Tag: ipad

HumanToolz: Making the iPad a Bit More Usable

Photo of HumanToolz iPad standAs much as I love my iPad, I have to admit it has a problem. Holding it gets tedious and is generally impractical while typing. And getting it to sit in a vertical position requires and external support of some kind.

Apple’s solution to this is hopeless. The Smart Cover works very well to protect the screen, but is a miserable stand. It only works at one angle and at the slightest provocation, its magnetic strip detaches from the iPad, which then topples over. There are many other stands available, but they tend to be clumsy, ugly, inflexible, or all three.

Enter the HumanToolz Mobile Stand, available for $65 as a preorder on Kickstarter; delivery is expected in November.) It’s a handsome aluminum device–the color on my preproduction model almost but didn’t quite match Apple’s–that supports a third-generation iPad or iPad 2 in positions from nearly horizontal to nearly vertical in landscape mode. (In portrait it is limited to a position 11 degrees off vertical.)

The stand consists of two thin bars that snap firmly to the iPad’s corners. A support piece shaped like a broad U attached to the middle of these bars with a clever hinge that rotates smoothly, without detents, through nearly 180 degrees but remains securely in any position you put it.

The stand weighs just 2.5 oz. (71 g) and is 5 mm thick at its thickest point, the hinge. It doesn’t really add appreciably to the iPad’s weight or bulk, a good thing since it is just hard enough to remove that you won’t want to put it on and off terribly often.

I found I used the HumanToolz stand in a variety of settings: Propped near vertical on a desk for table for reading or for use with my ZAGGflex keyboard, a bit above horizontal for typing on the on-screen keyboard, propped at a comfortable angle on my legs while sitting, or at a slightly less comfortable angle on my belly while lying down.

HumanToolz funded production of the stand by raising $88,600 on Kickstarter and it will be available online and in stores. Apple has kept stands other than the Smart Cover out of it retail stores, maybe on grounds of general ugliness. They ought to give the HumanToolz version a good look.

The iPad Is Selling like Mad And Making The Competition Sad

At the iPhone 5 event held on Wednesday, September 12, 2012, Tim Cook announced these facts regarding iPads:

1) Last quarter, Apple sold 17 million iPads.
2) Apple sold more iPads than any PC manufacturer sold of their entire PC lineup.
3) Apple has sold a total of 84 million iPads since its launch in April 2010, less than two and a half years ago.
4) Competitors have launched hundreds of tablets to compete with the iPad. One year ago, the iPad had 62% market share. Today the iPad’s lead has grown to 68% market share.

Five Observations:

First, all the action, all the growth in computing is in mobile devices. As for the future of computing, in my opinion, smartphones will have the bigger numbers, but tablets will have the bigger impact.

Second, neither Apple, nor HP, nor Dell, nor Lenovo, nor Acer, nor any one else who makes a living selling computing hardware cares a whit about whether you call the iPad a PC, a computer, a media tablet or a toy. That’s all just meaningless semantics. What they do care about is that Apple is selling more and more $500 (and up) devices while they are selling less and less.

“Airplanes are interesting toys but of no military value” ~ Marshal Ferdinand Foch

Third, Apple is just crushing the competition in this all-important new category. Starting with nearly 100% market share in 2010, it was inevitable that Apple’s overall market share would drop as seemingly every other manufacturer on the planet started selling this new, and rapidly growing form factor. So to see Apple’s market share GROWING after a two and a half year span is simply mind blowing.

Fourth, Google – and therefore Android – has, in my opinion, completely missed the boat in tablet computing. Andy Rubin and Google stubbornly refuse to acknowledge that there is a fundamental difference between smartphone apps and tablet apps:

“I don’t think there should be apps specific to a tablet…if someone makes an ICS app it’s going to run on phones and it’s going to run on tablets.” ~ Andy Rubin

Apple just announced that there are over 250,000 iPad specific apps in their store. Developers don’t create apps for kicks and buyers don’t buy iPad specific apps for no reason. There is a difference between a smartphone app and a tablet app. Apple gets it. Google doesn’t.

Android tablet manufacturers have paid the price for Google’s misstep as the lack of tablet specific Apps has cut the ground out from under their tablet efforts.

And with the introduction of the Google Nexus 7, Google has all but ended any hope that any Android manufacturer – other than Google – can make a profit on Android powered tablets.

Fifth, when you see the above numbers, you can see how very desperately Microsoft wants and needs to be in this sector. Microsoft Windows rules the notebook and desktop markets but they have nothing going on in phones and tablets…yet.

Conclusion

The future of computing is in tablets. And right now, Apple owns that future.

Re-Thinking The iPod Touch And The iPad Mini

Last week, my colleague Steve Wildstrom asked: “Is There Room in Apple’s Lineup for an iPad Mini?” I had the very same question and I was one of the very first to say so in the article’s comment section. However, after reading more on the matter and upon further reflection, I’m re-thinking my position.

With the rumored iPad mini on the horizon, I would have said that Apple was going to de-emphasize – if not discontinue – the iPod Touch. Instead, Apple did a major upgrade. How major? In addition to significant spec bumps, they added:

— 4″ Retina display
— A5 Chip (same as in the iPhone 4S)
— iOS 6
— Siri
— Airplay Mirroring
— Shared photo streams
— Dramatically improved, 5 megapixel iSight camera with autofocus, flash, Facetime HD and Panorama.

But it was the pricing that was the most perplexing. The new Touch, which will ship some time in October, will be priced at $299 for a 32 gigabyte model and $399 for 64 GB. With the new iPad starting at $499 for a Wi-Fi-only 16 GB model and the iPad 2 priced at $399, where does the rumored iPad Mini fit in?

I’m now speculating that the Ipad Mini will be priced the same, or nearly the same, as the iPad Touch. Counter-intuitive? Yes. Un-Apple like? Maybe not.

Apple has never been afraid of cannibalizing their own products. But one thing they have always feared and avoided was category confusion. Except during times of transition, Apple is fanatical about keeping their product lines distinct.

Marketing students and fans of the book: “The Paradox of Choice”, will understand Apple’s resolve in this matter. Confusion is the enemy of sales. Apple keeps its product lines far apart so that you know, almost intuitively, which device is the one and only one that will fit your needs.

So how would that work with the new iPad Touch and the rumored iPad Mini? If they have the same price, wouldn’t that cause massive consumer confusion? Not really. Here’s why.

Apple is clearly aiming the new iPod Touch at kids. In addition to all of the features described above, the new iPod Touch comes in kid-friendly colors and with a kid-friendly carrying Loop. Further, at the event where they announced the new iPod Touch, Apple heavily emphasisezed the iPod Touch’s ability to watch movies on its wide-screen display, the 1750,00 available games and the 150 million players made available via Game Center.

Apple is positioning the iPod Touch as a device for kids.

And the iPad Mini? It’s hard to know how Apple will position it since it doesn’t yet exist. But here are a couple of things that I think will differentiate it from the iPod Touch:

— It won’t fit in your pocket
— It won’t have a Retina Display
— It will run iPad – not just iPhone – Apps
— It will be 3G, and possibly LTE, capable

I believe that Apple is going to position the iPod Touch as the device for kids and the iPad Mini (or whatever it might be called) as a personal iPad – useful for everything an iPad can do except for screen intensive Applications.

I’ve always thought of the iPod Touch as Apple’s stealth iOS weapon. Virtually without competition, it gently ushers a younger generation into the world of iOS. And once they are there, what could be more natural than for those iPod Touch children to transition into iPhone and iPad carrying teens and adults?

Apparently, Apple feels the same way. They’ve sent a strong signal that the iPod touch is here to stay. And the rumored iPad Mini? Well, we won’t be able to say for sure until it actually exists. But I no longer think that the iPod Touch and the iPad Mini have much overlap with one another. Even at the same prices, they serve two very different purposes and two very different markets.

The iPad Put A Fork In Personal Computing

 
When Steve Jobs introduced the iPad in January 2010, he wondered aloud whether there was room between the smartphone and the notebook for a third category of tablet device like the iPad.

Everybody uses a laptop and a smartphone. And a question has arisen lately: is there room for a third category of device in the middle? Something that’s between a laptop and a smartphone. And of course we’ve pondered this question for years as well. The bar’s pretty high. In order to really create a new category of devices, those devices are going to have to be far better at doing some key tasks. Better than a laptop. Better than a smartphone.

Hard though it may be to believe, Western Civilization once had to collectively ask itself a similar question regarding a then radical new form of technology…a fork.

Before the fork was introduced, Westerners were reliant on the spoon and knife as the only eating utensils. Thus, people would largely eat food with their hands, calling for a common spoon when required. Members of the aristocracy would sometimes be accustomed to manners considered more proper and hold two knives at meals and use them both to cut and transfer food to the mouth, using the spoon for soups and broth.-Wikipedia


A FORK IS A CATEGORY ALL ITS OWN

A spoon, a fork and a knife are three different categories of cutlery. A smartphone, a tablet and a notebook are three different categories of computer.

A fork is its own category because it is far better at doing some key tasks. Better than a spoon. Better than a knife.

A tablet is its own category because it is far better at doing some key tasks. Better than a smartphone. Better than a notebook.


A FORK DOES NOT REPLACE A KNIFE

When I eat, I have a choice between using a spoon, a fork and a knife. A fork does not replace a knife. But its presence means that I use a knife less often.

When I compute, I have a choice between using a smartphone, a tablet and a notebook. A tablet does not replace a notebook. But its presence means that I use a notebook less often.


A FORK DOES NOT COMPETE WITH A KNIFE

Sometimes a fork complements a knife. Sometimes a fork is used on its own. But always a fork is used when it is most useful.

Sometimes a tablet complements a notebook. Sometimes a tablet is used on its own. But always a tablet is used when it is most useful.


A FORK IS NOT DEFINED BY HOW IT IS LABELED BUT BY WHAT IT DOES BEST

When I eat, I use the utensil that best serves my needs.

I do not ask silly questions, like whether a spoon is a liquid consumption device and a fork is a solids consumption device. I do not ask whether a knife does “real” work just because it does not, ordinarily, convey food to my mouth. I do not obsess on the exceptionally rare times when I may use my spoon as a fork, my fork as a knife or my knife as a fork. Instead, I simply use the right tool at the right time.

When I compute, I use the device that best serves my needs.

I do not ask silly questions, like whether a tablet is a consumption device. I do not ask whether a phone or a tablet does “real” work. I do not obsess on the exceptionally rare times when I may use my phone as a tablet, my tablet as a notebook or my notebook as a tablet. Instead, I simply use the right tool at the right time.


A FORK DOES NOT ASPIRE TO BE A KNIFE

Each utensil should be employed to do what it does best.

A fork does not aspire to be a knife. A knife does not aspire to be a fork. And most especially, a fork and a knife do not aspire to be one and the same thing.

Each device should be employed to do what it does best.

A tablet should not aspire to be a notebook. A notebook should not aspire to be a tablet. And most especially, a tablet and a notebook should not aspire to be one and the same thing.


A SPORK, A SPIFE, A KNORK AND A SPORF

A spork is a hybrid form of cutlery taking the form of a spoon-like shallow scoop with three or four fork tines.

A spife is a tool where the blade of a knife is used as the handle of the spoon.

