Defining The Next Generation Of Books…

March 4, 2010 By Leave a Comment
Share

Penguin Books seems to be aggressively embracing the concept of digital books. Take a look at this video:

While this is only a demonstration, it is clearly well developed conceptually. The model of using a traditional book framework as a ‘navigation map’ into additional content, applications, and services make complete sense. And it has the potential to redefine the economics of the entire publishing industry.

To make this happen in a way that can scale, the publishing industry (including Apple and other vendors) has to come up with a technical packaging model that moves beyond traditionally focused packaging like the ‘EPUB’ format. Having an open, commonly adopted standard for expressing/delivering these rich, interactive publications can shift publication from becoming one-off developments or publisher specific frameworks into a rich industry ecosystem. I believe that making this happen is the game changer the publishing industry needs. There is a lot to talk about on that front and I want to revisit and expand on it in a later post.

It’s exciting to see some momentum building behind the iPad. So much potential…

Filed Under: Apple, Posts Tagged With: , , , , , , , ,

Apple's IPad Event: Looking Beyond The iPad…

February 3, 2010 By 3 Comments
Share

There has been so much written about the iPad itself over the few days that I don’t think my fawning over it would add much to the discussion.
blog-ipad

Do I think there will be more in the released version than we saw in the presentation? Yes. Am I excited about the potential of the device? Without a doubt. Will I get one when it finally goes on sale? Absolutely! And though I am pretty pumped about ordering one, there is clearly still a lot of speculation in the media over the true market demand for a device like the iPad. Passions seem high on both sides. Given everything that we still DON’T know about the final functionality of the software/OS and about what types of new content will end up in the various ‘iStores’ by the time the iPad is released, I’d rather wait till then before jumping in to the fray.

Instead, for this post, I’d like to dig down a level and look at three of the less sexy things that were revealed during the iPad event that could actually end up being quite significant both to Apple and the industry overall.

Apple’s A4 Chip:

blog-a4-chipOutside of the release of the iPad itself, the revelation that it is powered by a custom Apple chip (handling both general and graphics processing chores) could be the most significant thing to come out of last weeks event. While the A4 chip will almost certainly make it into the 4G version of the iPhone, I also expect the A4 (or some variation of it) to also be at the heart of the next generation of AppleTV. This would likely be as part of a move of ATV onto the same OS platform as the iPhone/Touch/iPad, and would probably allow the box itself to be re-engineered to better support HD video (eg – real 1080p) and also to open it up to running games available from the App Store. As a big fan of the existing AppleTV, I see this as something that is long overdue. (I expect it to be announced before mid-2010.)

Another way Apple could leverage the chip this year could be the release of a successor to the Macbook Air based on some version of it. This could give Apple a way to deliver the dramatically improved battery life and graphic muscle of the iPad in the super-thin laptop form factor of the current Air (not to mention integrated “always connected” 3G/4G ). It could even end up running the iPhone OS, and provide the ‘Touch’ aspects either through a substantial trackpad area or directly on the display. While I’m not trying to predict specific product details here, I do see an opportunity for Apple in this segment as well – a hybrid offering blending the best tablet and laptop features for true ‘road warrior’ types.

Ultimately the most exciting thing about the A4 is that it frees Apple from Intel’s lock on mobile processors, and can give them the ability to change both the economics and overall direction of products they launch in this area. And in the hands of Apple, that holds some pretty big promise for the future.

The Touch Based Version Of iWorks:

blog-iworks-ipadApple’s iWorks has been around for quite a few years now, and has matured into a full productivity suite offering word processing, spreadsheet, and presentation applications. While no where near as popular as Microsoft’s Office suite, each component of iWorks is well thought out and a pleasure to work with. Unlike Office on a Windows tablet computer, the new iWorks isn’t simply an extension of the previous version that makes it usable without a keyboard. Instead, iWorks on the iPad has been designed from the ground up to work in a touch environment. From the way various functional menus are displayed to the way task specific virtual keyboards appear in different contexts, every element of the product is designed to be part of a native touch experience. While I will need to spend some quality time with the new iWorks before passing judgment, it does appear that Apple has learned a great deal from iterations of the user experience they developed for iPhone apps, and have done a good job scaling it to more comprehensive applications on larger displays.

