As a list of complaints for the iPad is being refuted with witty philosophies from the Apple-devoted, one issue that still seems odd to me is Apple's consistent refusal to allow Flash on their devices. It's no secret that Apple is not a fan of Adobe...but many experts considered Flash on the iPad a no-brainer....a must for a visually rich mobile web experience.
While Apple now allows developers to develop apps in Flash, they refuse to budge an inch in the mobile web space. The welcoming in one area and refusal in another didn't seem to make much sense, until I began to think about the one thing that dictates all companies, big and small....revenue.
Currently, Apple makes a 30% cut off of anything in their iTunes store and an undisclosed amount from mobile-ad banners serving within their app network. With over 3 billion app downloads in just two years, Apple has literally raked in hundreds of millions just from apps alone. The additional revenue from their audio and video content and ad-network deals are likely to be even more impressive.
Flash is the scary, evil force that currently, is the sole threat to this lush fiscal stream. Flash provides a legitimate threat to iTunes in two main areas...streaming video content (ala Hulu) and flash-based tools that could closely mimic the applications one could find in the robust app store. The fact Flash lives on the Internet, independent of any app store, would provide a direct by-pass for developers to tackle all sorts of content and revenue streams that Apple is accustomed to holding sole possession to. Instead of purchasing that episode of Arrested Development on iTunes, why not hit up Hulu? Why pay $3 for that Bewjewled app when I can just play it on this mobile site? Flash is such a threat that Steve Jobs wants you to know...it was no mistake he brought up nytimes.com on the iPad, with the gaping Flash hole (with the little blue lego) for the world to see.
Apple's victory is bound to be short-lived. New coding and technologies in mobile are pushing app-like aspects and video capabilities in web-based tools, independent of Flash. Mobile-optimized sites that can live independent of any app store, carrier or device are becoming increasingly sophisticated in what they can do. As the number of smartphones continues to explode, native apps will become increasingly hard for advertisers to craft, as the constant re-purposing for carriers, screen sizes and handsets will wipe any chances of profitability away. The technology of tomorrow doesn't pose much of a threat to Apple today, but the way the mobile landscape is moving, tomorrow's technology will be here in a Flash.
Monday, February 1, 2010
Wednesday, January 27, 2010
Don't judge the iPad yet....
The announcement came and went...and now that the iPad is finally official, we can discuss facts and not rumors. I have a mixed bag of emotions on the iPad, and I think it's important to point out the iPad is just approaching the starting line, not the finish line.
There are some glaring issues I saw with the iPad. Some point out prospective problems, others I feel are to be addressed later down the road. Here are some I found:
- The iPad has no built-in camera. This was a huge oversight in my opinion. While the iPad is built to be a netbook and Kindle competitor, there was a huge are of opportunity here. Skype and video-conferencing would have been a nice caveat to the iPad....for some, it could have provided that "extra facet" so many felt was coming, but never delivered in the speech. It's always easier to update software than hardware...so I guess we'll have to wait for another model before we can see this a reality.
- The name is horrid. As many females rightly stated on Twitter, it's quite feasible there were no ladies in the room when the device was named. Even a simple Google search would have brought Apple to the MadTV skit poking fun at a too-easy name. Not only does it side-track convos with talk of feminine products, it's too close to the iPod in naming. It's a fail in my book....and my perspective will be hard to change.
- Allow one video camera for streaming purposes at Apple events. Yes Apple, we know that not allowing cameras artifically adds a level of excitement and secrecy to your events, but millions of people scrambling around to EnGadgets, Gizmodos and other sites, crashing many, became a main focus of many groups who gathered to watch the event. If I didn't spend 80% of my time trying to find an audio link or solid live-blog that was still working, I could have focused more on the presentation. This is the most technological company in the world, yet they treat us as if we're in 1930.
- Horrible pricing for data. Yes, it's great we have no contracts to sign...but $14.99 for 250MB of data and $29.99 for unlimited? What are we in, 2003?
- Not attractive enough for techies (aka, early-adopters). Early adopters are pivotal in pushing new products into the mainstream. The majority of techie/early adopters on Twitter seem to be passing over the iPad already. Not good.
- No flash capabilities. Many missed this, but during the presentation, Jobs actually pulled up a site (I think it was Time.com) that had a huge, gaping whole in the middle of the screen with that nice "you need flash" icon. Apple, we know you don't like Flash...but again, what is this, 2003? At least software updates could potentially fix this.
- No discussions of Verizon or other carriers. Many who showed up for the event weren't so much interested in the iPad as they were in rumors of the end of exclusivity, O/S 4.0 and even iPhone 4G. These issues were not addressed. HOWEVER, if you look at the specs of the iPad, it does contain UMTS/HSDPA technology. This is huge as UMTS will become 4G, and it supports CDMA networks (like Verizon). I expect a big and exciting announcement surrounding all of this in June.
