Somewhere Out There
I don't want to suggest that we will never see an Apple Tablet (or whatever they choose to call it) because it makes so much sense, but we are bending over backwards to find proof of this thing. We have seen reporters and bloggers looking everywhere for clues, digging through patent applications and parts orders, reading tea leaves and going to psychics, all in an effort to unearth some shred of evidence that this Tablet that we so desire is on its way.
Most renderings have shown it to look like an over-sized iPhone. This IDC prediction reported in the NYT Times Bits Blog gets down-right detailed:
The long-rumored Apple touchscreen tablet computer, or iPad, will arrive in 2010, IDC predicts. It will be more …
I haven't used it; just seen the videos, but it appears to give you a set of results from which to make a choice.
Google announced Google Googles yesterday, an application that uses the camera in your Android-powered phone to take a picture, conduct a visual search, then return results. Google admits that it's very early, but this is extremely intriguing technology and it has the potential to take visual search to a whole new level by combining it with virtual reality to give you results when you have no information whatsoever.
Multimedia Search is A Different Animal
Multimedia search has always presented a unique challenge to search engines. It's one thing to locate text because the text itself is always going to provide a reasonable context to find the item you are looking for, but pictures, video and sound tracks generally lack textual clues beyond metadata such as a title, date, equipment used and so forth. While this is helpful it doesn't let you start with an item you know nothing about and get you to an accurate search result. That's where Google Goggles is so different.
In this example, the Google representative points his camera at a Japanese landmark he presumably would know nothing about. It's entirely possible when traveling in foreign countries (or even somewhere in the US), that you happen upon a landmark you know nothing about. You could go flipping madly through the guide book, but without a name or some context, even if you have your smart phone with you, it's going to be tough to enter enough information to return …
It's been almost a year since I last interviewed Joe 'Zonker' Brockmeier, who is the community manager at openSUSE. I sent him several questions to answer by email. I was curious about the new version of openSUSE, 11.2, along with his increasing use of social media to promote it. I also wanted to know how people curious about open source operating systems could get started.
RM: What are some of the key features in the new version of openSUSE?
JZB: Free beer! No, wait... that didn't make it into this release, except at the openSUSE conference, where we did consume rather a lot of free beer.
I have to disagree with both of you. It's a full fledged computer any way you slice it. Palm certainly got the ball rolling, but it couldn't do everything the iPhone can. The Apps give me the possibility to just about everything I want from a portable computer. I don't know why you would say it sucks as a phone. It's perfectly fine as a phone and actually from a voice quality standpoint, is better than any phone I've ever owned. I very rarely have dropped calls, the sound is great and the speaker is easy to use. It's simple to mute and it's simple to set up an address book entry or a conference call. iPhone is solely responsible for the touch screen as we know it and so far is still one of the best around (at least based on the phones I've tried).
Ron
Mike Elgan, the veteran technology journalist, mused last week in a Computerworld article that eBook readers would make lousy gifts. I don't necessarily agree with all of Elgan's points, but it got me thinking about how useful a one-trick device is for users. If you think about it, we began to solve the problem of carrying multiple devices with the iPhone. Suddenly we didn't need a camera, a phone and a notebook computer with internet access because we had it all in a single device (and we have access to all those Apps).
But reading a book is a unique experience. Trying to transfer that experience to a cell phone screen takes a bit of a leap. Sure, you can do it, but it's not the most comfortable reading experience in the world. Enter the eBook Reader, a device designed for the needs of the reader, but it begs the question: Do we really want a separate device even if it suits our needs?
The Apple Tablet
Elgan thinks the long-rumored Apple Tablet will blow the eBook Reader and the Netbook market out of the water and he could be right. But earlier this year, Forrester conducted a consumer survey and asked users how much they would be willing to pay to buy an eBook Reader. The vast majority of people said the price needed to drop below $100 in order for the eBook Reader to find mass consumer appeal.
…
Mike Elgan, the veteran technology journalist, mused last week in a Computerworld article that eBook readers would make lousy gifts. I don't necessarily agree with all of Elgan's points, but it got me thinking about how useful a one-trick device is for users. If you think about it, we began to solve the problem of carrying multiple devices with the iPhone. Suddenly we didn't need a camera, a phone and a notebook computer with internet access because we had it all in a single device (and we have access to all those Apps).
But reading a book is a unique experience. Trying to transfer that experience to a cell phone screen takes a bit of a leap. Sure, you can do it, but it's not the most comfortable reading experience in the world. Enter the eBook Reader, a device designed for the needs of the reader, but it begs the question: Do we really want a separate device even if it suits our needs?