A knork is a hybrid form of cutlery which combines the cutting capability of a knife and the spearing capability of a fork into a single utensil.

A sporf is a single eating utensil combining the properties of a spoon, fork, and knife. One popular brand is the Splayd.


MANY USES, FEW USERS

What does a spork, a spife, a knork and a sporf have in common?

Few have ever heard of them. Even fewer have any use for them.

What does a Surface Tablet, a Windows 8 Tablet and a Windows 8 desktop have in common with a spork, a spife, a knork and a sporf?

Everything.

They compromise on everything and excel at nothing. They provide far more features but far fewer benefits. They do many things but they don’t do any things better or even as well.

They’re not category defining because they’re not far better at doing any key tasks than are the already existing categories.


ONE MORE THING

Who are those most interested in using combination cutlery like the spork, spife, knork and sporf?

Specialists, with special needs, like campers, backpackers, fast food restaurants, schools, prisons, the military, plus special tasks like cutting kiwi fruit (spife) and special circumstances like those with only one hand (knork).

Who are those most interested in using combination devices like the Surface running Windows 8?

Specialists, like reporters, road warriors, gadget freaks, technological gunslingers, plus those with specialized tasks and special needs. In other words, the kinds of people who regularly read and even comment on tech blogs like this one. But not ordinary folk.

Just as the spork, spife, knork and sporf are extremely useful to the extremely few, so will the Surface and Windows 8 on tablets be extremely useful. But if you dare dream that any of these will go mainstream and earn a regular place at the table…you can stick a fork in it.

Confirmed: The iPad Isn’t Good At What It Isn’t Good At

What is it about the iPad that moves seemingly rational people to say perfectly ridiculous things?

The latest example of this foolishness is Matt Asay, writing in The Register, who argues that because there are some enterprise chores that the iPad does not do well or at all, “iPad is RUBBISH for enterprise.” The gist of Asay’s argument goes something like this:

  • Enterprise users depend on heavy-duty apps, especially Microsoft Word, Excel, and PowerPoint.
  • These apps are not available on the iPad.
  • The Apple alternatives, Pages, Numbers, and Keynote are less capable.
  • Therefore, the iPad is unsuited to enterprise use.

Each of these statements except the last is indisputably true. And that conclusion is completely wrong.

The problem is the implicit assumption that unless a computing device is well-suited to everything we might ask of any computer, it isn’t suited for anything. This is the sort of thinking–Microsoft is particularly prone to it–that has given us bloated all-purpose devices that can do anything, though often not very well.

To support his case, Asay quotes a Macworld article (unfortunately, no link was provided): “For the most part, I love writing on my iPad. But I still do so only when my MacBook isn’t around…”

I would say the same thing, and I would add that I don’t use my MacBook Air when my 27″ iMac or desktop Windows PC is around. The critical thing is that the iPad is always around when I want it; it has the right mix of capability of mobility for a vast variety of jobs, many of them as great utility to the enterprise.

It is true that putting capable Office programs on tablets gives Windows  slates a potential advantage in the enterprise markets. But, as I have written, the new versions of Office programs, while more touch-capable than their predecessors, still are not very well suited to touch use. It’s not at all clear at this point that a Windows tablet running Excel 2013 will really be very much better for enterprise spreadsheet use than an iMac with Numbers.

The big problem here, though, is the fallacy that lack of capability at any task the enterprise may demand renders a device useless. Let’s accept–and celebrate–the fact that we are living in a world where we have a choice of devices of varying capabilities and where

The Case for 7-inch Tablets

Last week the rumor mills and tech blogs were bustling last week about the possibility of a 7-inch iPad, potentially called the iPad Mini. Rather than focus this entire column on why it makes sense for Apple to make a smaller version of the iPad, I figured I would point out why I think there is a market for 7″ tablets and how such a product may fit in Apple’s and others portfolio.

The Evolution of Portable Entertainment

In my view the 7″ tablet represents the evolution of portable entertainment. In many of the same ways that the iPad itself represents the evolution of portable computing, so would a smaller iPad represent the evolution of portable entertainment. I spoke about this and was quoted on the subject last week with many press, and my overall point was that the right way to think about a smaller iPad is that it represents more the evolution of the iPod than the evolution of the iPad.

7″ tablets may very well be the ideal size for an ultra-portable entertainment focused tablet. The form factor itself makes it highly portable. It can fit in purses, coat pockets, and many other places easily. The screen size is more enjoyable for entertainment than the most pocketable computer (the smart phone) but still small enough to be more portable than a 9.7-10.1 inch tablet.

The larger tablets like the iPad are more mobile than notebooks but still capable of being used for productivity. In my view the iPad is a general purpose tablet where a 7″ tablet is more specialized and its value will be centered around entertainment.

For the iPad customer I don’t see the value of owning an iPad and an iPad mini. The iPad in my opinion is capable of fulfilling the task of personal computing for the vast majority of mass market, non power user consumers. In our talks with this specific group of consumers were are finding that their iPads are slowly replacing their traditional PCs and we expect this trend to continue.

However, there will still be plenty of consumers who still desire, want, need, a new notebook. This market may very well benefit from a more portable media companion like a 7″ tablet. The notebook plus a 7″ tablet combo will be an ideal solution for a certain segment of the market. And the sufficiency of the iPad as a portable media companion and personal computer will meet the needs of other segments of the market.

An iPad mini strengthens Apple’s ecosystem plain and simple.

For Google, and Amazon, a 7″ tablet is not an ecosystem strengthener it is an ecosystem extender. Amazon’s strategy is to drive commerce and they desire their screen to be consumers personal window to spend money in the Amazon commerce engine and consume Amazon services.

Google’s desire is to extend all of the Google services to a market broader than smart phones. The Nexus 7 is the first solid step in this direction and has all of Google’s services tightly integrated.

For all the above companies a pure media tablet play makes sense. All the above companies have more ways to make money on these devices than just the hardware. So where does that leave everyone else?

There was no MP3 Market

I recall the saying that there was not an MP3 market there was only an iPod market. The same case can be made for the iPad to date. The question in my mind is whether or not this 7-inch tablet market is sustainable for many or just a few. More specifically can anyone but Apple, Google, and Amazon make any money from this form factor?

I use the MP3 market illustration because I am willing to bet that the fundamentals of the 7″ tablet market will function very similar to the iPod market. Namely because the 7″ form factor represents the evolution of portable entertainment, which the iPod was an evolution of as well. These devices will also likely not see subsidization from a carrier any time soon or heavily discounted from a retailer. They are also highly dependent on a rich media ecosystem of services like music stores, video and TV show stores, digital books and magazines, etc. In many ways these devices represent to consumers a larger version of what they knew and loved about the iPod.

The devices being positioned primarily as entertainment devices, and their subsequent dependence of rich media services, only strengthens the case that this market favors the few over the many. I am in no way saying others can’t compete only that it will be very difficult and they may need to turn over new stones in order to find partners who own all or parts of a rich media ecosystems.

Where is Microsoft?

This discussion about the 7-inch tablet segment begs a fascinating question. Can Microsoft play in it? Microsoft has fundamentally built their next generation operating systems as the purest blend between a full desktop and full tablet software platform. This philosophy is not going to work on a segment that is focused purely on media. Metro may all by itself but not Windows 8. So is the answer Windows Phone? Is Windows Phone the solution Microsoft can offer any potential customers looking at the 7″ segment? Microsoft has Nook assets at their disposal but the Nook platform was built on Android. Do they need to revamp Windows Phone or create something new around Nook assets? Or does Microsoft let Android have the 7″ market as the platform of choice for any company not named Apple?

Microsoft is on the eve of simply trying to gain a foothold in tablet computing at large, while on that same eve a new category is dawning that I don’t believe the are even remotely prepared for. Microsoft’s reaction to the 7″ tablet market will be one of the more interesting story lines to watch.

All in all the tablet category is still the fastest growing segment in personal computing. Even though 7″ tablets will be focused on entertainment and media they will continue to ignite this new growth phase of personal computing. I think we can again confidently predict that tablets will be hot again this holiday.

Why Apple Needs a 7 Inch Tablet

Last week, most of the tech industry was consumed with Google I/O, Google’s annual event to woo software and hardware developers to Googlenexus 7 and consequently away from Apple and Microsoft.  In addition to Google Glass-adorned daredevils jumping out of blimps and scaling down the sides of buildings, the Nexus 7 Tablet, the first full-featured, no-compromise tablet was launched at $199.  What’s very clear is that the Google Nexus 7 will sell well and take business away from Apple’s $399 iPad 2.  This is exactly why Apple needs a 7” tablet or else face the prospect of losing market share and profit dollars.

The Kindle Fire was released back in September 2011 to big fanfare.  I was accurate in stating it would take share away from the $499 iPad 2, which was true until the iPad 3 was launched and iPad 2 reduced down to $399 back in February.  The situation has changed now as the Fire is slogging away and is losing share to the iPad 2 and even to the $199 Nook Tablet and the $169 Nook Color.  It makes sense, as the Fire is a stripped down tablet and the iPad 2 is not, and many consumers were willing to pay the extra $200 to have the full experience.  The Fire used a smartphone operating system, had an SD display and users got a large smartphone experience.  It wan’t a great experience, but it wasn’t horrible, particularly at the ground-breaking price point.  The Fire also lacked access to the broad Google Play content and application environment, too, which, to some, was limiting.

The Google Nexus 7 Tablet is an entirely different animal.  It comes with the top of the line NVIDIA Tegra 3 with 4-PLUS-1 processor, the latest Android Jelly Bean OS, NFC, an HD display, camera, microphone and full access to the Google Play store. After seeing Jelly Bean in action, it is a marked improvement over prior Android operating systems  I have used that just didn’t quite feel right and toward which I have been so critical.  The Google Nexus 7 will sell well, which is good for Google, Android, ASUS and NVIDIA, but bad for Apple, unless they act before the holidays.

Historically, Apple has been OK taking the high road on unit market share, particularly in PCs.  The situation changed with the iPod, iPhone and the same is true for iPad.  Apple wants market share and will do what it takes to get it, as long as it’s profitable, they can deliver a great experience, and stay true to their brand. Apple could do just this with a 7”, $299 tablet. Apple would be very profitable as well, as the most expensive piece-parts of a tablet are the display and touch-screen, which are priced somewhat linear with size. Apple may have redesigned some of the innards of the new iPad 2 as they lowered the price, but not nearly enough to offset the $100 price reduction, so a mini-iPad would be additive, not dilutive like the $399 iPad 2.

Would consumers pay $100 for the Apple brand and experience?  In most traditional geographies, yes, they would, as consumers have shown the willingness to pay more than $99 more for iPods and $199 more for iPads.  This is exactly what the mini-iPad would be; a large iPod.  That’s not bad, that is good in the sense that  the iPod is still the most popular full-featured personal media player out there.

Will Apple productize what they undoubtedly have running in their labs?  I will leave that to the numerous Apple rumor sites, but one major occurrence suggests they will not, and that was one of the great proclamations from the late Steve Jobs.  According to Wired, in October of 2010, Jobs apparently said the following during an earnings call: “7-inch tablets are tweeners: too big to compete with a smartphone and too small to compete with the iPad. These are among the reasons that the current crop of 7-inch tablets are going to be DOA — dead on arrival.” Does this say Apple would never do a 7” tablet?  Actually it does not, as it is really a statement about non-Apple products and  Jobs left Apple some wiggle room to maneuver.  What I know for sure is that Apple must act in the next few months or risk tablet share degradation to the Google Nexus 7.