We need to give the iPad time. When iPhone first launched in 2007, it had issues, it had no app store, and it's overcome so much. The iPad has potential, but as of now, it's still a niche product. I'll give it a chance, but as so many say, you never buy the first model of a new device. I think I'll wait and see what happens.
There are some glaring issues I saw with the iPad. Some point out prospective problems, others I feel are to be addressed later down the road. Here are some I found:
- The iPad has no built-in camera. This was a huge oversight in my opinion. While the iPad is built to be a netbook and Kindle competitor, there was a huge are of opportunity here. Skype and video-conferencing would have been a nice caveat to the iPad....for some, it could have provided that "extra facet" so many felt was coming, but never delivered in the speech. It's always easier to update software than hardware...so I guess we'll have to wait for another model before we can see this a reality.
- The name is horrid. As many females rightly stated on Twitter, it's quite feasible there were no ladies in the room when the device was named. Even a simple Google search would have brought Apple to the MadTV skit poking fun at a too-easy name. Not only does it side-track convos with talk of feminine products, it's too close to the iPod in naming. It's a fail in my book....and my perspective will be hard to change.
- Allow one video camera for streaming purposes at Apple events. Yes Apple, we know that not allowing cameras artifically adds a level of excitement and secrecy to your events, but millions of people scrambling around to EnGadgets, Gizmodos and other sites, crashing many, became a main focus of many groups who gathered to watch the event. If I didn't spend 80% of my time trying to find an audio link or solid live-blog that was still working, I could have focused more on the presentation. This is the most technological company in the world, yet they treat us as if we're in 1930.
- Horrible pricing for data. Yes, it's great we have no contracts to sign...but $14.99 for 250MB of data and $29.99 for unlimited? What are we in, 2003?
- Not attractive enough for techies (aka, early-adopters). Early adopters are pivotal in pushing new products into the mainstream. The majority of techie/early adopters on Twitter seem to be passing over the iPad already. Not good.
- No flash capabilities. Many missed this, but during the presentation, Jobs actually pulled up a site (I think it was Time.com) that had a huge, gaping whole in the middle of the screen with that nice "you need flash" icon. Apple, we know you don't like Flash...but again, what is this, 2003? At least software updates could potentially fix this.
- No discussions of Verizon or other carriers. Many who showed up for the event weren't so much interested in the iPad as they were in rumors of the end of exclusivity, O/S 4.0 and even iPhone 4G. These issues were not addressed. HOWEVER, if you look at the specs of the iPad, it does contain UMTS/HSDPA technology. This is huge as UMTS will become 4G, and it supports CDMA networks (like Verizon). I expect a big and exciting announcement surrounding all of this in June.
We need to give the iPad time. When iPhone first launched in 2007, it had issues, it had no app store, and it's overcome so much. The iPad has potential, but as of now, it's still a niche product. I'll give it a chance, but as so many say, you never buy the first model of a new device. I think I'll wait and see what happens.
Tuesday, January 26, 2010
What will Apple's Tablet truly be?
So with one of the biggest moments in emerging media technologies about to descend upon us tomorrow, I felt the need to throw down an Emeril-like "Bam!" and resurrect this blog from the likes of Chumbawumba.
As you know by now, there's been lots of build-up to an Apple tablet unveiling tomorrow. While so much debate has surrounded the O/S, the hardware or the look of this shadowy device, I've always been pre-occupied with the rumored name. No single company puts more (or less, depending on your perspective) into a name than Apple. Think about it. iPhone. iPod. MacBook. Nano. Steve Jobs. The two syllable theme has become as much an Apple trademark as their indispensable lowercase "i". It's all about simplicity blended with sophistication...simple words with so much meaning and technology hiding behind them.
The reason why I feel the name is so important is because it will give us a better long-term glimpse into what this tablet will be than any firework show they can put on tomorrow. Tomorrow, it's about the bells and whistles, the horsepower, the "ahhhhhhh" factor. But the name...that is where the plan lies. Will this be a device tailored for interaction...an iPad, iSlate, even an iCanvas? Or will it be more suited for media usage, such as an iTablet, iRead or MacBook Lite?
The most curious aspect of the tablet is the fact that its predecessors have for the most part, been failures. Clearly, Apple has found a crack...a niche between current smarpthone, netbook, Kindle and laptop technologies that makes tablet a viable device for a potentially large audiences in today's world. In my mind, I see the tablet, taking cues from the Kindle, being a media hub for all of your favorite websites, books, magazines, music and movies, complete with the iTunes store (apps included). Added features, such as video (Skype) conferencing, streaming Netflix abilities, desktop syncing/streaming, online gaming and a separate app store might vastly expand its prospective audience and abilities. No way could I ever begin to guess with any accuracy what Steve Jobs is capable of... but I have no doubt I'll be surprised tomorrow.