While this is impressive on it’s own, what may end up being the most significant aspect of the new iWorks probably isn’t in the code or design at all, but rather in the business model surrounding it. iWorks for the iPad will be sold through the Apple App Store, with each component application available individually for less than $10. That means the entire suite can be bought for under $30 – less than a third of the discounted price Microsoft’s Office 2007 Home and Student edition sells for on Amazon. By unbundling the individual applications, selling them for such a low price, and making them available through their App Store, Apple is clearly challenging the current economic model for the sale and distribution of traditional software applications. This is not without precedent for Apple – even beyond what they did with pricing in the iPhone App space. When Apple moved into producing professional media creation software (known for outrageously high prices), they were able to reset the price points for applications like video editing, compositing, and audio editing in a similar dramatic fashion. It would not be surprising to see this model finally slip over to the Mac, with the desktop version of iWorks taking on similar pricing and packaging to the iPad version – and possibly being sold through the app store as well.

Selling Books In The iBookstore Instead Of On iTunes:

blog-ibookstoreI think the fact that Apple chose to build a completely separate ‘iStore’ for books is interesting. By approaching print publications as truly unique forms of media with unique content and marketplace dynamics, Apple stands a good chance at reshaping the ebook market and really challenging the current dominance of Amazon’s Kindle platform. I believe that what was shown at the iPad launch is simply the most basic starter functionality for this store. I see it ultimately having different business and functional models to address some unique opportunities found in this marketplace. For example:

  • renting eTextbooks for a semester instead of buying them
  • offering subscriptions to magazine and newspaper content via special viewing applications unique to each of them
  • selling content that is pretty much static – like a daily newspaper – with options for dynamic updates
  • integrating social elements to let people discuss or interact around specific titles – much the way a college study group or typical reading club might interact

There is a lot of room in this space to innovate. The upheavals we have already seen happen between Amazon and publishers like MacMillan (almost 2 months before the iPad is even released!) are a good indication of how dynamic this marketplace still is – and just how disruptive Apple’s entry into this space will be. By having an independent store that can evolve quickly and embrace new and unique ways of accessing media, Apple will have the flexibility they need to learn, adapt, and adjust. Success wouldn’t be achievable with a more static approach.

I am firmly convinced that the iPad will have just as significant an impact on the media marketplace as the iPhone did on the mobile phone market. The convergence of these two markets, and the increasing importance of mobile computing will continue to present incredible opportunities for Apple. I believe the three elements I’ve discussed here will be important differentiators for Apple as the aggressively pursue this new market.

I can’t wait for my iPad…

Filed Under: Apple, Posts Tagged With: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

The Challenge For Google…

January 20, 2010 By 6 Comments
Share

Google and Apple always seem to get lumped together as the “new tech titans” that will define our digital future. While no one can deny the leadership each of these great companies has shown in their respective markets, they each represent a fundamentally different view of how this future we are racing toward will unfold. In many ways, Google’s approach to the market is actually pretty similar to that of the company many define as their biggest competitor: Microsoft.

googlechallenge

Both Google and Microsoft take the view that the best way to develop a product is to quickly put out a roughly thought-out “beta” version of it (hardware, software, or service), and continue refining it until it becomes something that might have appeal beyond a hard core tech audience. Products that never get to that critical mass eventually get pruned, and the really successful ones become the drivers of the business. All of the other products or services continue to roll along in limbo, backed by someone in the organization that believes in their potential to succeed but not fully supported by the organization as a whole. This ends up creating a fairly Darwinian environment for these projects to mature in, and the competition that results from it doesn’t always provide the best outcome.