The Apple Tablet
Elgan thinks the long-rumored Apple Tablet will blow the eBook Reader and the Netbook market out of the water and he could be right. But earlier this year, Forrester conducted a consumer survey and asked users how much they would be willing to pay to buy an eBook Reader. The vast majority of people said the price needed to drop below $100 in order for the eBook Reader to find mass consumer appeal.
…
It looks like Microsoft and News Corp could be entering into this type of pay for play agreement: http://mashable.com/2009/11/22/microsoft-and-news-corp-in-discussions-to-remove-newspaper-content-from-google/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Mashable+%28Mashable%29
Ron
If the new Google interface design is any indication, it appears that Google might actually be feeling a little heat, or at least some influence, from Bing. Danny Sullivan, who has been covering search for years, had a post in his Search Engine Land blog last week about the new interface overhaul Google is undertaking for its core search product. When I looked at the screen shot that Sullivan provided, it's hard not to see the Bing influence here.
The question is what does it mean? Well, first of all, it means competition is good for consumers, a point I've been making since I started this blog. Bing's clean interface is one of its core strengths and it didn't go unnoticed by Google. But does that mean Google feels threatened by Bing? Not necessarily.
How Do You Generally Search?
I don't know about you, but when I conduct a search I generally start with Google. I have my search box in Firefox set to Google by default. I enter my search criteria, press Enter, and usually I find what I need in the first several results. I don't tend to look much further, and I don't look at the other stuff like content filters. If I do a News search, I might click a date filter in the left column, but beyond that, I don't tend to use any of the other tools that show up in the interface.
For …
I actually had lunch with a friend today who had one and I was even more impressed. He showed me two add-on products: one is a dock. You attach it and it becomes a desk clock with access to local weather, music, an alarm clock and a couple of other key features. The other is a car dock. You insert it and it displays five large buttons including voice command and GPS and the map feature is very nicely designed. It's clear a lot of thought went into this OS and it's really neat to see some of the subtleties in action.
Thanks for the insightful comments. You pointed some things about this phone and the Moto strategy that I hadn't realized before.
Regards,
Ron
Until Motorola came out with the Droid, they were the forgotten cell phone company, but it wasn't that long ago that everyone wanted one of their phones: the Razr. This was in 2004, in the days before the iPhone when smart phones were found only in the pockets of executives and sales people. The Razr was thin and sleek and it flipped open in a very cool way. But after that, Motorola all but disappeared -- until now.
It's clear that Motorola recognized this was an opportunity and they have seized it, building a great feature-filled phone running Google's Android phone OS, but will it be enough to bring this company back from the dead in the cell phone market?
Hands-on with the Droid
I like to get my hands on a phone and see how it feels, so I took a pilgrimage to my local Best Buy yesterday where I encountered a sales person who was as enthusiastic as I am about gadgets. I asked her about the Droid and with a gleam in her eye she removed one from her pocket and handed it to me. I was immediately struck by its weight. This is one solid phone (maybe too heavy for some), one which should survive a fall. As I pushed open the keyboard, I was impressed with the large keys (for a cell phone). I played with the controls. I oohed at the 5 Megapixel camera. It was nice.
… Verizon made an ad making fun of AT&T's 3G coverage (and it's manliness). AT&T wasn't happy because it suggested their 3G coverage was spotty. So they sued saying the ads were misleading consumers, and anyway they had way more customers and their customers loved them, and Verizon just couldn't handle that. Verizon counter-sued saying AT&T was just jealous and their network sucks (and its mother dresses it funny). Now word is they are going to have a fight after school on the playground.
Playing Legal Mind Games
According to Engadget, AT&T sued first saying:
"Verizon's misleading advertising tactics appear to be a response to AT&T's strong leadership in smartphones. We have twice the number of smartphone customers... and we've beaten them two quarters in a row on net post-paid subscribers. We also had lower churn -- a sign that customers are quite happy with the service they receive."
Apple Insider Reports that Verizon did all but stuck out its tongue in court and say "na-na boo-boo" to AT&T in its counter-suit:
"AT&T did not file this lawsuit because Verizon's "There's A Map For That" advertisements are untrue; AT&T sued because Verizon's ads are true and the truth hurts."
They go onto say that the truth (at least as Verizon sees it) is that AT&T has failed to invest adequately in its network (and it's ugly too).
Lawsuits as Marketing Strategy
Verizon is clearly …
loganf, exactly, it's a case of 'Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.'
Thanks for the comment.
Ron