For what it's worth, my prediction is that the tablet will be called the iSlate, it will cost $500-$700, it will use an updated iPhone O/S 3.2 and will be available on both Verizon and AT&T. It will sync/dock with your computer and be it's "streaming remote" while you are out and about. It will be a media device first, and about 1,000 things second. It will succeed....but it will not live up to expectations. Those are my thoughts, and I'm sticking with them :-) Curious to hear what others think!
As you know by now, there's been lots of build-up to an Apple tablet unveiling tomorrow. While so much debate has surrounded the O/S, the hardware or the look of this shadowy device, I've always been pre-occupied with the rumored name. No single company puts more (or less, depending on your perspective) into a name than Apple. Think about it. iPhone. iPod. MacBook. Nano. Steve Jobs. The two syllable theme has become as much an Apple trademark as their indispensable lowercase "i". It's all about simplicity blended with sophistication...simple words with so much meaning and technology hiding behind them.
The reason why I feel the name is so important is because it will give us a better long-term glimpse into what this tablet will be than any firework show they can put on tomorrow. Tomorrow, it's about the bells and whistles, the horsepower, the "ahhhhhhh" factor. But the name...that is where the plan lies. Will this be a device tailored for interaction...an iPad, iSlate, even an iCanvas? Or will it be more suited for media usage, such as an iTablet, iRead or MacBook Lite?
The most curious aspect of the tablet is the fact that its predecessors have for the most part, been failures. Clearly, Apple has found a crack...a niche between current smarpthone, netbook, Kindle and laptop technologies that makes tablet a viable device for a potentially large audiences in today's world. In my mind, I see the tablet, taking cues from the Kindle, being a media hub for all of your favorite websites, books, magazines, music and movies, complete with the iTunes store (apps included). Added features, such as video (Skype) conferencing, streaming Netflix abilities, desktop syncing/streaming, online gaming and a separate app store might vastly expand its prospective audience and abilities. No way could I ever begin to guess with any accuracy what Steve Jobs is capable of... but I have no doubt I'll be surprised tomorrow.
For what it's worth, my prediction is that the tablet will be called the iSlate, it will cost $500-$700, it will use an updated iPhone O/S 3.2 and will be available on both Verizon and AT&T. It will sync/dock with your computer and be it's "streaming remote" while you are out and about. It will be a media device first, and about 1,000 things second. It will succeed....but it will not live up to expectations. Those are my thoughts, and I'm sticking with them :-) Curious to hear what others think!
Friday, July 31, 2009
The future of smartphones...
Top Five Things I’d like to see in future smartphones…
1. Built-in QR/2-D Code functionality in smartphone cameras – The technology has been great, the adaptation? Not so great. QR and 2-D Codes are a great idea that has wide appeal abroad, but has been slow to catch-on in the States. While it has the potential to match its brother the Bar Code in importance, it will need the boost of a standardized smartphone industry to take it to that next level.
2. I/R Transmitters – I’ve thought for quite some time now that I/R transmitter integration into smartphones could potentially double its value to the user. Literally. Imagine a smartphone device that was your “click for info” portal to the world. With receiving IR receivers or barcodes being placed on store signs, advertisements, street signs, any user can have “click-for” info abilities on many things in the environment. Walking by a restaurant? Point your device at the bistro as you drive by and receive deli specials immediately on your device. Driving by a theater? Click for movie times and to purchase some movie tickets, displayable on a mobile screen.
3. Flick-style data transfer of all media/file formats – Apps like iPhone’s Mover have made great strides towards this important and under-recognized ability, but in the near future users are going to demand smartphones, including ones from different networks, to allow flick-sharing of all forms of media and file formats. Be it in the business world or personal, emailing will quickly become too obsolete for data transfer amongst these powerful little devices.
4. Solar-cell technology – Some of the most innovative minds of the past decade, smartphone producers need to take some green-friendly steps by investing in hard-cased solar cell shells that can extend, or eventually replace, the need for toxic batteries. Solar cells are becoming more efficient in capturing broader wavelengths of light, meaning we could be making solar cells that can capture and use light from our cubicle fluorescents in the very near future. Imagine how much power the world could harness from leftover office space lighting.
5. ‘Mother’ Devices – The core of the 3.0 movement, people on the go want lightweight, durable, powerful devices that can get them any form of data/communication instantaneously. We seem to all be bingers in the electronic world, taking in way more data and info than we could ever use in 3 lifetimes. But we want it, we love to compare the size of our iTunes library amongst one another. Having a mother device that houses the data, while being fully and wirelessly connected to the smartphone at all times, is the future. The iPhone/iPod relationship to the computer will someday be its ancestor.
Thursday, July 23, 2009
The seed is planted...
I've been meaning to start a blog for months...heck...years. In any given day of my life, there are countless thoughts, ideas, even epiphanies that are long forgotten by the time I get home to my Totino's pizza. Hopefully now I'll be able to catch a few, with the proverbial "notepad on the bedstand" now in effect.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)