Apple, on the other hand, takes pretty much the exact opposite approach. They rarely release anything that hasn’t been fully thought out, and they focus on getting the core value proposition of an offering to a fairly high level of polish before it goes out the door. Even a product like Apple TV – which is clearly still trying to find it’s footing in the market – was still well integrated into Apple’s iTunes ecosystem from the day it launched. But given it’s evolving feature set and interface, Steve Jobs never misses a chance to refer to it as a “Hobby” product for Apple – clearly distinguishing it from their very successful mainstream offerings. Apple is all about creating an extraordinary consumer experience, anchored by market redefining design and technology. Anything less is unacceptable to them, and they invest years of internal product refinement to try and avoid that kind of failure.

The difference between these two approaches will have an important impact on the long term success of both these companies – positive for Apple and negative for Google.

Because so much refinement takes place before a product hits the market, Apple is able to provide a focused, consistent product and brand strategy across everything they do. Their product sets are diverse enough to cushion market fluctuations in various lines of business, but still linked at a software level that lets them integrate more or less seamlessly. Apple makes a limited number of products, which lets them lavish great attention on each one. And unlike most tech companies, they view a product as the entire user experience with a device – shopping, packaging, design, technology, interface, functionality and support. And that results in products that people don’t just like but are actually passionate about. To Apple, defining the future starts by tapping in to the needs of the individual. And they do that very well.

For Google, in contrast, defining the future starts by tapping in to the power of a collective community – something they also do well. They cast a wide product net, giving them a finger in just about every aspect of evolving internet trends, standards, and technologies. In some areas – like Search based advertising, online video, mapping, and email – they have been incredibly successful. But the number of real Google successes is small when compared to the full suite of services and capabilities they now offer. Just look at the number of significant product betas, open source initiatives, and Google Lab projects that they have active at this point. And even more telling than all of that is that, if you put popularity aside, search advertising still ends up being the only really meaningful source of revenue they have today. While incredibly successful right now, Google as an organization is unbalanced and spread thin. Outside of a few big areas they lack cohesion, with many smaller project teams competing with each other for funding and management attention. This has driven many incredibly bright, entrepreneurial developers, unable to make an impact or accomplish anything meaningful in this environment, to simply leave the company in complete frustration. I personally know a number of them. While this may not matter much to Google while the search ad dollars are still rolling in, it could really end up undermining their competitiveness over the long term. Not only are they losing talent they really could leverage today, they are seeding it to an incredible number of small, innovative companies that could end up competing with them in the future. Web search is still in its infancy, and the web is littered with the remains of once dominant search providers. Google isn’t immune to this, and needs to be careful.

Don’t get me wrong – I use many Google services on a daily basic and I depend on them for a great deal of what I need to do online. They are an extraordinarily innovative company. That said, I don’t have the same passion for Google’s services that I have for Apple’s products. There is a pleasure I get every time I open my Macbook or touch the screen of my iPhone that transcends the basic utility the devices provide. There are very few things in life that are able to deliver that type of experience, and none of them spring from the efforts of a collective. It takes the vision, talent, and desire of individuals to produce a result like that. That is the feeling I hope I’ll get one day from doing a search on Google.

But they still have a long way to go.

This isn’t to say the the next new product from Apple couldn’t be a complete market failure, or that an update to Google couldn’t completely redefine our expectations of web search. Either of those outcomes are possible. And while both Google and Apple are in exceptionally strong market positions today, that shouldn’t be much comfort for either of them going forward. Change is the one constant in the tech world that no one, no matter how big, can avoid. And change can be unforgiving.

After a decade of dominance in the 1990′s, Microsoft struggled to maintain relevance in the evolving internet landscape. Their size, diversity, and lack of clear focus made them slow to react and adapt. They instead tried to use their dominant position to preserve the status-quo that tilted in their favor. When they could no longer do that, the wave of competition that followed upended the entire market, even placing into question the fundamental value proposition Microsoft built their business around. Despite the strength of their significant product franchises like Windows and Office, Microsoft now finds itself in the position of playing catch up in as market that won’t cut them any slack.