The Apple Ecosystem Just Got Stronger

Apple today at their World Wide Developers Conference released a number of things that have made their ecosystem even stronger. I am of the opinion that one of the best ways to analyze computing platforms is to look at them as ecosystems. When consumers purchase a personal computer like a desktop, notebook, tablet or smartphone, whether they know it or not they are investing into an ecosystem.

Related Column: It’s All About Ecosystems

Not too long ago computing platforms were islands unto themselves. Each product stood on its own and wasn’t connected to other devices in a meaningful way. But now that consumers are purchasing more and more computing products they began to demand that their devices begin to work seamlessly together for a more fulfilling experience. This demand has led to the birth of more holistic computing ecosystems. And interestingly software companies who offer platform software for desktops / notebooks, tablets, and smartphones are the companies building the most robust ecosystems on the market and right now only Apple and Microsoft fit that bill. Today Apple with the release of new and updated Mac hardware and software and the release of their newest mobile operating system iOS 6 just strengthened their ecosystem all together.

It all revolves around iCloud

Tim Cook said something that made perfect sense to an Apple observer like me. He said that iCloud isn’t just a product, it’s a strategy for the next decade. With that fundamental point in mind it becomes easy to see why Apple is integrating so iCloud into the core of their OSX and iOS software. iCloud is the glue that holds all of Apple’s hardware and software together. Take for example some simple features they have added with the newest Safari.

It may seem small but this little thing is just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to the value of Apple’s ecosystem. Imagine you use a notebook, tablet, and smartphone regularly. In the usage of all three of those products it would seem logical that you would browse the web frequently on each of them. Now what if you where on the couch looking for a recipe and you wanted to view that very same recipe on your tablet or smartphone. Most people would either have to re-search for that recipe on the other device or you could email yourself the link. With the latest version of Safari for OSX Mountain Lion every single web page you have open as a tab is available to you on any of your OSX or iOS devices. So if I want to look at a web page I have open on my Mac from my iPad, I simply click the new iCloud tabs button on the top of Safari and all the same tabs open on my Mac are available for me on my iPad or iPhone.

This seems like something small but it is extremely useful and demonstrates the value of iCloud integration across hardware and software to create a consistent and useful experience. This is just one of many new features and advancements Apple is making through software to better delight their customers by solving current and future problems.

The Vertical Advantage

The tight integration of software innovations with specific hardware innovations all around a service like iCloud is easier when you control all the moving parts. I have emphasized this time and time again but it is this fundamental point that gives Apple such an advantage. The Apple ecosystem has no external variables. Apple doesn’t need the support of hardware or software partners in order to advance their ecosystem. This point can not be stressed enough.

It is because of this vertical advantage that Apple can annually release a unified launch of new hardware and new software all designed to work better together. And it is this better together that creates the fundamentals of the Apple ecosystem, which just got stronger.

Making The Devices We Know and Love Better

The last key point about the strength of the Apple ecosystem is that with this latest software for Mac, iPhone, and iPad, Apple has made the experience even better. I would contend that many of the devices we know and love have become even more useful. Now many may argue that some of the new features released are available on other devices or platforms. That is all fine and good for customers of other platforms but the bottom line is I and hundreds of millions of other people have invested in Apple’s ecosystem when it comes to my personal computing needs. So for me the fact that Apple has developed new features to make my experience with their hardware even better is most welcomed.

At the end of the day it is those features that add to our experience, make these products easier to use, and more importantly make using these products in our daily lives that much better. It is the small things like being able to ignore an incoming call with a text message or reminder to call the person back is extremely useful. The improved maps and elegant navigation is also a welcomed additional improvement. Perhaps the biggest improvement of all is the major upgrade to Siri.

All of these things and more are focused on one singular thing, making the devices we know and love better and more useful. Apple is continuing to make their hardware more functional every year. I am not sure it is possible to say that any other company is delivering their customer base new and improved features and functionality to all their hardware on an annual basis.

This is just one more thing adding to the already strong Apple ecosystem and it will be very interesting to see how the competition responds.

Dear Apple: Please Keep the iPhone Locked Down

Image of iPhone with padlockEver since Apple introduced the iPhone, first with no third-party apps allowed then permitting apps only under Apple’s strict supervision, there has been hand-wringing in some quarters of the tech world about how Apple’s locked-down mentality would stifle freedom and innovation. The latest blast  against “Apple’s Crystal Prison”comes from the Electronic Frontier Foundation:

While Apple’s products have many virtues, they are marred by an ugly set of restrictions on what users and programmers can do with them. This is most especially true of iOS, though other Apple products sometimes suffer in the same way. In this article we will delve into the kinds of restrictions that Apple, phone companies, and Microsoft have been imposing on mobile computers; the excuses these companies make when they impose these restrictions; the dangers this is creating for open innovation; why Apple in particular should lead the way in fixing this mess. We also propose a bill of rights that need to be secured for people who are purchasing smartphones and other pocket computers.

Fortunately, there’s no reason to believe that Apple is listening to the siren song of openness coming from places like EFF, the Free Software Foundation, Harvard’s Berkman Center, and the Software Freedom Law Center. Completely open systems would give opportunities for anyone with programming skill to get into the guts of any device and see what he or she could do with it. It’s possible that some wonderful things might result. But this same openness clears a pathway for the malicious or the merely incompetent. I don’t care if people want to mess up their own systems, but I don’t want their badly written or downright evil software corrupting mine.

The importance of user experience. By maintaining rigid control over just what software can be loaded onto an iPhone or iPad, Apple has created one of the best user experiences ever. An app that I download from the iTunes App Store may be good, bad, or indifferent in terms of its functionality or its usefulness to me. But I can be confident that it is not going to make a mess of my phone or tablet. And if it does something it shouldn’t, like upload my entire address book without permission, I can be reasonably confident it will be fixed quickly. I don’t have this confidence about any other phone, tablet, or PC except perhaps the fading BlackBerry and the struggling Windows Phone, which have lock-down policies of their own.

For people who really want to mess with their iPhones, they can always jailbreak them and live with the consequences, including a loss of warranty protection. Apple has tried to stop jailbreaking, but has generally been unsuccessful. For the rest of us, the overwhelming majority, we are happy to accept Apple’s restrictions  as the price of increased security and usability. I hate giving up freedom for an illusion of security, but Apple, unlike the Department of Homeland Security, seems to be delivering the real thing.

Misunderstood Gatekeeper. The same folks complaining about the lockdown of iOS are also fretting about new policies for Mac software. But here they seem to be willfully misunderstanding what Apple is doing. Apple recognizes that a Mac is a very different beast than an iOS device and that the sort of restrictions it imposes on iPhones and iPads simply won’t work on Macs. The new Gatekeeper for OS X Mountain Lion does no prevent any user software from being installed. In its default configuration, it will warn against apps that are not digitally signed by a registered Apple developer, but users can easily override the caution and install what they want. Other settings restrict installation only to apps from the Mac App Store, which are approved by Apple and which must obey  new rules requiring sandboxing of apps, or, at the other extreme, allow the installation of anything without objection.

EFF concedes that “fortunately, it will be possible to turn this off in Mountain Lion and install apps from anywhere you want,” but adds, “Apple is continuing down the dangerous road of making their products less open.” Failing to produce evidence of this, EFF’s Micah Lee falls back on hypotheticals: “OS X software authors will find themselves subject to the whims of Apple HQ. What would Mozilla do if Apple refused to authorize Firefox for OS X Mountain Lion, in the same way that Apple refuses to allow a true version of Firefox for the iPhone? Watch half their Mac market share disappear?”

EFF closes with a “Bill of Rights for Mobile Computer Owners.” It’s a strange manifesto, focusing on issues that very, very few users care about, such as the freedom to install the Linux operating system on the phone of your choice. Considering how few people have chosen to install Linux on PCs, where it actually works reasonably well,  this doesn’t seem like a burning issue for most folks. There is nothing in the call about security or ease of use, issues that actually driver users’ choices. This has been a huge blind spot of the free and open software movement for years. And until they take usability seriously, they will be pushed further to the fringes of the tech world and more and more of what we do goes mobile.

 

 

iPad Magazine Apps–A Rare Failure

Technology Review Editor Jason Pontin has written an insightful article on why magazine apps on the iPad have been a huge disappointment to publishers–and why TR is abandoning its apps in favor of an HTML 5 web site.

When the iPad came out two years ago, many in the magazine industry, along with Apple itself,  hailed the tablet as the savior of the troubled publication business.  While the iPad has vastly exceeded original expectations for most classes of apps, magazines have been a dismal flop. Pontin explains why better than I ever could, so read his piece.

But I have to admit I am not all that surprised. The goal of most apps seemed to be to recreate the print product in electronic form,  a goal that never felt right. And the apps tended to be big, slow, and buggy.

I still get a bunch of print magazines, but the only publication for which I have a paid online-only subscription is the Kindle Fire edition of The New Yorker.  The New Yorker works as an app better than most simply because it is almost entirely text, laid out in the most boring way imaginable, so the design elements, such as they are, survive. That  said, I actually hate the New Yorker‘s Kindle app. It’s slow and buggy. It violates Kindle user interface standards by requiring a vertical swipe to turn pages; a horizontal swipe takes you to the next or previous article. And it won’t let me rotate the Fire to get that annoying power button out of the way.

But I was surprised by Pontin’s explanation of just how dismal the economics of the app have been. It looks like magazine publishers will have to go on looking for their salvation.

The iPad May Kill Laptops and Save the Desktop

Photo of IBM PCThe iPad–and other tablets if we ever get some good ones–poses an existential threat to the laptop. But it might provide a new lease on life for the much-ignored desktop PC. My colleague Ben Bajarin touched on this theme in his a post Notebooks Are the Past, Tablets Are the Future. I want to take a look at it in more depth.

I’m starting from the increasingly uncontroversial premise that a good tablet is all the computer most people need. The biggest weakness of tablets, the lack of local storage, is being solved in the cloud. For the times that you want to write more than is comfortable with the on-screen keyboard, a lightweight Bluetooth keyboard does the trick.

For some of us, though, a full-featured PC remains very much a part of our everyday toolkit. I frequently work on complex documents with a large number of windows open at one time. I do a fair amount of research. I edit video and work on databases. These are tasks that range from inconvenient to impossible on my iPad. So I have a Windows 7 desktop, which I use primarily for accounting and as a sort of poor man’s file server, and a 27″ iMac, which is my desktop workhorse.

What I am finding however, is that is use my laptops less and less. I spent this past weekend at a family event in North Carolina. I took both an iPad and a 13″ MacBook Air and the MacBook never came out of my bag. Everything I wanted could be done more conveniently on the iPad. Even on business trips, I’m finding the laptop doesn’t get used unless I really need it.

My first notebook was a Hewlett-Packard OmniBook 600c in the mid-1990s and since then I have used everything from tiny netbooks to a dual-screen ThinkPad (barely) mobile workstation. And the truth is that every notebook has felt like a compromise. The displays were never big enough, even on units too heavy to carry comfortably. Except on the ThinkPads that I favored for years and the more recent MacBooks, pointing devices ranged from barely adequate to awful.