The challenge for Google is to avoid a similar fate.

Filed Under: Posts Tagged With: , , , , , , , ,

Intel Gives Us A Peek at "Light Peak"…

October 1, 2009 By 3 Comments
Share

Apple came to Intel last year with a really innovative idea.

What if every peripheral someone would want to connect to a computer could hook up to it via a single strand of fiber optic cable? This would include monitors, cameras, keyboards, printers, networks – basically everything short of power. The concept was that the myriad of connectors built into systems today could end up being replaced by a single thin cable.

Intel’s newly announced “Light Peak” hopes to achieve exactly that. Take a look:

Not only could adoption of Light Peak clean up the ‘cable clutter’ associate with the typical computer setup (the same way HDMI has cleaned up the cabling of AV systems), but it could also de-clutter the design of systems themselves! Computers, especially laptops and other portable form factors, would no longer need to be designed around the requirements of a wide range of bulky connectors. A single tiny connector would be the only consideration impacting their design.

This would let system designers avoid the connectivity compromises Apple had to make to in developing an incredibly thin or small device like the Macbook Air:
blog-macbook-air-ports
Enclosures could finally become sleeker and more rounded without forcing people to give up the connectivity they depend on. Even small handheld devices like the iPhone could easily connect to a range of devices without changing its size or form factor.

Apple has always pushed the envelope when it comes to new storage and connectivity options – everything from eliminating floppy drives, to support for USB and Firewire, to ExpressPort, to the ADC video connector and recently the new Mini DisplayPort. In large part this has been driven in service of better, sleeker device designs.

I can’t wait to see what they come out with once Light Peak is available…

Filed Under: Posts Tagged With: , , , , , , ,

Google Ad Promotes Chrome Browser…

May 9, 2009 By 2 Comments
Share

Here is a new ad Google produced to start promoting their Chrome browser:

This is a great stop-motion production, and it reminded me of some of the more creative ads tech firms put out during the go-go days of the early internet.

This particular ad was produced by Google’s office in Japan, and is part of viral campaign they are launching to try and boost the market share of Chrome. I’m not sure how much of a push Google will put behind this globally, but I hope that get some traction with it. Chrome is probably the best browser in the market today, though the beta of Safari 4 also looks interesting. Both Chrome and Safari have embraced HTML 5, making them attractive vehicles for the next generation of sophisticated browser based applications.

While I’m interested to see how effective this Ad campaign ends up being, one thing has become very clear. Web standards matter more now than they ever have before.

The days when Microsoft’s Internet Explorer ruled the web have come to an end…

Filed Under: Apple, Posts Tagged With: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Apple TV Finally Gaining A Foothold…

January 26, 2009 By 4 Comments
Share

It’s hard not to be impressed by Apple…

In their quarterly analyst conference call last week, Apple reported significant year over year growth in every one of their business lines. While some areas came in a bit weaker than expected (iPhone sales), they were easily balanced out by some that came in surprisingly strong (MacBook and iPod sales).

While not welcomed by the Apple shorts out there, this is certainly good news for everyone looking for leadership to help pull the tech sector out of it’s market slump. Given the broad drop in consumer sentiment it will take more than your typical corporation to fill that role – a company with products that are creative, innovative, and exciting.

That’s a role Apple has a track record of filling quite well…

While there was plenty of good news on the call about all of Apple’s most popular product lines, perhaps the most interesting bit of information to come out of it was an update on a niche product that Steve Jobs has referred to ‘a little hobby’ – Apple TV.
blog-appletv

It appears that Apple TV sales are up 300% from a year ago. That is a substantial increase for a product that has received almost no advertising attention from Apple. But it does get the most effective type of advertising a product can get.

Work of mouth from happy owners…

I love my Apple TV, and know that I’ve already talked at least three other people into getting one for themselves. I have no doubt that they will, in turn end, up influencing some of their friends to join the “Apple TV club” as well. It’s that type of product.