Ergonomic nightmares. The ergonomics are just plain bad because a keyboard permanently attached to the display meant that the positioning of the keyboard or the display or most likely both was less than optimal. (This is why I prefer my separate ZAGGkeys Flex keyboard  to more integrated units.) The push to include touch screens on Windows 8 laptops is going to make bad ergonomics worse. I tried many Windows Tablet PCs over the years and the awfulness of using touch in laptop mode was not due entirely to Microsoft’s dreadful software.

Desktops are actually a much happier solution for heavy-duty computing. Feature for feature, you get more for your money than with laptops. Storage is cheap and all but unlimited, and even with the cloud lots of local storage is a good thing to have. You can buy the keyboard, pointing device,  and displays you prefer and put them where you want relative to the keyboard.

The trend in recent years has been to use a laptop as an all-purpose computer, perhaps connecting it to a bigger display and an external keyboard when it’s at home on your desk. That made a fair amount of sense in a pre-tablet world. Today, however, even most heavy users of computing power will be happy with a tablet when away from their offices (there are exceptions, say, engineers and software developers.) And instead of settling for the compromises of a laptop when in your office, why not go for a no-compromise desktop. And if you really want touch in a desktop, the displays can be designed so they will tilt nearly horizontal for better ergonomics; HP has been using this feature in their TouchSmart all-in-ones. It’s time for a lot of businesses that have replaced desktops with laptops to rethink the policy.

I can’t see myself giving up a laptop just yet. There are still times when I need a full computer while traveling or when I have to work out of an office (someone else’s) and bring my own computer. But these occasions are getting rarer and rarer, and I could be laptop-free sooner than I think. But the desktops will survive and maybe even prosper.

My Two Must Have iPad Accessories

Accessories are a key part of any platforms ecosystem. I was at the Apple store in a mall in San Jose recently and I couldn’t believe the amount of accessories for iPad now on the market. I was especially surprised about the amount of iPad mounts for all around your house or yard—more on that later. Right now there are two accessories that are getting used quite a bit in combination with my iPad. The first is the recently announced BIG JAMBOX by Jawbone.

BIG JAMBOX

I have been reviewing the BIG JAMBOX from Jawbone for a little over a week. My conclusion is that it is one of the best wireless speakers available. Particularly however for my use cases it fits like a glove. If you have used the initial JAMBOX by Jawbone you got a taste of what big sound from a little portable speaker could sound like. But the use cases for the JAMBOX are more for travel. And although decently loud it is not quite loud enough for places like the beach, pool, backyard, park, etc.

The recently announced BIG JAMBOX is built specially for big portable sound perfect for outdoor use particularly. This is where the BIG JAMBOX was ideal for my needs.

I have an above average sized yard for California. I spend a lot of time outside in my pool, yard, garden and micro farm. While outside in all those areas I like to have music playing. And unfortunately running wires is just not an option. So from the beginning I have tried to solve my outdoor audio needs using wireless technology. This usually works as long as you are in close proximity to the speakers. In the pool area this works but not during parties or while working the fields. Enter BIG JAMBOX to solve my outdoor speaker problems.

Where the JAMBOX failed for me in long range, high volume sound the BIG JAMBOX did the trick and with a quality sound experience without distorted audio. When I was briefed by the folks at Jawbone on this product they promoted the speakers capabilities outdoors. The BIG JAMBOX lived up to the hype and performed admirably outdoors.

My backyard has outdoor audio challenges many for a range of reasons. The primary one, leading to my largest issue with sound, is that I have no solid fences. So sound has nothing to bounce off and can get drowned out quickly. To truly test the BIG JAMBOX’s audio capabilities I turned it all the way up and walked as far as I could and still hear the music clearly and cleanly. Below is a picture from the point of view of the BIG JAMBOX to where I was standing to still hear the sound clearly and cleanly.

The BIG JAMBOX’s ability to fill such a large open area with sound was what impressed me most and primarily why it is a must have iPad accessory for me and my go to wireless speaker.

The Logitech Ultrathin Keyboard Cover for iPad

I have been trying nearly every new iPad keyboard case that hits the market. Many are very good and nicely pair a keyboard with the iPad in an elegant case. Yet the new Ultrathin Keyboard Cover for iPad by Logitech is the best one I have tried yet.

There are several reasons why this is the case. My prior favorite case was the Zagg Folio case. I used this case and found it very nice. The only real problem was how the iPad slipped into the keyboard case made it difficult to quickly get the iPad out to use without the keyboard attached. The new Ultrathin Keyboard Cover for iPad pairs with the iPad like a smart cover via a magnet allowing it to easily detach for usage in tablet mode.

The other element that is very nice is that the groove to “dock” the iPad in to hold it up in landscape or portrait also has a magnet in it allowing it to snap in nicely and securely for use while typing. Due to this implementation it was also easy to dock the iPad in portrait mode while the Zagg Folio case could only be used in landscape mode due to its design. I actually prefer to use the iPad in portrait mode most of the time, especially when writing.

The Ultrathin Keyboard cover is also extremely thin when secured and shut with the iPad making it very nice for travel and mobility. The Ultrathin Keyboard Cover’s smart use of magnets both for using as a cover for the iPad as well as for docking while typing are two great features setting this iPad keyboard apart from the rest.

Runner Up – Seagate GoFlex Satellite Drive

Also making it very close to my top two iPad accessories is the Seagate GoFlex Satellite drive. When take the iPad with me when I travel as my only mobile computer, I need to make sure all my files are accessible. I use the cloud for storage of certain files but some files like our presentations, research material, and even my HD movies are more quickly accessible via a portable drive. The GoFlex Satellite’s wireless features allow me to keep all my key files and data quickly accessible with the iPad.

These are the things that are adding even more value to my iPad experience. Feel free to share any accessories that making your iPad experience that much more enjoyable.

Would Hemingway have used an iPad?

For most of the week I have been in Paris, a city that I have traveled to regularly since 1971. Back then, communications to the US was dismal and a letter sent from here could take 2 weeks to get home. In fact, General Charles De Gaulle was still ruling when I first came to Paris and he was not a big fan of telecommunications. Consequently, the French phone systems were antiquated and in need of serious attention.

But about 7 years after his death and with new open minded rulers now in charge, France actually leap frogged much of Europe when they introduced the Minitel systems, which was really the first in home computer terminals that connected to a broad range of services. In fact, from its early days, users could make online purchases, make train reservations, check stock prices, search the telephone directory, have a mailbox, and chat in a similar way to that now made possible by the Internet.

Over the years, communications in France, and much of Europe, has come a long way and today just about everybody here has a cell phone. And interestingly, pretty much every tourist I have run into is snapping pictures on their smartphones. It seems that cell phones and smart phones have almost replaced the local phone and the need for a MiniTel system is long gone thanks to the Internet. A side note to this is the amount of iPhones I have seen in use. On Saturday as I road the Metro or subway to a street market, there were 12 people in the subway car I was on using an iPhone. And while I saw a stray Blackberry or even a Nokia phone once in awhile, iPhones seem to be everywhere.

If you have been to Paris, you know that this is a city with a very rich history and reminders of this are all around. From the Eiffel Tower, to the Arc De Triumph to the century old paintings lining the walls of the Louvre. Next to Rome and Athens, Paris is perhaps the richest city when it comes to historic landmarks. But there is one part of Paris’ history that is of real interest to anyone serious about literature and that is the time when many expats moved to Paris to find inspiration and freedom of expression in the 1920’s. And while there were a lot of artists and sculptors in Paris during this time, it is the writers of this period that interests me the most.

As I write this column, I am in a café called Les Deux Magots at about the same spot Ernest Hemingway use to sit and write during the early 1920’s. I can almost see him leaning over his pad of paper, writing furiously as he sat there day after day for hours at a time writing out his masterpieces in long hand. At that time, Hemingway was in Paris representing a Canadian newspaper and writing on the side, so-to-speak. At this time he was introduced to Gertrude Stein and Ms. Stein referred to Hemingway, James Joyce and Ezra Pound and others such as Pablo Picasso and Joan Miro as the “Lost Generation”.

But in those days, the process of getting any of Hemingway’s works accepted, approved, edited and often rewritten took a great deal of time. There was limited air postal service and the telegraph was only used for short news items. As I sit here writing this column, I can’t help but think of how different it might have been for Hemingway and the great literary minds of those days, who have had so much influence on our literature today, if they had the tools of our modern era.

In fact, I am writing this on an iPad with a Bluetooth keyboard and when I send this off it will go over the Internet and to our editors in mere seconds. This got me to wondering if Hemingway had these tools available to him if he would have used an iPad? Or for that matter, would he have used a laptop or PC? He had a typewriter at his disposal but history reports that a lot of his writing was done in long hand.

Even today, I sometimes run in to writers who still use paper and pen, although they are a rare-breed these days. Most writers now use a laptop or desktop with a good word processor and use the Internet to send their work to editors instantly. Now, getting a response about a writers work could come to them in hours or days instead of the months it took in Hemingway’s era.

Of course, this is an empty exercise since most writers of that day used the modern day tools of their time, which in most cases was with pen and paper and typewriters if they were stationary. But in doing research about that period of time, even with typewriters available, I found that some writers thought them to be too new fangled and stayed with their most comfortable form of writing, which was with pen and paper. Hemingway typed when at his office but used pen and paper when in café’s, parks and anytime he was away from his tiny office.

But I can’t help wondering what other great works of literature Hemingway and his writer colleagues of that time would have given us if they had the tools of today at their disposal. What if Hemingway could have penned more novels during his era if he had the advanced tools of our time? Perhaps we would have the dozens of manuscripts he had written that were in a suitcase that his wife lost at Gare De Lyon when she was coming back to Paris from Geneva to meet him in 1922. If they had been in digital form and backed up, we may today be reading dozens of other works by him to enrich our literary life.

In Woody Allen’s fascinating movie “Midnight in Paris” he examines the idea of people of one age romanticizing about a different age of the past and wanting to go back and discover what it would be like to live during that time. But time travel in reverse is not my cup of tea. Rather, I love the age of technology and instant communications, not to mention the improved healthcare of our time. But if I could go back in time I would like to hand Hemingway an iPad and see if he would use it to create new literary masterpieces. Now that would be a picture worth a thousand words and perhaps we could prevail on Picasso to paint it!

The Fallacies of How To Compete with the iPad

I take articles like this claiming the iPad will drop below 50% market share by as early as next year with a grain of salt. I don’t want this article to be about all the reasons why we believe the iPad will maintain significant market share, we have written quite extensively about those reasons. I’d rather examine a few flaws in competitors thinking about how to compete with the iPad and to do that I’d like to start off by making a point. I genuinely believe that it is possible to compete with the iPad. I don’t think it’s easy. I don’t think many companies can; but I don’t think it is impossible.

There is always room to innovate. The problem is simply that the companies attempting to create competing touch computers don’t understand touch computing or the market dynamics for tablets. It seems as though many vendors and software platform providers believe that by simply slapping a touch screen on a piece of hardware, regardless of what that hardware looks like, that it will hit the market and instantly be competitive. This is the fallacy number one.