Once you have it, you wonder why you waited so long to get it…

Apple TV’s 2.0 refresh was a significant step forward for the device. One of the key features added to it in that release was support for video rentals – and it seems that movie rentals are actually one of the drivers behind its growing success.

“…it is clear the movie rental business has helped AppleTV and there are more and more customers who want to try it. We fundamentally believe there is something here for us in the future. We will continue to invest in it.

While Apple has shown some recent love to Apple TV on the software side, the hardware platform hasn’t changed since it’s launch nearly 2 years ago. It definitely needs to see a refresh, if for no other reason than to open up some of the awesome possibilities that new software updates could bring.

Here’s a breakdown of some of the things I’d like to see in the next generation of Apple TV:

Hardware:

  • True 1080p support – The current Apple TV hardware just can’t deliver on that. With flat panels getting cheaper and bigger – and all most of them being 1080p – the market is there for the full res HD experience. If Apple want’s to position digital downloads as a genuine alternative to BluRay, this is a must have improvement.
  • Bigger hard disk options – Selling a set top box today with drive sizes of 40GB and 160GB is kind of sad in an HD centric world. To keep costs low, Apple needs to create a new hardware footprint that will allow for full sized drives instead of just notebook drives. People just load up the box without worrying about running out of space. Failing that, I’d at least like to have some way for the Apple TV to make use of external drives both for storage and backup, or even integrate more directly with Time Capsule over the network.

Software:

  • Better integration of remote media – Apple currently allows Apple TV to stream content via iTunes from multiple local systems. Unfortunately, you can only connect to one systems at a time to do this. An update to the software should create an integrated view of all of the content available from any pre-connected systems. If I want to watch a particular movie, I probably don’t care that it’s on my son’s laptop or my iMac in the office. Show me everything and let me pick.
  • Support for the uPNP protocol – The uPNP protocol would allow non-iTunes devices to deliver video, music, and photos to an Apple TV. This could bring in content stored on low cost NAS devices from companies like Lacie or even on game consoles like XBox 360′s. Perhaps most importantly, uPNP brings DVR functionality to Apple TV – in a way. Both Elgato EyeTV and MythTV – two very popular DVR systems – both support uPNP streaming. This means you could record programs using these devices and simply have the recorded programs show up in Apple TV. That would definitely go a long way to integrating the oft requested DVR capability.
  • Games and Applications – This should be a no brainer. Apple has all of the pieces in place to make Apple TV a killer casual gaming platform. It could leverage either the iPhone or iPod Touch as a controller and change the console model in even more significant ways than Nintendo’s Wii did. This one probably deserves a post of it’s own.

Content:

    NOTE: I recognize that content is an area Apple doesn’t really have complete control over. Consider this a wish lists that I’d like to see Apple strongly advocate with the actual content providers.

  • Make rentals available the same time as Netflix – If the studios are serious about moving into the digital world, they need to get over making distinctions between physical and digital distribution. There is nothing more frustrating than seeing a movie on iTunes that I would like to watch, to find that it is only available for sale (in standard definition!) and will not be available to rent for another few weeks. The studios let you rent these movies at Blockbuster or via Netflix, so why not iTunes? Apple needs to be a strong advocate with the studios to make this shift in mindset happen.
  • Allow HD movie purchases – With Apple now in the process of shifting their entire computer line over to DisplayPort (which supports HDCP), I’m hoping that the studios will now allow movies to be purchased in HD as well as SD. I hate copy protection for all the myriad reasons I have talked about in the past, and see it as detrimental to the market in the long term. That said, if this is a precursor to getting the necessary HD content lined up to create a digital rival to BluRay, so be it. The stronger Apple can become in this space, the more leverage it will have to transform it the same way it did digital music sales.
  • Integrate TV network streaming sites – YouTube integration opens up a world of short form video content to Apple TV owners and is a great addition to the platform. However, the one thing that is specifically not available on YouTube is the content produced by the television studios. Instead of making it available there, most studios have chosen to either developed their own individual streaming sites (keeping everything under their control), or are providing their content to shared sites like Hulu. Getting these site natively integrated into Apple TV would be a really big deal. A well designed software interface could go a long way to making this form of television access mainstream. Note that until that happens, a great 3rd party alternative is available from a company called Boxee. They have a software mod for Apple TV that adds this capability and a whole lot more to Apple TV.