Touch computing requires a touch based ecosystem. This is everything from carefully designed hardware, software, and to a degree services, all around touch (not mouse and keyboard) as a computing paradigm. This is no trivial task. Android is a weak touch computing ecosystem in my opinion. Mostly due to Android being an advertising strategy not a software strategy to Google. Time will tell with Windows 8 what kind of touch computing platform it truly becomes. Windows 8’s success rests largely on the hardware manufacturers and software developers ability to understand touch computing and develop a truly competitive ecosystem.

Fallacy number two is that the number of designs in the market on a particular platform is a competitive advantage. When I ask why a particular platform release may be competitive, often number of designs is the answer. “There will be over xx designs in the market,” is a phrase I hear often. I don’t believe that number of designs alone makes a particular platform competitive. In fact, it is perhaps quite the opposite. There is a book I like to reference called The Paradox of Choice by Barry Schwartz. The overall premise of this great book is that too much choice or too much variation in choice can overwhelm the purchaser to the point of frustration and lead to the inability to make a decision. My concern with too many products on a particular platform is that consumers may find the decision making process painful and confusing. This is why I believe there is a lot of merit to the argument for very limited product offerings per vendor and per platform to a degree.

Fallacy number three is that low cost always wins. I don’t believe that today’s consumers in mature markets want things that are cheap. I believe they want things that are valuable to them at a personal level. A key point to understand is that in mature markets what is valuable varies quite a bit. This is because in mature markets consumers make specific purchases for specific reasons. Often in mature markets consumers know roughly what they want, why they want it, and they are shopping with a pre-set of conditions. What one segment finds valuable may not be the same as another group. This is why product segmentation is important. The key is to create products in a segment–hopefully a large one– that consumers in said segment find valuable. In the automotive industry, for example, minivans target a segment, trucks target a segment, motorcycles target a segment, economy cars target a segment, and so on and so forth. In this case, the automotive manufacturer understands the segment a product is being created for and then innovates and delivers solutions to meet that segments needs on an annual basis. This understanding of the market dynamics for tablets is what I think is largely being missed by those desiring to create competitive tablets.

The question anyone who desires to create a tablet to compete with the iPad needs to answer is “What will my tablet do better than the iPad.” And what can they do with it that they can’t do with an iPad?

If there is not a well reasoned answer to this question then get back to the drawing board and innovate. The answer may not be obvious or easy to figure out but just trying to be me too is a recipe for disaster. Perhaps if these new Windows tablet vendors can create a product that is unique, does specific things the iPad doesn’t, and meets additional needs that the iPad can’t (or Apple isn’t interested in), then they might have a chance to truly deliver a competitive product that gains market traction.

Where in the App Store is Carmen Sandiego?

One of the goals we have in my household is to develop and maintain an inquisitive culture and the desire to learn. Being immersed in the technology industry as I am, I naturally add technology as a part of that process. One of my favorite examples of how we have done this was with an app called iBird Explorer Western.

My family and I live just outside San Jose in an agricultural / rural part of the area and because of that we see quite a wide variety of birds we never encountered in the city. My oldest daughter (age 9) and I both have the app on our iDevices, mine on my iPhone and hers on the iPod Touch. It has been remarkable to see how quickly she can spot a new bird in the wild and quickly use the app to identify the bird and learn interesting facts.

Even more recently in this process she has begun playing a game called Stack the States fairly regularly. This game teaches her facts about US states as well as how to identify them and place them on a map. It does so in a way that makes learning fun and technology at its best should accomplish that goal when it comes to education.

Because of my desire to integrate technology into the learning process and inquisitive nature of my kids, I began thinking of games I appreciated as a kid that did the same. The first one that came to mind, for my wife and I, was Where in the World is Carmen Sandiego?

This game did a great job, in my opinion, of integrating game play with lessons on geography and other facts that was fun and educational. I had been watching for a while, and still to no avail, the arrival of this game in the iTunes App Store. This game seems like an ideal game for iOS devices and I am still surprised it is not there. The company that owns the rights called The Learning Company also owns the rights to The Oregon Trail, a game that is available for iOS and quite popular.

Game developers are smart to be using legacy franchises to bring games into the touch computing era. As devices like the iPad get integrated more into the learning process at different age levels, these games can provide a solid base to build upon and bring to tablets and more.

Apple’s re-invigoration of the software community is creating new possibilities with game software on computing devices and especially those that are touch based.

Where in the World is Carmen Sandiego is one of many legacy franchises that I hope make it to touch devices. Such software and the software development communities focus on creating games that are fun and educational are positive trends that I would like to see continue.

Apple Turns Technology Into Art

As I was reflecting on my first experience with the new iPad and its retina display I was intrigued with a thought. There has always been something about the iPhone’s retina display and now with the iPad’s display that has me mesmerized. When I first saw the new iPad and the screen at Apple’s event I couldn’t stop looking at it. Even today I sometimes just turn it on to look at it and shake my head in disbelief.

The thought that I was intrigued by is how the visual appeal of Apple’s devices, and in this case of the screen, causes us to be so emotionally attached to them. Even this NY Times article in September of last year points out that consumers do actually love their iPhones. I believe this affect however as everything to do with the visually appealing experience with Apple products.

In a TIME column I wrote last year, I pointed out that Apple’s desire to create products that are at the intersection of liberal arts and technology drives them to create technology products that are in essence art. Apple turns technology into art we can use. Apple exhibits an unparalleled focus in the technology industry to design some of the most visually appealing hardware in all of computing. This focus of creating objects of desire is one part of many that encompass the Apple experience. That experience, the visual and emotional experience tied to Apple products creates an emotional response in consumers of Apple products that create as much passion around a brand as I have ever seen.

The Most Passionate Community

I would challenge you to find a more passionate community anywhere in computing. I have attended many industry conferences and trade shows and the Macworld’s where Steve Jobs spoke had a level of energy associated with them that I am yet to encounter anywhere else in this industry.

The experience around Apple products is what I think many who compete with Apple take for granted and simply don’t understand. I’ve said often at industry talks I have given that consumers don’t buy products they buy experiences and that is what Apple delivers.

Consumers in droves are discovering what the hard core long time Apple community has known since the beginning and are converting in droves buying iPads, iPhones, and even Macs. It all leads with the visual experience and beautiful and attractive hardware. Believe it or not, however, beautifully designed things are easier to use.

What is Beautiful is Usable

In 2000 a scientist from Israel named Noam Tractinsky, wrote a book called “What is Beautiful is Usable.” He started with a theory and built the scientific evidence to back it up. To quote his report on the subject:

two Japanese researchers, Masaaki Kurosu and Kaori Kashimura1, claimed just that. They developed two forms of automated teller machines, the ATM machines that allow us to get money and do simple banking tasks any time of the day or night. Both forms were identical in function, the number of buttons, and how they worked, but one had the buttons and screens arranged attractively, the other unattractively. Surprise! The Japanese found that the attractive ones were easier to use.

Noam himself then wanting to test this theory with the Israeli culture so he duplicated the experiment. He thought that aesthetic preferences may be culturally dependent. His observation was that the Israeli culture is more action oriented and they care less about beauty and more about function. However when he duplicated the results with an Israeli group of people the conclusion was the same. In fact in his research the sentiment was stronger with the Israeli sample size. So much so that in his research report he remarked in his paper that beauty and function “were not expected to correlate” — He was so surprised that he put that phrase “were not expected” in italics.

It appears that Apple has been on to something from the beginning. Perhaps Steve Jobs absolute resolve to make technology products beautiful carried with it inherent user experience paradigms that simply made products easier to use and that theme is continued today all throughout Apple. This in my opinion is truly what is setting Apple apart in the market place. They create objects of desire and out of that focus comes a visually and easy to use user experience paradigm that drives emotional responses in consumers of their products.

We know humans are visual beings, especially men, and interestingly enough a great deal of science exists today linking beautiful things to ease of use. There are companies who can design objects of desire and easy to use products and there are those who can’t. Apple’s advantage in this area is that they create the hardware and the software with this technology and software as art philosophy. We see this in their hardware and their software and will eventually see it more in their services.

Noam Tractinsky is right and his book title highlights a profound truth. What is beautiful is usable and this philosophical truth carries over into computing and human interaction with computing.

Right now there is only one company who I think truly understands it.

References:
– Don Norman, Why We Love (or Hate) everyday things, Feb 4th 2003
– Tractinsky, N., Adi, S.-K., & Ikar, D. (2000). What is Beautiful is Usable. Interacting with Computers, 13 (2), 127-145.
– Tractinsky, N. (1997). Aesthetics and Apparent Usability: Empirically Assessing Cultural and Methodological Issues. CHI 97 Electronic Publications: Papers

What Apple Needs to do to Stay Ahead with the iPad 4

Apple once again delivered a high quality experience with the “new” iPad, aka iPad 3. Like phones, Apple has again managed to deliver enough to stay ahead as they did with the iPhone 4s. The new iPad didn’t deliver a knockout blow to Android, but certainly eliminated many gaps that could drive many premium ($499+) tablet buyers away from the platform. While the new iPad will sell exceptionally well, I’d like to discuss what Apple will need to deliver in the “new-new” iPad, aka iPad 4 to keep their leadership position.

Change What Broke Moving from iPad 2

As I said, the new iPad will sell extremely well, but there were some steps taken backward that need to be addressed:

  • Weight– 51 grams or 8% heavier (652 versus 601 grams) doesn’t sound like a lot, but when it comes to some usage models, it is. The weight increase is noticeable primarily while reading and playing games. If you don’t believe me, play Real Racing 2 or Air Supremacy for a few hours with the new iPad and then the iPad 2. Then read a few hours in bed with the two tablets. You will notice the difference, albeit a small number.
  • Battery Life– Even though the new iPad increased the battery a giant 70% to power the Retina Display, it actually stepped back in battery life according to Anandtech The iPad has always had good battery life but Apple needs to reverse the 49 minute, 8% reduction and get back to 10 hours in real battery life. As software is one of the biggest influencers of battery life, Apple could potentially drop a new iPad software image and help this.
  • Heat– I never saw this as a safety issue as Consumer Reports insinuated, but some usage models could be an inconvenience. First is outside use where even iPad 2s heat up and shut down. This can easily happen in the car or even using outside on the back porch. Anyone who has an iPhone or iPad can relate to this. It’s better that it shuts down than burning up, but is annoying. One point I need to make here is that many consumer devices heat up when they are used. This isn’t something unique to the new iPad.
Light Bike 2

Improved Scalable Graphics

Today, if a consumer wants to display some (not all) of their iPad content on a larger external display like a modern monitor or TV, issues exist. If they connect to an HDTV or to a modern-day monitor that is 16:9 there are huge black bars to the left and right that are not only ugly but limit the amount of data that a user can see on the external display. This is something that even RIM solved with the PlayBook and is primarily a matter of graphics drivers. Microsoft has enabled this for over a decade and Apple should too. This is more of an issue of software drivers and taking on a bit more complexity. If it’s a dev issue, then Apple needs to improve their tools to help developers do this easier.

Improve Wireless Display

The current Wi-Fi “n” is OK for web surfing but not for acceptable for wireless mirroring or displaying to an HDTV via AirPlay using an Apple TV. When playing games or displaying video the current implementation just isn’t quick enough. I and others I respect have had issues with stuttering. This can be solved by upgrading Wi-Fi to 60 Ghz. and adding support for WiFi Direct. This combination not only speeds up the connection significantly, but also removes the latency of the wireless router.

Improve Gameplay Even More

The current crop of games for the new iPad is impressive when compared to the iPad 2 but unimpressive when compared to game consoles and personal computers. Neither the CPU nor the GPU has enough horsepower to deliver this kind of experience. Real Racing HD, Modern Combat 3, Air Supremacy, and Infinity Blade 2 are nice for the new iPad’s 9.7″ display but to move up the food chain to challenge consoles and PCs in more graphically oriented games, they have a long way to go. I’m not saying that iPad won’t take sales away from today’s consoles, because they will, but those who want the highest gameplay reality with the use of technical graphics features of tessellation (better geometry, more real) , more textures (more real), physics (more real), AA (anti-aliasing to remove “jaggies”), and consumers are better off with a PC. To move all those frames around, Apple will also need to move to an ARM A15-based solution. I expect NVIDIA to keep their leadership role in tablet gaming and Apple needs to assess whether they continue to build or even consider using NVIDIA’s Tegra line. Apple won’t be able to keep pace as NVIDIA already has the intellectual property to deliver 100X the performance of what is shipping, albeit on much larger and power hungry designs.

Improve Safari Multitasking

Multi-tab browser multitasking is still painful and unproductive on the new iPad. Just open up 5-10 tabs and see what happens. First, when resources have maxxed out, iOS flushes the tab of data and the user needs to reload the entire tab when they return to it. The user returns to a blank, white tab. Secondly, iOS has a difficult time downloading items in different tabs at the same time. This is most likely the result of low memory bandwidth and a weak CPU. The new iPad uses the A5X which includes a dual core ARM A9-based processor which just isn’t up to the task. I’d like to see Apple use either NVIDIA’s Tegra line or even Intel’s Medfield to help fix this. If Apple wants to roll their own silicon, they will need to go to ARM-based A15 architecture, dual or preferable quad.

Complete iCloud

The current iCloud is incomplete as I point out here. Apple, at least for productivity, needs to complete the solution. Today, users need to go through gymnastics to sync their docs between the phone, tablet, and PC/Mac. There is a seamless link between iOS devices but breaks when it comes to the PC and Mac. Files do not automatically appear and update in the Documents folder as they should. Instead users need to open the document from iCloud in the web browser, edit on the PC/Mac, then copy back to the iCloud on the web This is suboptimal and Apple knows it and I expect this to be fixed at least by the new-new iPad. (Note: Technically these aren’t changes need to be made to the iPad, but the Mac and PC software.)

Convertible Configuration

As I sit and write this on my iPad with the Zagg keyboard, I really would like for Apple to take the convertible configuration more seriously as opposed to throwing it out to the peripheral makers. While better than nothing, the Zagg implementations and others are very clunky, and are, well….. peripherals and not well integrated. Apple should take what Asus has done with the Prime and Slider then perfect it. I can imagine a $699-799, 12mm thick iPad slider configuration. When the user wants a keyboard they slide it out and when they don’t need the keyboard, slide it on and use as a slate. Apple, while currently the tablet leader, cannot get caught sleeping as Microsoft with Windows 8 convertible designs.

This convertible configuration would benefit Apple in many ways:

  • fills $699-799 clamshell price hole Ultrabooks occupy
  • maintains MacBook premium positioning at $999 minimum
  • given Apple could add more battery in the keyboard, could outlast Ultrabooks by as much as 10 hours active use.
  • sets the stage for iOS and OSX operating system unification which then positions Apple to take more PC market share

Face Login that Works

Imagine how much time we waste logging into our devices. I am dumbfounded that this hasn’t been solved yet but understands the challenges, mostly technical. You see, to have accurate results, two elements are required. First, you need to upgrade the camera (s). Higher resolution, stereoscopic cameras could be used to capture a 3D view of the head and face. Those cameras should be higher resolution to capture skin and hair details. This helps to keep from someone fooling the device with a photograph of a person or using a mask. Finally, the new-new iPad would need enough “burst-mode” processing and memory bandwidth to do all of this in two tenth of a second. This wouldn’t impact battery life as it only maxes out the CPU, GPU or DSP for a very short time.

This same technology could be used to turn the iPad into a better multi-user, coffee table appliance that all the family members could share. For example, when my son grabs the iPad to play a game (which he often does), I don’t want him to get access to my client emails and accidentally delete one.

Anticipating the new-new iPad

The new iPad, aka iPad 3 will sell in droves, potentially twice as many as the $499 predecessor in the same timeframe. The fact that it will sell well doesn’t make it perfect by any stretch. It can and must be to continue its dominance at the $499+ price point. If the past is a guide to the future, Apple is making some of the final design and capability decisions right now on the new-new iPad and Apple knows better than everyone that they must continue to have at least “triples” to stay ahead of Android and Windows 8. The competition is more focused and more experienced and I expect a much tougher for Apple with Windows 8.

How Apple is Cornering the Market in Mobile Devices

I have been speaking with various vendors of tablets lately and more than once, the topic of Apple “iPodding” them has come up. iPodding basically refers to the fact that although Apple has had the iPod on the market for over 10 years now, they still have over 70% of the MP3 portable digital music player market. This fact is giving many of the tablet vendors nightmares. Although they see this tablet market as a very large one and believe there is room for multiple tablet vendors given the potential market size and potential world wide demand, they know very well that Apple has done a great job in cornering the MP3 player market with iPods and are afraid that Apple could do the same with tablets.

And even though Apple has not cornered the market in smartphones, all are amazed that Apple had record iPhone sales last quarter and realize that Apple has just started selling iPhones in the Chinese market and could be expanding to other BRIC (Brazil, Russia, India, China) countries too. And many of the smartphone vendors are certain that Apple will bring out a lower cost iPhone at some point and get very aggressive in emerging markets within the next two years. An even harder fact for them to swallow is that when it comes to smartphone profits, Apple takes about 75% of all profits made in cell phones.

While all of them think that they can compete with Apple when it comes to hardware, and maybe even software, what they all pretty much know is that the secret to Apple success is that they have built their hardware and software around an integrated ecosystem based on a very powerful platform. And it is here where their confidence level lags and the “iPodding” fears raise its head. And to be honest, this should really concern them.

Apple is in a most unique position in which they own the hardware, software and services and have built all of these around their eco-system platform. That means that when Apple engineers start designing a product, the center of its design is the platform. For most of Apple competitors, it is the reverse; the center of their design is the device itself, and then they look for apps and services that work with their device in hopes that this combination will attract new customers. In the end, this is Apple major advantage over their competitors and they can ride this platform in all kinds of directions.

For example, when they were working on the iPad, they already had in place the iTunes content store and since all were based on the iOS platform, it was pretty straight forward for them to now build the iOS iPad Apps environment that easily sat on top of this already existing software platform. Of course, the iOS app platform already existed for the iPhone so all they had to do is to create an apps toolkit to take advantage of the new screen size they now had with the iPad.

We will see this same concept repeated when they eventually release anything for the TV. The current Apple TV product is a good first step and is also based on this iOS platform and eco system. But let’s say they design an actual TV; the platform is already in place for them to tap into it and indeed, the center of design for any future TV is the platform itself.

For a lot of vendors, they had hoped that Google’s Android would deliver to them a similar platform to build on, but to date that has not been the case. The various versions of Android only complicate things for the vendors and the software community and in essence they really don’t have a solid unified platform to build anything as powerful as Apple’s iOS architecture. As a result there is a lot of fragmentation in the Android marketplace. This is more than problematic and has been at the heart of Android failures in tablets thus far.

And I am not sure Microsoft’s new Windows 8 platform will deliver what they need either. The key reason is that Windows 8 is still based on a PC Centric OS and this is being extended downward to tablets. At the same time, they have a Windows OS for their smartphones that share no code and no app base. In the end, it delivers at best splintered apps and a non-unified ecosystem even if all the devices have the same Metro UI. I believe this OS has more of a chance to challenge Apple then Google’s Android will, especially in tablets. But the lack of a powerful unified platform that the vendors can really design around and support, along with vendors own quests to differentiate, could cause this approach to have a hard time competing with Apple too.

The bottom line is that when it comes to competing with Apple, it really is all about the platform. And at the moment, I don’t see anybody creating a unified and powerful enough platform that comes close to or is equal to what Apple already has in the market. That is why Apple is cornering the market in mobile devices today and why it could continue to grow its user base WW at the expense of their competitors. Based on marketing material on Apple’s own website, I would say they understand this as well.

Why The iPad Will Change How We Work

What is becoming more clear every day is the way in which tablets are changing paradigms of computing that have existed for decades. The entire way we think about computers, and computing in general, is undergoing significant change. In the days of the desktop and notebook, computing hardware and software was functionally the same and remained relatively unchanged. Specifically how we used a mouse and keyboard as the main way to interact, work, play, produce, create, etc.

The iPad launched a new day in computing, one where the paradigm of mouse and keyboard computing gave way to touch based computing. In the early days it was programs like VisiCalc which paved the way for computers to move from hobby to office tool. Today we have a slew of apps on the iPad that are being created every day that are proving the iPad is more than a consumption and entertainment device and is a powerful tool in which genuine creation and productive jobs can be accomplished.

I have thought about this for a while and we have written extensively about many of the ways touch computing opens the door to new opportunities. However, it wasn’t until recently, with the launch of iPhoto on the iPad, that I have come to a deeper realization of how profound this change may be. That is why I choose to title this column the way I did. I truly believe the iPad and more specifically touch based computing will entirely change the way we work, create, produce, and more.

Tough Tasks Become Easier

While going through and analyzing the slew of information in the help tips for iPhoto for iPad I came to a profound realization. When it comes to content creation, touch and software optimized for touch, allows us to do with ease, tasks that were either very difficult or extremely time consuming with mouse and keyboard computing. This may or may not apply to all tasks or all software but there are certainly tasks that shine on touch platforms. iPhoto for iPad is one of the clearest cases of this.

I have been into photography since high school, taking photo for three years, and staying active since always trying to make perfect photographs. I also would call myself a advanced user of Photoshop. As I have been using iPhoto for iPad more and more it has become clear how powerful of a tool iPhoto for iPad is when it comes to photo editing. What’s more is that iPhoto, when paired with touch optimized software, actually makes extremely complex tasks much easier and enjoyable than with a mouse and keyboard.

A key example of this is adjusting colors in a photo. If I took a photo and wanted to adjust the color in just the sky for example, I would need to isolate the sky and then tweak the color elements independently. With iPhoto for iPad you simply touch then slide to the left and the software adjusts just the blue skies to your liking. With one single touch iPhoto on iPad accomplishes a task that would take a minimum of 5 clicks with a keyboard and mouse and probably 5 min or so of precision mouse work. This is just one example of many of a way that touch computing will change how we work today and of course in the future.

Mainstream Consumers Can Now Participate

Using again the Photoshop example another realization struck me. If I sat my kids or my wife down in front of the desktop or notebook, opened Photoshop and an image and had them try to edit it, there would be mass confusion. I would have to spend quite a bit of time teaching them several basic things just to get them started.

Mastering a program like photoshop is no easy task for the non-techie, think of all the seminars that exist for software and computer literacy. All of this changes with the iPad and touch based computing. I gave my kids the iPad, opened iPhoto and an image, and let them go. Watching them for five minutes they figured out how to adjust colors, lighten areas of an image and add effects (they are 6 and 9).