I have no clue when Apple plans to do their next Apple TV refresh. But given the traction it seems to be getting in the market place, I am confident that one will be coming in the near term. I covered the things I think are realistic both technically and politically, and hope to see at least some of them there when a new version drops.

Of course, my priorities may be different than yours.

Let me know what you’d like to see in the next Apple TV release…

Filed Under: Apple, Posts Tagged With: , , , , ,

Jim Cramer Discusses RIM…

December 3, 2008 By Leave a Comment
Share

Jim Cramer doesn’t have much good to say about Research In Motion…

In this clip from TheStreet.Com, Jim Cramer discusses what is happening to RIM given their announcement last night that 3rd quarter revenue was going to fall below their own projections for the quarter:

One really interesting point Jim makes is that the Blackberry has become commoditized, and no longer commands a premium in the market. It has become ubiquitous in both business and consumer circles and the cachet of having one has dissipated. They are no longer “the in” device to pull out of your purse or pocket.

But that’s only part of the story…

My personal view here is that RIM is following roughly same trajectory that Palm has taken. It sat on it’s technological lead way too long only to find that it’s franchise market – mobile corporate email – had been successfully challenged by Apple with the iPhone 3G. The proprietary infrastructure RIM was counting on to cement their position in the market failed them. (The same infrastructure they needed to pay NTP $600M for to settle patent claims just over two years ago!) The less than stellar debut of their highly anticipated touch screen ‘Blackberry Storm’ was really the tipping point in the market, convincing many that RIM was no longer the leader and innovator in this market.

But with all that being said, Apple shouldn’t get too cocky. Leadership in technology markets can be a fleeting thing, and a even a single misstep can be severely damaging.

If RIM can fall out of favor, it can happen to anyone…

Filed Under: Apple, Posts Tagged With: , , ,

Is This RIM's Blackberry "Thunder"?…

September 10, 2008 By 2 Comments
Share

RIM’s upcoming “Thunder” is supposed to be their answer to the iPhone…

Based on this video over at Crackberry.com, I wouldn’t be too sure:

[Unfortunately this link has been removed by YouTube]

Assuming this video is genuine, I’m not terribly impressed by the Thunder…

While certainly functional, it doesn’t appear to be an “Apple Killer” by any means. Needing to use a “Press and Hold” to scroll the screen seems clunky, and the process for selection/click looks more like an “ATM” style experience than a modern touch screen. That said, it may be an early prototype, or even a total – albeit clever – fake (people are becoming quite good at that these days).

But if this is the real deal we’re looking at, I’m not sure what RIM hopes to accomplish with it. Maybe they want to position it as offering an iPhone experience, but on a real network like Verizon. That approach may sound good in theory, but I’m not sure how it would play in the marketplace. Even if they don’t own one, people have a good idea how great the iPhone experience is. The bar has been set, even for die hard Verizon fans.

I have a lot of respect for RIM, but I was expecting to see something more.

Something “Wow!”.

Hopefully it will be there when Thunder is released…

UPDATE:

Thanks to a comment from reader JOHN, I have a new video to embed:

[This link has also been removed - can't keep up with the take-down orders!]

Based on John’s comment, I wanted to clarify some things in this post. The new Blackberry will be called the STORM 9530 not the THUNDER. The THUNDER will be the name of a GSM version of the device that will be released at some future date. Thanks John!

Filed Under: Apple, Posts Tagged With: , , , , , , , , , ,
Newer Posts »