They nearly mastered a program in under 10 minutes and began doing professional level tasks in that short time frame. This would be nearly impossible without extensive time and training using a mouse, keyboard, menus, icon palettes, etc.

Touch based computing opens the doors to brining true computing to the masses. Think about how many consumers out there have notebooks or desktops, running software capable of creating amazing things and they never use it or when they do they don’t take advantage of its full potential. Touch computing changes all of this and is the foundation that will bring more consumers to create and produce things they never would have using a mouse and keyboard.

A quote I am fond of is “simple solutions require sophisticated technology.” The iPad, and it touch computing software ecosystem is one of the most sophisticated technologies on the market today. It is no wonder that the iPad is enabling simple solutions and inviting more and more consumers to participate in computing in ways they never have before.

Although I focused this column on how the iPad and touch based computing will change how we work, produce, and create, we ultimately believe that this platform will also change the way we play, learn, be entertained, and much more.

It all boils down to the fact that the iPad is changing everything.

Why the Latest iPad Forecasts Are Wrong

The recent 2012 WW forecast for tablets from IDC which forecasts sales of 106MM units in 2012 with Apple’s iPad numbers at a little under 60MM has been widely picked up and republished across the internet. The report also predicted that Apple could lose dominant marketshare to the Android platform by 2015. Windows tablets do not figure in the IDC forecasts as currently IDC defines them as PCs.

While I’ve a lot of respect for IDC’s ability to identify key market trends, especially in the Enterprise IT market but I’m not convinced they have their finger on the pulse of the Apple iPad market nor Apple’s iOS strategy.

It appears that IDC has consistently under-estimated the iPad market since its launch and their recent forecasts seem to follow that pattern. Just to verify my suspicions I looked back at the IDC forecasts since the launch of the iPad on April 3rd 2010 when Apple sold 300,000 iPads on the first day and 3 million in the next 80 days.

I recall at the iPad launch IDC analysts noting that the iPad would do remarkably well if they sold 5MM units by the end of 2010. IDC subsequently estimated the total number of all tablets to be sold in 2010 at 7.6MM units. But when the final numbers were reported, Apple alone had sold nearly 15MM units. IDC’s forecast for 2011 was set at 44.6 MM units (the final sales for 2011 came in at nearly 69MM units with Apple selling 40 MM units). IDC first predicted 2012 sales of 70.8 MM units – this forecast was increased to 88 MM units and now stands at the 106 MM number announced by IDC a few days ago.

Based on the historical sales growth and the launch of the new iPad it is hard to believe that Apple will sell less than 60MM units in 2012.

With 40MM sales in 2012 – at least a doubling of that number is to be expected. Unlike the original iPad, which initially launched in the US, the new iPad will be sold in 36 countries by March 23rd. The combination of the price reduction on the iPad 2, the new iPad (third generation) and the highly likely launch of the 7.85′ iPad Mini for $299 should drive Apple iPad sales to well over IDC’s forecast number and I suggest that a number well above 80MM units is achievable for 2012 with an annual run rate of over 100 MM units.

IDC is hardly the only analyst firm underestimating Apple’s potential but is one of the most conservative.

The research company also predicts that Android tablets will have a higher market share than the iPad by 2015. Many have predicted that the growth of Android tablets will follow the success of Android smartphones but the markets are very different. The predicted success of Android tablets has not happened so far. The only tablet to get any traction is Amazon’s Kindle Fire. Amazon’s Kindle Fire is a gateway to Amazon’s retail store – it’s not really a tablet strategy – it’s a commerce strategy. To boost their m-commerce platform, Amazon is likely to drive their hardware sales by aggressive pricing – to near zero (perhaps even bundling the Kindle Fire with the Amazon Prime Free Shipping Service).

However, Amazon, if they could negotiate terms with Apple (which is a tall order) could be better off having a Prime app on the iPad rather that being in the hardware business.

At the low end, Android tablets may see some traction where they will be used low cost mobile web browsers and simple readers – especially in emerging countries where low pricing is essential to drive sales. But will customers want a product that has limited functionality, a sub-optimal experience and does not come with a massive eco-system of applications designed specifically for the device?

When Apple launched the iPad many questioned its role as a “Tweener” devices between the smartphone and the PC. Apple was however able to define the category due to the quality of the product, the user interface and experience but more importantly the totality of their eco-system -hardware, software, an apps development platform and a massive distribution system via iTunes.

Related Column: iPad: It’s More Than Just The Hardware

No other company gets close – so today, we don’t really have a tablet market – we have an iPad market. Note that Apple never refers to their product as a tablet – as they associate the tablet with Microsoft’s earlier failures.

Apple’s dominance of the tablet market has significant implications for media companies. Most have assumed that some equilibrium will eventually come into the tablet market, so a strategy of delivering content across multiple devices was a safe distribution strategy, even with the challenge of optimizing for many different devices. The publishers’ consortium Next Issue Media (made up of Condé Nast, Meredith, Hearst, News Corp and Time) decided, after negotiating difficulties, to eschew the Apple platform and support Android. A decision they are probably regretting. The success of the iPad platform lured each of the consortium members to find a way to eventually work with Apple so the value of the consortium is unclear if they remain solely focused on Android.. The question media companies now have to answer is whether the competitive platforms to Apple’s iPad can do justice to their digital publications. Can these platforms meet reader expectations or provide a significant large enough digital distribution channel to drive user and advertiser revenues ?

Apple will never compete for the low revenue, low margin low quality “budget” end of the market. Apple will always prefer a lower marketshare position so long as they maintain a high revenue and margin share of the segment. It’s possible that eventually the sheer numbers of very low cost tablets could outsell Apple’s premium products but I doubt it. Customers won’t be satisfied with an underpowered tablet any more than they were satisfied with the concept of the netbook. It’s much more likely that as smartphones increase in capabilities and significantly drop in price that they will be the mobile devices of choice in emerging markets. The functionality of even low cost smartphones will be superior in virtually every case to low cost tablets (other than display size and even then, foldable displays, 3D and projection could step in to solve that issue).

The tablet expected to take share from the PC market, overtaking it in unit sales by the 2015/16 timeframe. There will be a few specific cases where PC will remain superior to tablets in input and processing power, but that gap will narrow over the next few years and customers will flock to the convenience of the “tablet”. However the size of the tablet market , while significant, is never going to get close to the volume of the smartphone market which will be measured in billions.

We’re living in a world of digital mobility – it’s a multi-screen world – currently the dominant displays are smartphones, ultra-portable laptops, tablets and the TV but as the Corning Concept video suggests that will evolve. Apple’s goal is to take significant market share in each of the segments and bind them all other with an iOS platform that attracts the world’s best developers.

I don’t have IDC’s resources, contacts or detailed knowledge of the industry but I’ve been around the Apple marketplace for 25 years. My predictions are based on both gut and industry instincts – but are far from scientific but I’m willing to wager my 2012 estimates of iPad will be closer to the mark than the IDC forecasts. For the record I predict Apple will sell over 1MM units on March 16th. It will sell close to 10MM new iPad units within the first 30 days of launch as it rolls out t in 37 countries and in 2012 the total sales of iPads will be in excess of 90MM. My colleagues at IDC are willing to bet a nice bottle of wine that they will end up being more accurate than I am. Sounds good to me and no matter who wins I look forward to sharing it while we develop our own 2013 predictions for this exciting, emerging market.

Apple’s stock price is currently around $600, valuing the company over $500 billion. Already analysts are upping their target range to $700. If Apple continues to execute as well as it has this may too be conservative. I only wish I had the foresight to hold the Apple stock I purchased back in 1997.

iPad: It’s more than just the hardware

It seems that every time a new tablet comes on the market, people compare the hardware to Apple’s market leading iPad and wonder if this is the one that will dethrone it. The problem with this thinking is that the iPad isn’t just about the hardware and specs, it’s the experience.

iPad screen imageCompanies like Samsung can put together a piece of hardware that is similar — although still not as good — as the iPad, but they still lack the infrastructure that makes the iPad appealing to consumers.

People generally don’t care as much about specs as they do about what they can do with the device. You can list off the specs for the new iPad and people will just nod politely and smile.

However, if you tell them that with iCloud all of their information will be across every Apple device they own, including computers, you can see a light go off.

Explain to people that with iTunes Match they can access their entire music library without taking up any space on the iPad, and they will get that.

These are the things, in combination with the hardware, that make the iPad what it is. These are also the things that continue to elude Apple’s competitors.

No other company in the tablet or smartphone space have the infrastructure that Apple does. In that respect, Apple is almost 10 years ahead of its competitors.

Apple started building the foundation for what we see today with the release of the first iPod. Then with the release of iTunes, to give users a hub for syncing music and the iTunes Store, the company was well on its way controlling online sales of media.

Of course, the iTunes Store has expanded greatly since those early days and now sells movies, music videos, TV shows, and now apps for its mobile devices. That really tipped the scales.

A consumer with an iPad can purchase everything they need directly from Apple. All of the music or other media they may want, and keep all of their information synced between multiple devices. The best part is, it’s all done by simply entering your Apple ID.

When I picked up my new iPad from Apple after the event in San Francisco last week, I had it set up in minutes. I entered my Apple ID and all of my contacts, calendars and email were there waiting for me.

Not only that, I had access to all of the apps I purchased — no searching through the store trying to remember what I bought. I tapped 20 or so apps and they installed. My Apple ID also synced my iTunes Match music so I was listening, syncing and productive within minutes of having the device in my hands. I didn’t even need a computer.

All of my purchases in one place, instantly.

That can’t be matched in the market today. And it’s not for lack of trying. Other companies have tried to duplicate what Apple does, but they always come up short.

Apple has a way of making difficult tasks seem very easy. It’s mind boggling to think of all of the things going on in the background on an iPad, but all the consumer sees is their data is synced and they can access their media. That’s the way it should be.

While companies like Samsung and other tablet makers boast about specs, Apple explains what you can do with the iPad. You can create music with apps like GarageBand, edit images with iPhoto, record 1080p video, write documents, make spreadsheets, play games, create presentations and many other things with the more than 200,000 native iPad apps.

The iPad is about the experience and Apple has that locked up.

Why the New iPad is Revolutionary.

Not long after the new iPad was announced, story after story was written that this new iPad was evolutionary, not revolutionary. But I am not convinced that is a correct viewpoint. In fact, I believe that this new iPad will actually have a revolutionary impact on the market in some very interesting ways.

Some Historical Perspective

Back in 1981, I wrote the first report on what was to become desktop laser printers. At the time, laser printers were as large as mainframes and took up much of a 9’ X 12’ room. But I had seen Canon’s laser printer engine and wrote in this report that by using this type of technology in potentially desktop sized printers, I could imagine a day when we could publish documents on our desktops. Now, this was three years before postscript laser printers hit the market and before Aldus’s Pagemaker was introduced.

Not long after this desktop sized laser printer engine was shown to Steve Jobs, he made a fortuitous decision to build an Apple laser printer of his own. And after being convinced by John Warnock (co-founder of Adobe) to include Postcript as its software engine, Jobs put in place a key component of technology that would put Apple on the map. Not long after that, Paul Brainerd created a Mac product called Pagemaker and together, these two products launched the desktop publishing revolution. Although Jobs embraced both products, I am pretty sure he and even the team at Apple never really understood the magnitude of these products impact on the world of publishing at first. For Jobs, the decision to back a desktop laser printer was totally out of order given Apple’s PC centric business model and those around him argued loudly with him about doing this product.

But we now know that Steve Jobs’ stubbornness about introducing a laser printer had its roots in his desire to have a digital version of his calligraphic type fonts replicated through this printer. And from that point on, while at Apple until mid 1985 and at NeXT, the issue of high quality graphics took center stage on every product Steve Jobs touched. And when he came back to Apple, this was still top of mind. By the way, I worked on multiple desktop publishing marketing programs for Apple, MacWorld and various hardware and software vendors who were doing DTP like products then and saw up close how Apple single handedly rewrote the rules of electronic publishing, something we now take for granted and use every day when we create our own newsletters, Web pages, etc.

The New iPad

In the column I wrote not long after the new iPad was launched, I pointed out that from the inception of the iPad, Jobs wanted it to have the highest resolution screen possible but that at the time of the release of the first two generations of the iPad, the technology was not there to deliver the real iPad he wanted to give his customers.

But it was always on the roadmap and they had to do some serious engineering between their team and their partners to get us this new iPad to this incredibly high resolution. And with it, I believe Apple is ready to have another revolutionary impact on the market via one of their products.

One good example of this will be in medical applications. Although doctors and hospitals have actually been adopting and using iPads in pretty big numbers, this new iPad will become a must have tool soon. The reason is that with the older iPads, the information they were processing on it was mostly data driven. But as you know, doctors rely on a lot of things like xray’s and digital imaging to help them make key diagnostic decisions. For final analysis they will always defer to industrial strength 10K graphics workstations, but the new iPad with its high resolution screen will now be able to give them on-the-go images that can deliver much more imaging details then they had on their original iPads. This will become an important part of their ability to do immediate analysis and will now become the minimum level of tablet graphics quality they will accept in their medical practices.

Another example will be its impact on catalogs. Apple recently released the new catalog category in the iTunes store but I have talked to some catalog vendors who consider today’s tablets inferior for delivering the graphics quality they demand in their print catalogs. A good example might be Restoration Hardware. They pride themselves in delivering one of the greatest graphics quality catalogs on the market and would have never even considered doing a digital version for the older iPads. But for them and any other vendors for whom high quality images are critical to their catalog sales processes, the new iPad will be revolutionary for them. According to Joaquin Ruiz, CEO of Catalog Spree “With ultra-sharp pictures, text and video, the new iPad is perfect for all forms of publications. March 7, 2012 will be remembered as a landmark for publishers from news, to retail, to education, and to books.

The folks involved in engineering, oil and gas exploration and nuclear energy research will also see a higher resolution iPad as a welcome mobile tool that will become a key part of their on-the-go digital tool-belt. And don’t count out this high resolution iPad’s role in education. This new iPad will deliver a much closer representation of textbooks, especially ones that have a lot of images, graphics and diagrams, and to students it will become the minimum resolution they will accept in a tablet that will soon carry all of their textbooks.

When Steve Jobs introduced the iPhone, he said he would be happy if Apple could get even 1 percent of the cell phone market. An understatement if there ever was one. And even with the iPad, while Jobs used a lot of flowery language to describe it, he was cautious in declaring what type of impact it would have on the market.

At the launch of the new high-resolution iPad, Tim Cook and team–I believe–clearly understated what this new iPad’s market impact will be. All they said was that it was a newer and better version of the iPad and that they were pleased they could deliver a new tablet with a much better screen. But don’t let that fool you.

I believe we will look back relatively soon and realize that with this iPad, Apple started another revolution that has it roots in their desktop publishing heritage and instead of desktop publishing this time around, the revolution will take place in mobile publishing. The result will be to extend Jobs and teams original mantra that was, “What-You-See-is-What-You-get,” but this time it manifest itself on the new iPad. Think of the new iPad as the new representation of Steve Jobs’ laser printer’s paper. And its influence will touch every market. It will drive what I believe will be the minimum standard in tablets as tablets become the vehicles for every form of mobile publishing content, whether it be images, video, games, newspapers, magazines or books as well as the future of the web.

The Importance of Vision in the Technology Industry

I came across this article in the TabTimes written by my friend Dave Needle. What the article points out is an interesting video that was posted on YouTube showing Roger Fidler and his Information Design Lab putting quality thought and vision around media in particular but largely how digital technologies will change the future.

XEROX Parc and other institutions throughout this industries history were also voicing ambitious visions about our computing future. This could be called the Golden Years of computing. This was a fascinating time in the computing industries history. This time was full of ambitious vision and ideas about where computing could go. Many ideas never panned out, or took longer for the market to adopt but that didn’t change the fact that there was a good amount of thought leadership going on about the technology and its possibilities in the future.

My question is where is that kind of thinking today? Has this industry lost its vision? Are companies too focused on simply making next years products that they and their RND labs are not playing a role in creating the future but rather they are content to follow it?

There is no doubt that Apple is leading in many areas of vision and defining computing for tomorrow. I would, however, like to see more companies or RND labs, or institutions contributing vision to the public forum.

I am sure it is a mix of a lot of things but as I have studied this industry’s history and spoke with many who have been in it since the beginning it becomes clear that the vision for the future is not being cultivated today the way it was two decades ago.

As you watch this video with Roger Fidler I hope, that like me, we encourage more of this type of sharing of ideas, vision, and innovative concepts in the public forum. These are the kinds of things that lead to self fulfilling prophecies. We simply need more vision universally from more companies and more visionaries. I am not saying we are void of it completely today but what I am saying is that perhaps vision has lost its role in the industry today and needs to be brought back out into the limelight.

Corning I thought did a good job of this with their world of glass video series.

You can watch the video here as I highly recommend it. This video is as good as any I have seen on showcasing the importance of vision for the technology industry.

Also if you haven’t seen it view Knowledge Navigator made by Apple under the vision of John Sculley.

The iPad and The Simplicity of the Name

What Apple did by eliminating the numeric moniker was the right thing to do, in fact it may even be brilliant. The fact of the matter is numeric values that specify product generations simply can not last forever. Companies who use them generally change product names, create new names, or add some other moniker like HD, Extreme, Maxx etc. After a while they all get old. Does anyone think this would have continued to iPad 12? or iPhone 18?

This is actually a move I have been waiting for. Ever since the iPhone 4 I have been conversing with many industry insiders that the numeric moniker needs to go away. Many commenters and some smart folks out there in the press have been rightly observing that Apple themselves have been doing this for a while with other products. The Mac is not the Mac 25 or the iPod 8 or the MacBook Air 4, etc.

More importantly another industry, where legacy brands is hugely important does not do this and that is Automobiles. I do not drive the Honda Civic 17. I drive the Honda Civic and the model is 2009. The year is largely irrelevant when someone asks me what car I drive. I simply say the Honda Civic. Car companies often delineate the brand with a value for engine size or class but the brand is what matters the most. When consumers say they are getting the new iPhone it is common knowledge that that statement refers to the most recent or newest. Therefore the name is all that is needed not a numeric distinguisher.

Numeric branding simply gets old, tired, and generally more difficult to market after a while. The brand is the legacy not the number. I hope Apple does this with the iPhone. I hope it is not the iPhone 5 and just the iPhone. It may take people a little getting used to but believe me they will get used to it, past it, over it, etc and move on and it will be better for everyone.

You know who else does this? Intel. Intel has standardized for the time being on Core i3, i5 and i7. Each year this number does not change. What you know is that you want the latest Core i3, i5, or i7. Intel, like many other companies, knows how key branding is and numeric monikers to distinguish new generations are hard to keep up. They are also entirely un-necessary.

Why may this be brilliant? Well without a distinguishing moniker I wonder how the press will be able to speculate, rumor, etc without calling out which model exactly they are speculating or rumoring etc? A title like What Apple Should Bring to the Next iPad without a numeric moniker will become redundant. Would you follow that title next year with What Apple Should Bring to the Next Next iPad / iPhone? That would seem ridiculous. Now I am sure we are not lucky enough to get away from all the ridiculous Apple speculating that goes on the media. I am sure they will adapt and figure out ways to write crazy stuff but I do think this simple naming scheme will make it a bit more difficult–or at least I hope.

Apple’s Brand Unraveling? Ridiculous!

I came across an article yesterday in which the headline screamed out “Apple’s Brand Unraveling.” The author even went on to call the new naming of the new iPad “weird.”

Apple’s brand unraveling is the furthest thing from the truth. In fact, what Apple did with the new name is extremely calculated and strategic and in fact sets in motion a most important new branding statement. Before I get into the strategic value of the new name, you might ask how I know that this branding move is strategic. Well, it came from Steve Jobs himself. The last time I spoke to him when I caught him at the end of an Apple launch early last year, I asked him about the iPad’s positioning. When the iPad launched, it seemed very consumer focused, but by the time I asked him about it, the iPad had crossed into being a pretty solid productivity tool. I won’t go into detail here about his view on this but one thing he said in the conversation is that he wanted people to think of the iPad as their designation for their tablet and the fact that it had broad reach. He did not say iPad 1 or iPad 2. It was very clear to him that the brand was the iPad and the first two versions were just model numbers. He never even referred to them as 1 or 2.

Now from a strategic position, this new iPad actually represents the real iPad he and Apple always wanted to deliver to the market. I consider the first two models early versions of the iPad and this new iPad is the first one that really represents Job’s vision for the iPad. Apple had to use the existing screen technology that was available for the launch and used this in these first two models. But Apple executives told me that it has taken close to three years and incredible engineering work to finally bring to market the real iPad of Steve Job’s dream. This goes back to Steve’s incredible attention to detail. Remember in his Stanford speech when he talked about getting into the beauty of calligraphy? I am sure that he was somewhat disappointed with the fonts and even fancy letters on the original iPads as the screen just did not have the resolution to deliver the high quality non-pixalated text he came to love. And it is that vision that was always in Jobs’ plans when he and the team were creating the iPad.

Now, do you really think that Jobs, who had worked with the team on a long-range plan for the iPad well before he passed away, was not aware of the iPad retina project? And that he was not involved with the branding and new naming of this new version since it was the one he really envisioned from the start and represents the real iPad he always wanted to give his customers? For Jobs, this one with the Retina Display was the iPad! And as such, it now finally deserves the name “iPad.”

So, what does that mean? From this point on, any iPad they do will have at minimum this Retina display and deliver extremely high-resolution images, video and text in the ways Jobs envisioned it to be from day one. Now, text on an iPad is actually better then it can be even on paper. (My colleague Steve Wildstrom has a good piece on this today.)
And images are closer to being what you see in real life. And movies can be seen in higher resolution then you get on your HD TV set today.

All of this and nothing less is what from now on will define what an iPad is. While they may have future models such as an iPad mini or iPad biggie should they create other versions, the brand is iPad and from now on the name is set to mean all Apple branded tablets with their Retina display and high quality imaging experience. This represents a strategic branding move and a very important one.

So, let’s be clear. The brand of all Apple tablets is the iPad. There may be other models, but they will all be iPads. Doesn’t sound too weird to me.